The Radical Idea Of Marriage For Love: Bernard Shaw Comments

In the beginning of the twentieth century, George Bernard Shaw portrayed marriage as the factor for two individuals to come together. His comments were humorous about being marriaged and that a couple was suppose to become married because of specific factors, one being profound love. He thought that extreme, extensive love, and being wed up until death do them part was a sort of fantasy.

In the past it was unique for a couple to get married. Although some historians and other scientists utilized to think that falling in love to get wed was an Western development.

Individuals have actually fell in love throughout history and been wed simply since they just enjoyed one another. When this transpired it was a risk to crucial social order. The Greek theorist Plato believed that "love was a fantastic feeling that led males to act honorably (Stephanie Coontz pg 378).

Some societies assumed that falling in love after a couple was wed was better. If a society authorized of love marriage, it might ruin their dedication to household, next-door neighbors, or God.

Get quality help now

WriterBelle

Verified writer

Proficient in: Love

4.7 (657)

“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The Greeks and them Medieval age seen love illness as a type of "insanity" which it was interrupting to a person. Later on in the Middle Ages the French decided that love was an imbalance to the mind, that could be treated by sexual relations. By doing this you could move on to more vital concerns. The most famous love affair throughout that Middle Ages and occurred with Peter Abelard and Heloise. This couple eloped without weding, with Heloise having Peter's child.

Heloise refused to the concept that her uncle proposed about them getting wed, she specified that it would weaken their love for one another.

Many cultures thought is was inappropriate for a man to kiss his wife in front of anyone. The couple was suppose to keep their love under strict control with no public exposures. Some Roman and Greek philosophers said that a man who loved his wife with “excessive” ardor was a “adulterer” said Coontz. During the Medieval era Muslims were more approving of sexual intercourse between a man and his wife, while Christians believed that it would weaken their relationship with God. Many cultures still dislike putting love first in the marriage. Coontz stated,” that she did not believe that people of the past had more control over hearts as we do today, but love in marriage then was a bonus not a necessity like we try to achieve in marriages today“(Stephanie Coontz pg 381)

A married couple who clearly loved one another did not mean it would always work out. A Roman statesman wrote his wife of thirty years numerous of love letters, but love and those letters did not prevent him from divorcing her when he could not adapt to the way she provided for him. Europeans believed that he who married for love would have good and bad days.

Living happily every after is term we used for today’s marriages. Happily ever  after has its common understanding that married couples should live the rest of their lives that way. That understanding consists of: They must love one another deeply and choose each other , each must make the partner top priority in life, put their relationship above all other competing ties, parents and in-laws should not interfere with the relationship, the married couple should be best friends, they should talk to each other about problems, and be sexually faithful to one another.

The revolutionary implications of the love match were people who established new ideas about love. In the Western hemisphere they started to believe in companionship, intimacy ,and true love. They wanted to make marriage more secure and put loyalties and affection first. Critics of the love match argued about this new idea. They thought that choosing their own companion would just spin out of control. After the Revolutionary War there was separation of church and state. Preachers could no longer invade on people’s private lives to make sure the right people got married and had children or to stop the wrong ones from doing so Coontz stated.

Marriage between a couple should be linked with companionship, intimacy, and true love. I agree with Coontz about choosing the partner you want to marry. Your marriage should be fulfilled with love and intimacy. In life you choose how you want to live it and most people want to be happy, so in choosing the person you love and that makes you happy, will lead to a happier and healthier lifestyle. If other people had to choose the person you wanted to marry, it could cause you to be depressed and see no point in life because you do not get to make one of the bigger decisions of your life.

People find the person they marry at different times in their life. Some may be really young in their late teens to early twenties and others in their early thirties and up. This is no rules or regulations to when you should find that right person. Although there are reasons why people should marry for love. First you should marry someone you get along with well and enjoy being with. Secondly you marry that person because you have a intimate relationship and your sexually attracted to them. Last you should know in you heart who your true love is and that is the person you should marry and spend the rest of you life with.