Romance (love)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Romantic love)
Jump to: navigation, search

Romance is the expressive and pleasurable feeling from an emotional attraction towards another person associated with love.

In the context of romantic love relationships, romance usually implies an expression of one's strong romantic love, or one's deep and strong emotional desires to connect with another person intimately or romantically. Historically, the term "romance" originates with the medieval ideal of chivalry as set out in its Romance literature.

Humans have a natural inclination to form bonds with one another through social interactions, be it through verbal communication or nonverbal gestures. With some individuals, these social interactions can span beyond what one would typically view as a platonic relationship. Positive romantic relationships are a crucial part of society in that not only do these relations affect those that are in participation, but they can also have an influence on those that are in close vicinity[citation needed].

Sometimes, what may be viewed as tradition does not allow for as much of a range that is realistically present among those that are aiming for a healthy positive relationship. Some traditional approaches place certain responsibilities or unsaid assumptions on each party, where each person is expected to act a certain way simply because that's how it's supposed to be. With positive psychology, there seems to be a push for a more equal division of responsibilities regardless of sex, gender, or any other circumstances. Each individual can learn about love on more than one level; there is an acknowledgment of the word having multiple meanings, as well as relationships having multiple outcomes, as a result of previous attachment patterns in other social domains (i.e. parenting).

General definitions[edit]

  1. The debate over an exact definition of romantic love may be found in literature as well as in the works of psychologists, philosophers, biochemists and other professionals and specialists. Romantic love is a relative term, but generally accepted as a definition that distinguishes moments and situations within intimate relationships to an individual as contributing to a significant relationship connection.
  2. The addition of drama to relationships of close, deep and strong love.

In romantic relationships[edit]

During the initial stages of a romantic relationship, there is more often more emphasis on emotions—especially those of love, intimacy, compassion, appreciation, and affinity—rather than physical intimacy. Romantic love in the early stages is often characterized by uncertainty,[1] along with emotional anxiety that love may not be returned:

Love is this way: You're on one side of the edge of a canyon -- windy, deep, sunny, steep. Your lover's on the other. You wave to each other across the divide. You have a parachute. Your lover has a parachute. But the cords to open the parachutes are on the BACK not the front so only your lover can open your parachute for you, and you for your lover. You pause. Are you ready to jump? Will your lover jump too? If you and your lover jump simultaneously, grasp mid-air and yank each other's cords, you'll glide sweetly to your getaway island where a candlelight dinner awaits. If one thing goes wrong, a glitch in timing, a puff of wind, the slightest hesitation -- you'll be crushed on the rocks below.

—Anonymous[2]

Within an established relationship, romantic love can be defined as a freeing or optimizing of intimacy in a particularly luxurious manner (or the opposite as in the "natural"), or perhaps in greater spirituality, irony, or peril to the romantic relationship.

In culture, arranged marriages and betrothals are customs that may conflict with romance due to the nature of the arrangement. It is possible, however, that strong and close romance and love can exist between the partners in an arranged marriage.

Historical definition[edit]

Historians believe that the actual English word "romance" developed from a vernacular dialect within the French language meaning "verse narrative"—referring to the style of speech, writing, and artistic talents within elite classes. The word was originally an adverb of the Latin origin "Romanicus," meaning "of the Roman style." The connecting notion is that European medieval vernacular tales were usually about chivalric adventure, not combining the idea of love until late into the seventeenth century.[citation needed]

The word romance has also developed with other meanings in other languages such as the early nineteenth century Spanish and Italian definitions of "adventurous" and "passionate", sometimes combining the idea of "love affair" or "idealistic quality."

In primitive societies, tension existed between marriage and the erotic, but this was mostly expressed in taboo regarding the menstrual cycle and birth.[3]

Bernger von Horheim in the Codex Manesse (early 14th century)

Anthropologists such as Claude Lévi-Strauss show that there were complex forms of courtship in ancient as well as contemporary primitive societies. There may not be evidence, however, that members of such societies formed loving relationships distinct from their established customs in a way that would parallel modern romance.[4]

Before the 18th century, as now, there were many marriages that were not arranged – having risen out of more or less spontaneous relationships. After the 18th century, illicit relationships took on a more independent role. In bourgeois marriage, illicitness may have become more formidable and likely to cause tension.[citation needed] In Ladies of the Leisure Class, Rutgers University professor Bonnie G. Smith depicts courtship and marriage rituals that may be viewed as oppressive to modern people. She writes "When the young women of the Nord married, they did so without illusions of love and romance. They acted within a framework of concern for the reproduction of bloodlines according to financial, professional, and sometimes political interests." Subsequent sexual revolution has lessened the conflicts arising out of liberalism, but not eliminated them.

Anthony Giddens, in his book The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Society, states that romantic love introduced the idea of a narrative into an individual's life. He adds that telling a story was one of the meanings of romance. According to Giddens, the rise of romantic love more or less coincided with the emergence of the novel. It was then that romantic love, associated with freedom and therefore the ideals of romantic love, created the ties between freedom and self-realization.

David R. Shumway, in his book Romance, Intimacy, and The Marriage Crisis, states that the discourse of intimacy emerged in the last third of the 20th century and that this discourse claimed to be able to explain how marriage and other relationships worked. For the discourse of intimacy emotional closeness was much more important than passion. This does not mean by any means that intimacy is to replace romance. On the contrary, intimacy and romance coexist.[5]

The 21st century has seen the growth of globalization and people now live in a world of transformations that affect almost every aspect of our lives, and love has not been the exception. One example of the changes experienced in relationships was explored by Giddens regarding homosexual relationships. According to Giddens since homosexuals were not able to marry they were forced to pioneer more open and negotiated relationships. This kind of relationships then permeated the heterosexual population.

