unit4,硕士生英语综合教程2 课本原文 电子版
5s标语-教师资格证报名系统
Unit4
(Para. 1) In the last few
centuries, marriage has been connected to romantic
love. This
kind of package deal is
not easy to maintain and indeed many people fail
while trying to
do so. Nevertheless, most
people still pursue this deal. This is another
type of paradox
associated with marriage.
(Para. 2) Some of the main difficulties of
this package deal are the following: (a) in modern
society, marriage is no longer unique in
fulfilling tasks such as raising children and
enhancing one’s status and financial
situation, (b) long-term romantic relationships
are
problematic in that they lack significant
changes, which are so meaningful to emotions in
general and love in particular, and (c)
the greater flexibility of romantic boundaries
in
modern society make it harder to maintain
strict emotional connections and constraints,
such as those recommended in marriage.
(Para. 3a) In modern society, most of
the
penalties for dissolving a marriage
have been removed and many of the
incentives that marriage offers can be obtained in
other social frameworks. The
choice of
staying within a marriage depends, therefore, more
on the issue of love than on
those
traditionally unique advantages of marriage, such
as raising children and enhancing one’s
status
and financial situation.
(Para. 3b) If a
person feels that her present
marital
relationship prevents her from experiencing
genuine love (and from personal
development
and satisfaction), there is little incentive for
her to stay in the marriage. The fact
that
most divorce cases now cite a lack of love as
the reason for seeking to end the
marriage
indicates the greater importance that love has in
contemporary marriages.
(Para. 4a)
Romantic relationships consist of both change,
which increases excitement,
and familiarity,
which enhances commitment and
liking. The positive role of familiarity may
lead love to grow and become deeper
over time.
However, the lack of novelty may make the
element of passion less intense. As
David
Barash and Judith Lipton put it, “we don’t
normally speak of a passionate marriage.
(Para. 4b) A good marriage, a happy
marriage, a comfortable and compatible
marriage, yes, but only rarely a passionate
one.” They further argue that a passionate
marriage
would be exhausting, as to “live
in a state of perpetual passion” would be to
forgo much of the rest of life, and, in truth,
there are other things. Love can deepen and
broaden ... but it rarely becomes more
passionate.
(Para. 4c) Likewise, sex in
long-term relationship may be less passionate but
because of
familiarity and acquiring better
techniques may be more satisfied. In any case,
stability in
marriage and well-being are not
one and the same: a stable marriage does not
necessarily
mean that marriage is particularly
gratifying or vital. There is no general solution
to the
problem of the “right” amount and type
of change required for more profound and enduring
romantic love.
(Para. 5) The problem
of a long-term romantic relationship that usually
lacks significant
changes is further enhanced
in marriage, which involves more obstacles to
close personal
relationships. In the last few
hundred years, marriage has become part of a
package deal that is
also intended to include
love. The more independent that we become and the
more flexible
our romantic boundaries are, the
more it becomes difficult to take on the whole
package. One
such difficulty is that
love, and often ideal love, becomes a necessary
condition of the deal.
(Para. 6a) In
light of these changes, there has been a
significant increase, over the last
few
decades, in the percentage of single households in
modern society. Such an increase by
no means
suggests that marriage is dead, but that a
growing number of adults are spending
more of
their lives single or living unmarried with
partners. Nevertheless, it seems that the
desire for marriage remains strong and
constant.
(Para. 6b) The new circumstances
have significantly increased the autonomy of
individuals
and in particular that of women.
The greater independence of individuals weakens
the
expectation for romantic exclusivity of
the kind that involves significant dependence upon
the partner. Lovers who do not live together
see each other for limited times, do not depend
upon each other for their major needs, and
thus they need not abide by any external formal
dictates or constraints.
(Para. 7a)
One characteristic of modern society is that it
has become increasingly easier
to get out of
marriage (or any type of romantic relationship)
and to get into a new marital
relationship (or
any other type of romantic relationship). In
light of such changes, the
framework of
marriage has been transformed from a formal
contractual bond with
hardly any possibility
of future regret into an agreement that can be
dissolved without the
need to find cause,
fault, or justification.
(Para. 7b) The
agreement is based on the desires of the heart,
rather than on obligatory
commitment.
Hence, there is no need to be ashamed of following
one’s heart and
terminating the marriage,
or even in having an affair of the heart. In this
sense, love has
acquired additional weight in
personal relationships.
(Para. 8a)
Indeed, love is acquiring ever greater weight in
our decisions to maintain our
marriages. Thus,
an overwhelming majority of people (over 85% of
Americans) said that they
would not marry
someone they were not in love with and about 50%
of Americans believe that
they have the right
to divorce when romantic love fades. These
attitudes express the profound
wish to combine
romantic love with marriage.
(Para. 8b)
Moreover, a 2007 ACNielsen’s survey indicates that
70% of people surveyed said
that marriage is
for life and 60% said that marriage is one of
their lifetime goals. Although the
attitudes
toward marriage are largely dominated by a
country’s cultural and religious beliefs,
the
wish for a stable, long term relationship is still
a desired goal. Little wonder that most
romantic movies end in marriage or very close
to it.
(Para. 9a) Romantic love involves
commitment, and commitment is enforced by
marriage,
which imposes constraints against
any reduction to that commitment. In this way, the
chains of
marriage may enhance love. But
in ideal love, commitment is internal; it does not
stem
from external and imposed chains, but
from intrinsically valuable attitudes toward
the
beloved.
(Para. 9b) The great
problem that the chains of marriage generate is
that they may kill
novelty and change, which
is of great value in enhancing passion. As
Stephen Mitchell
indicates, “ Love and
marriage may go together like a horse and
carriage, but it is crucial that
the horse of
passion quickly be
tethered by the
weight of the carriage of respectability to
prevent runaways.” However,
the chain of the
carriage may be unbearable and may kill the horse.
(Para. 10) In modern society, the greater
availability of love outside marriage has forced
people to give love a more significant
place in marriage. Alas, the duration of each
instance of
this love is often limited. It is
a situation of having shorter but higher quality
romantic
relationships. Sometimes the higher
quality provides the circumstances for longer
relationships.
This quality may enhance the
strength of a specific romantic relationship, but
it may also make
another potential
relationship be perceived as more attractive.
(Para. 11) The marital paradox of
pursuing an ideal that one is most likely to fail
to
achieve could be resolved if we were to
accept the possibility of having shorter
marriages, in
which love is more likely to
remain alive. Another way to solve the paradox
would be to accept
that marriage should
essentially involve a
companionable
love rather than a romantic one; if romantic love
and passionate sex do
occur in a marriage, it
should be seen as a fortunate bonus. Many people
adopt this view.
However, most people still
seek to combine romantic love with marriage or
attempt to find
some other long-term romantic
relationship.
(Para. 12) Despite the above
difficulties Arlene Skolnick argues that “The
death of
marriage has been proclaimed
countless times in American history; and yet no
matter how
many times it fails to die, the
threat never seems to lose its power.” I join
Skolnick in this claim,
but would add that
marriage seems to be losing its unique, exclusive
place and some of its
main characteristics.
(Para. 13) The above considerations can
be encapsulated in the following
statement
that a lover might express: “Darling, if our
marriage is going to be short, please try
to
fix the house and make love to me as much as
possible while you are still around.”