Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An existential-phenomenological approach to understanding the experience of marital satisfaction Cawsey, Peter 1985

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1985_A8 C38.pdf [ 9.36MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054313.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054313-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054313-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054313-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054313-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054313-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054313-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054313-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054313.ris

Full Text

AN EXISTENTIAL-PHENOMENOLOGICAL APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCE OF MARITAL SATISFACTION By PETER CAWSEY B.R.E., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1973 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (DEPARTMENT OF COUNSELLING PSYCHOLOGY) We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to tjhe reqtjired standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l 1985 ©Peter Cawsey, 1985 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department Of Counselling Psychology The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date April 26, 1985 DE-6 (3/81) ABSTRACT This study i s an e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . I t sought to understand the meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as l i v e d . F i v e married i n d i v i d u a l s , three females and two males, who had been married f o r ten years or longer were i n t e r v i e w e d . They were s e l e c t e d on the b a s i s t h a t they were e x p e r i e n c i n g s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriage by t h e i r own reckoning. They were l o c a t e d through personal r e f e r r a l s from f r i e n d s and c o l l e a g u e s . Each person ( c o - r e s e a r c h e r ) was asked to t e l l the s t o r y of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriage. The in-d e p t h i n t e r v i e w s were tape-recorded, t r a n s c r i b e d and analyzed u s i n g an e x i s t e n t i a l -phenomenological approach as o u t l i n e d by C o l a i z z i (1978). The p r o t o c o l a n a l y s i s r e s u l t e d i n the e x p l i c a t i o n of f i f t e e n themes. The themes ( o r c o n s t i t u e n t s ) were de s c r i b e d and then woven i n t o an exhaustive phenomenological d e s c r i p t i o n of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . F i n a l l y a concise d e s c r i p t i o n of the experience was formul a t e d . The r e s u l t s of the study show that there i s a consensus of the experience and meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n by those (the co- r e s e a r c h e r s ) l i v i n g the experience. The study makes suggestions for f u t u r e r e s e a r c h and p o i n t s out a p p l i c a t i o n s of the r e s u l t s i n p r e - m a r i t a l and couples c o u n s e l l i n g . - i i i -TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ...... i i TABLE OF CONTENTS - i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i v DEDICATION v i CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1 Obj e c t i v e of the Study 1 S i g n i f i c a n c e of the Study 2 Personal E x p l i c a t i o n of Assumptions . .. 8 CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 11 I n t r o d u c t i o n 11 Overview of Research on M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n . 13 Theories of M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n . 22 Ps y c h o a n a l y t i c Theory 22 C l a s s i c a l 22 Object R e l a t i o n s 24 Conclusion • 26 B a s i c Assumptions 28 Symbolic I n t e r a c t i o n Theory 29 Ba s i c Assumptions 35 S o c i a l Exchange Theory 36 Basi c Assumptions 40 Be h a v i o r a l Theory 41 Basic Assumptions «, 44 Summary of Theories • 45 CHAPTER I I I METHOD 47 Ex i s t e n t i a l - P h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l Psychology - - 47 Co-researchers 49 S e l e c t i o n of Co-researchers 49 Deciding Whether to In t e r v i e w I n d i v i d u a l s or Couple 51 - i v -Page Demographic I n f o r m a t i o n 52 Phenomenological I n t e r v i e w 53 Procedure 54 A n a l y s i s of P r o t o c o l s 56 CHAPTER IV RESULTS 58 I n t r o d u c t i o n 58 D e s c r i p t i o n of Themes of the Experience 61 Exhau s t i v e D e s c r i p t i o n of the Experience of M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n 68 I n t r o d u c t i o n 68 Exhaustive D e s c r i p t i o n 70 Condensed D e s c r i p t i o n of the Experience of M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n 78 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION 81 Summary 81 P e r s o n a l Dialogue 82 T h o r e t i c a l I m p l i c a t i o n s 83 I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r C o u n s e l l i n g 86 I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r Future Research 89 Conclusions 90 REFERENCES 92 TABLE 2: S i g n i f i c a n t Statements 99 APPENDIX A: L e t t e r of I n t r o d u c t i o n and Subject Consent Form 109 APPENDIX B: Co-researchers' P r o t o c o l s I l l - v -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe s p e c i a l thanks to my f i v e co-researchers f o r t h e i r time and e f f o r t i n s h a r i n g a s p e c i a l part of t h e i r l i v e s w i t h me. Without t h e i r s t o r i e s of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n t h i s study would not have been p o s s i b l e . I would a l s o l i k e to warmly thank my committee chairman, Dr. Marv Westwood, f o r h i s time, advice and ever present a b i l i t y to l i s t e n and exchange Ideas l n a su p p o r t i v e and f r i e n d l y manner. My two other committee members, Dr. L a r r y Cochran and Dr. Bob Armstrong, were v e r y much ap p r e c i a t e d f o r always being a v a i l a b l e on short n o t i c e to o f f e r guidance and support. - v i -DEDICATION To my son Ryan - v i i -All happy families resemble each other; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. Anna Karenin Count Leo Tolstoy, 1904 - 1 -CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Objective of the Study When two people are under the influence of the most violent, most insane, most delusive, and most transient of passions, they are required to swear that they will remain in that excited, abnormal, and exhausting condition continuously until death do them part. Thus wrote George Bernard Shaw in 1908 in the preface to his play Getting Married. If the marital relationship is based on such a seemingly irrational footing (according to Shaw) how is i t that some marriages can survive the current statistics of record high divorce rates? Statistics Canada reported that in 1982 some 70,436 divorces were granted in Canada, more than double the 32,389 granted ten years before. Canada's divorce rate in 1982 soared 117 percent over 1972. Divorces involved 65,000 dependent children, up from 37,500 in 1972 (Statistics Canada, 1982). Divorce rates indicate only those marriages that have reached the point of being intolerable for one or both partners. Many marriages remain Intact only because of social pressures, financial constraints, children, edicts of religion or lack of attractive alternatives rather than any inherent desirability. That is , as Lewis and Spanier (1979) point out, "marriages with high stability cannot be assumed to have high quality" (p. 272). - 2 -What e x a c t l y i s the phenomenon of " m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n " that a marriage of q u a l i t y o f f e r s ? What c o n s t i t u t e s t h i s sought a f t e r experience that so many marriages f a i l to achieve? The purpose of t h i s study i s to b e t t e r understand what i t i s i n a m a r i t a l dyad that not only keeps the couple together but o f f e r s them s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriage. This study phenomenologically i n v e s t i g a t e the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . Significance of the Study Divorce r a t e s i n d i c a t e m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y . Lewis and Spanier (1979) d e f i n e m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y as "the formal or i n f o r m a l s t a t u s of a marriage i n t a c t or n o n i n t a c t . S t r i c t l y speaking, a s t a b l e marriage i s one which i s terminated by the n a t u r a l death of one spouse" ( p . 269). They b e l i e v e that "the g r e a t e s t s i n g l e p r e d i c t o r of m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y i s m a r i t a l q u a l i t y " (p. 273). They d e f i n e m a r i t a l q u a l i t y as "a s u b j e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n of a married couple's r e l a t i o n s h i p . . . . r e f l e c t i n g numerous c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of m a r i t a l i n t e r a c t i o n and m a r i t a l f u n c t i o n i n g " (p. 269). Lewis and Spanier (1979) suggest that "high m a r i t a l q u a l i t y i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h good judgement, adequate communication, a h i g h l e v e l of m a r i t a l happiness and adjustment, i n t e g r a t i o n , and a h i g h degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the r e l a t i o n s h i p " ( p . 269). M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n has been recognized as one of a number of concepts that researchers have used to study m a r i t a l q u a l i t y or happiness. Burr (1973) s t a t e d that " s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a s u b j e c t i v e phenomenon that occurs w i t h i n i n d i v i d u a l s " ( p . 42). He d e f i n e s m a r i t a l - 3 -s a t i s f a c t i o n as "the degree to which the d e s i r e s of the i n d i v i d u a l are f u l f i l l e d . . . s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h a marriage s i t u a t i o n as a whole. . . . t h i s phenomenon i s viewed as a continous v a r i a b l e v a r y i n g i n degrees from low to h i g h s a t i s f a c t i o n " ( p . 42). Another i n v e s t i g a t o r of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n who has attempted a d e f i n i t i o n i s Hawkins (1968). His conception of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s t h a t : M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n may be defined as the s u b j e c t i v e f e e l i n g s of happiness, s a t i s f a c t i o n , and pleasure experienced by a spouse when c o n s i d e r i n g a l l current aspects of h i s [ s i c ] marriage. This v a r i a b l e i s conceived as a continuum running from much s a t i s f a c t i o n to much d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n . M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s c l e a r l y an a t t i t u d i n a l v a r i a b l e and, thus, i s a proper t y of i n d i v i d u a l spouses. . . . i t i s a g l o b a l measurement i n the sense that the respondent i s asked to express h i s [ s i c ] f e e l i n g s of s a t i s f a c t i o n or d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n r e g arding l a r g e numbers of s p e c i f i c f a c e t s of the marriage by responding to a few questions phrased very g e n e r a l l y , ( p . 648) In h i s review and i n t e g r a t i o n of research i n marriage, Tharp (1963), wondered about the r e a l meaning of the s u b j e c t i v e phenomenon of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . He s t a t e d , " c e r t a i n l y s a t i s f a c t i o n now seems r e l a t e d to happiness, perhaps t a u t o l o g i c a l l y . But s a t i s f a c t i o n of what?" (p. 114). A number of other researchers have noted the d i f f i c u l t y i n c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n (Hicks and P i a t t , 1970; Spanier and C o l e , 1976; Spanier and Lewis, 1980; and B u r r , L e i g h , Day and C o n s t a n t i n e , 1979). Burr et a l . (1979) c l a r i f y the s i t u a t i o n - 4 -somewhat by p o i n t i n g out a general i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n the research that they have noted. We wish i t were an easy task to d e f i n e the dependent v a r i a b l e of s a t i s f a c t i o n , or that there were only one or two d e f i n i t i o n s to choose from. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , however, n e i t h e r i s the case. The task i s complex and i t i s probably not p o s s i b l e at t h i s time to achieve a consensus about what the term " s a t i s f a c t i o n " denotes. There i s ambiguity i n much of what has been done, and among the unambiguous d e f i n i t i o n s are two f a i r l y i n compatible p o i n t s of view. One p o i n t of view i s that s a t i s f a c t i o n i s the amount of congruence between the e x p e c t a t i o n s a person has and the rewards the person a c t u a l l y receives.. The other p o i n t of view i s that s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a s u b j e c t i v e l y experienced phenomenon of pleasure versus d i s p l e a s u r e , contentment versus discontentment, or happiness versus unhappiness. ( p . 67) In t h e i r review of research on m a r i t a l happiness and s t a b i l i t y i n the s i x t i e s Hicks and P i a t t (1970) d i s c u s s e d the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . A decade l a t e r Spanier and Lewis (1980) d i d a review of research on m a r i t a l q u a l i t y i n the s e v e n t i e s and s t a t e d that s i n c e the Hicks and P i a t t review of the s i x t i e s "there i s s t i l l c o n s i d e r a b l e d e f i n i t i o n a l ambiguity i n t h i s area of study" (p. 836). T h i s , however, has not been from a l a c k of e f f o r t as "during the decade of the 1970's alone, there were some 150 a r t i c l e s p u blished which p r i m a r i l y examined the q u a l i t y of marriage. In a d d i t i o n to these - 5 -articles in professional journals, 182 American doctoral dissertations completed during the decade included one of the above concepts in the dissertation title" (marital quality and related concepts—adjustment, happiness, and satisfaction) [italics added] (Spanier and Lewis, 1980,, p. 825). This definitional and conceptual turmoil prompted Lively (1969) to suggest that the three terms in marital interaction that he reviewed (marital happiness, success and adjustment) could be eliminated from the literature due to their semantic distortion and numbered connotations. After a l l that was said and done in research on marital quality in the 70's Spanier and Lewis (1980), stated that, "one of the more significant developments in marital research in the seventies has been the implicit recognition that the quality of marriage involves multidimensional phenomena" (p. 826). The author of this research feels that the most significant and all-encompassing variable is that of marital satisfaction. Burr et al. (1979), when discussing Lewis and Spanier's (1979) theory of marital quality and stability, suggest that the notion of satisfaction be used rather than Lewis and Spanier's term quality. They feel that it is a person's subjective evaluation of the marital relationship that is the important phenomenon and that the term satisfaction adquately portrays these subjective evaluations. Thus, for this researcher, the reason for approaching the dependent variable of marital satisfaction from a phenomenological perspective came from the finding that there is not an exhaustive nor concise description in the literature of exactly what marital satisfaction is. - 6 -This approach i s a l s o supported by Spanier and Lewis's (1980) statement that survey r e s e a r c h techniques have dominated the f i e l d and t h a t although survey research i s important, "the f i e l d must t r y new d i r e c t i o n s " ( p . 838). A l s o , approaching m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n from a phenomenological p e r s p e c t i v e i s , to t h i s r e s e a r c h e r , v i b r a n t and h u m a n i s t i c . That i s , much of the research on m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n to date has f o l l o w e d the path of the n a t u r a l sciences w i t h the emphasis on the experimental method. This has r e s u l t e d i n an approach t h a t concentrates upon measurement r a t h e r than understanding human experience as i t i s l i v e d . That i s , as i n the second po i n t of view noted by Burr et a l . (1979) [p. 4 of t h i s paper] the experimental approach s t r e s s e s a p o s i t i v i t y t h a t i s incapable of r e v e a l i n g , f o r example, the dynamic i n t e r p l a y of pleasure and d i s p l e a s u r e . The experimental method tends to view them as separate and mutually d i s t i n c t and c o n t r a d i c t o r y modes of being or s t a t e s of mind. Rather than l o o k i n g at d y s f u n c t i o n or perhaps m a r i t a l d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n to l e a r n about m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , t h i s r e s e a r c h i n v e s t i g a t e s marriages that have an absence of symptoms of d y s f u n c t i o n or at l e a s t have managed to d e a l w i t h these symptoms s u c c e s s f u l l y . Abraham Maslow looked at f u l l y f u n c t i o n i n g , f u l l y " a l i v e " i n d i v i d u a l s to d i s c o v e r what people were capable of becoming. "When you s e l e c t out f o r c a r e f u l study very f i n e and h e a l t h y people . . . then you get a d i f f e r e n t view of mankind. You are asking how t a l l can people grow, what can a human become? These are the Olympic gold-medal w i n n e r s — t h e best we have" (Maslow, 1967, p. 280). I t i s t h i s ... 7 -p e r s p e c t i v e that was used to i n v e s t i g a t e the phenomenon of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as l i v e d by i n d i v i d u a l s who f e e l s a t i s f i e d i n t h e i r m a rriages. With a more d e t a i l e d and p r e c i s e understanding of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n researchers and c l i n i c i a n s w i l l be b e t t e r able to help couples work toward a s a t i s f y i n g m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . For, as Lewis and Spanier (1979) r e p o r t , "the evidence a v a i l a b l e from dozens of s t u d i e s argues p e r s u a s i v e l y that i n d i c a t o r s of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y w i l l e x p l a i n a great p r o p o r t i o n of the v a r i a n c e i n m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y . In s h o r t , among any l a r g e sample of married couples, i t i s probable that those w i t h poorest m a r i t a l adjustment, s a t i s f a c t i o n , happiness, e t c . , w i l l subsequently be most s u s c e p t i b l e to s e p a r a t i o n and d i v o r c e " (p. 273). M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n was the v a r i a b l e chosen to phenomenologically i n v e s t i g a t e the m u l t i - f a c e t e d concept of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y . M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n encompasses a l l the dimensions of such r e l a t e d v a r i a b l e s a s , f o r example, happiness, communication, adjustment, c o m p a t i b i l i t y and i n t e g r a t i o n . I t i s t h i s researcher's view that i t most e f f e c t i v e l y accesses a complete d e s c r i p t i o n of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as i t i s a c t u a l l y l i v e d and experienced ( V a l l e and K i n g , 1978). - 8 -P e r s o n a l E x p l i c a t i o n of Assumptions (Why I am i n v o l v e d w i t h t h i s phenomenon) I became i n t e r e s t e d i n s t u d y i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as a r e s u l t of the f a i l u r e of my own marriage a f t e r seven ye a r s . As t h i s was a very recent experience I began reading e x t e n s i v e l y i n areas of immediate concern to me while at the same time l o o k i n g f o r a p o t e n t i a l research q u e s t i o n . I began my reading f o r a y around the areas of fatherhood and s i n g l e parent f a t h e r s as I suddenly found myself i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n . From t h i s r e a d i n g I found a great d e a l of support f o r my s i t u a t i o n along w i t h some coping s t r a t e g i e s and s u r v i v a l t a c t i c s . I a l s o was a s s i s t e d i n understanding and d e a l i n g w i t h the great a r r a y of emotions I was e x p e r i e n c i n g . I came to r e a l i z e t h a t I was too much i n the middle of my own experience to be able to deal w i t h r e s e a r c h i n the area of s i n g l e - p a r e n t fatherhood. This l e a d me i n t o the l i t e r a t u r e on c h i l d r e n of s e p a r a t i o n and d i v o r c e and then to the r e l a t i v e l y new i s s u e of j o i n t custody. Again, because the s e p a r a t i o n from my w i f e was so r e c e n t , I found t h i s reading at times to be very e m o t i o n a l l y d i f f i c u l t . I was searching f o r meaning to what had happened to my marriage and f o r the best ways f o r me to d e a l w i t h the r e a l i t i e s of my s i t u a t i o n . Even more p a r t i c u l a r , I was very concerned f o r the emotional w e l f a r e of my f o u r year o l d son. I found that much of my l i b r a r y time was spent i n r e f l e c t i o n and s e l f - d i a l o g u e on what I read i n r e l a t i o n to my own s i t u a t i o n . - 9 -Having d e a l t somewhat w i t h my i n i t i a l concerns re s i n g l e - p a r e n t f a t h e r h o o d , j o i n t custody, and c h i l d r e n of s e p a r a t i o n and d i v o r c e I turned to reading about ways of f u r t h e r understanding and perhaps h e l p i n g others to prevent what had occurred i n my marriage. This i n v o l v e d l i b r a r y r e s e a r c h i n the area of p r e - m a r i t a l c o u n s e l l i n g . I found that r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e w r i t i n g and research has been done i n t h i s f i e l d . A theme that emerged from the p r e - m a r i t a l c o u n s e l l i n g l i t e r a t u r e was t h a t of the r o l e of values consensus i n m a r i t a l adjustment. I then turned to reading Rokeach's (1973) work on values and the research l i t e r a t u r e on the r o l e of values consensus and c o n f l i c t on m a r i t a l adjustment. From t h i s reading I was becoming convinced t h a t b a s i c ( i n s t r u m e n t a l ) value d i f f e r e n c e s were present i n my marriage t h a t perhaps c o n t r i b u t e d to the fundamental d i f f e r e n c e s and r e s u l t a n t d i f f i c u l t i e s . I began t h i n k i n g of r e s e a r c h questions r e l a t i n g to a study of how couples d e a l w i t h the i s s u e s of values i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s and how they p e r c e i v e the r o l e of values consensus i n the success or q u a l i t y of t h e i r marriages. However, I r e a l i z e d that m a r i t a l f a i l u r e (or s a t i s f a c t i o n ) couldn't be c o n t r i b u t e d to only one v a r i a b l e . There had to be more. Thus from l o o k i n g j u s t at v a l u e s I began to r e f l e c t on what e l s e might be necessary i n a m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p f o r a couple to experience m a r i t a l q u a l i t y or s a t i s f a c t i o n . I was convinced that values consensus played a major r o l e and yet I wanted to f i n d out more about what f a c t o r s were needed i n a marriage f o r the i n d i v i d u a l s to experience s a t i s f a c t i o n . I became aware that the bulk of the research on m a r i t a l - 10 -q u a l i t y or s a t i s f a c t i o n focused upon l o o k i n g at v a r i a b l e s that attempted to e x p l a i n the d i f f e r e n c e s between marriages i n which the couples were i d e n t i f i e d as being " d i s t r e s s e d " or " n o n - d i s t r e s s e d . " T h i s cause and e f f e c t approach presented an o v e r a l l p i c t u r e , t h a t , f o r me, remained r a t h e r murky and c o n f u s i n g . There wasn't, i n the l i t e r a t u r e , a c l e a r understanding of the meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as i t i s l i v e d . I was thus d i r e c t e d to the e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l method of q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h by my t h e s i s a d v i s o r s Dr. Marv Westwood and Dr. L a r r y Cochran. I have i n c l u d e d t h i s e x p l i c a t i o n of why I am i n v o l v e d i n s t u d y i n g the p s y c h o l o g i c a l phenomenon of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n an attempt to approach the phenomenological aim of making the r e s e a r c h e r ' s own e x p e r i e n c e , p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s and p o s s i b l e biases v i s i b l e to the reader. This approach recognizes that man i s "bodily-engaged, p a r t i c i p a t i n g b e i n g - i n - t h e - w o r l d - w i t h - o t h e r s " ( C o l a i z z i , 1973, p. 132). Existential-phenomenology does not assume to be so o b j e c t i v e as to be t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y c o n t r o l l i n g . As Heideigger (1982) s t a t e s : . . . there i s t r u t h only i f a being e x i s t s which opens up, which d i s c l o s e s , and indeed i n such a way t h a t d i s c l o s u r e i t s e l f belongs to the mode of being t h i s being. We o u r s e l v e s are such a being. The Dasein i t s e l f e x i s t s i n the t r u t h . To the Dasein there belongs e s s e n t i a l l y a d i s c l o s e d world and w i t h that the d i s c l o s e d n e s s of the Dasein i t s e l f , ( p . 18) The Dasein Heidegger speaks of i s the German word f o r e x i s t e n c e , presence, l i t e r a l l y " t h e r e - b e i n g . " A person as o n t o l o g i c a l l y human, i s how C o l a i z z i (1978) d e s c r i b e s the Dasein. - 11 -CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Introduction In p r i m i t i v e times the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p was a p r a c t i c a l one based on the need f o r p h y s i c a l s u r v i v a l . During the Holy Roman Empire marriage became a Holy Sacrament through s t r i n g e n t c a n o n i c a l laws. Economic s u r v i v a l was another f o r c e that kept the u n i t together u n t i l the 19th century. F i n a l l y w i t h the i n d u s t r i a l r e v o l u t i o n and the weakening of the church's i n f l u e n c e on s o c i e t y marriage l o s t much of i t s f u n c t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i n terms of p h y s i c a l and economic s u r v i v a l ( L e d e r e r , 1968). Today marriage has become a bond based p r i m a r i l y on p s y c h o l o g i c a l and emotional needs. During the decades of the 1960s and 1970s upheaval i n the m a r i t a l bond was dramatic. As r e c e n t l y reported by Time magazine ( A p r i l 9, 1984) " i n the l a t e '60s and e a r l y '70s marriage, motherhood and the "nuclear f a m i l y " were g e n e r a l l y scorned by the counter c u l t u r e , f e m i n i s t s and r a d i c a l s " ( p . 89). The s o - c a l l e d sexual r e v o l u t i o n , born i n the mid-'60s and g e n e r a l l y claimed to be the product of a f f l u e n c e , the p i l l and the s o c i a l and economic freedoms gained by women, has impinged g r e a t l y on today's married couples. The d e f i a n c e of t r a d i t i o n a l v a l u e s , the search f o r s e l f - f u l f i l l m e n t and what appeared to be a d i s d a i n f o r commitment reached i t s peak by the l a t e 1970s and w i t h the help of more l i b e r a l - 12 d i v o r c e laws was r e f l e c t e d i n the r i s i n g d i v o r c e r a t e (Deburger, 1977; C l a r k , 1980; Laurence, 1982; Time, A p r i l , 1984). However, i n the opening years of the 1980s the popular press i s r e p o r t i n g that "the buzz words these days are "commitment," "in t i m a c y " and "working at r e l a t i o n s h i p s " (Time, p. 88). Could i t be that the "Me Generation" (a term coined by Tom Wolfe) i s changing i t s focus from "me" to "us"? Even a d v e r t i s i n g , t e l e v i s i o n and the motion p i c t u r e i n d u s t r y now appear to s a n c t i o n and promote the u n i t y of the f a m i l y and the p o s i t i v e aspects of f a m i l y l i f e ( e . g., The Waltons, On Golden Pond, Family T i e s ) . In s p i t e of the frequency of d i v o r c e today, many people are s t i l l c h osing to marry. In 1982 i n Canada 188,360 or 7.6 people per 1,000 got married compared to 200,470 or 9.2 per 1,000 people i n 1972 ( s t a t i s t i c s Canada, 1982). Although s l i g h t l y down from 1972, 1982's marriage r a t e d i d not drop to the same degree that the d i v o r c e r a t e r o s e . The N a t i o n a l Center f o r H e a l t h S t a t i s t i c s ( U n i t e d S t a t e s ) , r e p o r t s that weddings and b i r t h s are up and d i v o r c e i s down. They r e p o r t that a r e c o r d 2.5 m i l l i o n couples were married i n 1982 w h i l e the number of d i v o r c e s dipped s l i g h t l y to 1.2 m i l l i o n i n 1982, the f i r s t d e c l i n e i n twenty years ( c i t e d i n Time, A p r i l 9, 1984). People are s t i l l g e t t i n g married and g e n e r a l l y e x p e c t i n g that t h e i r spouse w i l l become t h e i r "best f r i e n d , l o v e r and source of primary emotional g r a t i f i c a t i o n " (Ammons and S t i n n e t t , 1980). Couples enter marriage c o n f i d e n t that t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i l l transcend the d i v o r c e r a t e s and be a happy, s a t i s f y i n g and f u l f i l l i n g one. P h y s i c a l , economic and s o c i a l s u r v i v a l are no longer s u f f i c i e n t f o r - 13 -a m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . As B r o d e r i c k (1979) p o i n t e d out, "one of the consequences of the e x i s t e n t i a l r e v o l u t i o n i s that couples have changed t h e i r standards f o r a good r e l a t i o n s h i p . Even among t r a d i t i o n a l couples i t i s not enough f o r each person to do h i s or her duty; love and marriage are supposed to b r i n g happiness as w e l l as s a t i s f a c t i o n " (p. 49). The id e a of marriage f o r s a t i s f a c t i o n or happiness or the id e a of seeking a d i v o r c e to provide a spouse "room f o r growth" are r e l a t i v e l y new (Laurence, 1982). Ammons and S t i n n e t t (1980) f e e l that " s e l f i s m as a m a r i t a l frame of reference lessens each p a r t n e r ' s sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the success of the r e l a t i o n s h i p and promotes moving i n t o and out of marriage" (p. 3 9 ). Even those who have experienced d i v o r c e g e n e r a l l y do not f e e l t h a t m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s an imp o s s i b l e g o a l . DeBurger (1977) commented on t h i s by s t a t i n g : Divorce per se does not imply a r e p u d i a t i o n or even a b e l i t t l i n g of the marriage i n s t i t u t i o n . Instead i t r e l e a s e s i n d i v i d u a l s to pursue happiness i n s t i l l another m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . Research a l s o shows that l i t t l e time i s l o s t i n the t r a n s i t i o n from one m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p to another. Twenty-five percent of d i v o r c i n g men and women were remarried w i t h i n f i v e months; f i f t y percent are remarried w i t h i n one year. (pp. 544-545) Overview of Research on M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n The v a r i a b l e of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n has been s t u d i e d ever s i n c e Hamilton's p i o n e e r i n g work on marriage i n 1929. In h i s study he devoted - 14 -a chapter to the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of h i s sample of 200 spouses as to apparent degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n or d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n based on t h i r t e e n of h i s questions administered by cards but answered o r a l l y . I n t e r e s t i n g l y • , Hamilton s t a t e d t h a t , "my standpoint i s that of the p s y c h i a t r i s t s who b e l i e v e that s u b j e c t i v e phenomena, as these are experienced by the persons who r e p o r t t h e i r occurances, ( i t a l i c s Hamilton's) do not need to be t r a n s l a t e d i n t o anything e l s e i n order to be d e a l t w i t h as o b j e c t i v e l y as we d e a l w i t h a l l other b i o l o g i c a l phenomena" (Hamilton, 1929, p. x i ) . However, the b a s i c approach of many s t u d i e s i s that the causes, determinants, or p r e d i c t o r s of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n are f i r s t h ypothesized by the researcher and then t e s t e d through the use of c h e c k l i s t s , adjustment and r a t i n g s c a l e s and v a r i o u s other measurement ins t r u m e n t s . The u n d e r l y i n g assumption o f t e n seems to be that married people are not r e a l l y aware of what i s o c c u r i n g i n t h e i r marriages to make them s a t i s f y i n g f o r them. Therefore, m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n has most o f t e n been s t u d i e d by using v a r i o u s measurement instruments designed to e x t r a c t i n f o r m a t i o n from s u b j e c t s , ( e . g . , Locke's M a r i t a l Adjustment S c a l e , Blood-Wolfe Composite Index of M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n , Terman's S e l f - R a t i n g Happiness i n Marriage S c a l e , Snyder's M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Inventory, Roach's M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Scale and Spanier's Dyadic Adjustment Sale.) Such instruments tend to measure the degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p and are not a s u b j e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n of i t . The m a j o r i t y of experimental s t u d i e s of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n marriage seek to r e l a t e i t to a wide range of b e h a v i o r a l , s i t u a t i o n a l and p e r s o n a l i t y v a r i a b l e s i n a c a u s a t i v e manner. These s t u d i e s have looked at m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n r e l a t i o n t o : congruence of r o l e p e r c e p t i o n (Hobart and K l a u s n e r , 1959; B u r r , 1971; Luckey, 1960; S t u c k e r t , 1963; Cohn, 1975/1976; Chadwick, A l b r e c h t , and Kunz, 1976; F i s h b e i n and Thelen, 1981), perceptions of p e r s o n a l i t y of s e l f and spouse (Luckey, 1964; M u r s t e i n , 1967; Randers-Pehrson, 1976; B e n t l e r and Newcomb, 1978), a m a r i t a l i n t e r a c t i o n comparison of s t a b l e and unstable marriages (Clements, 1967), number of years married (Luckey, 1966), b e h a v i o r a l a n a l y s i s of ' i n s t r u m e n t a l ' and ' a f f e c t i o n a l ' behaviors ( W i l l s , Weiss, and P a t t e r s o n , 1974), the f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e ( R o l l i n s and Cannon, 1974; Spanier, Lewis and C o l e , 1975), m a r i t a l happiness as a f u n c t i o n of the balance between m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , m a r i t a l t e nsions and m a r i t a l companionship (Hawkins, 1968; M a r i n i , 1976), dyadic s a t i s f a c t i o n as a component of a dyadic adjustment s c a l e ( S p a n i e r , 1976), a developmental model of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n c l u d i n g r o l e t r a n s i t i o n s , a n t i c i p a t o r y s o c i a l i z a t i o n , l e n g t h of marriage, number of c h i l d r e n , c h i l d s p a c i n g , f a m i l y socioeconomic s t a t u s and companionship ( M i l l e r , 1976), s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e (Burke, Weir and H a r r i s o n , 1976; Cozby, 1972; Freed, 1974; G i l b e r t , 1976), husband-wife h e l p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s (Burke and Weir, 1977), comparison l e v e l between one's m a r i t a l e x p e c t a t i o n s and one's m a r i t a l outcomes ( L e n t h a l l , 1977), m u l t i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t e s : f a m i l y income, husband's o c c u p a t i o n a l p r e s t i g e , years of school completed, d u r a t i o n of marriage, age, age at marriage, church attendance, presence of c h i l d r e n , w i f e ' s employment outside of the home (Glenn and Weaver, 1978; Snyder, 1979), being married f o r f i f t y or more years (Sporakowski and Hughston, 1978), spouses consensus of values - 16 -( K i n d e l a n and McCarrey, 1979; Maas and Featherstonaugh, 1979; Khan and Sharpley, 1980; Rambo, West and H e r i t a g e , 1980; Medling and McCarrey ) 1981), the ' v i t a l ' marriage as considered on the b a s i s of sex (gender), r e c i p r o c i t y , d e t e r m i n a t i o n and commitment, and ego s t r e n g t h s (Ammons and S t i n n e t t , 1980), male-female v a r i a t i o n s i n s a t i s f a c t i o n s (Ryhne, 1981), mental h e a l t h (Rogers, Young, Cohen and Dworin, 1970), m a r i t a l cohesion i n terms of exogenous v a r i a b l e s : sex, (gender), r e l i g i o s i t y , s e l f esteem and endogenous v a r i a b l e s : communication, comparison l e v e l and e x t r a f a m i l i a l Involvement ( P i t t m a n , Price-Bonham, and McKenry, 1983), scores on Locke's M a r i t a l Adjustment Scale and Terman's S e l f R a t i n g Happiness Scale i n a l o n g i t u d i n a l study over f i v e years ( P a r i s and Luckey, 1966), and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n m a r i t a l enrichment programs ( M i l h o l l a n d and Avery, 1982). In t h e i r review of the r e s e a r c h i n the s i x t i e s on m a r i t a l happiness and s t a b i l i t y Hicks and P i a t t (1970) s t a t e d that "the most compelling r e s u l t s suggest that high happiness i s r e l a t e d more s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the male than to female r o l e performance. The c r i t i c a l importance of the male i n s t r u m e n t a l r o l e i n m a r i t a l happiness f i n d s support i n study a f e r study" (p. 5 5 6 ) . 1 An e x t e n s i v e i n t e r v i e w study by Bradburn and Noel (1969) found that m a r i t a l happiness was h i g h l y r e l a t e d to g e n e r a l happiness; "somewhat more so f o r females" (p. 208). They a l s o found ^The reader w i l l note that i n r e p o r t i n g f i n d i n g s from e a r l i e r s t u d i e s the l i b e r t y has been taken of assuming that the terms m a r i t a l happiness and m a r i t a l q u a l i t y are a k i n to the m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h i s study. As Hicks and P i a t t (1970) s t a t e , " i n the body of the review, i t has not seemed f e a s i b l e to d i s t i n g u i s h i n each i n s t a n c e the exact conceptual d i s t i n c t i o n of each author due to the enormous ambiguity w i t h i n as w e l l as among sources" ( p . 556). t h a t p o s i t i v e and negative aspects of s a t i s f a c t i o n were u n r e l a t e d to one another, yet both r e l a t e d to o v e r a l l s a t i s f a c t i o n . The focus of study changed somewhat during the next decade. Spanier and Lewis (1980) found i n t h e i r review of the s t u d i e s of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y i n the se v e n t i e s that the two areas that r e c e i v e d the most i n t e r e s t were the e f f e c t s of c h i l d r e n or m a r i t a l q u a l i t y and the r e l a t i o n s h i p between m a r i t a l q u a l i t y and the stages of the f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e . M i l l e r (1976) found a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between the ease of most recent f a m i l y r o l e t r a n s i t i o n and frequency of companionate a c t i v i t i e s and m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . He found the very lowest l e v e l of s a t i s f a c t i o n at the time of the b i r t h of the f i r s t c h i l d and f o r persons married s i x to ten y e a r s . While researchers have attempted to d i s c o v e r new v a r i a b l e s necessary to achieve m a r i t a l q u a l i t y ( s a t i s f a c t i o n ) , some attempt has a l s o been made at theory c o n s t r u c t i o n . The major t h e o r i e s are reviewed i n the next s e c t i o n of t h i s study. There has been an abundance of q u a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h examining f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . However there appears to be only three s t u d i e s that used the q u a l i t a t i v e procedure of e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n to study m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . These were s t u d i e s done by Laurence (1982), Beck (1983) and B r i l l i n g e r (1983). Laurence and Beck focused t h e i r s t u d i e s on m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n couples w h i l e B r i l l i n g e r i n t e r v i e w e d i n d i v i d u a l s . Laurence i n t e r v i e w e d t w e n t y - f i v e couples who had been married from one-and-a-half to t w e n t y - f i v e years w i t h a mean of 6.81 years of marriage while Beck i n t e r v i e w e d f i f t e e n couples married f o r - 18 -more than t w e n t y - f i v e y e a r s . B r i l l i n g e r ' s f o r t y i n d i v i d u a l s had been married f o r a minimum of ten y e a r s . Laurence (1982) i n t e r v i e w e d what he termed " h a p p i l y married couples" who were s e l f - s e l e c t e d . He s t a t e s that h i s framework i s l a r g e l y phenomenological—he t a l k s about the "phenomenological s p i r i t " of the r e s e a r c h — w i t h the raw data analysed " a f t e r the f a c t . " Laurence used two r a t e r s to analyse the i n t e r v i e w t r a n s c r i p t s using the Beavers-Timberlawn Family E v a l u a t i o n S c a l e s , the I n t e r p e r s o n a l Check L i s t and Content Item A n a l y s i s . From the q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s h i s r a t e r s f e l t t hat the couples presented themselves h o n e s t l y and on balance were h a p p i l y m a r r i e d . The most q u a l i t a t i v e aspect of Laurence's study i n v o l v e d the Content Item A n a l y s i s . He generated 147 d e s c r i p t i v e statements from the i n t e r v i e w s . From these he grouped items together i n t o f o u r t e e n item c l u s t e r s . He then d i d anecdotal a n a l y s i s of each c l u s t e r . For example, under the " s e x u a l i t y c l u s t e r , " he reported t h a t one couple s t a t e d , "there's an e x c l u s i v i t y that makes your r e l a t i o n s h i p s p e c i a l . . . i t ' s something we share w i t h each other but don't share w i t h other people" (p. 87-88). He went on to comment that couples o f t e n spoke of t h e i r sexual behavior as a "barometer" measuring the o v e r a l l emotional c l i m a t e of the r e l a t i o n s h i p and then quoted from one of h i s i n t e r v i e w s . Male: I t ' s l i k e a thermometer. I t t e l l s us when something's wrong. I t wasn't too many weeks ago that we found o u r s e l v e s g e t t i n g i n t o a l i t t l e argument over how we were r e l a t i n g s e x u a l l y to each o t h e r , then we discovered i t wasn't a sexual disagreement but something e l s e , so we hammered i t out. (p.88) - 19 -Laurence summarizes h i s r e s u l t s by i d e n t i f y i n g "ground" d e s c r i p t o r s which he f e e l s are the foundations or melody f o r h a p p i l y married people. His ground d e s c r i p t o r s were commitment, common sense, p r a c t i c a l i t y , a w i l l i n g n e s s to assume personal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e i r l i v e s , humour, strong c o a l i t i o n s and boundary f o r m a t i o n , a warm and ple a s a n t atmosphere i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p , and "couple constancy." Laurence s t a t e s that these d e s c r i p t o r s are elements of i d e n t i t y f o r mation and t h a t , "a s o l i d and growth-producing i d e n t i t y and i d e n t i t y as a couple are the foremost c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of these couples" (p. 106). He a l s o i d e n t i f i e s "secondary" d e s c r i p t o r s which he m e t a p h o r i c a l l y r e f e r s to as the words each couple w r i t e s f o r t h e i r song. He found the secondary d e s c r i p t o r s to have a h i g h degree of v a r i a b l i l i t y through h i s sample. The secondary d e s c r i p t o r s i n c l u d e d : c l o s e n e s s , mythology, n e g o t i a t i o n , c l a r i t y of communication, i n v a s i v e n e s s , c o n f l i c t , p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g , s e x u a l i t y , i n t i m a c y , chores, and s i m i l a r i t i e s / d i f f e r e n c e s . These d e s c r i p t o r s are the s o r t of items t h a t are g e n e r a l l y c a t e g o r i z e d as growth, s e l f - f u l f i l l m e n t and a f f i l i a t i o n . Laurence p o s i t s t h a t the one element that a l l the h a p p i l y married people e x h i b i t i s couple constancy. He says that couple constancy means t h a t : They show both a strong sense of "being a couple" and a b e l i e f i n the a b i l i t y of the r e l a t i o n s h i p to endure and prosper. F a i t h i n the a b i l i t y to t h r i v e as a couple and to master the "storms of l i f e " anchors them i n the world of o t h e r s . Quick t o assume personal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the q u a l i t y of t h e i r l i v e s these couples show commitment to the r e l a t i o n s h i p , a - 20 -willingness to work hard and to carve out possibilities for meaning in their relationship, (p. 100) Laurence is careful to point out that couple constancy is not a trait but rather a multivariate construct. He feels that the couple constancy process begins very early in the relationship and that his couples stated that finding someone with (a) similiar goals (b) compatible values and (c) whom one has fun and simply enjoys being with are the first steps in the process of becoming a couple. Laurence's results were obtained primarily through the use of the three instruments. He did not employ the phenomenological process of themes and exhaustive and concise descriptions of the phenomenon studied. Beck (1983) approached her study of the experience of the long term marriage relationship from a more purely existential-phenomenological stance. She did a qualitative descriptive analysis of themes she extracted from her interviews. Beck explicated six basic themes from the interviews. Couples described their relationship as (a) consisting of a continuing process of commitment which satisfied personal needs and thereby deepened commitment to the sustained relationship, (b) a sharing of self through self-disclosure that increases the desire to remain in the marriage and work toward its enhancement, (c) the building of mutual memories which were a significant part of their long-term-marriage relationship, (d) experiencing a distancing that occurs in the natural ebb and flow of life and during crises, (e) experiencing a shifting from self-orientation to a oneness of being in the world while retaining - 21 -individuality, and (f) a branching outward of impact upon lives of others: children, extended family and friends. B r i l l i n g e r (1983) was not looking at marital satisfaction per se but rather at planned changes that individuals in satisfying marriages make to enhance their relationship. She interviewed forty individuals, twenty male and twenty female, who had been married for a minimum of ten years. She asked them what marital satisfaction meant to them, as applied to their own marriage. She then developed themes from her interviews. Her study had a phenomenological base as i t attempted to gain an understanding of the phenomenon as experienced by the repondents upon reflection on their own marriages. The themes in the order of frequency were (a) sharing and companionship, (this was mentioned more than three times as often as the next most frequently identified ingrediant, she reports. B r i l l i n g e r also states that 78% of her subjects "mentioned some form of sharing as contributing to their feelings of well-being around the marriage" (p. 50). In the study, the sharing of a c t i v i t i e s , interests, values and goals, experiences, friendships, a philosophy of l i f e , tasks, and responsibilities were the most frequently identified contributors to people's satisfaction with their marriage) (b) comfort, contentment, fulfillment, (c) support and security, (d) handling of differences, (e) verbal sharing and openess, (f) feelings of acceptance and closeness, (g) commitment to the relationship, (h) autonomy, ( i ) stimulation and growth, (j) enjoyment and excitment, and (k) trust and respect. The above three studies looked at marital satisfaction from varying exlstential-phonomenological perpectives. In review, Laurence found - 22 -couple constancy to be the most important i n g r e d i e n t i n m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . Beck i d e n t i f i e s s i x major themes of the experience of the long term marriage r e l a t i o n s h i p without p i n p o i n t i n g any one i n p a r t i c u l a r , w h i l e B r i l l i n g e r c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e s s h a r i n g and companionship as the number one component of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . The f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n i s a review of f o u r major t h e o r i e s as they r e l a t e to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . A f t e r each review there i s a l i s t of the b a s i c assumptions of the t h e o r y . The f o u r t h e o r i e s reviewed are (a) p s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory, (b) s y m b o l i c - i n t e r a c t i o n theory, ( c ) s o c i a l exchange theory, and (d) b e h a v i o r a l theory. Theories of Marital Satisfaction  Psychoanalytic Theory C l a s s i c a l P s y c h o n a l y s i s looks at m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n terms of the developmental l e v e l of the i n d i v i d u a l partners or the dyad. P s y c h o a n a l y t i c t h e o r i s t s tend to study the i n t r a p s y c h i c p e r s p e c t i v e of the i n d i v i d u a l or the dyad. C l a s s i c a l p s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory centers around f i v e stages of p s y c h o s o c i a l development: (0-8 months) (b) a n a l stage, (9 month8-2 yea r s ) (c) p h a l l i c stage (2-4 y e a r s ) (d) l a t e n c y p e r i o d , ( p e r i o d of r e s o l v i n g o d e i p a l r e l a t i o n s h i p ) and (e) g e n i t a l phase (puberty to adulthood) (Kimble and Garmezy, 1968). Freud p o s t u l a t e d that man i s g e n e r a l l y d r i v e n by i n s t i n c t u a l d r i v e s t h a t are i r r a t i o n a l i n nature. He based h i s t h e o r i e s of p e r s o n a l i t y development on the s u b l i m a t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s sexual and a g g r e s s i v e i n s t i n c t s . As i t r e l a t e s to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c - 23 -t h i n k e r s b e l i e v e problems i n a d u l t love are grounded i n our childhood e x p e r i e n c e s . Past l e a r n i n g , rooted i n the Oedipal c o n f l i c t , i s seen as the u l t i m a t e source of any i n h i b i t i o n s p r e venting the attainment of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n (Laurence, 1982). Freudian theory s t a t e s that when the i n f a n t begins to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between h i m s e l f and the breast that feeds him he has the choice of two love o b j e c t s . Freud i d e n t i f i e d these as a n a c l i t i c love and n a r c i s s i s t i c l o v e . A n a c l i t i c l i t e r a l l y means " l e a n i n g up a g a i n s t " ( M u r s t e i n , 1976, p. 24) and r e f e r s to dependency and nurturance needs. That i s , a f f e c t i o n f o r the person who feeds, nurtures and p r o t e c t s . N a r c i s s i s t i c l o v e or n a r c i s s i s m r e f e r s to the i n f a n t t a k i n g him or h e r s e l f as a l o v e - o b j e c t or "to f i n d a love o b j e c t l i k e o n e s e l f ; to f i n d someone who i s as one once was; to f i n d someone to love who corresponds to an image one would l i k e to be (ego i d e a l ) e t c . " (Laurence, p. 7 ) . Freud thought th a t o b j e c t love of the a n a c l i t i c type i s g e n e r a l l y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the man wh i l e the n a r c i s s i s t i c type i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the woman. Freud hypothesized that the c h i l d ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h i t s mother was the foundation f o r a l l f u t u r e love r e l a t i o n s h i p s . "The c h i l d ' s attachment to mother i s unique, without p a r a l l e l s , e s t a b l i s h e d u n a l t e r a b l y f o r a whole l i f e t i m e as the f i r s t and st r o n g e s t love o b j e c t and as the prototype of a l l l a t e r love r e l a t i o n s — f o r both sexes" (Freud, c i t e d i n Laurence, 1982, p. 7 ) . Kernberg (1976), among o t h e r s , t h e o r i z e s about what i s c a l l e d the p r e o e d i p a l p e r i o d of development which i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from the o e d i p a l stage. This p e r i o d i s considered to be the f i r s t three years of - 24 -l i f e d u r i n g which time c r i t i c a l f ormation of the i n t r a p s y c h i c s t r u c t u r e takes p l a c e . Such processes as s e p a r a t i o n - i n d i v i d u a t i o n occur d u r i n g t h i s time. The p r e o e d i p a l t h e o r i s t s b e l i e v e t h a t " a l l . k i n d s of developmental d e f i c i t s i n the f i r s t three years p o t e n t i a l l y put the i n d i v i d u a l "at r i s k " f o r f u t u r e problems i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l s a t i s f a c t i o n " (Laurence, p. 9 ) . Ch r i s t o p h e r Lasch (1979), i n h i s book The C u l t u r e of N a r c i s s i s m , looks at our s o c i e t y i n terms of our apparent c u l t u r a l i n a b i l i t y to form l a s t i n g and s a t i s f y i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s . He f e e l s t h a t t h i s i s a r e s u l t of i d e n t i t y d i s o r d e r s i n i n d i v i d u a l s . I f indeed i t i s more d i f f i c u l t today to form a l a s t i n g and meaningful r e l a t i o n s h i p , then, as Laurence (1982) reasons, i t w i l l be more d i f f i c u l t f o r couples to experience m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . A s t r o n g sense of pers o n a l i d e n t i t y i s necessary, according to E r i k E r l k s o n (1963), f o r he a l t h y p e r s o n a l growth and i n t i m a c y . I t f o l l o w s , then, t h a t s t a b l e i d e n t i t y f ormation i s important to the c r e a t i o n of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . As Laurence (1982) summarizes, " p s y c h o a n a l y t i c models of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n c o n t a i n a strong developmental p e r s p e c t i v e w i t h m a r i t a l happiness a f u n c t i o n of both i n t r a p s y c h i c and i n t e r p e r s o n a l f a c t o r s interwoven i n a h i g h l y complex manner across many l e v e l s of pers o n a l experience" ( p . 