A Scientist Looks at Romantic Love and Calls It Limerence:

Chapter VNew Guinea I

otherese refers to the manner in which caretakers speak to infants. Researchers in speech development had found that not only do people use a different voice with babies, but also that children learn to speak sooner and better if they are talked to in this special way. Mainly mothers, but fathers as well, and even older siblings, spontaneously adopt this form of speech. Motherese consists of shorter words and phrases spoken in a higher pitch, with more variable intonation. There is even a form of motherese used when speaking in sign language to infants who cannot hear. Motherese in American Sign Language consists of slower and more exaggerated movements, and, just as normal babies will listen longer to spoken motherese, deaf babies prefer signed motherese. The topic fascinated Ruth. Here was an important and complex human trait that could be observed and, therefore, subjected to scientific study! She chose a cross-cultural study of motherese as the topic of her doctoral dissertation. In the year after receiving her degree in anthropology, and before she and Peter were married, Ruth obtained a grant that committed her to collect observations on motherese among several non-English speaking peoples of New Guinea, as assistant to the famous pioneer in mother-infant relationships, Samantha Houston. It was not required that she know the languages, as her emphasis was on pitch range, length of utterances, and frequency and duration of pauses, rather the actual meanings of the words used. Ruth and Peter decided that they would wed after she returned, and would keep close touch, during the long year of separation, through the mail. Although it was not certain, Ruth might try to visit during the holiday season. They regretted the separation, but recognized the importance of it for Ruths research career. Furthermore, it would be a year of intense work for Peter. He planned to write several papers, take some additional clinical courses, and complete an internship in a psychiatric clinic. The day after Ruth left for New Guinea, while she was spending a week in London at the MotherChild Observation Laboratory at the University College, she received a telegram at her hotel room. Dr. Houston had suddenly developed a serious health problem. Three days earlier, she had been taken to New Zealand for emergency surgery. In a message dictated from her hospital bed, she doubted that she would be able to return to New Guinea before the end of Ruths stay. She said, So sorry I cannot be with you after all, but I have telephoned Dr. Xavier Samu, linguistic anthropologist from Australia, who is working with several of the tribes on our research schedule. He has promised to aid you with travel and introductions. Best of luck. Im sure everything will be well for you and that you will like Xavier. He is gracious as well as brilliant. Although he, himself, did not know about it at the time, Xavier Samu was the product of the union of a chief of the New Guinea highland Kikki tribe and a white missionary who had died shortly after his birth. The Kikki Tribe was one of the least accessible and most feared of New Guinean peoples. Although stories of cannibalism had never been authenticated, their rules about sexual relationships and marriage were known to be especially strict. On penalty of death, all marriages had to take place either with members of the Kikki tribe itself, or with one of three specific adjacent tribes. Sexual unions outside marriage were not severely punished unless they occurred with outsiders. Since Xaviers father had disobeyed tribal law, he could save himself from punishment by the members of the tribal council only if she with whom he had committed the unlawful act no longer lived. According to the Kikki religion, a wrongdoer could be purified only if the other person and any offspring were killed. Although they were unaware of the Kikki laws and the danger the child was in, Xaviers European kin took him with them when they fled New Guinea after his mothers murder. Thus he spent his childhood in England. To spare themselves what they would feel to be the shame of having it known that their deceased daughter had given birth to a child of mixed race, Xaviers grandparents had misinformed everyone, including Xavier, about his origin. To friends and community, as well as to Xavier himself, he was presented as a child they had adopted after his parents died in a dreadful mishap. They did not give him

