ANASTASIA TOUFEXIS has been an associate editor of Time, senior editor of Discover, and editor in chief of Psychology Today. She has written on subjects as diverse as medicine, health and fitness, law, the environment, education, science, and national and world news. Toufexis has won a number of awards for her writing, including a Knight-
As you read, consider the following questions:
How would you describe the tone Toufexis adopts in this essay, at least in the beginning? How effective do you think this tone was for her original Time magazine readers? How appropriate would it be for a college paper?
Given her purpose and audience, how effective is the visual in helping readers understand her rather technical explanation?
130
Love is a romantic designation for a most ordinary biological — or, shall we say, chemical? — process. A lot of nonsense is talked and written about it.
— Greta Garbo to Melvyn Douglas in Ninotchka
1
O.K., let’s cut out all this nonsense about romantic love. Let’s bring some scientific precision to the party. Let’s put love under a microscope.
2
When rigorous people with Ph.D.s after their names do that, what they see is not some silly, senseless thing. No, their probe reveals that love rests firmly on the foundations of evolution, biology and chemistry. What seems on the surface to be irrational, intoxicated behavior is in fact part of nature’s master strategy — a vital force that has helped humans survive, thrive and multiply through thousands of years. Says Michael Mills, a psychology professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles: “Love is our ancestors whispering in our ears.”
If, in nature’s design, romantic love is not eternal, neither is it exclusive.
3
It was on the plains of Africa about 4 million years ago, in the early days of the human species, that the notion of romantic love probably first began to blossom or at least that the first cascades of neurochemicals began flowing from the brain to the bloodstream to produce goofy grins and sweaty palms as men and women gazed deeply into each other’s eyes. When mankind graduated from scuttling around on all fours to walking on two legs, this change made the whole person visible to fellow human beings for the first time. Sexual organs were in full display, as were other characteristics, from the color of eyes to the span of shoulders. As never before, each individual had a unique allure.
4
When the sparks flew, new ways of making love enabled sex to become a romantic encounter, not just a reproductive act. Although mounting mates from the rear was, and still is, the method favored among most animals, humans began to enjoy face-
5
Romance served the evolutionary purpose of pulling males and females into long-
6
While Western culture holds fast to the idea that true love flames forever (the movie Bram Stoker’s Dracula has the Count carrying the torch beyond the grave), nature apparently meant passions to sputter out in something like four years. Primitive pairs stayed together just “long enough to rear one child through infancy,” says Fisher. Then each would find a new partner and start all over again.
7
What Fisher calls the “four-
8
If, in nature’s design, romantic love is not eternal, neither is it exclusive. Less than 5% of mammals form rigorously faithful pairs. From the earliest days, contends Fisher, the human pattern has been “monogamy with clandestine adultery.” Occasional flings upped the chances that new combinations of genes would be passed on to the next generation. Men who sought new partners had more children. Contrary to common assumptions, women were just as likely to stray. “As long as prehistoric females were secretive about their extramarital affairs,” argues Fisher, “they could garner extra resources, life insurance, better genes and more varied DNA for their biological futures. . . .”
9
Lovers often claim that they feel as if they are being swept away. They’re not mistaken; they are literally flooded by chemicals, research suggests. A meeting of eyes, a touch of hands or a whiff of scent sets off a flood that starts in the brain and races along the nerves and through the blood. The results are familiar: flushed skin, sweaty palms, heavy breathing. If love looks suspiciously like stress, the reason is simple: the chemical pathways are identical.
131
10
Above all, there is the sheer euphoria of falling in love — a not-
11
But phenylethylamine highs don’t last forever, a fact that lends support to arguments that passionate romantic love is short-
12
Fizzling chemicals spell the end of delirious passion; for many people that marks the end of the liaison as well. It is particularly true for those whom Dr. Michael Liebowitz of the New York State Psychiatric Institute terms “attraction junkies.” They crave the intoxication of falling in love so much that they move frantically from affair to affair just as soon as the first rush of infatuation fades.
13
Still, many romances clearly endure beyond the first years. What accounts for that? Another set of chemicals, of course. The continued presence of a partner gradually steps up production in the brain of endorphins. Unlike the fizzy amphetamines, these are soothing substances. Natural pain-
14
Researchers see a contrast between the heated infatuation induced by PEA, along with other amphetamine-
132
15
Oxytocin is another chemical that has recently been implicated in love. Produced by the brain, it sensitizes nerves and stimulates muscle contraction. In women it helps uterine contractions during childbirth as well as production of breast milk, and seems to inspire mothers to nuzzle their infants. Scientists speculate that oxytocin might encourage similar cuddling between adult women and men. The versatile chemical may also enhance orgasms. In one study of men, oxytocin increased to three to five times its normal level during climax, and it may soar even higher in women.
16
Chemicals may help explain (at least to scientists) the feelings of passion and compassion, but why do people tend to fall in love with one partner rather than a myriad of others? Once again, it’s partly a function of evolution and biology. “Men are looking for maximal fertility in a mate,” says Loyola Marymount’s Mills. “That is in large part why females in the prime childbearing ages of 17 to 28 are so desirable.” Men can size up youth and vitality in a glance, and studies indeed show that men fall in love quite rapidly. Women tumble more slowly, to a large degree because their requirements are more complex; they need more time to check the guy out. “Age is not vital,” notes Mills, “but the ability to provide security, father children, share resources and hold a high status in society are all key factors.”
17
Still, that does not explain why the way Mary walks and laughs makes Bill dizzy with desire while Marcia’s gait and giggle leave him cold. “Nature has wired us for one special person,” suggests Walsh, romantically. He rejects the idea that a woman or a man can be in love with two people at the same time. Each person carries in his or her mind a unique subliminal guide to the ideal partner, a “love map,” to borrow a term coined by sexologist John Money of Johns Hopkins University.
