Personal development in recent years has taken up considerable space on the shelves of bookstores. Not a week without yet another book dedicated to self-confidence, life coaching and others being published. On the heart side, the same.
The quest for a soul mate inspires many authors. Difficult to find novelty as it seems that everything has already been written.
Nice surprise with the latest work by Julie Klotz. As a freelance journalist, she managed to push the reflection further on the subject via a “holistic approach to romantic relationships”in his own words.
She endeavored to dissect what she calls “The 4 chords of the couple” (ed. Fayard, 342 pages, 20 euros), title of his opus, published by Fayard editions, with an eloquent subtitle “how to live happily together”.
Exit the cliches (yes communication is important, but it’s not enough). She examines in depth the cogs that make a couple successful or unsuccessful.
And for this, she compiled a host of bibliographical references, interviewed specialists in several disciplines and collected testimonies. Meet.
How did you work?
I started from an observation: at 20, we all enter a romantic relationship headlong. And at 40, we take it up, we take a step back on the reasons that led us to invest ourselves with someone. I wondered, I read a lot of authors, exchanged with some of them to come to the conclusion that for the couple to work, there must be an agreement between the two partners on four dimensions: biological, psychological, cultural and spiritual. One does not go without the others.
What are the most obvious pitfalls?
First, we confuse love and passion. At the biological level, you should know that it is the hormones that govern all of this. During the meeting, we receive a shot of dopamine (the famous hormone of happiness) which will allow us to enter into a relationship. In parallel, our level of serotonin implying our discernment with regard to the person collapses. After having sex with her, we bond under the effect of oxytocin. When we say that love lasts three years, it is actually because the production of these hormones will decrease beyond this period. But that does not mean the end. Everyone can put things in place to continue secreting dopamine and oxytocin, but also serotonin to solidify the couple. In short, if we maintain the relationship, it lasts well beyond these famous three years. It involves creating activities, doing things to boost all those hormones so that the couple lasts.
Do we therefore need to create a form of interdependence?
No, on the contrary, there should be no interdependence. It is important to be emotionally autonomous: the other is not there to fill our gaps but rather to bring added value.
In other words, to encourage and support our development. The couple must allow individuals to evolve and become better. It must be a path of growth, development, fulfillment and self-knowledge. In short, the relationship must elevate. If it diminishes us, it’s because it doesn’t work.
What about the influence of society on our romantic choices?
Some beliefs die hard. In particular the idea of soul mates according to which we would only be one half in search of our other half. You have to get away from that. We are not incomplete beings. You have to learn to love yourself, otherwise how can you claim to want to be loved? Moreover, you really have to break away from the idea of being “like all the others”, of being within a standard. There is not one recipe but an infinity of couples to invent.
You also put the story of the marriage into perspective.
We tend to forget that for a very long time, marriage was the alliance of two families with economic, political, etc. goals.
It was not until the 19th century that love marriage developed, including a sexual agreement between the partners. It offers a new conception of love, merging body and mind, in a whirlwind of exalted emotions. However, society, mores, have evolved. For example, for a long time, infidelity was not a cause of separation whereas today it is the prelude and the main cause of divorce. This shows that things are changing and that we must always keep this in mind. We no longer divorce because we are unhappy but because we could be happier.
Culture is important.
Yes, it is fundamental. Of course, being from different cultures can be enriching. But it is an illusion to believe that love can triumph over everything. When the partners come from backgrounds whose customs and habits are at odds, it is to be feared that tensions will arise. All this, we must talk about it together, set things right from the start without hiding the face. It is important for everyone to say how they see life: what they want to share, what they need, also with regard to the fidelity we have just spoken of. For some, exchanging text messages for several weeks can constitute an infidelity that is difficult to forgive. A couple is a contract between two, each of whom must know the terms and agree to them.
You mention in your book the equation 1 + 1 = 3.
Indeed, a couple is not an addition of two individuals, there is a third that allows us to say that 1 + 1 = 3. This third is the relationship, the bond, the system created by the couple to from their exchanges. Each relationship is unique. What you have with one person will be different from what you have with another. We create something unique but above all moving over time. This concept is essential. The couple at the start is not fixed. So if we refuse to evolve, we won’t be able to be happy, we’re going straight into the wall. In addition, it is not enough to love a person, we must also love and appreciate the relationship that he offers us and feel that he receives and appreciates the relationship that we offer him.
A mistake we make is to say “in any case you are like this or like that”, it amounts to limiting the other, but we all have a potential for evolution. The person we are during the meeting is not the same as the one we have become three years, ten years, twenty years later. Both change, the couple too. But elements remain such as sharing a spirituality, agreement on values is a strong link factor.