The Collected Works of Dorothy Tennov

their family name, but rather, out of a sense of patriarchal morality, they gave him the name of the person they believed was probably his biological father, because it was the name his mother had whispered just before she died of her wounds. Not knowing the tribal customs of the Kikki, they were unaware of the danger in which the name would place him. According to the story they invented, a rope bridge had given way, plunging the couple to their deaths in a ravine, 300 feet below. A friend traveling with them, to temporarily relieve the mothers burden, had been holding the baby at that moment; otherwise, the infant, too, would have perished in the abyss. Everyone was led to believe that the family had adopted the orphan out of Christian charity. They gave only vague answers to questions about his parentage. It was not until Xavier was well into adulthood and not from his family that he discovered the truth. Partly because he planned some day to visit to New Guinea, he became a linguist with a specialty in the languages of the region. It was Xaviers ambition to return to his birthplaces and, if possible, to learn more about his parents. He had arrived in New Guinea only weeks before Ruth to conduct a comparative study of the language of emotion. Ruth was sitting on her suitcase in the airport, waiting for transportation to the Anthropology Center, when a short, pudgy, olive-skinned man approached her. Dr. Samu introduced himself, and, as they walked to the jeep that would be the only vehicle she would ride in for a year, Xavier explained that, since he and Ruth would be working with the same peoples, he would be pleased to have her accompany him as he collected verbal data, during which occasions she could make her observations. Dr. Houston had explained to him something of what was to have been their joint project, and he had read Ruths doctoral thesis. Xavier had already published several articles in scientific journals and his research in linguistics was well subsidized. Ruth was honored by the interest he showed in her and in her work. Although, at 29, he was only six years older than she, his scientific accomplishments were of another order of magnitude from anything she would ever hope to do. As they drove to the compound, Xavier said, It is interesting that youre also studying language. Yes, Ruth replied, but I hadnt thought of it that way. Im an anthropologist, not a linguist. And yet motherese is a kind of language. I guess thats true, in a way, but the difference is that I am looking for behavioral constants, human universals. Motherese does not require learning. Although my training is in anthropology, Im really more of a human ethologist. I understand. I once heard the German scientist, Irenaus Eibl-Eibesfeldt, lecture on his work on emotional expression and expressive gestures, when he visited the University in Australia. Ruth was impressed. Ive never met him or heard him lecture, but Ive seen some of his photographs. They were inspiring. He found emotional expressions the same the world over. Actually, Eibl-Eibesfeldts pictures was one reason I became interested in motherese, Ruth confessed. If emotional expression is the same among people from varying cultures, I expected to find similarities in the way people interact with infants. I did find it among various groups in the United States, but finding it here as well would be confirmation of the theory. Yes, Xavier said, you search for the basics of human nature. As do I. They had reached the hut to which Ruth had been assigned. Ruth jumped from the jeep, grabbed her bags, and said goodbye. They would begin the next morning where the schedule called for visiting the Molungi, a coastal people. Ruths new home for the year was the hut that Dr. Houston had occupied. As she had expected, conditions were primitive, but less so than she had feared, and there were native assistants to clean and prepare meals. Xaviers quarters were further into the bush, about a quarter of a mile away. They soon fell into their work schedule. Each day Xavier would pick Ruth up at dawn to begin their journey over rough terrain. Usually, depending on their destination for the day, they would travel by jeep for several miles then continue for an hour or more on foot to get to most of the tribes that they visited. Usually, they returned to the compound before dark, but occasionally, especially when they had traveled a

A Scientist Looks at Romantic Love and Calls It Limerence:

longer distance, they would bivouac at the site overnight. It was a schedule that gave Xavier and Ruth plenty of time for conversation, conversation they used well from that first day. At first, Ruth and Xavier spoke mostly about the work at hand. Xavier described what he knew of the customs of the various tribes they visited. Then they talked about more general scientific matters. Xavier introduced her to Alan Brownes theory on Love Two. We all know that customs and attitudes about romantic love differ from one culture to another, and at different times, he said, but, if Browne and other anthropologists for example, Helen Harris are right, the underlying experience, when it occurs, is universal. Yes, Ruth said, Ive read some of Harriss writings on romantic love on various South Sea Islands. She found more overlap than differences among them. Which fits Brownes ideas, Xavier said. Ruth was reminded of the running disagreement between herself and Peter concerning human nature. Peter was mainly focused on psychopathology and differences among individuals, whereas Ruth looked for the fundamentals of human nature. So she truly enjoyed being able to hold conversations with someone who had a perspective similar to her own. From her readings in evolutionary anthropology, she was ready to see some kind of human mating urge as necessary to evolution of the species, and she had already puzzled over the paucity of the kind of scientific research that would bring about understanding of the mechanisms of human reproduction and family formation. On the other hand, even after borrowing and reading Xaviers copy of Brownes book, she hadnt really understood that Love Two was a distinct state universal, across cultures in its potential but also something that not all people experienced. One evening, after supper at the compound dining room, she asked Xavier about it. If romantic love, or Love Two, to use Brownes term, is a state that differs in its overt manifestations, depending on culture and the accidents of particular circumstances, how can it be considered universal? Also, Browne says that it does not happen to everyone. It doesnt seem very universal to me. It seems contradictory. I think of a universal trait as, well, like having five fingers on each hand or being inclined to speak motherese to an infant. But not everyone speaks motherese. Thats true. Motherese is also subject to social influences. But the differences are only in degree. I think that the tendency to speak differently to infants is true of everyone, although there are some differences between the sexes. For example, fathers do not vary their pitch as much as mothers do. But that could be due to social inhibitions. Its more acceptable for females to talk baby talk to babies, whereas men are obliged to remain manly. Is that the way it is with Love Two? Not exactly. According to Browne, and my personal experience has confirmed it, Love Two is something a person is either in or not in. They had finished eating, and were walking back to Xaviers work hut, when Ruth took up the conversation in a teasing mode. I know. Love Two is like being or not being a little bit pregnant? Ruth joked. In a way. The difference is that pregnancy has a predictable course. And Love Two doesnt? No, Love Two doesnt. In any situation, the course of Love Two depends on what happens. Mainly, it depends on how the person who is its object behaves, but also on whether there are obstacles to fulfillment. So its sensible. When there are obstacles, the Love Two wisely diminishes. You are teasing me. You know that thats not what Browne found. Okay, Browne found the opposite, at least to a point. Adversity strengthens it. At least, thats what he says. If the union between Romeo and Juliet had met with family approval, they might not have been attracted to each other.

