A Married Woman

As the title indicates, A Married Woman by Manju Kapur is a subtle portrayal of a married woman. The protagonist Astha symbolizes a typical married woman of India. There are countless ways a woman’s married life can be made a wreck by abusive and demanding  husband and/or in-laws. However, Astha, fortunately, doesn’t have to go through it. By all means, she has a fairly good marriage -  financially comfortable, large house, servants, fairly considerate husband, non-interfering in-laws, and two kids. She also works. Bingo! What can she possibly complain about??

Love – she pines for the ever elusive elixir of life. The insensitiveness of her husband creates a void in her. She is “allowed” to work, but her work and the resulting money she makes is considered inconsequential. Decisions are made without consulting her, not only about the family as a whole, but also about “her” things. Her indulgence in her art is seen as extravagance. The time she spends outside the home, in the things that interest her and those that she believes in, is resented.

Mind you, all this acrimony is not displayed overtly. But still, she has to fight the invisible chains to be able to do something for herself. ‘Permissions” are to be sought, explanations are to be given, and people are to be convinced before she can  step out and do something on her own. Each time, they let go of her reluctantly at the best.

Such a scenario has so become a part of marriage that it is never questioned.  Nor many people realize there is anything wrong with it. But if there is nothing wrong with it, why would women like Astha feel  dissatisfied, unloved, unappreciated and lost in a void? Why do they store pent-up anger and rage at their life in general?

Whenever I think of the deep-rooted conditioning about the role of woman in the family and society that has been instilled in the minds of the people since forever, I’m scared to bits. It reminds me of  the horrors as portrayed in the literary classics 1984 and Brave New World. People all over the world were alarmed and frightened at the idea of such “brain washing” as depicted in those pieces of fiction. But a similar kind of “mind-control” and “conditioning” has been taking place in reality since ages and none gives a damn. The problem is none even recognizes the problem or acknowledges it and its magnitude, let alone work towards a solution.

In my immediate circle, I’m yet to see a woman completely satisfied in her marriage. I wonder if it has always been like this. Have women of all ages felt the same in their marriages? May be in the past, owing to the ignorance thrust upon them by way of confining them to the four walls and the resulting limited sense of individuality, women weren’t even aware of the pathetic state of their lives.  But I doubt if there weren’t an occasional free spirit here and there perplexed at the injustice of it all.

If half of the human race isn’t happy with their lives, isn’t there something wrong with the whole system? And isn’t there an urgent need to address this?

Marriage kills the individual in a woman. To begin with, the family instills self-doubt and attacks the woman’s self-confidence. Once  succeeded in destroying the woman’s self-esteem, it’s a cakewalk to tread all over her. Isn’t it?

From the point of sharing of responsibilities, the traditional view is that while one spouse (typically husband) works for a living, the other spouse (typically wife) takes care of the children and the house.(Note that usually women are not free to choose what and how much they want to do. Of course, this applies to men too. Stereotypes rule.)  If it is as simple as just distribution of duties and responsibilities, why are women not content with the part they (are supposed to) play?  Because, the effort she puts in is not valued as much as it deserves. She and her duties are looked upon as inferior and menial, despite they comprising an inevitable part of family life. I believe if a woman is given the respect and freedom she deserves, then she wouldn’t feel lost in her role as wife/mother.  All this appears to come out as strong statements and  seems obvious, but the interesting thing is that in many cases the ill-treatment is practiced in a very subtle manner, not because people around are bad, but because they believe that’s the way things are and are unaware of any other way of dealing with women. what a pity!

It may seem like I’m generalizing things here, but I’m only trying to give a typical picture. If you are one of the very small percentage of lucky ones, who find love in your marriage (in long-term), are respected, shown interest and are encouraged in your individual interests without the slightest protest/reluctance, can make your own decisions, not feel burdened by the expectations of a good wife, mother, DIL etc., then I whole-heartedly congratulate you.

On the other hand, men too, quite possibly, have their own share of dissatisfaction from their marriages and I’m curious to know how much and in what way the social stereotypes are burdening them.

In this novel, Astha finds love, missing so far in her life, in Pipeelika. Actually, it makes a lot of sense. Given the biased society and the insensitiveness of men towards women’s needs in general, lesbian relationships make a lot of sense.