Shumway also states that together with the growth of capitalism the older social relations dissolved, including marriage. Marriage meaning for women changed as they had more socially acceptable alternatives and were less willing to accept unhappy relations and, therefore, divorce rates severely increased.

The discourse of romance continues to exist today together with intimacy. Shumway states that on the one hand, romance is the part that offers adventure and intense emotions while offering the possibility to find the perfect mate. On the other hand, intimacy offers deep communication, friendship, and long lasting sharing.

"La Belle Dame sans Merci" 1893, by John William Waterhouse (1849-1917)

Popularization of love[edit]

The conception of romantic love was popularized in Western culture by the concept of courtly love. Chevaliers, or knights in the Middle Ages, engaged in what were usually non-physical and non-marital relationships with women of nobility of whom they served. These relations were highly elaborate and ritualized in a complexity that was steeped in a framework of tradition, which stemmed from theories of etiquette derived out of chivalry as a moral code of conduct.

Courtly love and the notion of domnei were often the subjects of troubadours, and could be typically found in artistic endeavors such as lyrical narratives and poetic prose of the time. Since marriage was commonly nothing more than a formal arrangement,[6] courtly love sometimes permitted expressions of emotional closeness which may have been lacking from the union between husband and wife.[7] In terms of courtly love, "lovers" did not necessarily refer to those engaging in sexual acts, but rather, to the act of caring and to emotional intimacy.

The bond between a knight and his Lady, or the woman of typically high stature of whom he served, may have escalated psychologically but seldom ever physically.[8] For knighthood during the Middle Ages, the intrinsic importance of a code of conduct was in large part as a value system of rules codified as a guide to aid a knight in his capacity as champion of the downtrodden, but especially in his service to the Lord.

In the context of dutiful service to a woman of high social standing, ethics designated as a code were effectively established as an institution to provide a firm moral foundation by which to combat the idea that unfit attentions and affections were to ever be tolerated as "a secret game of trysts" behind closed doors. Therefore, a knight trained in the substance of "chivalry" was instructed, with especial emphasis, to serve a lady most honorably, with purity of heart and mind. To that end, he committed himself to the welfare of both Lord and Lady with unwavering discipline and devotion, while at the same time, presuming to uphold core principles set forth in the code by the religion by which he followed.[8]

Religious meditations upon the Virgin Mary were partially responsible for the development of chivalry as an ethic and lifestyle: the concept of the honor of a lady and knightly devotion to her, coupled with an obligatory respect for all women, factored prominently as central to the very identity of medieval knighthood. As knights were increasingly emulated, eventual changes were reflected in the inner-workings of feudal society. Members of the aristocracy were schooled in the principles of chivalry, which facilitated important changes in attitudes regarding the value of women.[9]

Behaviorally, the manner in which a knight was to regard himself towards a lady, was with a transcendence of premeditated thought; his virtue ingrained within his character. A chevalier was to conduct himself always graciously, bestowing upon her the utmost courtesy and attentiveness. He was to echo shades of this to all women, regardless of class, age, or status.[10] Over time, the concept of chivalry and the notion of the courtly gentleman became synonymous with the ideal of how love and romance should exist between the sexes. Through the timeless popularization in art and literature of tales of knights and princesses, kings and queens, a formative and long standing (sub)consciousness helped to shape relationships between men and women.

De amore or The Art of Courtly Love, as it is known in English, was written in the 12th century. The text is widely misread as permissive of extramarital affairs. However, it is useful to differentiate the physical from without: romantic love as separate and apart from courtly love when interpreting such topics as: "Marriage is no real excuse for not loving", "He who is not jealous cannot love", "No one can be bound by a double love", and "When made public love rarely endures".[11]

Some believe that romantic love evolved independently in multiple cultures. For example, in an article presented by Henry Grunebaum, he argues "therapists mistakenly believe that romantic love is a phenomenon unique to Western cultures and first expressed by the troubadours of the Middle Ages."[12]

The more current and Western traditional terminology meaning "court as lover" or the general idea of "romantic love" is believed to have originated in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, primarily from that of the French culture. This idea is what has spurred the connection between the words "romantic" and "lover," thus coining English phrases for romantic love such as "loving like the Romans do." The precise origins of such a connection are unknown, however. Although the word "romance" or the equivalents thereof may not have the same connotation in other cultures, the general idea of "romantic love" appears to have crossed cultures and been accepted as a concept at one point in time or another.

Types[edit]

Romantic love is contrasted with platonic love, which in all usages, precludes sexual relations, yet only in the modern usage does it take on a fully asexual sense, rather than the classical sense in which sexual drives are sublimated. Sublimation tends to be forgotten in casual thought about love aside from its emergence in psychoanalysis and Nietzsche.[citation needed]

Unrequited love can be romantic in different ways: comic, tragic, or in the sense that sublimation itself is comparable to romance, where the spirituality of both art and egalitarian ideals is combined with strong character and emotions. Unrequited love is typical of the period of romanticism, but the term is distinct from any romance that might arise within it.[13]

Romantic love may also be classified according to two categories, "popular romance" and "divine or spiritual" romance:

Popular romance
may include but is not limited to the following types: idealistic, normal intense (such as the emotional aspect of "falling in love"), predictable as well as unpredictable, consuming (meaning consuming of time, energy and emotional withdrawals and bids), intense but out of control (such as the aspect of "falling out of love") material and commercial (such as societal gain mentioned in a later section of this article), physical and sexual, and finally grand and demonstrative.
Divine (or spiritual) romance
may include, but is not limited to these following types: realistic, as well as plausible unrealistic, optimistic as well as pessimistic (depending upon the particular beliefs held by each person within the relationship.), abiding (e.g. the theory that each person had a predetermined stance as an agent of choice; such as "choosing a husband" or "choosing a soul mate."), non-abiding (e.g. the theory that we do not choose our actions, and therefore our romantic love involvement has been drawn from sources outside of ourselves), predictable as well as unpredictable, self-control (such as obedience and sacrifice within the context of the relationship) or lack thereof (such as disobedience within the context of the relationship), emotional and personal, soulful (in the theory that the mind, soul, and body, are one connected entity), intimate, and infinite (such as the idea that love itself or the love of a god or God's "unconditional" love is or could be everlasting)[14]

In philosophy[edit]

Greek philosophers and authors have had many theories of love.