The Collected Works of Dorothy Tennov

At least not with such intensity, Xavier added. It might have been short-lived. In fact, it was short lived. Xavier laughed. Youre teasing again. Browne contends that once a person is caught in its grip, there are only two routes out of Love Two: Total fulfillment of desire through reciprocation or, alternatively, obstacles so great that hope for fulfillment is completely and totally destroyed. The latter can be very difficult to attain because, Love Two leads one to hang on to every conceivable sign of a possibility that the person will come around. Thats why it can take a long time to get over it. Browne reported that it could last a lifetime under conditions with a little hope here and there. That must be what is meant by stringing someone along. Frankly, Love Two sounds diabolical, Ruth observed. You got it, Xavier answered. And you forgot the third way of ending Love Two. Third way? The way of the Capulets and Montagues, she said, laughing. But seriously, it looks to me like Love Two is not such a good thing. It depends on what you mean by good. It has biological advantage. Before getting to sleep that night, Ruth considered the implications of what Xavier had said about Love Two. The next morning, they continued the discussion. Ruth said, Yesterday, you said Love Two had a biological advantage or it wouldnt exist. But thats a truism. Thats reminds me of the evolutionary psychologists, with their best-of-all-possible-worlds approach. Everything that is had to be or we wouldnt be. Now Xavier was the one who was laughing. I know. It seems silly sometimes. But it makes us more sensitive to the consequences of our traits, and they are not all good in the sense of making life comfortable for its creatures. Also, many have spoken out against over-simplified just-so stories. Frans de Waal, for example. I know what you mean. Ive read Richard Dawkins. Evolution is a bungling process that selfishly keeps what works but doesnt always know how to get rid of what doesnt work so well. Right, Xavier agreed. But heres something else that should not be missed. Love Two gives rise to the most wonderful, most ecstatic, most entirely pleasurable experience human beings ever know. The French writer Stendhal called it the greatest happiness. Browne told about an interview, taped by one of his assistants, in which a woman told such a tale of torment that it brought tears to Brownes eyes as he listened. When the interview was over, the interviewer, almost as an afterthought, asked if the woman had any final comment. She responded, Despite the pain, I would not have missed it for anything. It was the most wonderful thing that ever happened to me. It gave meaning to my life! No wonder psychologist Stanton Peele calls it an addiction. You make it sound like a drug effect. When it comes down to it, it probably is a drug effect, the effect of a drug that one part of the brain gives to another part. Do you mean oxytocin? Ruth asked. Many researchers have linked oxytocin to feelings of affection and bonding, as well as the kind of muscle relaxation that aids childbirth and letting down of the mothers milk for nursing the baby. Maybe its oxytocin, maybe its a substance not yet isolated, or some combination. Xavier insisted. Okay, but theres another thing that really puzzles me. In fact, I doubt that it is true. Whats that? Well, you, that is, Browne and you, contend that everybody has an equal chance of getting into the state of Love Two, that things like gender, race, education, income or even culture dont matter. Its an