I sometimes wonder that when nature ordained for men and women to get together for procreation (which is the corollary of the very basic goal of any species – survival), why does the nature make them so very different in their thoughts, needs, and temperament? Wait a second, how much of it is nature, how much of it is nurture? Are men and women really as alien to each other as Martians and Venusians? It just seems so much trouble – trying to find a common ground (except bed, of course!):  trying to communicate, trying to complement each other, or just trying to “bear” with each other. I feel too much energy and effort goes into the attempt of creating harmony. Whether or not it can be achieved, I’m not so sure.

I couldn’t help noting down some observations made in the novel and would like to quote some of them here:

Given certain circumstances, there was no aphrodisiac more powerful than talking, no seduction more effective than curiosity.

 

‘Have you ever wanted more lovers?’

What could Astha say? She was living, the way people like her lived, where was the question of more lovers, or love for that matter?

 

‘Is he good in bed?’

‘I suppose.’

‘If you have to suppose, he is not,’ said Pipee severely.

 

And it also felt strange, making love to a friend instead of an adversary.

 

She was a wife too, but not much of her was required there. A willing body at night, a willing pair of hands and feet in the day and an obedient mouth were the necessary prerequisites of Hemant’s wife.

 

Now sexually involved with another, she realized how many facets in the relationship between her husband and herself reflected power rather than love. Hemant had managed to ignore her because ultimately he filled his own landscape. That her discontent had been expressed in nuances that were minor, only helped him in his disregard.

 

It was not fair. It needed his wife’s having an affair for Hemant to promise to see a video with her, something he knew she loved.

 

It was an illusion, ou could never be one with another, no matter how hard you tried. It was better to realize and accept that, life became easier once you did.

 

‘Teach me how to live, God. I’m not asking for happiness, but I would welcome some stability, so I need not run all over the place looking for love and confirmation. Give me substance, God, give me a life that has not been lived for nothing.’

 

Living with someone interested in the details of your work is companionship at the deepest level.

 

‘What do you want that I don’t give you?’

‘Interest. Togetherness. Respect.’

 

‘There has to be something more between us. I have to feel it is me you want.’

Hemant looked baffled. ‘Of course, it’s you I want. You are my wife,’ he repeated.

‘That’s the problem. Anybody could be your wife.’

‘What rubbish, I picked you, didn’t I?’

‘Picking is not the same thing as knowing.’ 

For a moment Astha felt an intense stab of envy, not just for Pipee, but for anyone who had the possibility of a new life. She had to remind herself sternly that if she wanted, she too had choices. 

He was lying. She had gone to Ayodhya twice, painted the masjid at least five times, scripted a play about it, and he didn’t know she was interested? This was his revenge for being concerned in things other than him. 

The first 100 and odd pages are more like premise for what comes later and I actually didn’t get hooked on until much later. All in all, it’s a good read.

Mangalasutram

When a man ties mangalasutram around a woman’s neck, they are said to be married. Thus “mangalasutram” symbolizes marriage and hence deemed as an important part of any married woman. Over the years, or I should say centuries, lot of sentiments arouse around it. Some of the accepted norms or sentiments include -

• “Mangalsutram represents the long life of the husband”
• “It is so sacred and thus should be worshiped”
• “Not wearing it continuously will cause harm to the husband” etc and etc.

The extent of  drama around it can be understood better from movies from a decade or more ago – where women even go to the extent of preferring “mangalsutram” to the one who ties it or put their lives on stake to safeguard it. It is true that it is a symbol of marriage, which ideally follows that it is a symbol of love, trust and commitment between a man and a woman (assuming that people get married out of love, mutual trust and commitment). But when more and more emphasis is placed on only the symbol and not on what it symbolizes, it becomes a big joke. 

When one really thinks about it, one can discern the reason for this undue importance attached to the “mangalasutram” and the high extent of sentimentalism involved with it – It provides the society a means to control women. Following that “mangalasutram” is the symbol of marriage, we conveniently ignore the fact that married men wear nothing to announce their married status.  By projecting the mangalasutram as the identity of a married woman, society succeeded in keeping women in the place it wanted to. In our culture, the importance of marriage in every one’s life cannot be overemphasized. While it is true for both the genders, it is especially so in the case of women. Women born to get married (and of course, bear children), period. This follows that “mangalasutram” becomes the most valuable possession of a woman not because of the person who places it around her neck but because it is just so. While women until the previous generation accepted its importance and role without a murmur, today’s woman doesn’t seem to follow suit. She questions the norms,  and even deviates from them.

