Why relationships in 2026 carry impossible expectations

It used to be the case that when people found partners, they would do so according to fairly

pragmatic considerations. Couples were formed not by the individuals themselves, but by

the wider society. There were, if you like, dynastic marriages. There was then a momentous

change that occurs towards the end of the 18th century that we now know as Romanticism. And one

of the central tenets of Romanticism is that each individual should be left to decide

on their partner by their own, the movements of their own heart. It's a beautiful idea. It's a

very liberating idea. And let's put it plainly, it's been a disaster. We are not any appreciably

happier now in a romantic culture than we were in a dynastic culture. And why? Because we live

in a romantic culture that sees something adverse in planning and thinking and reflecting too hard

on the business of love. And it's been a serious problem for humanity

My name is Alain de Botton. I'm a philosopher, psychotherapist, and founder of The School of Life

The unique challenge of modern dating. We know in theory that love matters a lot

It's in every pop song. It's the center of most religions. we sometimes lose sight of what that word actually means

It's really about connection. And it is one of the most beautiful

and one of the most complicated of all phenomena. Even though we think we've been around on this planet

for a long time trying to figure things out, I'd say we were still at the dawn collectively

of making sense of this phenomenon we call love. And it's no surprise that most people

will go to their deathbeds thinking, not quite sure I've figured that side of life out. At least many of us will still be grappling

with some of the complexities of love by the time time runs out on us. The most central kind of love

that people are obsessed about, concerned about, is romantic love. That is the intimate connection

between two human beings who have a sexual contact. It's worth saying that there are other forms of

love. We can love our children, we can love animals, we can love ideas, we can love tables

chairs, clouds, all sorts of things. We are capable of many forms of love, but I'd say that when people

sing about love and when they cry about love, it tends to be the love of one very special person

we tend to call our soulmate our partner It used to be the case that when people found partners they would do so according to fairly pragmatic considerations In most nations in most parts of the world for most of history

couples were formed not by the individuals themselves, but by the wider society, families

the village, the court. There were, if you like, dynastic marriages. You would get together with

somebody because they had a plough and you had an ox and it seemed like a good match. Or you were

the Duke of Brabant and they were the Princess of Naples. And that was seen as a wonderful union

So you got together for reasons that were nothing to do with emotional compatibility

There were a lot of tears, there was sadness, there was loneliness. It didn't seem to matter

because relationships were seen to be about something else. There was then a momentous

change that occurs in towards the end of the 18th century, starting in Britain, France, Germany

parts of Italy, a revolution in feeling that we now know as Romanticism. And one of the central

tenets of Romanticism is that each individual should be left to decide on their partner by

their own, the movements of their own heart, they should be left to decide for themselves

It's a beautiful idea. It's a very liberating idea. It should make a lot of sense. And we have

been in the romantic age now for, you know, 200 years, perhaps shorter, perhaps a little longer

that kind of time period. And let's put it plainly, it's been a disaster. We are not any appreciably

happier now in a romantic culture than we were in a dynastic culture where marriages were made

for dynastic reasons. Why? Because we have failed collectively to focus with enough intent

on the difficulties that couples will have when they choose each other according to the movements

of their own heart. Look, I think a really key prejudice of the romantic worldview is that if

love is working well, it should be following instinct. There's been an enormous veneration

almost a worship of instinct. Love is described as a special feeling

not in a set of ideas, not a sense of rationally observable principles, but a feeling

You either have the feeling or you don't. You must be guided by your feeling

There's even a prejudice against language. You know, true lovers shouldn't talk too much

They should just feel the fluttering of their own hearts. That's why music has a huge prestige

higher than, you know, philosophy. When we're in love, we don't want to read philosophical tracks

We want to hear love songs. That is to do with our sense that emotion should be guiding us not reason Reason is the enemy in the romantic worldview of truly happy relationships If you follow reason that cold

It may be calculating. It's unromantic. And, you know, there are so many things

that are considered unromantic. And I would love to train our audience

that every time something seems unromantic, question it. Is it truly unromantic

if we define romanticism as the pursuit of a workable relationship. On that basis, is it unromantic to talk about money

Is it unromantic to think long and hard about childhood patterns of psychological development

Is it anti-romantic to spend a lot of time thinking about families and friends and compatibility at that level

All these things, in my view, belong to a truly adequate way of surveying whether a couple should be together

But I'm also aware that nowadays these things are considered very unromantic

To live in a romantic culture means to live in a culture that has a set of ideas about how good couples should form

They should be formed by instinct, that everybody has a soulmate, that you'll recognize your soulmate by a special fluttery feeling

that you shouldn't be asked to account for that feeling. You should simply go for it and marry in Vegas in two weeks

if that's what seizes you. And that you should be able to communicate deeply

with your partner without using language through that special medium of the heart

through the silence. Also that you shouldn't criticize your partner, that true partners should love each other

for who they really are, which means no desire to grow or change

You just accept someone. Couples in romantic culture will sometimes complain, you're trying to change me

And this is seen as really offensive. It's like, what? You know, you complain to your friends

My partner's trying to change me. Oh, what an awful person. This must be awful

You must get out immediately. If you went to an ancient Greek, if you went to Athens in 400 BC, and you said to an ancient

Greek, what is love? And where is the role of criticism? they would say love is a process of education. It's the education of emotion. And lovers should

of course, be able to pick each other up for things that they don't spot in one another

And they should be trying to develop into the best version of themselves

rather than simply staying stuck in an admiration for who they are today. The whole process should

be dynamic, become who you could be, not worship who you happen to be right now. All of this sounds

very strange in romantic culture which is why relationships are so difficult in our time Let remember that a person life satisfaction is determined by up to around 70 by the quality of their personal relationships

A Martian hearing that statistic, visiting planet Earth, would think, well, clearly Earthlings

given the enormous role of love, will be spending 70% of their money and 70% of their educational

time working out how on earth this business of love works. Is that true? No. We spend hardly any

time rationally thinking about it. None of us are made to sit through classes in attachment theory

classes in apology, classes in listening, classes in communication. No, we're, you know, physics is

important. Geography is important. Don't get me wrong. But is there no time for this given its role

in our lives? Do we really want to leave this to chance? And the answer is yes. And why? Because we

live in a romantic culture that sees something adverse in planning and thinking and reflecting

too hard on the business of love. It's very deleterious and it's been a serious problem

for humanity. One of the most powerful disseminators of romantic culture is art. And by art, I mean

all the leading artistic media. Film, definitely. You know, if you were learning about love from

films, you would be very confused. And that's why many of us are confused because films and

I include that television shows and other, you know, narrative forms. These things are hugely misleading

They simply do not show what a real relationship is like. I mean, probably you can count on one hand

that the number of films that have accurately shown love, I think one of the most accurate representations of love

is Richard Linklater's Before Trilogy, which ended up with Before Midnight. It's a wonderful reckoning, really, with the real complexities of love

But, you know, most films are not that. Most films are blithe, are superficial

are not modest enough in showing us what's really going on between couples

It's also terminated through music. And music constantly gives us little miniature stories

about, you know, how love works. And, you know, the music is terrific

but it's not accurate to what's going on. And it presses the wrong buttons

Poetry, no one really reads poetry nowadays. If they did, the problem exists in poetry too

So we have so much media around, and yet we're still so much strangers to ourselves

I would say that the single greatest, most misleading disseminator of ideas on love is culture and art

The problem is very heavily located there