A Scientist Looks at Romantic Love and Calls It Limerence:

equal opportunity condition. Sorry, but I cant believe that. I think women, neurotics, and the poor are more vulnerable. You are right that that is the common conception, but its wrong. It has to be wrong. What do you mean? she asked. Well, he explained, look at it this way. If Love Two has anything to do with human reproduction Which it must, Ruth interrupted. Of course. Its all about reproduction. And therefore, if only certain types of people could come down with it I think you mean rise up with it, Ruth laughed. There you go again! But seriously, if only neurotic people fell into Love two, what would be the result? More neurotic people, of course. Right. And since neurotic basically means self-destructive We would have turned into a neurotic race that couldnt survive. Which, incidentally, I think we are, but thats not your point. Yes, I mean no, thats not my point, Xavier said. The point is that any mechanism of reproduction that selects certain types would lead to an increase of that type. Thats why I think it has to be random. But they had arrived at the village of the Branosi tribe, their destination for the day. It wasnt until the end of the day, on the ride back to camp, that they were able to continue the conversation about romantic love. Xavier, Ruth began almost as soon as Xavier started the motor, You did say random, didnt you, that Love Two is unconnected to anything, that it strikes like lightening, anywhere, on anyone, without warning? Pretty much. Its associated with certain kinds of conditions, but not to anything about the person. But, Ruth wondered, what about it being connected to good things, things that help a person survive and have more offspring? Maybe, but this is the way I think it works. It occurs to all kinds of people, not just to rich or poor, woman or man, dumb or bright, and it does not occur to everyone. My idea, and I dont know that Browne ever addressed this particular notion, is that conditions that favor some people falling into Love Two and others not works for everybody. Have you heard of evolutionary stable strategies? Ive heard the term, but I am not entirely sure what it means, Ruth responded. As I understand it, an evolutionary stable strategy is one that is somehow arranged so that that some people would show the trait but others wouldnt, and that that arrangement, in the end, is more beneficial to the species than if everyone in the population, or if no one in the population, were endowed with the trait. In the case of Love Two, there must be a triggering mechanism randomly applicable with which nature could play probabilities. In other words, all people have the potential, but it is activated only under circumstances that occur more or less randomly with respect to other traits. Ruth was incredulous. Do you mean that it is not a matter of personality, and women are not more prone to it than men? Thats right. Browne said he had found it in all kinds of people from the very uptight to the very laid back. How they dealt with it was different, but how they felt, what they wanted, and how much their thinking was interfered with, was the same for king and commoner. So thats what is meant by universality. It could happen, although it might not, but if it does happen, it happens in the same way to everyone.

The Collected Works of Dorothy Tennov

Yes. It appears that the basic neuro-physiological mechanism is what is universal, and that the conditions that bring it on depend on chance, mostly on the action of others. Browne said he once had a brief discussion with the famous entomologist and sociobiologist, E. O. Wilson, in which Wilson said he was also convinced that the mechanism was universal. In other words, it could happen to anyone. At any age. But Ruth was still doubtful. Surely it mainly occurs more during youth, and older people are immune. Maybe it does occur more to younger people, but that could be because younger people are more likely to get into the right triggering conditions. Such as being around attractive possible mates. Im beginning to get the picture. Furthermore, Xavier said excitedly, Some of Brownes informants reported having the experience for the first time in their forties, or even later. One man said he finally understood what the words to the songs meant. He had always assumed they were romantic exaggerations. He was astonished to learn that they were literal descriptions. You mean things like I cant get you out of my mind. Precisely. But, again, is Love Two good? Ruth insisted. By my own experience, I felt that it wasnt at all good. It drew my attention away from other aspects of living that I counted before and since as of greater value. It wasted time I could have used more profitably in other ways. Not that nature cares. Ruth was pensive. Yes, thats the point, isnt it? Nature doesnt care. Its like one of natures scars, as Elaine Morgan labels them. Its something that can be a terrible burden to human beings: good for passing on genes, but bad for human experience, including mortality. It is not a comfortable arrangement for its victims, because it can undermine the pursuit of other goals. Like the voice box and the air pipe so close together that people choke. Thats one of Morgans examples. I know, Ruth said. I read her book, The Descent of Woman. But they had arrived at their destination, so further talk would have to wait. On the way back, Xavier said that his informants had told him of a couple who had been executed by the tribe for carrying on what was considered an illicit union. My goodness, Ruth exclaimed, When did it happen? A century ago? Xaviers face took on a very serious aspect. It happened three weeks ago, just before we began our work. Ruth was stunned. Love Two is powerful enough to counter cultural proscriptions. It reminds me of Anna and the King of Siam. And from what you say and Browne wrote, its involuntary and can strike anywhere, even where it is outlawed on pain of death. A certain set of circumstances lights up the fire of Love Two. What those circumstances are isnt exactly clear, but we can make some guesses. For example, if an attractive person, one who ranks high in the individuals hierarchy of attractiveness, sends, or seems to send, a signal of interest, and the person is somehow ripe for it, the state of Love Two might get started. Hmnn. Ruth pondered the implication. By attractive is meant physically attractive. Partly, but I think not entirely, Xavier said. Furthermore, this more attractive person also has to seem somehow attainable. Brown gives the example of the teenager fixated on the rock star. That was someone she didnt know and had no chance of knowing, Ruth objected.