Plato[edit]

Some of these theories are presented in Plato's Symposium. Six Athenian friends, including Socrates, drink wine and each give a speech praising the deity Eros. When his turn comes, Aristophanes says in his mythical speech that sexual partners seek each other because they are descended from beings with spherical torsos, two sets of human limbs, genitalia on each side, and two faces back to back. Their three forms included the three permutations of pairs of gender (i.e. one masculine and masculine, another feminine and feminine, and the third masculine and feminine) and they were split by the gods to thwart the creatures' assault on heaven, recapitulated, according to the comic playwright, in other myths such as the Aloadae.[15]

This story is relevant to modern romance partly because of the image of reciprocity it shows between the sexes. In the final speech before Alcibiades arrives, Socrates gives his encomium of love and desire as a lack of being, namely, the being or form of beauty.

French philosopher Gilles Deleuze linked this idea of love as a lack mainly to Sigmund Freud, and Deleuze often criticized it.

British writer Iain King has tried to establish rules for romance which are applicable across most cultures. He concluded on six rules, including:

  1. Do not flirt with someone unless you might mean it;
  2. Do not pursue people who you are not interested in, or who are not interested in you; and,
  3. In general, express your affection or uncertainty clearly, unless there is a special reason to not.[16]

René Girard[edit]

Though there are many theories of romantic love such as that of Robert Sternberg in which it is merely a mean combining liking and sexual desire, the major theories involve far more insight. For most of the 20th century, Freud's theory of the family drama dominated theories of romance and sexual relationships. This has given rise to a few counter-theories. Theorists like Deleuze counter Freud and Jacques Lacan by attempting to return to a more naturalistic philosophy:

René Girard argues that romantic attraction is a product of jealousy and rivalry—particularly in a triangular form.

Girard, in any case, downplays romance's individuality in favor of jealousy and the love triangle, arguing that romantic attraction arises primarily in the observed attraction between two others. A natural objection is that this is circular reasoning, but Girard means that a small measure of attraction reaches a critical point insofar as it is caught up in mimesis. Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream, As You Like It, and The Winter's Tale are the best known examples of competitive-induced romance.[17]

Girard's theory of mimetic desire is controversial because of its alleged sexism. This view has to some extent supplanted its predecessor, Freudian Oedipal theory. It may find some spurious support in the supposed attraction of women to aggressive men. As a technique of attraction, often combined with irony, it is sometimes advised that one feign toughness and disinterest, but it can be a trivial or crude idea to promulgate to men, and it is not given with much understanding of mimetic desire in mind. Instead, cultivating a spirit of self-sacrifice, coupled with an attitude of appreciation or contemplation, directed towards the other of one's attractions, constitutes the ideals of what we consider to be true romantic love. Mimesis is always the desire to possess, in renouncing it we offer ourselves as a sacrificial gift to the other.[18]

Mimetic desire is often challenged by feminists, such as Toril Moi,[19] who argue that it does not account for the woman as inherently desired.

Though the centrality of rivalry is not itself a cynical view, it does emphasize the mechanical in love relations. In that sense, it does resonate with capitalism and cynicism native to post-modernity. Romance in this context leans more on fashion and irony, though these were important for it in less emancipated times. Sexual revolutions have brought change to these areas. Wit or irony therefore encompass an instability of romance that is not entirely new but has a more central social role, fine-tuned to certain modern peculiarities and subversion originating in various social revolutions, culminating mostly in the 1960s.[20]

Arthur Schopenhauer[edit]

The process of courtship also contributed to Arthur Schopenhauer's pessimism, despite his own romantic success,[21] and he argued that to be rid of the challenge of courtship would drive people to suicide with boredom. Schopenhauer theorized that individuals seek partners who share certain interests and tastes, while at the same time looking for a "complement" or completing of themselves in a partner, as in the cliché that "opposites attract", but with the added consideration that both partners manifest this attraction for the sake of the species:

"But what ultimately draws two individuals of different sex exclusively to each other with such power is the will-to-live which manifests itself in the whole species, and here anticipates, in the individual that these two can produce, an objectification of its true nature corresponding to its aims." --World as Will and Representation, Volume 2, Chapter XLIV

Other philosophers[edit]

Later modern philosophers such as La Rochefoucauld, David Hume and Jean-Jacques Rousseau also focused on morality, but desire was central to French thought and Hume himself tended to adopt a French worldview and temperament. Desire in this milieu meant a very general idea termed "the passions," and this general interest was distinct from the contemporary idea of "passionate" now equated with "romantic." Love was a central topic again in the subsequent movement of Romanticism, which focused on such things as absorption in nature and the absolute, as well as platonic and unrequited love in German philosophy and literature.

Philosophers and authors interested in the nature of love, which may not have been mentioned in this article are Jane Austen, Stendhal, George Meredith, Proust, D. H. Lawrence, Freud, Sartre, de Beauvoir, Hemingway, Henry Miller, Deleuze, Alan Soble and Ayn Rand.

In literature[edit]

Romeo and Juliet parting on the balcony in Act III.

