Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Marriage and Dependence
And is it not the bitterer to think
That, disengage our hands and thou wilt sink
Although thy love was love in every deed?
Last night I had one more little thought about Judge Reinhardt's explanation for his decision not to recuse himself (opinion here). On four occasions in the decision, Judge Reinhardt states forcefully that his wife is an "independent woman" or an "independent person" or that she has "independent views."
Since it seemed to me that the judge was attempting not only to describe the actual nature of his marriage but also to explain what a reasonable or ordinary contemporary (and therefore, not "outmoded") observer would think about the relationship of a married couple, something he had to do for purposes of the recusal standard, I began to wonder about the emphasis on the idea of the independence of spouses.
It is certainly true that in many ways spouses are independent. They will have different occupations and careers, different interests, different tastes, different friends, different views, and so on. Much of their lives will be independent. Sometimes one hears that to be married is to "sacrifice" one's independence -- no more hogging the closet, no more going out drinking with your buddies whenever you want to, or lying on the couch all day just because you feel like it.
But I've always thought that dependence is a reason to want to be married, an important boon of marriage, not a sacrifice. In at least some happy marriages, to be dependent is to be supported, to be cared for, to enjoy the goods of intimate trust and loyalty. I enjoy greatly my dependency on my wife, because in addition to making possible the attainment of certain goods to which I otherwise wouldn't have access, it is an intrinsic solace and a comfort to rely deeply on another person.
To be sure, as feminists have pointed out to great effect, dependence (and especially marital dependence) can go horribly wrong -- it can be abused by one or both of the parties, as it was by the husband in Browning's lovely poem ("Any Wife To Any Husband"). In criminal law, one sees that marital dependence can breed all sorts of horrors -- wives who cannot leave their abusive husbands, mothers who cannot report abusive fathers.
But for all that, dependence seems to me something which couples who are contemplating marriage might relish and look forward to with excitement. Dependence is the natural state of many thriving marriages. It is so powerful a bond that it somehow persists even when a marriage is in disrepair -- as Browning says, dependence becomes "bitter" after betrayal, just as it was sweet before the fall.
https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2011/01/marriage-and-dependence.html
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the
comment feed
for this post.
Marc,
This reminds me of another essayist I read, Wendell Berry. He was criticized by some feminists after writing an article in which he noted that his wife of many years assisted him with his writing in various ways. His reply is in the article "Feminism, the Body and the Machine" and may be found here - http://www.crosscurrents.org/berryspring2003.htm.
An excellent (longish) excerpt:
"Marriage, in what is evidently its most popular version, is now on the one hand an intimate “relationship” involving (ideally) two successful careerists in the same bed, and on the other hand a sort of private political system in which rights and interests must be constantly asserted and defended. Marriage, in other words, has now taken the form of divorce: a prolonged and impassioned negotiation as to how things shall be divided. During their understandably temporary association, the “married” couple will typically consume a large quantity of merchandise and a large portion of each other.
The modern household is the place where the consumptive couple do their consuming. Nothing productive is done there. Such work as is done there is done at the expense of the resident couple or family, and to the profit of suppliers of energy and household technology. For entertainment, the inmates consume television or purchase other consumable diversion elsewhere.
There are, however, still some married couples who understand themselves as belonging to their marriage, to each other, and to their children. What they have they have in common, and so, to them, helping each other does not seem merely to damage their ability to compete against each other. To them, “mine” is not so powerful or necessary a pronoun as 'ours.'"