A Scientist Looks at Romantic Love and Calls It Limerence:

In reality, perhaps, but not in her mind. Remember, she created a complex fantasy in which she imagined a set of realistic circumstances that would cause him to become interested in her. They were not very realistic. Maybe not realistic to sober judgment, but not impossible, at least not theoretically impossible, Xavier said. Given a highly unlikely set of conditions. True, Xavier conceded, but thats the way of Love Two. It is built on what the particular mind deems possible, however unlikely. And there are a couple of other things to remember. Once the state of Love Two is entered into, the gates slam shut, to use Stendhals term, and no one else can get in. When some of Brownes informants said that they felt simultaneous attraction for two people, further probing disclosed that other characteristic features attributed to Love Two, notably loss of thought control, were also absent. In other words, Ruth said, you cant Love Two but one person. At a time, Xavier added. And that is biologically important, because it means that less attractive people get a shot at reproduction. Once Love Two is directed at one person, no other, not even a more attractive person, can penetrate the barrier. Wow, said Ruth, this is getting clear, but complicated. Im beginning to see how Love Two operates from a biological, but also from a social, point of view. If the gates didnt close, there would be no monogamy. Or stability. As soon as another, more attractive person came along, the previous one would be dumped. Yes, Love Two insists on monogamy. But the biological significance of monogamy is not entirely clear. Its a matter of some controversy. It might seem obvious, as the anthropologist Helen Fisher maintains, that monogamous pairing benefits the reproductive process because it keeps the man around to provide needed help with the children. Fisher doesnt use Brownes term. She talks about passionate love or infatuation but neither term really captures the meaning of Love Two. Furthermore, Randolph Nesse, a proponent of what he calls evolutionary medicine, thinks that an even more important function of monogamy might be protection against sexually-transmitted disease. They had arrived back at the compound, which ended the discussion for that day. It had left Ruth with new things to think about. The next morning, she was eager to continue. They had hardly started the days journey when she brought up where they had left off. Xavier, she began, yesterday you said that Love Two offered some protection against sexuallytransmitted disease. Is there evidence of that? Only indirect evidence, common sense ideas. The more Love Two, the more monogamy; the more monogamy, the less opportunity for transmitting disease. Of course, Ruth said. It should have been obvious to me. Its just that it seemed far-fetched at first. Do you really think thats the evolutionary explanation? Who knows? I dont think we can ever know for sure. The reason why a particular trait came into existence during evolution is always something of a guess, Xavier replied. But sometimes guesses lead to good ideas. Randolph Nesse, George Williams, and others find that such guessing is helpful in seeing troublesome things like fever as having more value than people realized. Their ideas have led to some changes in medical practice. Evolutionary medical theorist Paul W. Ewald tells of how he decided that maybe the swelling of a wound acts as a kind of natural cast that promotes healing. It has long been suspected that fever is a protective device that keeps pathogens at bay so that they do less harm. Ruth was thoughtful. Finally, she said, I can think of a way that Love Two is irredeemably harmful. Oh?