13). Object R e l a t i o n s The p s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory of o b j e c t r e l a t i o n s has been a p p l i e d to m a r i t a l therapy and r e s e a r c h ( B a r r y , 1970). Barry s t a t e s that the pa r t n e r s i n a marriage both have an " i n t e r n a l o b j e c t - r e l a t i o n system" - 25 -t h a t they b r i n g i n t o the marriage. He presents a d e f i n i t i o n of object r e l a t i o n s as: An organized schema of c o g n i t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s e x i s t i n g w i t h i n the system ego, i n c l u d i n g images and r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the s e l f and i t s human o b j e c t s , together w i t h r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of needs and a f f e c t s c h a r a c t e r i z i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between them (the images and r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s ) , which evolves out of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s contact w i t h v a r y i n g p s y c h o - s o c i a l c o n t e x t s , and which c o n d i t i o n s the i n d i v i d u a l ' s a c t u a l and f a n t a s i e d i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n s ( p . 42). Meissner (1978) a p p l i e s o b j e c t r e l a t i o n s s p e c i f i c a l l y to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h i s statement: . . . the r e l a t i v e success that the m a r i t a l partners experience and the manner i n which these developmental ta s k s are approached and accomplished are determined to a l a r g e extent by the res i d u e s of i n t e r n a l i z e d o b j e c t s and the o r g a n i z a t i o n of i n t r o j e c t s which form the core of the sense of s e l f and c o n t r i b u t e In s i g n i f i c a n t ways to the i n t e g r a t i o n of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e i d e n t i t i e s ( p . 27). Object r e l a t i o n s theory deemphasizes b i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s . I t c o n c e p t u a l i z e s human development d i f f e r e n t l y from c l a s s i c a l p s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory. Object r e l a t i o n s theory as presented by F a i r b a i r n (1954) r e p l a c e d the psychosexual stages of c l a s s i c a l theory w i t h three developmental stages of obje c t r e l a t i o n s : (a) the stage of immature or i n f a n t i l e dependence, (b) the t r a n s i t i o n a l phase, and (c) - 26 -the stage of mature dependence. These stages can be r e l a t e d to the m i d d l e - l e v e l theory of value consensus as a source of p a r t n e r s a t i s f a c t i o n . Barry (1970), suggests that i f one i s a t t r a c t e d to another and does not have a d i f f e r e n t i a t e d o b j e c t r e l a t i o n s system, one may imagine that the person's values are harmonious w i t h one's own. He concludes that " i f i n f a c t values do not c o i n c i d e and i f marriage eventuates, c o n f l i c t i s probably i n e v i t a b l e . I f on the other hand, the schema i s more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d , then one can t e s t f o r c o m p a t i b i l i t y of values and a t t i t u d e s before marriage" (p. 4 4 ) . Object r e l a t i o n s theory, then, s t a t e s that to understand a person, one must c o n s i d e r h i s / h e r perceptions of other i n d i v i d u a l s . I t focuses on the i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n of i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s and how these r e l a t i o n s determine i n t r a p s y c h i c s t r u c t u r e i n the mind. These i n t r a p s y c h i c s t r u c t u r e s d e r i v e from " f i x a t i n g , m o d i f y i n g , and r e a c t i v i t i n g past i n t e r n a l i z e d r e l a t i o n s w i t h others i n the context of present i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s " (Kernberg, 1976, p. 56). Con c l u s i o n How the p e r s o n a l i t i e s of the m a r i t a l partners a f f e c t m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n has been of concern to some re s e a r c h e r s (Luckey, 1964; M u r s t e i n , 1967; Randerspehrson, 1976; B e n t l e r and Newcomb, 1978). K e l l y (1941), however, was the f i r s t to study p e r c e p t i o n of p e r s o n a l i t y as i t concerns m a r i t a l f u n c t i o n i n g . He concluded from h i s study t h a t "an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n marriage i s r e l a t e d to both s e l f - r e g a r d and to the judgement of the s e l f ' s i n f e r i o r i t y or - 27 -s u p e r i o r i t y v i s - a - v i s the spouse" ( c i t e d i n Tharp, 1963, p. 99). The e f f e c t s of p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s on m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n have been s t u d i e d w i t h regard to n e u r o t i c tendencies of the partners i n the m a r i t a l dyad. Tharp (1963) s t a t e s i n h i s review " t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s ' n e u r o t i c t r a i t s are p r e d i c t i v e of m a r i t a l disharmony can be accepted as demonstrated f a c t " (p. 98). Barry (1970), i n h i s review supports Tharp i n s t a t i n g that s t u d i e s have shown a c o r r e l a t i o n between m a r i t a l unhappiness and n e u r o t i c t r a i t s i n the i n d i v i d u a l . Again i n h i s review, Barry concludes that m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s more r e l a t e d to the husband's background and p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s than the w i f e ' s . He s t a t e s t h a t " s o l i d male i d e n t i t y , e s t a b l i s h e d through a f f e c t i o n a l t i e s w i t h the f a t h e r and b u t t r e s s e d by academic and/or o c c u p a t i o n a l success and the esteem of h i s w i f e , i s s t r o n g l y r e l a t e d to happiness im marriage f o r the couple" ( B a r r y , p. 47). P e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s were a l s o i n v e s t i g a t e d by Ammons and S t i n n e t t (1980) when they were l o o k i n g at what they termed " v i t a l marriages." They d i s c o v e r e d t h a t those couples whom they found to e x h i b i t v i t a l marriages had w e l l developed ego s t r e n g t h as i n d i c a t e d by the e x p r e s s i o n of "a moderate need to make independent judgment and take independent a c t i o n s as measured by the Edwards Pe r s o n a l Preference Schedule autonomy su b - s c a l e " (p. 4 0 ) . A l s o r e l a t e d to p e r s o n a l i t y , the concept of homogomy ( l i k e chosing l i k e ) has been a major focus i n m a r i t a l r e s e a r c h s i n c e Pearson's comparisons of the anthropometric c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of spouses i n the 1890's (Tharp, 1963). In summary, p s y c h o n a l y t i c theory on m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n has been - 28 -s u b j e c t to very l i t t l e r e s e a r c h . As Mu r s t e i n (1976) makes note of In h i s book, Who W i l l Marry Whom?, "Winch (1950) pointed out a g e n e r a t i o n ago, t h a t the h i g h a b s t r a c t i o n s of Freudian theory l a c k observable r e f e r a n t s " ( p . 39). M u r s t e i n quotes Winch (1950) d i r e c t l y w i t h the statement: "one cannot observe an Oedipus complex, he can only observe behavior which he may then t r y to i n t e r p r e t i n terms of the concept of the Oedipus complex" ( c i t e d i n M u r s t e i n , p. 39). Psycho a n a l y s i s bases i t s theory on the b e l i e f that missed or unresolved stages i n the development of the i n d i v i d u a l are l i k e l y to cause both i n t r a p s y c h i c and i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i f f i c u l t i e s f o r the m a r i t a l dyad. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s viewed as another aspect of an i n v o l v e d developmental p r o c e s s . Basic Assumptions of Psychoanayltic Theory 1. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s grounded i n childhood experiences; e s p e c i a l l y those r e l a t e d to sexual and aggressive i n s t i n c t s 2. Love r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n a d u l t l i f e are grounded i n one's e a r l y c h i l d h o o d r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h one's p a r e n t s , ( i . e . Oedipal c o n f l i c t . ) 3. The f i r s t three years of l i f e are developmentally c r i t i c a l f o r success i n f u t u r e i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . 4. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s r e l a t e d to a s t a b l e personal i d e n t i t y f o r m a t i o n i n f l u e n c e d by one's i n t e r n a l o b j e c t r e l a t i o n s system. 5. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s h i g h l y i n f l u e n c e d by the p e r s o n a l i t y development and sense of s e l f of the p a r t n e r s . - 29 -Symbolic Interaction Theory of Marital Satisfaction Burr et a l . (1979) d i s c u s s e d the h i s t o r y of symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n theory before p r e s e n t i n g t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n i s t theory of s a t i s f a c t i o n . Symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n i s best d e s c r i b e d by p r e s e n t i n g t h i s quote from Burr et a l . : The o r i g i n a t o r s of the symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n school of thought r e l i e d h e a v i l y on the pragmatic p h i l o s o p h i c a l t r a d i t i o n that grew out of the work of the B r i t i s h e m p i r i c i s t s Hume, Locke, and B e r k e l e y . Pragmatism has i t s roots i n the n o t i o n t h a t phenomenon has meaning only i f i t can be a p p l i e d to a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n e i t h e r d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y . I t argues that man i s i n constant i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h h i s environment and the i n d i v i d u a l p u r p o s e f u l l y s e l e c t s the s t i m u l i to which he w i l l respond. Pragmatists t r a d i t i o n a l l y examine the e f f e c t s that communication has on r e l a t i o n s h i p s and the meaning of s i g n s t h a t are used to express i d e a s . They a l s o b e l i e v e t h a t " t r u t h " e x i s t s only inasmuch as i t has a payoff or somehow "works" to help a t t a i n important g o a l s , ( p . 43) In order to b e t t e r understand the symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n theory of s a t i s f a c t i o n as i t r e l a t e s to marriage i t i s important to c o n s i d e r the b a s i c assumptions i n i n t e r a c t i o n i s m . Burr et a l . (1979) formulated e l e v e n assumptions based on t h e i r readings (pp. 46-48). This review w i l l l i s t only the b a s i c assumptions as presented by Burr et a l . as a r e s u l t of t h e i r search of the l i t e r a t u r e without going i n t o d i s c u s s i o n of each one i n d i v i d u a l l y . - 30 -Assumption 1. Humans l i v e In a symbolic environment as w e l l as a p h y s i c a l environment, and they acquire complex set s of symbols i n t h e i r minds. Assumption 2. Human Value This i n v o l v e s l e a r n i n g to make e v a l u a t i v e d i s t i n c t i o n s about symbols. Assumption 3. Symbols are important i n understanding human behavior Humans decide what to do and what not to do p r i m a r i l y on the b a s i s of the symbols they have lea r n e d In i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h others and t h e i r b e l i e f about the importance of these meanings. Assumption 4. Humans are r e f l e x i v e and t h e i r i n t r o s p e c t i o n g r a d u a l l y creates a d e f i n i t i o n of s e l f I t i s a process of being aware and d e f i n i n g o n e s e l f r a t h e r than p e c e i v i n g a f i x e d s t a t i c obj e c t . Assumption 5. The s e l f has s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t p a r t s (a) p h y s i c a l s e l f (b) s o c i a l s e l f ( c ) I (d) me Assumption 6. The human i s a c t o r as w e l l as r e a c t o r That i s , " o b j e c t s become s t i m u l i when they serve to l i n k impulses w i t h s a t i s f a c t i o n s " ( S t r y k e r , 1964, p. 135). S t r y k e r ' s (1964) comment Is worth r e p e a t i n g here as i t p o i n t s out that t h i s assumption i s b a s i c to the theory and i t r e l a t e s to the phenomenological approach of t h i s study. " I t i s t h i s assumption which leads to the fundamental methodological p r i n c i p l e of the theory, namely, th a t the i n v e s t i g a t o r must see the world from the p o i n t of view of the s u b j e c t of h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n . I f men s e l e c t and i n t e r p r e t the environment to which they respond, an e x p l i c a t i o n of s o c i a l behavior must i n c o r p o r a t e these s u b j e c t i v e elements" ( S t r y k e r , 1964, p. 135). Assumption 7. The i n f a n t i s a s o c i a l Human nature i s determined by what i s encountered and r e a c t i o n to i t r a t h e r than p r e d i s p o s i t i o n to act i n c e r t a i n ways. Assumption 8. S o c i e t y precedes i n d i v i d u a l s People are not born i n t o s o c i a l vacuums, the s o c i e t y they l i v e i n always e x i s t s p r i o r to t h e i r a r r i v a l . Assumption 9. S o c i e t y and man are the same There e x i s t s a harmony between man and s o c i e t y . I n d i v i d u a l s l e a r n a c u l t u r e and become the s o c i e t y . Assumption 10. The human i s i n d e l i b l e Man's behavior i s a product of h i s l i f e h i s t o r y , of a l l e x p e r i e n c e , through communication w i t h o t h e r s . - 32 -Assumption 11. Man ought to be studied on his own level That i s , study human behavior, not rats, mice, monkeys etcetera. Burr et al. (1979, p. 50) use Figure 1 to illustrate the process of how people relate to what occurs in their intimate associations, "reference relationships" and the reciprocal process. Figure 1 I Societal Mental Structural Variables Variables Interaction Variables Behavioural Variables This approach to the study of humans is quite different from pure behaviorism (see behavioral section at end of Chapter II) which argues that there is a pure determinism between the stimuli that impinge on humans and their behavior. Burr et al. (1979) go on to identify a middle-range symbolic Interaction theory of marital satisfaction that they say offers an alternative to the theoretical ideas of Spanier and Lewis (1979). (see exchange theory in next section.) The term "middle-range theory" comes from Merton (1957) as cited by Burr et al. (1979). They report that Merton coined the term "when he was arguing that i t would be more fruitful for contemporary social science to concentrate on theories of modest scope rather than to develop "grand" - 33 -theories that would explain a l l social or behavioral phenomena in the Parsonian (1951) tradition" (p. 61). Burr et a l . (1979) formed their theory by analyzing empirical research on role performance variables and satisfactions and relating i t to interaction theory. They suggest that: The most fundamental part of a definition of roles is that they are more or less intergrated sets of social norms that are distinguishable from other sets of norms that constitute other roles. Social norms are beliefs or expectations that people ought or ought not behave in certain ways. These normative beliefs are situational in that we believe people ought to do things at certain times and under appropriate conditions Burr et a l . (1979) have developed the following four propositions: Proposition 1. The perceived quality of role enactment in a relationship influences the satisfaction individuals i n the relationship have, and this i s a positive, linear relationship, (p. 69) Propostition 2. The more important a role expectation i s to a person, the greater the effect that the quality of role enactment has on that person's satisfaction, (p. 71) Role expectations have been defined by Burr (1967, 1971) as "variation in the amount of significance or saliance attached to - 34 -deviance from or conformity to the e x p e c t a t i o n s f o r a r o l e " ( c i t e d i n Burr et a l . , 1979, p. 71). This r e f e r s to the i d e a that i f members of the m a r i t a l dyad f e e l that t h e i r marriage i s comparable to that of others c l o s e to them, they w i l l tend to be s a t i s f i e d ; i f they see t h e i r marriage as b e t t e r or perhaps worse, they w i l l tend to be more or l e s s s a t i s f i e d . P r o p o s i t i o n 3. The g r e a t e r the r e l a t i v e d e p r i v a t i o n of one's s i t u a t i o n as a whole, the l e s s one's s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the s i t u a t i o n , ( p . 73) That i s , i n comparing oneself w i t h one's reference group, the more deprived one f e e l s the l e s s s a t i s f i e d one w i l l be. P r o p o s i t i o n 4. The amount of consensus on r e l e v a n t r o l e e x p e c t a t i o n s i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p i n f l u e n c e s the s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the r e l a t i o n s h i p , and t h i s i s a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p , ( p . 73) That i s , the g r e a t e r the agreement on r o l e e x p e c t a t i o n s the g r e a t e r the s a t i s f a c t i o n . In 1957 Mangus supported t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n . He s t a t e d that "the i n t e g r a t i v e q u a l i t y of a marriage i s r e f l e c t e d i n degrees of concordances and d i s c r e p a n c i e s among the p a r t n e r s ' q u a l i t a t i v e r o l e p e rceptions and expections as r e c i p r o c a l l y reported by them . . . I t i s taken f o r granted that the husband's and the w i f e ' s perceptions of the m a r i t a l r o l e s of themselves and of each other are c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the adaptive or maladaptive c h a r a c t e r of t h e i r marriage" (p. 256). As mentioned b e f o r e , Luckey (1960), S t r u c k e r t (1963) and others have done e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s on the r e l a t i o n s h i p between m a r i t a l - 35 -s a t i s f a c t i o n and r o l e p e r c e p t i o n and found a s i g n i f i c a n t a s s o c i a t i o n between consensus and s a t i s f a c t i o n . v I n t e r a c t i o n i s m , u n l i k e p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , emphasizes c o g n i t i v e as opposed to a n a l y t i c c o n s t r u c t s such as i d , ego, and superego as i d e n t i f i e d by Freud, or the concepts of the unconscious, d r i v e s , or i n s t i n c t s such as the l i b i d o . That i s , the c o g n i t i v e d e f i n i t i o n s people make i n t h e i r unique s i t u a t i o n s are the most u s e f u l to i n t e r a c t i o n i s t s f o r understanding human and s o c i a l b e havior. I n t e r a c t i o n i s t s , then, b e l i e v e t h a t the most p r o d u c t i v e way to study human s o c i a l behavior i s through the b e l i e f s and values that people get from i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h o t h e r s . They f e e l a s i t u a t i o n has meaning only through people's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and d e f i n i t i o n s of I t . B u r r , et a l (1979) t h i n k that "the more a n a l y t i c and i n t e r p r e t i v e branches of symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n blend i n t o phenomenology" ( p . 43)., Thus the i n t e r a c t i o n i s t theory of s a t i s f a c t i o n i s based on the ideas of q u a l i t y of r o l e enactment, r e l a t i v e d e p r i v a t i o n and consensus of e x p e c t a t i o n s . Although t h i s theory a l s o a p p l i e s to s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h j o b s , f r i e n d s h i p s , p a r e n t - c h i l d - r e l a t i o n s h i p and so on, i t s s t r o n g a p p l i c a t i o n to a theory of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s obvious. Basic Assumptions of Symbolic-Interaction Theory 1. Human thought and thus behavior i s shaped through i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h and l e a r n i n g from the symbols (mental a b s t r a c t i o n s ) i n one's environment. The mind emerges from i n t e r a c t i o n . - 36 -2. Human behavior i s i n f l u e n c e d by the meaning of ideas i n the mind and not by i n s t i n c t s , f o r c e s such as l i b i d i n a l energy, needs, d r i v e s or a b u i l t - i n p r o f i t motive that are independent of t h e i r s i t u a t i o n s . An emphasis on mental phenomena. 3. To understand humans one must study the b e l i e f s and values that i n d i v i d u a l s get from i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h o t h e r s . 4. S a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h i n a m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p i s r e l a t e d to s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h and agreement on r o l e behavior of s e l f and spouse i n comparison to one's reference group (the marriages of others who are important to them). Social Exchange Theory Lewis and Spanier (1979) have attempted to develop a theory of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y and s t a b i l i t y based on exchange theory. A s o c i a l exchange model views human behaivor as an exchange r e l a t i o n s h i p . Human i n t e r a c t i o n i n the s o c i a l exchange view presupposes "that i f the p e r s o n a l p r o f i t from i n t e r a c t i o n i s rewarding, there i s a b u i l d i n g up of p o s i t i v e sentiments, i . e . , a r e l a t i o n s h i p continues to grow, whereas i f the c o s t s of i n t e r a c t i o n are l e s s than the p r o f i t s , the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i l l terminate or at l e a s t w i l l slow i n i t s growth or development" (Lewis and S p a n i e r , 1979, p. 285). Thibaut and K e l l e y ' s (1959) theory of s o c i a l exchange has been the b a s i s f o r f u r t h e r development of exchange models w i t h s t r e s s " q u a s i - b e h a v i o r a l economics" (Weiss, 1978). Weiss s t a t e s t h a t , " i n w e l l f u n c t i o n i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s , p artners should be exchanging b e n e f i t s , which are b o l s t e r e d by the f a c t that each person has r e i n f o r c e d value f o r the other" (p. 189).. - 37 -Lewis and Spanier (1979) c o n s i d e r m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as a s p e c i f i c dimension of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y . For the purposes of t h i s study m a r i t a l q u a l i t y i s synonymous w i t h m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and t h e i r theory i s reviewed w i t h t h i s i n mind. In b u i l d i n g t h e i r theory they s t a t e that they i n c l u d e d any resea r c h that looked at m a r i t a l adjustment, happiness, i n t e g r a t i o n , success, s a t i s f a c t i o n , commitment, or other q u a l i t i e s . Spanier and Lewis (1980) f e e l that m a r i t a l q u a l i t y i s dynamic, not s t a t i c . In t h e i r review of e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s Lewis and Spanier (1979) organized t h e i r theory of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y i n t o three g e n e r a l areas: (a) p r e m a r i t a l f a c t o r s , (b) s o c i a l and economic f a c t o r s , and (c) i n t e r p e r s o n a l and dyadic f a c t o r s . Under each area they put together an i n v e n t o r y of " f i r s t - o r d e r , " "second-order," and " t h i r d - o r d e r " p r o p o s i t i o n s to a i d them i n t h e i r theory b u i l d i n g process. Under p r e m a r i t a l f a c t o r s , they developed t w e n t y - f i v e f i r s t - o r d e r p r o p o s i t o n s . These came under the headings of homogamy, r e s o u r c e s , p a r e n t a l models, support from s i g n i f i c a n t others and independent f i r s t - o r d e r p r o p o s i t i o n s . Under s o c i a l and economic f a c t o r s were eleven f i r s t order p r o p o s i t i o n s c o v e r i n g socio-economic f a c t o r s , wives employment, household compositon and community embeddedness. The area of i n t e r p e r s o n a l and dyadic f a c t o r s i n c l u d e d t h i r t y - e i g h t f i r s t - o r d e r p r o p o s i t i o n s d i v i d e d by the sub-categories of p o s i t i v e regard, emotional g r a t i f i c a t i o n , communication, r o l e f i t and i n t e r a c t i o n . From these s e v e n t y - f o u r f i r s t - o r d e r p ropositons Lewis and Spanier (1979) i n c l u d e d t h i r t e e n second order p r o p o s i t i o n s and three t h i r d - o r d e r p r o p o s i t i o n s . T h e i r t h i r d - o r d e r propositons r e l a t e s t r o n g l y to a s o c i a l exchange theory of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y . These t h i r d - o r d e r p r o p o s i t o n s are as - 38 -f o l l o w s : (a) The g r e a t e r the s o c i a l and personal resources a v a i l a b l e f o r adequate m a r i t a l r o l e f u n c t i o n i n g , the higher the subsequent m a r i t a l q u a l i t y , (b) the g r e a t e r the spouses' s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r l i f e s t y l e , the g r e a t e r t h e i r m a r i t a l q u a l i t y , and (c) the g r e a t e r the rewards from spousal i n t e r a c t i o n , the g r e a t e r the m a r i t a l q u a l i t y (Lewis and Spanier, 1979, pp. 275, 279, & 282). From t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n a l i n v e n t o r y Lewis and Spanier (1979) developed what they have c a l l e d a t h e o r e t i c a l typology which makes use of assumptions from the s o c i a l exchange framework. The typology i s a c t u a l l y one of m a r i t a l q u a l i t y and m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y . Lewis and Spanier (1979) do not separate the two dimensions because they f e e l that " m a r i t a l q u a l i t y i s a major determinant of m a r i t y s t a b i l i t y " (pp. 268-269). They s t a t e that the model i s an attempt to demonstrate "that an exchange framework i s u s e f u l f o r understanding the balance between m a r i t a l q u a l i t y and m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y " (p. 287). Th e i r o b j e c t i v e i n developing the p r o p o s i t i o n a l Inventory and t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n was to " e x p l a i n why some marriages f a i l and others do not" (p. 285). To f u l l y a p p r e c i a t e the development of Lewis and Spanier's (1979) t h e o r e t i c a l typology i t i s worth b r i e f l y r e v i e w i n g Cuber and H a r r o f f ' s (1965) popular typology d e t a i l e d i n t h e i r book, The S i g n i f i c a n t  Americans. They c a t e g o r i z e d upper middle c l a s s American marriages as e i t h e r (a) c o n f l i c t - h a b i t u a t e d , (b) d e v i t a l i z e d , ( c ) p a s s i v e - c o n g e n i a l , (d) v i t a l or (e) t o t a l . These f i v e types were based upon the degree to which couples i n t h e i r study had a u t i l i t a r i a n marriage as c o n t r a s t e d w i t h an i n t r i n s i c marriage. A u t i l i t a r i a n marriage, they suggest, i s : - 39 -Any marriage which i s e s t a b l i s h e d or maintained f o r purposes other than to express an i n t i m a t e , h i g h l y important p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between a man and a woman. The absence of continuous and deep empathic f e e l i n g and the e x i s t e n c e of an atmosphere of l i m i t e d companionship are n a t u r a l outcomes, s i n c e the purposes f o r i t s establishment or maintenance are not p r i m a r i l y s e x u a l and emotional o n e s . . . . the marriage i s u s e f u l to the mates f o r reasons o u t s i d e of pe r s o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , ( p . 109) They c l a s s i f y an i n t r i n s i c marriage as one i n which the r e l a t i o n s h i p has top p r i o r i t y over a l l other events i n the couples l i v e s . The p r i v a t e and personal d e s i r e s and needs of the p a i r come before anything e l s e . The i n t r i n s i c marriage, they s t a t e , has the uniform q u a l i t y of an " i n t e n s i t y of f e e l i n g s about each other and the c e n t r a l i t y of the spouses' w e l f a r e i n each mate's s c a l e of v a l u e s " (p. 114). Lewis and Spanier's (1979) t h e o r e t i c a l typology i s considered an exchange theory as i t deals w i t h reward and p r o f i t . They s t a t e that " i t i s most reasonable to assume that the f o r e c a s t of f u t u r e rewards as balanced a g a i n s t f u t u r e c o s t s , as w e l l as the memory of cumulative rewards and c o s t s throughout the h i s t o r y of the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , do g r e a t l y a f f e c t both the q u a l i t y and continuance of m a r i t a l h r e l a t i o n s h i p s " ( p . 285). Exchange theory then, deals w i t h reward and p r o f i t as does i n t e r a c t i o n i s m but exchange theory does not deal w i t h other mental phenomenon and c o n t e x t u a l v a r i e t i e s whereas i n t e r a c t i o n i s m does. - 40 -S o c i a l exchange theory of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n has not been i n v e s t i g a t e d as thoroughly as has exchange theory of developing r e l a t i o n s h i p s and human i n t e r a c t i o n i n g e n e r a l . Edwards (1969) notes that i n s p i t e of the p r i n c i p l e of r e c i p r o c i t y , marriages o f t e n evidence asymmetrical exchanges and c o n t a i n many d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of exchange re s o u r c e s , rewards and c o s t s . Basic Assumptions of Social Exchange Theory 1. Humans are always, c o n t i n u a l l y p r o f i t seeking i n an exchange r e l a t i o n s h i p . That i s , a person ev a l u a t e s the rewards and c o s t s of a gi v e n r e l a t i o n s h i p i n terms of that which w i l l b r i n g the most p r o f i t (most reward/fewest c o s t s ) . A high l e v e l of reinforcement at a low l e v e l of c o s t . 2. I f pers o n a l b e n e f i t s from a r e l a t i o n s h i p are p o s i t i v e the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i l l grow, i f gains are l e s s than c o s t s , the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i l l f a l t e r . 3. A comparison of the outcome of a r e l a t i o n s h i p to those of the a l t e r n a t i v e s to the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s i n v o l v e d . 4. Whenever an i n d i v i d u a l has b e t t e r a l t e r n a t i v e s (as they perceive them), they w i l l leave t h e i r present r e l a t i o n s h i p f o r the a l t e r n a t i v e that o f f e r s the b e t t e r reward/cost outcome. 5. S a t i s f a c t i o n i s based not only upon reward and cost experiences i n the past but a l s o upon a n t i c i p a t i o n of rewards and cost s i n fu t u r e i n t e r a c t i o n s . 6. In a s u c c e s s f u l marriage both partners work to maximize mutual rewards w h i l e m i n i m i z i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o s t s . - 41 -7. A m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p i n v o l v e s a mutual behavior shaping. 8. P o s i t i v e consequences tend to i n c r e a s e r a t e s of responding; n e g a t i v e consequences decrease r a t e s of responding. Behavioral Theory of Marital Satisfaction B e h a v i o r i s t s focus on the p r i n c i p l e s of l e a r n i n g t h a t shape human behavior. They emphasize reinforcement c o n t i n g e n c i e s ( s t i m u l u s and response) i n the s i t u a t i o n s that c o n t r o l behavior. They do not deal w i t h developmental nor i n t e r n a l f a c t o r s such as unconscious d r i v e s or conscious process. Weiss (1978) t a l k s about behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n p r i n c i p l e s i n r e l a t i o n t o m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h the statement, "Behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n Is not a theory of human i n t e r a c t i o n s ; i t i s b e t t e r d e s c r i b e d as a technology d e r i v e d from l e a r n i n g p r i n c i p l e s , which are q u i t e f r a n k l y mute on the i s s u e of a theory of a d u l t i n t i m a c y i n long term committed r e l a t i o n s h i p s ! " ( p . 173). B e h a v i o r i s t models of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n tend to f o l l o w behavior exchange theory which comes out of Thibaut and K e l l e y ' s (1959) s o c i a l exchange theory as d e s c r i b e d p r e v i o u s l y . B e h a v i o r a l theory and s o c i a l exchange theory are c l o s e l y r e l a t e d . That i s , "an i n d i v i d u a l enters i n t o a r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h a l e a r n i n g h i s t o r y as w e l l as a c o n s t i t u t i o n which predisposes him/her to f i n d c e r t a i n p artner i n i t i a t e d behaviors r e i n f o r c i n g " (Jacobson, 1981, p. 559). Behavior theory has been l a b e l e d behavior exchange theory when d e a l i n g w i t h married or c o - h a b i t i n g couples. The d e f i n i t i o n of behavior exchange has been broadened to the use of the l a b e l , s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory. As Jacobson (1981) p o i n t s out: - 42 -S o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory incudes i n i t s t h e o r e t i c a l f o r m u l a t i o n s • not only p r i n c i p l e s of l e a r n i n g d e r i v e d from the l a b o r a t o r i e s of experimental psychology, but a l s o t h e o r e t i c a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s from s o c i a l , developmental and c o g n i t i v e psychology. While the i n f l u e n c e of the environment i s s t i l l emphasized, s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory a l s o attends to the r o l e played by p r i v a t e events ( t h o u g h t s , images and f e e l i n g s ) i n the r e g u l a t i o n and c o n t r o l of b e h a v i o r , (p. 557) T his behavior exchange p r i n c i p l e i s based on a reward/cost r a t i o which determines the degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p and i s r e f e r r e d to as the comparison l e v e l (Thibaut and K e l l e y , 1959). S o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory i s connected i n t i m a t e l y to behaviorism i n that the " s o c i a l l e a r n i n g model p o s i t s t h a t the r a t e of r e i n f o r c e r s r e c e i v e d from the p a r t n e r determines not only the degree of s u b j e c t i v e s a t i s f a c t i o n , but a l s o the r a t e of rewards d i r e c t e d toward the p a r t n e r " (Jacobson, pp. 558-559). This has been r e f e r r e d to as r e c i p r o c i t y . Weiss (1978) s t a t e s t h a t the world i s populated w i t h s i t u a t i o n s , persons and b e h a v i o r s . He s p e c i f i e s s i t u a t i o n s as s t i m u l i , persons as c o g n i t i o n s , and behaviors as responses. With t h i s premise the Oregon Research Group c o n s i s t i n g of Gerald P a t t e r s o n , Robert Weiss and others developed a c u b i c a l model of v a r i a b l e s a f f e c t i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . . The Oregon group c o n s t r u c t e d twelve areas of m a r i t a l i n t e r a c t i o n i n which spouses can demonstrate s k . i l l f u l n e s s , f o u r areas of r e l a t i o n s h i p accomplishment, thought to be h i e r a r c h i c a l l y ordered, which i n c l u d e the r o l e of hedonic, s i t u a t i o n a l and communicative f u n c t i o n and four stages - 43 -of the family l i f e cycle which emphasize differences in the requirements for interaction depending on where the relationship is in time. From this model the great complexity of marital satisfaction among persons (accomplishments), behaviors (interactional category) and situational variables (family l i f e cycle) is made clearer. According to the model, marital satisfaction is attained through achieving a balance that permits each individual to maximize benefits while minimizing costs. Figure 2 Companionship A f f e c t ion C o n s i d e r a t i o n Sex Communication Process >• g Coupling A c t i v i t i e s o £ C h i l d Care C P a r e n t i n g < ° Household Management z 2 F i n a n c i a l D e c i s i o n Making t-Employment Education CE £ Personal Habit S Appearance z ~ S e l f 6 Spouse Independence c «* o> V o *» c o> U c u > ID •o • ^ U c o — => i_ — E o t> U o > tl o. •a a. o 3 «I o o. aa ACCOMPUISHMEHT Source: Cited in Laurence, L.T. (1982) from Weiss, R. (1978). The conceptualization of marriage from a behavioral perspective. T. Paolino and B. McCrady (Eds.), Marriage and marital  therapy, (p. 205). New York: Brunner/Mazel. - 44 -Given t h i s i n t e g r a t i v e model i t can be summarized that i n a s a t i s f y i n g m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p p artners are exchanging b e n e f i t s and each person has reinforcement value f o r the other (Weiss, 1978). On the other s i d e of the c o i n , Weiss (1978) p o s t u l a t e s t h a t : The f a i l u r e of r e l a t i o n s h i p s i s thought to be ex p l a i n e d by d e f i c i e n t reward exchanges. In f a c t , i t i s s a i d that the reward system s h i f t s from a p o s i t i v e to a c o e r c i v e c o n t r o l system i n which each person attempts to coerce p o s i t i v e reinforcement i n exchange f o r negative r e i n f o r c e m e n t s . Forced reward, l i k e s o l i c i t e d compliments, l o s e t h e i r v a l u e , (p. 189) Basic Assumptions of Behavioral Theory 1. Behaviorism i s concerned w i t h how c e r t a i n consequences, made contingent upon beh a v i o r , l a w f u l l y r e g u l a t e f u t u r e behavior. Human behavior i s subj e c t to ca s u a l determinants. 2. Human behavior i s c o n t r o l l e d by reinforcement c o n t i n g e n c i e s i n the s i t u a t i o n s . 3. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a f u n c t i o n of c o s t / b e n e f i t , g i v e / t a k e exchanges between members of the m a r i t a l dyad. 4. In a marriage of s a t i s f a c t i o n each person has reinforcemnt v a l u e f o r each o t h e r . 5. Events of a r e l a t i o n s h i p add to or s u b t r a c t from s a t i s f a c t i o n . - 45 -Summary P s y c h o a n a l y s i s , symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n theory, s o c i a l exchange theory and b e h a v i o r a l theory as they r e l a t e to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n are at v a r i a n c e on a number of major p o i n t s . Very b a s i c a l l y , p s y c h o a n a l y s i s holds t h a t the mind i s the primary e x p l a n a t i o n of human beh a v i o r . " P s y c h o a n a l y s i s . . . focuses on such aspects of the mind as the i d , ego, superego and unconscious and i t emphasizes i n s t i n c t u a l f o r c e s such as l i b i d i n a l energy and death wishes" (Burr et a l . , 1979, p. 4 7 ) . I n t e r a c t i o n i s m , on the other hand, p o s t u l a t e s that "humans decide what to do and not to do p r i m a r i l y on the b a s i s of the symbols they have learned i n i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h others and t h e i r b e l i e f s about the importance of these meanings" (Burr et a l . , 1979, p. 4 7 ) . S y m b o l i c - i n t e r a c t i o n i s m deals not only w i t h rewards and p r o f i t , but a l s o mental phenomena. This d i f f e r e n t i a t e s i n t e r a c t i o n i s m from a s o c i a l exchange theory, which i s based on rewards and p r o f i t or s a t i s f a c t i o n s . With regard to s o c i a l exchange theory, Burr et a l . (1979) s t a t e : I f the p e r s o n a l p r o f i t from i n t e r a c t i o n i s rewarding, there i s a b u i l d i n g up of p o s i t i v e sentiments, i . e . , a r e l a t i o n s h i p continues to grow, whereas i f the costs of i n t e r a c t i o n are l e s s than the p r o f i t s , the r e l a t i o n s h i p probably w i l l t e r m i n a t e , or at l e a s t w i l l slow i n i t s growth or development, ( p . 285) S o c i a l exchange t h e o r i s t s always use the reward-cost c o n s t r u c t as they assume th a t human behavior i s based on p r o f i t . Burr et a l . (1979) suggest a theory such as that of p s y c h o a n a l y s i s or i n t e r a c t i o n i s m has to - 46 -be used to e x p l a i n why some th i n g s are rewarding or c o s t l y i n the f i r s t p l a c e . F i n a l l y , b e h a v i o r a l theory, as i t r e l a t e s to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , i s not a mindless d o c t r i n a i r e behaviorism that i s concerned only w i t h the m e c h a n i s t i c use of b e h a v i o r a l c o n t r o l , i g n o r i n g f e e l i n g s and thoughts, as i s o f t e n p o p u l a r l y thought. B e h a v i o r a l theory c o n s i d e r s c o g n i t i v e components as i l l u s t r a t e d i n Weiss's (1978) i n t e g r a t i v e model of the " g i v e - g e t " paradigm of behavior change based on areas of m a r i t a l i n t e r a c t i o n and accomplishments as a f u n c t i o n of where a r e l a t i o n s h i p i s i n time. B e h a v i o r a l theory r e l a t e s to s o c i a l exchange theory i n t h a t m a r i t a l partners f u n c t i o n i n a "quasi-economy" that i n v o l v e s the exchange of costs and b e n e f i t . - 47 -CHAPTER III METHOD Existential Phenomenological Psychology The q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h model of e x i s t e n t i a l phenomenology was s e l e c t e d to i n v e s t i g a t e the res e a r c h q u e s t i o n : What i s the exerience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n ? Existential-phenomenology i s a d e s c r i p t i v e technique that s y s t e m a t i c a l l y s t u d i e s a person's experience i n the world and i s concerned w i t h how the i n d i v i d u a l p e r c e i v e s h i m / h e r s e l f i n t h i s world w i t h regard to p e r s o n a l reponses to s e l f and o t h e r s . As an approach that f a l l s under the r u b r i c of humanistic psychology, existential-phenomenology has as I t s u l t i m a t e goal the p r e p a r a t i o n of a complete d e s c r i p t i o n of what i t means to be a l i v e as a human being ( B u g e n t a l , 1964). Phenomenology provides a means by which e x i s t e n t i a l philosophy i s a p p l i e d to humanistic s c i e n t i f i c i n q u i r y . While e x i s t e n t i a l i s m "seeks to understand the human c o n d i t i o n as i t manifests i t s e l f i n our c o n c r e t e , l i v e d s i t u a t i o n s " [ V a l l e & K i n g , 1978, p. 6] phenomenology (founded and developed by Edmond H u s s e r l , 1859-1938) " i s a method which a l l o w s us to contact phenomena as we a c t u a l l y l i v e them out and experience them" ( V a l l e & K i n g , 1978, p. 7 ) . Therefore, e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l psychology attempts to understand the s t r u c t u r e of human experiences and behaviors as revealed through d e s c r i p t i v e techniques ( V a l l e & K i n g , 1978, p. 7 ) . - 48 -The b a s i c design f o r phenomenological d e s c r i p t i v e r e s e a r c h as o u t l i n e d by C o l a i z z i (1978) was f o l l o w e d . C o l a i z z i ' s approach i s based on the concept of a phenomenon as i n t r i g u i n g l y presented by Heidegger's (1962) statement, "to l e t t h a t which shows i t s e l f be seen from i t s e l f i n the very way In which i t shows i t s e l f from i t s e l f " ( c i t e d from C o l a i z z i , 1978, p. 53). E x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l psychology I s e s s e n t i a l l y based on the n o t i o n of i n t e n t i o n a l i t y [ i t a l i c s added]. That i s "we are never merely conscious but always conscious of something" ( V a l l e & K i n g , p. 13). Human e x i s t e n c e (the s u b j e c t i v e , the p e r c e i v i n g ) and the o b j e c t s we r e f l e c t on (the o b j e c t i v e , the perceived) c o n s t i t u t e the u n i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l and h i s or her world. One cannot e x i s t independent of the other t h e r e f o r e one does not "cause" the o t h e r . This concept of " l i f e - w o r l d " or "lebenswelt," the world l i v e d by the person, i s a l s o b a s i c to existential-phenomenology.. The above presents the fundamental d i f f e r e n c e between e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l methodology and t r a d i t i o n a l q u a l i t a t i v e " o b j e c t i v e " r e s e a r c h methods which tend to assume that people e x i s t independently from the o b j e c t s around them. Through e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l methodology the r e s e a r c h e r t r i e s to approach the everyday l i f e experiences of people w i t h as few preconceptions as p o s s i b l e . However, as one can never be t o t a l l y o b j e c t i v e , the r esearcher must begin the process of research by r e v e a l i n g one's preconceptions and p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s . The e x p l i c a t i o n of assumptions of the experience of t h i s r e s e a r cher have been presented i n Chapter one. - 49 -F i n a l l y , as a model f o r r e s e a r c h , phenomenology i s based upon the p h i l o s o p h i c a l theory t h a t conscious experience i s e s s e n t i a l to the understanding of human behavior. Co-researchers C o l a i z z i (1978) c i t i n g F r i e r e (1970) r e f e r s to the " s u b j e c t s " of the r e s e a r c h as " c o - r e s e a r c h e r s " (p. 69). This terms i s much more meaningful f o r e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h than " s u b j e c t s " as the p a r t i c i p a n t s are i n v o l v e d d i a l o g a l r e s e a r c h as persons on an equal s t a t u s l e v e l w i t h the r e s e a r c h e r . I t i s a non-manipulative paradigm based on cooperation r a t h e r than c o n t r o l ( G i o r g i , 1970, p. 203). T r u s t i n g what the co-researchers r e l a t e i n t h e i r s t o r i e s of t h e i r experience i s b a s i c to t h i s r e s e a r c h . As s t a t e d by C o l a i z z i (1978), "genuinely human r e s e a r c h , i n t o any phenomenon whatsoever, by s e r i o u s l y i n c l u d i n g the t r u s t i n g d i a l o g a l approach, passes beyond rese a r c h i n i t s l i m i t e d sense and occasions e x i s t e n t i a l i n s i g h t " (p. 69). The co-researchers i n t h i s study are c u l t u r a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of people e x p e r i e n c i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . Selection of Co-researchers F i v e i n d i v i d u a l s were i n t e r v i e w e d , three females and two males. The c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i o n were t h a t the co-researchers had been married i n North America, had been married to the same par t n e r f o r a minimum of ten y e a r s , were able to a r t i c u l a t e t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e , and by t h e i r own reckoning were e x p e r i e n c i n g s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriage. According t o C o l a i z z i (1978) "experience w i t h the i n v e s t i g a t e d t o p i c and - 50 -a r t i c u l a t e n e s s s u f f i c e as c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i n g s u b j e c t s " (p. 58). This researcher chose to I n t e r v i e w people who had been married ten years or longer based on the 1982 S t a t i s t i c s Canada re p o r t that the average d u r a t i o n of marriage f o r d i v o r c e d persons was 12.0 years while the median [ i t a l i c s added] d u r a t i o n of marriage was 10.3 y e a r s . None of the co-researchers had been married f o r l e s s than twelve y e a r s . M i l l e r ' s (1976) f i n d i n g that couples experience the lowest m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n between s i x and ten years of marriage a l s o i n f l u e n c e d the d e c i s i o n to i n t e r v i e w persons married ten years and l o n g e r . The co-researchers were found through p e r s o n a l r e f e r r a l s from f r i e n d s and c o l l e g u e s . The approach was to t e l l people about the resea r c h and ask them i f they knew of any couples whom they f e l t were e x p e r i e n c i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . I f they d i d (and almost everyone spoken to was able to i d e n t i f y at l e a s t one couple) they were asked i f they thought whether one member of the couple would be w i l l i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the r e s e a r c h . I f they f e l t that they might be they were asked to make the i n i t i a l i n q u i r y . I f the response came back p o s i t i v e ( I n three i n s t a n c e s couples d e c l i n e d the contact's i n i t i a l request) the l e t t e r of i n t r o d u c t i o n and s u b j e c t consent form were mailed to the p o t e n t i a l co-researchers (see Appendix A). The l e t t e r was f o l l o w e d up a week l a t e r w i t h a phone c a l l to set up an i n t e r v i e w time i f the i n d i v i d u a l was s t i l l i n t e r e s t e d In p a r t i c i p a t i n g . I nterviews were he l d i n co-researchers homes, o f f i c e s and i n one fol l o w - u p i n t e r v i e w , a r e s t a u r a n t . - 51 -Deciding Whether to Interview Individuals or Couples An important d e c i s i o n was whether to i n t e r v i e w couples or only one i n d i v i d u a l from the m a r i t a l dyad. I t was decided to i n t e r v i e w i n d i v i d u a l s f o r t h i s study. This was based on the f a c t that the d e s c r i p t i v e methodology sought to i d e n t i f y what the phenomenon of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s as i t i s l i v e d by the i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r i e n c i n g i t . I t was not an a n a l y s i s of the m a r i t a l system. I t would have been d i f f i c u l t to separate the systemic dynamics of the couple from the i n d i v i d u a l s making up the m a r i t a l dyad i f both partners were i n t e r v i e w e d at the same time. The q u e s t i o n being asked was what i s the phenomenon as l i v e d by the i n d i v i d u a l , not why or how i n an e x p l a i n i n g , p r e d i c t i n g or c o n t r o l l i n g sense. One's experience i s most v i s i b l e f o r o n e s e l f as an a c t o r whereas behavior i s most v i s i b l e f o r the observer. That i s , one's p a r t n e r can only be an oberver of one's b e h a v i o r a l antecedents of s a t i s f a c t i o n . Bogdon and T a y l o r (1975) s t a t e d that a phenomenological approach to an i s s u e " i s concerned w i t h understanding behavior from the a c t o r ' s own frame of r e f e r e n c e " ( p . 2 ) . E s s e n t i a l l y m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a s u b j e c t i v e p e r c e p t i o n that only the i n d i v i d u a l h i s or h e r s e l f can d e c l a r e . This researcher a l s o f e l t t hat to i n t e r v i e w the dyad would add a dimension of d i s t r a c t i o n i n terms of the d i r e c t i o n the i n t e r v i e w might take without c o n s i d e r a b l e I n t e r f e r e n c e from the i n t e r v i e w e r . The d i f i c u l t y i n t r a n s c r i b i n g a three-way c o n v e r s a t i o n , and the f a c t that i n i n t e r v i e w i n g a couple the researcher i s tuned i n t o the "couple" r a t h e r than each i n d i v i d u a l ' s experience of being p a r t of that couple were a l s o c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . - 52 -The d e c i s i o n was a l s o based on B r i l l i n g e r ' s (1983) f i n d i n g from her p i l o t study i n which she found that i n t e r v i e w i n g the second p a r t n e r added l i t t l e new data to that a l r e a d y g i v e n by the f i r s t . Demographic Information The co-researchers were s e l e c t e d on the b a s i s of a v a i l a b i l i t y and f u l f i l l m e n t of the b a s i c s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a . Background i n f o r m a t i o n was not requested u n t i l a f t e r the v a l i d a t i o n of the themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n . This i n f o r m a t i o n i s i n c l u d e d f o r the i n t e r e s t of the reader. Table 1 Co-researcher Demographic I n f o r m a t i o n CR Gender and Age No. of Years Mar r i e d C h i l d r e n Ages and Occupation Years of Educ a t i o n CRj: Female 47 23 Male Male Female -Male 20 19 18 15 Student/ Homemaker D o c t o r a l Candidate CR 2: Male 41 19 Male Female -9 6 Co l l e g e I n s t r u c t o r M.A. CR 3: Male 42 12 Male Female -11 4 Bakery Manager High School p l u s . CR4: Female 37 15 Female - 2 Teacher/ Homemaker B.A. CR 5: Female 41 15 - Student/ Teacher D o c t o r a l Candidate - 53 -Phenomenological Interview Each co-researcher was i n t e r v i e w e d t w i c e . The f i r s t i n t e r v i e w i n v o l v e d the co-researcher t e l l i n g the researcher the s t o r y of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriage. I t was tape recorded and t r a n s c r i b e d . The second set of i n t e r v i e w s were the v a l i d a t i n g i n t e r v i e w s . The r e s e a r c h e r returned to the co-researchers w i t h the themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n as formulated from the data of a l l f i v e p r o t o c o l s (term f o r co-researcher t r a n s c r i p t ) . The second i n t e r v i e w s were not tape-recorded but notes were taken r e g a r d i n g any changes or a d d i t i o n s to the themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of the phenomenological a n a l y s i s . The i n t e r v i e w s occurred over a p e r i o d of seven months. They v a r i e d i n l e n g t h from one to two hours. The o c c a s i o n a l f o l l o w - u p telephone c a l l to check w i t h co-researchers on changes was a l s o made. Before s e t t i n g up appointments w i t h the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s , the researcher d i s c u s s e d w i t h them, f u r t h e r to the l e t t e r of i n t r o d u c t i o n , the nature of the r e s e a r c h . The researcher was concerned w i t h p u t t i n g them at ease about the purpose and d i r e c t i o n of the i n t e r v i e w by p o i n t i n g out to them t h a t they were i n f a c t the experts on m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and that they would only be r e l a t i n g me that which they f e l t comfortable d i s c l o s i n g . During the a c t u a l i n t e r v i e w s i t was found that the co-researchers r e l a x e d c o n s i d e r a b l y and spoke of t h e i r experiences w i t h openness and genuineness. Had evidence of obvious d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n or unhappiness been heard as the i n t e r v i e w unfolded that p r o t o c o l would have been d i s c a r d e d . This d i d not occur. The i n t e r v i e w s were e s s e n t i a l l y u n s t r u c t u r e d . Each i n t e r v i e w began by e s t a b l i s h i n g rapport w i t h the c o - r e s e a r c h e r . This was achieved by - 54 -setting both co-researcher and researcher at ease through casual verbal exchanges and by answering any further questions that the co-researcher may have had regarding the research methodology or question. Each interview then began with the following preamble: Please reflect on your marriage and then t e l l me the story of your experience of marital satisfaction. You may want to give me an outline of the satisfactions in your marriage from the beginning until the present or you might like to describe vignettes of experience that typify the satisfaction you feel. I also had the following l i s t of research questions that I asked i f they were not covered during the course of the Interview. 