Guest Posted June 24, 2000 Report Share Posted June 24, 2000 I will present one point of view. This is an excerpt from a story called "Alina" written by Shirvanzade. "... Barekams, ser che ayn, inch mardiq sovor en anvanel ser, aysinqn shoshapelin, ararkayakan@: Barekams, ser che kin@, vori het xosum enq, batsatrvum, vijum, krvum, hashtvum, noren krvelu u noren hashtvelu hamar: Ser che kin@, vorin grkum enq, hamburum, pashtum, vorpeszi vayelenq yev vayelum enq, vorpeszi apakanenq: Voch, da ser che: Ser@ yeraz e yev yeraz el piti toghnel nran: Ser@ havitenakan e, anjnjeli, anmoranali, bayts anjashakeli: Na mi shogh e, vor chi marum, bayts yev chi vorsvum inchpes trchun, mi gaghapar, vor@ chi hnanum, bayts yev chi gortsadrvum inchpes marmnavor vayelqi mijots, mi mitq vor chi mashvum, bayts yev chi yuratsvum yev marmnanum: Soskali e nra pahanj@, bayts yev hajeli, o, o, ansahman hajeli yev ansahman tunavor - payqarel, yerbeq ch@haghtelu yev dzgtel, yerbeq ch@hasnelu hamar: Na drama che, vor uni hanguyts, @ntatsq u vaxjan: Na mi tragedia e arants mijararneri u arants dadarneri: Na uni miayn skizb yev yerbeq vaxjan, miayn tsnund yev yerbeq mah..." Translated to English by me: "It's not love what people are used to calling love, which is the touchable, the objective. It's not love with whom we talk, open-up, argue, fight, make-up, so we can fight and make-up again. It's not love, whom we hug, kiss, admire, so we can enjoyand we enjoy it, so we can corrupt. No, that's not love. Love is a dream, and it should be left as a dream. Love is eternal, ineffacable, unforgetable, but untasteable. It's a beam, that never faints, but it can never be hunted like a bird, it's an idea taht never grows old, but it's never put to use, just like a way of sensual pleasure, and thought that never wears out, but it's never embodied or personalized. It's need is terrible, but pleasant. O, infinitely pleasant, but also poisonous - fight, never to win and distend, without ever reaching it.It's not a drama that has a bond, course and an ending. It's a tragedy without any intermissions and without pauses. It only has a beginning and no ending, only birth and never death..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 26, 2000 Report Share Posted June 26, 2000 Greetings from ArmCleo ) Bravo Shirvanzade...beautiful love...what a concept.. I always say "if you haven't loved, you haven't lived". I was/am lucky enough to love and be loved; truly, deeply, passionately, and for all eternity. Yes, love is a dream. A dream that can die just as easily as it is born. For it to live, you constantly have to nurture it. What is love, you ask? I don't know, really, I can't put it into words. I see his love for me in things big and small. I will probably sound like a total drama queen if i say that he'd give his life for me, yet it's true, he would, he almost did. It's in his total committment to those seemingly endless hours in the hospital waiting room (where i was having my breast examined). It's in the way he'll pull my sweater down to cover my back if he thinks i'm cold, in the way he literally showered me with chocolate in the middle of the night, in his voice the first time he said "i love you", in the way he puts wild flowers in my hair and calls me "perineri taguhi", in the way he winked and quoted "here's looking at you, kid" (from casablanca) the very first day we met, in the way he shivered the first time he touched my arm,in the way he waltzed with me down the aisles of the movietheater to that beautiful waltz at the end of "eyes wide shut" to the absolute dismay of all moviegoers that evening (lol). I can't describe the feeling itself, i can only describe the way it's demonstrated (on his side at least). For myself, I know I love him because I would do anything for him: lie, cheat, steal, etc. It's this complete surrender on my part. He says he knows I love him because of the way I've changed since the very first day we met. After nearly 2 years, my heart still skips a beat when I hear his voice, when I watch him ever so slightly touch that hat of his whenever a woman he knows approaches (I call it the "al capone" hat, it's the kind men of that timeperiod would wear)... God, this is long...I guess you could say it's love when you can't shut up about it..lol.. Let me sum up. I think love is the end product of a long chain of events, mutual devotion, and yes, that dream that doesn't die. It's the feeling where you know that when you're 80 and on your deathbed, that person will still be a part of your life, in one way or another (and not necessarily through marriage, either) Chgitem, I don't think i've been able to put this into words, as articulate as I may be..lol...