The Collected Works of Dorothy Tennov

When it breaks up a home, Ruth explained. If, as you say, Love Two ends when the person receives total reciprocation, then the person may become ripe for a new Love Two. And that very destructive situation is the subject of much fiction. And much of real life, too, Xavier added. The seven-year-itch that some researchers have lately said it is more accurately called the four-year-itch. Love Two is over and some attractive other comes along. The tale is repeated endlessly. And, Ruth added. If its as powerful as you and Browne say, then it can have more serious consequences than just distraction of thought. Its really dangerous. For the next two days, Xavier and Ruth discussed the way that different societies treated the subject of romantic love. It was idealized in contemporary Western countries, but was severely punished in others, particularly when it led to what was considered illicit mating. As late as in the 1980s a Saudi Arabian princess and her lover were beheaded for the sin of Love Two. Aware of its power, totalitarian regimes attempt to stamp it out along with other threats to the leaders control over the populace. Tyrants hate Love Two because of its power over motivation, but not even tyranny can stop Love Two once it strikes, Xavier observed. Yet, Ruth agreed, despite its ubiquity and the precise descriptions contained in folklore, biography, and literature, the traditions of social science prevent its being subjected to scientific analysis. Thats why Browne published only in a trade book. He never even tried to put anything about Love Two into a psychology journal. And no other researcher has yet followed up on Browns work. They cite it, but they dont really accept it. Its amazing, when you think about it, Ruth said. One of the most important aspects of human nature is beyond the reach of the science supposedly devoted to the study of human nature! One reason is that they reject self-report as scientific data, and, at this time, its the only way Love Two can be studied, Xavier pointed out. Its irrational, and yet, understandable when you consider the history of science. But its a barrier science must get through if people are ever able to understand themselves well enough to counter destructive human behaviors. I wonder, Ruth mused, if they ever will. I agree with Browne that verbal report can be a reliable and valid source of scientific data, and that science should pay better attention to it. Another thing I find fascinating about Love Two, Xavier said, is that it makes its own rules. Browne says that knowing how it operates does not stop it. Once it lands in a victims psyche, the result is a predictable function of circumstances over which the person has little or no control. I guess thats why they speak of falling into it. It suggests helplessness. Yes, and although every case of Love Two is as different in its detail as each snowflake is unique, there is an underlying constancy in the laws of its operation. What makes it even more intriguing, is that the mechanism obviously involves what we usually see as differing kinds of processes. But, as Browne contends, the processes are not different. It is just that the experience is sensitive to minor variations in conditions. Conditions? Ruth asked Yes, all kinds of things. As I said before, not only imposed obstacles to fulfillment such as parental objections, but also what the other person does, and how it is interpreted. But, Ruth objected, once you bring in interpretation, dont you put the matter back on to details of personality thereby making the process too subjective for scientific scrutiny? It makes it harder, and it certainly makes it harder to get research grants, but interpretations dont vary all that widely. Anyway, theres a lot more we need to know. Browne admitted that he only scratched the surface. But Browne found people having exactly the same experience across a range of types of people and circumstances, which confirms the image of romantic love derived from literature. Exactly? Ruth asked. But you said each is different.

A Scientist Looks at Romantic Love and Calls It Limerence:

The reactions, the feelings, are the same. Browne said that the word exactly came up again and again in the letters he received from people who had read his book. And I would agree. What he described is exactly what happened to me. To you? she asked. What do you mean? I mean that how I would feel depended on what she did. I was euphoric at signs of hope, but in despair when she rejected me. She rejected you? It was classic. Maria left me for my best friend, and it was a long time before I stopped thinking about her and wanting her back. How long? Ruth asked. Five years. Thats incredible! Its what happens with Love Two. I might have recovered sooner, except that I would see her from time to time, and every time I did, the feelings would come back. But did you really recover? Yes, I really did. Finally. And when I did, there was nothing left of it. I didnt even like her. And that is exactly what many of Brownes informants said. If you get over it, you really get over it. Whether you end up liking the person is independent of your having been in love. It was my own experience that attracted me to Brownes theory. It hit home. Love Two had interrupted and diverted my life in ways that interfered with other things that were really more important. I have heard that, except for the elderly, who commit suicide to escape physical distress, many people kill themselves following rejection by the object of their romantic passions. Lovesickness, Xavier said, is a serious matter. Ruth told Xavier about Peter. I expect to marry him, although I have not felt about him the way that Browne calls Love Two. Just at that point, she looked at Xavier and saw him in a different way. She had liked him from the first, and enjoyed their conversations, but now she felt a kind of affection. She also felt a good feeling, a happiness. She did not realize at first what was happening, or that from that moment it was unstoppable. Xavier was speaking. Since Love Two has its downsides, Ive pondered whether knowing about it might help to control it. I think it would be important to know. Why would it be important? Because then perhaps it could be controlled. For a few seconds, their eyes locked. They would soon find out whether control would come from knowing. Even as they discussed Love Two, they both fell into it. The day after that conversation, as each prepared for the days work, each felt a glow that both, at first, attributed to the pleasure of the work, itself. In the jeep, they said nothing about Love Two, but as they disembarked to begin the remaining journey on foot, Ruth lost her balance and Xavier caught her in his arms. Their embrace was spontaneous, inevitable, and sustained. Electricity surged through their bodies. For the rest of that day, they stayed aloof from each other, but the joy had begun. That evening, as they listened to Xaviers taping of the days interview, they could no longer stay apart. They found each others hands, and then each others whole bodies. They were suddenly a couple, very much in love, by any name. A glorious honeymoon had begun. The ingredients were all there. They shared common interests, common values, and common levels of interest in their work. Both were unmarried, and, more important, neither felt Love Two for anyone else. Racial and geographical differences added the spice required to cook the stew. It was a recipe for extreme Love Two. Their happy time of mutual Love Two endured for a total of just five months. Nothing experienced before or since by either of them could compare with the ecstasy of those euphoric days. They collected data, they trudged through the rain forest, they battled dangerous animals, and