In the following excerpt, from William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, Romeo, in saying "all combined, save what thou must combine By holy marriage" implies that it is not marriage with Juliet that he seeks but simply to be joined with her romantically. "I pray That thou consent to marry us" implies that the marriage means the removal of the social obstacle between the two opposing families, not that marriage is sought by Romeo with Juliet for any other particular reason, as adding to their love or giving it any more meaning.

"Then plainly know my heart's dear love is set On the fair daughter of rich Capulet: As mine on hers, so hers is set on mine; And all combined, save what thou must combine By holy marriage: when and where and how We met, we woo'd and made exchange of vow, I'll tell thee as we pass; but this I pray, That thou consent to marry us to-day."

--Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene III

Shakespeare and Søren Kierkegaard share a similar viewpoint that marriage and romance are not harmoniously in tune with each other. In Shakespeare's Measure for Measure, for example, "...there has not been, nor is there at this point, any display of affection between Isabella and the Duke, if by affection we mean something concerned with sexual attraction. The two at the end of the play love each other as they love virtue."[22] Isabella needs love, and she may reject marriage with the Duke because he seeks to beget an heir with her for her virtues, and she is not happy with the limited kind of love that implies.

Shakespeare argues that marriage, because of its purity, simply cannot incorporate romance. The extramarital nature of romance is also clarified by John Updike in his novel Gertrude and Claudius, as well as by Hamlet. This same supposition of romance is also found in the film Braveheart or rather apparent in the example of Isabella of France's life.

Romance raises questions of emotivism (or in a more pejorative sense, nihilism) such as whether spiritual attraction, of the world, might not actually rise above or distinguish itself from that of the body or aesthetic sensibility.

While Buddha taught a philosophy of compassion and love, still in his philosophy of anatman or non-self spiritual appearances are of a piece with the world and essentially empty. The contradiction between compassion and anatman seems to be a part of Buddhism. In that case a seemingly negative insight can result in very different overall views, for example if one compares Buddha and Shakespeare with Friedrich Nietzsche.

Kierkegaard also addressed these ideas in works such as Either/Or and Stages on Life's Way.[23]

Tragedy and other social issues[edit]

The "tragic" contradiction between romance and society is most forcibly portrayed in literature, in Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, in Flaubert's Madame Bovary, and William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. The female protagonists in such stories are driven to suicide as if dying for a cause of freedom from various oppressions of marriage.

Even after sexual revolutions, on the other hand, to the extent that it does not lead to procreation (or child-rearing, as it also might exist in same-sex marriage), romance remains peripheral though it may have virtues in the relief of stress, as a source of inspiration or adventure, or in development and the strengthening of certain social relations. It is difficult to imagine the tragic heroines, however, as having such practical considerations in mind.

Romance can also be tragic in its conflict with society. The Tolstoy family focuses on the romantic limitations of marriage, and Anna Karenina prefers death to being married to her fiancé, however this is because she is tired of waiting and being hidden away from public, when her fiance makes failed attempts to get his mother's approval of the marriage. Even being aristocrats did not make them both free, as the society was nevertheless equally binding for all. Furthermore, in the speech about marriage that is given in Kierkegaard's Either/Or, Kierkegaard attempts to show that it is because marriage is lacking in passion fundamentally, that the nature of marriage, unlike romance, is explainable by a man who has experience of neither marriage nor love.

Reciprocity of the sexes appears in the ancient world primarily in myth where it is in fact often the subject of tragedy, for example in the myths of Theseus and Atalanta. Noteworthy female freedom or power was an exception rather than the rule, though this is a matter of speculation and debate.[24]

Psychology[edit]

Many theorists attempt to analyze the process of romantic love.

Helen Fisher[edit]

Anthropologist Helen Fisher, in her book "Why We Love," [25] uses brain scans to show that love is the product of a chemical reaction in the brain. Norepinephrine and dopamine, among other chemicals, are responsible for excitement and bliss in humans as well as non-human animals.

Fisher concludes that these reactions have a genetic basis, and therefore love is a natural drive as powerful as hunger.

John Townsend[edit]

In his book "What Women Want, What Men Want,",[26] anthropologist John Townsend takes the genetic basis of love one step further by identifying how the sexes are different in their predispositions.

Townsend's compilation of various research projects concludes that men are susceptible to youth and beauty, whereas women are susceptible to status and security. These differences are part of a natural selection process where males seek many healthy women of childbearing age which will mother offspring, whereas women seek men who are willing and able to take care of them and their children.

Karen Horney[edit]

Other researchers have focused on opposing forces in human love.

Psychologist Karen Horney in her article "The Problem of the Monogamous Ideal",[27] indicates that the overestimation of love leads to disillusionment; the desire to possess the partner results in the partner wanting to escape; and the taboos against sex result in non-fulfillment. Disillusionment plus the desire to escape plus non-fulfillment result in a secret hostility, which causes the other partner to feel alienated. Secret hostility in one and secret alienation in the other cause the partners to secretly hate each other. This secret hate often leads one or the other or both to seek love objects outside the marriage or relationship.

Harold Bessell[edit]

Psychologist Harold Bessell, Ph.D, in his book "The Love Test," [28] reconciles the opposing forces noted by the above researchers and shows that there are two factors that determine the quality of a relationship.

Bessell proposes that people are drawn together by a force which he calls "romantic attraction," which is a combination of genetic and cultural factors. This force may be weak or strong and may be felt to different degrees by each of the two love partners. The other factor is "emotional maturity," which is the degree to which a person is capable of providing good treatment in a love relationship. It can thus be said that an immature person is more likely to overestimate love, become disillusioned, and have an affair whereas a mature person is more likely to see the relationship in realistic terms and act constructively to work out problems.