I’ve noticed a clear change in the thinking and perception of today’s women about it. While they respect it for what it symbolizes, they don’t attach excessive importance to it. They don’t wear it regularly and when they do wear it, it is because they want to, not because they are expected to do so. Some women even see it only as a piece of jewelry.

I don’t mean to imply that everyone is like that. (Not that there is any problem for me with that. ) Women of the current generation have largely varying attitudes about this whole issue. What I want to point out is that women today want to take the choice of following whatever norms that are in existence into their hands.

This attitude seems blasphemous not only  to religious groups and activists but also to many common people in the society, whose reaction to the new change is usually something along the lines of  “That is the norm.  Ancestors cannot be wrong. We have to follow our tradition, period.”

Another argument is – If everyone behaves as they like, there will be no order in the world. Well, I tend to agree with this point. For there to be order in society, there have to be some rules. But if more and more people are not obeying the rules, the problem is not with the people, it is with the rules. Change them to suit the current thinking. Blindly following the age-old practices may not be a good idea. Rules are for the people, not the other way around.

I don’t mean to imply that I’m against this “mangalsutram” or that it should be abolished or something like that. I currently take no sides. This is a very  controversial and hot topic and I found it interesting to see different perceptions about the concept. I’ve seen/read a few online discussions on how today’s women perceive “mangalasutram” and I must say they are stimulating and revealing. My response in one of the forums:

Thinking about this a little bit more objectively, I feel that mangalasutra is predominantly a symbol – to let people/society know that one is married. This is important because it avoids a lot of confusion and trouble. There can be other ways too but a symbol makes the classification easier and instantaneous. All the other sentiments emerged out of man’s ego or woman’s (perceived) lower status or religion or need to dominate and control etc. So, people kind of expect a married woman to showcase that symbol. Ideally, this is required by both men and women, Actually, men also have some symbol (like jenjam) but the society has overlooked that part very conveniently long long back. Double standards for men and women didn’t born just yesterday. Since society could enforce that on women and had a wonderfully success rate throughout several centuries, it continues to do so even today. From that perspective, there is no reason for it to change its expectation. If today’s women think that they need not showcase to the world that they are married, or use that particular symbol to do so, it will take a lot of time for the society to get used to it and accept it. It’s long way and until then the struggle, cultural and emotional attacks, discrimination go on. The same is true not only for this particular issue but for all the other gender specific issues. It is very difficult to change deep-rooted beliefs. Mere scientific and logical explanations won’t work. People should be willing to accept new ideas and this is a herculean task. But of course, all this doesn’t stop progress or change.[ I  have a problem at labeling every new thought as progressive thought. Every change may not be progressive in nature, unless the long-term repercussions are carefully considered. I believe one cannot say whether something is progressive or not right away; especially when it does not deal with atrocities like  Sati: which directly harms a section of people. While creating  mental and psychological snares is  equally or more fiendish, its effect is subtle and so deep-rooted that it is often difficult even to recognize it.] There have been many changes to the lifestyle and customs in the past. No reason why it will not happen to more and more things in future.

 And moreover, “mangalasutra” is a symbol for the institution of marriage [for the facility of society] – not mental commitment. Since there is no way to convey or detect mental commitment, people rely on physical and tangible things to make some sense of mental concepts. For example, in the legal world, whether you are committed to your spouse doesn’t matter as long as you have your marriage certificate and/or your marriage is not annulled or divorced. This is not the flaw of a system or religion or society. This is just how things can work. [The bottom line is "love and commitment between the couple" attaches importance to mangalasutra, not the other way around.]

Committed

Just finished Elizabeth Gilbert’s Committed. As I’ve written in an earlier post, Committed is a kind of sequel to the more well-known Eat, Pray, Love. In Committed, the author explored many aspects of marriage: history, expectations, women, infatuation and the like. It sure was interesting.