1. What are the most important components or basic ingredients of satisfaction in your marriage? 2. What do you see as the strengths/weaknesses in your marriage relationship? 3. Tell me about your changes in satisfaction and how they occured. 4. What facilitates/blocks your communication as a couple? 5. Can you t e l l me about love/sex/romance/intimacy in your relationship? 6. What does the future hold for your marriage relationship? Procedure Each co-researcher was i n i t i a l l y contacted by letter. The letter included an explanation of the purpose of the study and a subject consent form (see Appendix A). Approximately a week after sending the - 55 -l e t t e r co-researchers were phoned to arrange for an interview time. The interviews were tape-recorded. As this researcher personally knew a l l of the co-researchers to some extent there was already a degree of trust present. Before beginning each interview the co-researcher and researcher were set at ease by establishing further rapport. The researcher also answered any questions about the research. The co-researcher then signed the consent form before formally beginning the interview by turning the tape-recorder on. The co-researchers were allowed to t e l l their story i n their own way as much as possible. The researcher reflected feelings and content and occasionally probed with a question to c l a r i f y or get further into the experience of the co-researcher. The inteviews ended when the co-researcher had said as much as they f e l t they could. The interviews were then transcribed with the aid of a dicta-phone and typewriter. The protocols were analysed following Colaizzi*s (1973) method of phenomenological protocol analysis. The resultant themes and exhaustive description were then taken back to each co-researcher for validation. Each co-researcher was mailed a copy of their transcript, the themes with descriptions, and a copy of the exhaustive description. Each co-researcher was seen approximately a week often sending them the material. This gave the co-researchers an opportunity to read and reflect upon the data before meeting with researcher. This proved to be a very expedient move as the validation interviews were more involved and went longer than i t had been inmaglned they would. It also gave the co-researchers time to think carefully about the themes and exhaustive description. Three of the co-researchers took the time to make marginal - 56 -notes f o r ease of r e c a l l during the a c t u a l i n t e r v i e w . The v a l i d a t i o n i n t e r v i e w was not tape-recorded but notes were taken regarding any necessary changes. Changes were then made to the themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n as deemed necessary by the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . Analysis of Protocols C o l a i z z i * s (1978, pp. 59-62) steps of phenomenological p r o t o c o l a n a l y s i s were f o l l o w e d . A f t e r having typed out the p r o t o c o l i t was l i s t e n e d to twice more while f o l l o w i n g the typed t r a n s c r i p t . I t was then set aside f o r a number of days. The t r a n s c r i p t was then read again to continue to become f a m i l i a r w i t h the f e e l i n g and essence of the experience as r e l a t e d by the c o - r e s e a r c h e r . This process i n v o l v e d r e f l e c t i o n on what was a c t u a l l y s a i d and the u n d e r l y i n g meaning of l e s s e x p l i c i t l y expressed e x p e r i e n c e s . Each t r a n s c r i p t was then read again while u n d e r l i n i n g statements that p e r t a i n e d d i r e c t l y to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . These statements were then typed onto i n d i v i d u a l f i l e cards and marked as to which p r o t o c o l they came from (CR^, CR2, CR3, e t c . ) . With the s i g n i f i c a n t statements from each p r o t o c o l , meanings were formulated using the process of " c r e a t i v e i n s i g h t " ( C o l a i z z i , 1978) when the meaning of a statement was not c l e a r and e x p l i c i t . As s u c c i n c t l y s t a t e d by C o l a i z z i (1978) " c o n t e x t u a l and h o r i z o n t a l meanings are g i v e n w i t h the p r o t o c o l but are not in i t ; so the researcher must go beyond what i s g i v e n i n the o r i g i n a l data and at the same time, stay w i t h i t " ( p . 59). When a l l the p r o t o c o l s had been analyzed those statements from each co-researcher t h a t had the same meaning were grouped t o g e t h e r . Once these were - 57 -grouped together themes were formulated common to the experience of a l l the co-researchers as shown by the meanings and s i g n i f i c a n t statements. This was not a one-shot task as i t took over a month of "being w i t h " w i t h the data to f e e l that the experience had been a c c u r a t e l y represented through the themes. The themes were then woven together i n t o an exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as l i v e d by the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . With the themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n completed the researcher returned to each co-researcher f o r v a l i d a t i o n of the r e s u l t s . The co-researchers became very i n v o l v e d i n t h i s process and made numerous suggestions re c l a r i f i c a t i o n and to a l e s s e r degree a c t u a l content. This researcher found t h i s part of the r e s e a r c h e s p e c i a l l y rewarding because of the co-researchers e n t h u s i a s t i c v a l i d a t i o n of the themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n and d e s i r e to t a l k f u r t h e r about t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e . I t would have been s a t i s f y i n g to have been able to spend more time w i t h the co-researchers i n the v a l i d a t i o n process than was a v a i l a b l e f o r e i t h e r them or me. However as C o l a i z z i (1978) s t a t e s , " r e s e a r c h can never exhaust the i n v e s t i g a t e d phenomenon, that r e s e a r c h can never be complete" (p. 70). A l l themes were acknowledged as true to the experience of the co-researchers w i t h only a few statements w i t h i n themes being changed or i n some cases e l i m i n a t e d a l t o g e t h e r because of a l a c k of co-researcher consensus. - 58 -CHAPTER IV RESULTS Introduction The o r i g i n a l p r o t o c o l s are presented i n Appendix B. Table 2 i s the r e s u l t of the o r g a n i z i n g of s i g n i f i c a n t statements around common themes. For example, the f i r s t theme, Ease of Communication, was spoken of by each co-researcher i n the manner recorded (see Appendix B ) . Some statements are o b v i o u s l y more e x p l i c i t i n t h e i r meaning than o t h e r s . The themes are not presented i n order of p r i o r i t y or p r o g r e s s i o n . I t i s the l i n e a r i t y of the w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n that makes i t appear that way. Each thematic experience i s necessary but not s u f f i c i e n t i n i t s e l f f o r the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . The f o l l o w i n g are the themes of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as e x p l i c a t e d from the p r o t o c o l s : 1. Ease of Communication 2. S e l f - D i s c l o s u r e 3. Emotional Commitment A. Intimacy 5. Values Consensus 6. Shared Goals 7. Couple S o l i d a r i t y 8. Respect 9. J o i e de V i v r e 10. Complementary D i f f e r e n c e s - 59 -11. Autonomy/Dependence 12. R e a l i s t i c Outlook on Marriage and L i f e 13. Strong P e r s o n a l I d e n t i t y 14. Emotional Security/Support 15. E x i s t e n t i a l Couple I d e n t i t y The e x p l i c a t i o n of themes was not a simple one-shot process. The f i r s t attempt produced twenty-six themes based on the s i g n i f i c a n t statements and meaning u n i t s . Upon r e f l e c t i o n i t was r e a l i z e d that a number of the themes needed to be melded together i n t o more concise statements f o r b e t t e r understanding and c l a r i t y . This i n v o l v e d f u r t h e r hours of being w i t h the data and searching f o r words that portrayed the experience. For example, an o r i g i n a l theme was l a b e l e d "Sharing i n the P a r t n e r s h i p . " Under t h i s theme was i n c l u d e d a f o r m u l a t i o n of meaning i n v o l v i n g values consensus, g o a l s , i n t e r e s t s , r o l e s / t a s k s and d i f f i c u l t l i f e experiences. Even before r e t u r n i n g to the co-researchers f o r v a l i d a t i o n i t was r e a l i z e d that what had been come up with was not n e a r l y concise nor c l e a r enough. The end r e s u l t was separate themes f o r Values Consensus and Shared Goals, with i n t e r e s t s , r o l e s / t a s k s , and d i f f i c u l t l i f e experiences being i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the subsequent themes of Intimacy, E x i s t e n t i a l Couple I d e n t i t y , and Couple S o l i d a r i t y . This process was repeated a number of times before i t was f e l t that the essence of what was being s a i d by the co-researchers had been captured. I t r e s u l t e d i n a much deeper and more f l o w i n g and u n i f i e d exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n based on the meaning of what the co-researchers had r e l a t e d i n t h e i r s t o r i e s of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriages. The v a l i d a t i o n Interviews were two-way dialogue with each co-researcher that r e s u l t e d i n a number of a d d i t i o n s and d e l e t i o n s to - 60 -the wording of the d e s c r i p t i o n s of themes and the exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n . A l l the themes were v a l i d a t e d by a l l c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . An example of a change i n d e s c r i p t i o n that r e s u l t e d from d i s c u s s i o n w i t h the co-researchers was under the theme of "Complementary D i f f e r e n c e s . " I t was o r i g i n a l l y s t a t e d that "the p a r t n e r i s an ex t e n s i o n of one's own p o t e n t i a l . " A l l co-researchers r e f u t e d t h i s statement as not being e x a c t l y the way they experienced i t . I t was modifi e d t o , "being w i t h one's p a r t n e r helps one develop one's own p o t e n t i a l , " which a l l co-researchers were i n agreement w i t h . Another example was a c l a r i f y i n g of the d i f f e r e n c e between Couple S o l i d a r i t y and E x i s t e n t i a l Couple I d e n t i t y . This came about as a r e s u l t of each co-researcher c l a r i f y i n g t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e . This process of c r e a t i n g meaning together t y p i f i e s the i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e aspect of e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h . P a r t of the c l a r i f y i n g process Involved dropping a quote from co-researcher f i v e that the others could not v a l i d a t e as being part of t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e . Co-researcher f i v e a l s o agreed that p r e s e n t i n g the quote on i t s own (out of the context of the whole i n t e r v i e w ) was not a v a l i d r e f l e c t i o n of her experience. The next s e c t i o n of t h i s chapter i s an e x p l a n a t i o n of each of the themes of the experience f o l l o w e d by the exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n . The exh a u s t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n r e v e a l s the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as f u l l y and c l e a r l y as p o s s i b l e . I t i s a weaving together of the themes c r e a t i n g a u n i t y and i n t e r g r a t i o n of the phenomenon. F o l l o w i n g the exhau s t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n i s the condensed d e s c r i p t i o n of the experience of m a r i t a l s t a i s f a c t i o n . I t i s presented as a s u c c i n c t and fundamental summary of the exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of the q u e s t i o n : What i s the meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n ? - 61 -DESCRIPTIONS OF THEMES OF THE EXPERIENCE 1. Ease of Communication Marital satisfaction involves open and continual communication that helps facilitate the healthy functioning of the relationship. The communication is experienced as being heard by the partner and in turn listening. The communication Involves not only constructive expression of feelings and concerns but also discussion of thoughts and ideas about l i f e in general. It consists of an ease of sharing with one's partner on a deeper, personal level. 2. Self-Disclosure One experiences a level of effective communication that involves the risk of exposing deeper parts of the self to one's partner. This truthful sharing of the self occurs in spite of possible emotional pain for oneself. It involves discovering one's own potential to express self truthfully. It occurs because of trust that one will be understood and accepted by one's partner. 3. Emotional Commitment Marital satisfaction occurs as each partner is available to and for the other in existential ways. Emotional commitment involves sharing the f u l l array of life's experiences together. The experience consists of deep feelings of belonging to and responsibility for the - 62 -relationship. There is willingness to work together, over time, on the relationship because of a belief in the future of the marriage. This occurs most often in a natural, "subconscious" manner. A c r i s i s may bring i t to a more "conscious," intentional l e v e l . Tolerance i s recognized as necessary to maintain the relationship during trying and d i f f i c u l t times. Marital satisfaction i s experienced through risking the giving of self without guarantee of other's immediate responsiveness. Doing things for one another that describe modes of a v a i l a b i l i t y and dependability founded upon mutual love and respect. 4. Intimacy Being alone together sharing "special time" on emotional, in t e l l e c t u a l and physical levels. Time out from every day tasks and distractions. It may involve deliberately setting aside time for each other on a regular basis. Intimacy enhances marital satisfaction and is positively valued. Emotional accessibility Is key. It may also include shared interests/activities that are bonding and enriching for the relationship. It is experienced as learning and growing together. A unifying core for the relationship. 5. Values Consensus A consensus of values on both a verbal and experiential level occurs. Partner's values are experienced as being congruent with one's own. There are feelings of attachment to and comfort with the partner based on the experience of shared values. An experiencing of a unifying way of l i v i n g and d i r e c t i o n i n l i f e . Values consensus i s a ground upon which much of the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s based. Partners understand one another; are aware of thoughts, f e e l i n g , a t t i t u d e s , p r e f e r e n c e s , l i k e s and d i s l i k e s . As Co-researcher three e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d , "Our v a l u e s , the t h i n g s that we agree upon, l o o k i n g back now, they r e a l l y haven't changed that much." 6. Shared Goals P a r t n e r s experience a bond that i s s a t i s f y i n g as a r e s u l t of working toward shared g o a l s . Shared goals and support f o r each i n d i v i d u a l ' 8 goals and accomplishments r e l a t e to present s a t i s f a c t i o n and f u t u r e promise f o r the marriage. 7. Couple S o l i d a r i t y The experience of being i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p creates a couple s o l i d a r i t y . I t draws the couple c l o s e r over time and r e s u l t s i n a deeper sense of meaning i n l i f e . Learning and e x p e r i e n c i n g personal s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses occurs that are f o u n d a t i o n a l to s e l f - u n d e r s t a n d i n g and create a couple s o l i d a r i t y . I t i s a p a r t n e r s h i p that each c o n t r i b u t e s to through s h a r i n g r o l e s and tasks that create s t a b i l i t y w i t h i n which s a t i s f a c t i o n develops. I t i n v o l v e s support on a day-to-day b a s i s and d u r i n g c r i s i s . The phenomenal or e x p e r i e n t i a l dimension of t h i s i s i l l u s t r a t e d by Co-researcher two's statement, "You look to one another, e x a c t l y . And i t ' s the same, l i k e even the way I am r i g h t now. I have taken on more - 64 -and more t h i n g s . Even t h i s whole p o l i t i c a l t h i n g that I've done up here, I couldn't have done that without C." And again f o r Co-researcher two, an i l l u s t r a t i v e experience d u r i n g c r i s i s . " I j u s t remember the scene. She was i n t e a r s . And of course her r e l i a n c e on me i n that k i n d of s i t u a t i o n and I j u s t d i d n ' t have the answers. But t h i s k i nd of s t o r y i s only symptomatic of the kinds of s t r e s s that you can be under and you have not one to t u r n to but y o u r s e l v e s . And out of that you both begin to change." Couple s o l i d a r i t y i s experiences as a "we d i d i t together" f e e l i n g that comes from shared l i f e experiences i n which the partners f i n d s u pport, understanding and l o v e . 8. Respect Respect i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s an experience and a t t i t u d e based on l i k i n g who the p a r t n e r i s and how she/he runs h e r / h i s l i f e ; a p o s i t i v e r e gard. An experience of being w i t h someone s p e c i a l . L i v i n g w i t h t h i s f e e l i n g of r e s p e c t i n g and being respected by one's pa r t n e r opens one to examine and r e f l e c t on e x i s t e n t i a l values and p r e f e r r e d ways of being i n the world. I t i s shared f e e l i n g s of c a r i n g , t r u s t and c l o s e n e s s . The s a t i s f a c t i o n of respect emerges out of mutual f r i e n d s h i p and r e c o g n i t i o n of p a r t n e r ' s uniqueness. 9 . J o i e de V i v r e One's p a r t n e r i s someone w i t h whom one enjoys being w i t h and has f u n w i t h . The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f f e r s humour and warmth and a i d s I n a p o s i t i v e outlook on l i f e . Co-researcher one speaks c l e a r l y to t h i s i n s a y i n g , "he's a very p o s i t i v e t h i n k i n g person. And that i s a tremendous boost as f a r as the s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t I f e e l out of l i v i n g w i t h him." 10. Complementary D i f f e r e n c e Co-researchers were aware of both a c c e p t i n g and l i k i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s between themselves and t h e i r p a r t n e r s . I t i s experienced as a f u l f i l l m e n t that r e s u l t s i n a p l e a s i n g sense of wholness through the presence and care of one's p a r t n e r . I t i n v o l v e s being open and able to a p p r e c i a t e the aspects of one's pa r t n e r that are d i s s i m i l i a r to o n e s e l f . Being w i t h one's p a r t n e r helps one develop one's own p o t e n t i a l . 11. Autonomy/Dependence This theme i s r e a l l y the two s i d e s of the same e x i s t e n t i a l c o i n . M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n occurs i n the context of the balance i n the ebb and f l o w of being t o g e t h e r . I t i n v o l v e s the paradox we experience i n the development of our sense of s e l f throughout l i f e . The process of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n that we s t r u g g l e w i t h from e a r l y l i f e a l s o occurs i n marriage. I t embodies a developed s e l f - i d e n t i t y that a l l o w s the i n d i v i d u a l the freedom to enjoy both s i d e s of the r e l a t i o n s h i p . F i n d i n g a comfort zone f o r both partners between the extremes of abandonment and - 66 -i n v a s i o n . As experienced by Co-researcher f i v e , "a wanting to be, not having to be, dependent." I t a l s o i n v o l v e s having the f i n a n c i a l resources that a l l o w f o r some i n d i v i d u a l autonomy f o r both p a r t e n r s . 12. R e a l i s t i c Outlook on Marriage and L i f e I t i s recognized that the p a r t n e r i s s u b j e c t to human l i m i t s and f a u l t s . This i s accepted as part of the r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t a l s o i n v o l v e s a common sense that helps d e a l w i t h any i l l u s i o n s or r o m a n t i c i z e d i d e a l s about the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . A somewhat p r a c t i c a l and pragmatic approach to l i f e e x i s t s . The e x p e r i e n t i a l dimension i s i l l u s t r a t e d by Co-researcher f o u r ' s r e f l e c t i o n on her r e l a t i o n s h i p . " I can't expect complete f u l f i l l m e n t from another i n d i v i d u a l . I have to be more r e s o u r c e f u l myself and not expect complete happiness and contentment to be created by another person. That poor person who has that r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , that u n a t t a i n a b l e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of making someone happy." 13. Strong P e r s o n a l I d e n t i t y M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s experienced w i t h a r e c o g n i t i o n and acceptance of s e l f that i s supported by the r e l a t i o n s h i p . The marriage f e e l s s a t i s f y i n g l y s t rong as a r e s u l t of being w i t h a partner who conveys a p o s i t i v e sense of knowing h i s / h e r s e l f and having the s t r e n g t h t o express t h i s i n c o n s t r u c t i v e ways to the b e n e f i t of the marriage. I t t i e s i n c l o s e l y w i t h the theme of autonomy/dependence i n that both p a r t n e r s have a c o n s i d e r a b l e degree of s e l f r e l i a n c e . - 67 -14. Emotional S e c u r i t y / S u p p o r t The marriage a c t s as a refuge from the i n s e c u r i t i e s of l i f e and the wo r l d . A p l a c e where one can " r e f u e l . " Confidence i n the continuence of the r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s . One can be o n e s e l f w i t h one's pa r t n e r without f e a r s of harming the r e l a t i o n s h i p . Emotional s e c u r i t y and support c o n t r i b u t e s to the emotional s t r e n g t h of the p a r t n e r s . The experience i s heightened during d i f f i c u l t times i n l i f e . Emotional s e c u r i t y / s u p p o r t c r eates a "gentle k i n d of l o v e . " 15. E x i s t e n t i a l Couple I d e n t i t y S a t i s f a c t i o n i n one's marriage i s experienced as an e x i s t e n t i a l sense of c l o s e n e s s ; a b a l a n c i n g of two p e r s o n a l i t i e s i n t o one that both p a r t n e r s f e e l good about. A r e c i p r o c a l way of r e l a t i n g that i n c l u d e s a shared power base. I t i s knowing that one's partner a l s o w i l l i n g l y accepts b u i l d i n g and m a i n t a i n i n g a marriage of s a t i s f a c t i o n f o r both. The r o l e s of the partners i n the marriage are maintained without being o v e r l y conscious of them. One's r o l e i s experienced as- a v a l i d c o n t r i b u t i o n to the marriage. I d e n t i t y w i t h extended f a m i l y may add a dimension of support and c a r i n g that a f f i r m s the marriage. For couples w i t h c h i l d r e n f a m i l y togetherness Is a source of d e r i v e d s a t i s f a c t i o n . Couple i d e n t i t y i n v o l v e s being there f o r one another; being e m o t i o n a l l y open and a v a i l a b l e . - 68 -EXHAUSTIVE DESCRIPTION OF THE EXPERIENCE OF MARITAL SATISFACTION Introduction The experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t o n as l i v e d i s a m u l t i v a r i a t e phenomenon. I t i s one which has not been i d e n t i f i e d i n t h i s study as pr o g r e s s i n g i n developmental stages. The f i f t e e n themes e x p l i c t e d from the p r o t o c o l s are i n no p a r t i c u l a r order of s i g n i f i c a n c e or importance. As pointed out by a few of the co - r e s e a r c h e r s , i t i s very d i f f i c u l t , i f not i m p o s s i b l e , to put the components of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriages i n any d e f i n i t i v e order of importance. Therefore, the order of the themes i s not meant to suggest a p r o g r e s s i o n , f l o w or h i e r a r c h y . The exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n w i l l begin by r e f e r r i n g to the f i r s t theme as presented, then the second theme and so on. As s t a t e d by C l a s p e l l (1983), "each c o n s t i t u t e n t (theme) p a r t i c i p a t e s i n the others i n a no n - l i n e a r f a s h i o n , b r i n g i n g the experience i n t o a f u l l n e s s that cannot be achieved through observations and s e l f - r e p o r t s alone" (p. 88). This exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s the r e s u l t of a n a l y s i n g the p r o t o c o l s of f i v e i n d i v i d u a l s who are s a t i s f i e d , by t h e i r own reckoning, i n t h e i r m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The co-researchers were of v a r y i n g ages, e d u c a t i o n a l backgrounds, stages of the f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e and of both sexes. In s p i t e of these d i f f e r e n c e s they share common experiences i n t h e i r marriages that revealed themselves i n the e x p l i c a t i o n of the f i f t e e n themes that serve as the p r e f i g u r e f o r the e s s e n t i a l s t r u c t u r e of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . This phenomenological d e s c r i p t i v e a n a l y s i s moves beyond what the co-researchers e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d i n t h e i r s t o r i e s of the experience. I t captures the r i c h n e s s and - 69 -depth of human experience that r e s u l t s i n t h i s exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as i t i s l i v e d . S a t i s f a c t i o n i n marriage i s not a constant. I t ebbs and flows throughout the r e l a t i o n s h i p but i s c o n s i s t e n t l y present to v a r y i n g degrees i n s e l f - i d e n t i f i e d marriages of s a t i s f a c t i o n . In numerous q u a n t i t a t i v e s t u d i e s (e.g., R o l l i n s and Cannon, 1974; Spanier, Lewis and C o l e , 1975) m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n has been i d e n t i f i e d as changing throughout the f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e . Each co-researcher emphasized a few p a r t i c u l a r themes i n t h e i r s t o r y of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . Co-researcher one focussed on autonomy, f i n a n c i a l s e c u r i t y and e f f e c t i v e day-to-day communication; Co-researcher two's were s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e and the hard work both p a r t n e r s put i n t o the r e l a t i o n s h i p ( e motional commitment); Co-researcher three's were f a m i l y togetherness ( e x i s t e n t i a l couple i d e n t i t y ) , d e c i s i o n making (couple s o l i d a r i t y ) , and shared v a l u e s ; Co-researcher four's were commitment and a r e a l i s t i c view of marriage and l i f e ; and f i n a l l y Co-researcher f i v e ' s favoured themes were respect f o r p a r t n e r , couple i d e n t i t y and the dependency/independency balance. Again, each co-researcher tended to lean more h e a v i l y on two or three themes during the s t o r y of t h e i r m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n but r e f e r r e d to a l l others to l e s s e r degrees. As a l r e a d y s t a t e d , but worth r e p e a t i n g , m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a m u l t i v a r i a t e phenomenon. No one, two or even h a l f dozen v a r i a b l e s can be i s o l a t e d from the r e s t and h e l d up as the most important components of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . The components are not i n e x o r a b l y welded i n p l a c e ; r a t h e r they f l o w and mesh together to c r e a t e - 70 -the experience. There are, however, common themes that have been e x p l i c a t e d by examining and being w i t h the d e s c r i p t i v e experiences of the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . The f o l l o w i n g exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a weaving of these themes i n t o a s y n t h e s i z e d and i n t e g r a t e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the phenomenon. Exhaustive Description The person who i s e x p e r i e n c i n g a marriage of s a t i s f a c t i o n i s not immediately c l e a r l y and expressedly aware of the nuances of why the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s s a t i s f y i n g . However, as the s t o r y of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p u n f o l d s i n the i n t e r v i e w , and they begin to l i v e the s a t i s f y i n g and, i n c o n t r a s t , the d i s s a t i s f y i n g experiences of t h e i r marriage i n dialogue w i t h the i n t e r v i e w e r , the experience r e v e a l s i t s e l f . Co-researchers t o l d of experiences that revealed ease of communication, s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e , commitment to the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , i n t i m a c y , values consensus, shared g o a l s , couple s o l i d a r i t y , r e s p e c t , j o i e de v i v r e , complementary d i f f e r e n c e s , autonomy/dependence, r e a l i s t i c o u t l o o k on marriage and l i f e , s t r o n g p e r s o n a l i d e n t i t y , emotional s e c u r i t y / s u p p o r t and an e x i s t e n t i a l couple i d e n t i t y . These are the e x i s t e n t i a l r e a l i t i e s and themes of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . E f f e c t i v e communication i s experienced on two l e v e l s . A primary l e v e l i n v o l v e s an ease of communication that manifests i t s e l f as open and c o n t i n u a l communication between p a r t n e r s d u r i n g the course of day-to-day l i v i n g . I t i s i n f o r m a t i o n s h a r i n g and e x p r e s s i n g concerns and annoyances when they occur r a t h e r than having them e s c a l a t e and come out l a t e r as blown-out-of-proportion f r u s t r a t i o n s and anger. As - 71 -Co-researcher one expressed, " i f something i s n ' t going ok we t a l k about i t . As a gen e r a l p a t t e r n i t ' s not harboured; so that f e e l s good." The communication not only centers on p r e v e n t a t i v e concerns but i s a l s o communication about i d e a s , observations i n l i f e , p e r s o n a l experiences and the s h a r i n g of thoughts and f e e l i n g s on a deeper personal l e v e l . Co-researcher two's experience of t h i s i s i l l u s t r a t e d by the statement, "so we'd d i s c u s s whatever was the essay t o p i c . I f she had to do the essay t o p i c every week or two weeks or whatever the h e l l i t was. Oh, j u s t great d i s c u s s i o n ! . " These i n d i v i d u a l s value keeping the communication open and f l o w i n g . I t i s l i k e a mountain stream, s p l a s h i n g and bubbling about the ongoing experience of i t s t r a v e l s . As w i t h the moving stream, the communication between the partners i s constant and new, and y e t , l i k e the r e g u l a r i t y of the f l o w , the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h i n which the communication occurs i s c o n s i s t e n t and dependable and encourages communicative ease. He/she i s heard and l i s t e n s c a r e f u l l y i n r e t u r n . What happens i n t h e i r l i v e s apart i s shared when they are back to g e t h e r . A deeper l e v e l of communication occurs as s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e . S e l f d i s c l o s i n g communication i s a f a c t o r that c o n t r i b u t e s to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . A r e v e a l i n g of deeper p a r t s of the s e l f occurs that heightens the t r u s t , honesty, genuiness and in t i m a c y of the r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t Invo l v e s d i s c o v e r i n g one's own p o t e n t i a l to express s e l f t r u t h f u l l y to one's partner to one's s e l f . A l o o k i n g to one's pa r t n e r f o r help w i t h s e l f understanding. I t i s experienced as t h e r a p e u t i c and growth producing. I t occurs i n s p i t e of f e a r s of p o s s i b l e emotional pain f o r o n e s e l f . Co-researcher three d e s c r i b e s i t - l i -as f o l l o w s , " I t ' s s o r t of l i k e you have a b o i l . I t pains and when you lance i t there's a sharp p a i n . I t i s a r e l i e f although the pain i s much sharper. Then i t d i s s s i p a t e s . You squeeze i t and i t hurts a l i t t l e more but the s t u f f oozes out." Not a p a r t i c u l a r l y pleasant image but one that i s t e l l i n g i n i t s g r a p h i c n e s s . Emotional commitment occurs to the b e n e f i t of the r e l a t i o n s h i p . With ease of communication and s e l f d i s c l o s u r e there e x i s t s an emotional commitment to the partner and the r e l a t i o n s h i p . The commitment i s experienced as each partner being a v a i l a b l e to and f o r the other i n e x i s t e n t i a l ways. A deep sense of belonging and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to the r e l a t i o n s h i p o c curs. A b e l i e f i n the f u t u r e of the marriage e x i s t s that i s enacted through conscious hard work on the r e l a t i o n s h i p when needed. The commitment operates on a subconscious l e v e l on a day to day b a s i s . Tolerance i s recognized as necessary to m a i n t a i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p d u r i n g t r y i n g and d i f f i c u l t times. Co-researcher three expressed h i s b e l i e f w i t h the statement, " s a t i s f a c t i o n i s not j u s t s i t t i n g h a p p i l y together on a bench i n the sunset. I t h i n k s a t i s f a c t i o n i s r e a l l y g r i n d i n g i t out." The same experience was r e l a t e d by Co-researcher f o u r i n the f o l l o w i n g manner, "on o c c a s i o n I do s t a r t t h i n k i n g , what the h e l l am I doing here. And then I ' l l s t a r t t h i n k i n g , because I want i t to work. I ' l l f o r c e myself to t h i n k of the good things even though my s t a t e of mind i s completely n e g a t i v e at the time. I ' l l t r y and t a l k myself out of being n e g a t i v e . So i t ' s d i f f i c u l t . " The f e e l i n g s of commitment are expressed i n u n s e l f i s h ways. A g i v i n g of o n e s e l f without guarantee of immediate partner responsiveness. Love and commitment i s shown by doing t h i n g s - 73 -f o r one's partner that i n d i c a t e a v a i l a b i l i t y and d e p e n d a b i l i t y . A d e f i n i t e a p p r e c i a t i o n of the p a r t n e r and the r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s . The strands of experience are connected through i n t i m a c y . This occurs as f e e l i n g s of connection w i t h the l i f e energies of the p a r t n e r on emotional, p h y s i c a l and i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l s . This means that i t o f t e n has to be encouraged by " s e t t i n g the scene." For example one co-researcher sets aside F r i d a y n i g h t s as "together n i g h t s . " "Making the e f f o r t to show l o v e , " i s how I t was d e s c r i b e d by another. Intimacy i s c o n s c i o u s l y expressed and keeps the r e l a t i o n s h i p a l i v e , v i t a l and i n s p i r e d . The meaning of being together i s renewed c o n t i n u a l l y . The p a r t i c i p a n t i n a marriage of s a t i s f a c t i o n f e e l s a connection to the partner through shared ways of being i n the w o r l d . One way t h i s i s experienced i s through a consensus of v a l u e s . E x p e r i e n c i n g the p a r t n e r as having values s i m i l a r to one's own develops a r e l a t i o n s h i p that helps to transcend any f e e l i n g s of doubt i n the m a r i t a l bond. There are f e e l i n g s of attachment to and comfort w i t h the p a r t n e r . There i s the experience of a u n i f y i n g way of being and d i r e c t i o n i n . l i f e . A s p i r i t u a l connection that i s not n e c e s s a r i l y r e l i g i o u s e x i s t s . The person experiences a t r u s t i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p stemming from shared v a l u e s . There i s a r e c o g n i t i o n that the t h i n g s most important i n one's l i f e are shared by one's p a r t n e r . There i s a s a t i s f y i n g awareness of a n a t u r a l e x p r e s s i o n of the p a r t n e r ' s way of being t h a t i s congruent w i t h one's own. The experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s l i v e d by the p a r t i c i p a n t s on a l e v e l of shared goals and a shared f u t u r e v i s i o n . I t a l s o c o n s i s t s of support f o r each other's i n d i v i d u a l g o a l s . This i s an o r i e n t a t i o n , a - 74 -common d i r e c t i o n i n the marriage and l i f e . P a r t n e r s f e e l m u tually r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h i s shared d i r e c t i o n . I t g i v e s the marriage a sense of togetherness and accomplishment i n the present and hope f o r the f u t u r e . A couple s o l i d a r i t y pervades the r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t i s an experience t h a t heightens the f e e l i n g s of uniqueness and e x c l u s i v i t y i n the marriage. I t i s a f e e l i n g o f , "we d i d i t together," that draws the couple c l o s e r and b r i n g s a deeper meaning to t h e i r l i v e s t ogether. I t i s t u r n i n g to one's pa r t n e r f o r help and f i n d i n g support, understanding and l o v e . I t may i n v o l v e going through i n t e n s e emotional experiences such as the l o s s of a c h i l d , death t h r e a t e n i n g i l l n e s s or f i n a n c i a l c r i s i s . Or i t may be experienced as emotional support on a day-to-day b a s i s that i s e q u a l l y powerful and u n i f y i n g . L i k e a s o l i d base l i n e i n a j a z z arrangement, respect f o r one's pa r t n e r and f e e l i n g respected i n r e t u r n , keeps the r e l a t i o n s h i p on tempo. This respect develops and grows through the course of s h a r i n g l i f e t o g e t h e r . I t c o n t r i b u t e s to one's f e e l i n g s of v a l i d a t i o n as a person. I t i s an acceptance of one's pa r t n e r that goes beyond a d m i r a t i o n ; i t i s experienced as a mature p o s i t i v e r e g a r d . One's pa r t n e r o f f e r s a " j o i e de v i v r e " that i s an emotional plus f o r the f e e l i n g s of p o s i t i v e n e s s , happiness and r e l a t i o n s h i p ease. I t i s having fun and e n j o y i n g being w i t h one's p a r t n e r . While p a r t n e r s f e e l a s trong bond based on shared goals and i n t e r e s t s there i s a l s o an a p p r e c i a t i o n and understanding of the s t r e n g t h of p e r c e i v e d d i f f e r e n c e s . The person experiences a b a l a n c i n g of t h e i r p e r s o n a l i t y that f e e l s goods. The experience connects one w i t h one's p a r t n e r . As expressed by Co-researcher three t h i s connectedness - 75 -involves enjoying the "otherness" of one's partner without necessarily wanting to be that way oneself. These complementary differences blend in with the experience of autonomy/dependence. The drive for autonomy and its opposing force, the need for a sense of belonging, have achieved a comfortable balance. It is experienced as a freedom and self determination coupled with feeling good about a dependence on one's partner. It is also experienced as being available for one's partner. Being supportive and dependable in a way that frees both to make their own decisions. Opportunities and support for discovering and enacting options, personal talents and abilities are available and satisfying. Having the emotional and financial resources contributes to achieving this melodic counterpoint in marriage. Being satisfied in one's marital relationship involves an awareness, understanding and acceptance of marriage and life's realities. The partners are able to accept the human limitations and faults of one another; the lack of perfection that may have seemed impossible at the beginning of the relationship. A mature attitude toward romantic idealizations and unrealistic expections has developed. It ties in with the theme of Emotional Commitment in a mature and practical manner. The phenomenon of marital satisfaction includes the realization that one feels a strength to the relationship that comes from both partners conveying a positive self identity; a recognition and acceptance of self. It is expressed in constructive ways to the benefit of the marriage. - 76 -The s y n t h e s i s of the marriage Is developed through e x p e r i e n c i n g emotional s e c u r i t y and support. The p a r t i c i p a n t s look to the marriage as a refuge from the i n s e c u r i t i e s of l i f e and the world. A s a f e , comfortable place to " r e f u e l . " The partner i s experienced as s u p p o r t i v e , t r u s t w o r t h y and dependable. A confidence i n the continuence of the r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s . Out of the emotional support and s e c u r i t y comes a "gentle k i n d of l o v e . " There i s the r e a l i z a t i o n that one can r e l a x and be ones e l f i n the marriage without f e e l i n g that one i s d e a l i n g w i t h a f r a g i l e s t r u c t u r e that may c o l l a p s e w i t h the s l i g h t e s t p r o v o c a t i o n . As Co-researcher f o u r pointed out, i n her marriage she lea r n e d that she could argue and s t i l l remain t o g e t h e r . Something she thought i m p o s s i b l e from her experience w i t h her f a m i l y of o r i g i n . M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n v o l v e s more than a marriage c o n s i s t i n g of numerous s a t i s f y i n g e x p e r i e n t i a l components. I t i s a u n i t y that has blended the s a t i s f a c t i o n s and d i s s f a c t i o n s of l i f e and marriage i n t o a phenomenon of l i v e d e x p e r i e n t i a l dimensions c r e a t i n g an e x i s t e n t i a l couple i d e n t i t y . The marriage and the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n . i t are experienced as one i n an e x i s t e n t i a l r e a l i t y . I t i s experienced as a merging and immersing of o n e s e l f i n the world of one's partner while at the same time m a i n t a i n i n g a strong s e l f - i d e n t i t y . Genuine f e e l i n g s of emotional closeness and mature love e x i s t . The s a t i s f a c t i o n of the marriage has not j u s t happened but has been created through j o i n t e f f o r t . P o s i t i v e f e e l i n g s about extended f a m i l y add a dimension of support and c a r i n g that a f f i r m s the marriage. The couple i d e n t i t y extends to any c h i l d r e n there may be i n the marriage. Co-researcher two i l l u s t r a t e s h i s experience of an extended couple i d e n t i t y as f o l l o w s , " I - 77 -t h i n k that what has happened i s th a t the r e l a t i o n s h i p between C. and myself has grown i n t o a r e l a t i o n s h i p between the fo u r of us . . .." [husband, w i f e and two c h i l d r e n ] . - 78 -CONDENSED DESCRIPTION M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a m u l t i v a r i a t e phenomenon that f l u c t u a t e s d u r i n g the course of the marriage. The p a r t i c i p a n t s experience venues of s a t i s f a c t i o n that are interwoven and u l t i m a t e l y i n s e p a r a b l e from one another. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n v o l v e s an e f f e c t i v e ease of communication between p a r t n e r s . This i n c l u d e s day-to-day communication of a f u n c t i o n a l and p r e v e n t a t i v e nature and, on a deeper l e v e l , s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e e x i s t s that i s t h e r a p e u t i c and growth producing f o r the r e l a t i o n s h i p . A s t r o n g emotional commitment to the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s pre s e n t . I t i n c l u d e s a deep sense of f a i t h i n the p a r t n e r and the marriage. This manifests i t s e l f i n a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to and f o r the m a r i t a l bond. I t Is b u i l t and maintained through r e l a t i o n s h i p "work" and t o l e r a n c e . Intimacy i s valued and occurs on i n t e l l e c t u a l , emotional and p h y s i c a l l e v e l s . I t helps i n keeping the r e l a t i o n s h i p v i t a l and a l i v e . Values consensus i s b a s i c to the s a t i s f a c t i o n of the marriage. P a r t i c i p a n t s experience a t r u s t i n the par t n e r and the r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t stem from knowing t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e values have remained congruent over the course of the marriage. Couple and i n d i v i d u a l goals are shared and supported i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p . This g i v e the r e l a t i o n s h i p d i r e c t i o n and s a t i s f a c t i o n i n the present and p o s i t i v e f e e l i n g s f o r the f u t u r e . A f e e l i n g of couple s o l i d a r i t y I s p r e v a l e n t i n the marriage. I t i s an experience of togetherness wherein one f i n d s support f o r the common cha l l e n g e s i n l i f e . This s o l i d a r i t y i s epitomised by the f e e l i n g of - 79 -"we d i d i t together" t h a t may be experienced a f t e r going through a c r i s i s together or simply being together and f e e l i n g good about i t over the y e a r s . T y p i c a l of the interconnectedness of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s the theme of r e s p e c t . A d i f f i c u l t concept to c l e a r l y d e f i n e i n terms of a marriage i t i s perhaps best d e s c r i b e d as a mature p o s i t i v e regard that one f e e l s f o r and i n t u r n f e e l s from one's p a r t n e r . The r e l a t i o n s h i p i s fun to be i n . This i s experienced as an o v e r a l l f e e l i n g of a " j o i e de v i v r e . " The d i f f e r e n c e i n c h a r a c t e r of the p a r t n e r s i s not only accepted but adds to each pa r t n e r ' s sense of completeness and s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the marriage. The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f f e r s a balance of autonomy/dependence that both partners t h r i v e on. F i n a n c i a l s e c u r i t y f o r both a i d s i n t h i s e xperience. People e x p e r i e n c i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n tend to be r e a l i s t i c i n t h e i r approach to l i f e and marriage. They accept p a r t n e r short-comings and recognize t h a t one must a l l o w f o r u n r e a l i s t i c i d e a l s r e l a t e d to being m a r r i e d . To d e a l w i t h the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e and marriage the partners need to be able to draw on t h e i r p e r s o n a l resources grounded i n a strong p e r s o n a l i d e n t i t y . A s trong personal i d e n t i t y i s i n t u r n supported and nurtured through a r e l a t i o n s h i p that o f f e r s emotional s e c u r i t y and support. