While the romantics in us would like to believe that love and matrimony are synonymous concepts, I beg to differ. Never mind my jaded exposure to relationships, referring back to basic human nature might serve to suggest that this version of love is a much more literal concept than we chose to recognize. For all intensive purposes, marriage is simply companionship; an agreement to share one’s life with another.
The fiery, passionate “love” described in romantic novels and poetry, is a shifty emotional state too grand and elusive to contain. It rather takes the form of sudden and tremendous infatuation, which comes and goes as it pleases without rhyme or reason. This face of “love” takes no realistic consideration towards compatibility or sensibility, but rather fits the mould of errant human desire. This heightened corporeal state does not and cannot last for long, disappearing often times far before any one party is ready. The flame flounders and two souls are left hurt, confused, and dejected.
Failures in love leave a doubtful notion that the wildly intense passion felt between two irrational lovers is the same admiration evolved between two companions.
Perhaps this appears a cynical approach to such a romanticized component of life. It is just the opposite. If anything this is an optimistic testament and reassurance that while the bible pronounces lust a sin, it is often nothing more than an irrational, short-lived craving much like the sneaky bits of chocolate hidden in the back of the pantry. Heed this temptation with warning as it does not come without consequence. Do as you please and as your Mother taught you, but perhaps avoid overlooking the person who makes everything feel at ease.
