I've
always thought "falling in love" an unfortunate expression,
especially when it leads to marriage, because "falling" suggests an
accident—like someone falling into a hole. I’m tempted to think we should
put a little reason into the romantic equation and not let love and marriage be
a total accident. One solution of course
is to keep them separate, as in Oscar Wilde’s famous quip: “One should always be in love. That is the reason one should never marry.”
But using
your head in matters of the heart seems at first blush a huge sacrifice—and it may
well be too much to ask. I recently
watched a television drama in which an American traveling in Europe was puzzled
by a beautiful girl who was engaged to a hard-working, box-like guy who lacked
all romantic possibilities. The American
asked the beautiful girl why she was engaged to this overly earnest, stolid sort
of man, and she replied, "You live in the richest country in the
world. You can afford to have emotions." She was using her head, you see. She had made the smart choice. But had she given up too much?
According
to online statistics, arranged marriages make up some 55% of marriages
worldwide, and the divorce rate is an incredibly low 6%. In America the divorce rate is between 40 and
50%. “Learning” to love is after all
different from “falling” in love, but the longer, slower way around may yield firmer
and deeper relationships, lifetimes of commitment that are probably very happy in
their way.
What a shame it has to come at such a cost.