On the other note, I felt that the way she defended single ladies was so comical. She proclaimed that single women are an inevitable part of evolution; that they are saviors of the society and blah, blah, blah. For me, all this just made me sense her desperation. It seemed as if she needed the readers to validate her choices and opinions. She was so defensive.

In the end, she seemed to accept that marriage might not be unpleasant after all. But not really! She has her own terms and ideas of marriage, which is of course totally fine. She very conveniently “forgot” to mention any of the numerous benefits of marriage, verified by a number of research studies. No worries.

But somehow I’m not convinced that she had made her peace with “marriage”, as she claimed. Not at least with the kind of marriage I’m aware of.

Eat, Pray, Love

I have little talent for writing book reviews. In fact, it is apt not to regard them as “reviews”.  As anyone who reads my blabbering about the books I read, can tell, I just try to pen down certain, often incoherent, thoughts. And presently, I do just the same.

I have put off reading this bestseller by Elizabeth Gilbert for quite a while but in the end I gave in. I believed that one western woman’s personal journey wouldn’t interest me much but the book surprised me.  The author’s colloquial and witty expression impressed me. Above all, I was smitten by the honesty, which the woman has put forth into the words.

The first part of the book- being all about pleasure (of food and language) – had been a pleasant read. I was struck by the urge of the author to learn Italian for no other purpose than to feel the taste of those magical words on her tongue. I appreciated that a lot.

Being an Indian with ideas about spirituality of my own, the “Pray” part was not entirely unfamiliar to me. But reading a westerner’s perspective on the subject was a novel experience for me. I especially liked the way she explained complex spiritual concepts – in a simple and straight-forward manner.

The final part of the book is the one which I considered least captivating but it was fun to learn things about Bali.

Unfortunately, I found myself unable to empathize with the author. Frankly, I could neither understand her need to not have children nor her misery in her marriage. I felt many a times while reading the book that she is a very self-centered person – who always thinks only about herself and only from her perspective. It also struck me that in the modern western culture, it’s largely that way in relationships: each person cares for only what he/she gets out of a relationship or the other person. As long as everything goes right and their needs are met, the relationship flourishes. But as soon as some calamity occurs, the relationship ends.  I don’t want to sound as a bigot but it’s just my general perception. (I may be wrong too!)

This selfish nature was evident even in her brief affair soon after her marriage ended. Both she and her boyfriend were looking at only the reflection of their own needs and desires in the other person. No wonder they had to end their relationship.

Whenever two people are in a relationship, they need to treat that relationship as a third entity and nurture it.  There is nothing called a perfect match, where none is required to make certain adjustments.   To my knowledge, every relationship requires certain degree of compromise on the part of its entities. There is always – ” give and take”.  I safely assumed that it’s obvious to one and all that once you are in a relationship, you think and decide for your partner’s happiness too in addition to yours.

I was baffled to know that even people who are in their thirties, with enough life and experience behind them, fail to understand such a simple concept. But such was the case with this woman. And no where in the whole book, did she realize this.

I know I’m not being fair with this woman – who is from a different culture and background than myself. And given my own cultural stereotypes, I admit that my judgment might be a bit skewed.

And then I started reading Elizabeth’s next non-fiction work: Committed, in which she talked all about Marriage. I was relieved to find her more mature in this work.  In addition to admitting to her narcissistic nature, she even talked wisely about relationships. While “Committed” might seem less attractive a read compared to her “Eat, Pray, Love”, it does have many pearls of wisdom. None of them are new or groundbreaking but still are invaluable. Again, I was bowled over by her honesty. She is one hell of a brave lady.

Life challenges

This particular topic has been in my mind for quite some time, not only because I myself am a victim but I saw many others struggling too. I belong to a middle-middle-class and like many others in the same or similar status, was raised by my parents with lots of love and enough freedom. Girls are being given the same attention, resources and love as boys, are educated to be engineers, business women, doctors and what not. All this is a very commendable development, coming from a culture where women were always treated as subordinates to men.

With the increase in nuclear and small families, children got all the attention they wanted (sometimes unwanted) as they became the center of the parents’ lives and thoughts.  This too can be seen as a positive development. But the problem arises when the children go out into the world and find themselves incapable of dealing with the people and situations around. I agree that most people succeed in handling things well, but I must say that it comes only after a lot of initial struggling. I want to discuss one such area, which is perhaps the most important too:  Marriage.