18
Drawn from the people and experiences of childhood, the map is a record of whatever we found enticing and exciting — or disturbing and disgusting. Small feet, curly hair. The way our mothers patted our head or how our fathers told a joke. A fireman’s uniform, a doctor’s stethoscope. All the information gathered while growing up is imprinted in the brain’s circuitry by adolescence. Partners never meet each and every requirement, but a sufficient number of matches can light up the wires and signal, “It’s love.” Not every partner will be like the last one, since lovers may have different combinations of the characteristics favored by the map.
19
O.K., that’s the scientific point of view. Satisfied? Probably not. To most people — with or without Ph.D.s — love will always be more than the sum of its natural parts. It’s a commingling of body and soul, reality and imagination, poetry and phenylethylamine. In our deepest hearts, most of us harbor the hope that love will never fully yield up its secrets, that it will always elude our grasp.
[REFLECT]
Make connections: How love works.
The chemistry of love is easily summarized: Amphetamines fuel romance; endorphins and oxytocin sustain lasting relationships. As Toufexis makes clear, however, these chemical reactions do not explain why people are attracted to each other in the first place. Rather, she claims that an attraction occurs because each of us carries a “unique subliminal guide,” or “love map” (par. 17), that leads us unerringly to a partner. Make a short list of the qualities in a partner that would appear on your “love map,” and then consider Toufexis’s explanation. Your instructor may ask you to post your thoughts on a class discussion board or to discuss them with other students in class. Use these questions to get started:
What role do factors such as family, friends, community, the media, and advertising play in constructing your love map?
Why do you think Toufexis ignores the topic of sexual orientation?
According to Toufexis, men typically look for “maximal fertility,” whereas women look for security, resources, status, and a willingness to father children (par. 16). Does this explanation seem convincing to you? Why or why not?
[ANALYZE]
Use the basic features.
A FOCUSED EXPLANATION: EXCLUDING OTHER TOPICS
133
In writing about a concept as broad as love, Toufexis has to find a way to narrow her focus. Writers choose a focus in part by considering the rhetorical situation— the purpose, audience, medium, and genre — in which they are writing. Student Jonathan Potthast is limited by the fact that he is writing in response to his instructor’s assignment. As a science writer for Time magazine, Toufexis probably also had an assignment—
Write a paragraph analyzing how Toufexis focuses her explanation in “Love: The Right Chemistry”:
What is the focus or main point of Toufexis’s essay? How do you think she answers readers’ potential “So what?” question?
How do the title, epigraph, and opening paragraphs help you identify this focus or main point?
How do you think Toufexis’s purpose, audience, and genre (an article for a popular newsmagazine) affected her focus?
A CLEAR, LOGICAL ORGANIZATION: CUEING THE READER
Experienced writers know that readers often have trouble making their way through new and difficult material. To avoid having them give up in frustration, writers strive to construct a reader-
Write a paragraph or two analyzing the strategies Toufexis uses to organize “Love: The Right Chemistry” for readers:
Skim the essay, and note in the margin where she announces her concept and forecasts the topics she uses to organize her explanation. Then highlight the passage where she discusses each topic. How well does her forecast work to make her essay readable?
Study how Toufexis connects the topic of “love maps” (pars. 17–18) to the topics she discussed earlier in the essay. Identify any sentences that connect the two parts of the article, and assess how well they work.
APPROPRIATE EXPLANATORY STRATEGIES: USING VISUALS
134
Both Potthast and Toufexis use a visual to help explain their concept. In Potthast’s case, the visual comes from one of his sources. In contrast, Toufexis’s visual was most likely created after her article was written, by the magazine’s art editor, Nigel Holmes. Notice also that whereas Potthast, following a convention of academic writing, refers in the text of his essay to the visual he includes, labeling it “Fig. 1” and providing a title and source, Toufexis does not refer to the visual in her text or provide a caption.
Write a paragraph analyzing Toufexis’s use of the visual in “Love: The Right Chemistry”:
First, consider it apart from the rest of the article. What can you learn from the visual itself? What makes it easy or hard to read?
Then skim Toufexis’s essay to mark where she discusses each of the stages in the process described in the flowchart. Considering her original audience, how well does the flowchart work as a map to help readers navigate through the somewhat technical content of her explanation? Would it have been helpful had Toufexis referred to and labeled the visual?
SMOOTH INTEGRATION OF SOURCES: ESTABLISHING CREDIBILITY
To establish their credibility on the subject, writers need to convince readers that the information they are using is authoritative. They can do this in a number of ways, but giving the professional credentials of their sources is a conventional strategy.
Write a paragraph or two analyzing how Toufexis establishes the credentials of her sources in “Love: The Right Chemistry”:
Skim the essay, underlining the name of each source she mentions. Then go back through the essay to highlight each source’s credentials. When Toufexis provides credentials, what kinds of information does she include?
Consider the effectiveness of Toufexis’s strategies for letting readers know the qualifications of her sources. Given her original audience (Time magazine readers), how well do you think she establishes her sources’ credentials? If she were writing for an academic audience (for example, for your instructor), what would she have to add?
[RESPOND]
Consider possible topics: Examining other aspects of love.
Like Toufexis, you could write an essay about love or romance, but you could choose a different focus — for example, the history of romantic love (how did the concept of romantic love develop in the West, and when did it become the basis of marriage?), love’s cultural characteristics (how is love regarded by different American ethnic groups or in world cultures?), its excesses or extremes (what is sex addiction?), or the phases of falling in and out of love (what is infatuation?). You could also consider writing about other concepts involving personal relationships, such as jealousy, co-