(that's self praise if ever heard it) look forward to hearing from the guys on this, gayancho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 26, 2000 Report Share Posted June 26, 2000 As one of my friends once said in Yerevan, "Ser@ suta, lvatsk prel sovori" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 26, 2000 Report Share Posted June 26, 2000 alpha brings up an interesting point..lvatsk prel sovori... there's widsom behind that...i am a firm believer in the following: love is NOT necessary for a successful marriage.. what do you guys think? gayane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2000 Report Share Posted June 27, 2000 Never in the course of human development has love been the cornerstone of family and marriage. If you look back in history you can see arrange marriages as the norm in the society. With the rise of feminist movement and new industrial age society has changed it's norms and standards. As statistics show the arranged marriages worked better. In advance western societies divorce rates are reaching alarming rates, almost 50%. Society is losing it's atomic building block, the family. It's very common nowdays to live with someone for many years and not be married. It's like you share the bed with them, but not your life (things like income and etc.). I personally think that for love you have an affair, the passion. It dies away pretty soon, just like everything else. One gets tired of a company of another, no matter how enjoyable it is. I think marriage should be a matter of a convenience. One should ask the question, how will it improve my life, before getting into such a committment? It's like a business, there should be long term and short terms goals, expansion plans (having kids), and running the business etiquitee (who does what in the family). I know this view is unique but it's interesting to hear your views on this subject. quote:Originally posted by Gayancho: alpha brings up an interesting point..lvatsk prel sovori... there's widsom behind that...i am a firm believer in the following: love is NOT necessary for a successful marriage.. what do you guys think? gayane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2000 Report Share Posted June 28, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha: I know this view is unique but it's interesting to hear your views on this subject. It is not as unique as you may think I have heard this point of view from some people. I can't say I agree and I can't say I disagree. There is some truth to it, but ... love IS an essencial part of marriage, even though it is not the only thing. Sulamita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2000 Report Share Posted June 28, 2000 Oh, so you are a Bruin. Very nice !!! Yes in some cases you are right, love is important. But lets go back to the business viewpoint of the whole thing. You can look at dating as somewhat of a long interview. That's what interviewers do they try to grasp an idea who the hell is the person in front of them. There is the first interview, that's like the first date, people try to feel each other, see who is who. Then there is an in-house interview, that's when you are being seriously considered for the job. This is very similar of the dating part when people seriously consider committment. The hiring is eventually equivalent of getting married. Then divorce is obviously getting fired part. If you look at things really deeply and realistically family is run like a business. It's just people are really uncomfortable with this idea. They think of business as only a profit taking entity. But the profit of the family is the leisure and the quality time that you spend their. Whenever it stops you might want to consider changing a job, or a wife/husband. quote:Originally posted by Sulamita: It is not as unique as you may think I have heard this point of view from some people. I can't say I agree and I can't say I disagree. There is some truth to it, but ... love IS an essencial part of marriage, even though it is not the only thing. Sulamita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2000 Report Share Posted June 29, 2000 Did anybody put "Girls only!" sign on this topic. Just immagine what this world will turn into without love marriges. Immagine everybody to calculate before their marriges. I would call this kind of couples "larges intestinelus sapiens" rather than "homo sapiens". So, do we just marry to safely eat and shit (I'm sorry). I understand that sometime life ****s, but a real homo sapiens created by the God must try his best, best, best to marry by love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2000 Report Share Posted June 29, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha:It's just people are really uncomfortable with this idea. They think of business as only a profit taking entity. But the profit of the family is the leisure and the quality time that you spend their. Whenever it stops you might want to consider changing a job, or a wife/husband. Alpha,Being REAL is essential ... but you should not go overboard, since then you turn into a computer. I would hate to come to the conclusion that marriages are nothing more than business transactions. Lets not take romance out of