The Value of Marriage
By Catherine Ziten
Image source: Flickr.
In the 20th century, people living in the province of Quebec underwent a shift in their opinion of marriage as a step into adulthood; in turn, previous religious motivations for matrimony were cast aside and the act of marriage was viewed as an unnecessary inconvenience in a declining religious society. Consequently, the way forward for most Quebecers was a life of "coupledom" without fear of repercussion for lack of a sanctified union.
Interestingly, the shift against marriage in Quebec has not completely terminated weddings or the act of marriage altogether. In fact, a huge wedding industry thrives in the city of Montreal, which caters to couples who do choose marriage as their united path forward. While couples avoid marriage for many reasons; from the cost of a wedding to the reality that love and happiness are not permanent in any relationship, the act of marriage itself defines the growth of an individual and a relationship and pays tribute to traditional family values, while at the same time, offers additional protection (in the eyes of the law) to couples who have officially married.
Currently, it is quite easily understood how weddings can be seen as not worth their effort considering that the act of marriage can lead the way to a costly event without the promise of long-lasting commitment or happiness.
Consumerism and the need for publicity have taken hold of the modern wedding and some couples avoid marriage as a result of the cost. Couples who do allow themselves to be carried away by the fantasy of a perfect day centered around them and their love has led to a booming wedding industry ready to feed into any and every desire. From the dress to the memorable entrance at the hall, some couples spare no expense. Jason Cochrane, a consumer finance editor of the WalletPop website, explains that it is not unimaginable that the average cost of a wedding--in a larger American city like Chicago (in 2010)--ranged from between "USD$22,500 and USD$37,500"1. This is a staggering figure considering that in the 1930s, comparable weddings, according to Cochrane, "[cost] around USD$400"1. Taking into account the average cost of living in the 1930s2, this is an increase of over 700% over a period of 80 years! The trend to go big can causes great stress on a couple's financial situation and weddings do not even guarantee commitment.
Although considered to be a wonderful union between two people, marriage does not ensure long-lasting happiness or promise of fidelity. The reality of marriage throughout history has not always included the notion of love as the driving force of a wedding. Even relationships initially based on love suffer over time from the pressures and obligations of family and work, or simply from special circumstances. Simply consider the recent separation of Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver. Only knowing that Arnold admitted to infidelity, one assumes that his actions are likely the result of fame and his ego having gone to his head. However, infidelity has occurred on numerous occasions over the centuries, especially in marriages based on necessity or to ensure alliance. A prime example would be the marriage between King Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon; according to The Official Website of the British Monarchy, their wedding occurred after Henry was forced to "marry his brother's widow"3. Henry, unsatisfied with Catherine's lack of producing a suitable male heir, fell in love with "the sister of one of his many mistresses"3 after which he requested an annulment from Catherine3. Ending a marriage, be it the result of an annulment or divorce, is not uncommon in Quebec, especially considering the province's culture of cohabitation. In 2004, data from Statistics Canada showed that Quebec was the province with the highest rate of divorce at 47.6%4. And, in 2008, new Statistics Canada data "put the risk of divorce by the 30th wedding anniversary for recently married couples at 38% for the country as a whole-ranging from 21.6% in Newfoundland and Labrador to 48.4% in Quebec"5. So, the question prevails: why agree to be tied down when the likelihood of happiness and fidelity in marriage are seemingly slim?
Despite the various reasons for which not to marry are reasons for which one should get married; namely: the act of marriage symbolizes maturity and legitimizes a change in one's social status. Through this act, family tradition and values are honored. Moreover, marriage ensures security and makes concrete a relationship between two people in the eyes of the law.
Couples should marry because it shows personal growth that also results in a sense of pride. Since it has generally been synonymous with the approach to adulthood and the capability to make insightful decisions, marriage easily marks the transition of a person from immature to mature, or youth to adult. Furthermore, the act of publically announcing a choice to commit to another individual is not to be taken lightly. Thus, the seriousness of the decision to wed represents a milestone of personal growth for both the individual and the couple. Consequently, it is recognized that marriage symbolizes a mature and legitimate relationship.
Not only does marriage represent a shift in status6 for the individual and couple, but it sanctions their relationship and any children that come from that union. The legitimization of self and one's relationship through marriage stems from past religious ideologies. Though North American society is shifting away from former deep religious beliefs, Time Magazine's Belinda Luscombe explains that marriage is still a unique way in which to partake in a societal form of normalcy7. Marriage also pays tribute to our ancestors and the choices they made, which resulted in our current existence. The act of marriage, regardless of how formal or informal the ceremony may be, provides a tie to our family's past and reinforces the value system that has existed among families for centuries. If marriage was not deemed worthwhile on so many levels, why would the tradition continue today?
A form of kinship, the age-old institution of marriage actually goes beyond simple cohabitation. According to the Gouvernement du Quebec, though common-law spouses are legally recognized in the province of Quebec, the protection that is provided to both (cohabitating) parties under the law is not reflective of the rights granted to those who are legally married8. In the event of a separation, common-law spouses "have no obligation toward each other, regardless of how many years [they] have lived together"8. Consider, for example, the divorce case of Guy Laliberté, founder of the famous Cirque du Soleil. Ten years and three children later, Guy's former common-law spouse was deemed to have no rights to any earnings that Guy made during their time of cohabitation. Though child support was paid, the lack of recognition of Guy and his former common-law partner by the courts can be interpreted as if their relationship and the time they spent as a family was not significant.
Although marriage may not be a logical choice for some considering the cost of weddings and the lack of enduring long-term commitment or happiness, the institute of marriage should and does continue to prevail. It continues to exist for it marks an individual's growth as well as progression in a relationship. In addition, it legitimizes family values and tradition, while offering a means to protect the bond between two people in the eyes of the (Quebec) law.
1 http://www.walletpop.com/2010/06/25/why-are-weddings-so-expensive-historians-find-the-answer/
2 http://www.aier.org/research/worksheets-and-tools/cost-of-living-calculator
3 http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensofEngland/TheTudors/HenryVIII.aspx
4 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2004/05/04/divorce040504.html
5 http://www.christiantelegraph.com/issue7785.html
6 http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/06/04/oh-the-humanities-why-get-married/
7 http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/02/can-the-kids-persuade-brangelina-to-marry/
Leave a comment