Our ability to wander among temporal dimensions, including comparing the past with present and future situations, can prompt a sense of regret. Regret can be understood as a negative attitude toward our past behavior. In the short term, regret often concerns past actions that generated negative consequences; in the long term, however, regret tends to involve inaction—the road not taken—which is seen as responsible for our current limited horizons.15 Americans, according to one study, express great regret concerning their choices in four fields: education, career, romance, and parenting. Education tops that list, since it functions as a gateway to highly valued options, from higher income to more challenging careers to a diversity of social and romantic contacts. We regret most not extending our horizons. Regret is intimately entwined with opportunity; that is, we are inclined to regret when the prospect of change, growth, and renewal is not fulfilled.16
Worry can be thought of as a negative attitude toward our future behavior and circumstances. In the short term, we might worry about specific future events that can harm us; in the long term, worry concerns the future shrinking of our horizons. When we are young, we usually perceive our future horizons as expanding. As we age or become sick, the horizon appears to shrink. Laura Carstensen claims that our motivation in each case is different. When we see our horizons as expanding, we are motivated to broaden our interests and the types of activities we pursue; when we see them as shrinking, we are more likely to focus on the options we already have. This is particularly evident in old age, women’s awareness of their “biological clock,” and during times of war. Thus, as we grow older, increasingly perceiving time as finite and our horizons as constrained, we reorder our priorities. We attach less importance to long-term considerations and greater significance to goals from which we derive immediate emotional meaning.17 However, while at a young age, the immediate meaning relates to external (romantic and otherwise) options; at an older age, the immediate meanings tend to be part of our current frame of living.
In the romantic realm, we demonstrate an appreciation of long-term considerations when we nurture our current relationships rather than expend effort on new romantic opportunities. This tending of our own garden encourages a sense of being happy with one’s own portion, which in turn decreases the feeling of being romantically compromised and the inclination to look elsewhere. While short-term possibilities tend to take the front burner, it is our long-term horizons that guide our most profound attitudes concerning personal and romantic flourishing.
I Love You, but I Am Leaving You
I’m sorry, I love you, but I have to leave you. You were the right choice, but not my “happy” choice.
HALLIE MANTEGNA
There is love, of course. And then there’s life, its enemy.
JEAN ANOUILH
The claim “I love you, but I am leaving you” seems paradoxical. If you love me, why should you leave me? After all, love implies the wish to be with the beloved, and not to leave him. Despite this paradoxical tone, we shall see that there is no paradox in this claim.
Sometimes love and life clash, and we have to make compromises—one such compromise is leaving the one you love.
The Importance of Love in Life
All you need is love.
THE BEATLES
Romantic love adds sweetness to our lives. It does much more than that, however: it enhances health, happiness, and flourishing. It makes us feel alive. Thus, marriages, which are the prevailing framework of long-term love, have been linked to many health advantages, such as lower psychological distress, greater well–being, fewer doctor visits, lower blood pressure, faster healing, and longer life. Love clearly stimulates health, well-being, and (re)productivity. The connection between love (and marriage) and happiness (including flourishing and health) works both ways: it is easier for happy people to fall in love, and it is more likely that those in love will be happy.18 Hence, those reporting their marriage as “very happy” are among the happiest of people—57 percent of these couples declared life as a whole to be very happy (compared with 10 percent of those whose marriage is “pretty happy” and 3 percent of those with a “not-too-happy” marriage).19
The situation, however, is more complex, as not all marriages are equal: unhappy marriages provide fewer benefits than happy ones. Studies indicate that those not too happy in marriage also had equal or worse health and mortality risk compared to those who were never married, divorced or separated, or widowed. Thus, although being married is associated with better outcomes than not being married, unhappy, poorly functioning marriages may be as harmful to health as happy marriages are beneficial. Marriage is not a panacea; it is beneficial only for those who are pretty happy or very happy in their marriage.20
The Importance of Life in Love
Goodbye taught me that people don’t always stay and the things that belonged to you today can belong to someone else tomorrow.
RANIA NAIM
We need to love in order to flourish. And it is equally true that profound love craves a flourishing life. Thus, we come to the thorny issue of whether to remain in a romantic relationship that prevents one’s personal flourishing. In this regard, the late Princess Diana once quipped, “They say it is better to be poor and happy than rich and miserable, but how about a compromise like moderately rich and just moody?” Similarly, one might claim that it is better to be poor in love than rich without love, but how about a compromise like being moderately rich and just loving (rather being madly in love with) each other?
In romantic compromises, we give up a romantic value, such as passionate love, in exchange for a nonromantic quality-of-life value. Such compromise stems from the awareness that we are limited creatures; we cannot always meet our standards or achieve our ideals. Survival sometimes depends on being flexible, settling for something less—or simply different—than we might have wanted.
