Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.1
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.2
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.3
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.4
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.5
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.6
FOOTNOTES
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.1
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.2
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.3
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.4
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.5
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.6
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.7
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.8
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.9
MARRIAGE-10.1
MARRIAGE-10.2
MARRIAGE-10.3
MARRIAGE-10.4
MARRIAGE-10.5
MARRIAGE-10.6
MARRIAGE-10.7
MARRIAGE-10.8
MARRIAGE-10.9
MARRIAGE-10.10
MARRIAGE-10.11
MARRIAGE-10.12
FOOTNOTES
THE ART OF LOVE-11.1
THE ART OF LOVE-11.2
THE ART OF LOVE-11.3
THE ART OF LOVE-11.4
THE ART OF LOVE-11.5
THE ART OF LOVE-11.6
THE ART OF LOVE-11.7
THE ART OF LOVE-11.8
THE ART OF LOVE-11.9
THE ART OF LOVE-11.10
THE ART OF LOVE-11.11
FOOTNOTES
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.1
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.2
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.3
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.4
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.5
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.6
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.7
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.8
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.9
FOOTNOTES
INDEX OF AUTHORS

ultimately the art of attaining the right conditions for procreation. 

 

"It seems extremely probable," wrote Professor E.D. Cope,[376] "that if 

this subject could be properly understood, and become, in the details of 

its practical conduct, a part of a written social science, the monogamic 

marriage might attain a far more general success than is often found in 

actual life." There can be no doubt whatever that this is the case. In the 

great majority of marriages success depends exclusively upon the knowledge 

of the art of love possessed by the two persons who enter into it. A 

life-long monogamic union may, indeed, persist in the absence of the 

slightest inborn or acquired art of love, out of religious resignation or 

sheer stupidity. But that attitude is now becoming less common. As we have 

seen in the previous chapter, divorces are becoming more frequent and more 

easily obtainable in every civilized country. This is a tendency of 

civilization; it is the result of a demand that marriage should be a real 

relationship, and that when it ceases to be real as a relationship it 

should also cease as a form. That is an inevitable tendency, involved in 

our growing democratization, for the democracy seems to care more for 

realities than for forms, however venerable. We cannot fight against it; 

and we should be wrong to fight against it even if we could. 

 

Yet while we are bound to aid the tendency to divorce, and to insist that 

a valid marriage needs the wills of two persons to maintain it, it is 

difficult for anyone to argue that divorce is in itself desirable. It is 

always a confession of failure. Two persons, who, if they have been moved 

in the slightest degree by the normal and regular impulse of sexual 

selection, at the outset regarded each other as lovable, have, on one 

side or the other or on both, proved not lovable. There has been a failure 

in the fundamental art of love. If we are to counterbalance facility of 

divorce our only sound course is to increase the stability of marriage, 

and that is only possible by cultivating the art of love, the primal 

foundation of marriage. 

 

It is by no means unnecessary to emphasize this point. There are still 

many persons who have failed to realize it. There are even people who seem 

to imagine that it is unimportant whether or not pleasure is present in 

the sexual act. "I do not believe mutual pleasure in the sexual act has 

any particular bearing on the happiness of life," once remarked Dr. Howard 

A. Kelly.[377] Such a statement means--if indeed it means anything--that 

the marriage tie has no "particular bearing" on human happiness; it means 

that the way must be freely opened to adultery and divorce. Even the most 

perverse ascetic of the Middle Ages scarcely ventured to make a statement 

so flagrantly opposed to the experiences of humanity, and the fact that a 

distinguished gynecologist of the twentieth century can make it, with 

almost the air of stating a truism, is ample justification for the 

emphasis which it has nowadays become necessary to place on the art of 

love. "Uxor enim dignitatis nomen est, non voluptatis," was indeed an 

ancient Pagan dictum. But it is not in harmony with modern ideas. It was 

not even altogether in harmony with Christianity. For our modern morality, 

as Ellen Key well says, the unity of love and marriage is a fundamental 

principle.[378] 

 

The neglect of the art of love has not been a universal phenomenon; it is 

more especially characteristic of Christendom. The spirit of ancient Rome 

undoubtedly predisposed Europe to such a neglect, for with their rough 

cultivation of the military virtues and their inaptitude for the finer 


Page 4 from 5:  Back   1   2   3  [4]  5   Forward