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n occurs i n the context of a r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t a l l o w s one to " r e f u e l " and to experience a "gentle k i n d of l o v e . " The experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n occurs on the l e v e l of an e x i s t e n t i a l couple i d e n t i t y . I n t e r t w i n e d w i t h couple s o l i d a r i t y , e x i s t e n t i a l couple of i d e n t i t y i s experienced more on an a f f e c t i v e l e v e l - 80 -than the c o g n i t i v e / b e h a v i o r a l make-up of couple s o l i d a r i t y . I t i n v o l v e s being a couple because of choice that provides meaning i n l i f e . - 81 -CHAPTER V DISCUSSION Summary The e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l approach to understanding the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n produced f i f t e e n themes that were common to a l l f i v e c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . The experience i s the same f o r each co-researcher as rev e a l e d by the themes but e x a c t l y how I t i s experienced i s unique f o r each i n d i v i d u a l . On the basis of these common themes a d e s c r i p t i o n of the e s s e n t i a l s t r u c t u r e of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n was w r i t t e n . The a n a l y s i s moved beyond the d e s c r i p t i v e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of e s s e n t i a l q u a l i t i e s and uncovered hidden meanings i n what had been e x p l i c i t l y g i v e n . The co-researchers v a l i d a t e d the exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n and a l l f i f t e e n themes. Th i s study does not assume that the exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n encompasses the e n t i r e p o p u l a t i o n of people e x p e r i e n c i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . I t provides a very c l e a r s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r f u r t h e r study of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n ; not o b j e c t i v e " f a c t s . " The experience may vary from c u l t u r e to c u l t u r e . The themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n are congruent w i t h some of the data gathered through v a r i o u s q u a n t i t a t i v e research s t u d i e s ( L i v e l y , 1969; B a r r y , 1970; Cohn, 1975; Ki n d e l a n & McCarrey, 1979; Ammons & S t i n n e t t , 1980; Pittman, Price-Bonham & McKenry, 1983). There are a l s o many p o i n t s i n common w i t h the three q u a l i t a t i v e s t u d i e s (Beck, 1983; B r i l l i n g e r , 1983; and Lawrence, 1982) t h a t were reviewed i n Chapter two. - 82 -This r e s e a r c h has q u a l i t a t i v e l y i n v e s t i g a t e d the person's world as l i v e d by them and r e p o r t s the r e s u l t s i n a d e s c r i p t i v e form that " f r e e z e s " the experience i n time; r a t h e r l i k e pushing the pause button on a video playback machine so that one can c a r e f u l l y s c r u t i n i z e a segment of the whole g e s t a l t . Personal Dialogue At the beginning of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n I wrote a b r i e f e x p l i c a t i o n of my pe r s o n a l assumptions. My i n t e r e s t i n the phenomenon of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n was not from the p o i n t of view of one who was e x p e r i e n c i n g i t at the time. Coming from the p o s i t i o n of f e e l i n g t h a t I had experienced i t i n the past to knowing that I wasn't i n the present perhaps made my assumptions p a r t i c u l a r l y p o w e r f u l . As I had s t a t e d , I f e l t t hat the r o l e of values consensus was a very important c o n t r i b u t i o n to the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . My assumption was met w i t h the very c l e a r experience of values consensus that the co-researchers spoke o f . However, there were-, as I had a l s o assumed, many more v a r i a b l e s or experiences that c o n t r i b u t e to the meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . As I once again read over the themes and exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n I was s t r u c k by the connectedness of the themes. I was s u r p r i s e d that I was able to look at marriages that were e x p e r i e n c i n g harmony and s a t i s f a c t i o n and e x p l i c a t e such s p e c i f i c yet i n t e r c o n n e c t e d experiences from f i v e seemingly u n r e l a t e d i n d i v i d u a l s . T h e i r r e l a t e d n e s s being, of course, t h e i r common experience of the phenomenon. I f e e l t h a t I have not only been able to make c l e a r my own assumptions before t r y i n g to - 83 -answer my qu e s t i o n but a l s o show that q u a n t i t a t i v e data can provide r i c h , d e s c r i p t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n . S t a t i s t i c s such as those c i t e d i n Chapter one of t h i s t h e s i s t e l l us only that something d e s t r u c t i v e i s c l e a r l y happening to marriages today. By l o o k i n g at the p o s i t i v e , s a t i s f y i n g marriages of the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s , I have made v i s i b l e a c l e a r , r i c h and v i b r a n t d e s c r i p t i o n of not only what keeps these marriages together but what makes them s a t i s f y i n g . Rather than searching f o r what plagued u n s u c c e s s f u l marriages and then c r e a t i n g a theory of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n based on those f a c t o r s , I have put aside t h e o r i e s and c o n s t r u c t s to i n v e s t i g a t e the phenomenon as l i v e d . As F i s c h e r & Wertz (1979) have suggested, q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h suggests which q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s might make meaningful q u a n t i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s . Theoretical Implications This study touches on each of the four t h e o r i e s reviewed. I t i s the c r e a t i o n of a c l e a r and comprehensive d e s c r i p t i o n of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n that goes beyond the t h e o r i e s reviewed and yet Is compatible w i t h p o i n t s from a l l of them: p s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory, s y m b o l i c - i n t e r a c t i o n theory, s o c i a l exchange theory and b e h a v i o r a l theory. I t draws together p o i n t s from each theory i n t o a d e s c r i p t i o n of meaning without proposing a hypothesis or theory i t s e l f . P s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory i s d i f f i c u l t to r e l a t e d i r e c t l y to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . The theory tends toward a c a u s a t i v e , somewhat s p e c u l a t i v e frame of refe r e n c e that i s not easy to v e r i f y without long s e s s i o n s of p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . I t seems that the assumptions of the importance of one's primary love r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n childhood (mother-father) r e l a t e - 84 -very c l e a r l y to the themes of Intimacy, Autonomy/Dependence, and a Strong P e r s o n a l I d e n t i t y . Freud's theory of a n a c l i t i c and n a r c i s s i s t i c l o v e p a r a l l e l s the theme of Autonomy/Dependence. Perhaps those who have found t h i s balance i n t h e i r m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s experienced a h e a l t h y balance of a n a c l i t i c and n a r c i s s i s t i c love i n t h e i r e a r l y c h i l d h o o d . The p s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory of ob j e c t r e l a t i o n s e s s e n t i a l l y s t a t e s t h a t one's sense of s e l f i s of u l t i m a t e importance as to how one f u n c t i o n s i n a m a r i t a l bond. Object r e l a t i o n s theory d i r e c t l y r e l a t e s to the theme of Strong P e r s o n a l I d e n t i t y . Tied i n w i t h a Strong P e r s o n a l I d e n t i t y i s the a b i l i t y to s e l f - d i s c l o s e e f f e c t i v e l y , to commit o n e s e l f to a r e l a t i o n s h i p , to f i n d a comfortable balance between autonomy/dependence and the a b i l i t y to be par t of an E x i s t e n t i a l Couple I d e n t i t y . P s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory a l s o r e l a t e s to Values Consensus as suggested by Barry (1970). M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n may very w e l l hinge on the developmental processes of the p e r s o n a l i t y . I t would seem that many of the f a c t o r s i d e n t i f i e d through the p r o t o c o l a n a l y s i s , i f not a l l , c o u l d be r e l a t e d i n some way to p s y c h o a n a l y t i c theory. Freud h i m s e l f probably summed i t up best w i t h t h i s quote from Jean M a r t i n Charcot (1835-1893): Theory i s good; but I t doesn't prevent t h i n g s from e x i s t i n g (Sigmund Freud, 1893). Symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n theory r e l a t e s to ob j e c t r e l a t i o n s theory of ps y c h o a n a l y s i s i n i t s concern w i t h the i n f l u e n c e of persons and events (symbols) on one's present way of r e l a t i n g to the world. The middle range theory of Burr et a l . (1979) i s d i f f i c u l t to connect w i t h my - 85 -f i n d i n g s . I f the co-researchers experience t h e i r m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n terms of r o l e enactment and r o l e e x p e c t a t i o n s i t does not come out c l e a r l y i n t h e i r s t o r i e s . In f a c t one co-researcher noted how she f e l t that each marriage f i n d s i t s own s u c c e s s f u l way of o p e r a t i n g and that she couldn't use others f o r comparison w i t h her own marriage. She experienced i t as a much more i n t e r n a l i z e d p r o c e s s . The co-researchers are no doubt i n f l u e n c e d by the c u l t u r e and s o c i e t y i n which they l i v e but as s t a t e d e a r l i e r a s i t u a t i o n has meaning only through people's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of i t ; the experience as i t i s l i v e d by them. In summary, t h i s study showed l i t t l e to r e l a t e co-researchers m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n to the r o l e behavior of s e l f and spouse i n comparison to one's own reference group. There may be an u n d e r l y i n g i n f l u e n c e but t h i s i s not expressed as being part of the s a t i s f a c t i o n f o r the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . S o c i a l exchange theory i s c e r t a i n l y congruent w i t h some of the f i n d i n g s . Most s p e c i f i c a l l y Values Consensus, Couple S o l i d a r i t y , Emotional Commitment and Emotional S e c u r i t y / S u p p o r t . That i s , co-researchers t a l k e d about s o c i a l exchange as a very important part of t h e i r marriage. What i s happening i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p f e e l s good and s a t i s f y i n g so consequently the p a r t i c i p a n t s value i t and f i n d p o s i t i v e experience i n i t . Mutual rewards appear to be maximized and i n d i v i d u a l costs minimized. This a l l o w s the co-researchers to experience s a t i s f a c t i o n and probably the E x i s t e n t i a l Couple I d e n t i t y that was i d e n t i f i e d . They a l s o experience hope and rewards f o r the f u t u r e . This i n f o r m a t i o n could perhaps be separated i n t o the c a t e g o r i e s of a p r e m a r i t a l f a c t o r s , s o c i a l and economic f a c t o r s , and i n t e r p e r s o n a l and dyadic f a c t o r s as presented by Burr et a l . (1979) i f there were any - 86 -reason f o r doing so at t h i s p o i n t . Key to t h i s theory i s that marriages evidenced asymmetrical exchanges. This may be h i g h l y dependent on the p e r s o n a l i t y of each i n d i v i d u a l i n the dyad. This could have very w e l l have been t r u e of the co-researchers i n t h i s study but was not an area being e x p l o r e d . B e h a v i o r a l theory i s , as s t a t e d by Weiss (1978), not p a r t i c u l a r l y conversant w i t h a theory of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . B e h a v i o r a l p r i n c i p l e s are c e r t a i n l y used i n therapy to help change behaviors i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p but behaviorism i t s e l f f o l l o w s more of a s o c i a l exhange p a t t e r n when i t comes to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . As w i t h s o c i a l exchange theory, b e h a v i o r a l theory i s i n t e r t w i n e d w i t h the f i n d i n g s of t h i s study. As Weiss's (1978) model suggests, m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n v o l v e s a balance t h a t permits the partners to maximize b e n e f i t s w h i l e m i n i m i z i n g c o s t s . C e r t a i n l y the exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n speaks to a r e l a t i o n s h i p balance that has been achieved through the involvement of a l l the themes to v a r y i n g degrees. Implications for Counselling This study i s i n v o l v e d w i t h d e s c r i b i n g the meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and thereby h e l p i n g to understand more about the i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p of marriage. C o u n s e l l o r s are o f t e n i n v o l v e d w i t h h e l p i n g i n d i v i d u a l s and couples a t t a i n s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r m arriages. This study can a s s i s t the c o u n s e l l o r i n h i s / h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and challe n g e of e s t a b l i s h i n g c r i t e r i a to help people before and d u r i n g t h e i r marriages to cr e a t e and/or enhance m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . - 87 -This study presents an exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and themes that provide the ground upon which the experience i s based. I t does not present a cookbook s t y l e r e c i p e f o r a c h i e v i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . I t presents some of the e x i s t e n t i a l r e a l i t i e s of the phenomenon. These can be used by the c o u n s e l l o r to b e t t e r understand what I t i s that a couple or i n d i v i d u a l may be se a r c h i n g f o r when they speak of not being s a t i s f i e d i n t h e i r marriage. C l i e n t s could a l s o be shown the exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n and themes to help them c l a r i f y what i t i s that they f e e l i s m i s s i n g or needs work, i n d i v i d u a l l y and as a couple, to cr e a t e m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . The r e s u l t s of t h i s study could be used to develop workshops and c o u n s e l l i n g s t r a t e g i e s f o r p r e - m a r i t a l assessment of c o m p a t i b i l i t y and p r e p a r a t i o n f o r a h e a l t h y marriage. Through the u t i l i z a t i o n of s p e c i f i c themes i n d i v i d u a l s and couples can be made aware of some of the s p e c i f i c s necessary f o r b u i l d i n g sound s u s t a i n e d marriages of s a t i s f a c t i o n . The themes of Values Consensus, Shared Goals, Complementary D i f f e r e n c e s , J o i e de V i v r e and Respect cannot be e n t i r e l y c r eated i f they do not a l r e a d y e x i s t i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p . This i m p l i e s the need f o r p r e - m a r i t a l c o u n s e l l i n g that i n c l u d e s an examination of these areas by the couple to b r i n g to t h e i r awareness p o s s i b l e areas of f u t u r e c o n f l i c t . Being aware of incongruencies i n these areas w i l l help couples work toward m i n i m i z i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s or even come to the r e a l i z a t i o n that the d i f f e r e n c e s present are too great to withstand the pressure of the long-term commitment of marriage. This r e s e a r c h a l s o p o i n t s to areas of i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l development that couples need to be aware of and have competence i n to - 88 -c r e a t e and enhance m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . These s k i l l s Include p r i m a r i l y the themes of Ease of Communication and S e l f - D i s c l o s u r e . Most c e r t a i n l y not new areas of concern but once again r e i n f o r c e d by the data given by the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . Besides the need f o r couples to work on the above mentioned ar e a s , c o u n s e l l o r s must be aware that each i n d i v i d u a l i n a marriage may have f a c e t s of t h e i r p e r s o n a l i t y that d e c i d e d l y a f f e c t t h e i r a b i l i t y to experience s a t i s f a c t i o n i n a marriage. As pointed out i n the e x p l i c t i o n of themes t h i s may r e l a t e to how the i n d i v i d u a l s i n a marriage f e e l about and p e r c e i v e themselves. The themes of Autonomy/Dependence, R e a l i s t i c Outlook on Marriage and L i f e , Strong P e r s o n a l I d e n t i t y Emotional S e c u r i t y / S u p p o r t , Emotional Commitment, and Intimacy a l l d e a l w i t h i n d i v i d u a l s ' i s s u e s that should be d e a l t w i t h on a one-to-one b a s i s and w i t h the partners t o g e t h e r . The themes of Couple S o l i d a r i t y and E x i s t e n t i a l Couple I d e n t i t y are i n t e g r a l to the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n but d i f f i c u l t to p i n p o i n t as to how the experience might be advanced i n a c o u n s e l l i n g s e t t i n g . I t appears that these themes may be the r e s u l t of the s u c c e s s f u l i n t e g r a t i o n of p r e - m a r i t a l c o n d i t i o n s , i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l - l e v e l s and p e r s o n a l i t y v a r i a b l e s of each i n d i v i d u a l p a r t n e r . The themes have somewhat a r b i t r a r i l y been d i v i d e d i n t o three groups. This was done p r i m a r i l y f o r the purpose of d i s c u s s i o n . This r e s e a r c h e r doesn't b e l i e v e that the themes are r e a l l y that c l e a r l y d e l i n e a t e d . They a r e , r a t h e r , very f l u i d . Each theme could c o n c e i v a b l y be c l o s e l y connected to any other. - 89 -C o u n s e l l o r s are c u r r e n t l y presented w i t h many new and e x c i t i n g models of marriage and couples c o u n s e l l i n g . Whatever approach c o u n s e l l o r and c l i e n t are us i n g to enable the c l i e n t to l i v e t h e i r p ersonal and r e l a t i o n s h i p l i f e more f u l l y and e f f e c t i v e l y , t h i s paper could serve as an e x c e l l e n t s t a r t i n g place f o r d i s c u s s i o n and common understanding of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . As two unique i n d i v i d u a l s ( c o u n s e l l o r and c l i e n t ) e x p e r i e n c i n g and l i v i n g two d i f f e r e n t r e a l i t i e s , t h e i r concept of what m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s and how to a t t a i n i t may vary g r e a t l y . The exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n can be a s t a r t l i n g p o i n t f o r c o u n s e l l o r and c l i e n t to begin to explore and i d e n t i f y what i t i s the c l i e n t i s r e a l l y seeking i n l i f e and marriage. Implications for Future Research Each theme e x p l i c a t e d from the p r o t o c o l s represents an area f o r f u t u r e e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l study. Future r e s e a r c h c o u l d i n v o l v e f u r t h e r dialogue w i t h people e x p e r i e n c i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n so as to tune-up and r e f i n e the d e s c r i p t i o n of the expe r i e n c e . Each theme could a l s o be phenomenologically examined independently to c l a r i f y f u r t h e r what the experience of each i s i n marriage. As alr e a d y quoted on p. 56, C o l a i z z i (1978) s t a t e s that the e x i s t e n t i a l meaning of the phenomenological t h e s i s i s that "research can never exhaust the i n v e s t i g a t e d phenomenon, that r e s e a r c h can never be complete" (p. 70). Or as Heidegger ( c i t e d i n C o l l a i z z i , 1978) a s s e r t s , "the s t r u c t u r e of any Dasein i s such that i t never ' a r r i v e s ' but i s always only 'on the way'" (p. 70). - 90 -Conclusions The purpose of t h i s e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l study was to understand the meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n as i t i s l i v e d . F i v e i n d i v i d u a l s ( t h r e e women and two men) who were e x p e r i e n c i n g s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriages were i n t e r v i e w e d . During the f i r s t i n t e r v i e w the re s e a r c h e r was f u l l y present to the co - r e s e a r c h e r s . This was done by assuming the stance of i m a g i n a t i v e l i s t e n i n g and making every e f f o r t to l i s t e n w i t h the t o t a l i t y of the being. The researcher r e f l e c t e d and g e n t l y probed f o r the meaning of the experi e n c e , u s i n g questions when a p p r o p r i a t e i n the c o n t e x t . The i n t e r v i e w s were tape-recorded and then t r a n s c r i b e d . C o n f i d e n t i a l i t y was ensured by usin g the i n i t i a l s of the co-researchers and the people and places they r e f e r r e d t o . The t r a n s c r i p t s were erased when the t h e s i s was completed. C o l a i z z i ' s (1978) method of p r o t o c o l a n a l y s i s was then used. A f t e r e x t r a c t i n g s i g n i f i c a n t statements and f o r m u l a t i n g meaning u n i t s from the t r a n s c r i p t s the process of c r e a t i n g themes was begun. This step Involved o r g a n i s i n g the s i g n i f i c a n t statements and meaning u n i t s around common themes through the use of c r e a t i v e i n s i g h t . I t was necessary to check back w i t h the p r o t o c o l s to ensure that they v a l i d a t e d the themes. That i s , the process i n v o l v e d checking back to ensure that meanings and themes had not been formulated that had no connection w i t h the p r o t o c o l s ; that the a n a l y s i s had a c t u a l l y been tr u e to the c o n t e x t u a l and h o r i z o n t a l meanings given by the c o - r e s e a r c h e r s . An exhaustive d e s c r i p t i o n of the experience was then formulated. F o l l o w i n g t h i s the researcher returned to each co-researcher f o r a v a l i d a t i o n i n t e r v i e w . This i n t e r v i e w was not - 91 -tape-recorded but notes were taken regarding changes the co-researchers f e l t were needed i n accordance w i t h t h e i r experience. F i n a l l y the exh a u s t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n was r e - w r i t t e n and changes made to some of the d e s c r i p t i o n s of the themes before w r i t i n g out the concise d e s c r i p t i o n of the meaning of the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . Weiss (1978) s t a t e d that marriage has been c a l l e d one of the most popular, i n t e r e s t i n g , a l b e i t e l u s i v e forms of i n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o r s . This r e searcher agrees w i t h him whole-heartedly and yet at the same time f e e l s that t h i s study has helped to de-mystify some of the e l u s i v e n e s s of the phenomenon of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . This study answered the q u e s t i o n : What i s the experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n ? , b e t t e r than anything e l s e d i s c o v e r e d . The co-researchers r e l a t e d s t o r i e s of experiences that t o l d e x p l i c i t l y and t a c i t l y of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n a way th a t added t e x t u r e and r i c h n e s s to previous q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e s t u d i e s . I found the study p e r s o n a l l y and p r o f e s s i o n a l l y very f u l f i l l i n g and h o p e f u l . Marriages of s a t i s f a c t i o n can and do e x i s t d e s p i t e p r e v i o u s l y unheard of i n t e r p e r s o n a l and s o c i e t a l pressures f a c i n g married couples today. I have p e r s o n a l l y b e n e f i t e d from what my co-researchers shared w i t h me. I now have a paradigm from which to examine my own f u t u r e marriage and that of c l i e n t s I w i l l be working w i t h whom might be s t r u g g l i n g w i t h a t t a i n i n g s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriages. This study has been a p o s i t i v e experience t h a t has l e f t me i n t e l l e c t u a l l y s t i m u l a t e d and w i t h a heightened awareness f i l l e d w i t h hope and encouragement f o r marriages i n the 80's and beyond. - 92 -REFERENCES Ammons, P. & S t i n n e t t , N. (1980). The v i t a l marriage: A c l o s e r look. J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d Family and C h i l d S t u d i e s , 29, 37-42. B a r r y , W.A. (1970). Marriage r e s e a r c h and c o n f l i c t : An i n t e g r a t i v e review. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 73, 41-54. Beck, G.R. (1983/1984). The experience of the long-term marriage  r e l a t i o n s h i p ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The Union f o r Experimenting C o l l e g e s and U n i v e r s i t i e s , 1983). Ann Arbor: U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s I n t e r n a t i o n a l (3592) B e n t l e r , P.M. & Newcomb, M.D. (1978). L o n g i t u d i n a l study of m a r i t a l success and f a i l u r e . J o u r n a l of C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 46, 1053-1070. B r i l l i n g e r , M.E. (1983). I n d i v i d u a l s ' I n t e n t i o n a l changes r e l a t e d to  marriage. Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. B r o d e r i c k , C.B. (1979). Marriage and the Fa m i l y . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l . B u g e n t a l , J.F.T. (1964). The t h i r d f o r c e i n psychology. J o u r n a l of  Humanistic Psychology, 4_, 19-26. Burke, R.J., & Weir, T. (1977), Husband-wife h e l p i n g - r e l a t i o n s h i p s : The "mental hygiene" f u n c t i o n i n marriage. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 40, 911-925. Burke, R.J. Weir, T. & H a r r i s o n , D. (1976). D i s c l o s u r e of Problems and tensions experienced by m a r i t a l p a r t n e r s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 38, 531-542. B u r r , W.R. (1971). An expansion and t e s t of a r o l e theory of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 33, 368-372. Bu r r , W.R. (1973). Theory c o n s t r u c t i o n and the s o c i o l o g y of the f a m i l y . New York: John Wiley and Sons. B u r r , W.R., L e i g h , G.K., Day, R.D., & Co n s t a n t i n e , J . (1979). Symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n and the f a m i l y . In W.R. Burr, R. H i l l , F . I . Nye & I.L. Re i s s ( E d s . ) , Contemporary t h e o r i e s about the f a m i l y : V o l . 1 1 ,  General t h e o r i e s / t h e o r e t i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n s (pp. 42-111). New York: The Free P r e s s . Chadwick, B.A., A l b r e c h t , S.L. & Kunz, P.R. (1976). M a r i t a l and f a m i l y r o l e s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 38, 431-430. - 93 -C l a r k , T.L. (1980). What makes r e l a t i o n s h i p s work? F i r s t d r a f t , Copyright pending. ( A v a i l a b l e from School of S o c i a l Work L i b r a r y , U n i v e r i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.) C l a s p e l l , E.L. ( S p r i n g , 1984). An e x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l approach t o understanding the meaning of g r i e f . Unpublished d o c t o r i a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. Clements, W.H. (1967). M a r i t a l i n t e r a c t i o n and m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y : A p o i n t of view and a d e s c r i p t i v e comparison of s t a b l e and unstable marriages. J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 29, 697-703. C o l a i z z i , P.F. (1973). R e f l e c t i o n and Research i n Psychology: A  phenomenological study of l e a r n i n g . Dubuque, IA: K e n d e l l Hunt. Cohn, A.R. (1976). S e l f concept and r o l e p erceptions as c o r r e l a t e s of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , I l l i n o i s I n s t i t u t e of Technology, 1975). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 36, 3569B. Cozby, P. (1972). S e l f - d i s c l o s u r e , r e c i p r o c i t y , and l i k i n g . Sociometry, 35, 156-160. Cuber, J.F. & H a r r o f f , P.B. (1965). The s i g n i f i c a n t Americans. New York: Appleton-Century. DeBurger, J.,. ( E d . ) . (1977). Marriage today: Problems, i s s u e s , and  a l t e r n a t i v e s . New York: John Wiley and Sons. Edwards, J.N. (1969). F a m i l i a l behavior as s o c i a l exchange. J o u r n a l  of Marriage and the F a m i l y , 31, 518-516. E r i k s o n , E.H. (1963). Childhood and s o c i e t y (2nd ed.). New York: W.W. Norton. F a i r b a i r n , W.R.D. (1952). An o b j e c t r e l a t i o n s theory of p e r s o n a l i t y . New York: B a s i c Books. F i s h e r , C T . & Wertz, F.J. (1979). Emperical phenomenological analyses of being c r i m i n a l l y v i c t i m i z e d . I n A. G i o r g i , R. Knowles & D.L. Smith ( E d s . ) , Duquesne s t u d i e s i n phenomenological psychology, I I I , (pp. 135 - 158). P i t t s b u r g : Duquesne U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . F i s h b e i n , M.D., & Thelen, M.H. (1981). P s y c h o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s i n mate s e l e c t i o n and m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n : A review. JSAS: Catalog of  S e l e c t e d Documents i n Psychology, 11, 4. (Ms. No. 2374) Freed, F.H. (1975) S e l f - d i s c l o s u r e as a f a c i l i t a t o r of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n marriage ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , F u u l l e r T h e o l o g i c a l Seminary, 1974). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 36, 440B. - 94 -G i l b e r t , S.J. (1976). S e l f d i s c l o s u r e , i n t i m a c y annd communication i n f a m i l i e s . The Family C o o r d i n a t o r , 25, 221-231. G i o r g i , A. (1970). Pschology as a human s c i e n c e : A phenomenologically  based approach. New York: Harper and Row. G i o r g i , A. (1975). An a p p l i c a t i o n of phenomenological method i n psychology. I n A. G i o r g i , G.T. F i s h e r , E.L. Murray ( E d s . ) , Duquesne  s t u d i e s i n phenomenological psychology, I I . (pp. 82-103) P i t t s b u r g h : Duquesne U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . G l a s e r , B.G. & S t r a u s s , A.L. (1967). The d i s c o v e r y of grounded theory:  S t r a t e g i e s f o r Q u a l i t a t i v e Research. Chicago: A l d i n e . Glenn, N.D., & Weaver, C.W. (1978). A m u l t i v a r i a t e , m u l t i s u r v e y study of m a r i t a l happiness. J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 40 269-280. Hamilton, G.V. (1929). A r e s e a r c h i n marriage. New York: Lear. Hawkins, J.L. (1968). A s s o c i a t i o n s between companionship, h o s t i l i t y , and m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 30, 647-650. Heidegger, M. (1982). (A. H o f s t a d t e r , Trans.). The B a s i c Problems of  Phenomenology. Bloomington: Indiana U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . ( O r i g i n a l work p u b l i s h e d 1975.) Hesse, H. 1951. S i d d h a r t h a . ( H i l d a Rosner, T r a n s . ) . New York: New D i r e c t i o n s . H i c k s , M.W., & P i a t t , M. (1970). M a r i t a l happiness and s t a b i l i t y : A review of research i n the s i x t i e s . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the  Family, 32, 553-573. Jacobson, N. (1981). B e h a v i o r a l m a r i t a l therapy. I n A. Gurman and D. K n i s k e r n ( E d s . ) , Handbook of f a m i l y therapy, (pp. 556-591). New York: Brunner/Mazel. K e l l y , E . I . (1941). M a r i t a l c o m p a t i b i l i t y as r e l a t e d to p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s of husbands and wives as rated by s e l f and spouse. J o u r n a l of  S o c i a l Psychology, 13, 193-198. Kernberg, 0. (1976). Object r e l a t i o n s theory and c l i n i c a l  p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . New York: Jason Aronson. K i n d e l a n , K.M. & Mc Carrey, M.W. (1979). Spouses' v a l u e systems: S i m i l a r i t y , type and a t t r i b u t e d m a r i t a l adjustment. P s y c h o l o g i c a l  Reports, 44, 1295-1304. - 95 -Kimble, G.A. & Garmezy, N. (1968). P r i n c i p l e s of General Psychology. (3rd e d . ) . New York: Ronald P r e s s . Lasch, C. (1979). The c u l t u r e of n a r c i s s i s m . New York: W.W. Norton. Laurence, L.T. (1982). Couple constancy: Conversations w i t h today's  h a p p i l y married people. Ann Arbor: UMI Research P r e s s . L e d e r e r , W.J., & Jackson, D.D. (1968). The mirages of marriage. New York: W.W. Norton. L e n t h a l l , G. (1977). M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and m a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y . J o u r n a l of Marriage and Family C o u n s e l l i n g , 3^ 25-32. Leo, J . (1984, A p r i l 9 ) . The r e v o l u t i o n i s over. Time, pp. 88-93. L e r n e r , R.M. & Spanier, G.B., ( E d s . ) . (1978). C h i l d i n f l u e n c e s on  m a r i t a l and f a m i l y I n t e r a c t i o n : A l i f e - s p a n p e r s p e c t i v e . New York: Academic P r e s s . Lewis, J.M., Beavers, W.R., G o s s e t t , J.T. and P h i l l i p s , V.A. (1976). No s i n g l e t h r e ad: P s y c h o l o g i c a l h e a l t h i n f a m i l y systems. New York: Brunner/Mazel. Lewis R.A.., & Spanier, G.B. (1979). T h e o r i z i n g about the q u a l i t y and s t a b i l i t y of marriage. In W.R. Burr, R. H i l l F . I . Nym & I.L. Reiss ( E d s . ) , Contempary t h e o r i e s about the f a m i l y : V o l . 1, Research-based  t h e o r i e s (pp. 268-294). New York: The Free P r e s s . L i v e l y , E.L. (1969). Toward concept c l a r i f i c a t i o n : The case of m a r i t a l i n t e r a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the F a m i l y , 31, 108-114. Luckey, E.B. (1960). M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and i t a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h congruence of p e r c e p t i o n . Marriage and Family L i v i n g , 2 2 ( b ) , 49-54. Luckey, E.B. (1964). M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and i t s concomitant pe r c e p t i o n s of s e l f and spouse. J o u r n a l of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology, JJ., 136-145. Mass, V.S. & Featherstonaugh, H.G. (1979, August). C o n f l i c t i n g values  and m a r i t a l problems: A c o u n s e l l i n g model f o r c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l on Family R e l a t i o n s , Boston. (ERIC Document Reporduction S e r v i c e No. ED. 183989) Mangus, A.R. (1957). Family impacts on mental h e a l t h . Marriage and  Family L i v i n g , 1_9, 256-262. M a r i n i , M.M. (1976). Dimensions of marriage happiness: A r e s e a r c h note. J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 38, 443-448. - 96 -Maslow, A.H. (1967). S e l f - a c t u a l i z l a t i o n and beyond. In J.F.T. Bugental ( E d . ) , Challenges of humanistic psychology, (pp. 279-286). Toronto: McGraw-Hill. Medling, J.M. & McCarrey, M. (1981). M a r i t a l adjustment over segments of the f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e : The i s s u e of spouses' value s i m i l a r i t y . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Fa m i l y , 43, 195-203. M i l h o l l a n d , T., & Avery, A. 1982. E f f e c t s of marriage encounter on s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e , t r u s t , and m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of  Marriage and Family Therapy, j}, 8790. M i l l e r , B.C. (1976). A m u l t i v a r i a t e developmental model of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 38, 643-657. M u r s t e i n , B.I. (1976). Who w i l l marry whom?: Theories and r e s e a r c h l n m a r i t a l c h o i c e . New York: S p r i n g e r . P a o l i n o , T.J. & McCrady, B.S. ( E d s . ) . (1978). Marriage and m a r i t a l  therapy: P s y c h o a n a l y t i c , b e h a v i o r a l and systems theory  p e r s p e c t i v e s . New York: Brunner/Mazel. P a t t e r s o n , J & R e i d , J . (1970). R e c i p r o c i t y and c o e r c i o n : Two f a c e t s of s o c i a l systems. I n C. Neuringer and J . Mi c h a e l ( E d s . ) , Behavior  m o d i f i c a t i o n i n c l i n i c a l psychology, (pp. ) New York: A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s . P a r i s , B.L. & Luckey, E.B. (1966). A l o n g i t u d i n a l study i n m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . S o c i o l o g y and S o c i a l Research, 50, 212-222. P i t t m a n , J.F., J r . , Price-Bonham, S. & McKenry, P.C. (1983). M a r i t a l cohesion: A path model. J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Fa m i l y , 45, 521-531. Randers-Pehrson, S.B. (1976). The congruence of spousal perceptions and m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n : An e x t r a p o l a t i o n of Leary's theory of i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i a g n o s i s of p e r s o n a l i t y ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Maryland, 1976). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 37, 3091-B. Rhyne, D. (1981). Bases of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n among men and women. J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Fa m i l y , 43, 941-955. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human v a l u e s . New York: The Free P r e s s . Rogers, L.S., Young, .H, Cohen, I.H., Dworin, J . & L i p e t z , M.E. (1970). M a r i t a l s t a b i l i t y , mental h e a l t h , and m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 35, 342-348. - 97 -R o l l i n s , B.C. & Cannon, K.L. (1974). M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n over the f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e : A r e e v a l u a t i o n . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the  Family, 36, 271-284. S c h l e s i n g e r , B. and G i b l o n , S.T. (1984). L a s t i n g M a r r i a g e s . Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto, Guidance Centre. Snyder, D.K. (1979). M u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l assessment of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 41, 813-823. Spa n i e r , G.B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New s c a l e s f o r a s s e s s i n g the q u a l i t y of marriage and s i m i l a r dyads. J o u r n a l of  Marriage and the F a m i l y , 41, 813-823. Spa n i e r , G.B. & C o l e , C L . (1976). Toward c l a r i f i c a t i o n and i n v e s t i g a t i o n of m a r i t a l adjustment. I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of  S o c i o l o g y and the Family, 6^ , 121-146. Spa n i e r , G.B. & Lewis, R.A. (1980). M a r i t a l Q u a l i t y : A r e v i e w of the s e v e n t i e s . J o u r n a l of Marriage and the Family, 42, 825-^838. Sporakowski, M.J. & Hughston, G.A. (1978). P r e s c r i p t i o n s f o r happy marriage: Adjustments and s a t i s f a c t i o n s of couples married f o r 50 or more y e a r s . The Family C o - o r d i n a t o r , 27 1 321-327. S t a t i s t i c s Canada. (1982). V i t a l S t a t i s t i c s , Vol.11, Marriages and  D i v o r c e s . S t r y k e r , S. (1964). The i n t e r a c t i o n a l and s i t u a t i o n a l approaches. In H.T. C h r i s t e n s o n , ( E d . ) , Handbook of Marriage and the F a m i l y , (pp. 125-170). Chicago: Rand McNally. S t u c k e r t , R.P. (1963). Role p e r c e p t i o n and m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n : A c o n f i g u r a t i o n a l approach. Marriage and Family L i v i n g , 25, 415-419. Tharp, R.G. (1963). P s y c h o l o g i c a l p a t t e r n i n g i n marriage. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 60, 91-117. Thibaut, J.W. & K e l l e y , H.H. 1959. The S o c i a l Psychology of Groups. New York: John Wiley and Sons. V a l l e , R.S. & K i n g , M. (1978). E x i s t e n t i a l - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r psychology. New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Webb, D.G. (1972). R e l a t i o n s h i p of s e l f - a c c e p t a n c e and s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e to empathy and m a r i t a l need s a t i s f a c t i o n . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s  I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 33, 1-B. - 98 -Weiss, R. (1978). The c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of marriage from a b e h a v i o r a l p e r s p e c t i v e . In T. P a o l i n o and B. McCrady, ( E d s . ) , Marriage and  m a r i t a l therapy, (pp. 165-237). New York: Brunner/Mazel. W i l l s , T.A.., Weiss, R.L. & P a t t e r s o n , G.R. (1974). A B e h a v i o r a l a n a l y s i s f o r the determinants of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . J o u r n a l of  C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 42, 802-811. Table 1 S i g n i f i c a n t Statements CRj CR 2 CR3 CRA CR 5 Theme 1. I'm never a f r a i d to bring up an idea or suggestion. We'd talk about i t and come to some kind of a [decision] . . . that i s a quality that I . r e a l l y l i k e . 1. And a core i s not only the experiences and being together and ironing out stress related issues which ultimately come from that kind of thing, but just generally and being able to communicate on that one-to-one [le v e l ] and making decisions. . . . 1. We always communicated what we thought but not always how we f e l t about each other. That'8 come slowly, i t ' s fragments. 1. 1. Right now whenever he's i n V. we always t a l k to each other every day. Our phone b i l l s are astronomical but i n the evening usually i f he's home we usually discuss the day's events and what's happening. And that was a conscious thing that we decided before he l e f t . That we would do this to keep the li n e s of communication open because i t ' s very easy to be away a week and. . . . 1. Ease of Communication. CR2 CR3 CRA CR 5 Theme 2. You know i n one whole phase of my l i f e , which i s about ten years ago I guess, we were getting Into something . . . that I didn't l i k e . . . and I was r e a l l y distressed and upset about tl.at and we used to talk about It but we never resolved. . . . 2. But I think what happens i s that since you go through these things not singly, l i k e a l l the questions are only within your own s e l f , that you are able to share those things. I think that's just something that we've accomp-li s h e d . As each external situation happens, s t r e s s f u l or c r i s i s or just decisions g e n e r a l l y — what happened i s that we have been able to make those decisions as a unit. I think that's r e a l l y helped. 2. Since we have been communicating these problems of our romantic feelings towards one another I think we have r e a l l y made great leaps i n our marriage. 2. I t took me awhile to a r t i c u l a t e my f r u s t r a -t i o n or to know what was causing my f r u s t r a t i o n and then to try to find a way of expressing my needs without aruging or without getting angry and s i l e n t and without jus t becoming resent-f u l and s i l e n t ; to show my f r u s t r a t i o n before I get angry. And so i t ' s gotten better. 2. This Is one of the parts that I r e a l l y appreciate about J , i s that he i s very open and he r e a l l y l i k e s to discuss the issue so that I never have to store anything or keep anything Inside. Usually h e ' l l l i s t e n and many times h e ' l l agree or we'll work i t out. 2. Self Disclosure. CRj CR2 CR3 CR4 CR5 Theme 3. That was something I wanted to do, those things were Important to me. Looking after W's comforts, It's s t i l l very Important to me. 3. . . . have to have a certain amount of tolerance, otherwise you always end up, l i k e there Is a c o n f l i c t s ituation . . . that's something we have always t r i e d to avoid because there i s always ways of doing things, always ways of doing things. 3. But i t doesn't mean that oh, she's never going to leave me so I'm Just going to be a slouch. I think input has to be there. 3. And i t ' s times l i k e that [I] r e a l l y have to start talking to [my] s e l f ; think of the important things, think of the good things that are coming from [my] r e l a t i o n -ship. 3. I think we're both of the mind that i f we f e l t that something was r e a l l y wrong with the relationship we'd seek counselling. J has mentioned that several times, which pleases me because he would readily go. 3. Emotional Commitment. 4. The end of the week, Friday night, I don't care how wiped out I am, Friday night i s together night. That's the night when he comes home there'8 something nice planned for dinner, the house is n ' t a mess. We s i t and have a drink or go out some place. 4. 4. . . . going out, changing the environ-ment and spending time together, being romantic, going to places that you went to when you were sing l e . And i t comes (romance), i t sneaks back i n because you begin to r e f l e c t back, you say, what was i t that brought us together and a sort of gentleness comes i n , a gentle kind of love. 4. Cause sometimes you both get so busy, each with your own i n t e r e s t s , his wood-working and ay c h i l d caring that you don't give each other enough, I don't know i f i t ' s care or concern. . . . Making the e f f o r t to show love. 4. The affectionate side of our marriage i s d e f i n i t e l y there because we're both very affectionate people. 4. Intimacy. CRj CR2 CR3 CR4 CR 5 Theme 5. We were very compatible i n things, i n a l l our i n t e r e s t s , i n the way we'd been brought up, our values . . . our goals and ambitions. 5. She's changed the greatest because of my values and I'm sure mine changed as well. There's a number of events i n our l i v e s that helped to change that [C's religions material values]. One of them i s that the kind of friends that I had ln university were people who began to t r a v e l . As I say we'd changed so much. 5. The f i r s t time we ever talked about something . . . i t was about values. I knew that I wanted to meet her again and I knew that i f I ever met her again I was going to be very serious. 5. But the fact that he's w i l l i n g to work i s very important to me right now. Probably always w i l l . Not to be ambitious, not to be money grubbing, jus t w i l l i n g to work. 5. It was always, i f you want to do i t , the decision i s yours and I w i l l back i t . I think that's been a rule of our marriage. If you make a decision and you're happy with i t then I w i l l back i t . . . . From the beginning, there was always this . . . careers, the decision i s our own with the back-up of the other person. 5. Values Cons ens us. 6. I guess those things stand out when I think about s a t i s f a c t i o n , i t ' s the friendship f i r s t and then also It i s r e a l l y fun to have goals. 6. I've thought of doing other f i e l d t r i p courses but I think i t ' 8 too tough often with two kids. Because I won't do a f i e l d course without taking everybody. And we are actually working on one next to go to Japan. . . . But also the key element of course i s that C. wants to do this t r i p too. 6. Going to school has enriched my l i f e and P's l i f e and has improved our marriage. 6. [We] both love her so much and are so interested i n her wellbeing that I think i t makes you try harder often times to get along. 6. I f there was a major decision to be made I alwaya consulted with him and i t kind of became a partner-ship rather than he j u s t doing everything and me not knowing what's going on. 6. Shared Goals. CRj CR2 CR 3 CR4 CR 5 Theme 7. . . . l i k e I was at home now, I loved i t . I just loved i t . W. was working and that was a - l i k e we thought we'd arrived, you known, this was what we'd been working f o r , building a family and . . . so I can't remember anything p a r t i c u l a r l y that was negative. It was just l i k e we were playing, house. 7. She was lying i n bed for four months and I'd teach and I'd come home and I'd do every-thing; and that was r e a l l y tough. But i t was something that we r e a l l y shared through. Out of that hardship i n many ways often comes a closer relationship. 7. 7. Having someone [husband] with me at that time who was involved l n the whole thing and was concern-ed about my physical and emotional w e l l -being. It was a very close sort of f e e l i n g to share that. A time l i k e that makes you f e e l quite close, l i k e you r e a l l y need somebody. . . . The I088 of the baby was an experience that brought us together. 7. I was there just to keep him going. We used to s i t and talk f o r hours and hours. He would t e l l me how much he hated the place and we'd just work i t through, and work i t through and work i t through and then he's go i n and put l n another day and then that evening we'd do i t again. . . . 7. Couple S o l i d a r i t y . 8. He's always been a good provider, always has. I've great respect for his a b i l i t y to. . . . he '8 r e a l l y very clever at that, very. 8. I think i t ' 8 just respect for each other. That's a basic. We've been through so many, had so many experiences that i t ' s j u s t , It comes down to respect. I think that's the main l i n e . 8. I think you have to admire your husband or wife, I think that helps to remind one-s e l f that one married someone s p e c i a l . Not f o o l i s h admiration but true admiration for what the person stands f o r . . . . 8. The fact that he's working and w i l l i n g to work i s something I respect i n him. If he didn't, i f he decided, I'm not going to work, I'm going on welfare. . . . that would r e a l l y make me angry and i t might even sever the r e l a t i o n s h i p . 8. His good nature and j u s t his respect for me as a person, that i s something that I r e a l l y l i k e about him. He never, ever puts his finger down sort of thing, there's r e a l l y no c o n t r o l . He never t r i e s to control me and I've r e a l l y respected that. I was aware of that r i g h t away and i t ' s s t i l l very much so, i n fact more so. 8. Respect. CR2 CR3 CR4 CR 5 Theme 9 . He's a very positive thinking person and I think that also i s a tremendous boost as far as the s a t i s f a c t i o n that I f e e l out of l i v i n g with somebody l i k e that. 9 . And then we went on and just had more and more good experiences, i n terms of l i k e , we went to A u s t r a l i a , we worked i n New Zealand. 9 . I rejoice i n the North American outlook. P. brought into my l i f e and the people i n general. It's much more upbeat, much happier. 9 . I put a sense of humour down. I f i n d that a very important thing i n a mate. 9 . I think that the thing that r e a l l y attracted me was his good naturedness rig h t at at the beginning when I f i r s t met him and he was so easy to talk to. . . . Being quite happy and easy to be around people, people j u s t kind of l i k e him. . . . 9 . Joie.de v i v r e . 10 . We're two dif f e r e n t people and each of us l i k e s that part about the other person. 10 . I says, " l i s t e n C , I ' l l t e l l you right now, when we f i n i s h and I get my degree I'm just going to work and we are going to s p l i t 1" She says, and this i s where she i s the p r a c t i c a l side, . . . "forget i t ! " We are going to s p l i t , but what money? And of course she i s ri g h t . 10 . . . . what I mean about different universes getting together i s the subtleties i n thinking and the subtleties of the experiences i n childhood. They can divide or they can enrich too. 10 . He reads a b i t more than I do, the Manchester Guardian, so he's getting more information that I haven't the time to right now, having a c h i l d . I f i n d him a good source of information. I can ask him questions about something. 1 0 . It's very evident one always plays the d e v i l ' s advocate i n anything major. In ju s t about anything that's of r e l a t i v e Importance one of us always takes that r o l e . 10 . Complementary Differences. CR2 CR3 CR4 CR 5 Theme 11. We each have similar interests but the other things that strikes me as being important i s that we also have Interests that we don't share with each other. For one I love the theatre and . . . W doesn't l i k e i t . So I get tickets and go with somebody else. And there Is no jealousies about that or there i s not feelings of g u i l t . 1 1 . I've taken on more and more things. Even this whole p o l i t i c a l thing that I've done up here, I couldn't have done that with-out, I mean I didn't do that without talking to C. 11 . 1 1 . Another thing that gives some s a t i s f a c tion . . . i s having over-lapping i n t e r e s t s . Liking a lo t of the same people. . . . Liking s i m i l a r forms of l i t e r a t u r e and fi l m s . I think i t ' s important to have d i f f e r e n t interests too, to not do everything together. That would be more than I would want. And to allow each other to go separate way, to not have to always be with each other. To trust each other, I suppose, enough that you can go somewhere for a few days and that's ok. 11 . That came out this summer when he got s i c k . I mean I thought I was a very independent person and I could r e a l l y handle my l i f e by myself but when he got sick I r e a l i z e d that I didn't, not that I couldn't, but I didn't want to. And that r e a l l y struck home aa to just how , dependent we are on each other as well as having this freedom and this independence to do as we want to do. 11 . Autonomy/Dependence CR2 CR3 CR4 CR 5 Theme 12. You know we diverged, that's what i t was. That '8 when I started to come back to school because I, thought, i t ' s not going to l a s t . Through a l l that we got along fine and there wasn't fights or arguments of that kind of disagreements between us. It was just there's a massive gut f e e l i n g that our l i f e was changing and I wasn't, i t had never occurred to me before not to just go along with whatever happened. 12. And I think individuals, or kids even, have to a certain amount of tolerance, otherwise y o u ' l l always end up, l i k e there i s a c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n and I think that ' 8 some-thing we have always t r i e d to avoid. . . . Because there i s always ways of doing things. Always ways of doing things. 12. I was th i r t y when I got married and I think that made a real difference. . . . I don't think I went into marriage b l i n d l y . I knew what I was getting into. 12. My mother once said to me, " i f you're bored with l i f e i t ' s your own f a u l t , " and on occasion I have f e l t r e s t l e s s and wanting something more stimulating. [Think-ing that the] e x c i t e -ment and the newness of a new relationship [could] give me what I'm missing i n l i f e and I r e a l i z e that she's r i g h t , that I should try and do something for myself and not expect another person to do things for me. It has to come from me i f I'm going to be a con-tented person. 12. The other thing I think with him being away so much i s you appreciate each other when you're around each other. We seldom f i g h t because time i s j u s t too short and there's no point i n having a big blow-up and not tal k i n g to each other for a week or so because when he's only home for nine days you make the best of i t . It's not an a r t i f i c i a l s i t u a t i o n though. You make the best of the s i t u a t i o n . 12. R e a l i s t i c Outlook on Marriage and L i f e . CRj CR2 CR3 CR 4 CR5 Theme 13. I decided to frame i t for myself. That was my job, to me that was, and I was good at i t . You know, I'm proud of my house and proud of my family and that was the contributions I was making; was a homemaker. 13. 13. I was th i r t y when I got married and I think that made a real difference. . . . I don't think I went into marriage b l i n d l y . I knew what I was getting into. 13. Ever since then i f I get restless I usually j u s t wait It out 'cause I usually pass through these l i t t l e phases and come out the other side. It Is something I know about myself; perhaps i t happens to everybody, I don't know. But I guess with experience i t s one of those things I've learn't about myself. . . . 13. We [are] r e a l l y very conscious of each other's feelings and things and yet, as I say, when we're separated we l i v e very f u l l l i v e s away from each other too. 13. Strong Personal Identity. 14. He was very supportive. Very supportive. (About CR returning to school). And that's t y p i c a l for both of us. 14. You look to one another, exactly. And i t ' s the same, l i k e even the way I am right now. I've taken on more and more things. Even this whole p o l i t i a l thing that I've done up here. I couldn't have done that without C. 14. I asked her and she said she'd never leave me. Well, you know people can change th e i r minds. But I'm quite confident that I can say that I can't see us ever leaving each other. 14. Having someone [husband] with me at that time who was i n -volved l n the whole thing and was concern-ed about my physical, emotional wellbeing. It was a very close sort of f e e l i n g to share that. A time l i k e that makes you f e l l quite close, l i k e you r e a l l y need some-body . . . the loss of the baby was an experience that brought us together. 14. You know a l o t of people have pentioned to me when they see me by myself, when he's away, a lo t of people say, "Oh, I could never do i t , " or "you seem so happy when you're on your own," or whatever the comments are. I guess because I f e e l secure with what I have I don't have to worry about being by myself. 14. Emotional Security/ Support. CRj CR2 CR3 CR4 CR 5 Theme 15. I decided to frame i t for myself. That was my job and I was good at i t . I'm proud of my house and I'm proud of my family and that was the contribution I was making, was a homemaker. 15. What has happened i s that the relationship between C. and myself has grown now into a relationship between the four of us. 15. I don't think we are very role conscious. I help with the house, I do the cooking, or the dishes or the vacuuming. Usually I do the more heavy work. . . . We have preferences. If I cook, she does the dishes . . . 