Lisa M. Diamond[edit]

Romantic love in the abstract sense of the term, is traditionally referred to as involving a mix of emotional and sexual desire for another as a person. However, Lisa M. Diamond, a University of Utah psychology professor, proposes that sexual desire and romantic love are functionally independent[29] and that romantic love is not intrinsically oriented to same-gender or other-gender partners. She also proposes that the links between love and desire are bidirectional as opposed to unilateral. Furthermore, Diamond does not state that one's sex has priority over another sex (a male or female) in romantic love because her theory suggests it is as possible for someone who is homosexual to fall in love with someone of the other gender as for someone who is heterosexual to fall in love with someone of the same gender.[30] In her 2012 review of this topic, Diamond emphasized that what is true for men may not be true for women. According to Diamond, in most men sexual orientation is fixed and most likely innate, but in many women sexual orientation may vary from Kinsey 0 to Kinsey 6 and back again.[31]

Martie Haselton[edit]

Martie Haselton, a psychologist at UCLA, considers romantic love a "commitment device", or mechanism that encourages two humans to form a lasting bond. She has explored the evolutionary rationale that has shaped modern romantic love and has concluded that long-lasting relationships are helpful to ensure that children reach reproductive age and are fed and cared for by two parents. Haselton and her colleagues have found evidence in their experiments that suggest love's adaptation. The first part of the experiments consists of having people think about how much they love someone and then suppress thoughts of other attractive people. In the second part of the experiment the same people are asked to think about how much they sexually desire those same partners and then try to suppress thoughts about others. The results showed that love is more efficient in pushing out those rivals than sex.[32]

University research[edit]

Research by the University of Pavia suggests that romantic love lasts for about a year, and then it is replaced by a more stable form of love called companionate love.[33] In companionate love, changes occur from the early stage of love to when the relationship becomes more established and romantic feelings seem to end. However research done at Stony Brook University in New York suggests that some couples keep romantic feelings alive for much longer.[34]

Major theories[edit]

These are the major theories associated with current research on romantic relationships, especially in the context of positive psychology.

Attachment Patterns[edit]

As mentioned in the introduction, attachment styles that people develop as children can influence the way that they interact with partners in adult relationships, with secure attachment styles being associated with healthier and more trusting relationships than avoidant or anxious attachment styles.[35][36] Hazen and Shaver found that adult romantic attachment styles were similar to the categories of secure, avoidant, and anxious that had previously been studied in children’s attachments to their caregivers, demonstrating that attachment styles are stable across the lifespan.[37] Later on, researchers distinguished between dismissive avoidant attachment and fearful avoidant attachment.[38] Others have found that secure adult attachment, leading to the ability for intimacy and confidence in relationship stability, is characterized by low attachment-related anxiety and avoidance, while the fearful style is high on both dimensions, the dismissing style is low on anxiety and high on avoidance, and the preoccupied style is high on anxiety and low on avoidance.[39]

Romantic Love Definition/Operationalization[edit]

Singer (1984a,[40] 1984b,[41] 1987[42] ) first defined love based on four Greek terms: eros, meaning the search for beauty; philia, the feelings of affection in close friendships, nomos, the submission of and obedience to higher or divine powers, and agape, the bestowal of love and affection for the divine powers. While Singer did believe that love was important to world culture, he did not believe that romantic love played a major role (Singer, 1987 [42]). However, Susan Hendrick and Clyde Hendrick at Texas Tech University (1992,[43] 2009[44] ) have theorized that romantic love will play an increasingly important cultural role in the future, as it is considered an important part of living a fulfilling life. They also theorized that love in long-term romantic relationships has only been the product of cultural forces which came to fruition within the past 300 years. By cultural forces, they are referring to the increasing prevalence of individualistic ideologies, which are the result of an inward shift of many cultural worldviews.

Passionate and Companionate Love[edit]

Researchers have determined that romantic love is a complex emotion which can be divided into either passionate or companionate forms. Berscheid and Walster (1978[45] ) and Hatfield (1988[46] ) found that these two forms can co-exist, either simultaneously or intermittently. Passionate love is the arousal-driven emotion which often gives people extreme feelings of happiness, and can also give people feelings of anguish. Companionate love is the form which creates a steadfast bond between two people, and gives people feelings of peace. Hendrick and Hendrick (1995[47] ) studied college students who were in the early stages of a relationship and found that almost half reported that their significant other was their closest friend, providing evidence that both passionate and companionate love exist in new relationships. Conversely, in a study of long-term marriages, researchers (Contreras, Hendrick, and Hendrick, 1996[48] ) found that couples endorsed measures of both companionate love and passionate love and that passionate love was the strongest predictor of marital satisfaction, showing that both can types of love can endure throughout the years.

The Triangular Theory of Love[edit]

Psychologist Robert Sternberg (1986[49] ) developed the Triangular Theory of Love. He theorized that love is a combination of three main components: passion (physical arousal); intimacy (psychological feelings of closeness); and commitment (the sustaining of a relationship). He also theorized that the different combinations of these three components could yield up to seven different forms of love. These include popularized forms such as romantic love (intimacy and passion) and consummate love (passion, intimacy, and commitment). The other forms are liking (intimacy), companionate love (intimacy and commitment), empty love (commitment), fatuous love (passion and commitment), and infatuation (passion). Studies on Sternberg’s theory love found that intimacy most strongly predicted marital satisfaction in married couples, with passion also being an important predictor (Silberman, 1995[50] ). On the other hand, Acker and Davis (1992[51] ) found that commitment was the strongest predictor of relationship satisfaction, especially for long-term relationships.