romance. Sulamita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2000 Report Share Posted June 29, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha:Oh, so you are a Bruin. Very nice !!!First time a Trojan compliments a Bruin. Historians mark this date !!! He he he ...Now I can't make my Trojan joke Oh well...Sulamik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2000 Report Share Posted June 29, 2000 Homo Sapiens, as any other species of Animalia Kingdom marry for reproduction. It's vital for continuation of the species. As society changed during the last few centuries, the purpose of marriage evolved from reproduction to love. When you look back in history you will see that people in aristocratic families married for reproduction and then had affairs and kept mistresses (like Price Charles was doing, he married Diana, so his children will be beautiful, but had a mistress named Camelia). All I am saying is that you should look at things from not a sentimental viewpoint, look at it simply scientifically. You can love someone but marry someone else. Do you think marriage and love have anything to do with each other. quote:Originally posted by Berj:Did anybody put "Girls only!" sign on this topic. Just immagine what this world will turn into without love marriges. Immagine everybody to calculate before their marriges. I would call this kind of couples "larges intestinelus sapiens" rather than "homo sapiens". So, do we just marry to safely eat and shit (I'm sorry). I understand that sometime life ****s, but a real homo sapiens created by the God must try his best, best, best to marry by love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2000 Report Share Posted June 29, 2000 Sulamita what was your major at UCLA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 30, 2000 Report Share Posted June 30, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha: When you look back in history you will see that people in aristocratic families married for reproduction and then had affairs and kept mistresses (like Price Charles was doing, he married Diana, so his children will be beautiful, but had a mistress named Camelia). And now he has the nerve to marry Camelia. What has this world come to???? He he he ...Sulamita[This message has been edited by Sulamita (edited June 29, 2000).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 30, 2000 Report Share Posted June 30, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha:Sulamita what was your major at UCLA.Major: EconomicsMinor: Armenian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 30, 2000 Report Share Posted June 30, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha: You can love someone but marry someone else. Do you think marriage and love have anything to do with each other. "Love and marriage, love and marriage ... they go together like a horse and carriage ..." I just could not resist Sulamik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 1, 2000 Report Share Posted July 1, 2000 lol..sulami, i was tempted to throw that in the first time i wrote on this, but resisted..lol.. alpha, the marriage=business analogy is pretty prevalent among the educated worldly types such as ourselves..and I subscribe to it as well, at least partly. But it's not only a business deal, it's total committment. So that's where I'd place all the mushy stuff you're supposed to feel for your husband. This is how I look at it: you find a guy you're truly compatible with (business side), you marry him. Even so, you'd still have to hold up your end of the whole thing (lol..i don't even know what to call it). That's when you have to be mutually respectful, supportive, committed, in short, you'd have to function as one (romantic side, sort of). (and some would say that's what love is anyway). My parents' marriage is a perfect example of this. I am certain they didn't marry for love, they married for convenience, and yet they are soo incredibly committed to each other and to this family it amazes me. and no, Berj, this isn't a girls only topic.. we'd love to hear more guys speak. (sidenote: I think guys are more romantic and subscribe to the "marriage for love" philosophy more readily; surprising, isn't it?) Gayane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 1, 2000 Report Share Posted July 1, 2000 There is nothing surprising in it. Jesus Christ is a man and if you'll imagine the God you see that he is a man too. This is the men's world, but it would be...whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 1, 2000 Report Share Posted July 1, 2000 Gayane, I am truely amazed at your level of modernity. It would have been much better if we, as a nation, moved away from middle ages to modern times. You have got my utmost respect for your views.By reading your posts I got truely convinced that there are some people in Armenian community of Los Angeles who live in 21st century, not 12. (Never thought UCLA could produce so many smart people quote:Originally