15. I can be B's mother and do the gardening and whatever. And he l i k e s his work. It's l i k e we a l l have f a i r l y set roles right now which I think i s good for a person i f you l i k e what your role i s . I think i t i s important to have that kind of, you s t a b i l i t y , that's a good word. 15. I think 75% of the couples are divorced [at husband'8 work place] and I f e e l that we've r e a l l y turned i t around. That has become a r e a l positive thing i n our marriage and we've r e a l l y made i t work. 15. E x i s t e n t i a l Couple Identity. - 109 -APPENDIX A SUBJECT CONSENT FORM T i t l e of P r o j e c t : A Phenomenological I n v e s t i g a t i o n I n t o the Experience of M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n P r i n c i p a l I n v e s t i g a t o r : P e t e r Cawsey I am doing a master's study to understand the experience and meaning of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . I w i l l be as k i n g you to de s c r i b e i n d e t a i l your experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . There w i l l be two to three i n t e r v i e w s each l a s t i n g one to two hours f o r a maximum time of s i x hours. Each i n t e r v i e w w i l l be tape-recorded and t r a n s c r i b e d . The i n f o r m a t i o n you gi v e to me w i l l be s t r i c t l y  c o n f i d e n t i a l . C o n f i d e n t i a l l y w i l l be maintained by d e l e t i n g any per s o n a l r e f e r e n c e , not u s i n g the s i r name of anyone you may mention and onl y u s i n g the f i r s t i n i t i a l of your f i r s t name i n the t r a n s c r i p t . Once the r e s e a r c h i s concluded, the taped i n t e r v i e w s w i l l be erased. I f you have any questions about the research and how I p l a n to use the i n f o r m a t i o n I w i l l be more than pleased to e x p l a i n i t to you as f u l l y as p o s s i b l e . When the p r o j e c t i s completed I w i l l share the r e s u l t s w i t h you i f you are i n t e r e s t e d . Your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s v o l u n t a r y . You have the r i g h t to refuse to answer any qu e s t i o n or to withdraw from the study at any time. I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE ABOVE AND CONSENT TO BE A SUBJECT IN THIS RESEARCH. Name of Subject: S i g n a t u r e of Subject: Date: Researcher: P e t e r Cawsey - 110 -THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA FACULTY OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF COUNSELLING PSYCHOLOGY 5780 TORONTO ROAD VANCOUVER, B.C. V6T 1L2 Dear I am a master's student i n the Department of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. As part of my degree requirements I must complete a master's t h e s i s . I am w r i t i n g to request your a s s i s t a n c e i n my r e s e a r c h . I am s t u d y i n g m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n by a s k i n g people to t e l l me the s t o r y of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r marriage. That i s , what i t means to them, how they have achieved i t and how they m a i n t a i n i t . I w i l l be a s k i n g you to share some of your thoughts, f e e l i n g s and a c t i o n s connected to t h i s experience. By p a r t i c i p a t i n g I n t h i s r e s e a r c h you w i l l have the o p p o r t u n i t y to l e a r n more about m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n and provide i n f o r m a t i o n which w i l l be h e l p f u l to c o u n s e l l o r s and others working w i t h people and t h e i r m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The i n t e r v i e w s (2-3) w i l l be approximately 1-2 hours each f o r a maximum time of 6 hours. They w i l l be tape-recorded and t r a n s c r i b e d . You, of course, have the r i g h t to r e f u s e to answer any questions or to withdraw from the study at any time. I w i l l be c o n t a c t i n g you by phone to see whether you are i n t e r e s t e d i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h i s r e s e a r c h . I f you are, I w i l l arrange to meet w i t h you to answer any questions and to d e s c r i b e the study i n more d e t a i l . Yours s i n c e r e l y , P e t e r Cawsey - I l l -APPENDIX B INTERVIEW #1 I : Please r e f l e c t on your marriage and then t e l l me the s t o r y of your experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . You may want to g i v e me an o u t l i n e of the s a t i s f a c t i o n i n your marriage from the beginning u n t i l now or you might l i k e to d e s c r i b e v i g n e t t e s of experience t h a t t y p i f y the s a t i s f a c t i o n you f e e l . CR: I t ' s an immense ta s k . I've been married f o r ah, I was married i n 1961 so we're t a l k i n g about 23 yea r s . I : Well that might take us a few too many hours ( l a u g h t e r ) . CR: So I guess, um, I mean b a s i c a l l y I've got to s t a r t r i g h t at the very beginning. I knew my husband very w e l l before we were ma r r i e d . We'd know each other f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s , three or f o u r years and had been seeing each other f r e q u e n t l y d u r i n g that time. Had gone around together or what ever term you use now. I l i k e d him a l o t . You know we had a l o t of s t u f f that was ah, we were very compatible i n t h i n g s , i n a l l our i n t e r e s t s , i n the way we'd been brought up, our v a l u e s , you know we both k i n d of valued the same th i n g s and, again what we l i k e d to do sp o r t s w i s e , our goals and a m b i t i o n s . I mean we never t a l k e d about these at great lengths but there was, when we d i d we knew that we were both goal d i r e c t e d people and we both l i k e d a l o t of fun time and we l i k e d the s i m i l a r t h i n g s i n that sense. So r i g h t from the s t a r t I guess W. was more of a f r i e n d . I : Did you con s i d e r t h a t , d i d you t r y to separate . . . CR: No, I separate that now, but he was a good f r i e n d before he was a l o v e r . So that to me was a n i c e f o u n d a t i o n . I don't know how that works f o r other people. Had we married or not married we would have s t i l l been always f r i e n d s 'cause there was that c o m p a t i b i l i t y and l i k e f o r each other and respect f o r each o t h e r . So t h a t ' s k i n d of the f i r s t b u i l d i n g b r i c k t h a t I can t h i n k o f . The other t h i n g i s that we were always, l i k e two d i f f e r e n t people and each of us, l i k e d that part about the other person that we d i d n ' t have to ho l d hands a l l the time or do e x a c t l y the same th i n g s a l l the time. I have s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s that he doesn't have and he has some that I don't and that was always ok. I : Right from the beginning that was the case? CR: I t was a b s o l u t e l y ok at the beginning. There were times when i t wasn't ok and that was, you know, probably when I was at home w i t h k i d s and I f e l t some s t u f f about t h a t . That I was stuck and he wasn't. So at that time i t wasn't as ok but i t d i d n ' t get i n the way v e r y much. And you know i t ' s l i k e a l i t t l e mini r o l l e r c o a s t e r but that i s one of the things t h a t I l i k e d o r i g i n a l l y and I a b s o l u t e l y l o v e i t now. But during the course of our twenty-three years t h a t ' s v a r i e d . 112 -I: When did you have your f i r s t child and how many years had you been married? CR: We'd been married four and half years and that also was planned, that we wouldn't have children right away. We, I mentioned been goal directed, you know, we talked about getting married and we planned getting married. We both lived at home, in our own homes but we also spent a lot of time together. We had a ski cabin together and we had our holidays together and things like that. With and without family. In other word we didn't li v e together i n the words of today, l i v i n g together, but we knew a lot about how the other partner was during the whole course of the day. You had asked me something specific and I was going after i t and I've forget what i t was. I: I'd asked you about kids, how old you were when you had children? CR: Oh ya, so anyway, before we were married we decided that we didn't want to liv e in an apartment that we'd like to have a house and so we both made a bank loan and we bought a house and rented i t for six months in the time that we were getting married, you know, getting ready to be married. And then we moved into that and we plan . . . gee i t sounds s t e r i l e , completely organized . . . we planned that we'd both work and pay off that loan and we were really s e l f i s h in those days, or no, i t ' s not se l f i s h i t was really fun loving. We were away every weekend either skiing or sa i l i n g and didn't want kids or anything and then eventually we did. We talked about that before we were married too and my husband wanted four children and had said that before we were married. I don't know why four. We talked about that a b i t . He said, well he was from a family of three and I was from a family of two and we didn't want one and I thought three would be great and he thought three was not so good, i t should be two or four and we'd go through these kind of things. You know we said as twenty year olds, well, we'11 have four kids and sure enough we ended up with four kids. I: Is that how old you were when you got married, you were twenty-one? CR: I was twenty-one. I: And he was? CR: He was, he's four years older than I am, twenty-five. (8 seconds silence) So that, I mean, I guess those things stand out when I think about satisfaction. It's friendship f i r s t and then also i t was really fun to have goals, I mean I can't, besides going into minute det a i l , that was a lot of togetherness for us. Something we set up was every anniversary we would review our last year. Where we started, you know, with bank loan and mortgage debt or whatever and what we had accomplished and part of that, growing in s t a b i l i t y was - we kept patting ourselves on the back, those were good times. - 113 -I: Sure. CR: Those were really good times and I, we made use of them. I: When you reviewed your marriage at each anniversary you looked at the concrete kind of financial things? CR: That was a review of our position. I: Did you look at the relationship too or was that really part o f — i t was just going fine and so i t f e l t good. CR: We didn't look at the relationship. Ya, I guess the second, i t was just going ok and the other thing, i f something isn't going ok we talk about i t . We don't always get i t solved but i t ' s not harboured, ah, as a general pattern i t ' s not harboured, so that feels good. I: And i t ' s been that way from the beginning you fee l . CR: It's been, i t ' s always been that way even before we were married. Now that's not, I mean that paints a pretty ideal picture and that's not true because we've had our rocky up and downs and a l l the rest of i t , but i t ' s not because there's been some known that hasn't been discussed. You know in one whole phase of my l i f e , which is just about ten years ago I guess, we were getting into something business wise that spilled over into time wise and to a direction that I didn't lik e to go and I was really distressed and upset about that and we used to talk about i t but we never resolved any . . . you know, we were s t i l l getting carried down that road. That confused me, I couldn't put my finger on what i t was that was going on. I: So there was change taking place that you didn't feel really comfortable with but W. was more into i t . CR: Well he was into i t , emotionally he was into i t . It was the music business. We got into the music business and we got into i t in a big way. It demanded time and money and a whole lot of energy and i t was not stable. It was kind of not what I was used to. I: Oh, you mean financially It was a l i t t l e bit of a, i t was a risk. CR: Ya, and the people that were working for us weren't stable. You know, they were not, I didn't think they were competent. They were into that whole g l i t t e r and plastic drug scene which is the music scene and that was so foreign to me that I had, I mean i t was coming up in my stomach, i t wasn't coming up in my head. I couldn't analyze what the problem was 'cause we were getting very rich at that time too. I mean that was a big c r i s i s in our lives and i t was what, i t was kind of one of those silent c r i s i s . I could feel us going farther apart. Then we'd talk about i t but also our feelings about i t were different. W. saw i t as a real opportunity and I saw i t as something that was getting in the way. - 114 -I: So i t became a bit of a values clash in a way, I mean just a minor sort of thing, is that right or is that taking i t too far? CR: Ya, it's taking i t too far because we never got dragged into the drug scene or anything like that. I mean he was on the business end dealing with the banks and on the business level where he's very capable there. It meant living in L.A. for two weeks out of every four. I: Both of you? CR: No. No. That could have been but I wasn't willing to do that. We had four children and they were a l l kind of ten, eight to twelve some where in there. I mean there's just so much that goes with that li f e style change, that kind of things that we didn't ever implement in our house. You know we never kind of changed but i t was very uncomfortable. I: So you say you guys talked about i t but how did you sort of resolve it? That was something that you had to work at, I wonder if i t just fizzled. . . . CR: It didn't, we didn't resolve that Peter, we probably would have drifted apart over that had i t gone on. The music business went bankrupt. I look at that as a blessing because i t actually saved our marriage. We're s t i l l digging our way out of that financially but i t wasn't something that's easy to turn off. I mean there's investment, there were partners involved, i t was, you know we were off on a different l i f e . And had it kept going W. would have been out of his normal business, the paint business, and we would have gone totally into the music business. We would have moved to L.A. and we would have been going to music conventions and tried to jive with people that are spaced out looking in the corner for spiders. I: So i t would have been a totally different li f e style. CR: So that was, you know it was something that we talk about. We talked about i t then and we talk about i t now but during the time that i t was happening we weren't working on a resolution. I: It was going ahead and i t was sort of, i t was pretty hard to cut it off, I guess i t was something that was happening. CR: Ya, that's right and as a matter of fact there wasn't the willingness to cut it off. You know we diverged, that's what i t was. That's when I started to come back to school because I thought, it's not going to last. Through a l l that we got along fine and there wasn't fights or arguments or that kind of disagreement between us. There was a massive gut feeling that our li f e was changing and I wasn't, i t had - 115 -never occurred to me before not to j u s t go along w i t h whatever happened. I : So i t was a r e a l change, a d e f i n i t e changing po i n t i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p i n how you d e a l t w i t h t h i n g s . U s u a l l y t h i n g s were mutual and you both f e l t . . . CR: Ya, and i t was the u l t i m a t e of going your own way, i n a way, you know, because i t was going to be, w e l l i t was a l i f e s t y l e change f o r us. Having somebody l i v e two weeks at home and two weeks i n L.A. You know, change from business s u i t s to jeans and l e a t h e r . Those are the t h i n g s t h a t I saw happening. The things that were most important to me a c t u a l l y d i d n ' t change; the p a r e n t i n g , the time w i t h the k i d s and our time together w i t h our f r i e n d s and those k i n d s of t h i n g s were s t i l l i n t a c t . I t was probably . . . (few seconds s i l e n c e ) I : You s a i d that you came back to s c h o o l , you thought, you f e l t t h i n g s might come ap a r t . Did you mean the business or the r e l a t i o n s h i p ? CR: The r e l a . . . w e l l (pause) the r e l a t i o n s h i p I c o u l d see changing. You know I never, ah, I never c a r r i e d i t to the f a c t that we might not l i v e together or d i v o r c e . I never thought about that because we a c t u a l l y don't f i g h t , so those things aren't as, but there was d e f i n i t e l y a d r i f i t i n g a p a r t . Time-wise, I mean that was an a l l consuming t h i n g . He was running, W. was running two businesses at the time, two b i g businesses. One i n t e r n a t i o n a l , there j u s t i s n ' t j u s t much time l e f t over. I : You j u s t mentioned that you don't f i g h t . I guess that means a l o t of d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s to d i f f e r e n t people. How do you deal w i t h disagreements and that s o r t of t h i n g ? CR: We t a l k about them. I mean, I r e a l l y , I've always h e s i t a t e d , p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n c e I've been i n t h i s program, to say t h a t . I don't t h i n k I've ever s a i d that to anybody, but we don't f i g h t . People say, oh that must be p r e t t y f l a t k i n d of a t h i n g . I can remember the times that we've, you know maybe three times i n twenty-three years have we r e a l l y fought. I t h i n k both of us are able to say, you know, I'm p i s s e d - o f f about something and we b e t t e r , you know, l e t ' s get together and t a l k about i t . I : And i n doing that you can come to a r e s o l u t i o n t h a t ' s s a t i s f a c t o r y to both? I t may i n v o l v e a l i t t l e b i t of compromise and that s o r t of t h i n g . CR: I don't know about the r e s o l u t i o n t h a t ' s s a t i s f a c t o r y to both, but boy, I know I'm heard and I l i s t e n to him. U s u a l l y i f you do that you can k i n d of see what the other person i s t h i n k i n g about. I t might not, you know, I might s t i l l want to do A and he might s t i l l want to do B or whatever i t i s that we're, but anything t h a t i n v o l v e s us both we'd c e r t a i n l y get together on. You know i t comes up w i t h c h i l d r e a r i n g , i t comes up w i t h a l l kinds of t h i n g s . - 116 -I: Can you t e l l me a l i t t l e about having four kids and I guess relatively close together, as you say sort of eight to twelve their span of ages were. CR: Well actually Chris was not five when our fourth was born, so they're a l l very close. I: So during that time certainly roles weren't the same as they are now, there weren't the expectations on men and women, I guess. But how did you deal with that part of i t then. Did you find, you said that in that point of your l i f e you felt the feelings a women feels when she's at home alone and the mate is off doing a thing on their own. How did you feel about that stuff? CR: I wasn't a modern day woman to start with. I wanted to have children. I looked forward to the time when we would have children. I was not at that point a career person. I had a good job in an accounting department but it was not, you know i f I ever thought that we couldn't have children I would have gone and trained for a different kind of job. So i t was kind of one of those good paying jobs that is boring. So I looked forward to having children. The things that bothered me being stuck weren't career oriented things. Like I didn't feel like I was missing out on a whole bunch of stuff. It was more just I've got to get out of here for a while. I've got to go talk to some real people, that kind of stuff. I would look after that myself. I had, you know, gi r l friends and we would share babysitting and I had a woman that would come in once a week and I would have that day off to go and play tennis, or read in the park or visit or have lunch with somebody or anything. It wasn't at a l l career oriented, i t was more time for me. And the other thing was that we had, like we weren't broke in those days. We didn't get married and have kids right away. I was able to have somebody come in and have some flexibility so the stuck part is got more to do with just time out for adult company than anything, you know, my career's falling behind kind of gripe. And that's when I started to teach sewing. I was a sewing teacher and my friend was also a sewing teacher. She had children, I had children, and we'd look after each other's kids while the other one had their day of work. You know, when they grow a bit older and a couple of them in school, that was the kind of thing that I did. I: How did W., how did that work with your relationship with him? Was it pretty much something you did and he was busy supporting the family working and so you worked that out and i t was fine with him, no conflicts, i t just worked out. CR: That's right. It was a very traditional, we s t i l l have a very traditional type of marriage in that way. In things that I do around the house and what he does around the house. Traditional or whatever, I don't know. Non-traditional now-a-days. None of the household chores are his, absolutely none, not even the lawn, the - 117 -d i s h e s , the cooking, anything l i k e t h a t . Now, t h a t ' s d i f f e r e n t , I don't count on him f o r any of t h a t . But th a t ' s d i f f e r e n t than ah, somebody that won't do i t . So I'm the operator of the house and I can say, you know, the lawn needs to be cut and somebody w i l l go out and cut the lawn. Somebody w i l l f i g u r e out, i t could be W., i t could be one of the k i d s . The k i d s do the dishes and s t u f f so there's nothing l i k e t h a t . I f we're a l l going to have a Sunday morning b r e a k f a s t together and the t a b l e needs to be s e t , the c o f f e e needs to be put on, the laundry needs to be put i n , then anybody does t h a t . I f somebody's doing one t h i n g then I can d i r e c t t h a t or i t j u s t happens i t doesn't matter which i t i s . There aren't e x a c t l y g i r l jobs and boy jobs but there c e r t a i n l y i s , l i k e I'm the domo, nothing would happen, I don't t h i n k . I : So i f there i s a bloc k , something's not happening, you're the one that w i l l suggest t h a t , take the r o l e of o r g a n i z i n g , as th a t ' s your r o l e . CR: That's r i g h t . I lo o k at i t as being d i r e c t o r , ( l a u g h t e r ) Sometimes i t needs a l o t of d i r e c t i o n , sometimes i t doesn't need any. But f o r sure the onus i s not on W. to do any of the housework and t h a t ' s , you know, I don't dis a g r e e w i t h t h a t . Times are changing now. When I s t a r t e d back at s c h o o l , p a r t i c u l a r l y f i r s t time i n the Master's program, I had a fam., w e l l I guess you'd c a l l i t a f a m i l y meeting, and I , you know, one n i g h t when we were a l l together I s a i d , "hey, I want to t a l k to everybody about what I'm doing and what my time i s and I'm going to need some help here and I'm wondering how i t i s that you guys can help me." So we t a l k e d about i t q u i t e a b i t and the k i d s came up w i t h the i d e a that they could do a l l t h e i r own laundry by now because they were doing i t p a r t l y anyway. So I s a i d that would be great and I'd get everybody t h e i r own laundry basket and teach them how to run the washer and d r y e r , and to me that took hours out. Not only g e t t i n g i t down there but doing i t and s o r t i n g i t and g e t t i n g i t back up, a l l t h a t vanished j u s t from one l i t t l e meeting and buying four baskets that they could c a r r y t h e i r s t u f f up and down i n . I : Then that was, W. a l s o d i d t h a t . CR: No, No, I s t i l l look a f t e r W.'s, a l l W.'s s t u f f . Not any of h i s , buying h i s s t u f f or anything l i k e t h a t , but a l l h i s laundry and things l i k e t h a t . I : So i n your r o l e s , they sound l i k e they're f a i r l y w e l l d e f i n e d and you both must accept them. I t works so i t ' s good f o r you guys. Was t h i s j u s t something that k i n d of happened, evolved over the r e l a t i o n s h i p o r , besides the time that you sat down w i t h the whole f a m i l y when you wanted to go back to s c h o o l , was there very conscious d e c i s i o n s about ok, these are your jobs and these are my j o b s . Or were they something that came about more n a t u r a l l y ? - 118 -CR: I t h i n k they came about more n a t u r a l l y . And i n t r u t h I'm from a t r a d i t i o n a l f a m i l y . When we both worked at the beginning, those f o u r years we both worked, there's j u s t the two of us, we d i d do s t u f f together then. I : You mean household s o r t of s t u f f . CR: Ya, I mean we cleaned on Saturday morning or d i d n ' t and you know we'd both get dinner ready and both c l e a n up. I can't remember, I mean I know I would have been p i s s e d - o f f i f i t had worked out that I had a husband that dug i n about something. So that was never th e r e , I don't ever remember that n o n - w i l l i n g n e s s to do something being t h e r e . You know the guy that goes and s i t s w i t h the paper and won't look up f o r f e a r he's going to have to do something. I would say i t was evolved j u s t out of ah, (10 seconds pondering) how we were brought and s t u f f l i k e t h a t . And I probably do a way more than a woman i s w i l l i n g to do today that i s brought up under some d i f f e r e n t circumstances. I don't t h i n k about the t h i n g s I do. I : They're the t h i n g s you want to do, your r o l e i s something t h a t you're s a t i s f i e d w i t h . CR: Ya, part of the time when I r e a l l y s t a r t e d to t h i n k about i t I decided to frame i t f o r myself, that that was my j o b . To me t h a t was, and I was good at i t . You know, I'm proud of my house and proud of my f a m i l y and I was, that was the c o n t r i b u t i o n I was making, was a home-maker. And I d i d n ' t work f o r ages, so I accept t h a t . I : I t sounds l i k e you, you're sense of who you were, your i d e n t i t y , you made a commitment to a p a r t i c u l a r r o l e and t h a t ' s because you maybe had a strong sense of who you were, a strong i d e n t i t y , i s t h a t not . . . CR: I don't know about that P e t e r , maybe, you know the words that go w i t h i t are funny. L i k e a strong sense of r o l e , I never thought of i t as a r o l e . I : Ya, i t was j u s t the way . . . CR: Ya, that was what I wanted to do, those things were important to me. Looking a f t e r W.'s comforts, i t ' s very important to me s t i l l . The end of the week, you know, F r i d a y n i g h t , I don't care how wiped out I am, F r i d a y n i g h t i s together n i g h t and t h a t ' s the n i g h t when he comes home that there's something n i c e planned f o r d i n n e r , the house i s n ' t i n a mess, t h a t ' s p a r t l y because I couldn't stand i t , not because he'd be so impressed. We s i t and have a d r i n k , or go out some place and i t doesn't matter i f I'm wiped, that s t i l l happens. Now t h a t ' s not 'cause I'm, I don't know why that i s , i t ' s j u s t 'cause t h a t ' s what I l i k e too. - 119 -I: So you're doing i t for yourself also. CR: Ya, and I guess that would be looked at as a role. I don't know what roles are, so much. It's kind of like I like i t and he likes i t and I know that its going to be good i f we both like i t . I: You've told me a l i t t l e bit about your pre-marriage time and how you started off, you felt, just a friendship sort of thing. I guess because the dating thing started fairly casually. You lived, did you live in the same neighbourhood, same school, the whole bit. CR: No, he lived in L. and I lived in K. I started going around with his brother and ah, not going around, you know, dating his brother. And then I met him and started dating him. It was a friendship kind of thing. We had some mutual friends. I: And you talked ahout how you discussed things and you both felt that you had similarities, similar interests, and that things were relatively well planned out. You seemed to know really what you wanted and went for i t . It was happening naturally anyway but i t occurred for you because you also, sounds like you worked at making it . . . CR: Ya. Just going back a bit. We each had similar interests but the other thing that strikes me as important is that we also had interests that we didn't share with each other. And that was ok. I guess I hear that in counselling now that that's not ok with some people. You know, i f somebody has a different interest i t gets in the way of the other person. And I don't remember that ever being a big part of our . . . I: Can you t e l l me what that i s . Two things that you might have interest in that you didn't share. CR: Well, for one I love the theatre and ah, you know, we do that together sometimes but not like, I like a l l kinds of drama things and W. doesn't like that. If he wants theatre he wants comedy or something like that. So I get tickets and go with somebody else. And that's ok with him and that's sure ok with me because, you know, I like to be with somebody that is keen about something and isn't not enjoying themself oyer something. So it's not something that I've had to give up because of that. W. likes racing and I'm not a competition. . . I: Horse racing? CR: Well, he likes boat racing, he likes ski racing, he likes any kind of racing. And he's a good competitor, he's very competitive, and I'm not competitive at a l l . So I don't partake in the type of racing that he does, I would partake in a regatta racing and have some fun, you know, if it's a kind of a fun thing. He's in a high level competition with our boat. So that's his thing and to me - 120 -i t ' 8 super f o r the f a m i l y 'cause the k i d s have a l l been i n t e r e s t e d i n that too and so t h a t ' s ok w i t h me. I t takes a l o t of time and a l o t of i n t e r e s t . I : And so you might share about i t or t a l k about i t on j u s t the v e r b a l l e v e l s o r t of say what i t was l i k e and how i t was f o r them. CR: Oh a b s o l u t e l y , I'm i n t e r e s t e d i n i t but I'm not i n t e r e s t e d i n doing i t . So those are two examples. I : Carry i t through the marriage p r e t t y w e l l . CR: That k i n d of t h i n g . For in s t a n c e I ' l l go away to the Oregon Shakespear F e s t i v a l w i t h a f r i e n d and t h a t ' s ok, i t ' s not something I have to worry or t h i n k about, w i l l t h a t be ok w i t h him. I : I t has been t r a d i t i o n a l l y and so i t ' s j u s t ok. CR: Ya r i g h t . And there i s no j e a l o u s i e s about that or there's not f e e l i n g of g u i l t , you know that he should come, from him or any t h i n g , t h a t ' s j u s t . . . t h a t ' s an easy t h i n g f o r us to work w i t h . I : And then you spent the p e r i o d of time, f o u r years or so, without any c h i l d r e n where you had fun and I guess got to know each other even f u r t h e r , i s there anything p a r t i c u l a r about that time that you can t h i n k that . . . you s a i d that they were r e a l l y good y e a r s , they were r e a l l y happy times because you were having a good time, p l a y i n g a l o t I guess. CR: We l l we l i v e d from Monday to F r i d a y and j u s t got r i d of that and then from F r i d a y n i g h t t o Sunday ni g h t we'd be w i t h a l l our f r i e n d s e i t h e r s k i i n g or s a i l i n g or camping or something. I : We t a l k about companions, you were companions a l s o , you spent time together on weekends. CR: Ya, then more than ever. I : And then when the c h i l d a r r i v e d , how was that f o r both of you and your r e l a t i o n s h i p . Can you remember anything s p e c i f i c along that • • • CR: I t was s c a r y . What do we do w i t h t h i s , ( l a u g h t e r ) I t ' s funny, a f r i e n d of ours j u s t had a baby the other day, a f t e r four years of marriage and I saw i t and i t was so t i n y and she was going through a l l the same t h i n g s , you know you get so e x c i t e d to have i t . You've got t h i s t h i n g and say what the h e l l , ( l a u g h t e r ) and i t j u s t brought back a l l kinds of neat f e e l i n g s . - 121 -Let me see, what was that l i k e . I t ' s sure d i f f e r e n t . I can remember that as a being much b i g g e r , bigger adjustment than g e t t i n g married, when the f i r s t c h i l d came. We had our next c h i l d eleven and a h a l f months a f t e r so i t was r e a l l y k i n d o f , you know, we'd s a i d w e l l l e t ' s have them bang, bang, bang, but we d i d n ' t r e a l i z e that i t was so easy, ( l a u g h t e r ) Bang. So we were r e a l l y v e r y c h i l d o r i e n t e d from the s t a r t . But we s t i l l d i d , you see I was j u s t t h i n k i n g , C h r i s was born i n ah, on the 31st of January and on the 15th of February we went s k i i n g f o r three weeks and he went w i t h us. So our p a t t e r n , l i k e we were s t i l l able to do those t h i n g s . So that hadn't . . ., i t c e r t a i n l y changed our weekend s t u f f . Are you l o o k i n g f o r l i k e , I'm not sure what you're l o o k i n g f o r . I mean i t sure changed us because f i r s t of a l l none of our f r i e n d s had c h i l d r e n . We s t a r t e d to be the ones that e n t e r t a i n e d by dinner p a r t i e s and a l s o our, l i k e I was at home now, I l o v e d i t , I j u s t loved i t . W. was working and that was a, l i k e we thought we'd a r r i v e d , you know, t h i s was what we'd been working f o r , b u i l d i n g a f a m i l y . So I can't remember anything p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t was negative . . . i t was j u s t l i k e we were p l a y i n g house. I : And i t worked, that was the t h i n g . CR: Ya. I : W. worked and you were at home working. CR: And i t was a n i c e time f o r him. The company was growing and the f a m i l y was growing. The k i d s were h e a l t h y , we'd never had any k i n d of problems that way. Nobody was, none of our k i d s were c o l i c y or we'd probably only would have had one. Somehow, I mean, t h a t doesn't j u s t happen, t h a t ' s got to be, you know, the k i d s d i d n ' t , I don't know, when I see people that t h e i r k i d s get them angry. P a r t l y we shared t h a t , that l o o k i n g a f t e r the k i d s . I t wasn't j u s t t h a t I had the k i d s and he went to work and came and k i s s e d them goodnight. L i k e he r e a l l y had fun w i t h them so there was a n i c e -and t h a t ' s p a r t l y what I missed when he got i n v o l v e d i n the music b u s i n e s s . I : H i s time to be . . . CR: W e l l i t was a l l time r e l a t e d . His time from me and h i s time from the f a m i l y , h i s time from the k i d s , i t was r e a l l y a remoter f e e l i n g . L i k e , I'm on my own. Which wasn't there at a l l i n the f i r s t p art of our marriage. I : So you j u s t , you f e l t as you say, j u s t on your own a l i t t l e b i t more, he wasn't there to share and help out and support as much as he had been b e f o r e . CR: Ya, I don't even mean p h y s i c a l l y , he wasn't even r e a l l y t h ere, he was m e n t a l l y t h i n k i n g a l l t h i s other s t u f f . People were always coming to house f o r meetings, l i k e he was j u s t too busy, from my p o i n t of view. I don't know from h i s what, how that was. I t might - 122 -have been very s t i m u l a t i n g f o r him, I have a f e e l i n g i t was 'cause he loves that a d r e n i l i n go-go s t u f f . (8 seconds s i l e n c e ) The s a t i s f a c t i o n , I mean, now when I t h i n k about i t , i t was part of what made i t very comfortable was being able to a f f o r d to have time o f f and t h i n g s l i k e t h a t . You know I see young f a m i l i e s s t r u g g l i n g and not being able to go out f o r a dinner or have a b a b y s i t t e r f o r a day or something l i k e t h a t . You know i t doesn't take me very long to remember what t h a t ' s l i k e w i t h f o u r p r e - s c h o o l e r s at home and on the go a l l the time. You get t i r e d i f that goes on and on without any r e l i e f , you know. So that was looked a f t e r and I t h i n k that was i n s t r u m e n t a l - j u s t to have tha t freedom. I : And I guess W. was l o o k i n g a f t e r that part of i t e s s e n t i a l l y , wasn't he. I mean be able to go out and f u l f i l l that and a l l o w you to have that time together. CR: A b s o l u t e l y , he's always been a good p r o v i d e r , always has. I've great respect f o r h i s a b i l i t y t o , you know, even a f t e r the bankruptcy he's j u s t worked and worked and worked and he's got back, w e l l i t ' s g e t t i n g t h e r e . You know the end of the tunnel's i n s i g h t and i t ' s from hard work and not g i v i n g up. I : He d i d n ' t g i v e up and you d i d n ' t g i v e up e i t h e r . Sounds l i k e you were there too. CR: No, but I wasn't the one that was having t o , you know, go to the banks and make the money and make the d e c i s i o n s and make th i n g s grow, I mean he's r e a l l y , he's very c l e v e r at t h a t . Very. I mean i f I was the p r o v i d e r we wouldn't be where we are so I keep reminding myself about t h a t . I'm sure g l a d he's the p r o v i d e r around here, c o u n s e l l i n g ' s never going to get us very f a r , i t j u s t happens to be what I l i k e doing. I : And do you s t i l l have a c h i l d at school? CR: Um-mmm. We've got t h r e e . We've got our f i r s t , our f i r s t son was k i l l e d you know, and our second boy j u s t graduated from M. t h i s year and we have a daughter i n grade eleven and a son i n grade n i n e . I : So i f he's s t i l l i n grade n i n e , so i t ' s r e a l l y , they're not gone, they're going to be there f o r a few more years. Your l i f e hasn't taken a, you're back working, you're going to school r i g h t now and so there's s t i l l , t h i n g s are the same as they've been f o r a number of years 'cause there's k i d s at home to look a f t e r and there's that s o r t of aspect of your l i f e to keep you going, to keep going I guess. CR: Ya, t h a t ' s r i g h t , although I see i t o v e r l a p p i n g now w i t h my own career development. I t ' s not k i n d of that t h a t ' s going to end and then the next stage s t a r t s . I t h i n k my next stage has s t a r t e d , you - 1 2 3 -know, and i t ' s k i n d of i n t e g r a t e d w i t h the f a c t that they're s t a r t i n g to leave s c h o o l , to leave home. I: You s a i d you got i n t o coming back to sc h o o l because of s o r t of l o o k i n g i n t o the f u t u r e and t h i n k i n g about the f a c t that t h i n g s may change and you might want to prepare y o u r s e l f , i s that r i g h t ? CR: Oh ya, f o r sur e . Things were changing f o r me and I had not developed any s k i l l s . I f I was going to be a - or wasn' t ever t h i n k i n g I'd ever want to go back to the B.C. Hydro i n the accounting dept. And that was always a v a i l a b l e . I used to go back p a r t time. But i f I was going to be on my own i n some way, whether married or not married then I wanted to have some t r a i n i n g . That's when I s t a r t e d back to u n i v e r s i t y . Sure i t ' s a long time ago because I d i d my undergraduate degree f i r s t . And I d i d n ' t s t a r t i n t o the master's . . . I : So you were t h i n k i n g then that perhaps that marriage r e l a t i o n s h i p might f a l t e r and you'd be on your own. Was that part of your m o t i v a t i o n f o r g e t t i n g out or was i t . . . ? CR: I don't know, i t ' s k i n d of i n t e r e s t i n g i s n ' t i t . I've thought about t h a t . I know that the p o s i t o n I was i n at the time that was uncomfortable f o r me had to do w i t h our marriage and the d i r e c t i o n i t was going i n . I t was co n f u s i n g to me as I s a i d 'cause our marriage was not v o l a t i l e . I t was s t a b l e , and we were s t i l l r e l i a b l e and very fond of each o t h e r . But we were, our d i r e c t i o n was d i f f e r e n t . We were s t a r t i n g to go o f f i n a d i f f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n . But not i n the sense of t u r n i n g one's back on a part of i t . I t was l i k e i f you suddenly decided to go and ah, you know, you're a c o u n s e l l o r and you suddenly decided to go and be a s c u l p t o r , i t was i n Greece. You know, i t ' s a d i f f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n and so there's some d e c i s i o n s to be made. I t was more l i k e t h a t . So I s t a r t e d to look at myself 'cause I'd always f e l t very secure up u n t i l that time. I don't know i f i t would have happened anyway or not, t h a t ' s always something I toy w i t h . You know, what made you s t a r t to r e a l l y look and s e a r c h . I'd always wanted to go on i n u n i v e r s i t y but I hadn't. I'd come f o r one year a f t e r h i g h s c h o o l and gone o f f on a t r i p and gone to work and so on. So I decided t h a t I'd s t a r t back to u n i v e r s i t y and T. had j u s t gone i n t o grade one and that was our l a s t c h i l d so I had the time. I was t h i n k i n g , w e l l what w i l l I do? 'Cause now I've t h i s time I ' l l e i t h e r get a pa r t time j o b or something and I chose u n i v e r s i t y 'cause I wanted to b u i l d something. But i n the back, I mean that seemed to be the c a t a l y s t that made me say, "now i s the time to s t a r t doing i t . " I : What was W.'s r e a c t i o n to . . . what do you t h i n k he was f e e l i n g about i t ? CR: Oh, I know what he was f e e l i n g about i t . He was very s u p p o r t i v e . Very s u p p o r t i v e . And t h a t ' s t y p i c a l f o r both of us. Except f o r the music b u s i n e s s . That's why i t ' s such an i s s u e because i t - 124 -s t a r t e d out i n n o c e n t l y enough i n being s u p p o r t i v e but then i t got more i n v o l v e d and more i n v o l v e d and we s t a r t e d to t h i n k d i f f e r e n t l y about i t . And there was no r e s o l u t i o n . That's not a t y p i c a l p a t t e r n i n our marriage, we u s u a l l y can t a l k about something. I f I want to do something, he's always s u p p o r t i v e . He's a very p o s i t i v e t h i n k i n g person. And I t h i n k that a l s o i s a tremendous boost as f a r as the s a t i s f a c t i o n that I f e e l out of l i v i n g w i t h somebody l i k e t h a t . I'm never, you know a f r a i d to b r i n g up an i d e a or suggest . . . you know i f I went home today and s a i d , " l o o k I'd love to go and l i v e i n France f o r a year." Well he wouldn't j u s t say w e l l , " f o r g e t t h a t . " L i k e we'd t a l k about i t and come to some k i n d of a . . . we could or we c o u l d n ' t . So that i s a q u a l i t y t h a t I r e a l l y l i k e . I : Is there anything e l s e you want to add? CR: No, I t h i n k t h a t ' s i t . - 125 -INTERVIEW #2 I : Please r e f l e c t on your marriage and then t e l l me the s t o r y of your experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . You may want to give me an o u t l i n e of the s a t i s f a c t i o n i n your marriage from the beginning u n t i l now or you might l i k e to d e s c r i b e v i g n e t t e s of experience that t y p i f y the s a t i s f a c t i o n you f e e l . CR: Ok. When you're sayin g t h a t , the c h r o n o l o g i c a l w i t h the v i g n e t t e s i n i t might w e l l be the, I f e e l comfortable w i t h that one. In other words that seems to a have a f l o w to i t to me. And so maybe to g i v e you a l i t t l e b i t of background. I've known C. s i n c e she was f i f t e e n . We both came from K. She went to a d i f f e r e n t s c h o o l and came r e a l l y from N. K. which Is separated by water and a b r i d g e . So she went to a d i f f e r e n t school and a l l that than I d i d . She was f i f t e e n and I was seventeen at the time. And so you might say s o r t of l i k e the hometown sweetheart number. At any r a t e I went o f f to u n i v e r s i t y at nineteen and we'd been going out a l l that time. I : You mean during h i g h s c h o o l even though you weren't i n the same s c h o o l . CR: You know, we'd meet on weekends and thi n g s l i k e t h i s . But j u s t s o r t of l i k e b o y f r i e n d - g i r l f r i e n d r e l a t i o n s h i p . Although I t h i n k r e l a t i v e l y e a r l y In that r e l a t i o n s h i p we'd even t a l k e d about the p o t e n t i a l of i t becoming one which would lead to marriage and a l l those kinds of t h i n g s . At any r a t e , what happened i s that we d i d get married at a r e l a t i v e l y young age. Me, I was twenty-one at the time, C. was n i n e t e e n . At the same time of course I'm going to u n i v e r s i t y . By t h i s time she was working. She'd f i n i s h e d her grade 12 and she's working. She's a bookkeeper so i t was easy enough to get a j o b and a l l those kinds of t h i n g s . So i n f a c t she had the money. And I needed the support, r i g h t . I t was looked upon, c e r t a i n l y I t h i n k by my p a r e n t s , as l i k e , why wouldn't you wait at l e a s t u n t i l you f i n i s h e d u n i v e r s i t y so that you know, you see a b i t of an end to something and you s t a r t married l i f e a f t e r t h a t . Not that there was a tremendous o p p o s i t i o n but there was c e r t a i n l y some, some concern. I t h i n k that i t would be at that l e v e l . I guess what I'm saying through a l l t h i s process i s that f a m i l y i s v e r y much at both s i d e s . In other words i t i s l a r g e r than j u s t the both of us. There's C.'s s i d e of the f a m i l y and there's l o t s of brothers and s i s t e r s and she's the o l d e s t daughter of s i x k i d s i n that f a m i l y . Whereas our f a m i l y i s , I'm the second son of f o u r k i d s on our s i d e . But both f a m i l i e s are very c l o s e and ah, c l o s e w i t h i n themselves. I t was only a f t e r we"got married that they became s o r t of attached to each other as w e l l . So i n other words those are made e s s e n t i a l l y as f a m i l y d e c i s i o n s . And once we'd made the d e c i s i o n that we were going to get married, I mean, they a l l s a i d , w e l l t h a t ' s f i n e , go f o r i t . We don't know how you're going to get along at u n i v e r s i t y and things l i k e t h i s but you guys have made that d e c i s i o n and we respect i t . So we got - 126 -m a r r i e d . We came down to Vancouver. I t h i n k i t was a somewhat sca r y s i t u a t i o n f o r C. She'd never r e a l l y t r a v e l l e d and i t meant a l s o t h a t , I t h i n k that the set of f r i e n d s that we had then, which were u n i v e r s i t y f r i e n d s and so on, were b a s i c a l l y my f r i e n d s . In a sense I guess what happened over time, and I t h i n k what does happen w i t h marriage and f o r women i n p a r t i c u l a r , i s that not only do they l o s e t h e i r l a s t name but they l o s e a c e r t a i n sense of i d e n t i t y to that name. Often even the f r i e n d s h i p s that go along w i t h i t . The f r i e n d s we had became b a s i c a l l y my f r i e n d s . Of course we kept coming back t o K. and had r e l a t i v e s on a r e g u l a r b a s i s and of course we s t i l l have f a m i l y and a l l of that c o n n e c t i o n . I t h i n k a l s o that we had a t t i t u d e s i n those days which were, t h i n k i n g back, i s s o r t of l i k e what does one want to do w i t h that u n i v e r s i t y e d u c a t i o n . Where does one want to go and things l i k e t h i s . I know l o o k i n g back at career o p p o r t u n i t i e s and t h i n g s l i k e t h i s I j u s t d i d n ' t know what the h e l l I wanted to do. We never thought about having k i d s , i n f a c t we d e f i n i t e l y thought about not having k i d s . That would c e r t a i n l y put an end to our o p t i o n s . I t h i n k that was p a r t of both our conscienceness. Although we never r e a l l y , I mean there wasn't even r e a l l y much d i s c u s s i o n about that other than that was s o r t of l i k e i n t u i t i v e l y understood that somewhere we had to make some d e c i s i o n s about where we were going. Quite c l e a r l y t h a t couldn't happen u n t i l a f t e r u n i v e r s i t y and even then we're not sure of what was happening. I : So you d i d s i t down and say i f you were going to have k i d s i n t e n y e a r s . CR: No, No. I : You j u s t weren't sure, you both seemed to r e a l i z e t h a t you . . . CR: And yet as I say i t wasn't something we'd s i t down and have t h i s great d i s c u s s i o n about, but you know, l i k e I say, i n t u i t i v e l y we d i d a l l those kinds of t h i n g s . I t h i n k other a t t i t u d e s too are Important because they change over time. That part of married l i f e and I t h i n k p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r C., you know, I can t h i n k of times, l i k e the t h i n g that you d i d on the weekend i s that you went out shopping and so, you know, she looked forward to t h a t . I t was going downtown and do the Bay, Woodwards, Eatons, you know, the t r i a n g l e there and i t was three p a i r s of new shoes, i t a l l had to match those kinds of t h i n g s . That was a way of l i f e that was i n h e r i t e d from u p b r i n g i n g i n K. That was a way of l i f e t h e r e , the c l o t h e s and a l l t h a t , so i t f i t i n r i g h t here. I d i s t i n g u i s h that from C., separate from myself, because I was j u s t l e a d i n g t h i s u n i v e r s i t y l i f e where none of those kinds of values r e a l l y matter. Now I don't see those as p a r t i n g values but d e f i n i t e l y d i s s i m i l a r values that o c c u r r e d . I b r i n g that up because C. changed tremendously over time. I t h i n k a l s o - I don't know what r o l e i t p l a y s , C. was brought up C a t h o l i c and I was brought up A n g l i c a n , d e f i n i t e l y not s t r o n g A n g l i c a n . C. was d e f i n i t e l y brought up as a s t r o n g C a t h o l i c simply because you don't have a c h o i c e . I t h i n k - 127 -f o r the f i r s t time a l s o i n her l i f e that she had to come to g r i p s w i t h a t t i t u d e s towards r e l i g i o n and t h i n g s l i k e t h i s . And I t h i n k from a u n i v e r s i t y p e r s p e c t i v e and a not t e r r i b l y orthodox r e l i g i o u s p e r s p e c t i v e . These views d i f f e r e d . Now again as part of the s o r t of t o l e r a n c e on my s i d e , or whatever, we got married i n a C a t h o l i c Church. I changed over to be C a t h o l i c to get married i n the church. I f you want a church wedding you have to become a C a t h o l i c you become . . . t h a t ' s i t you see. Now again my f a m i l y i s , l i k e wow. And not only that we used to go to church r e g u l a r l y . Slowly I was l i k e , "hey, why do we have to get up, you know, I've got a hangover," or whatever. And of course I was seen as the . . . and that wasn't a great s t r u g g l e I e s s e n t i a l l y have to mention i t because I don't t h i n k i t became a source of r e a l l y of g r i e f but o b v i o u s l y C. o b v i o u s l y bent that way too. She went away from there and has over time s o r t of questioned that whole r o l e of church w i t h i n orthodox r e l i g i o n and t h i n g s l i k e t h a t . And sees now more C h r i s t i a n v a l u e s , s p r i t u a l values and t h i n g s l i k e t h a t . I t ' s much more important than becoming an orthodox a n y t h i n g . So i n other words the values are important, the orthodoxy i s n ' t . So those are some of the v i g n e t t e s . Through a l l t h i s I t h i n k t h a t I'm f a i r l y t o l e r a n t . Somewhere along the l i n e my values were, were . . . she's changed the g r e a t e s t because of my v a l u e s . And I'm sure mine changed as w e l l . I : O r i g i n a l l y she was i n t o d r e s s i n g w e l l and a l l t h i s s o r t of s t u f f and the church a t t i t u d e was way d i f f e r e n t and she's leaned more toward where you were. CR: A l s o , I t h i n k why I b r i n g the h i s t o r i c context because there's some number of events i n our l i v e s that helped to change some of t h a t . One of them i s that the k i n d of f r i e n d s that I had i n u n i v e r s i t y were people who began to t r a v e l . A couple of f r i e n d s i n p a r t i c u l a r went and played hockey f o r Belgium and went over there j u s t to p l a y hockey and work and they have them work j u s t to p l a y hockey over t h e r e . And they came back and d i d a s l i d e show at my p l a c e . In f a c t I remember d i s t i n c t l y , I f e l l asleep d u r i n g the s l i d e show, I t h i n k I've done i t ever s i n c e . But never the l e s s i t l e f t t h i s i mpression on me and i t l e f t an impression on C. as w e l l and t h i s was r i g h t d u r ing my f o u r t h year so i t was coming up to my B a c h e l o r ' s . I t was coming to a p o i n t where I knew that the career was f i n i s h i n g as a u n i v e r s i t y student. I had no d e s i r e whatsoever to continue on nor d i d I r e a l l y have the marks. I only saw a B.A. degree as a means to an end. But keep i n mind that t h i s i s 1967 and a B.A. was a means to an end. That's when a l l those i n t e r v i e w s used to happen out there at U.B.C. . . . ( t a l k about career choice and the f i r s t j o b he landed). . . . And I got one, I was working f o r Eatons c o n t r a c t s a l e s . In f a c t I had a, I was the r e g i o n a l o f f i c e a d m i n i s t r a t o r f o r B.C. and A l b e r t a . I : J u s t l i k e t h a t , l i k e f i r s t . . . CR: Bang, j u s t r i g h t now. - 128 -I : And a l l t h i s time was C. working as a bookkeeper? C: Yes, and as a bookkeeper f o r a r e a l e s t a t e f i r m that through mergers and takeovers kept changing i t s name. And so she changed l o c a t i o n s a few times, from downtown going up to 41st and Arbutus. What happened was that here i n '67 I had seen these s l i d e s , Europe and thin g s l i k e t h i s , and i n my mind I'm s a y i n g , "hey, t h a t ' s something t h a t I r e a l l y want to do". In other words what I'm beginning to see i s that here I've got to get a career or something when the B.A. f i n i s h e s . I want to t r a v e l before I ever r e a l l y make those heavy d e c i s i o n s , I want to see more of the w o r l d , and I'm making those kinds of d e c i s i o n s without r e a l l y a r t i c u l a t i n g w i t h C. other than s a y i n g , "hey, l o o k I t , we should be t h e r e , l e t ' s go f o r i t . " And ,in f a c t I remember seeing that s l i d e show, i t was probably somewhere around about February and I s a y s , " l i s t e n C., I ' l l t e l l you r i g h t now, when we when I f i n i s h and I get my degree I'm j u s t going to work and we are going to s p l i t ! " She says, and t h i s i s where she i s the p r a c t i c a l s i d e , she i s the bookkeeping and a l l t h a t , she says: " f o r g e t i t . You are going to s p l i t , but what money?" And of course she i s r i g h t . I s a i d we j u s t can't w a i t around and I guess what I was r e a l l y saying and r e a c t i n g and t h i n k i n g back on t h a t , how can I s t a r t a career of something and then leave i t , but then I r e a l i z e t h a t ' s e x a c t l y what I had to do. And so I went to t h i s j o b knowing f u l l w e l l that the j o b was a means f o r an end and the end i s l e a v i n g . And so, as I say, a l l of a sudden walking i n t o t h i s j o b w i t h three piece s u i t s on and managing an o f f i c e s t a f f and a l l those kinds of t h i n g s . And I r e a l l y enjoyed that experience, i t wasn't too bad. Except t h a t I a l s o had then some s u b t l e and l e s s than s u b t l e s o r t of h i n t s from the management p e r s p e c t i v e , of how one has a whole . . . s o r t of being a manager that you have to have a c e r t a i n amount of t r a p p i n g s . In other words my boss was s a y i n g , l i k e , "how come you are s t i l l l i v i n g i n a basement s u i t e i n the West End, you should be t h i n k i n g about a house, mortgage, t i e d to the j o b , " r i g h t ? K i d s and so on. And I used to have an A u s t i n m i n i , i t was- C.'s c a r . Keep t e l l i n g her t h a t ' s why I married her. But what happened Is that he would say, " w e l l you know as a manager you should now be t h i n k i n g of a h a l f - d e c e n t c a r , " because I wasn't going to spend any money. In f a c t , as you know, as a student and you do know, i s that you