The Self-Expansion Theory of Romantic Love[edit]

Researchers Arthur and Elaine Aron (1986[52] ) theorized that humans have a basic drive to expand their self-concepts. Further, their experience with Eastern concepts of love caused them to believe that positive emotions, cognitions, and relationships in romantic behaviors all drive the expansion of a person’s self-concept. A study following college students for 10 weeks showed that those students who fell in love over the course of the investigation reported higher feelings of self-esteem and self efficacy than those who did not (Aron, Paris, and Aron, 1995[53] ).

Mindful Relationships[edit]

Harvey and Ormarzu (1997[54] ) developed a model of minding relationships which included five key components. These five components are: seeking to know and be known by the other; using knowledge learned in a relationship to enhance the relationship; accepting the other person; being motivated to continue this process of learning, enhancing, and accepting; and developing a sense of appreciation in the relationship. Each of these components is considered adaptive, however, nonadaptive steps to minding a relationship were also theorized by the research team. The five nonadaptive components include: one or both partners out of step in seeking to know and be known by the other; not using the knowledge learned in a relationship to enhance the relationship (or using that knowledge to hurt the other); low acceptance and respect for the other person; not being motivated to continue to process of learning, enhancing, and accepting; and failing to develop a sense of appreciation in a relationship. Gottman studies the components of a flourishing romantic relationship have been studied in the lab (1994;[55] Gottman & Silver, 1999[56] ). He used to physiological and behavioral measures during couples’ interactions to predict relationship success and found that five positive interactions to one negative interaction are needed to maintain a healthy relationship. He established a therapy intervention for couples that focused on civil forms of disapproval, a culture of appreciation, acceptance of responsibility for problems, and self-soothing (Gottman, Driver, & Tabares, 2002[57] ).

Relationship Behaviors[edit]

The most recent research on romantic love and relationships is focused on the behaviors which either sustain a relationship or aid in its dissolution. These behaviors can be considered either appetitive or aversive. Appetitive relationship processes are considered the promotion of positive relationship behaviors, as determined by psychologists Gable and Reis (2001,[58] 2003[59] ). Aversive relationship processes are described as the eliminating the behaviors which have a negative effect on relationships (Gable and Reis 2001,[58] 2003[59] ). This new research has also allowed relationship success to be predicted as a function of these appetitive and aversive processes. This is all related to research which shows that sharing positive life events with one’s partner is related to greater relationship satisfaction and intimacy (Gable et al., 2004[60] ). In research by Gable et al. (2003) appetitive (promotion of positive relationship behaviors) and aversive (elimination of negative relationship behaviors) processes are independent constructs. A specific type of appetitive processing, capitalization, leads to increased relationship satisfaction and intimacy when one member of the relationship tells the other about positive life events and receive quality reactions and feedback from the partner (Gable, Reis, Impett, & Asher, 2004[60] ).

Applications[edit]

Awareness of major theories on positive romantic relationships and knowledge of proven findings that support them gives couples the tools to strengthen their relationships and allows single individuals to have the resources to build a flourishing relationship in the future. Access to information like this could contribute to the reduction of divorce rates in the United States, as well as producing happier and healthier home lives for many families. For example, though there appears to be a correlation between an increased divorce rate and premarital cohabitation, living with a person of romantic interest before marriage still appears to be a common and growing trend.[61] Knowledge of this is one way in which positive psych could help aid flourishing relationships.

In addition to the aforementioned factors, awareness would also provide the opportunity for people to better understand or empathize with those who may not illustrate the level of positivity found in these major theories. Knowing this information can help with coming to terms with someone that is particularly difficult in a given romantic relationship, and could help one aid them to a better outlook through this gain of knowledge. The attachment style of individuals has a strong influence on the way future relationships are created and harnessed. While those with a secure attachment style fare better, one may be prone to more bumps in the road if having a disorganized style of attachment.

With a heightened awareness comes an upward spiral of positive relationships in general. Having younger individuals modeled by positive interactions would, in turn, greatly influence the probability of these individuals implementing such behaviors in their own social relationships.

Controversies[edit]

Researchers such as Feeney and Noller question the stability of attachment style across the life span since studies that measured attachment styles at time points ranging from 2 weeks to 8 months found that 1 out of 4 adults’ attachment style changed.[62] Furthermore, a study by Lopez and Gormley found that attachment styles could change during the first year of college and that changes to more secure attachment styles were associated with adjustments in self-confidence ratings and coping styles.[63] On the other hand, attachment styles in childhood mirror the ones found in adult romantic relationships.[64] In addition, research has shown that building interpersonal connections strengthens neural regulatory systems that are involved in emotions of empathy, enjoyment of positive social events, and stress management,[65][66] providing evidence that early social interactions affect adult relationships.

Conclusions[edit]

This section briefly discusses the implications of current research on romance and love within the context of positive psychology.

