What is it with "unconditional love," anyway? Why are humans so fascinated by this notion? Is it because they feel so inadequate that they can't imagine actually deserving or earning love on a day-to-day basis?
This phrase comes up all the time when people talk about why they love pets, which, they say, give unconditional love. I am dubious of this. It may be true that what dogs and cats want is straightforward and not hard to give them, but I think they certainly have conditions. Try starving your pets and beating them every time you see them and see how long they love you.
I do understand that love should have a long-term arc that transcends the feelings of the moment. Our children need to know that we love them even when we are angry with them. So do our spouses. But that is not the same as "unconditional."
Love between grown-ups should have more in common with friendship than it has with parenting an infant. Love between grown-ups should be based on mutual respect. It should be based on expectations that our partners will carry their own weight in the world, be pleasant companions, and keep the promises they have made. Not all the time -- everybody falls low at times, and everybody screws up, and the long arc of love should keep our partners with us for a while. But to expect to be loved as a baby is loved, without having to do anything to earn it beyond an occasional smile, is to deny both the responsibilities of adulthood and its greatest joys. One of those great joys is to earn love through our efforts and because of who we are. Love should not be brittle, and we should not fear losing it because of an act or a word, but love worth getting is given because of what we give in return.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I suspect the phrase "unconditional love" is an awkward one used to describe a love that comes from within the person--that is, that the default position is you don't have to "earn" it. It's related to the commonly-reported finding that people who love tend to see the persons they love as better than they really are, they tend to overlook faults as much because they simply don't see them or care about them, as because of "fairness" or some other austere adult emotion.
The risk in trying to cast spousal love as distinct from other kinds in an "adult" way is that you can turn this love into something that sounds like no--repeat, no--fun at all. Respect in itself is crucial, but if you emphasize it too much you can turn your pair of adults into a pair of Roman statues.
No, I would say that love is supposed to be fun, and that is one of the things that makes it conditional. "Unconditional" love to me implies love that is drudgery, like caring for a baby often is. Adults should delight each other.
You may be describing what unconditional love might actually be, taken literally, but I think if we go on in this way much longer, we'll be splitting hairs. If you emphasize too much the literal meaning of either conditional or unconditional, you're going to get something that sounds dreary. (After all, nothing sounds less fun than the idea that your spouse will stop loving you if you stop being fun.)
Post a Comment