Updated, Feb. 13, 2015
More than 20 years ago, the psychologist
Arthur Aron succeeded in making two strangers fall in love in his laboratory.
Last summer, I applied his technique in my own life, which is how I found
myself standing on a bridge at midnight, staring into a man’s eyes for exactly
four minutes.
Let me explain. Earlier in the evening, that
man had said: “I suspect, given a few commonalities, you could fall in love
with anyone. If so, how do you choose someone?”
He was a university acquaintance I
occasionally ran into at the climbing gym and had thought, “What if?” I had
gotten a glimpse into his days on Instagram. But this was the first time we had
hung out one-on-one.
“Actually, psychologists have tried making
people fall in love,” I said, remembering Dr. Aron’s study. “It’s fascinating. I’ve
always wanted to try it.”
I first read about the study when I was in the
midst of a breakup. Each time I thought of leaving, my heart overruled my
brain. I felt stuck. So, like a good academic, I turned to science, hoping
there was a way to love smarter.
I explained the study to my university
acquaintance. A heterosexual man and woman enter the lab through separate
doors. They sit face to face and answer a series of increasingly personal
questions. Then they stare silently into each other’s eyes for four minutes.
The most tantalizing detail: Six months later, two participants were married.
They invited the entire lab to the ceremony.
“Let’s try it,” he said.
Let me acknowledge the ways our experiment
already fails to line up with the study. First, we were in a bar, not a lab.
Second, we weren’t strangers. Not only that, but I see now that one neither
suggests nor agrees to try an experiment designed to create romantic love if
one isn’t open to this happening.
I Googled Dr. Aron’s questions; there are
36. We spent the next two hours passing my iPhone across the table, alternately
posing each question.
They began innocuously: “Would you like to be
famous? In what way?” And “When did you last sing to yourself? To someone
else?”
But they quickly became probing.
In response to the prompt, “Name three things
you and your partner appear to have in common,” he looked at me and said, “I
think we’re both interested in each other.”
I grinned and gulped my beer as he listed two
more commonalities I then promptly forgot. We exchanged stories about the last
time we each cried, and confessed the one thing we’d like to ask a
fortuneteller. We explained our relationships with our mothers.
The questions reminded me of the infamous
boiling frog experiment in which the frog doesn’t feel the water getting hotter
until it’s too late. With us, because the level of vulnerability increased
gradually, I didn’t notice we had entered intimate territory until we were
already there, a process that can typically take weeks or months.
I liked learning about myself through my
answers, but I liked learning things about him even more. The bar, which was
empty when we arrived, had filled up by the time we paused for a bathroom
break.
I sat alone at our table, aware of my
surroundings for the first time in an hour, and wondered if anyone had been
listening to our conversation. If they had, I hadn’t noticed. And I didn’t
notice as the crowd thinned and the night got late.
We all have a narrative of ourselves that we
offer up to strangers and acquaintances, but Dr. Aron’s questions make it
impossible to rely on that narrative. Ours was the kind of accelerated intimacy
I remembered from summer camp, staying up all night with a new friend,
exchanging the details of our short lives. At 13, away from home for the first
time, it felt natural to get to know someone quickly. But rarely does adult
life present us with such circumstances.
The moments I found most uncomfortable were
not when I had to make confessions about myself, but had to venture opinions
about my partner. For example: “Alternate sharing something you consider a
positive characteristic of your partner, a total of five items” (Question 22),
and “Tell your partner what you like about them; be very honest this time
saying things you might not say to someone you’ve just met” (Question 28).
Much of Dr. Aron’s research focuses on
creating interpersonal closeness. In particular, several studies investigate
the ways we incorporate others into our sense of self. It’s easy to see how the
questions encourage what they call “self-expansion.” Saying things like, “I
like your voice, your taste in beer, the way all your friends seem to admire
you,” makes certain positive qualities belonging to one person explicitly
valuable to the other.
It’s astounding, really, to hear what someone
admires in you. I don’t know why we don’t go around thoughtfully complimenting
one another all the time.
We finished at midnight, taking far longer
than the 90 minutes for the original study. Looking around the bar, I felt as
if I had just woken up. “That wasn’t so bad,” I said. “Definitely less
uncomfortable than the staring into each other’s eyes part would be.”
He hesitated and asked. “Do you think we
should do that, too?”
“Here?” I looked around the bar. It seemed too
weird, too public.
“We could stand on the bridge,” he said,
turning toward the window.
The night was warm and I was wide-awake. We
walked to the highest point, then turned to face each other. I fumbled with my
phone as I set the timer.
“O.K.,” I said, inhaling sharply.
“O.K.,” he said, smiling.
I’ve skied steep slopes and hung from a rock
face by a short length of rope, but staring into someone’s eyes for four silent
minutes was one of the more thrilling and terrifying experiences of my life. I
spent the first couple of minutes just trying to breathe properly. There was a
lot of nervous smiling until, eventually, we settled in.
I know the eyes are the windows to the soul or
whatever, but the real crux of the moment was not just that I was really seeing
someone, but that I was seeing someone really seeing me. Once I embraced the
terror of this realization and gave it time to subside, I arrived somewhere
unexpected.
I felt brave, and in a state of wonder. Part
of that wonder was at my own vulnerability and part was the weird kind of
wonder you get from saying a word over and over until it loses its meaning and
becomes what it actually is: an assemblage of sounds.
So it was with the eye, which is not a window
to anything but rather a clump of very useful cells. The sentiment associated
with the eye fell away and I was struck by its astounding biological reality:
the spherical nature of the eyeball, the visible musculature of the iris and
the smooth wet glass of the cornea. It was strange and exquisite.
When the timer buzzed, I was surprised — and a
little relieved. But I also felt a sense of loss. Already I was beginning to
see our evening through the surreal and unreliable lens of retrospect.
Most of us think about love as something that
happens to us. We fall. We get crushed.
But what I like about this study is how it
assumes that love is an action. It assumes that what matters to my partner
matters to me because we have at least three things in common, because we have
close relationships with our mothers, and because he let me look at him.
I wondered what would come of our interaction.
If nothing else, I thought it would make a good story. But I see now that the
story isn’t about us; it’s about what it means to bother to know someone, which
is really a story about what it means to be known.
It’s true you can’t choose who loves you,
although I’ve spent years hoping otherwise, and you can’t create romantic
feelings based on convenience alone. Science tells us biology matters; our
pheromones and hormones do a lot of work behind the scenes.
But despite all this, I’ve begun to think love
is a more pliable thing than we make it out to be. Arthur Aron’s study taught
me that it’s possible — simple, even — to generate trust and intimacy, the
feelings love needs to thrive.
You’re probably wondering if he and I fell in
love. Well, we did. Although it’s hard to credit the study entirely (it may
have happened anyway), the study did give us a way into a relationship that
feels deliberate. We spent weeks in the intimate space we created that night,
waiting to see what it could become.
Love didn’t happen to us. We’re in love
because we each made the choice to be.
Source: The New York Times
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario