It's Complicated



Sipping lemon ice-tea and watching the twenty somethings making eyes at each other was fun on any weekend in this boring city.  Especially so when you are in a happy zone of not pleasing anyone but yourself. Pleased as punch I was with myself, for being this all knowing woman of the world but the heart still did sigh at the sight of young love. Also I knew how all roads will lead to disappointment, but somehow they must falter and find out for themselves. And when you are with your best mates quite obviously, the relaxed conversation on our table veered to relationships as it mostly happens between close friends.

Right there on the table we had one anguished married man, a happily living - in woman and me, a once bitten, twice shy widow, with no intention of getting into a relationship ever again. Although three of us had very different relationship statuses but we all agreed marriage is the worst possible relationship for us. 

Marriages – just - don’t- work- no -more. Period! Given the chance, the only committed man at the table will "get out" before you could blink. But he chose to endure on for his two lovely kids. To each his own. We celebrated our differences on the matter with some French fries.

This is a common place scenario for all 40 plus urban Indians today. Just not specific to India but also in the sub-continent around us. Things have really changed we would agree. It’s an urban thing, yes. But in rural India too abandonment and polygamous relationships are thriving.

But what has really happened to the historical successful marriages of our last generations I wondered? Most of us have a good memory of our parents’ lovey-dovey and often not-so-rosy and rocky relationships which has endured the test of times. They had their low points I am sure like any long term relationship is bound to have, but somehow, they overcame it all. But did they? Or, it was just what our memories doctored or rewired? Did they also live in unhappy relationships? 

Come to think of it, I believe they were entrapped in situations where mostly two people lived together because they had to, "choice" had no room there. Later, they somehow convinced each other to stay on for the children. The social stigma attached to divorce and laws of inheritance further cemented them to stay together. As women became professionals and economically independent the game changed. The enabling laws helped them to assert and attain their share of the broken marriages too.

As more and more people find their voice in a relationship it seems keeping a relationship together becomes a “humongous task” and not something we would like to “nurture” anymore. Well, I have learnt the hard way and so have my friends, but would like to hear from you what do you think makes a relationship, errr, so complicated now than it was ever before? Or marriages will soon become a thing of the past? After all it is a social contract between a woman and a man to procreate. With time as more and more couples remain childless, will there be a reason to stay on as a man and wife? Do share your opinion as I keep pondering!

Comments

WeiBo said…
„before“ families (not just couples) were an economic necessity, one couldn’t survive as single or as an isolated couple. If so - badly. Now, with our atomised societies the need to form an economic cell in which family members find a an emotional and economic backing has disappeared. So has the tolerance for partners and their manierism and the significance of marriage. Why should one go into and through all this personal and relationship trouble and for what? Marriage, there is still the function of providing personal but also economic security for sharing life’s risks together, but it is waning. One may find this aspect rather with the relatively well off, as the others have nothing to share anyway. And then marriage should provide the stability for children to grow up within - see Pragya’s post. Too often even this element fails and egoism prevails.
illusions said…
Thanks WeiBo for stopping by on my pondering. Yes, you are right there is an economic aspect to marriage and that is why it is known as an "social contract" and not a "sacred covenant" as it is made out to be. Hence, the need for family unit in an agrarian society.

But in modern times it has become more or less redundant (apart from societies where laws are not strong for protecting human rights). I like your phrase "atomised societies"relationships can only thrive by choice and that I believe is diluted by the marriage contract of today and egos only wreck havoc.
ziyuusan said…
Maybe just because socities are indeed becoming increasingly "atomised", the need increases for what is perceived (at least initially) as a sound and durable relationship, legally formalised? At least in the West, but I sense this spreading also among developing Asian countries, societies have indeed become freer and more empowering but concurrently more competitive and aggressive, which reinforces the perceived need for a "strong" backbone that one often associates with actual marriage.

Also: practically, to date, in many countries formal marriages still provide more legal and financial securities than any legally unsactioned relationship. Not to mention that it is still strongly associated with religious or personal beliefs (see for instance in the official Catholic doctrine).
illusions said…
Quite right. The religious sentiments does encourage marriages to continue I suppose. The Vedic mantras read in a Bengali marriage was an eye opener in a recent wedding where it was translated into English for our benefit. Here it only talked of a contract for procreation and how the husband is to be the bread winner of the family and the wife is to play the role of the pro-creator and nurturer. And the bread winner was liable to take care of the family and the wife in return.

As you rightly point out in the freer, competitive world it only breeds aggression. And herein lies the pitfall. It automatically synthesizes as well as amalgamates the roles so inextricably that no such clear delineating point remains. So, relationships become furthermore complex. Within the Indian society too these lines have been fading and merging for a while and as we get close to another decade in the Millennium the balance tips against the institution I feel. On a lighter note you must tell me how you became ziyusaan, I mean so Japanese. At least it reads so to my untrained eyes :)
ziyuusan said…
I think there is also a different underlying value. At least in its original conception, marriage implied a sense of responsibility, sacrifice and commitment to make things work in the long run and against all odds.
The present culture of "I want it all and I want it now" often comes with the freedom also FROM long term commitments which, however you want to name it, are still necessary to make anything work in the long run, relationships included. So many couples reject marriage and opt for other alternatives with the spirit of "Ok, we stay together as long as this works, then each one is free", which may mean that at the first hindrance, they split. In other words, they opt for something else as an easier way out of commitments.
Funny enough, I was first brought to think about this by a young, well-educated and well-traveled Indian man as he was trying to explain me the "logic" and somewhat effectiveness of arranged marriages. Not to their defense (he was against them and eventually went for a love marriage) but to "decode" this practice for me, he was explaining how by engaging into something that you know from the start is not based on feelings but on a "deal", you are more aware and somewhat more ready to take up efforts and sacrifices to make it work in the long run.
illusions said…
But I have seen enough arranged marriages of my younger colleagues going bust within a year of reading the vows. They have gone to remarry and some are happy and others are still struggling or have remained single. But, yes, if you are made to be duty bound with a fear of being unacceptable to immediate families for non-performance if it did not work out, you may just continue with your plight. This again is interesting as it can be compared to one's professional life. More so in India probably, where we have a staggering educated unemployed youth looking for job- security.

In the context of relationships "choice" today plays stronger role. But once it is given we human beings who have access to 500 odd channels on TV and 1000 other digital attractions, probably lose interest in it and stop working to make it successful partnership.

I find it more and more fascinating as I have witnessed the change here in India the last decade. The business model of the "Wedding" has taken over. American style big weddings have become the norm of the day. And thanks to poor aspirational TV content has also penetrated the rural India. 13 years back, that was not too long ago right, I had a small and intimate wedding with 60 wedding guests. Same applied to 70% of my friends those days. But today the BIG whole 9 yards is planned ahead for a year and then it goes bust by the time you can wish the couple a "Happy Anniversary". I reckon what is a loss for intimacy, is a gain for the "event industry" now.

Popular Posts