Added to the first part of this post is 2 years of experience... of wisdom and age. The understandings have changed, so have the perspectives.
The realisation has dawned on me that there is a reason why "love" had no mention in the historical literature on marriage - it is because the two are mutually independent concepts, perhaps even contradictory!
Love, by definition is an emotion. Hence being irrational, spontaneous, not knowing bounds. The more the irrationality the greater is the depth and the meaningfulness of love.
Marriage, on the other hand, is an institution. Created for governance of society, just like any other institution - the government for instance. The scope of governance here may seem different at some levels: social behaviour, family life, sexuality. But there is no denial that these in turn, relate ultimately to law and order, the prevention of anarchy, the preservation of social stratifications (caste or religion through endogamy).
The creation of an institution is always strategic. It is rational, intelligent and is defined by its boundaries. We know what DOES NOT constitute a marriage as well as what DOES, and these boundaries are universal... as universal as the boundlessness of love.
The success of a marriage is therefore, based on the degrees of rationality and the strength of its boundaries. The stronger the fence, the better the marriage! The strategic base of the institution of forming the alliance, completely on pratical matters, is what makes it so feasible, so universal, and so durable. It is due to these reasons why it has not become extinct as a concept (keeping with Darwinian selection).
Human beings are rational and intelligent. We are predisposed to organising our lives,our societies. We like order, governance and systems. The institution of marriage embodies all these qualities. That is the appeal. That is the secret.
Love may become extinct, but not marriage. The latter makes sense... it is here to stay!
No comments:
Post a Comment