A marriage brings two families together. From what I’ve experienced and observed, being raised in a nuclear family, with little or nominal contact with relatives and kin (everyone is busy with their own lives, people spread out geographically), embracing a new family through marriage poses its own problems. Often the guy and girl aren’t ready for the responsibility of the marriage. (Everyone craves marriage in the beginning for its benefits, but the duties and responsibilities are hidden for later) I’m not saying that everyone is like that, but I’ve seen a considerable number of such cases.

Problems for the girl are many because the expectations only increase for her in her new family. While they adore her for her beauty, education, job, dowry and gifts she brings into the family, the age old expectations of a DIL still hold. She must work and earn along with the guy but somehow also be able to serve the family, cook, and bear and rear children with unsurpassing excellence and ease. Add to that, she must be really tactical and diplomatic enough to deal with various satires, comments from the new family and continuously try to please them. This is the general scenario but in most cases, the demands on the girl go worse. How can a girl, who has little experience in dealing with people whose only duty is to find faults with her, who was loved and protected by her parents till now, and who strived all her pre-marriage years with education and career suddenly become an expert in housekeeping, cooking and interpersonal relationships and be able to handle so much just on the fly? People really have to get hold of reality of it at some point.

I seriously feel that many people are under-qualified for today’s marriage scenario. When someone enters a relationship with too much individuality and self-centeredness, they are bound to succeed only if they try hard to learn the ways of successful relationships. Almost everyone has good intentions but have no idea what to do or how to go about them. In order to avoid the confusion and struggle and pain that accompanies in the process of fumbling around to find ways of dealing with the new demands and situations, I honestly think that there should be a kind of program for would-be wed-lockers. Or else, parents should take it as their prime responsibility to let their children know the ways of people and life and actively make them ready for the life’s challenges, instead of just protecting them all the time and trying to solve their problems for them. Lessons in soft skills aren’t only required for a career but for marriage as well. People really need to be trained in handling criticism, diplomacy, adjustment etc. Of course, experience teaches everything, but sometimes the cost involved might be too much to incur, which might be avoidable.

Marriage in modern India

I chanced upon an interesting post on the Random Reads blog. It’s titled “An Open letter to Rakhi Sawant”. It’s written by Shaifali Sandhya, who is a clinical psychologist based in Chicago. 

She has some advice to give to Rakhi Sawant, who was the star of the television show – Swayamvar. She had chosen a partner on the show from the numerous men who applied for the same. 

Also, Shaifali has some interesting facts to say about the current Indian marriage system. She commented on how the increased expectation of women in the aspects of love and intimacy has increased the dissatisfaction in marriages and often leads to depression and/or broken marriages. 

Evidently, she had made some observations and conducted some studies on this subject. Her book, ‘Love will follow: Why marriage is burning in urban India’, featuring them is coming out in October. Since this is a subject that I can closely relate to or at least empathize about, I am eagerly waiting to lay my hands on the book asap. But I’m not sure when exactly the book will be released. I couldn’t even find it on Amazon.com (to pre-order). Curiously, googling the title returns only the blogpost I mentioned above. Surprisingly, nothing on the publisher’s site too. Hmm… Is this a mysterious book or have the plans changed?

Marriage: Love or Arranged?

Marriages can be broadly classified as Love or Arranged on the basis of how they are initiated. A Love Marriage is one in which two people meet, fall in love with each other and marry eventually. An Arranged Marriage is one in which two people are brought together into wedlock by the elders concerned – mostly parents, based on various criteria like religion, caste, family reputation, economic status, height, complexion, dowry, education, income etc among other things.

If you look at the big picture, different cultures favor/follow different marriage systems.  As one can see today, in the Western countries like America or European countries, love marriages are the norm, while it is otherwise in the countries like India, Japan, China or even Islamic countries.  But a culture is an ever evolving and ever transforming thing like anything else in this world. And you can see the trend towards growing preference to the love marriages in many countries (might be one of the dimensions of westernization).

In India too the picture is changing but the pace is not so alarming. Nevertheless, it has its own repercussions. More often than not, love marriages here happen with the hard-gotten approval of the parents of both sides. One can observe tremendous cultural/social turmoil as parents find it very hard to relinquish their power on their children on the most important event in the latter’s life, which they have taken for granted until now. And other things like different religion or caste, severe economic or cultural differences make the older generation’s task of blessing its offspring’s love even harder.