The Collected Works of Dorothy Tennov

they were bitten by insects, but because they did it together, it was a joy. Everything was a source of pleasure. They didnt talk about the future. Nor did they talk more about Love Two. They knew, and there was nothing they could do but luxuriate in the ecstasy. Ruth took notes on motherese while Xavier talked with the people they visited. Later, he would tell her what they had said. Ruth found, to her delight, that she was learning some of the languages, as well as getting to know about the personal lives of the tribal people. It was on the eve of the sixth months anniversary of the beginning of their glorious mutual love, that it all came to an abrupt end. Xavier announced that he was leaving the next morning, that he had given much thought to the situation, and that they must say final goodbyes. It was the only time they had talked about Love Two since those first days. Ruth was stunned. She tried to protest, but she could see that Xavier was firm. It was final. When did you decide? she asked. I have always known that our continued partnership, much as I wanted it, would raise intolerable problems, that our lives could not be shared. You knew, too, didnt you? Yes, of course I knew, she lied. She had not really known because she had not allowed herself to think about it. But she felt his determination, and knew that for him to say it as he did meant that there was no turning away from it. Its Love Two, he said, taking her in his arms. Ruth had begun to tremble. Yes, I know. They spent that last evening together in tears. Because of what they knew of Love Two, they knew their break must be clean, that they must not maintain contact of any kind. It was the most final of endings, and Ruths heart was broken as she lay in his arms for the last time. Xavier awoke while Ruth still slept. He slipped quietly out of the hut, returning after a while with a package that he placed in the bed beside her. He gave her one last long look, and then was gone. At first, Ruth wanted to leave New Guinea. She didnt think she could bear continuing without Xaviers being with her. But her contract had required an entire 12-month set of observations. It was for the best, as it turned out. The people she had come to know during the months with Xavier were friendly and cooperative, a source of real support. But she wept in the evenings alone in the hut they had shared. The pain of yearning would not leave her for a long time. One thing was clear: knowing all about Love Two didnt prevent it. That was an important bit of scientific information. It meant that the Love two mechanisms bypassed cognitive functions. What happened when Love Two struck was not under conscious control. It happened in another part of the brain. Knowing Love Two as she now did, Ruth decided that she would live without it. She felt that her experience with Xavier had left her with an emotional wound from which she might not easily recover, but from which she determined to gain strength. She did not anticipate how long it would be before she stopped searching the journals for his publications. When, many years later, knowledge of him finally came, she wondered whether this man, this genius, was someone with whom she could have shared a life. His intellect was so imposing, would she not have lost herself in it. Or could she? For the rest of her life, she never decided. In any case, on that first day, she was in awe of his wisdom in deciding that they had to break up, and she was grateful for the kindness and gentleness with which he did it, despite its suddenness. Whenever she thought about that last night, she felt renewed admiration for her lost love, admiration that would be both intensified, in some ways, and diminished, in others, when she learned the truth; it intensified when she realized his sacrifice, but it diminished by the thought of his having been less than truthful. Was it hard to marry one man when she loved another? It was, and yet, by marrying Peter, she convinced herself that she would, ironically, remain true to Xavier. She would never allow herself to feel Love Two for anyone else. And she was comfortable with Peter. She loved him in the Love One way.