Today, the prevailing view is love over life. Time and again, we hear that “love always wins” and “love always finds a way.” Life might not be the greatest enemy of love, but it often involves considerations that clash with romantic ones. To admit that in some circumstances life should take precedence over love is to admit the necessity of romantic compromises. As Kierkegaard rightly said, “Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced.” And it is a reality that we must take into account.
Despite the importance of love in life and life in love, love and life often clash. This conflict underlies the situation of leaving the person you love. Usually, this conflict can be traced to one of two issues: (1) romantic reasons that have to do with the nature of love between the partners, and (2) reasons concerning the flourishing life of the partners.
I Love You, but Not Strongly Enough
There is a difference between someone who wants you and someone who would do anything to keep you. Actions speak louder than wishes.
UNKNOWN
Romantic love is not an all-or-nothing attitude—it comes in different degrees. Some degrees are good enough for having an affair for a few weeks or months, but not sufficient for sustaining long-term love. Examples of common reasons for loving and leaving in this group are the following:
“I found a new lover.”
“In the past, I have loved someone more strongly than I love you.”
“I am happy with you in the short term [great romantic intensity], but I do not see prospects for the long term [not much romantic profundity].”
“We are great sexual partners, but not good friends.”
“We are profound friends, but not great sexual partners.”
“There are major flaws in your behavior preventing me from trusting you and feeling calm with you.”
“I cannot give you the love you deserve”; or more bluntly, “My feelings toward you are not strong enough.”
The reasons in this group are mainly comparative—indicating a lower level of love or romantic suitability. Here, there is some degree of love, but that degree is not sufficient
—at least not when compared to other available options. Choosing life is even clearer when love is not achieved. As one woman said, “I have never really been in love before, so I’m going to go with money.”
I Love You but Cannot Live with You
Look, I hate good-byes, too. But sometimes, we need them just to survive.
RACHEL CAINE
If I should stay, I would only be in your way, So I’ll go, but I will always love you.
DOLLY PARTON (and later, Whitney Houston)
Long-term romantic relationships should take into account nonromantic factors concerning the living together of the two partners. Loving someone is not always sufficient for deciding to live with someone. Living together and establishing a family together certainly require love—but much more than that. They require the ability to help each other flourish. Examples of common reasons on this basis are the following:
“I love you, but I’m not ready.”
“You cannot help me to flourish because you do not bring out the best in me.”
“I cannot help you to flourish—on the contrary, being with me blocks your flourishing.”
“We are not suitable for building a long-term, thriving life together.”
“You are not a good father, husband, or provider (though you may be a great lover).”
In this group of reasons, the degree of love is sufficient for supporting enduring love, but not enduring living together.
People sometimes prefer thriving in life over love—it can be their own thriving or that of their partner. An illustration of the first kind is the case of a married woman who said that she loved her first husband very much, but something was missing in their relationship that made her decide to divorce him: “There was nothing wrong with him,’ she said, “but nevertheless I felt that self-fulfillment would not be part of my life. He would not block it, but he would not bring out the best in me. With my second husband, I have many fights, but I do feel his profound passion and ability to bring out the best in me.” This woman chose losing her first husband over losing herself.
An example of preferring the partner’s thriving over love is the case of a partner who, out of profound love, ends a relationship saying that staying together would make his or her beloved miserable in the long term. This is the theme of the above-mentioned song “I Will Always Love You,” which many consider the greatest love song of all time. In taking into account this reality, we sometimes hear of a partner, out of profound love, ending a relationship out of concern that staying together would make his or her beloved miserable in the long term. In this case, ending the relationship expresses a genuine interest in the other’s profound well-being.
Love, and especially intense love, can make us neglect important aspects of life, thereby hurting ourselves in a way that risks our togetherness. In his memorable song “So Long, Marianne,” Leonard Cohen says, “You know that I love to live with you,” but adds, “You make me forget so very much, I forget to pray for the angels, And then the angels forget to pray for us”; hence, “So long, Marianne.”
Profound love is indeed about the heart’s tendencies—but it does not stop there. This kind of love takes the partner and his or her flourishing deeply into account. Profound love involves the desire to live with a partner who is thriving in mutual relationship. Sometimes, when this desire cannot be fulfilled, life wins over love, and one partner might say to the other something along the lines of “l will always love you, but I do not believe in the future of our love, as we cannot flourish together.” Accordingly, profound love is not identical to long-term love. There are couples who divorce despite their profound love.
Profound love cannot remain oblivious to the beloved’s thriving—such flourishing is essential for enduring profound love. Bringing out the best in each other, a critical component of lasting love, is impossible in the face of certain extreme challenges, such as when one partner is deeply despondent or when poverty is making life miserable. One might feel that staying together will prevent the partner or both of them from flourishing, or (in the case of a married person) will have a negative impact on any children involved. In such cases, love often takes second place to the need for broader flourishing.
Is Love All We Need?
