I think I agree with this. I don’t think a marriage is built on or defined by its grand photographable moments; I think it is built on whatever rhythm of words is passed back and forth across a couple’s lifetime. Desire dwindles, looks fade, circumstances shift, health waxes and wanes, but conversation stays as the daily ground on which two lives meet.
I also don’t think that what Nietzsche is referring to is simply whether one enjoys talking with the other, but whether one can imagine talking with them endlessly, across the seasons of life. A marriage is a lifelong interaction between two people where every stage requires new words, new listening, and new patience. The partner who sits across from us at breakfast today is not the same person we first kissed. Nor are we. Five years can completely remake an individual; new interests arise, old interests die, historic wounds deepen, identities shift, worldviews expand, passions cool, or unexpected ambitions take root. It is not in the nature of a human being, or anything else for that matter, to remain the same across a lifetime. ‘The only constant is change’, as Heraclitus put it. Therefore, the union of two human beings cannot be a covenant between two fixed selves to preserve an illusion of permanence; it must be a covenant to commit to the continuous process of reintroducing ourselves and learning again who the other has become.
Conversation, as Nietzsche posits, is the bridge across these evolutions. Without good conversation in any relationship, this flux occurs in isolation, and its members grow silently apart, each changing alone, until they no longer recognise one another. But with good conversation, genuine, curious, searching, playful, sometimes difficult, marriage becomes a vessel spacious enough to contain transformation.
This is why I find the question Nietzsche asks so intriguing: can you imagine talking with this person for a lifetime? Can you imagine interest in them lasting a lifetime? Can you imagine rediscovering them again and again? Beauty alters, careers shift, children grow and leave, but the conversation continues.
Thanks for this well-written article, Zahra. I find the analogy of marriage as a conversation to be apt. Even though I am not married myself, I can see the logic in the comparison, as marriage is a journey between husband and wife that doesn't always follow a consistent upward or downward trajectory. However, change in both partners is bound to happen along the way, and being able to find new ways to appreciate the differences between who one's partner was when the marriage began, to the present time, is important to maintaining a contented and harmonious relationship, in my view. Even though the conversation topic may change, being able to appreciate the new topics and interests is a sign of positive growth in a couple's bond, in my view.
Glad you talked about how conversation evolves. In the age of endless memes about how couples change over the years, it’s important to (seriously) discuss the evolution of relationship and discussions - Including the language of silence.