are able to make do on a r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l amount of money. And I mean we continued l i v i n g that way. And each month - and I got somewhere i n excess of 600 d o l l a r s each month, and t h a t was a h e l l of a l o t of money, i t j u s t a l l went i n t o the bank. We kept l i v i n g o f f of C's s a l a r y . Yeah. And so i t j u s t went . . . I : And a l l t h i s time were you guys t a l k i n g a l i t t l e b i t about t a k i n g o f f and was C. a c c e p t i n g i t more? CR: Yes. And then i t only became the dimensions of the t r i p i t s e l f . Where was i t going to be t o , and t h i n g s l i k e t h a t . I : How d i d she happen to change her view from, no way, to . . . - 129 -CR: Oh no, she wasn't ever sayi n g no way to t r a v e l l i n g . What she s a i d was no way of t r a v e l l i n g without money. Because she i n i t i a l l y thought that i t was q u i t e e x c i t i n g , q u i t e i n t e r e s t i n g . I don't t h i n k she ever r e a l i z e d the parameters. I guess a l s o what I'm a l s o suggesting here i s that from K. she came to V., she l i v e d i n a compartment i n a sense. In K. you are p r o t e c t e d by f r i e n d s and r e l a t i v e s and s t u f f l i k e t h i s . M a r r i e d , she came down and she had me and was able to do things l i k e t h a t . Whereas coming down to u n i v e r s i t y I came alone and d i d a l l those kinds of th i n g s and l i k e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , you never had any money i n those days, you had to borrow money to get through u n i v e r s i t y , student loans and a l l that k i n d of s t u f f . And I mean one h i t c h - h i k e d . And you understood the whole h i t c h - h i k i n g m e n t a l i t y and how to l i v e w i t h nothing and a l l that k i n d of s t u f f . And she r e a l l y never had that k i n d of experience. Other than the o c c a s i o n a l time when I'd take her alo n g . But her contact w i t h u n i v e r s i t y was through my f r i e n d s , l i k e we used to go to p a r t i e s and l i k e t h a t , more than l i k e , her f r i e n d s at work, the places she began to work. Now she gets to know some of these people but never to the degree of my people, of my f r i e n d s , t h i n g s l i k e t h i s . So she got more and more exposed to the u n i v e r s i t y scene i n terms of the party scene which would o f t e n i n v o l v e not j u s t a matter of going out there and d r i n k i n g and a l l those kinds of th i n g s but would o f t e n i n v o l v e some k i n d of p o l i t i c a l and p h i l o s o p h i c a l debates and things l i k e t h i s . And she s t a r t e d g e t t i n g more and more i n t o that and enjo y i n g that sphere. And so that when I s t a r t e d working, i f anything I f e l t t h a t I was the one who was somewhat d e c e p t i v e , i n that I knew th a t t h i s job was only going to be to a c e r t a i n degree and i n f a c t i t was, i t was 10 months. And then I j u s t t o l d my boss, I s a y s , " w e l l you know, two t h i n g s are going to happen, one i s t h a t I now r e a l i z e t h a t I want to go back to u n i v e r s i t y f o r a degree, I don't know what k i n d . And the other t h i n g i s that before I do that there i s no qu e s t i o n that I r e a l l y want to t r a v e l , " and I was a c t u a l l y t h i n k i n g i n many ways of an MBA degree, (both t a l k at same time) . . . then I c o u l d get much more of a choice and the MBA degree was j u s t becoming important at that time as w e l l . And anyway he s a i d , " f i n e , good recommendation and e v e r y t h i n g e l s e , come back here, f e e l f r e e . " So we took o f f . And that was i n 1968, we took o f f . And again, maybe to gi v e some of the c o n s e r v a t i v e background of C's parents and so on - they s a i d "you seem to have $5,000 and you mean to say you are j u s t going to take t h i s and blow i t ? " I : A l o t of money. CR: I t was a l o t of money. You have to keep i n mind that i t could have bought a house f o r ten or twelve thousand d o l l a r s , and a decent home. And to have f i v e thousand r i g h t t h e r e , man. I : Wow. - 130 -CR: And so they were s a y i n g , "how can you do t h i s ? You are j u s t going to go over there and how are you going to get around? You're j u s t going to h i t c h - h i k e ? " Whoooooo - I t was a l l t r e a t e d i n s o r t of a l i k e j o k i n g manner and things l i k e t h i s but they j u s t had a v e r y , very c o n s e r v a t i v e background on her s i d e of the f a m i l y . My mother has always been one who wants to t r a v e l , anyway, so she was s a y i n g , "hey, I wish I c o u l d come!" And so there was never r e a l l y any s t a t i c from my s i d e of the f a m i l y and there was always that s o r t of l i k e , i f anything I suppose, encouragement to go. But f o r us, and I always s a i d t h i s l a t e r too, a f t e r t r a v e l l i n g , i s t h a t I t h i n k t h a t was the g r e a t e s t change f o r both of us because I can t h i n k of a couple of s i t u a t i o n s when you are working and going to s c h o o l and s t u f f l i k e t h i s , you are not r e a l l y together a l l that much, you are at home at c e r t a i n times and you are away most of the day. And t h i n g s l i k e t h i s . So, i n terms of a c t u a l l y being together and c o n v e r s a t i o n a l time - what i t does i t r e a l l y throws you t o g e t h e r . And i t throws you together under circumstances which are r e a l l y p o t e n t i a l l y complex s i t u a t i o n s . I : The t r a v e l l i n g part of i t you mean. CR: The t r a v e l l i n g p a r t . Because there are times when o b v i o u s l y you are l o s t , you are hungry, you don't know, you can't t a l k because you are i n a d i f f e r e n t country and that became a r e a l problem, t h a t one, f o r C. i n p a r t i c u l a r . Our f i r s t e x perience, what happened we went to I r e l a n d , h i t c h - h i k e d around I r e l a n d , and that was a good experience. H i t c h - h i k e d around Scotland and England and that was another good experience. And then as soon as we h i t the c o n t i n e n t , hey, can't speak. I j u s t remember the scene, and she was i n t e a r s . And of course then her r e l i a n c e upon me, i n that k i n d of s i t u a t i o n , and I j u s t d i d n ' t have the answers. But t h i s k i n d of s t o r y i s only symptomatic of the kinds of s t r e s s that you can be under, and you have no one to t u r n to but y o u r s e l v e s . And out of that you begin to change. And the other c r i s i s p o i n t that came i n the t r i p i s something that we had d i s c u s s e d b e f o r e . And that i s how long i s the t r i p going to be! ( l a u g h t e r ) C. says i t was going to be a year. We'd go t o Europe and t r i p around Europe and come back from Europe. I : And t h i s was '68 so people were j u s t s t a r t i n g to do t h i s . CR: Yeah, j u s t s t a r t i n g to do t h i s , e x a c t l y . And I s a i d I t h i n k what we would do i s that we should go over there and we should, I should back up here. She says a year, we were going to go to Europe, and then she was t h i n k i n g we might go around the r e s t of the w o r l d . And I s a i d what we do i s go to Europe, t r i p around Europe and work a year. See i f we can get j o b s . And then work f o r the w i n t e r and then go around the world. I : So you had two b a s i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t ideas about what was going to happen. - 131 -CR: Yeah, th a t ' s r i g h t , and I'd mention o c c a s i o n a l l y l i k e " i f we would spend a couple of years t r a v e l l i n g t h i s would be g r e a t . " She i s sa y i n g we are coming back a f t e r . . . But other than that i t never came down to that u n t i l i t came to the end, i t came to September or October. I : The year was up? CR: W e l l , no that was because we l e f t i n A p r i l or May I guess, the end of May. And i t came down to the end of September so the d e c i s i o n was to e i t h e r keep going around the world, or you stop and work. And I would say, " t h a t ' s not going to work." And she s a i d , " w e l l Jesus I don't know - I don't want to do t h i s and I t h i n k we should go on and be s i d e s , " she s a i d , " s t a r t working, where the h e l l w i l l we work?" W e l l we happened to be i n southern Germany at the time and I says w e l l maybe I can be a teacher. I had my B.A. but not my tea c h i n g degree. But there's a l l those Canadian bases down t h e r e . And I went t o Lahr and places l i k e t h i s and couldn't get on. And then I heard about a place where the Americans were h i r i n g anybody who wasn't American. Because what happens i s that they have t h e i r army bases there i n the best part of Germany and i t was s o r t of l i k e a l a s t d i t c h e f f o r t . So we walked i n th e r e , i n t h i s place and they h i r e d both of us. I : R e a l l y . To teach? CR: No, C. was what you'd c a l l a redeployment c l e r k . What she d i d i s she was the one who was t y p i n g out the orders to send them to Vietnam. And I was a b i l l e t i n g c l e r k , because t h i s l i t t l e community of Oberammergau i s where there i s r e a l l y a NATO base and a hig h s c h o o l . We taught them e v e r y t h i n g there from how to assemble weapons to t y p i n g , and things l i k e t h i s . So once we had the job and the c o n f l i c t was over and then we became s t a b i l i z e d . And i t was the b e s t , l o o k i n g back on i t to r e a l i z e the c r i s i s we went through between, l i k e I r e a l l y pushed l o o k i n g f o r the job or jobs p l u r a l , and that was, there was times, I remember i n Lahr i n p a r t r i c u l a r , there was a f a i r amount of c o n f l i c t over t h a t . I : Did you ever get to the poi n t where one of you, where she s a i d I'm going home or anything, you were s t i l l s t i c k i n g out? CR: Oh no, never, ever. I : So you were k i n d o f , you were f i g u r i n g that i t would be best to get a j o b . And C. was s a y i n g , " w e l l maybe we should t r a v e l , " but she went along w i t h your l o o k i n g f o r work f o r a w h i l e to see what would happen. And then I guess the f a c t that she got a j o b helped out. CR: Yeah, t h a t ' s r i g h t . So I mean i n r e t r o s p e c t again those were probably some of the best years or year we spent. We s k i e d f o r the year. And we met a l l these people who we then t a l k e d i n t o coming back t o Canada. And not only t h a t , j u s t the realm of f r i e n d s - 132 -because we a l l l i v e d i n t h i s o l d h o t e l that was taken over by the American Army w i t h communal k i t c h e n s and s t u f f l i k e t h i s . And there i s people from A u s t r a l i a and I r e l a n d and Scotland and Canadians and j u s t everybody and from a l l t h i s g l o b a l content of people - and of course we a l l became r e a l l y good f r i e n d s over time and i t was j u s t one long party time. I t was. I t was f a n t a s t i c . I was j u s t showing some s l i d e s of i t the other n i g h t . One of the other guys; t h i s guy Herman, not i n the town we l i v e d , but i n another town, was a Canadian, found out other Canadians were l i v i n g t here and he used to come and commute r e g u l a r l y over to our p l a c e and he was j u s t over here the other n i g h t . And then I got a l e t t e r from another f r i e n d of ours who was j u s t another A u s t r a l i a n guy and he went back to A u s t r a l i a v i a the T r a n s - S i b e r i a n r a i l w a y . In Japan he met t h i s woman, t h i s Japanese woman. And i n the l a s t f i v e years has been l i v i n g i n Japan. He's got four k i d s . I : So you guys kept i n touch w i t h some . . . CR: So we've kept i n touch w i t h most of them who were t h e r e . I : That's amazing. That's neat. CR: In f a c t the next t r i p we are going back to v i s i t them next year. I : Are you? CR: Yeah. I : So I t ' s k i n d of been a core to through your r e l a t i o n s h i p , the whole t r a v e l l i n g t h i n g has k i n d of . . . CR: Yeah, and a core i s not only the experiences and being together and i r o n i n g out, I t h i n k , any s o r t of s t r e s s - r e l a t e d i s s u e s which u l t i m a t e l y come from that k i n d of t h i n g . But j u s t t a l k i n g about l i f e g e n e r a l l y and being able to communicate on that one to one and making d e c i s i o n s which, w e l l , I t h i n k I've probably pushed more my - I've made more of the d e c i s i o n s . I t h i n k C. c e r t a i n l y f e e l s that she probably had a l o t of i n f l u e n c e i n most of those d e c i s i o n s . But any r a t e , then we headed down to A f r i c a and we h i t c h - h i k e d around A f r i c a , and I thought that l i k e from her r e l a t i v e l y no h i t c h - h i k i n g experience to h i t c h - h i k i n g around Europe. And we used to s l e e p on the s i d e of the road j u s t to save money and go to a campsite every other day or so j u s t to have a shower. And then going t o A f r i c a . We s t a r t e d i n South A f r i c a , Cape Town and we h i t c h - h i k e d up through Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, through Mozambique and i n t o Malawai. We j u s t l i t e r a l l y ran out of roads. But I was t h i n k i n g l a t e r , you know, w i t h a white woman, we were j u s t one, the wrong c o l o r , I'm not sure i t was a wise t h i n g to do. But having done i t , i t was a great experience. But even then there was t h i s whole t e r r o r i s t element and there i s a c e r t a i n amount of f e a r that you're because we got trapped a few times out there i n the w i l d e r n e s s . - 133 -I : And you guys must have gone through a l o t of l i t t l e experiences that you both shared . . . CR: Yeah, as I say. And then we went on and j u s t had more and more good experiences i n terms of l i k e , we went to A u s t r a l i a , we worked i n New Zealand; the next w i n t e r we worked i n New Zealand. I : So t h i s i s your second year on the road. CR: Yeah. The second year. And i n the meantime I know that were coming c l o s e to the end of the t r i p . And I know the two years i s coming up, and I know I've a l s o got to make some d e c i s i o n s . About l i k e , what am I going to do. Now, community c o l l e g e s were opening up. And I've always thought of one aspect, i s t e a c h i n g , I don't mind t e a c h i n g . But I j u s t was not i n t o teaching elementary s c h o o l or h i g h s c h o o l and that whole s o r t of book l i k e , oh what the h e l l i s i t c a l l e d , you can see the p i c t u r e of that apple. I : Teaching as a Subversive A c t i v i t y ? CR: Yeah, that k i n d of t h i n g , you know. As I say one of the b i g problems i s you are almost handed the c u r r i c u l u m , you have a c e r t a i n f l e x i b i l i t y w i t h i n i t , and then there i s a l l that p o l i t i c a l b u l l s h i t that happens and then the d i s c i p l i n e a c t i o n , so I j u s t wasn't i n t o t h a t . But meanwhile the community c o l l e g e s were opening up and I knew one of the people who were i n v o l v e d i n i t , one of them was N. R. Because I knew him from K. So I was re a d i n g , here I am i n New Zealand, and here I am I'm going to w r i t e away and see i f I can get an MBA and w r i t e to a few u n i v e r s i t i e s . The a l t e r n a t i v e i s that maybe I should go back i n t o geography and do t h i s t h i n g f o r community c o l l e g e s . So I b a s i c a l l y get r e j e c t e d w i t h a l l the MBA programs, I never had the marks. So we f i n a l l y get back to Canada a f t e r going to Hong Kong and spending some time i n Japan, i t was Expo '70 i n Japan, j u s t c o i n c i d e n t i a l l y , at that time. And through t h i s Japanese woman, who t h i s guy A. m a r r i e d , e v e n t u a l l y , he'd o n l y j u s t met her then i n 1970. • We met her i n A u s t r a l i a , she came to A u s t r a l i a w i t h him, she gave us the addresses of and wrote l e t t e r s to her parents and her f a m i l y and we stayed w i t h them i n Japan. . . . And they were i n Kyoto, which i s l i k e 20 minutes down the t r a c k from the Osaka World's F a i r . So we stayed there a week w i t h them. They spoke no E n g l i s h and we spoke no Japanese, and we a l l had a h e l l of a good time. J u s t a h e l l of a good time. But . . . I : What an experience. CR: Yeah, i t was, i t was a l l , as I say we'd changed so much. And I say we, I t h i n k mostly C. had a tremendous t r a n s i t i o n going from three p a i r s of matching shoes to h i t c h - h i k i n g and r e a l l y being part of t h a t . - 134 -I : When you s t a r t e d t h i n k i n g about going back to school and a l l that s o r t of s t u f f , how d i d that work i n terms of d e c i s i o n making f o r tha t one? CR: Somehow, and ag a i n , i t ' s l i k e osmosis, I was making a d e c i s i o n about what to do w i t h my l i f e and I j u s t assumed, t h a t , you know C. would work and put me through. And somehow that never . . . I : Wasn't accomplished. CR: No. No that was r e a l l y , that i s q u i t e i n ord e r . I t was r e a l l y most important t h a t I e v e n t u a l l y d i d something w i t h my l i f e . So I j u s t s a i d to her, "God you can get a job as a bookkeeper anywhere, God, don't worry about that one." So she d i d n ' t , t h a t ' s j u s t the way i t went. So that was the i n t e r e s t i n g part of the whole proces s . So when we d i d come back and I'm b a s i c a l l y r e j e c t e d from the MBA program, w e l l then I'm s o r t of t h i n k i n g l i k e , how am I going to get i n t o geography? Because you see i n those o l d days you had the double major, and I had i t i n economics and geography. Not the s i n g l e major. And of course I'd never taken, l i k e i f I was going to go i n t o a Masters degree i n geography, w e l l you'd have to take a l l the r i g h t p r e r e q u i s i t e s and t h a t , w e l l I d i d n ' t take any of those kinds of t h i n g s . What happened i s that you are f e e l i n g a l i t t l e b i t o l d e r and you've got t h i s two years of working and t r a v e l l i n g , w e l l three years - a year of working experience and two years of t r a v e l l i n g , w e l l three years - a year of working experience and J.C. was the Chairman of Geography at the time. I remember walking i n and s a y i n g , l i s t e n , I've done a l l these t h i n g s and I want to get a Masters i n Geography, and l e t s go f o r i t ! " ( l a u g h t e r ) I : SFU? CR: No, UBC. I was going to go t o SFU next i f I d i d n ' t get past the door on t h i s one. And he s a i d , " w e l l , w e ' l l have to look at our rec o r d s , " and s t u f f l i k e t h i s and I says, " w e l l I- can t e l l you what the records are, I d i d n ' t do t e r r i b l y good i n geography, but a l l t h a t ' s changed. That changed my l i f e . " I t showed me the d i r e c t i o n I wanted to go. I knew a couple of grad students there as w e l l , and N. was one of them. And so anyway, I mentioned what was happening and that I knew a few of the students and he says, "normally we go through t h i s long and p r o t r a c t e d s t r u g g l e of refer e n c e s and s t u f f l i k e t h i s but t e l l you what w e ' l l do. You take a year of the courses we p r e s c r i b e , a l l t h i r d year and f o u r t h year, and i f you pass those w i t h good marks, not only w i l l we l e t you i n t o the program, w e ' l l g i v e you some c r e d i t f o r t h a t . " I : Graduate C r e d i t s . CR: Graduate C r e d i t s . Not d e f i n i n g how many or any of those kinds of t h i n g s . And meanwhile, you see we come back, w i t h no money, and we get caught i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n where we were t r y i n g to rent a p l a c e , - 135 -knowing f u l l w e l l by t h i s time we want to l i v e i n K i t s i l a n o - we know where we want to l i v e . And knocking on doors and s a y i n g , "we want to rent your p l a c e , " and they say, " w e l l have you got a j o b ? " And we say, " w e l l no, we don't have a job because we don't have a p l a c e ! " And they say, "I'm s o r r y i f you don't have a job you can't have t h i s p l a c e . " A c a t c h 22 number, you see. Sort of l i k e , by South A f r i c a we knew what d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was a l l about, o n l y there i s d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a g a i n s t us i n t h i s scene. I mean e v e n t u a l l y we d i d , we got a place on 13th Avenue. And that became a tremendous p a r t y house. And C. got a very i n t e r e s t i n g j o b as a bookkeeper f o r Erickson-Massey. And i t j u s t , i t was f a n t a s t i c . So anyway, o f f I went back to u n i v e r s i t y . C. supported me a g a i n , and we are p l a y i n g as a grad student and so on and we used to have these F r i d a y a f t e r n o o n , l a t e F r i d a y afternoon hockey games. C. used to come out there and she used to p l a y hockey and got i n v o l v e d w i t h that and so she was v e r y , v e r y much i n v o l v e d w i t h the u n i v e r s i t y scene. So I can s t i l l see J.U.R. who was the o l d f a t h e r of Geography out t h e r e , (both t a l k at same t i m e ) . Here he i s on the l i n e w i t h C. who i s c a l l e d the Chicken. He c a l l s her the Chicken s t i l l to t h i s very day. So I see him and he says, how's the Chicken? And then we a l l go back i n the Grad Cen t r e , you see, and some of the p r o f s and s t u f f l i k e t h i s and we a l l s i t down and have few beer and the p a r t y would s t a r t from there and away i t would go. And so she was, you know, the second go-around w i t h u n i v e r s i t y and so on. She had t h i s w o r l d l y experience w i t h t r a v e l l i n g . Not o n l y w o r l d l y experience and t r a v e l l i n g and a l l of the t h i n g s we had seen, but, as you begin t o see those t h i n g s you have to begin to put them i n t o some k i n d of context of p o l i t i c s , of economics of why people are being e x p l o i t e d and a l l t h i s i s part o f , wherever you stopped you ended up q u e s t i o n i n g those t h i n g s , you see, and so an education, and i n f o r m a l education was r e a l l y happening. But she a l s o , at the same time began to miss not having a u n i v e r s i t y e d u c a t i o n . And i n f a c t e n r o l l e d i n a couple of courses at VCC. A philosophy course was one of them. And an E n g l i s h course. I can't remember what k i n d of E n g l i s h i t was but i t was l i k e a philosophy course as w e l l . And l a t e r she went t o D.C. when we f i n a l l y moved out to C. I t ' s at t h a t time when I was f i n i s h i n g my Masters degree which was i n 1972. In other words no one saw any expansion of them at that time, they had a l l been e s t a b l i s h e d and we r e a l l y d i d n ' t know what s o r t of dynamic was going to take p l a c e . And of course l a t e r , so t h i s i s by 1972, by 1975, 1974-75 they s t a r t e d to mushroom. And the t h i n g r e a l l y caught on. But i t was r e a l l y at that stage that they d i d n ' t . So here I am, by t h i s time people l i k e N.R., he i s the chairman of C C . and I say t o N., " f o r C h r i s t ' s sake h i r e me!" And he says, "one, we don't have the funds, the other we don't have the demands." And yet on the other s i d e of i t I d i d n ' t want to go back to K. and r e a l l y n e i t h e r d i d C. So I end up w i t h a p a r t - t i m e j o b at C.C.. Not t h a t I'd had any other o f f e r s ! ( l a u g h t e r ) You know, teaching one s e c t i o n , but a l l of a sudden that career was launched, I was i n . Then th a t ' s when we s o r t of decided that we would s t a r t a f a m i l y . - 136 -I : And C. was s t i l l working f o r Massey-Erickson? CR: We used to go there too a f t e r work at times and s i t around w i t h those guys. I used to enjoy that one too. And f i n a l l y , I shouldn't say f i n a l l y , t h i s i s l i k e nine years l a t e r , C gets pregnant. I : And you guys had planned that f a i r l y w e l l , l i k e you've s a i d t h a t you'd thought about a f a m i l y . CR: Yeah. And we s o r t of s a i d , "yeah, l e t ' s go f o r i t , " not knowing what the f u t u r e would be and hoping that C C . would develop and of course i t d i d . Then i n '74 I was on f u l l time but part time, i n other words they d i d n ' t g i v e i t to you, you can have a l l those s e c t i o n s but we are not going to c a l l you f u l l time. J u s t i n case we ever have to go back the other way. And so t h a t ' s when she became pregnant, and "we're t a k i n g a chance," you see. But then we decided once she becomes pregnant, how can we l i v e i n t h i s apartment, i t s time to buy a house. So we moved out to C. and I d i d n ' t have any money, but t h a t ' s when I went to my mother. My f a t h e r died i n 1968, when I was i n Europe. But he had a couple of s t r o k e s and s t u f f so I knew that there was the p o t e n t i a l . I : I t wasn't a t o t a l s u r p r i s e . CR: And so from the insurance my mother had some money l e f t over so she helped us out w i t h $15,000. And I guess we'd saved f o u r or f i v e or something. And then we got a $25,000 mortgage f o r the house. J u s t a cheap house, i n C. But then there i t i s , we could then have t h i s f a m i l y . What happened though i s again w i t h J . C. had an extremely bad pregnancy. She was i n bed f o r f o u r months. And J . was two months premature, he a r r i v e d on Christmas day. But she was l a y i n g i n bed f o r f o u r months, and I'd teach, and I'd come home and I'd do e v e r y t h i n g . And that was r e a l l y tough. I : So i t was not a wonderful experience, the pregnancy was not something that you would remember. . . . CR: No. But i t was something that we had r e a l l y shared though. And then of course out of t h a t J . became r e a l l y a s p e c i a l c h i l d , because as a premy they s t i l l d i d n ' t even t e l l us we were going to be out of the woods. So we go i n t o the i n t e n s i v e care ward f o r I guess ten days before he could even come out of t h e r e . But as I say, out of that hardship i n many ways o f t e n comes a c l o s e r r e l a t i o n s h i p . And so that was a l l w e l l and good. I t h i n k what has happened, t h i s September we've been married 19 y e a r s . I : What was i t '65, because you graduated i n 1965. CR: Sept. 1965. But, out of C , we j u s t couldn't handle being i n C. any more and we both came to that r e a l i z a t i o n f a i r l y q u i c k l y . But I d i d n ' t know where to go. So that a g a i n , by a s e r i e s o f , more by - 137 -a c c i d e n t than by d e s i g n , we ended up here. On 0. Road. And then a g a i n , much changes over time. As I began to get i n t o 0. Road I s t a r t e d teaching more about environmental i s s u e s and t h i n g s l i k e t h i s , i n p a r t i c u l a r about energy, s o l a r . But I trapped myself at 0. Road because what I d i d i s that I l o c a t e d the house r i g h t i n the middle of the woods because a f t e r being i n where you are cheek by j o w l you want to get r i g h t i n t o the woods. U n f o r t u n a t e l y I'd put myself too c l o s e to the p a r k i n g l o t and a l l the woods weren't mine, ( l a u g h t e r ) You can only chop down so many of the trees -and so I couldn't r e a l l y get the sun i n t h e r e . I was q u i t e w i l l i n g to modify the house, so that and the other s i d e of i t was t h a t by 1979 I a l r e a d y had the f e a r that there was going to be a c o l l a p s e , t o t a l bank f a i l u r e , the depression we are i n . And I t o l d t h i s to a number of people i n c l u d i n g C.'s brother who i s q u i t e i n v o l v e d i n the stock market. " L i s t e n I don't want to be the prophet of doom, but my f e e l i n g i s from a number of sources t h a t I've been l i s t e n i n g to look, b a i l out of t h i n g s that you can get out o f , " and i t kept going up u n t i l 1980, 1981, I t s t a r t e d going down. And i n t h a t time, two t h i n g s , one not only d i d I want to get something s o l a r and b u i l d i t myself, but two, I wanted to get out of the mortgage. And I d i d by s e l l i n g t h a t place o f f . The market was s t i l l going up and I s o l d i t . I could have s o l d i t f o r more, no doubt, but you never look upon that one because i f I'd h e l d on any longer I might have s t i l l been t h e r e , have s t i l l had a mortgage and s t u f f l i k e t h a t . So I was able to s e l l out of t h a t , buy t h i s p r o p e r t y , and again the burden f e l l t o C. to do e v e r y t h i n g i n terms of once I s t a r t e d b u i l d i n g t h i s house. T o t a l l y l o o k i n g a f t e r the k i d s , t o t a l l y run the house - which we rented down i n L. And so I was working and b u i l d i n g at the same time. But then l i k e I say I t h i n k that brings us up to where we are today. I: And then you had your daughter come i n t o the middle of a l l t h i s ? CR: Yes, M. We had M. I t h i n k i t ' s , she should be s i x i n August, I have to s u b t r a c t , ( l a u g h t e r ) I : In nineteen-seventy, . . . w e l l , 77. CR: Seventy-seven, ya t h a t ' s r i g h t . And then we decided that was i t f o r k i d s . And the other t h i n g that happened, I t h i n k f o r both of us, but me more i m p o r t a n t l y than anybody, i s that I've s t i l l got that t r a v e l bug. So a f t e r teaching f o r two terms, when i t comes to l i k e the s p r i n g , end of A p r i l , I s t a r t t h i n k i n g , hey, and s t a r t p l a n n i n g f o r the next events. When you have k i d s , you've got to be w i t h i n c e r t a i n bounds. Again, they don't have to be l i t e r a l l y that r e f i n e d , but I ran a f i e l d - t r i p course to Europe, where C. and J . came; J . was 5 months o l d . So I mean . . . I : You were able to work i t out. - 138 -CR: Yeah. And that was another tremendous experience. And we d i d i t as a f a m i l y . I'd thought of doing other f i e l d t r i p courses but I t h i n k i t ' s too tough o f t e n w i t h two k i d s . Because I won't do a f i e l d t r i p course without t a k i n g everybody. And we are a c t u a l l y working on one next to go to Japan and we might s t i l l do i t but i t won't be f o r a few more years I'm s u r e . We've taken the k i d s across Canada, camping up i n t o the Yukon and t h i n g s l i k e t h i s , so I've s t i l l got that t r a v e l t h i n g . But next year i t s going to be a major t r i p , we're going to go f o r f o u r months. I: Great yeah, so that whole scene i s j u s t c a r r i e d on. CR: Ya, i t repeats i t s e l f . I : Whereas I f you'd gone by y o u r s e l f you wouldn't have experienced i t together and you would have been two d i f f e r e n t places m e n t a l l y a l t o g e t h e r . CR: That's r i g h t . I t h i n k a l s o i t s developing a c e r t a i n respect f o r each other out of t h i s that . . . They are not done i n terms of l i k e i t ' s a f a i t a c c o m p l i . They are u s u a l l y j u s t discussed i n one way or another. And I t h i n k i n d i v i d u a l s , or k i d s even, have to have a c e r t a i n amount of t o l e r a n c e , otherwise y o u ' l l always end up, l i k e there i s a c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n , and I t h i n k t h a t ' s something we have always t r i e d to a v o i d . Is that k i n d of c o n f l i c t . Because there i s always ways of doing t h i n g s . Always ways of doing t h i n g s . I : So l o o k i n g f o r ways of d e a l i n g w i t h s i t u a t i o n s without deeply c o n f l i c t e d . . . CR: Yeah. I : How do you manage that? How do you t h i n k i t happens? L i k e you say you are f a i r l y t o l e r a n t , . . . CR: I t h i n k i t s j u s t a respect f o r each o t h e r . That's a b a s i c . We've been through so many, so much, had so many experiences and i t s j u s t . . . i t j u s t comes down to r e s p e c t . I t h i n k t h a t ' s , t h a t ' s the main l i n e . I : What about when C. was going to s c h o o l , you s a i d i t s t a r t e d and then when J . came along that ended. CR: That's r i g h t . Those were good courses though, God I t h i n k I l e a r n e d as much as C. l e a r n e d . I'd never taken a philosophy course and she was i n t o a l l these d i f f e r e n t philosophers so we'd d i s c u s s whatever was the essay t o p i c . She had to do the essay t o p i c every week or two weeks or whatever the h e l l i t was. Oh, j u s t great d i s c u s s i o n ! And she'd t e l l me what the guy had s a i d at the u n i v e r s i t y or c o l l e g e and I'd get my two-bits i n and she would get - 139 -her two-bits i n and somehow the essay would mature, of course a l l of them would end up as A's as w e l l . But I guess as w i t h anything i f you r e a l l y put the e f f o r t i n - i t ' s j u s t l i k e when I was put under the gun to t r y and get good marks to get i n t o my masters. Out of 12 couroes I got nine A's, the other ones were damn c l o s e , I'd never done that before t h a t ' s f o r s u r e . I : There i s one t h i n g t h a t I wanted to go back t o , way back. You s a i d t h a t when you guys f i r s t s t a r t e d going out, before you even got toge t h e r , was i t a s i t u a t i o n where you knew one another, j u s t s o r t of C. was a k i d around town s o r t of thing? CR: No. I : Were you s o r t of going out together r i g h t away, or d i d you know each other as f r i e n d s at the beginning? CR: What happened was that t h i s f r i e n d of mine W.N., I guess he was growing up w i t h D.S. D.S. was C.'s best f r i e n d , and so anyway, we ended up meeting up at a bowling a l l e y i s what i t came down t o . So I t h i n k I asked her out or something. On the weekend we went one or two weekends or something l i k e t h i s and then there was a b i t of a f a l l i n g out or something, she probably thought she could get something f a r b e t t e r . Oh ya, she was going around w i t h the mayor's son f o r a w h i l e . I : Oh r e a l l y , oh wow. How d i d you compete eh? CR: E x a c t l y , e x a c t l y , i t was something t h a t , when you are going to s c h o o l , I don't know, maybe because i t s so long ago I can't remember that w e l l . You are going to school and you are l o o k i n g forward to the weekend and the weekend i s always a p a r t y . While you went out w i t h that i n d i v i d u a l you are r e a l l y w i t h the group. I : Yeah, r i g h t . CR: I t wasn't l i k e i t was a heavy date where you both went o f f to some secluded area. I t was always l i k e a p a r t y . "Where're you going? I ' l l see you the r e , " and that k i n d of s t u f f . I : You s a i d you were 17? Grade 11 or 12 or something? Couple of years of high s c h o o l worth of doing the d a t i n g t h i n g . And then you went to u n i v e r s i t y f o r two y e a r s , before you got married? CR: Yeah. I : So you knew each other f o r at l e a s t f o u r y e a r s . CR: Oh yeah, oh sure. I : You've known each other c l o s e to 25 y e a r s . That's a l o t of h i s t o r y . - 140 -CR: I've known her longer than I haven't. That's r i g h t i t i s a l o t . I t ' s r e a l l y , i t ' s been a long time. But a good time you know. I: You had done a l o t before you had k i d s , and having k i d s r e a l l y changes your l i f e a l o t as you know because i t , w e l l i t j u s t changes your l i v i n g p a t t e r n s t o t a l l y . Plus you had a s t r e s s f u l pregnancy time and s t u f f , but i t sounds l i k e that went p r e t t y smoothly r e g a r d l e s s , i n f a c t even maybe drew you a b i t c l o s e r because of the . . . CR: Yeah. I t h i n k so. I t h i n k i t ' s j u s t l i k e you go through s t r e s s f u l s i t u a t i o n s o f t e n from the e x t e r i o r environment, whether i t ' s t r a v e l l i n g i n a f o r e i g n country or whatever c r i s i s that comes down, as I say, a bad pregnancy or whatever i t might be. But yeah, I t h i n k what happens i s that s i n c e you go through those things not s i n g l y , l i k e , a l l the questions are only w i t h i n your ownself, t h a t you are able to share those t h i n g s . I t h i n k t h a t ' s j u s t something that we've accomplished. That as each e x t e r n a l s i t u a t i o n happens, s t r e s s f u l , or c r i s i s or j u s t d e c i s i o n s g e n e r a l l y , i s that what has happened i s that we have been able to make those d e c i s i o n s , I t h i n k as a u n i t , and I t h i n k t h a t ' s r e a l l y helped. I : So you look to one another f o r . . . CR: And i t ' s the same l i k e , e x a c t l y , even the way I am r i g h t now. I've taken on more and more t h i n g s , so that even t h i s whole p o l i t i c a l t h i n g that I've done up here, I couldn't have done that w i t h o u t , I mean I d i d n ' t do that without t a l k i n g to C. That d e c i s i o n w i l l have to come up again s i n c e the e l e c t i o n comes up i n November a g a i n . And so now we've got the assessment of having had two years of doing t h a t , and we can see the amount of time that i t takes to do i t , t hat then we w i l l have to make that d e c i s i o n as a f a m i l y u n i t . I t ' s r e a l l y rewarding i n terms of s a t i s f a c t i o n of making d e c i s i o n s and a l l those kinds of t h i n g s and being i n v o l v e d w i t h the k i n d of d e c i s i o n s that e f f e c t everybodies l i f e . Not s a t i s f y i n g i n terms of any money. But i t ' s been a great experience because I can use the experience I've had w i t h p o l i t i c s i n t e a c h i n g . But somewhere one has to say, i s that then more and more at the expense of time w i t h the k i d s ? And there i s no q u e s t i o n i t i s at the expense of the k i d s ' time. I t ' s j u s t whether you can do a l l those other t h i n g s as w e l l as the k i d s not f e e l i n g that they've been r e a l l y cheated of time. I t h i n k as J . gets o l d e r and M. gets o l d e r that they too w i l l become part of the decisionmaking proc e s s . I don't know i f you've seen - no you haven't - I ' l l show you the k i d s ' bedrooms u p s t a i r s - they designed what they wanted f o r t h e i r bedrooms and I b u i l t i t . I t came out of t h e i r t a l k i n g about t h i n g s l i k e Jungle Jim or something. But they a l s o wanted bunkbeds to s l e e p i n . But when you q u e s t i o n them they r e a l l y both want to sleep i n the upper bunk. So they have i t . There's a l o t of other t h i n g s they wanted i n t h e r e . They wanted to come down a f i r e p o l e , s t u f f l i k e t h i s , and he does. But he wanted a l s o a s l i d e , the s l i d e should go from up there to r i g h t down here i n the - 141 -l i v i n g room. But you do have to draw the l i n e somewhere! ( l a u g h t e r ) I t h i n k what has happened i s that the r e l a t i o n s h i p between C. and myself has grown now i n t o a r e l a t i o n s h i p between the f o u r of us i n terms of the k i n d of d e c i s i o n s that are being made. I: And C , I know th a t C. i s not t o t a l l y , she, she knows what i s going on p o l i t i c a l l y , what you're d e a l i n g w i t h . I t ' s not something that you go o f f and do. You come home and you t a l k about i t and d e a l w i t h i t ? CR: The t r u t h of the matter i s that C. has become more p o l i t i c a l . You know how some people are s o r t of l i k e they're the v i s u a l s i d e of t h i n g s , you can s o r t of see them and they represent some p o l i t i c a l t h i n g s and then there i s the background people who do a l l the w r i t i n g , do a l l the ( i n a u d i b l e ) . There i t i s , you see. I t h i n k we've got more l e t t e r s coming from people l i k e B i l l Bennett and P i e r r e Trudeau i n t h i s house as r e t u r n m a i l from what C. has w r i t t e n about - from i s s u e s t h a t I t h i n k r e a l l y a f f e c t everybody. From nuc l e a r disarmament to simply zoning and t h i n g s l i k e t h i s that a f f e c t our l i v e s . I : Yeah, I guess to me i t seems that the important t h i n g i s that i t ' s not j u s t something that you j u s t go o f f and do . . . CR: No, t h a t ' s r i g h t , i t d e f i n i t e l y i s n ' t . I : I t happens l o t s and t h a t ' s where t h i n g s s t a r t t o , I guess f a l l a p a r t , or where the i n t e r e s t s become so d i f f e r e n t that you s t a r t to d r i f t i n t o d i f f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n s I guess. CR: W e l l , t h a t ' s what I s a i d as the k i d s came along. Now we are a u n i t of f o u r , and we p l a n h o l i d a y s and things l i k e t h i s , I've got t h i s great t r i p planned f o r next year but I am a l r e a d y t e s t i n g i t -t a l k i n g to the k i d s . "Now how do you t h i n k about going here," and s t u f f l i k e t h i s . I mean, we're going to go where I want to go! I j u s t want to make sure that they understand why. (laughs) But a l s o the key element i s of course that C. wants to do t h i s t r i p too, . . . I : That's g r e a t , you d i d g r e a t , you s t a r t e d at the begining and went a l l the way through. CR: I t h i n k i n c y c l e s . I : Yeah, so your l i f e has gone i n , I don't know, what i t i s , f i v e year c y c l e s , three year c y c l e s , something l i k e t h a t . There has been some s o r t of change that occurs every once i n a w h i l e . CR: Yeah. That's r i g h t . I : That's g r e a t , I don't have anything p a r t i c u l a r that I want f i l l e d i n on. Thanks. - 142 -INTERVIEW #3 I : Please r e f l e c t on your marriage and then t e l l me the s t o r y of your experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . You may want to give me an o u t l i n e of the s a t i s f a c t i o n i n your marriage from the beginning u n t i l now or you might l i k e to d e s c r i b e v i g n e t t e s of experience that t y p i f y the s a t i s f a c t i o n you f e e l . CR: I j u s t had an i d e a . I t h i n k what people would see or understand as s a t i s f y i n g or not s a t i s f y i n g , u n s a t i s f y i n g , i s determined perhaps by the way they got i n t o the marriage. The s t a t e of mind, the m a t u r i t y . I t j u s t occurred to me, to say i t occurred to me i s s i l l y , but I was t h i r t y when I got married and I t h i n k that made a r e a l d i f f e r e n c e . P. was 26. I don't t h i n k I went i n t o marriage b l i n d l y . I knew what I was g e t t i n g i n t o . C e r t a i n l y I couldn't foresee f i n a n c i a l problems the way they came up or other problems that were imposed on us from the o u t s i d e — m o t h e r - i n - l a w p r o b l e m s — I don't want to go i n t o t h a t . But I d i d n ' t have any i l l u s i o n s about my own f e e l i n g s waxing and waning. I : So you decided to get m a r r i e d , you f i g u r e d . . . CR: I knew, I expected that my f e e l i n g s would go and come and go and come. And then there were droughts. I : I wonder why you expected that? CR: From my experience w i t h other g i r l s b e f o r e . I d i d n ' t expect to be on cloud nine a l l the time. I wasn't on cloud nine on my wedding day,, you know, the supposedly happiest day i n one's l i f e , at l e a s t most women t h i n k so. I was happy, but I know l e t ' s c e l e b r a t e today and w e ' l l see what happens tomorrow. S a t i s f a c t i o n . . . perhaps on my death bed and I look back on my marriage and I have time t o r e f l e c t and I'm not too o l d and too f e e b l e I ' l l say "ya that was good". You know, that you could say i n the end i t was good. But somewhere i n between to say i t ' s good, I t h i n k i t ' s too soon to say t h a t . But as you s a i d before there are moments when i t ' s good and moments when . . . I : Yes, i t doesn't cont i n u e , l i k e you s a i d , i t s not b l i s s a l l the time and you were k i n d of expecting that when you got married because of your age you s a i d . CR: And P. I was s u r p r i s e d she . . . j u s t r e c e n t l y we t a l k e d about i t . . . she s a i d , " I expected my f e e l i n g s to be always the same," and I s a i d , " I don't b e l i e v e you." She s a i d yes. Then of course the f e e l i n g s went and she went i n t o shock. But she had had b o y f r i e n d s before and she thought oh maybe i t ' s not the r i g h t guy because my f e e l i n g s went f o r something l i k e t h a t . You read i n books that f e e l i n g s go but you t h i n k , oh, that happens to someone e l s e . I t doesn't happen to me, when I love someone, I love him a l l the time. W e l l , i t never happened to me that I l o v e d them a l l the time - 1 4 3 -and I began to t h i n k about what love i s a l l about. E r i c Fromm's book The A r t of Loving r e a l l y , r e a l l y helped me. I read f t years before I got married but i t always stuck w i t h me. And I t h i n k he helped me mature. I : Can you t e l l me a b i t about t h a t , what i t was, what that . . . CR: W e l l , he s a i d that ah, he's very much a g a i n s t romantic love as a s u p p o r t i v e b a s i s f o r a marriage and I s t i l l remember that there are moments, I t h i n k i t was Fromm, or maybe R o l l o May. But Fromm says that there are f e e l i n g s that sometimes you have to do i t by sheer w i l l power, by sheer d e t e r m i n a t i o n . That love i s not a f e e l i n g but i t ' s an a c t i v i t y , i t ' s d e c i d i n g to c a r e , d e c i d i n g , i t ' s a d e c i s i o n . And I wasn't q u i t e happy w i t h t h a t . I t ' s a l l w i l l power, that can't be q u i t e r i g h t . But I found there are moments and s t r e t c h e s and days and months where you go day by day, you say today I decide to l o v e my w i f e . I d i d that f o r a long time, however, I d i d n ' t l i k e t h a t , I d i d n ' t l i k e the f e e l i n g of not being i n l o v e , you know, ommission of romance, romantic f e e l i n g s and I d i d n ' t know what to do about i t . And I don't know how i t happened, what l e t me on to t h i s , I guess t h i n k i n g about i t . I s a i d , "I'm not seeing something r i g h t , " 'cause romantic love i s n ' t a l l there i s , we a l l know that so that so t h a t ' s . . . there are experiences so there must be, i t must be the f a c t . So o l d e r couples that are h o l d i n g hands that we see, why are they s t i l l h o l d i n g hands. Is i t romantic love or i s i t something e l s e t h a t came way a f t e r . And I was bothered by . . . say when P's h a i r wasn't n i c e , "oh, I wish she would f i x her h a i r . " S t u f f l i k e t h i s would bother me, I want her to look p r e t t y a l l the time. Or, "what k i n d of s t u f f i s she wearing today, oh that looks a w f u l . " I t shouldn't matter, but i t does and s t i l l does even now, I admit t h i s . L i t t l e t h i n g s i n l i f e , two people j u s t l i v i n g t o g e t h e r , h a b i t s , p e r s o n a l h a b i t s . I t s t a r t s to get to you. And then you say, w e l l , there's two worlds here that decided to come together and. . . . w e l l I'm going to jump f i r s t to how I s o l v e d t h i s problem. And I s t a r t e d l o o k i n g , I thought, wait a minute maybe I'm not seeing P. p r o p e r l y . L e t ' s s i t back and s t a r t l o o k i n g , l o o k i n g , t r y i n g to look deeper w i t h a d i f f e r e n t eye s o r t of w i t h a, people say mind's eye, eye of the h e a r t , to see the r e a l person t h a t ' s b u r i e d behind a l l these s u p e r f i c i a l i t i e s and h a b i t s and c u l t u r a l c o n d i t i o n i n g s and i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n d i t i o n i n g s , brainwashings—who i s r e a l l y behind a l l t h i s ? And that a t t i t u d e r e a l l y s t a r t e d to help me and I l a i d a completely new foundation f o r l o v e . And not only does i t r e f l e c t and help me w i t h other people I meet i n l i f e , you know, I s t i l l make the same s t u p i d mistakes but I know that there's a way around these mistakes, that there's a way beyond the s u p e r f i c i a l i t i e s . We a l l know t h i s i n theory i n c o u n s e l l i n g but we never apply i t very much. We a l l know there's more behind t h i s person, behind you, behind me. But somehow i t comes f r e e l y and i t goes. And I say, "oh that j e r k or that dumb broad", so we w r i t e them o f f , as human beings even, you know, not even wanting to be bothered and then we miss that which we have i n common, which i s - 144 -most of i t , most of i t we have i n common. So I s t a r t e d j u s t l o o k i n g , as WIchenstein says, " l o o k , don't t h i n k " . And that i s so t r u e , j u s t s t a r t l o o k i n g . I t h i n k P. was going through a c r i s i s too, she was bothered by the same t h i n g s . We never t o l d each other that because i t ' s s o r t of a d i c e y s i t u a t i o n , "hey T. I don't love you any more," o r , "P. I don't have the same f e e l i n g s f o r you" and, you know, goodbye. That d i d not happen, the end d i d not come. I f i n d the moment when people t e l l each, " I don't love you any more w i t h my f e e l i n g s , my emotions the way I used," I t h i n k t h a t ' s the moment when r e a l love can begin. I t ' s f r i g h t e n i n g to admit that to each other. A l o t of people walk out and look f o r more romance. I : Can you t e l l me how f a r i n t o your marriage that occurred. CR: For myself I was aware of i t r i g h t from the beginning, even b e f o r e , I d i d n ' t expect my f e e l i n g s to l a s t . As f o r P., she s o r t of went to sleep and she awoke about two years ago. She had the courage to admit to h e r s e l f that the f e e l i n g s weren't the same. And then she t o l d me; she had more guts than I . But I had been working on i t so I went through periods when I f e l t very s t r o n g l y f o r her and p e r i o d s when I f e l t n o t h i n g . But s i n c e we have been communicating these problems of our romantic f e e l i n g s towards one another I t h i n k we have r e a l l y made great leaps i n our marriage. Once you have made—I'm not c r a z i l y i n love w i t h you any more, then you say, w e l l what i s i t that keeps us tog e t h e r . That i s the love that perhaps E r i c Fromm t a l k e d about, t h a t ' s the l o v e I always wanted. I t ' s a l o v e that i s not 'me' o r i e n t e d . 