Contemporary research on love and romantic relationships is heavily influenced by positive psychology. Specifically, concepts from positive psychology such as building flourishing relationships through appetitive processes are being used to study how to correct relationship problems, especially in a romantic context.[58] Further, this new research is also based on known empirical findings, such as the fact that attachment styles are important in the maintenance of successful relationships, romantic or not.[67] From this, couples can maintain and build flourishing relationships, by implementing mindful relationship behaviors and increasing positive interactions, as opposed to using negative communication styles.[60]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Serena Gordon of HealthDay (March 25, 2009). "Romantic Love: Study disputes notion that passion can't be part of long-term relationships". US News. Retrieved January 14, 2013. "...In the early stages of a relationship, everything's uncertain, and there's a lot of anxiety..." 
  2. ^ Anonymous (Jan 25, 2013). "Romantic love". Citizendium. Retrieved 2013-02-12. 
  3. ^ Power and Sexual Fear in Primitive Societies Margrit Eichler Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 37, No. 4, Special Section: Macrosociology of the Family (Nov., 1975), pp. 917-926.
  4. ^ Lévi-Strauss pioneered the scientific study of the betrothal of cross cousins in such societies, as a way of solving such technical problems as the avunculate and the incest taboo (Introducing Lévi-Strauss), p. 22-35.
  5. ^ Shumway, David R (2003). Romance, Intimacy, and The Marriage Crisis. ISBN 978-0-8147-9831-7. Retrieved 2010-07-08. 
  6. ^ Middle Ages.com - Courtly Love
  7. ^ Courtly Love and the origins of romance
  8. ^ a b A History of Women: Silences of the Middle Ages
  9. ^ International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: K-P by Geoffrey W. Bromiley 1994 ISBN 0-8028-3783-2 page 272
  10. ^ James Ross Sweeney (1983). "Chivalry", in Dictionary of the Middle Ages, Volume III.
  11. ^ The Art of Courtly Love by Andreas Capellanus
  12. ^ [1] Thinking about romantic/erotic love
  13. ^ Beethoven, however, is the case in point. He had brief relationships with only a few women, always of the nobility. His one actual engagement was broken off mainly because of his conflicts with noble society as a group. This is evidenced in his biography, such as in Maynard Solomon's account.
  14. ^ Romance In Marriage: Perspectives, Pitfalls, and Principles, by Jason S. Carroll http://ce.byu.edu/cw/cwfamily/archives/2003/Carroll.Jason.pdf
  15. ^ Symposium 189d ff.
  16. ^ How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time: Solving the Riddle of Right and Wrong, 2008, p. 154
  17. ^ In works such as A Theatre of Envy and Things Hidden Since the Foundation of The World, Girard presents this mostly original theory, though finding a major precedent in Shakespeare on the structure of rivalry, claiming that it—rather than Freud's theory of the primal horde—is the origin of religion, ethics, and all aspects of sexual relations.
  18. ^ Things Hidden from the Foundation of the World, Rene Girard, Stanford University Press, 1978, pp. 283-350.
  19. ^ The Missing Mother: The Oedipal Rivalries of René Girard. Toril Moi, Diacritics Vol. 12, No. 2, Cherchez la Femme Feminist Critique/Feminine Text (Summer, 1982), pp. 21-31
  20. ^ A contemporary irony toward romance is perhaps the expression "throwing game" or simply game. In Marxism the romantic might be considered an example of alienation.
  21. ^ Essays and Aphorisms
  22. ^ The Marriage of Duke Vincentio and Isabella Norman Nathan Shakespeare Quarterly > Vol. 7, No. 1 (Winter, 1956), pp. 43-45
  23. ^ "In the first place, I find it comical that all men are in love and want to be in love, and yet one never can get any illumination upon the question what the lovable, i.e., the proper object of love, really is." (Stages p. 48). Nietzsche, while he might answer negatively to the platonic theory of love as having a transcendent object, being a naturalist, was more interested intellectually in marriage than in romance, as evinced by the many aphorisms on marriage in Human All Too Human. In any case, Nietzsche is often taken as diametrically opposed to Kierkegaard, of whom there is often supposed mention in Thus Spake Zarathustra alongside Leo Tolstoy. (Shakespeare raises a similar criticism about the meaning of love in Measure for Measure, and Love's Labors Lost is often considered Shakespeare's encomium on love.)
  24. ^ Cf. Hegel's Philosophy of History, or womenintheancientworld.com.
  25. ^ Helen Fisher, 2004, "Why We Love" Henry Holt and Company LLC, 175 Fifth Ave. New York, NY 10010, ISBN 0-8050-7796-0
  26. ^ John Townsend, 1998, "What Women Want, What Men Want" Oxford University Press, United Kingdom ISBN 978-0-19-511488-1
  27. ^ Karen Horney, 1967, "Feminine Psychology," W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., New, York, NY ISBN 0-393-31080-9
  28. ^ Harold Bessell, 1984 "The Love Test," Warner Books, 666 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10103, ISBN 0-446-32582-1
  29. ^ Lisa M. Diamond (2004). "Emerging Perspectives On Distinctions Between Romantic Love and Sexual Desire". Current Directions in Psychological Science 13 (3): 116–119. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00287.x. 
  30. ^ Lisa Diamond (2003). "What does Sexual Orientation Orient? A Biobehavioral Model Distinguishing Romantic Love and Sexual Desire". Psychological Review 110 (1): 173–192. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.110.1.173. PMID 12529061. 
  31. ^ Lisa M. Diamond (2012). "The desire disorder in research on sexual orientation in women". Archives of Sexual Behavior 41 (1): 73–83. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-9909-7. 
  32. ^ Zimmer, Carl (2008-01-17). "Romance Is An Illusion". Time. Retrieved 2010-07-08. 
  33. ^ "Romantic love 'lasts just a year'". BBC News. 2005-11-28. Retrieved 2010-04-10. 
  34. ^ "Scientists: True love can last a lifetime". CNN. 2009-01-04. Retrieved 2010-04-10. 
  35. ^ Ainsworth, M (1979). "Infant-mother attachments". American Psychologist 34 (10): 932–937. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.34.10.932. 
  36. ^ Simpson, J (1990). "Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships". Journal of personality and social psychology 59 (5): 971–980. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.971. 
  37. ^ Hazen, C; Shaver, P (1987). "Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process". Journal of personality and social psychology 52 (3): 511–524. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511. 
