I have found myself thinking a lot of the part of the Literary Theory book that talks about “no one would ever have thought of being in love if they hadn’t read about it in books, and the notion of romantic love is arguably a massive literary creation.” My first, natural response to this statement was that this is absolutely not true! But once I gave it more thought, I have come to realilze that the idea of romantic love as we know it is a direct result of not only the literature we have read but movies and other forms of media as well.
Obviously love is a natural human emotion but it is the way we act upon this emotion and what we expect from this emotion that has roots in the literature we have read. I think the classic fairy tales have influenced romantic love greatly—there’s this expectation of perfect cohabitation and happily ever after.
This may be a stretch but I can’t help but wonder if this is the reason there are so many failed marriages in America. Many people enter into a whirl-wind relationship and get married really soon/young. I think people want and expect some fairy tale relationship to simply happen without putting much effort into making the relationship work.
I think it is common in fairy tales and other forms of literature for the characters to fall in love rather quickly and live some charmed life while putting very little effort into really getting to know each other and develop a meaningful relationship based on deep and true feelings of love.
With literature idealizing this type of surface-level relationship it is no wonder that today’s society is characterized by an excessive number of divorced and failed marriages/relationships. I realize I have a fairly cynical viewpoint when it comes to love but I think generally speaking, my observations are true/correct. Most, if not all, aspects of our lives are influenced by literature and other media forms and our notion of love and relationships is no exception.
Hi Kelsey, Thanks for the good blog post. I could not agree more, and in fact this is something that I wanted to go back to you in class. Here, I think, is an instance when we can see how we have been interpellated. Culler is interesting on this point. thanks for posting. dw
ReplyDeleteHi Kelsey,
ReplyDeleteThe claim by La Rouchefoucald that “no one would have ever thought of being in love if they (incorrect pronoun reference!) hadn’t read about it in books,” (Literary Theory, p. 96) reflects theorists’ belief that language does not refer to a prior, established state of affairs but actually creates the state of affairs it refers to. While I agree that the idea of romantic love is often the direct result of literary, film, and advertising models, I question whether the core idea of “being in love” or the longing for a romantic, lifelong relationship is the result of language. I see both the idea of and the emotional need for this closest of all human relationships as something inherent in human nature and, contrary to the claims of theorists, an essential human need. Even children can feel and recognize this emotion to some extent, such as when a child has a “crush” on another child or some adult figure. As you note, fairy tales, which are surface-type stories, do greatly influence our idealization of how romantic love should look and in the absence of healthy modeling by parents or others in our families, we all too often buy into the fancy that either a “Prince Charming” or “damsel in distress” will be the answer to our longing for marital bliss. While a “love at first sight” relationship does work out from time to time, it is not the norm. As you also point out, such surface-level relationships must deal with the reality that “happily ever after” involves give-and-take, lots of effort, patience, and forgiveness, and most importantly of all, love.