It was through this demand from the middle classes that we accepted the principle of marrying for love, not for the convenience of parents, or the exigencies of family alliances. But that does not mean that all marriages shifted to romantic impulses. We must admit that the passionate side of romance is not what keeps marriages tougher. More likely, the early romantic love tempers to a cooler flame, if it remains at all. Such cooling was certainly no reason for divorce, not so long ago.
Marriage is, after all, about far more than that.
In a good portion of our world, romance has not taken over from more practical arrangements for the long-term relationships we call marriages. No dating, especially alone. It is similar in India, even though the Indian film industry seems determined to produce the greatest number of romantic films of any country on the planet. There the definition of romance is closer to Lancelot's and Guenevere's than to that of the contemporary United States. I recall the results of a Canadian National Council of Churches study that sought to explicate the reasons behind successful marriages.