'Cause romantic love i s e s s e n t i a l l y very s e l f i s h . I am i n l o v e . Never mind I love you, i t ' s what I f e e l . And I want to get out of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p , I want to be b l i s s f u l l y happy because you're w i t h me and you're so p r e t t y . But I don't want to g i v e you anything. I j u s t want you to make me happy. So t h a t ' s romantic l o v e I t h i n k . And then you do a l l k inds of s t u f f j u s t to get more, you make g i f t s and t h i s and that and you f l a t t e r j u s t to maybe keep that p o s s e s s i o n , that p i e c e of happiness. J u s t l i k e a piece of g o l d , every day you kind shine i t a b i t . I : So you got to a p o i n t , you s a i d you were k i n d of prepared f o r i t anyway because I guess maybe you were l o o k i n g at i t r e a l i s t i c a l l y , but the i l l u s i o n s of marriage, and love and romance—that i l l u s i o n s o r t of d i s s o l v e d and the r e a l i t y was there and then you found ways to d e a l w i t h t h a t . CR: W e l l I found that was a weakness w i t h i n myself, not being able to l o v e s e l f l e s s l y . I don't want to overdo t h i s s e l f l e s s b u s i n e s s , I don't want to be a martyr. Some people say there should be nothing i n i t f o r me, a l l s e l f l e s s g i v i n g . But I t o l d P. even before I married her, I s a i d , " l i s t e n , I don't know i f I can t r u l y l o v e you," and I knew about my weakness and I thought i t was unique but now I know everybody has s e r i o u s problems w i t h i t . When one was young we t h i n k that only we have th a t problem, we are the only one that s u f f e r s t h i s . - 145 -„I: Can you t e l l me a l i t t l e b i t about P. communicating i t to you. Sounds l i k e communication was a f a i r l y important part of i t because had you not, had n e i t h e r of you s a i d anything i t could have j u s t CR: You can only communicate what you are aware o f . So i f I had t o l d P. " I don't love you," and she hadn't been aware of t h i s the way she was when she t o l d me I don't know how she would have handled i t . Whether she would have been ready f o r i t 'cause she was under the i l l u s i o n t hat there's only one k i n d of l o v e , t h a t ' s romantic l o v e , and lov e and f e e l i n g s are synonymous. Although she di d n ' t have those f e e l i n g s she s t i l l was under impression that t h i s i s the on l y way i t i s . As I s a i d I wasn't happy w i t h the l o s s of my b l i s s f u l f e e l i n g s e i t h e r . I : How d i d t h i s then r e l a t e to your day-to-day g e t t i n g up i n the morning, making b r e a k f a s t . . . CR: W e l l i t r e a l l y bothered me, i t r e a l l y , r e a l l y bothered me that I di d n ' t f e e l t h i s exhuberance. I was l o o k i n g f o r i t . Every day I'd look at her and I'd say, " w e l l why i s i t that I can't f e e l t h i s . " And I t h i n k i t had a l o t to do w i t h the way she c a r r i e d h e r s e l f , you know she l e t h e r s e l f go a l i t t l e b i t . People do that i n marriage, probably I d i d i t too. And s i n c e she awakened about two years ago she goes out and buys d r e s s e s , keeps h e r s e l f up. Her appearance has changed which may which makes i t , I hate to admit t h i s that I'm s u p e r f i c i a l , but that s u r e l y h e l p s . And I t h i n k going o u t — b e i n g i n — c h a n g i n g the environment and spending time t o g e t h e r , being r o m a n t i c — g o to places that you went to when you were s i n g l e . We a l l t h i n k that that has to stop; now we don't go to t h i s bar, we don't go dancing anymore, we don't spend romantic weekends together, even t a k i n g a shower together and s t u f f l i k e t h i s . I t gets b u r i e d underneath the r o u t i n e and everyday l i f e . I t h i n k i t ' s work and I hated to admit that marriage i s work, i t i s work. I don't know what i t takes to break up the marriage, I have an i d e a what i t could be, but I t h i n k i f there was something i n the beginn i n g , i f the people r e a l l y l i k e d each o t h e r , I d i d n ' t say l o v e , I s a i d l i k e d , I t h i n k i t can be r e k i n d l e d again and a g a i n . I : But what's t h i s l i k e n e s s that you are t a l k i n g about. CR: Likeness i s j u s t a step below the romantic exuberance, you s t i l l have to l i k e the person. I don't know, between male and female, boy and g i r l I t h i n k that these boundaries are f u z z y . Sometimes I wonder, why do I l i k e a man, why do I l i k e a man f o r a f r i e n d ? C e r t a i n l y i t ' s not romantic, not t h a t I'm being t r i t e . So what i s i t then. Why do I l i k e t h i s person? Why do I see woman always as s e x u a l , as a sex r e l a t e d t h i n g . Why can't I j u s t l i k e a woman f o r a f r i e n d ? And I don't seem to be able to do that very e a s i l y . And I t h i n k a l s o i t helps to see how other people see your spouse. I f someone says, "gee, you sure married a dog," probably the only one who would be that honest would be your enemy. I t h i n k - 146 -exposing y o u r s e l f to other people, as couples away from k i d s t a l k , l e t ' s say from couple to couple t a l k , a d u l t to a d u l t . Get the t e e t h i n g k i d s out of the way and don't t a l k about your k i d s and about the f a m i l y and about the house and about the new car but t a l k about what's going on b e t w e e n — r e l a t i o n s h i p s — e v e n i f i t gets a b i t d i c e y once i n a w h i l e , about what one d i s l i k e s about one another. Seeing your spouse i n a d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n . See how she behaves i n a group. I t h i n k you have to admire your husband or your w i f e , I t h i n k that helps to remind o n e s e l f that one married someone s p e c i a l . So I t h i n k that a d m i r a t i o n f o r one another. Not f o o l i n g a d m i r a t i o n but true a d m i r a t i o n f o r what the person stands f o r , the values they have. I t h i n k values i s another t h i n g , I t h i n k values i s one of the biggest t h i n g s . The reason P. and I got together because we d i s c u s s e d — t h e f i r s t time we ever t a l k e d about something, I don't remember the c o n v e r s a t i o n , I haven't much of a memory f o r d e t a i l s , I only have a f e e l i n g that remained. I would say i t had a p h i l o s o p h i c a l bend, d e f i n i t e l y . I don't remember the s u b j e c t , but i t was d e f i n i t e l y , what do you t h i n k , what do I t h i n k , what are our v a l u e s . And I don't know what about, r e a l l y , and that d i d i t . I knew i t was about v a l u e s , I knew t h a t I wanted to meet her again and I knew that i f I ever met her again I was going to be very s e r i o u s . I : So t h i s was very e a r l y i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p ? CR: F i r s t n i g h t . And the f i r s t date I picked her up I knew I was going to marry her. Of course I d i d n ' t t e l l her t h a t . That's how simple i t was. Then we went through the a g o n i z i n g process of g e t t i n g to know each other which i s n ' t always t h a t , you know, i t ' s awkward. There were times when I thought I couldn't do i t . When I thought, w e l l here my f e e l i n g s go, God, w i l l I ever love anybody? Am I able to l o v e . I r e a l l y had t r o u b l e w i t h t h a t , d e c i d i n g t h a t , whether I was t r u l y capable of l o v i n g someone, to ask someone to marry me and s t i c k to i t . I t r e a l l y cost me a l o t of p a i n to work that out. I : What other experiences have you had along the s i m i l a r values l i n e ? I n i t i a l l y you recognized that so that must have been . . . CR: We hated the same t h i n g s . I t h i n k t h a t ' s a good b a s i s to s t a r t . People are always more aware of what they d i s l i k e d , what they do not l i k e , the hatreds of t h e i r d i s l i k e s . Sometimes i t ' s e a s i e r to focus on, to f i n d out what one d i s l i k e s . U s u a l l y we are very d e f i n i t e about what we d i s l i k e . Much more vague about we l i k e . I : Because the s u b t l e s are g r e a t e r , aren't they? CR: We seem to be vehement about t h i n g s that d i s g u s t us. Our v a l u e s , the t h i n g s t h t we agreed upon, l o o k i n g back now they haven't not r e a l l y changed very much. I was more negative than P. 'Cause of my background I guess, being European, North Americans seem to be more on an upbeat, more p o s i t i v e . But Europeans, snob I would say, are more n a i v e . But be that as i t may, I don't know i f i t ' s - 147 -n a i v e t y or whether i t s j u s t seeing l i f e from a completely d i f f e r e n t angle. Europe has had hard times and seen much more hardship and the memories are longer from g e n e r a t i o n to g e n e r a t i o n . You know you get t h i s fed from your grandmother, t h i s moaning, a l o t of moaning, the women moan a l o t , so you grow up as a k i d w i t h a much more negative outlook on l i f e and on people. But I r e j o i c e i n the N.A. o u t l o o k that P. brought i n t o my l i f e and the people i n g e n e r a l , i t ' s much more upbeat, much happi e r . I would almost l i k e to use the word gay but i t has bad c o n n o t a t i o n . I t h i n k my negativeness r e a l l y got P. down a l o t because I've been too n e g a t i v e . And that was a burden on her, I'm sure, at times. And j u s t r e c e n t l y , j u s t the l a s t few days even, I r e a l i z e d that how tremendously d i f f e r e n t the worlds are even i f they seem s i m i l a r when two people get togeth e r . How s l o w l y over the years we r e v e a l to each other the d i f f e r e n t u n i v e r s e that we r e a l l y l i v e i n and i f anyone r e a l l y knew from the beginning how d i f f e r e n t , how d i f f e r e n t we r e a l l y a r e , I don't t h i n k anybody would get married. But s i n c e we are ignorant we have an o p p o r t u n i t y to work i t out. I f we knew e v e r y t h i n g that could happen we would never t r y i t . I don't want to g i v e you the impression t h a t I t h i n k that i t couldn't be done but what I mean about d i f f e r e n t u niverses g e t t i n g together i s the s u b t l e t i e s i n t h i n k i n g and the s u b t l e t i e s of the experiences i n c h i l d h o o d . They can d i v i d e or they can e n r i c h too. I : E s p e c i a l l y , I guess when you come from d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s , i t ' s heightened i s n ' t i t ? Even though they're Western c u l t u r e s i t ' s s t i l l d i f f e r e n t . So how d i d you d e a l w i t h that? CR; I wasn't aware of them. I was aware of the b i g ones, the obvious. I : The s u b t l e way of t h i n k i n g , the s u b t l e way of seeing l i f e . CR: I t ' s almost i n d e s c r i b a b l e I guess i s n ' t i t , i t ' s j u s t a f e e l i n g . I t h i n k i t ' s p o s s i b l e among the same, w i t h i n the same c u l t u r e . I t ' s j u s t how the way you see a f l o w e r . One sees i t , the other one walks past i t . Maybe you both see i t but you get- d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s out of i t . I : So how d i d you two deal w i t h t h a t , the d i f f e r e n c e s ? CR: F o r t u n a t e l y , as I s a i d , we d i s l i k e d the same t h i n g s . So we d i s l i k e l a r g e crowds, we d i s l i k e going to the Sea F e s t i v a l and watching the f i r e w o r k s , we d i s l i k e snobbishness although we may be perceived as snobs o u r s e l v e s . I guess we l i k e people In g e n e r a l who communicate and we d i s l i k e people who need to wear a mask because i t takes so much energy to get through. Another problem i n our marriage i s , she has a l l the f r i e n d s and I have h a r d l y any. So her f r i e n d s are my f r i e n d s and I l i k e her f r i e n d s . They t r u l y become my f r i e n d s , mostly women. And I f i n d I communicate b e t t e r w i t h women than w i t h men, I t h i n k most men would say t h a t . Once you get past the s u p e r f i c i a l i t y of hockey and f o o t b a l l and the money market, you know what men t a l k about, then they shy away and how do you make - 148 -r e a l l y true f r i e n d s unless you meet them i n childhood and I d i d n ' t grow up here. I'm r e a l l y g e t t i n g o f f the s u b j e c t I guess. She says, " a l l my f r i e n d s are your f r i e n d s , how come you don't c o n t r i b u t e any of your own?" I work i n the t r a d e s . I'm not r e a l l y a tradesman at h e a r t , and we don't have much i n common, the people t h a t I work w i t h . I work w i t h them, th a t ' s i t . I wouldn't ask them home f o r dinner 'cause a l l we would t a l k about i s some s t u f f I'd r a t h e r leave behind. I t ' s p o s s i b l e that p r o f e s s o r s do t h a t too. But I l i k e to put work away and then say, "hey, what i s l i f e a l l about? Why are we here, where are we going, what's t h i s s u f f e r i n g a l l about, what are these moments of j o y , what do they teach us?" I : So t h a t ' s where you and P. are s i m i l a r ? GR: That's where we are s i m i l a r , ya, why are we here? You know, th a t leads to endless q u e s t i o n s . Where we are going, I don't even t h i n k about t h a t , i t ' s unimaginable anyhow. I : So you guys, over time, have r e a l l y communicated a l o t about t h a t s o r t of t h i n g . CR: Yes we d i d , v e r y much. We always communicated what we thought but not always how we f e l t about each o t h e r . That has come s l o w l y , i t ' s fragments. You can always say, " I l o v e you," t h a t ' s f i n e , but what i f you can say at the moment, " I don't love you, I hope i t comes back, I'm working on i t . " That, I must say, i s what I l i k e best about being m a r r i e d . I hate i t when e v e r y t h i n g goes smoothly. Ya, I s t a r t l o o k i n g at other women much more than when I'm working on my marriage. You know, you go around and you say, "oh, she looks cute and oh boy, wouldn't i t be n i c e to be f r e e , " or something l i k e t h a t . What would happen I f I cheated on my w i f e . But i f you are r e a l l y t r u l y i n v o l v e d i n your marriage, I would say to c e r t a i n degree, not i f you b a t t l e every day. But i f you're t r u l y working on i t w i t h care and w i t h b a s i c m o t i v a t i o n to make things work, I t h i n k i t ' s much more i n t e r e s t i n g . You may have p a i n f u l d i s c u s s i o n s and sometimes you f e e l l i k e you're g e t t i n g k n i f e d a l i v e . But I t h i n k that those are the most important moments. T a l k i n g about s a t i s f a c t i o n , i t doesn't go without p a i n , I would say I'm masochist. But, you know, pain has i t ' s l i m i t s . So I t h i n k s a t i s f a c t i o n comes w i t h deeper understanding. That's what I s a i d about the two un i v e r s e s meeting, when t h i s i s revealed t r u e understanding comes i n t h e r e . True respect and t r u e , a c t u a l l y I would say awe, almost, f o r the other person. I : Ya, t h a t ' s a r e a l theme i n what you're s a y i n g , the working at i t and f i n d i n g out more about the person to the poi n t of respect and even awe. CR: Awe i s j u s t overwhelming. You say oh you know someone, no, never. In every new s i t u a t i o n , every new c h a l l e n g e , i t shows you d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s . - 149 -I : P a r t of t h i s r e a l l y s a t i s f y i n g part of your marriage then i s p a i n f u l too because l i k e you say i t ' s l i k e you're being k n i f e d a l i v e , t h a t ' s q u i t e a d e s c r i p t i o n . Can you t e l l me a l i t t l e more about t h a t 'cause t h a t ' s r e a l l y i n t e r e s t i n g . CR: J u s t r e c e n t l y we had a d i s c u s s i o n . Whenever P. says she i s w r e s t l i n g w i t h her f e e l i n g s f o r me, you know, her f e e l i n g s are dead, I f e e l l i k e I'm r e a l l y , l i k e a l l my s t r e n g t h s o r t of . . . ( s t r u g g l i n g f o r the r i g h t words). I t a f f e c t s me p h y s i c a l l y as w e l l , I f e e l weak, p h y s i c a l l y weak. Of course i t ' s only a mental c o n d i t i o n . I c o u l d s t i l l l i f t a 100 l b . bag. You f e e l weak a l l over. Although I have the same f e e l i n g s f o r her but when someone t e l l s you that i t aches. And there's another t h i n g I should mention. P. i s an academic and I'm not. Now t h i s has been a source of pain f o r both of us. I f I was a happy tradesman i t would make a d i f f e r e n c e , but probably not 'cause she s a i d , " I married you because you're not j u s t a tradesman." Tradesmen have t h i s image of being i n t e r e s t e d only i n f o o t b a l l and d r i n k i n g beer and going to the beer p a r l o r . I t ' s u n f o r t u n a t e , they're not that way but a l o t of guys pretend they're that way. I've been a l i t t l e b i t slow i n g e t t i n g o f f the ground going to s c h o o l . My experience was so h o r r i b l e as a k i d I d i d n ' t ever want to go back to s c h o o l . Any way I'm doing that now. And i t has enriched my l i f e and P.'s l i f e and has improved our marriage. I: But somehow you got together even though that part of your l i v e s was r e a l l y d i f f e r e n t . CR: I was w e l l read and s t i l l read a l o t . I t was somehow incongrous t h a t I was a tradesman and s t i l l i n t e r e s t e d i n so many of those t h i n g s . I : I guess P. must have seen that part of you. CR: Yes, t h a t ' s why she married me, she t o l d me t h a t . She s a i d that she was bothered t h a t I was a baker, r e a l l y bothered. I'm bothered by being a baker too, I don't l i k e i t . I t doesn't g i v e me any f u l f i l l m e n t and my unhappiness r e a l l y was a burden on the f a m i l y and on our marriage. So t h a t ' s another problem, should a much b e t t e r o f f i c i a l l y educated person marry someone who i s n ' t ? I t takes a l o t more work, more m a t u r i t y on both p a r t s . I : So t h a t ' s been a part of your marriage t h a t ' s been d i f f i c u l t but you've worked i t out. CR: You see when she t e l l s me these things i t h u r t s . And I've thought of l e a v i n g her, you know how you dream of these t h i n g s . You know, even i f you daydream about those t h i n g s , I knew I'd never do t h a t . And I asked her and she s a i d she'd never leave me; w e l l you know people change t h e i r minds. But I'm q u i t e c o n f i d e n t t h a t I can say tha t I can't see us ever l e a v i n g each o t h e r . - 150 -I : So you've reached a l e v e l of t r u s t t h a t ' s p r e t t y h i g h then I guess, i s that r i g h t ? CR: I would say, ya. But i t doesn't mean that oh, she's never going to leave me so I'm j u s t going to be a s l o u c h . I know that I w i l l never leave you means that i f we cont i n u e . I don't know, maybe t h a t ' s wrong. I t h i n k input has to be t h e r e . I : Yes, i t keeps things k i n d of s p i r a l l i n g upwards. What about the r o l e s you guys have. I don't know i f P. worked before but you have always been the breadwinner. When you came i n t o marriage what d i d you expect that your r o l e would be, and expect t h a t P.'s r o l e would be? Did you see one another's r o l e s i n the same way do you t h i n k . What was that experience.? CR: I never expected to marry someone who j u s t sat at home. I thought i t was degrading. I grew up i n a business and my mother always worked and I always b a s i c a l l y saw women and men as e q u a l . I had a boss i n G. and she was a woman so to me i t d i d n ' t make any d i f f e r e n c e , I could work under a woman boss, you know, I d i d . I saw my mother work a l l her l i f e . So I have no problem w i t h women working. I a c t u a l l y thought i t was the best f o r them. I t was never a bone of c o n t e n t i o n w i t h i n me, so to me i t was, l e t a woman do what she wants to do. I: Do you t h i n k P. has s i m i l a r views on that? CR: No, I don't t h i n k so. I f e l t t h a t P. would have r a t h e r l i k e d to have married someone more s u c c e s s f u l , maybe a l i t t l e more money and she'd be more of a d i l e t t a n t e . That's one s i d e of her but the other s i d e says, "no I don't want that e i t h e r . " 'Cause she's not the type to stay home at a l l . But she was brought up i n a d i f f e r e n t environment although her mother worked a l l her l i f e t oo. But she thought maybe I t would be n i c e to go to the neighbourhood c o l l e g e and look f o r the lawyer, d o c t o r . I guess she d i d too but she couldn't f i n d one that she l i k e d enough. Yes she had that image of l i v i n g i n maybe a fancy house, and having an e a s i e r l i f e , and I wish I could have provided some of t h a t , wish I could have provided maybe a l i t t l e money. On the other hand i t was good that she had to go out, continue her ed u c a t i o n . I: In your marriage have you had any experiences of c o n f l i c t over who should do what, those k i n d of r o l e c o n f l i c t s ? CR: No, I don't t h i n k we are r o l e c o n s c i o u s . I h e l p w i t h the house, I do the cooking, or the dishes or the vacuuming. U s u a l l y I do the more heavy work l i k e p a i n t i n g o u t s i d e , p a i n t i n g i n s i d e , b u i l d i n g the porch and the sundeck, and I do the gardening and s t u f f l i k e t h a t . I : Do the r o l e p a r t s seem to have j u s t happened? - 151 -CR: Ya, we do what has to be done, sure we have p r e f e r e n c e s . I f I cook she does the d i s h e s . She makes the bed, I j u s t crawl i n t o i t unmade, I don't care i f i t ' s made or not. So I don't come home and s a y — w e l l sure I l i k e a c l e a n house and sometimes i t s messy 'cause she has much to do and I work p r a c t i c a l l y around the c l o c k , s c h o o l i n g and work so thin g s get out of hand once i n a w h i l e and i t upsets me. When you have s m a l l k i d s you can't put them to work. W e l l now i t ' s e a s i e r , when k i d s are o l d e r i t ' s a l o t e a s i e r I must say. I : How has that e f f e c t e d your marriage, the k i d s , as you go through your l i f e c y c l e . CR: W e l l , I don't t h i n k the k i d s were a burden as such. Sure there were many s l e e p l e s s n i g h t s when they were s i c k but I don't t h i n k they were used as cementing our marriage or were seen as d r i v i n g us apart although sometimes you wish you had a r e l a t i v e i n town to g i v e the k i d s to to get away f o r a few days. We have never been away f o r a weekend without the k i d s . And I t h i n k that i s t e r r i b l e . I t h i n k a married couple should be able to get away to renew t h e i r marriage. F i n d out what they have together away from the k i d s . Without wondering what i s l i t t l e Johnny doing. Never mind l i t t l e Johnny, what i s happening between us. I t h i n k that would have perhaps avoided a l o t of p a i n . I t h i n k we would have d i s c o v e r d sooner what we d i s c o v e r e d a f t e r ten y e a r s , about our f e e l i n g s . I : You t a l k e d about p a i n . Can you t e l l me about t h a t , j u s t i n c o n t r a s t to the s a t i s f a c t i o n of f i n d i n g out, what was the p a i n p a r t of i t . CR: The p a i n on my part was h o l d i n g a m i r r o r up to me and making me look at my f e e l i n g s f o r her. I was aware of that a l r e a d y but when someone t e l l s you something that even you y o u r s e l f are w r e s t l i n g w i t h . As long as you can't admit i t to the other person you haven't r e a l l y faced i t 100 p e r c e n t . You only face i t the moment you admit i t or confess; then you've r e a l l y made a statement, a commitment of s o r t s . I f you h o l d i t i n , gee, I wish I f e l t romantic love f o r my w i f e , as long as you don't t e l l her you s o r t of l i v e i n limbo. Maybe there i s the time when you shouldn't take the r i s k and maybe there i s the time when you should take the r i s k . And I guess P. knew th a t I c o u l d take t h i s , she t o l d me t h i s , " I know you can take t h i s s t u f f . " I s a i d , "what i f I'd t o l d you e a r l i e r " and she s a i d , "I'm not so sure I c o u l d have taken i t , " and I must have sensed that so I kept i t to myself. And I'm glad t h a t she came to the p o i n t she can face her own f e e l i n g s . She s a i d she wasn't aware of i t b e f o r e . She j u s t wasn't aware. She thought that t h a t ' s how i t i s and she was sad. She was aware that she hadn't, d i d n ' t have those f e e l i n g s anymore but she thought, t h a t ' s how i t i s . She passed i t out of her mind. I don't t h i n k she r e a l l y stood up and faced i t . She s a i d she wasn't r e a l l y aware, she thought she would never f e e l romantic love again i n her l i f e . - 152 -I: So f o r you then the p a i n f u l part was knowing that you f e l t the romantic i n f a t u a t i o n part had gone, probably q u i t e a long time ago, and you were t r y i n g to de a l w i t h how to b r i n g i t back and yet you couldn't t e l l her so you were j u s t d e a l i n g w i t h i t i n s i d e a l l the time and i t was hard. CR: Very hard. I t ' s s o r t of l i k e when you have a b o i l . I t pains but when you lance i t there's a sharp p a i n , but i t ' s a r e l i e f although the p a i n i s much sharper. I : But i t g r a d u a l l y d i s s i p a t e s . CR; Then i t d i s s i p a t e s and you squeeze i t and I t hurts a l i t t l e more but the s t u f f oozes out. I: That's r i g h t . That's a good analogy T. CR: A c t u a l l y I love these d i s c u s s i o n s about our f e e l i n g s and l o v e . We get used to i t too. F i r s t , oh my God, I don't know i f she's going to l o v e . . . maybe we're going to s p l i t up, maybe our marriage i s over, but then, f a r from i t . I : Because you s t a r t to t a l k about i t . CR: And I t h i n k t h a t ' s wonderful. S a t i s f a c t i o n i s not j u s t s i t t i n g h a p p i l y together on a bench i n the sunset. I t h i n k s a t i s f a c t i o n i s r e a l l y g r i n d i n g i t out. I ; So the s a t i s f a c t i o n you get from knowing that th i n g s are . . . CR: Then you know you are both working towards a b e t t e r marriage. You can t r u s t t h a t I'm not the only one who's working to make t h i s t h i n g work but my par t n e r too, we're both beginning to see each other i n d i f f e r e n t ways. Once you know your f e e l i n g s are gone and you admit i t to each other I t h i n k you begin to look f o r a d i f f e r e n t k i n d of l o v e . Although to have the romance back would be r e a l l y n i c e too. And i t comes, i t sneaks back i n because you begin to r e f l e c t back, you say, "what was i t that brought us together," and s o r t of a gentleness comes i n , a ge n t l e kind of l o v e . Not the exurberance, not the w e l l , passion i s s t i l l perhaps p o s s i b l e . I t ' s a g e n t l e k i n d of l o v e . And sometimes I wonder what i f I suddenly found myself s i n g l e and was d a t i n g women. What would be my f e e l i n g s now at age 42. Would I f e e l the same f o r a new r e l a t i o n s h i p as I d i d then and I can t r u l y and h o n e s t l y say, "no", I wouldn't. I would be much c o o l e r , I would be, I'm not even sure I would get i n f a t u a t e d . I would be, I don't know what I would be. I t h i n k i t would be much harder to f a l l i n l o v e . You know they're j u s t people. You don't have t h i s clouded v i s i o n . Romantic love i s j u s t because you have t u n n e l v i s i o n , you only choose to see c e r t a i n t h i n g s , the things that you want to see i n someone. - 153 -I : So you're saying that you've k i n d of gone through romantic love and d e a l i n g w i t h the marriage f o r so long that i f you got out of i t you'd be so r e a l i s t i c , perhaps, that i t would be d i f f i c u l t . . . CR: Or perhaps the d e c i s i o n would be more r e l i a b l e too. You c o u l d t r u s t your experience. I : Is there anything more you'd l i k e to add at t h i s time T.? CR: No, I don'd t h i n k so. - 154 -INTERVIEW #4 I : Please r e f l e c t on your marriage and then t e l l me the s t o r y of your experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . You may want to g i v e me an o u t l i n e of the s a t i s f a c t i o n i n your marriage from the beginning u n t i l now or you might l i k e to d e s c r i b e v i g n e t t e s of experience that t y p i f y the s a t i s f a c t i o n you f e e l . CR: You s a i d o r i g i n a l l y you got people to t a l k about the s t o r y of t h e i r marriage and then you g r a d u a l l y adjusted i t to them sometimes t a l k i n g about some of the negative things as w e l l as the p o s i t i v e because i t s r e a l l y hard to j u s t t a l k about p o s i t i v e t h i n g s I f i n d . Maybe because so much of i t i s negative a l o t of the time. I t ' s l i k e you're c o n s t a n t l y d e a l i n g w i t h some problem. I don't mean that every second, I mean every few days or maybe sometimes you go f o r weeks and there's no b i g problems and then one w i l l come and s t i c k around f o r two weeks and then i t w i l l be another i s s u e you're d e a l i n g w i t h so i t ' s d i f f i c u l t to t a l k about the p o s i t i v e without the negative because they're j u s t so i n t e r w i n e d . The p o s i t i v e t h i n g s are what keeps you t h e r e , sometimes s t r u g g l i n g d u r i ng the negative t h i n g s . I So that makes sense to you. By l o o k i n g at the negative you can look at the p o s i t i v e too. CR: Yes, because u s u a l l y the p o s i t i v e t h i n g s are what help you to get through the negative t h i n g s . When you're s i t t i n g there r e a l l y t h i n k i n g , you know, g e t t i n g r e a l l y c a l c u l a t i n g and c o l d blooded about, l i k e , what k i n d of r e l a t i o n s h i p i s t h i s and you s t a r t l o o k i n g at a l l the negative t h i n g s , you have to s t a r t l o o k i n g at the p o s i t i v e t h i n g s too i f you want to keep the r e l a t i o n s h i p g o i n g . On oc c a s i o n I do s t a r t t h i n k i n g , what the h e l l am I doing here, and then I ' l l s t a r t t h i n k i n g , because I do want i t to work. I ' l l f o r c e myself to t h i n k of the good t h i n g s even though my s t a t e of mind i s completely negative at the time. I ' l l t r y and t a l k myself out of being n e g a t i v e , so i t ' s d i f f i c u l t . I have a l i s t of some of the p o s i t i v e t h i n g s , they are not i n any order of importance by the way. I t j u s t occurred to me when I was reading your l e t t e r to not ah, one of things t h a t I learned and my mother once s a i d to me, " i f you're bored w i t h l i f e i t ' s your own f a u l t , " and on occasion I have f e l t r e s t l e s s and wanting something r e a l l y more s t i m u l a t i n g and t h i n k i n g t h a t , I t h i n k being m i s l e d that i t can j u s t come from a new r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h a new person. Expecting the excitement and the newness of a new r e l a t i o n s h i p to g i v e me what I'm missing i n my l i f e and I r e a l i z e that she's r i g h t , t h a t I should t r y and do something f o r myself and not expect another person to do things f o r me. I t has to come from me i f I'm going to be a contented person. I can't expect complete f u l f i l m e n t from another i n d i v i d u a l . I have to be more r e s o u r c e f u l myself and not expect complete happiness and contentment to be created by another person. That poor person who - .155 -has that r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , that u n a t t a i n a b l e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of making someone happy. I guess we're brought up w i t h some of those f a l s e e x p e c t a t i o n s by some of the movies we see. When we're growing up the love s t o r i e s and t h i n g s , "oh, I ' l l have happiness f o r e v e r from a man." And though I f e e l r a t h e r r e s e n t f u l about tht= l i e s that we've been t o l d through our media I f i n d that other people are r e a l l y important to me too. I've r e a l i z e d as I've gotten o l d e r , e s p e c i a l l y other women are r e a l l y important to me. Sometimes so you can t a l k about problems or f e e l i n g s or ideas that you have that are p a r t i c u l a r to the female sex. Some men are r e a l l y good at understanding them too. Some men are r e a l l y s e n s i t i v e and p e r c e p t i v e about p u t t i n g themselves i n t o a female's view p o i n t . But I s t i l l f i n d I f i n d I need women f r i e n d s and so that takes some of the pressure o f f my mate to have to f u l f i l l me completely or to meet a l l my emotional needs. I f i n d that f r i e n d s , men f r i e n d s or women f r i e n d s , j u s t other f r i e n d s i n g e n e r a l are r e a l l y important to me. Keep me contented. Sometimes the more d i s s a t i s f i e d I get i t ' s probably sometimes because I've been j u s t at home w i t h G. and B. too long and haven't been g e t t i n g out and being i n v o l v e d w i t h other people more, so t h a t ' s important. Sometimes when you have a downer you're not q u i t e sure what the causes are and sometimes t h a t ' s one of the t h i n g s to look f o r . Am I not doing enough, i s there not enough v a r i e t y i n my l i f e . And t h a t ' s my own f a u l t u s u a l l y i f there i s n ' t . I : In t h i n k i n g of that i s there a p a r t i c u l a r time t h a t ' s happened r e c e n t l y or i s that something gen e r a l t h a t you've f e l t over the years of being married. CR: I t h i n k i t might be s i n c e I had a c h i l d . Since I had B. I ' v e — y o u have so much i n common wi t h another person who has a c h i l d . You can t a l k about, you can l e a r n so much from other people who have had c h i l d r e n . I guess i t ' s that l e a r n i n g t h i n g I get from other people. (Telephone r i n g s and i n t e r v i e w i s i n t e r r u p t e d . ) Since I had a c h i l d I've gotten i n v o l v e d w i t h other people i n a d v e r t e n t l y because they have c h i l d r e n and someone f o r B. to p l a y w i t h too. M a i n l y f o r B. to p l a y w i t h them but a l s o g e t t i n g , j u s t to l e a r n from other people who have c h i l d r e n e i t h e r my c h i l d ' s age or a b i t o l d e r so that you can j u s t p i c k up l i t t l e t r i c k s they use or games they teach them or how they teach them. I guess I f e l t I needed other people more too. P a r t l y because l i t t l e k i d s can't t a l k very w e l l . So I t h i n k i t ' s been s i n c e then t h a t I've r e a l i z e d my need f o r more people than j u s t one person. I : I guess maybe, l i k e f o r you guys G. i s here a l l time too i s n ' t he, k i n d a works at home. CR: Ya, comes i n f o r lunch and c o f f e e . I : So your contact w i t h him i s ongoing during the day. I was t h i n k i n g i n terms of people whose husband goes out to work, k i n d of a stereotype here, because the woman i s g e n e r a l l y at home f o r the f i r s t couple of years anyway. I'm not sure what t h i s has to do - 156 -w i t h anything but g e n e r a l l y the guy goes away i n the morning and comes back i n the a f t e r n o o n . Your s i t u a t i o n i s j u s t a l i t t l e b i t d i f f e r e n t t h a t ' s a l l , because G. works on the property here. CR: Having a c h i l d has put more s t r e s s e s on our r e l a t i o n s h i p and i t a l s o has made i t , w e l l we have that common i n t e r e s t i n a c h i l d . I t ' s one of the p o s i t i v e t h i n g s of having a c h i l d . You both love her so much and are so i n t e r e s t e d i n her w e l l being t h a t I t h i n k i t makes you t r y harder o f t e n times to get a l o n g — a t l e a s t when she's there ( l a u g h t e r ) , f i g h t i n the other room l a t e r . I mean she's got to l e a r n to argue too. So i t ' s got a s t r e n g t h e n i n g e f f e c t having a c h i l d but i t a l s o causes new s t r e s s e s . I know t h a t I have at times f e l t hard done by from not having had more freedom from the c h i l d c a r i n g . I t ' s g e t t i n g b e t t e r because I'm a r t i c u l a t i n g my needs more. L i k e I d i d n ' t r e a l l y know o f t e n what was b o t h e r i n g me, I couldn't always put i t i n t o words. And then I guess I s t a r t e d to understand what was b o t h e r i n g me more. Not g e t t i n g away from the c h i l d more, not having more v a r i e t y i n my l i f e . At times I f e l t t h a t I was the cook and the c l e a n e r and the c h i l d r e a r e r and I was f e e l i n g there wasn't, there was j u s t so much of myself t h a t I wasn't developing or u s i n g . I was f e e l i n g frumpy. I : Not an uncommon experience f o r women. CR: Ya, v e r y common. So i t took me a w h i l e to a r t i c u l a t e my f r u s t r a t i o n or to know what was causing my f r u s t r a t i o n and then to t r y to f i n d a way fo e x p r e s s i n g my needs without arguing or without g e t t i n g angry and s i l e n t and without j u s t becoming r e s e n t f u l and s i l e n t , to show my f r u s t r a t i o n by a s k i n g before I get angry. Would you do t h i s or I want to go out t h e r e , w i l l you s t a y home w i t h the c h i l d . I need more time o f f i n a month, I'm never away from the c h i l d u n l e s s I arrange two hours w i t h a woman f r i e n d or somebody e l s e who's w i l l i n g to take her. I would l i k e him, the husband, the f a t h e r to do more. And so i t ' s gotten b e t t e r , p a r t l y too w i t h her g e t t i n g o l d e r i t ' s e a s i e r f o r him to take her because she's not being b r e a s t f e d and they're becoming good chums. I'm not her, I am s t i l l her prime c a r e - t a k e r but they're developing a r e a l l y good f r i e n d s h i p too so he can take her away over n i g h t on occasion to V. or something. I : How does that communicating your f r u s t r a t i o n s w i t h G.; how i s that r e c e i v e d and d e a l t w i t h . You s a i d i t was b e t t e r because you've decided and r e a l i z e d the need to s t a r t t a l k i n g about those kinds of t h i n g s . I guess what I'm t r y i n g to get at i s how i s that communication, has i t worked out f a i r l y s a t i s f a c t o r i l y i n that you f e e l that you've been heard and that something has happened as a r e s u l t of what you've done. CR: Yes, something has happened, not q u i t e what was planned, not q u i t e the h a l f day a week I was promised ( l a u g h t e r ) , but i t i s b e t t e r . And I'm not q u i t e sure how much to ask f o r e i t h e r , what's f a i r , because I'm not the bread winner r i g h t now so I'm a b i t confused - 157 -about how much I should expect, what's f a i r of me to expect. Each r e l a t i o n s h i p has, I t h i n k , t h e i r own i d e a of what e q u a l i t y and f a i r n e s s i s , t h a t ' s what I'm f i n d i n g out. You can't look at another couple and get your i d e a s , you can get i n f l u e n c e d by i t and get some ideas but you can't expect to j u s t copy another couple. I f i n d you look at another couple's l i f e and t h i n k , "God, how can she stand i t he never takes the c h i l d , he never does anything." Looking at someone e l s e where the man i n seasonably employed away and when he i s home he does so much of the c h i l d c a r e work that I'm ovewhelmed that he's w i l l i n g to do so much. My brother f o r example. He's not seasonable employed but when he comes home he p r e t t y w e l l takes over the c h i l d and I j u s t sometimes t h i n k i t ' s u n f a i r to him, he does too much f o r h i s h e a l t h I t h i n k . So you can look around you f o r other ideas but you s o r t of have to work i t out. And sometimes I s t i l l f a i l , I guess sometimes I ' l l s t i l l get f r u s t r a t e d and not express my needs soon enough without f e e l i n g r e s e n t f u l f i r s t . G. d i d n ' t know what was bo t h e r i n g me e i t h e r because he'd never had a c h i l d before so he'd come i n t o the house and get the heavy v i b e s and not know why he was supposed to be f e e l i n g g u i l t y . And so the odd b i g f i g h t was over the c h i l d and what I wanted. How has that worked out. I t ' s much b e t t e r . And then I a l s o know that i f I need more freedom I have to work i t out too by t a k i n g B. to f r i e n d s each week so I g i v e them her f o r two hours and then I take t h e i r c h i l d f o r two hours and i f I do t h i s w i t h two f r i e n d s then I'm guaranteed at l e a s t f o u r hours by myself d u r i n g the day. And I do look at that mainly as my r o l e as being the mother, the c a r e t a k e r , because I'm not earning any money so I don't expect too much from G. d u r i n g the week, the working days or even on weekends. Communication a l l round could be b e t t e r about e v e r y t h i n g I'm sure. That's one t h i n g we have to work on. I: I t sounds l i k e r i g h t now w i t h B., your r o l e s , you've k i n d of got them worked out to a degree. Those t h i n g s are always changing and being adjusted but e s s e n t i a l l y you f e e l k i n d of comfortable w i t h what's going on now f o r the way i t has to be, s o r t of t h i n g . CR: HMM-mm I t h i n k i t ' s q u i t e f a i r f o r the most p a r t , w i t h the odd l i t t l e b i t of f r u s t r a t i o n , ( l a u g h t e r ) But then i t ' s up to me to complain too because he's not a mind reader; mind you i t would be n i c e i f he was a mind reader, ( l a u g h t e r ) So I say to people who t h i n k having a baby i s going to help t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p , "don't do i t , " because i t sure doesn't, i t ' s j u s t one more t h i n g to cr e a t e havoc. I: In f a c t , you know, I d i d l o t s of reading before I got i n t o my re s e a r c h and they t a l k about the f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e , the stages of our f a m i l y l i f e c y c l e and a f t e r the b i r t h of the f i r s t c h i l d i s when the s a t i s f a c t i o n i n the marriage i s g e n e r a l l y the lowest. Not tha t people don't want the k i d , l i k e you say the c h i l d draws you together i n ways. In one way you have a very strong common bond and yet i t creates so many other r e l a t e d tensions and d i s t r a c t i o n s and your a t t e n t i o n doesn't go to one another so much of course. - 158 -CR: Ya, you tend to ignore each other a l o t more. I t ' s e a s i e r to not gi v e each other much time or care or want to l i s t e n to your spouse's problems because a l l day I've been l i s t e n i n g to what B. wants and i f G. walks i n the door and s t a r t s t e l l i n g me h i s problems or asking f o r something I j u s t f e e l a l l I have been doing a l l day i s g i v i n g , g i v i n g , g i v i n g and when i s anybody going to ask me how I f e e l , you know, that s o r t of martyred f e e l i n g , when i s my t u r n going to come to complain. I : I don't t h i n k t h a t ' s recognized enough somehow. For example, i n p r e - n a t a l c l a s s e s they don't t a l k about that s o r t of s t u f f , about the f a c t that t h i n g s are going to go down h i l l before they go up and that i t ' s r e a l l y d i f f i c u l t . I t seems to me that unless you have what you may c a l l a very t r a d i t i o n a l marriage and the woman somehow i s t o t a l l y s a t i s f i e d doing e v e r y t h i n g , which I t h i n k happens sometimes. But I don't t h i n k t h a t ' s too r e a l i s t i c . So t h a t ' s r e a l l y common. I don't know f o r subsequent k i d s i f i t changes at a l l but there's probably l i t t l e d i ps every time. CR: I guess the f a c t t h a t G. i s earning the money now i s important to me too, l i k e I f e e l f a i r l y g r a t e f u l . I don't know i f I should but, i s that the r i g h t word, I a p p r e c i a t e the f a c t that he i s doing t h a t . P a r t l y 'cause I l i k e to be w i t h B. at t h i s age. Money i s very b i g . I see other people around me where n e i t h e r of them can f i n d work. I t h i n k that would be r e a l l y hard on a r e l a t i o n s h i p i f n e i t h e r of you could f i n d money. Can't f i n d a j o b . The f a c t t h a t he's working and w i l l i n g to work i s something I respect i n him. I f he d i d n ' t , i f he'd dec i d e d , "I'm not going to work, I'm going on w e l f a r e , " o r , "you go and f i n d something I don't care what i t i s j u s t get out and f i n d something," I t h i n k that would r e a l l y make me angry and i t might even sever the r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t h i n k i t ' s a r e a l l y b i g i s s u e , the persons a t t i t u d e and w i l l i n g n e s s to work. Unless he r e a l l y wanted to be the prime c a r e t a k e r of the c h i l d , i f that was h i s m o t i v a t i n g t h i n g . Then i t would be a d i f f e r e n t i s s u e . But the f a c t that he's w i l l i n g to work i s very important to me r i g h t now. Probably always w i l l be. Not to be ambitio u s , not to be money grabbing, but j u s t to be w i l l i n g to work. F o r t u n a t e l y he's found something he l i k e s doing which i s a hard t h i n g to f i n d these days, i s n ' t i t ? So t h a t ' s a b i g number 'cause i f he wasn't i n t o p u l l i n g h i s own w e i g h t — l i k e some men maybe they can't f i n d g a i n f u l employment so when they're home t h e y ' l l become house-husbands and t h a t ' s f i n e . I've met the odd guy who won't do e i t h e r . He's home, he doesn't change the d i a p e r s , he won't cook, he might do a b i t of mechanics on the ca r , he doesn't do any of the gardening, he's an a r t i s t but doesn't do much a r t work. His w i f e , she amazes me how she can be so acc e p t i n g of h i s ways. I don't know i f my l o v e , so c a l l e d , would bear those s o r t of s t r e s s e s . And then i t makes me f e e l bad t h a t I q u e s t i o n , l i k e I s t a r t t h i n k i n g , what the h e l l i s love then i f these things l i k e economics are so c r u c i a l , l i k e what the h e l l i s love i f money plays such a b i g part i n h o l d i n g a r e l a t i o n s h i p t o g e t h e r . Seems maybe I'm being t e r r i b l y s e l f i s h or p e t t y . I t makes me q u e s t i o n , why i s i t so important? - 159 -I : So the money part that i s important, does i t g i v e you a c e r t a i n amount of freedom and maybe some s t a b i l i t y i n l i f e that allows you to do what you have to do. CR: R i g h t , i t does provide a very s t a b l e environment and a l i f e s t y l e . I t ' 8 not much money but i t provides a l i f e s t y l e . I t means th a t I can be B.'s mother and do the gardening and whatever. And he l i k e s h i s work. I t ' s l i k e we a l l have f a i r l y set r o l e s r i g h t now which I t h i n k i s good f o r a person I f you l i k e what your r o l e i s . I t h i n k i t i s important to have that k i n d o f , ya s t a b i l i t y , t h a t ' s a good word. Maybe t h a t ' s why the word money has such negative connotations but i t ' s not money, i t ' s p r o v i d i n g you w i t h a c e r t a i n freedom to l i v e a c e r t a i n way which i s a f a i r l y s t a b l e l i f e f o r us. I : And then you were f e e l i n g k i n d of funny about equating l o v e w i t h having money. What r o l e does love p l a y i n your marriage? Can you t e l l me some of your experience of f e e l i n g l o v e d , what has happened t h a t ' s made you f e e l that way. I t ' s p r e t t y much d i r e c t i n g you but I'm i n t e r e s t e d i n t h a t . CR: How has i t f e l t ? I : What has happened to make you f e e l t h a t way? There's probably an o v e r a l l f e e l i n g , j u s t s h a r i n g and being t o g e t h e r . CR: Yes, I guess that was a l a r g e part of i t , having a background together having had common experiences. Sometimes you s t a r t to wonder about how loved are you, how loved i s one, i s i t j u s t a h a b i t of- being t o g e t h e r , i s i t the i n e r t i a of having an o l d r e l a t i o n s h i p . And then once i n a w h i l e t h i s f e e l i n g of being l o v e d w i l l pop up on a c e r t a i n o c c a s i o n . I guess the l a s t time was when I had to have the a b o r t i o n because the baby had no b r a i n . Going through the a b o r t i o n , they i n j e c t e d a drug i n t o the uterus to cause c o n t r a c t i o n so I went through f i v e hours of l a b o u r . Having somebody with me at that time who was i n v o l v e d i n the whole t h i n g and was concerned about my p h y s i c a l , emotional w e l l being. I t was a very c l o s e s o r t of f e e l i n g to share t h a t . A time l i k e that makes you f e e l q u i t e c l o s e , l i k e you r e a l l y need somebody. R e a l i z i n g at times l i k e that that you r e a l l y do need other people to support you. And then a c r i s i s t h i n g l i k e t hat w i l l pass and then everyday l i f e comes bumbling back along and you s t a r t harping at each other and not showing enough tenderness or care f o r each o t h e r . Being c r i t i c a l of each other r a t h e r than p o s i t i v e , not p a t t i n g each other on the head enough. Sometimes, I've f e l t l i k e , "God, I never get p a t t e d on the head or c r e d i t e d f o r anything. Jesus, I might as w e l l leave f o r s e v e r a l days j u s t to show, my absence w i l l maybe show what I do when I am here so I t h i n k I should go away so maybe I ' l l s t a r t being a p p r e c i a t e d a g a i n . So I ' l l go through l i t t l e mental tantrums i n s i d e my head l i k e t hat and u s u a l l y I don't do i t . ( l a u g h t e r ) Or i f I c r i t i c i z e G. and he won't take c r i t i c i s m v e r y w e l l I get angry at him f o r not being able to take c r i t i c i s m . He c r i t i c i z e s me so I f e e l he should be able to take i t . And so - 160 -I ' l l get angry at him i n s i d e myself. That's one t h i n g I have to work on i s t e l l i n g him I f e e l he's not l e t t i n g me c r i t i c i z e him without g e t t i n g u p p i t t y or s e l f - d e f e n s i v e and i t ' s h i s response I don't l i k e i t ' s not what I'm c r i t i c i z i n g t h a t I d i s l i k e so much, i t ' s h i s response of being c r i t i c i z e d that puts me o f f . And I ' l l have to s t a r t a r t i c u l a t i n g that because t h a t — s o what was the p o i n t t h a t I was t r y i n g to make, I can't even remember. T a l k i n g about l o v e , how something w i l l happen that w i l l r e u n i t e you. 'Cause sometimes you both get so busy each w i t h your own i n t e r e s t s , h i s woodworking and my c h i l d c a r i n g , that you don't give each other enough s o r t o f , I don't know i f i t ' s care or concern. Ah, they're tough, they're s u r v i v i n g , they're g e t t i n g by ok, I don't have to go i n and do anything s p e c i a l f o r them, and besides I'm too t i r e d , ( l a u g h t e r ) I want to read. Making the e f f o r t to show l o v e . Or t a k i n g the person f o r granted i s something that i s so easy to happen that once i n a w h i l e you f e e l a b i t g u i l t y about i t . The l o s s of the baby was an experience that brought us t o g e t h e r . The b i r t h of B. was major event and the pregnancy too, s h a r i n g t h i n g s i n a pregnancy. Except at times d u r i n g the pregnancy I f e l t v e r y alone. I : Because you're both e x p e r i e n c i n g two r e a l i t i e s about i t , aren't you. CR: Ya, and he was so i n v o l v e d i n h i s woodworking course i n C. at the time that I j u s t f e l t q u i t e a l o n e . I suppose being i s o l a t e d from my f a m i l y and f r i e n d s down there made i t harder although I met some r e a l l y wonderful people down t h e r e . So t a l k i n g about lo v e t h i n g s . God, i t ' s so easy to g e t , as I was saying t a k i n g someone f o r granted and not, I mean that romantic f e e l i n g i s not there that was there i n the i n i t i a l phases of your r e l a t i o n s h i p . I would be i n t e r e s t e d to know i f these other poeple who have had long-term marriages whether they f e e l the romance at a l l anymore. To be honest, I don't. I wouldn't say that to G. 'cause I wouldn't want to hurt him. And he probably doesn't even t h i n k I do, i t ' s j u s t t h a t i f I a r t i c u l a t e d i t , i t would be h u r t f u l . I can understand why people have b r i e f romances or quick a f f a i r s because of the sameness, always being i n bed w i t h the same person, year a f t e r year a f t e r year. I t can be pleasant and i t can be b o r i n g , depends on your hormones or how your r e l a t i o n s h i p i s going at the time. You can understand though how people do i t j u s t because i t would be n i c e to have a change. And i t ' s l i k e times l i k e that that you r e a l l y have to s t a r t t a l k i n g to y o u r s e l f , t h i n k of the important t h i n g s , t h i n k of the good t h i n g s that are coming from your r e l a t i o n s h i p and you can't r e a l l y probably have your cake and eat i t too although i t would be n i c e . I t h i n k having f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s l i k e mothers and brothers and s i s t e r s around you who know you as a couple. Having that extended f a m i l y present helps to keep you as a couple too. I t h i n k that there's a c e r t a i n amount of s o c i a l - 161 -pressure t h e r e . People j u s t expect that you're going to be w i t h your mate tomorrow. I f the thought ocurs to one, hmmmm, I wonder what i t would be l i k e being a s i n g l e person a g a i n , and you t h i n k , oh God, I'd have to t e l l everybody, ( l a u g h t e r ) Or what you f a n t a s i z e about, what i t would be l i k e to be s i n g l e sometimes when you're j u s t a b i t bored w i t h your humdrum e x i s t e n c e . And then you s t a r t t h i n k i n g about the r e a l i t i e s as I s a i d , f a c i n g your f a m i l y and t e l l i n g them 'cause they j u s t assume that e v e r y t h i n g i s f i n e and e v e r y t h i n g ' s going to be the same tomorrow as i t i s today. So there's a c e r t a i n s t r e n g t h that comes from having f a m i l y around. Maybe i t ' s f o r c e d s t r e n g t h , but i t does e x i s t , i t e x e r t s a k i n d of f o r c e on you. Although I've s a i d to myself, I'm not every going to stay i n a marriage because of s o c i a l p r e s s u r e s , t h a t ' s not enough to keep me here i f I r e a l l y want to l e a v e . Were you saying that having f a m i l y around, i s that something t h a t you l i k e even though there's pressure there from i t ; unspoken, passiv e p r e s s u r e , that we may only create i n o u r s e l v e s . I'm sure i t i s , my f a m i l y would be t o t a l l y a c c e p t i n g of whatever move I made. They wouldn't condemn me, i t would be great I'm s u r e . G.'s mother, that would be d i f f e r e n t , ( l a u g h t e r ) Another t h i n g that g i v e s some s a t i s f a c t i o n i n a marriage r e l a t i o n s h i p i s having o v e r l a p p i n g i n t e r e s t s . L i k i n g a l o t of the same people. I f he chose f r i e n d s t h a t I couldn't t o l e r a t e that would r e a l l y be tough. So I t h i n k t h a t ' s r e a l l y important, that you end up l i k i n g , not a l l your f r i e n d s can be the same. 