Ever since I understood the concept of marriage and love, I’ve been a fan of love marriage. The main reason is not because I believe love marriages are the best, (I have no reason to think so as I didn’t have any role models in that aspect), but my observation and conviction that arranged marriages are usually not happy marriages, that arranged marriage is a gamble and there is more than a fair chance that you could end up with a wrong person. I’ve also observed that while arranged marriages are stable (of course in India, all marriages are relatively more stable compared to some other cultures), most couples only stay together only because of cultural and social reasons.  And there are always countless incidents all over the country of domestic violence and abuse of wives in particular (the other case is a rare exception), sometimes resulting in murder. I used to wonder what makes a man to hate his wife so much. All I saw between most couples was hatred or fear or disgust or dispassion or indifference. I’ve noticed only a sense of duty and responsibility. I attributed all the unhappiness of a marriage to lack of love. And I was convinced that love usually doesn’t happen in arranged marriages, where two people are brought together by the families.

Even though I later learned that many couples who underwent an arranged marriage lead really happy married lives and in some cases find love in each other, my initial impression never managed to change and I continued dreading an arranged marriage. Any my equally rosy perception of love marriages might as well be buoyed up by the media’s and literature’s glorifying love stories.

However, I realize that love marriages too go through the tests of the marriage as in arranged marriages, and that just being in love doesn’t mean that they live happily ever after. But my argument is that, when there is love, all difficulties pass and the couple can conquer any differences and issues that arise between them. My motto is: Love makes all the difference. But this is only my imagination for I have no experience to draw from.

When you look at the global picture, as per my theory, marriages in the West must be happier. And I have no doubt they are, however long they last.  But why aren’t a large portion of them lasting forever? Why is the divorce rate so high? Clearly love isn’t enough for a marriage. This is not just my opinion but the observation made by researchers.

Studies were made over the decades on what people think are important in a marriage. While love was only one of the top 5 criteria a few decades ago – 3rd or 4th place specifically – , it has been placed at the top for a number of years recently. And this change of priority coincided with the huge increase in the divorce rate.

Talking about love, I feel that ‘all’ love is not the same. Love based on just superficial things like physical attraction, common hobby etc might not be strong enough to stand the test of time.  Given the complexity of the concept of love, I can’t really say what works or what doesn’t, but clearly we can see that some love last and some do not. But when we talk about marriages, only those which consider things other than love have greater chances of lasting. Because passion is something which diminishes or loses its luster with time and you must have something more to rely on to stay in a relationship. And the nature of love itself changes as it culminates into a deep, intense bonding. But it can be otherwise too.

Of course, love marriages in India are relatively much more stable than those in Western countries, because of the country’s culture and family system. But still the divorce rate is higher compared to the arranged marriages.

A small digression:

I read once in a book called “Sthree” (Woman) by Venkatachalam that an ideal marriage is one which is initiated usually by the passion between two people and in which the initial passion gives way to a deeper understanding and love for each other as the years go by. He also says that the attachment we usually see in long-time couples, the way they are dependent on each other for little and big things, how they miss each other when they are apart, should not always be mistaken as love. It’s just an effect of habit. He says that people get used to people, just like they get used to an old house or furniture etc. Any change in the familiar settings or schedule or absence of the partner makes people uncomfortable and even vulnerable.

Now, addressing the question in the title, which marriage is really better? How right are my assumptions and preferences? I don’t have any intellectual answers. J

But I guess I would like to keep my illusions or otherwise about and preference for love marriage as long as I can.

Marriages can be broadly classified as Love or Arranged on the basis of how they are initiated. A Love Marriage is one in which two people meet, fall in love with each other and marry eventually. An Arranged Marriage is one in which two people are brought together into wedlock by the elders concerned – mostly parents, based on various criteria like religion, caste, family reputation, economic status, height, complexion, dowry, education, income etc among other things.

