The information that we collected suggest that most couples go through these periods of stress and transition at least once during their life together. After a honeymoon period of relative stability and happiness, changing conditions in the relationship or in the outside world impacts on the relationship. The trust that has been established is eroded. Minor annoyances and complaints begin to accumulate. In many marriages, these are not voiced or given sufficient attention. The fantasies of the “ideal” mate and of “living happily ever after” are dispelled as a result of daily interactions. The accumulated experiences with one’s mate, particularly related to the mundane issues of life, lead to disillusionment and disinterest.
While most couples repeatedly move through a series of developmental stages (that we will describe more fully in subsequent chapters) in which many of these problematic areas are repeatedly confronted, one or more major issues often begin to emerge that never seem to be adequately addressed by the couple. Central issues may concern time away from home, inequity in household work, allocation of personal funds, or any of a wide array of problem areas. The couple is faced with a decision which is often not fully acknowledged, but rather is acted out in an informal, often unconscious manner: do we remain together as we now are or do we attempt to change or disband this relationship?
On the one hand, it is usually less risky to keep doing what we have always done. We know each other and we certainly know how we feel about each other in these problematic situations in which we repeatedly find ourselves. On the other hand, our relationship is no longer satisfying either of us. We assume an even greater risk if we don’t do something dramatic about our relationship. Namely, we risk either living the rest of our life in a stagnant, inhospitable relationship or losing everything we have built up by breaking off our relationship. Thus, we must risk our relationship if we want to save or renew it. Ironically, couples seem to change precisely because they want to remain in some sense un-changed.
Typically, the second path is chosen when one or both partners decide to work on the relationship and perhaps to alter some major part of it. There is always a major challenge in doing so, for the alteration will inevitably force the two partners to change the accustomed ways in which they relate to one another. These changes may destroy the relationship. It is often even more frightening when we realize in the midst of this process that the change in our relationship with our partner may also force each of us to change some part of ourselves!
Perspective of a Movie Historian
What is our model for such a dramatic change in an intimate relationship? This type of change certainly doesn’t fit with the myth of “living happily ever after,” nor does it fit with most of our other images of the perfect relationship. We looked around for help—and found it in several movies of the 1930s. Stanley Cavell (2005) writes about a process that he calls “remarriage” in his analysis of the romantic, “screwball” movies of the 1930s (for example, Bringing Up Baby and The Philadelphia Story). Cavell suggests that these movies emerged not from the depression (as “escapist” movies to distract people from their personal misfortunes), but from an emerging women’s consciousness (that became dormant again after the Second World War). Cavell believes that years in the thirties represent a time when women in many modern societies sought consolidation of their gains in the public arena by translating these gains into the private arena.
Download Article 1K Club