All you need is love. But a little chocolate now and then doesn’t hurt.
CHARLES SCHULZ
We have seen that romantic love has a very positive impact upon one’s life. However, people need more than love to flourish. For love to thrive and endure, we need a good-enough living framework. When romantic love thrives, it can contribute to a more general feeling of thriving. Sometimes, however, love and life conflict.
And so, we can find ourselves asking: Which takes precedence, love or life? This can be a hard call. At one extreme, one might sacrifice life for love (let’s remember Romeo and Juliet). At the other, one might sacrifice love for life (remaining in a loveless, but otherwise comfortable, marriage, for example). Of course, most of us make romantic decisions that fall somewhere between these harrowing poles. It is the strength of love, the nature of life’s demands, and the degree of conflict between them that dictate exactly where we wind up on that continuum.
When intense desire is perceived as the core of romantic love, the conflict between romantic love and life ramps up. Such desire is usually brief and decreases with time. Life, by contrast, tends to last. A lover cannot be blind to life, and love does not always win. In any case, love cannot replace life.
Indeed, in a study on partners in romantic relationships who provided reports on perceived changes in their relationship, the participants who continue to be together during the study (four years) perceived that their love, commitment, and satisfaction were increasing over time. However, in the case of the couples who experienced breakup, satisfaction was perceived to decrease the most, whereas love was perceived to decrease the least. These results suggest that “people do not end their relationships because of the disappearance of love, but because of a dissatisfaction or unhappiness that develops, which may then cause love to stop growing.”21
When love and life go head-to-head, love almost always loses, especially when it is based on intense desire. In the long run, it is when lovers nurture the connection between themselves and do things that enable each other to flourish that love is maintained and enhanced. That is how ties to the living framework are tightened.
The claim that “all you need is love” indicates, as Brian Epstein, the Beatles’ manager, once said, “a clear message saying that love is everything.” Although romantic love is extremely important for our happiness and flourishing, love is neither a necessary, nor a sufficient, condition for a happy and thriving life. As it turns out, love is not everything in life, though it is often a central part of it.
If indeed, love is not all we need, then it is certainly reasonable for some people to leave the one they love.
Brief Infatuations and Long Romance
I want both—a long, profound love AND a series of short, intense romantic/sexual experiences. Lust and profound love are both meaningful and satisfying for me.
A WOMAN IN HER THIRTIES
Done with trying to find a woman for life. Much easier to just hook up for a good short time. Avoid all the other personal drama!
FRANK
This book takes the view that long-term, profound love is possible. As we near the end of the introductory chapter, I would like to raise the rather radical question of whether or not this kind of love is a desirable goal. And, even if we decide that the ideal of “endless love” is important and worth pursuing, we can ask if it spells the end of all short-term, intense relationships.
Let’s listen to Marianne, a divorced woman and successful businesswoman:
I am happy for people who remain in love with the same partner for a long time. . . . Would I want to be in love with the same man all my life? To be honest with myself, the answer is no. However, while I am intensely in love with a man, I want this love to endure for a
long time. I would be happy to feel in love forever with the man I am with now. However, I know that it is impossible and although I am not so young, I am still attracted to excitement. Accordingly, I believe that what I really want, and what actually happens to me, is that I need more than one love in my whole life.
Marianne’s attitude rests on a questionable claim—that long-term, profound love is not possible. However, as indicated above, research points to the definite possibility of lifelong love—and to more of this love than many of us ever imagined. Moreover, perceptions of long-term love tend to change over time. As we age, a sense of peacefulness rather than excitement can become the essential element in a marriage.22
Marianne’s dilemma is genuine—and she is far from alone. Even those who experience profound love can feel this way. Consider the following message from a reader, sent as a comment to a post that I wrote in Psychology Today:
I’m a female in my 30s. We cannot know what the future brings, but after many years of seeking the person who is right for me, I am very happy that last year I found the man with whom I want to build a calm and meaningful life and achieve profound love. I love him. The reason I wanted to have this kind of relationship is for stability, calmness, and happiness. However, I have an interesting issue here. . . . Putting all taboos aside and focusing on my true nature, satisfying this long-term need of mine doesn’t and didn’t suppress my desire for an intense romantic/sexual experience. I am experiencing strong intense sexual desire for another man, besides the man with whom I want to be life partners. If I had never met this other man in my life, perhaps I would not have known how satisfying and meaningful lust and its ups and downs could be. This relationship is a very exciting and meaningful one. But I guess I’m talking about only one sexual partner here, not many; I don’t really want short-term/intense relationships with multiple partners. All I need and want is multiple short-term/intense experiences with one man, and a life-long, less intense, more stable and productive relationship with a life partner. So I want both—a long, profound love AND a series of short, intense romantic/sexual experiences. Lust and profound love are both meaningful and satisfying for me, and contribute to my happiness.
The Arc of Love Page 2