'Cause I have one g i r l f r i e n d that he j u s t doesn't care f o r very much which d i s a p p o i n t s me. I wish he would 'cause I would l i k e her to come over more and to see them s o c i a l l y more. But I know he doesn't get o f f on her so i t ' s something I have to do on my own and sometimes I'm a b i t l a z y and I don't bother going to see her. People, r e a l l y l i k i n g s i m i l a r types of people i s very important. I f he went out or brought home f r i e n d s that I d i d n ' t l i k e that would r e a l l y be tough. And I guess I'd put that under the t o p i c of having s i m i l a r i n t e r e s t s . Ok, l i k i n g s i m i l a r forms of l i t e r a t u r e and f i l m s . I don't know how important i t i s to have a s i m i l a r background i n e d u c a t i o n , we both have s i m i l a r amounts of education so I can't speak t h e r e . I t seems important to me that he's an i n t e l l i g e n t person. He reads a b i t more than I do, the Manchester Guardian, so he's g e t t i n g more i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t I haven't the time to r i g h t now, having a c h i l d . I f i n d him a good source of i n f o r m a t i o n . I can ask him questions about something. He doesn't t e l l as much as I wish he would but i f I have a s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n I can ask him. So I l i k e to be w i t h a mate who i s as w e l l informed or b e t t e r informed than me. I'm not saying i t ' s e s s e n t i a l , i t ' s j u s t because i t i s l i k e t h a t , and I do enjoy t h a t . - 162 -I : R i g h t , f o r you, th a t ' s your e x p e r i e n c e . I f i t was any d i f f e r e n t you f e e l maybe that you wouldn't l i k e i t j u s t from what . . . CR: I would miss t h a t , say i f I was w i t h a d i f f e r e n t mate next year and they d i d n ' t have that aspect I would miss i t or f e e l a l a c k of i t . Oh ya, I t h i n k i t ' s important to have d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s too, to not do e v e r y t h i n g t o g e t h e r . That would be more th a t I would want. I l i k e to have separate i n t e r e s t s . I pla y the f l u t e and he doesn't, he doesn't read music, t h a t ' s an i n t e r e s t I have w i t h one of my women f r i e n d s . He's not i n v o l v e d i n the gardening, sometimes I wish he was more i n v o l v e d i n the back labour part of i t . I l i k e to have some d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s than him. I : How come, have you thought about that part of i t ? CR No, I don't know why. Maybe i t ' s an excuse to do something w i t h another person. I t ' s something that makes me get together w i t h t h i s other person. I: At the same time l e a v i n g him out because he's not i n t e r e s t e d anyway. CR: Ya, r i g h t , maybe t h a t ' s i t , that he can't share i t so there's no way he can get l n on i t . And to a l l o w each other to go separate ways, to not have to always be w i t h each o t h e r . To t r u s t each other I suppose enough that you can go somewhere f o r a few days and t h a t ' s ok. To not always have to be under the same r o o f . To not f e e l that the other person i s grabbing at you, they l e t you have a b i t of b r e a t h i n g space. Side two of tape CR: I put a sense of humor down, mind you i t doesn't always come up when you need i t . ( l a u g h t e r ) I f i n d that a very- important t h i n g i n a mate. Somebody who has a sense of humor. People who are very s e r i o u s , I may respect them and admire them i n many, many ways, but i f they are not capable of making a joke on oc c a s i o n or a p p r e c i a t i n g c e r t a i n types of humour, I f i n d that very d i s a p p o i n t i n g . I : Can you t e l l me a s t o r y from your marriage of where humor i s , i t probably happens on-going a l l the time, but i s there anything p a r t i c u l a r . CR: I guess q u i t e o f t e n when humor, when we laugh i t ' s o f t e n when other people are w i t h us. Humor doesn't so o f t e n a r i s e when you r e a l l y need i t the most to make fun of yourselves i f you're being s i l l y or t a k i n g something too s e r i o u s l y . The people I enjoy are people I can laugh w i t h about some t h i n g s . - 163 -I: I want to ask you if you can t e l l me a l i t t l e bit about what attracted you guys together and if you can reflect on whether those qualities s t i l l exist and whether there're s t i l l things that you find attractive. What do you see now as first attracting you to one another. CR: I guess going back to when I f i r s t started to get to know him the situation was I was going to university. I was sharing a house with a couple and a girlfriend, the four of us were sharing a house. And G. used to come to visit the couple because he was in the same sociology class as my housemate T. So I got to know him just as a friend. At f i r s t I had no romantic interests in him at a l l . It must have been something about his, just his basic character that came across in the conversations. We used to also listen to Goon shows, which were old British radio things, together. We liked that British type of humor. I found him very easy to be with, very accepting. He wasn't at a l l a r t i f i c i a l . I found him very easy to talk to, he could listen. So i t started out like a friendship rather than an instant, ah, I've got to get into bed with you, i t wasn't like that. It was like getting to know him slowly, to get to know a bit of his mind, his personality and then gradually i t just developed into really trusting him. I guess I really trusted him and felt really at ease with him. I: Can you t e l l me about that trust, what i t was for you. CR: I felt secure with him. I didn't find him at a l l threatening, I guess that's what I mean by that. What would have I found threatening in a person? Somebody who's too awfully good looking or too awfully talented and would intimidate me. I sometimes get intimidated by somebody who's terribly brilliant at something, although I shouldn't be, I'm getting over that as I grow older, I realize I shouldn't be. I used to be just awestruck by somebody who was a professor or something, thank goodness I've outgrown that. Or a poet, somebody who was a specialist in a certain area. I was so impressed by things like that at that age I would put people on pedestals in my own mind. I didn't find him at a l l threatening. That doesn't mean he wasn't good at anything. That was important that I didn't feel threatened by him. It a l l happened so gradually that I'm not even sure what things we ever talked about or what kind of values came up. Like we never talked about what kind of lifestyles we would like or do you want children or what are you going to do for money. None of those sort of practical things ever came up. It was just sort of fluky that we got together. It gradually developed into sleeping together. He could climb in my bedroom window because I lived on the basement floor. It was just sort of convenient, he could come in any hour of the day or night, (laughter) - 164 -And then he went away to S. to teach school because he a l r e a d y had that commitment. So a l o t of our r e l a t i o n s h i p was through correspondence and he w r i t e s an e x c e l l e n t l e t t e r . That's a great way to keep a r e l a t i o n s h i p going; i s be apart and then you can't get to know each other too w e l l and you have these wonderful l e t t e r s . I was going to go down there and meet him but he q u i t the j o b 'cause of the headmaster. So anyway he came back to C. and got another job out of the country, p u t t i n g posters up around u n i v e r s i t y campuses i n C. I t h i n k the thought of a long term r e l a t i o n s h i p r e a l l y t e r r i f e d him so he k i n d of . . . ( l a u g h t e r ) . So I found i t a b i t d i f f i c u l t t h a t he went away, but somehow the r e l a t i o n s h i p manged to endure the long s e p a r a t i o n s . And then we decided to l i v e together when he came back from h i s j o b . I t j u s t seemed l i k e the s e n s i b l e t h i n g to do at that p o i n t i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p . J u s t s o r t of v i s i t i n g each other d i d n ' t seem l i k e q u i t e enough. We wanted to get more of each other and spend as much time together as we c o u l d . That's when we got the basement s u i t e i n that o l d house down on T h i r d . Then I got a teaching job a f t e r u n i v e r s i t y , teaching French. Then we got a f i s h boat about a h a l f year l a t e r w i t h another couple. So I taught f o r three years to help pay f o r the f i s h b o a t because you couldn't make much money f i s h i n g i n those days. That was a hard time, about the t h i r d year of the marriage. I : So you got married some time i n between. CR: Oh ya, we got married about s i x months a f t e r we were l i v i n g together because we decided to apply f o r CUSO to go t o A f r i c a t o g e t h e r . We though i n order to end up i n the same v i l l a g e i n A f r i c a we'd have to be m a r r i e d . And then we never got accepted anyway 'cause we a p p l i e d q u i t e l a t e , ( l a u g h t e r ) I : So that was one of your reasons f o r g e t t i n g married, r i g h t . CR: Ya, I l i k e to make a jo k e out of i t . But somehow marriage seemed to be the n a t u r a l t h i n g to do at the time even though n e i t h e r of us had great b e l i e f i n the so c a l l e d " i n s t i t u t i o n " of marriage. We di d n ' t g i v e I t much thought, funny how you j u s t do these t h i n g s . So I was teaching mainly to pay o f f the f i s h b o a t although I s t a r t e d h a t i n g t e a c h i n g . I was q u i t e t o r n . I was g e t t i n g fed-up economically and ca r e e r - w i s e . I guess t h a t ' s when I f e l t r e a l l y r e s t l e s s too. I s t a r t e d q u e s t i o n i n g , why be married, what's the po i n t of i t ? And I d i d n ' t see any sense of i t at that p o i n t . A f t e r about three years I got q u i t e r e s t l e s s . G. had gone f i s h i n g and I was s t i l l t e a c h i n g . I guess i t was that month I was alone and had time to t h i n k about the pros and cons of being married and mostly saw negative reasons f o r i t . So when I went out f i s h i n g a f t e r school got out I t o l d him I was going to leave him and he j u s t thought i t was such a s t u p i d - a s s i d e a . He j u s t s o r t of made i t seem so absurd, l i k e he argued me out of i t . I can't remember how he made i t appear so absurd but i t d i d make i t appear absurd. - 165 -"After a l l we've been through together you're planning on pulling out now, I mean Jesus, what an idiot." Sometimes it's good to be talked to that way, i t makes you not take your own ideas so seriously. You think, well maybe you're right, maybe it is a s i l l y thing to do, maybe we should try i t a bit longer. If i t had been a guy who had said, "oh, ok, alright then, sure dear, go ahead, whatever you want", then I probably would have left. Partly because of his reaction I stayed and tried to work on i t and ended up staying. I think the next year I didn't teach so I was much happier. I was quite frustrated teaching, i t was part of my stress. Ever since then if I get restless I usually just wait i t out, 'cause I usually pass through these l i t t l e phases, come out: the other side. It's something I know about myself; perhaps i t happens to everybody, I don't know. But I guess with experience it's one of those things I've learned about myself that I do get those sort of really restless times and I don't know what i t is about, me that makes me like that. I wish I wasn't like that 'cause it makes i t difficult, it's a hard thing to cope with myself sometimes; to try to control myself. I usually just try to not act upon any of my urges, just sort of wait ' t i l l they pass, (laughter) I: So what got you through that rough spot. Essentially, like you said i t was G. saying, "this is crazy, i t doesn't make any sense," that was one thing and getting out of teaching. CR: And he had a job that winter at the museum in V. so I got to ride around V. on my bicycle and join a food cooperative; just do pleasant things.. I felt like l i f e was ok again. Periodically I go through those sort of really restless phases and usually talk myself out of them. I: You already mentioned this before, about the difference in your relationsip after having a child because of the added stress of having a child. Is there anything else that is really different because of that. CR: I guess i t makes i t more important to me that the relationship lasts, for the child. There's less pressure on staying together now so I think people are separating for reasons that really aren't that valid. That's my guess, because marital break ups are so common that I think people are breaking for reasons that if they did try quite a bit harder, and it's bloody hard, then maybe they would weather i t . Like some of the weatherings I've been through, I know that maybe they could do i t too if they tried. I: Unless you have anything else particular that you want to add . . . CR: No I can't. I: That was great A., thank you. - 166 -INTERVIEW #5 I : Please r e f l e c t on your marriage and then t e l l me the s t o r y of your experience of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . You may want to give me an o u t l i n e of the s a t i s f a c t i o n i n your marriage from the beginning u n t i l now or you might l i k e to d e s c r i b e v i g n e t t e s of experience that t y p i f y the s a t i s f a c t i o n you f e e l . CR: My f i r s t thought i s , my goodness can I t h i n k of a l l these v i g n e t t e s . There's a l o t o f , i n f i f t e e n years what do you choose. I wouldn't know where to begin. I : What I would l i k e you to t h i n k of then, and perhaps I should have asked you to do t h i s b e f o r e , i s some of the components or b a s i c i n g r e d i e n t s i n your r e l a t i o n s h i p that have been s a t i s f y i n g to you and those j u s t might be i n d i v i d u a l words or short phrases that come to your mind. CR: Components, do you mean things l i k e r e s p e c t i n g each ot h e r , i s that what you're t h i n k i n g of as a component. I : Yes, t h a t ' s the k i n d of t h i n g I'm t h i n k i n g o f , so, respect f o r one another i s a b a s i c component. You have a few of these things going through your mind now and t h a t ' s j u s t as s t a r t i n g p o i n t and then e l a b o r a t i n g on those. I'm not l o o k i n g f o r your theory or philosophy but f o r i l l u s t r a t i o n s and s t o r i e s of s a t i s f a c t i o n i n your marriage. And l i k e you say there's so much over f i f t e e n y e a r s , l i t t l e t h i n g s are going to pop i n t o your mind and t h a t ' s what I'm i n t e r e s t e d i n . What I should have done yesterday was a c t u a l l y had you w r i t e these down. CR: Ya, now that would r e a l l y have helped me to t h i n k about them because as I say there are so many. L i k e r i g h t now I'm t r y i n g to t h i n k o f , l i k e you're going back f i f t e e n y e a r s , there's j u s t been a l o t t h a t I t h i n k I'd l i k e to t h i n k about. L i k e what are the h i g h l i g h t s . I can c e r t a i n l y t h i n k of a few off-hand s o r t of t h i n g s , but I would r e a l l y l i k e to t h i n k about t h i s a l i t t l e more. But l e t ' s proceed and l e t ' s see where we get. We can do i t again i f I can't t h i n k of any, then w e ' l l have to do i t again! ( l a u g h t e r ) I : Ok. So do you want to s t a r t o f f then w i t h , ah, f i r s t you mentioned r e s p e c t . Can you t e l l me how t h a t ' s been part of your r e l a t i o n s h i p and s a t i s f a c t i o n . CR: Ya. To s t a r t w i t h I t h i n k our r e l a t i o n s h i p i s a l i t t l e b i t d i f f e r e n t than most couples because we have been away from each other so much. When we f i r s t got married, f o r the f i r s t f o u r , f i v e years J . was gone f o r f o u r weeks and he was home f o r f o u r weeks so that I guess f o r the f i r s t seven years of our marriage we r e a l l y o n l y l i v e d three and h a l f years together 'cause he was working the other time. And i t ' s the same r i g h t now too. He's working i n V. - 167 -and I'm over here but I t h i n k that has been a r e a l p l u s , a r e a l advantage. I t c e r t a i n l y has i t s disadvantages but i t ha* i t s advantages too because I t h i n k we both respect each other i n many ways. The one t h i n g that r e a l l y comes to mind i s J . r e a l l y r e s p e c t s my independence and I re s p e c t h i s . We're two very, v e r y independent people who are t o t a l l y dependent on each other i n many ways as w e l l . That came out t h i s summer when he got s i c k . I mean I thought I was a very independent person and I could r e a l l y handle my l i f e by myself but when he got s i c k I r e a l l y r e a l i z e d that I d i d n ' t , not th a t I c o u l d n ' t , but I d i d n ' t want t o . And that r e a l l y s t r u c k home as to j u s t how dependent we are on each other as w e l l as having t h i s freedom and t h i s independence to do as we want to do. I t h i n k t h a t ' s probably the f i r s t t h i n g t h a t comes to mind, i s t h i s respect f o r the freedom of being o u r s e l v e s . I : And yet u n d e r l y i n g t h a t , there's something much deeper than that i s n ' t t h e r e . CR: Oh yes, yes. There i s t h i s wanting to be dependent. Not having to be, I t h i n k , but wanting to be dependent. J . never r e a l l y t e l l s me tha t I should be doing t h i s or should be doing t h a t . Let's take career f o r i n s t a n c e . He was q u i t e happy working on the boats. He then had an o p p r t u n i t y to go i n t o the o f f i c e at three quarters f o r h a l f the s a l a r y that he was making on the boats. That d i d n ' t stop him from doing i t , the question of money was never r a i s e d . He f e l t i t , I f e l t i t , but that was something he r e a l l y wanted to do and I encouraged i t and allowed him to do that to f i n d that he r e a l l y d i d n ' t l i k e i t . He never would have known t h i s i f we would have been i n the p o s i t i o n where I would have s a i d , "you can't do t h i s . " I t was something that he j u s t had to f i n d out f o r h i m s e l f . The same was when he changed jobs as a p i l o t . There were a l o t of questions and a l o t of f e a r s f o r me but i t was something that he r e a l l y wanted to do and I respected him f o r t h a t . He worked very hard to get i n t o the p i l o t s . He a l s o had a heck of a time g e t t i n g out of the company he was a t . That's where the dependence came i n . I was there j u s t to keep him going and we used to s i t and t a l k f o r hours and hours. He would t e l l me how much he hated the place and we'd j u s t work i t through and work i t through and work i t through, and then he'd go i n and put i n another day and then that evening we'd do i t again and he kept saying as soon as I get t h i s p i l o t s j o b e v e r y t h i n g i s going to be O.K. I t was a f e a r f o r me that once he got the job i t wouldn't be as great as he was making i t out to be. But i t has turned out that way. I always respected h i s p o s i t i o n here, i f he wanted to do something and i t ' s been the same f o r me. When I wanted to go back to u n i v e r s i t y there was never any q u e s t i o n , l i k e , you should work. Everybody needs the money, you know, the s a l a r y was good and there was never any qu e s t i o n about, w e l l maybe you should work another two years and pay o f f the house or maybe you should do t h i s . I t was always, i f you want to do i t , the d e c i s i o n i s yours and I w i l l back i t . I t h i n k t h a t ' s been a r u l e of our marriage. I f you make the d e c i s i o n and you're happy w i t h i t then I w i l l back i t . - 168 -I : Would have you, when he was wondering whether he should have become a p i l o t and you were s o r t of t h i n k i n g w e l l he might get i n there and f i n d out i t ' s not what he t h i n k s i t i s , d i d you say that to him or how d i d you . . . CR: No, I never s a i d that to him because I j u s t never saw any p o i n t i n doing t h a t . He was so gung-ho i n doing i t that I f i g u r e d he would be d i s a p p o i n t e d . You know, i f he was d i s a p p o i n t e d and i f he r e a l l y d i d n ' t l i k e i t he would f i n d something e l s e to do and then I'd go back to work and support him f o r t h a t . I : And t h a t ' s k i n d of the way i t ' s been from the beginning. CR: From the beginning, there was always t h i s , you know, w i t h our own p a r t i c u l a r l i f e , c a r e e r s , the d e c i s i o n i s our own w i t h the back-up of the other person. I f the d e c i s i o n i s r i g h t f o r you then i t ' s r i g h t f o r me too. I : Can you t h i n k of a time when i n c o n t r a s t to you that you haven't f e l t supported i n what you decided to do or you haven't supported him i n what he wanted to do and l e t one another know and how that worked out. CR: As f a r as careers go? I : W e l l , c a r e e r s I guess because t h a t ' s a biggy but maybe i n almost anything i n l i f e . CR: Oh, yes we d e f i n i t e l y have the un . . . i t ' s very evident one always pla y s the d e v i l s advocate i n anything major. I f we wanted to go on a b i g h o l i d a y one of us always plays the d e v i l ' s advocate u n t i l we're a b s o l u t e l y s u r e . I f we want to buy a c a r , he may want to buy h i s s p o r t s car and I ' l l go against i t or I may want the s t a t i o n wagon and h e ' l l go a g a i n s t i t . In j u s t about anything t h a t ' s of r e l a t i v e importance one of us always takes that r o l e . We're i n the process r i g h t now of buying t h i s house and t h i s i s the f i r s t time where there's no d e v i l ' s advocate and one of us i s t r y i n g d e s p e r a t e l y to be that j u s t so that we can be v e r y , very s u r e . U s u a l l y i f one of us takes t h i s r o l e , i f the other person can convince, l i k e i f he can convince me and can t u r n me around then w e ' l l go f o r i t and w e ' l l be happy. I t ' s very seldom that we both say, " t h i s i s i t , t h i s i s what we want, t h i s i s what we're going to go f o r , " one of us w i l l always hold back. I : So t h i s seems l i k e a b i t of a d i f f e r e n t d e c i s i o n because you both want i t and there's nobody s a y i n g , "hold i t , l e t ' s look at t h i s . " CR: This i s a bad one, t h i s i s a r e a l bad one because t h i s i s a major, t h i s i s the biggest one of a l l but i t ' s something that we both r e a l l y , r e a l l y want. But the d e v i l ' s advocate i s the f i n a n c i a l statement or the bank r i g h t now. This i s the f i r s t time that I can t h i n k o f — t h o u g h I'm beginning to s t a r t s a y i n g , " w e l l , what do we - 169 -r e a l l y need t h i s place f o r and do we r e a l l y need a swimming pool and do we r e a l l y need lea d l i n e d w a l l s . So that's coming through a g a i n but t h a t ' s very s u p e r f i c i a l , i t ' s very hard f o r me to do t h a t . I : So you're so aware of i t that you're t r y i n g to create i t . CR: Oh yes. I: Do you t h i n k that you were aware of t h i s k i n d of i n t e r p l a y between yo u r s e l v e s before you got married or r i g h t at the beginning, were you aware of how you f u n c t i o n e d t o g e t h e r . CR: Not before we were mar r i e d , we d i d n ' t have a very long c o u r t s h i p so we r e a l l y d i d n ' t know v e r y much about each other before we were married. Right from the beginning there was always t h i s r o l e t h a t one of us took and i t could be that I took over the fi n a n c e s r i g h t from the s t a r t because J . wasn't around so i t was j u s t a n a t u r a l t h i n g . I f there was a major d e c i s i o n to be made I always consulted w i t h him and i t k i n d of became a p a r t n e r s h i p r a t h e r than he j u s t doing e v e r y t h i n g and me not knowing t h a t ' s going on. I never purchase anything u n l e s s I c o n s u l t him and he very seldom says no. I can't even remember the l a s t time he s a i d , "no, a b s o l u t e l y not." I t ' s j u s t a n a t u r a l t h i n g — " d o you t h i n k I should get i t , " or " I r e a l l y would l i k e i t , " or "what do you t h i n k , " but I always c o n s u l t . I: So some d i s c u s s i o n ? CR: U s u a l l y about every purchase, w e l l not every purchase, but every more major, anything over $25.00 or $50.00. So there's a l o t of that and I guess maybe t h i s i s where the dependence comes i n where I r e a l l y want that and I t h i n k he does too. I : So i t ' s a need t h a t ' s f u l f i l l e d probably f o r both of you, both of your needs are f u l f i l l e d i n that r e s p e c t . CR: Ya. The other t h i n g I t h i n k w i t h him being away so much i s you a p p r e c i a t e each other when you're around each o t h e r . We very seldom f i g h t because time i s j u s t too short and there's j u s t no po i n t i n having a b i g blow-up and not t a l k i n g to each other f o r a week or so because when he's only home f o r nine days you make the best of i t . I t ' s not an a r t i f i c i a l s i t u a t i o n though. You make the best of the s i t u a t i o n . Even when he was at work f o r fo u r weeks, you j u s t a p p r e c i a t e d having the other person around that you never r e a l l y thought o f going at i t i n a negative f a s h i o n . I: I t r e a l l y i s a unique aspect of your r e l a t i o n s h i p . I know people do that but maybe not on such a continuous b a s i s , I'm t h i n k i n g of loggers who work the seasonal t h i n g . They're up i n camp f o r fou r months and then they're home f o r e i g h t and that s o r t of t h i n g . But yours Is r e a l l y on-going. - 170 -CR: Ya, i t ' s a p o i n t where a l o t of people at h i s work, I t h i n k 75% of the couples are d i v o r c e d and I f e l t that we've r e a l l y turned i t around. That has become a r e a l p o s i t i v e t h i n g i n our marriage and we've r e a l l y make i t work. I : And probably these d i v o r c e s have occured because of s t r e s s from the spouse being away so much. How do you t h i n k you guys have turned that around. CR: W e l l , by being independent when we're not around each other and a l s o by g e t t i n g along so w e l l when we are w i t h each o t h e r . I : I can see t h a t ' s r e a l l y important, but I wonder how you ever e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t . Did you have to work at i t r e a l l y hard and t h i n k , ok I've j u s t r e a l l y got to do t h i s . CR: No, we never d i d , I t h i n k t h a t ' s j u s t our make-up. J . i s a very easy person to get along w i t h and I t h i n k I am too and th a t ' s why we've never r e a l l y run i n t o t h i s stubborness. He c e r t a i n l y i s n ' t the s t e r e o - t y p e macho that has to have c o n t r o l , not so at a l l . That has c e r t a i n l y helped the r e l a t i o n s h i p . I : So i t i s n ' t something t h a t you've probably t a l k e d a whole l o t about, i t ' s happened and i t ' s worked r e a l l y w e l l . CR: Ya, never t a l k about i t . I t j u s t works. And you know when we do, don't get me wrong, i t ' s not as though we never have f i g h t s , or s p a t s . But when we do spat u s u a l l y one of us w i l l come very soon a f t e r and say, " t h i s i s r e a l l y dumb". I t h i n k we're very, v e r y open, we can d i s c u s s i t and I t h i n k t h i s i s r e a l l y one of the pa r t s t h a t I r e a l l y a p p r e c i a t e d about J . i s that he i s very open and he r e a l l y l i k e s to d i s c u s s the i s s u e so that you never have to s t o r e anything or keep anything i n s i d e . U s u a l l y h e ' l l l i s t e n and many times h e ' l l agree w i t h or y o u ' l l work i t out. I : So you're saying that you never r e a l l y have to guess what he's t h i n k i n g about anything. CR: No, you can check i t out. Now he may have more t r o u b l e w i t h me because I keep things to myself and many times he might be guessing. But r e c e n t l y , about the l a s t four or f i v e y e a r s , he's r e a l l y been pushing me to d i s c u s s and to be more open and i t ' s working. I : So from s t a r t i n g o f f w i t h the respect you've k i n d of . . . CR: W e l l , r e s p e c t to independency, yet there's t h i s dependency. I : You t o l d me a l i t t l e about your communication. CR: Communication—no problem. Right now whenever he's i n V. we always t a l k to each other every day. Our phone b i l l s are as t r o n o m i c a l but i n the evening u s u a l l y i f he's home we u s u a l l y d i s c u s s the day's - 171 -events and what's happening. And that was a conscious thing that we decided before he left . That we would do this to keep the lines of communication open because it's very easy to be away a week and you just forget about what's happened during the day and then something Important doesn't seem relevant anymore. So this way with the phone call - that's just an expense we incur. I: Have you done that right from the start. CR: Yup, our phone bills have never been less than, well I guess $150 to $200 a month, that's just part of our expenses. I: That's interesting because I know a couple who do that. However they live together a l l the time. He's a teacher and he phones her just about every day at noon hour just to say hello. And that's probably really important and probably sometimes i t takes effort, I don't know. CR: For them i t could be important, I don't know if i t would be like that for me but when he's away i t is because there are issues that we can resolve right then and there. You just don't forget, I mean it's just so easy and we're both so very, very aware of how quickly you can not bother saying anything; "well that wasn't important enough." So i f there's anything that's exciting that's happened or anything that's horrible that's happened, usually we share that in the conversation. I: So then unless he's out on the ship and you just can't get a hold of him there's not very many days that you don't make contact. CR: Yes, and usually the most he's gone is two days when he's gone up north so usually I talk to him once a day. I: And sometimes are you tired and just don't feel like phoning but you do anyway? CR: Ya, and sometimes we have absolutely nothing to say. If he's tired and I'm tired. You know, "how did things go today, nothing new to report, i t was just a blah day. Same here, ok, well, what did you have for supper today? Well I had this, this and this. No mail today for you or there was a letter from so and so, talk to you tomorrow." I: Sort of the kind of things you just might say to someone i f you just came home regularly. CR: Or maybe you wouldn't even say those 'cause you make a conscious effort of saying things and keeping them informed. Something you may not do if they were at home. It's just become part of us now, it's just part of our l i f e . - 172 -I : Is there anything e l s e t h a t ' s come up s t r o n g l y f o r you i n terms of components of s a t i s f a c t i o n ? CR: Gee, i t ' s j u s t so hard to p i n things down because . . . I mean he's a very pleasant person to be around, he's very easy to l i v e w i t h . We r e a l l y care f o r each other and I guess maybe c a r i n g and r e s p e c t i n g go hand i n hand. Very conscious of each other's f e e l i n g s and things and y e t , as I say, when we're separated we l i v e v e r y f u l l l i v e s away from each other too. Now you're l o o k i n g f o r more v i g n e t t e s aren't you? I: W ell no, i t ' s g r e a t , you've j u s t t o l d me a whole p i l e , you r e a l l y have. And I guess o b v i o u s l y t h a t ' s a very important part of your l i f e t o g e t h e r . What you've j u s t t o l d me, that you marriage has a l l these p o t e n t i a l l y r e a l l y . . . CR: E x p l o s i v e . I : Yes, and s t r e s s f u l l i f e to i t and yet you've handled i t r e a l l y s u c c e s s f u l l y . I t sounds to me that that i n i t s e l f i s very s a t i s f y i n g to you, that you've been able to do that whereas o t h e r s , 75% of the o t h e r s , haven't been able t o . I t says a l o t about your r e l a t i o n s h i p . CR: And we've been through a l o t , l i k e when our place burnt down, when we had the f i r e . That p o t e n t i a l l y could have been a d i v o r c e over th a t 'cause we were taken out of our own place f o r three months and that was p r e t t y t r y i n g . Again we made i t work. We l i v e d w i t h my bro t h e r f o r three months which was very k i n d of them. But you know, you can never r e a l l y l i v e w i t h another f a m i l y . I taught Home Ec. at the time so I had k i t c h e n f a c i l i t i e s so I used to buy food and I would make sandwiches f o r supper and so we'd go to t h i s burnt out place and we'd have our supper. So we'd have supper i n that place j u s t to be by o u r s e l v e s . J u s t kept on going l i k e t h a t . I t h i n k many times we f e e l t h i n g s never come easy f o r us, we r e a l l y have to work f o r what we have and we r e a l l y have to work f o r e v e r y t h i n g but somehow we manage to do i t tog e t h e r . I t h i n k maybe having almost l o s t him t h i s summer made me r e a l i z e j u s t how v e r y , very important that was to me and that I j u s t wasn't prepared to l o s e i t . I t h i n k that r e a l l y came home t h i s summer. I: Has i t changed your r e l a t i o n s h i p i n any way? I t ' s heightened your awareness of what i t i s . CR: We l l i t has. I t has changed my r e l a t i o n s h i p i n that I f e e l I'm too p r o t e c t i v e now and I t h i n k J . f e e l s I'm too p r o t e c t i v e of him and I t h i n k I am. But I t h i n k t h a t ' s a n a t u r a l r e a c t i o n . You know, I j u s t don't want to see him get s i c k a g a i n . And yet tha t ' s a d e t r i m e n t a l t h i n g too because many times he t e l l s me I'm nagging, to get o f f h i s back. He's a b i g boy now and he knows what he can and can't do. And t h a t ' s an i s s u e that I'm working w i t h . That's my i s s u e . - 173 -I t h i n k we c e r t a i n l y a p p r e c i a t e each other more now, even more. There's a l s o always t h i s f e a r o f , i s he ok. I f I c a l l and he doesn't answer the phone i t ' s almost t h i s p a n i c , I wonder i f he's ok. And here he i s having a beer w i t h the guys down the s t r e e t , but i t ' s a f e a r that probably w i l l never go away. I: Have you changed anything about communicating. L i k e maybe J . before might have gone a l i t t l e longer before c a l l i n g you or i f you weren't i n you might have s a i d , "oh w e l l , I ' l l c a t c h him l a t e r . " CR: Ya we've, ever s i n c e h i s i l l n e s s and ever s i n c e he's been back i n V. he makes more of a p o i n t to c a l l , to c h e c k - i n as he says. Because he knows I worry a l o t , he's r e a l l y been good. There were a couple of times i f he d i d n ' t f e e l l i k e phoning he d i d n ' t but I d i d n ' t r e a l l y worry. But now he always checks i n . whenever he leaves f o r a t r i p he t e l l s me. Sometimes we t a l k to each other two or three times a day. H e ' l l j u s t phone and say I'm coming i n t o V. or I'm going to P.R. so t h a t I always know when he's away. I: And h i s schedule changes so much doesn't i t . CR: Oh ya, you never know where and then he always c a l l s me when he gets back to say e v e r y t h i n g Is ok. I : You s a i d that he's a n i c e person and that you r e a l l y care f o r him and that he's easy going and a l l those s o r t s of t h i n g s . Can you t e l l me some of the t h i n g s that bother you, that bug you, the k i n d of s t u f f that . . . CR: Oh, now we're g e t t i n g i n t o the good s t u f f , ( l a u g h t e r ) Oh, and that bother me. I thought that t h i s was m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n P e t e r . I: W e l l , i t i s S. but maybe some of the weakness of your r e l a t i o n s h i p , some of the t h i n g s that p e r s o n a l l y you might l i k e changed but you know t h a t , w e l l I don't know I won't say much more. Jus t to look at the c o n t r a s t as much as anything. CR: You know, i n many ways being away i s an advantage to us but i f I had a c h o i c e I t h i n k I would r a t h e r l e a d a n i c e normal l i f e because we can never make an appointment, we can never make a date f o r a n y t h i n g . People say, "come on over f o r d i n n e r . " W e l l w e ' l l say, " w e l l i f he's i n town." We can't get seasons t i c k e t s f o r anything because I never know when he's going to be home and that has been f r u s t r a t i n g . Even now when he says, "I'm coming i n t o V. can you meet me at 12 noon," t h a t ' s u p s e t t i n g because i t d i s r u p t s my r o u t i n e . Or I may have made plans to go out f o r supper and h e ' l l say, "I'm coming i n at s i x . " So that means I have to phone and say, " w e l l I can't make i t , " and t h a t ' s tough, t h a t ' s hard. I : That r e a l l y c a l l s f o r a whole l o t of f l e x i b i l i t y on your p a r t . CR: Which I'm not. - 174 -I : No? CR: 'Cause I'm a very s t r u c t u r e d person and everytime I do i t i t bothers me. I f I have to phone people and say, " w e l l we can't make i t a f t e r a l l " , or Sunday's f o o t b a l l game f o r i n s t a n c e . I know he r e a l l y wants to go. So we've got these two t i c k e t s . Now I don't know i f he's going to work so that I can't ask anybody to go w i t h me 'cause I don't know i f he's going to be home. So Sunday morning at ten o'clock I w i l l know i f he's going to be home. So who are you going to c a l l a t 10 o'clock Sunday to go to the 1 o'clock game. That's the s i t u a t i o n , you never know j u s t when he's going to be around and when he i s n ' t . I : That's h i s j o b so do you f e e l k i n d o f , I don't know, somehow you've r e a l l y adapted to i t w e l l , but does i t , and i t bothers you a b i t , but you've learned how to cope w i t h i t . I guess what I'm t r y i n g to say, do you f e e l l i k e some of your freedom or whatever i s taken away. CR: Not my freedom as much as my, w e l l my independence I guess. Because I am a s t r u c t u r e d person and i f I t e l l somebody I'm going to be t h e r e , I'm going to be t h e r e . I mean i t ' s important that I be t h e r e . To have to change a l l the t i m e — I don't t h i n k i t ' s any e a s i e r , i t doesn't get any e a s i e r . But i t ' s something t h a t I'm going to have to l i v e w i t h 'cause t h a t ' s h i s j o b . And he i s good though, he always phones and sa y s , "what are your plans f o r the day?" I f he knows that, I'm doing something r e a l l y important he won't say - w e l l h e ' l l j u s t c a t c h the plane back or whatever. So he t r i e s not to i n t e r f e r e w i t h the t h i n g s that I'm doing. S t i l l i t ' s an inconvenience and i t ' s something that i s a r e a l t h o r n . I t h i n k t h a t ' s probably the biggest t h o r n , j u s t never knowing. I : I guess i f he got a j o b i n V. that would change a b i t . CR: Ya, that w i l l change i n J u l y . But i t w i l l and i t won't, because when he's on c a l l he's on c a l l . So we s t i l l won't know whether he i s going to be t a k i n g a shi p out or not, i t might even be worse. I : I'm going to ask you one other t h i n g , I don't know where i t w i l l take us. In l o o k i n g at the person that you knew when you f i r s t met J . and the things that a t t r a c t e d you to him and now through your f i f t e e n y e a r s , do you t h i n k those things are s t i l l t h e r e, those q u a l i t i e s , those a t t r a c t i o n s or have they changed? Or even j u s t t e l l me a l i t t l e b i t about your h i s t o r y , your e a r l y h i s t o r y . CR: I t h i n k that the q u a l i t i e s that a t t r a c t e d me to him I s t i l l admire v e r y much. I t h i n k h i s easy going nature was something that I r e a l l y l i k e d . He j u s t i s a very easy person to get along w i t h and he's a l s o very p a t i e n t . I can tease the d a y - l i g h t s out of him and h e ' l l never get angry at me. W e l l , every so o f t e n h e ' l l blow. He takes an awful l o t , he r e a l l y does, before he gets angry. He's g e t t i n g set i n h i s ways i n middle age and l i v i n g by h i m s e l f . Which - 175 -we're going to have to change when he gets home. I'm n o t i c i n g that he i s g e t t i n g very set i n h i s ways, he eats at 5:10 i n the apartment so when he's at home we have to eat at 5:10, w e l l that j u s t i s n ' t n e c e s s a r i l y so because many times I don't get home u n t i l a q uarter a f t e r . I t h i n k h i s good nature and j u s t h i s respect f o r me as a person; that was something t h a t I r e a l l y l i k e d about him. He never, ever put h i s f i n g e r down s o r t of t h i n g , there's r e a l l y been no c o n t r o l . He's never t r i e d to c o n t r o l me and I've r e a l l y respected t h a t . I : And do you t h i n k you were aware of that r i g h t away or has your awareness j u s t s o r t of come. CR: No, I was aware of that r i g h t away and i t ' s s t i l l v e r y much so, i n f a c t more so. He r e s p e c t s that even more. And r i g h t now w i t h my career going the way i t i s he's supporting anything I am prepared to do. Except the t e a c h i n g , he doesn't p a r t i c u l a r l y want me to go back teaching because he saw what i t d i d to me and a l s o he wants, w i t h h i s time o f f i t ' s a good time.to t r a v e l and he f e e l s t h i s i s the time i n our l i v e s that we should be. And I agree w i t h him. I : He's s u p p o r t i n g you, maybe almost encouraging you, to choose something e l s e . CR: But he's never s a i d , "don't", never. He s a i d , "these are my f e e l i n g but i f you decide to go back to teaching then t h a t ' s the way i t w i l l be." So I t h i n k that freedom. I: That's r e a l l y important to you. CR: Yes i t i s . I: When you guys met d i d , w e l l can you j u s t t e l l me a l i t t l e b i t about when you f i r s t got together, j u s t r e a l l y b r i e f l y . CR: I should l e t J . t e l l you that because he t e l l s i t so o f t e n . I met him on the f e r r y going to V. I was v i s i t i n g my brother and I had my mother and my s i s t e r and my aunt with me. My brother knew him and J . had j u s t gotten h i s t i c k e t f o r h i s master s k i p p e r ' s papers. He was going to go to R. to work, h i s f i r s t j o b , and we were going to V. and I j u s t happened to s i t by him. And we never stopped t a l k i n g a l l the way down. I was i n T. at the time and when we l e f t I s a i d , " i f you're ever i n T. g i v e me a c a l l " and so a month and a h a l f l a t e r he c a l l e d . ( i n t e r v i e w i n t e r r u p t e d by a knock on the door) I : And you t o l d me about how you sat down and t a l k e d and that was i t . And I'm wondering i f you can a c t u a l l y remember what you t a l k e d about. - 176 -CR: I t h i n k probably J . t o l d me about h i s work more than anything 'cause I'd never met anybody who worked at sea. I t h i n k b a s i c a l l y we t a l k e d about work, j o b s , t r a v e l and that was i t . I mean what can you say i n an hour and a h a l f , although we s a i d a l o t . 'Cause I remember my aunt s a y i n g , "you guys never stopped t a l k i n g , " or "doesn't he ever stop t a l k i n g ? " But he phoned me about a month and a h a l f or two months l a t e r and s a i d he was a r r i v i n g i n T. the f o l l o w i n g day. He got good and drunk before he could phone and s a i d he was coming to T. the next day. And I s a i d , "oh s u r e , ya", and so I d i d go out to the a i r p o r t and there he was, he had come. That's how i t a l l s t a r t e d . This was November and we were engaged i n December but then we d i d n ' t get married u n t i l May so t h a t happened very q u i c k l y . I : He came back east and you stayed there f o r a w h i l e y o u r s e l f and he went back to V. CR: Ya, I was working i n T. teaching and that was the time when he has f o u r weeks on and f o u r weeks o f f so he'd come to T. on h i s f o u r weeks o f f . I: So that p a t t e r n was e s t a b l i s h e d r i g h t at the b e g i n n i n g . CR: But I t h i n k that the t h i n g that r e a l l y a t t r a c t e d me was h i s good naturedness. Right at the beginning when I f i r s t met him and he was j u s t so easy to t a l k t o , I mean that r e a l l y impressed me on the f e r r y . I : What's "good naturedness"? CR: Being q u i t e happy and easy to be around people, people j u s t k i n d of l i k e him, and j u s t easy to be around. He's changed a l i t t l e b i t , he's become more s e r i o u s now but I remember him j o k i n g w i t h my a u n t i e and t e a s i n g my mom and he s t i l l does. I : And he was able to do t h i s r i g h t away. CR: Right o f f the bat. As a matter of f a c t I t h i n k he even c a l l e d Mom, Mom on the f e r r y , but t h a t ' s him. He probably would have c a l l e d the next person Mom too. I c a l l e d her Mom so he c a l l e d her Mom but t h a t ' s the way he i s . So that was the beginning. He' s changed c o n s i d e r a b l y i n h i s o l d age. I t h i n k h i s work has c e r t a i n l y taken i t ' s t o l l and I t h i n k h i s i l l n e s s has c e r t a i n l y taken i t ' s t o l l and he has become much more s e r i o u s now but I t h i n k so have I . I : So you changed a l i t t l e b i t together i n that r e s p e c t . CR: Ya, and I t h i n k the other part t h a t ' s r e a l l y worked f o r us i s that we've both changed careers at the same time which has been very e x c i t i n g f o r both of us. Had one changed and the other one stuck i n a job that we were, that I wasn't happy w i t h , t h a t could have produced a l o t of t e n s i o n . And the same w i t h him, had I gone to - 177 -u n i v e r s i t y and he had stuck w i t h h i s o l d job t h a t would have been p r e t t y m i s e r a b l e . But we both decided to change at the same time which has made i t very e x c i t i n g . I : You guys are i n two t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t career areas so that you don't have that commonality but the commonality seems to be t h a t you both changed, that you were both d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h what you were doing and wanted to change and went f o r i t i n your own ways. I: (new t o p i c ) You t o l d me about your communicating. You s a i d the o n l y t h i n g , i f any t h i n g , t h a t blocks your communication i s t h a t you become a l i t t l e b i t q u i e t and don't speak out and t h a t ' s r e a l l y e s s e n t i a l l y i t i s i t ? CR: I t h i n k I'm the person at f a u l t t h e r e , v e r y much so when i t comes to communication, I'm the pouter. I : Being a c o u n s e l l o r , how do you f i n d J . as a communicator? Obviously he has some n a t u r a l communication s k i l l s , you don't r e a l l y have to teach him. CR: But he's learned an awful l o t from me. You know, h e ' l l always p i c k out c o u n s e l l o r j a r g o n as he c a l l s i t , he can r e a l l y p i c k that up. But he's learned a l o t because he's r e a l l y i n t e r e s t e d i n psychology, he r e a l l y i s , and I've g i v e n him a l o t of my books to read. Much more i n t e r e s t than I've taken i n h i s j o b . I don't know anything about s h i p s . I f he t e l l s me i t ' s a 154 t o n or a 122 t o n I j u s t say, "oh, r e a l l y " , 'cause I have no concept of what a ton i s as f a r as s h i p p i n g goes. I : What I t h i n k sometimes i s that being w i t h somebody who i s n ' t a p a r t i c u l a r l y good communicator i n terms of what we l e a r n and j u s t i n g e n e r a l , I f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to be w i t h somebody l i k e that now. And I'm not a wonderful communicator by any means but I'm sure much more aware of i t . L i k e you got i n t o c o u n s e l l i n g a f t e r you guys had been together ten years or whatever and so your patt e r n s must have changed somewhat. But i t wasn't to any s o r t of detriment, I mean, you d i d n ' t go r o l l i n g along and he . . . CR: No, he always kept up and t h a t ' s something we've both being very conscious o f , v e r y conscious o f , keeping up w i t h the o t h e r . And he has mentioned t h i s s e v e r a l times and I've done i t to him. He's expressed a f e a r that I might go too f a r ahead and he wouldn't be able to keep up and that's a l e g i t i m a t e f e a r . I've expressed the same t h i n g i n h i s j o b , l i k e too much can happen too q u i c k l y and I might not be able to keep up. But I t h i n k i f you're conscious of i t , then y o u ' l l do something about i t . And I t h i n k t h i s i s where the communication comes i n , keeping him posted on what's happening a l l the time h e l p s . - 178 -I : So he doesn't come back three weeks l a t e r and you've gone through something and i t ' s r e a l l y hard to r e l a t e to what has happened and s t u f f . I t seems to me that that i s a r e a l danger i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s . I f somebody changes t h i s way and the other person i s s t i l l going m e r r i l y along because t h i n g s were always that way. CR: Ya, and that was something that we were very, v e r y conscious o f . We were determined that wasn't going to happen. You know a l o t of people have mentioned to me when they see me by myself, when he's away, a l o t of people say, "oh, I could never do i t " , or "you seem so happy when you're on your own," or whatever the comments a r e . I guess because I f e e l secure w i t h what I have I don't have to worry about being by m y s e l f . I : E m o t i o n a l l y secure. CR: Ummum. But I t h i n k the t e s t came t h i s summer when I j u s t about l o s t him and I r e a l i z e d t h a t I d i d n ' t want t o . That h i t home v e r y , v e r y , v e r y much so. So I t h i n k I ' l l keep him f o r a w h i l e . (laughs) I : Do you have about f i v e more minutes? CR: Sure. I : What does the f u t u r e hold f o r your r e l a t i o n s h i p i n terms of l o o k i n g ahead now. CR: W e l l how can I answer that P e t e r ? I : Y o u ' l l j u s t have to look i n your l i t t l e c r y s t a l b a l l . What's your sense about what's going to occur. This i s a b i g change, l i k e buying a house, I don't know, what does the f u t u r e h o l d . CR: I have a f e a r f o r the f u t u r e , I r e a l l y do, because I'm a f r a i d t h a t J . w i l l get s i c k a g a i n . (end of tape) I f we decide on the house and we have to make changes to our p l a n s , we expected to t r a v e l a l o t i n the next f i v e years or so, but t h a t w i l l change, w e ' l l have to concentrate our e f f o r t s on the house. We have to d i s c u s s t h i s v e r y s e r i o u s l y . Do we want to do t h i s , there are a l o t of d e c i s i o n s to be made. What do we want to g i v e up to have t h i s p l a c e . I don't see anything going very d i f f e r e n t l y * I t h i n k I ' l l j u s t keep doing what I want to do. And as f a r as my j o b goes i t doesn't matter i f I'm earning money or not as long as I'm not a bear to be around h e ' l l go f o r a n y t h i n g , ( l a u g h t e r ) I can't r e a l l y say any more and i t ' s something that we don't r e a l l y d i s c u s s that o f t e n . - 179 -I : But you're a l r e a d y both working on your f u t u r e s aren't you, you're l o o k i n g at houses, you're . . . CR: Oh ya, and our r e t i r e m e n t ' s a l l taken care of so we don't have to worry about our r e t i r e m e n t , t h i n g s l i k e t h a t . The f u t u r e as f a r as r e t i r e m e n t goes and the f u t u r e w i t h i n the next four c r f i v e y e a r s , but I can't r e a l l y say, nor do I even want to p r e d i c t beyond t h a t . I t h i n k we're both of the mind t h a t i f we f e l t t hat something was r e a l l y wrong w i t h the r e l a t i o n s h i p we'd seek c o n s e l l i n g . J . has mentioned that s e v e r a l times, which pleases me because he would go r e a d i l y . So I don't see too much happening i n the n e g a t i v e . I : That's i n t e r e s t i n g because i t sounds l i k e J.'s never become de f e n s i v e about your education, your d i r e c t i o n , you know, t h i s h i g h - f a u l t i n ' psychology b u l l s h i t . CR: Never, never. That's the one t h i n g that a g a i n I r e a l l y respect about him because he has never ever s a i d anything i n that r e s p e c t . A l o t of people have, to J . , and t h a t ' s when he becomes d e f e n s i v e , but he has never, ever, he may have thought i t , but he has never s a i d a n y t h i n g . I : I t j u s t seems to me, because you guys are i n such d i f f e r e n t areas and you've made so many changes, i n some ways, i n your p e r s o n a l l i v e s and yet there's a core there that c a r r i e s on and that seems ve r y important. CR: Ya, and you know I t h i n k i n many other r e l a t i o n s h i p s , had I pursued a Ph.D. . . . Where J . doesn't have a u n i v e r s i t y education and he's very conscious of t h a t , v e r y conscious of t h a t , that would have bothered him. But then, he's so very s u c c e s s f u l i n h i s own area that i t r e a l l y doesn't matter. Maybe i f he hadn't been s u c c e s s f u l i t would have mattered. I mean, I can have 150 degrees but he's r e a l l y the one who's got the best j o b of a l l . R e a l l y h i s career i s i d e a l and a l o t of people envy h i s c a r e e r . The time o f f and the f i n a n c i a l end of i t . So I guess there's r e a l l y no reason f o r him to f e e l threatened. And a l o t of people have s a i d to him, "you must be r e a l l y threatened, you must r e a l l y f e e l threatened, i t must r e a l l y bother you." But i t doesn't. I : I t must take some e f f o r t on h i s part too. CR: I don't know, i t doesn't seem l i k e i t does. I don't t h i n k so, I t h i n k he's j u s t q u i t e happy i n what he's doing. And i t ' s never bothered me that he doesn't have a u n i v e r s i t y e d u c a t i o n , i t ' s never, ever bothered me. I : 'Cause l i k e you say, he's made e f f o r t s to understand what's going on and he has read your s t u f f . W e l l , he's very i n t e l l i g e n t anyway. - 180 -CR: Ya, and I t h i n k had he been g i v e n the o p p o r t u n i t y to go to school he would have. And I t h i n k he r e g r e t s not having gone many times, but t h a t ' s the way t h i n g s a r e . I : Is there anything e l s e that you want to add before we . . . CR: I don't t h i n k so P e t e r . I t h i n k I've b a s i c a l l y summed u p — I don't know i f there's anything more that you're l o o k i n g f o r . I : I'm t r y i n g not to d i r e c t i t too much to t e l l you the t r u t h , I'm l o o k i n g f o r your s t o r y . So what I ' l l do, h o p e f u l l y i t w i l l be r e a l l y soon now, come back to you w i t h your t r a n s c r i p t and w i t h my d e s c r i p t i o n and get you to look at i t and see i f there's anything you d i s a g r e e w i t h . CR: Your d e s c r i p t i o n of? I: Of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , the combined, everyone I've I n t e r v i e w e d . That w i l l be my way of v a l i d a t i n g i t . I f at that time you've thought of something e l s e l e t me know and i f there's things i n there that perhaps f o r someone e l s e i t was r e a l l y important but i t wasn't f o r you, then I want you to t e l l me and w e ' l l t a l k about i t . One other t h i n g . What part does i n t i m a c y and romance p l a y i n your r e l a t i o n s h i p now a f t e r f i f t e e n years? CR: What part does i t p l a y . How do you want me to answer t h a t — w h a t p a r t . You mean i s I t an important p a r t . Ya, i t i s . Of course i t i s . We're two s e l f i s h people you have to remember. We don't have anybody e l s e to share our a t t e n t i o n w i t h so t h e r e f o r e we share I t w i t h one another. I : Do you s t i l l have i n t i m a c y — d o you go out f o r dinners and romantic s o r t of s t u f f . CR: Oh, twice a week when he's home. That's very important. And t h a t ' s something we can do f i n a n c i a l l y now too. The a f f e c t i o n a t e s i d e of our marriage i s d e f i n i t e l y there because we're both very a f f e c t i o n a t e people. I t ' s an important part of our marriage but i t ' s not the most important part because I t h i n k i t ' s one of the most important p a r t s . I t ' s j u s t part of the whole p i c t u r e of making i t work. But I c e r t a i n l y wouldn't say i t i s the most important 'cause there are other areas that are j u s t as important. I : I t ' s p r e t t y hard, or at l e a s t f o r me i t would be p r e t t y hard to put them i n order of importance. CR: I wouldn't want to t r y . I t could be too dangerous. I don't want to know what's the most important part of my marriage. My marriage i s working and I don't want to have to say that i t ' s because i t ' s - 181 -f o r t h i s or i t ' s f o r t h a t . These are the t h i n g s that work f o r me and these are the important parts of our r e l a t i o n s h i p and I wouldn't break i t down. I: Great S., I a p p r e c i a t e d t h a t . CR: E a s i e r to do than I f i g u r e d . 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054313/manifest

Comment

Related Items