posted by Gayancho: lol..sulami, i was tempted to throw that in the first time i wrote on this, but resisted..lol.. alpha, the marriage=business analogy is pretty prevalent among the educated worldly types such as ourselves..and I subscribe to it as well, at least partly. But it's not only a business deal, it's total committment. So that's where I'd place all the mushy stuff you're supposed to feel for your husband. This is how I look at it: you find a guy you're truly compatible with (business side), you marry him. Even so, you'd still have to hold up your end of the whole thing (lol..i don't even know what to call it). That's when you have to be mutually respectful, supportive, committed, in short, you'd have to function as one (romantic side, sort of). (and some would say that's what love is anyway). My parents' marriage is a perfect example of this. I am certain they didn't marry for love, they married for convenience, and yet they are soo incredibly committed to each other and to this family it amazes me. and no, Berj, this isn't a girls only topic.. we'd love to hear more guys speak. (sidenote: I think guys are more romantic and subscribe to the "marriage for love" philosophy more readily; surprising, isn't it?) Gayane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 1, 2000 Report Share Posted July 1, 2000 That's quite a compliment, alpha..I'm truly humbled by it ) It's very difficult to be modern and be Armenian, all at the same time. Thank you for supporting me. I really appreciate it ) Gayane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2000 Report Share Posted July 2, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha: (Never thought UCLA could produce so many smart people How ironic I never thought they had computers at USC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2000 Report Share Posted July 2, 2000 quote:Originally posted by alpha:Homo Sapiens, as any other species of Animalia Kingdom marry for reproduction. It's vital for continuation of the species. As society changed during the last few centuries, the purpose of marriage evolved from reproduction to love. When you look back in history you will see that people in aristocratic families married for reproduction and then had affairs and kept mistresses (like Price Charles was doing, he married Diana, so his children will be beautiful, but had a mistress named Camelia). All I am saying is that you should look at things from not a sentimental viewpoint, look at it simply scientifically. You can love someone but marry someone else. Do you think marriage and love have anything to do with each other. OK let's except sentimentalism from our discussion. In that case we must except it not only from the marrige cases but also from all the other different situations of our life where heroism, devotion, commitment come to help us. You're talking about the Animalia Kingdom, OK, don't you know how sentimental the animals can be while saving their master's sinking children from icy waters etc. If we except feelings from our life we are not worthy of being called even animals, we are nothing in that case. My friend's father is a surgeon, one of the best in Armenia, and not only in Armenia. He is a brain surgery specialist. Once he told us:"If my patient dies I'm always 100% sure of the reason, but in some cases I can't understand how a patient, who was almost dead, stays alive, recovers and goes on with his life. There is a God". And this is a specialist who cures hopeless cases, sometimes brought from the US. And despite all the proposals he stayed in Armenia. It is sentimental, but he is a Homo Sapience and not an intestine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2000 Report Share Posted July 3, 2000 For the tuition we paid there they better provide us computers and every other amenities. quote:Originally posted by Sulamita: How ironic I never thought they had computers at USC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2000 Report Share Posted August 10, 2000 Are we through with love? There was an opinion expressed here that humans marry for repruduction. So, why do we need marrige in case, when reproduction can be achieved very easily without marrige and considering the development of science at present even without the original human way of reproduction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 7, 2000 Report Share Posted October 7, 2000 Hello, It seems all these "Love" subjects are the chick sections. Why? who knows what "love" is? I suppose the only answer to that, simply, what ever you make it. Here is an interesting fact - Diana was actually a Hye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 8, 2000 Report Share Posted October 8, 2000 quote:Originally posted by Kazza:Here is an interesting fact - Diana was actually a Hye Maybe we should make a list of all the famous people who are NOT hye It would be a much shorter list for sure ... A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.