  38. ^ Bartholomew, K; Horowitz, L (1991). "Attachment styles among young adults: a test of a four-category model". Journal of personality and social psychology 61 (2): 226–244. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.226. 
  39. ^ Brennan, K; Clark, C; Shaver, P (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment. Attachment theory and close relationship. Attachment theory and close relationships. pp. 46–76. 
  40. ^ Singer, Irving (1984). The Nature of Love: Vol. 1. Plato to Luther. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 
  41. ^ Singer, Irving (1984). The Nature of Love: Vol. 2. Courtly and romantic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 
  42. ^ a b Singer, Irving (1987). The Nature of love: Vol. 3. The modern world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 
  43. ^ Hendrick, S. S.; Hendrick, C. (1992). Romantic Love. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 
  44. ^ Hendrick, C.; Hendrick, S. S. (2009). S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder, ed. Oxford handbook of positive psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 447–454. 
  45. ^ Berscheid, E.; Walster, E. (1978). Interpersonal Attraction (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. 
  46. ^ Hatfield, E. (1988). "Passionate and companionate love". In R. J. Sternberg & M. I. Barnes. The Psychology of Love. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. pp. 191–217. 
  47. ^ Hendrick, S. S.; Hendrick, C. (1995). "Gender differences and similarities in sex and love". Personal Relationships 2 (1): 55–65. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00077.x. 
  48. ^ Contreras, R.; Hendrick, S. S.; Hendrick, C. (1996). "Perspectives of Marital Love and Satisfaction in Mexican American and Anglo-American Couples". Journal of Counseling & Development 74 (4): 408–415. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1996.tb01887.x. 
  49. ^ Sternberg, R. J. (1986). "A Triangular Theory of love". Psychological Review 93: 119–135. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.93.2.119. 
  50. ^ Silberman, S. (1995). "The relationships among love, marital satisfaction and duration of marriage". Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University. 
  51. ^ Acker, M.; Davis, M. H. (1992). "Intimacy, passion and commitment in adult romantic relationships: A test of the triangular theory of love". Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 9 (1): 21–50. doi:10.1177/0265407592091002. 
  52. ^ Aron, A.; Aron, E. N. (1986). Love and the expansion of self: Understanding attraction and satisfaction. New York: Hemisphere. 
  53. ^ Aron, A.; Paris, M.; Aron, E. N. (1995). "Falling in love: Prospective studies of self-concept change". Journal of Personality and social Psychology 69 (6): 1102–1112. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1102. 
  54. ^ Harvey, J. H.; Ormarzu, J. (1997). "Minding the close relationship". Personality and Social Psychology Review 1: 223–239. 
  55. ^ Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce?: The relationship between marital processes and marital outcomes. New York: Psychology Press. 
  56. ^ Gottman, J. M.; Silver, N. (1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. New York: Random House LLC. 
  57. ^ Gottman, J. M.; Driver, J.; Tabares, A. (2002). "Building the Sound Marital House: An empirically-derived couple therapy". In A. S. Gurman and N. S. Jacobson. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford PRess. 
  58. ^ a b c Gable, S. L.; Reis, H. T. (2001). "Appetitive and aversive social interaction". In J. Harvey & A. Wenzel. Close romantic relationships: Maintenance and Enhancement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp. 169–194. 
  59. ^ a b Gable, S. L.; Reis, H. T.; Elliot, A. J. (2003). "Evidence for bivariate systems: An empirical test of appetition and aversion across domains". Journal of Research in Personality 37 (5): 349–372. doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(02)00580-9. 
  60. ^ a b c Gable, S. L.; Reis, H. T.; Impett, E. A.; Asher, E. R. (2004). "What do you do when things go right? The intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing positive events". Journal of personality and social psychology 87 (2): 511–524. 
  61. ^ Axinn, William G.; Alrland Thornton (August 1992). "The Relationship between Cohabitation and Divorce: Selectivity or Causal Influence?". Demography 29 (3): 357–374. doi:10.2307/2061823. Retrieved 20 April 2014. 
  62. ^ Feeney, J; Noller, P (1996). Adult Attachment. Sage. 
  63. ^ Lopez, F; Gormley, B (2002). "Stability and change in adult attachment style over the first-year college transition: Relations to self-confidence, coping, and distress patterns". Journal of Counseling Psychology 49 (3): 355–364. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.49.3.355. 
  64. ^ Collins, N; Reads, S (1990). "Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples". Journal of personality and social psychology 58 (4): 644–663. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.644. 
  65. ^ Schore, A (1994). Affect regulation and the origin of the self: The neurobiology of emotional development. Psychology Press. 
  66. ^ Taylor, S; Dickerson, S.; Klein, L. (2002). "oward a biology of social support". Handbook of positive psychology: 556–569. 
  67. ^ Hazan, C.; Shaver, P. (1987). "Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process". Journal of personality and social psychology 52 (3): 511–524. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511. 

Further reading[edit]

  • Kierkegaard, Søren. Stages on Life's Way. Transl. Walter Lowrie, D.D. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1940.
  • Lévi-Strauss, Claude. Structural Anthropology. London: Allen Lane, 1968; New York: Penguin Books, 1994. Structural Anthropology. (volume 2) London: Allen Lane, 1977; New York: Peregrine Books 1976.
  • Nietzsche, Friedrich. Human, All Too Human. Transl. R.J. Hollingdale. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2nd Edition, 1996.
  • Wiseman, Boris. Introducing Lévi-Strauss. New York: Totem Books, 1998.
  • Denis de Rougemont, Love in the Western World. Pantheon Books, 1956.
  • Francesco Alberoni, Falling in love, New York, Random House, 1983.
  • Brad Hayden, "falling in love" Canada, Random place, 2007 Made possible by Cora-lee Reid.
  • de Munck, Victor, and Andrey Korotayev. Sexual Equality and Romantic Love: A Reanalysis of Rosenblatt's Study on the Function of Romantic Love // Cross-Cultural Research 33 (1999): 265–277.

External links[edit]