If you look at the big picture, different cultures favor/follow different marriage systems.  As one can see today, in the Western countries like America or European countries, love marriages are the norm, while it is otherwise in the countries like India, Japan, China or even Islamic countries.  But a culture is an ever evolving and ever transforming thing like anything else in this world. And you can see the trend towards growing preference to the love marriages in many countries (might be one of the dimensions of westernization).

In India too the picture is changing but the pace is not so alarming. Nevertheless, it has its own repercussions. More often than not, love marriages here happen with the hard-gotten approval of the parents of both sides. One can observe tremendous cultural/social turmoil as parents find it very hard to relinquish their power on their children on the most important event in the latter’s life, which they have taken for granted until now. And other things like different religion or caste, severe economic or cultural differences make the older generation’s task of blessing its offspring’s love even harder.

Ever since I understood the concept of marriage and love, I’ve been a fan of love marriage. The main reason is not because I believe love marriages are the best, (I have no reason to think so as I didn’t have any role models in that aspect), but my observation and conviction that arranged marriages are usually not happy marriages, that arranged marriage is a gamble and there is more than a fair chance that you could end up with a wrong person. I’ve also observed that while arranged marriages are stable (of course in India, all marriages are relatively more stable compared to some other cultures), most couples only stay together only because of cultural and social reasons.  And there are always countless incidents all over the country of domestic violence and abuse of wives in particular (the other case is a rare exception), sometimes resulting in murder. I used to wonder what makes a man to hate his wife so much. All I saw between most couples was hatred or fear or disgust or dispassion or indifference. I’ve noticed only a sense of duty and responsibility. I attributed all the unhappiness of a marriage to lack of love. And I was convinced that love usually doesn’t happen in arranged marriages, where two people are brought together by the families.

Even though I later learned that many couples who underwent an arranged marriage lead really happy married lives and in some cases find love in each other, my initial impression never managed to change and I continued dreading an arranged marriage. Any my equally rosy perception of love marriages might as well be buoyed up by the media’s and literature’s glorifying love stories.

However, I realize that love marriages too go through the tests of the marriage as in arranged marriages, and that just being in love doesn’t mean that they live happily ever after. But my argument is that, when there is love, all difficulties pass and the couple can conquer any differences and issues that arise between them. My motto is: Love makes all the difference. But this is only my imagination for I have no experience to draw from.

When you look at the global picture, as per my theory, marriages in the West must be happier. And I have no doubt they are, however long they last.  But why aren’t a large portion of them lasting forever? Why is the divorce rate so high? Clearly love isn’t enough for a marriage. This is not just my opinion but the observation made by researchers.

Studies were made over the decades on what people think are important in a marriage. While love was only one of the top 5 criteria a few decades ago – 3rd or 4th place specifically – , it has been placed at the top for a number of years recently. And this change of priority coincided with the huge increase in the divorce rate.

Talking about love, I feel that ‘all’ love is not the same. Love based on just superficial things like physical attraction, common hobby etc might not be strong enough to stand the test of time.  Given the complexity of the concept of love, I can’t really say what works or what doesn’t, but clearly we can see that some love last and some do not. But when we talk about marriages, only those which consider things other than love have greater chances of lasting. Because passion is something which diminishes or loses its luster with time and you must have something more to rely on to stay in a relationship. And the nature of love itself changes as it culminates into a deep, intense bonding. But it can be otherwise too.

Of course, love marriages in India are relatively much more stable than those in Western countries, because of the country’s culture and family system. But still the divorce rate is higher compared to the arranged marriages. I also came across an argument about why arranged marriages are more stable – Without given much choice, people are forced to make the best of what they have and all turns out well in the end.

A small digression:

I read once in a book called “Sthree” (Woman) by Venkatachalam that an ideal marriage is one which is initiated usually by the passion between two people and in which the initial passion gives way to a deeper understanding and love for each other as the years go by. He also says that the attachment we usually see in long-time couples, the way they are dependent on each other for little and big things, how they miss each other when they are apart, should not always be mistaken as love. It’s just an effect of habit. He says that people get used to people, just like they get used to an old house or furniture etc. Any change in the familiar settings or schedule or absence of the partner makes people uncomfortable and even vulnerable.

Now, addressing the question in the title, which marriage is really better? How right are my assumptions and preferences? I don’t have any intellectual answers.

But I guess I would like to keep my illusions or otherwise about and preference for love marriage as long as I can.