WEBVTT

00:00:00.974 --> 00:00:02.692
I published this article

00:00:02.692 --> 00:00:06.732
in the New York Times Modern Love column
in January of this year.

00:00:06.732 --> 00:00:09.194
"To Fall in Love With Anyone, Do This."

00:00:09.194 --> 00:00:11.515
And the article is about
a psychological study

00:00:11.515 --> 00:00:14.720
designed to create romantic love
in the laboratory,

00:00:14.720 --> 00:00:17.785
and my own experience
trying to study myself

00:00:17.785 --> 00:00:19.712
one night last summer.

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:19.712 --> 00:00:22.359
So the procedure is fairly simple:

00:00:22.359 --> 00:00:29.232
two strangers take turns asking each other
36 increasingly personal questions

00:00:29.232 --> 00:00:31.646
and then they stare into each other's eyes

00:00:31.646 --> 00:00:35.385
without speaking for four minutes.

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:35.385 --> 00:00:38.751
So here are a couple of sample questions.

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:38.751 --> 00:00:44.022
Number 12: If you could wake up tomorrow
having gained any one quality or ability,

00:00:44.022 --> 00:00:46.251
what would it be?

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:46.251 --> 00:00:50.965
Number 28: When did you last cry
in front of another person?

00:00:50.965 --> 00:00:52.520
By yourself?

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:52.520 --> 00:00:56.491
As you can see, they really do
get more personal as they go along.

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:56.491 --> 00:00:59.277
Number 30, I really like this one:

00:00:59.277 --> 00:01:01.761
Tell your partner
what you like about them;

00:01:01.761 --> 00:01:03.526
be very honest this time,

00:01:03.526 --> 00:01:09.006
saying things you might not say
to someone you just met.

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:09.006 --> 00:01:13.348
So when I first came across this study
a few years earlier,

00:01:13.348 --> 00:01:15.693
one detail really stuck out to me,

00:01:15.693 --> 00:01:18.595
and that was the rumor
that two of the participants

00:01:18.595 --> 00:01:21.126
had gotten married six months later,

00:01:21.126 --> 00:01:25.050
and they'd invited the entire lab
to the ceremony.

00:01:25.050 --> 00:01:28.068
So I was of course very skeptical

00:01:28.068 --> 00:01:31.575
about this process of just
manufacturing romantic love,

00:01:31.575 --> 00:01:34.756
but of course I was intrigued,

00:01:34.756 --> 00:01:38.285
and when I got the chance
to try this study myself,

00:01:38.285 --> 00:01:41.048
with someone I knew
but not particularly well,

00:01:41.048 --> 00:01:44.461
I wasn't expecting to fall in love.

00:01:44.461 --> 00:01:47.224
But then we did, and --

00:01:47.224 --> 00:01:49.151
(Laughter) --

00:01:49.151 --> 00:01:53.540
and I thought it made a good story,
so I sent it to the Modern Love column

00:01:53.540 --> 00:01:55.467
a few months later.

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:55.467 --> 00:01:59.902
Now, this was published in January,

00:01:59.902 --> 00:02:01.806
and now it is August,

00:02:01.806 --> 00:02:04.801
so I'm guessing that some of you
are probably wondering,

00:02:04.801 --> 00:02:07.541
are we still together?

00:02:07.541 --> 00:02:10.025
And the reason I think
you might be wondering this

00:02:10.025 --> 00:02:12.649
is because I have been asked this question

00:02:12.649 --> 00:02:16.944
again and again and again
for the past seven months,

00:02:16.944 --> 00:02:20.404
and this question is really
what I want to talk about today.

NOTE Paragraph

00:02:20.404 --> 00:02:22.331
But let's come back to it.

NOTE Paragraph

00:02:22.331 --> 00:02:24.816
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:02:24.816 --> 00:02:26.882
So the week before the article came out,

00:02:26.882 --> 00:02:29.367
I was very nervous.

00:02:29.367 --> 00:02:32.199
I had been working on a book
about love stories

00:02:32.199 --> 00:02:34.057
for the past few years,

00:02:34.057 --> 00:02:36.890
so I had gotten used to writing
about my own experiences

00:02:36.890 --> 00:02:39.931
with romantic love on my blog.

00:02:39.931 --> 00:02:44.436
But a blog post might get
a couple hundred views at the most,

00:02:44.436 --> 00:02:47.060
and those were usually
just my Facebook friends,

00:02:47.060 --> 00:02:50.148
and I figured my article
in the New York Times

00:02:50.148 --> 00:02:53.956
would probably get a few thousand views.

00:02:53.956 --> 00:02:56.881
And that felt like a lot of attention

00:02:56.881 --> 00:03:00.062
on a relatively new relationship.

00:03:00.062 --> 00:03:04.172
But as it turned out, I had no idea.

NOTE Paragraph

00:03:04.172 --> 00:03:06.285
So the article was published online

00:03:06.285 --> 00:03:08.258
on a Friday evening,

00:03:08.258 --> 00:03:14.040
and by Saturday, this had happened
to the traffic on my blog,

00:03:14.040 --> 00:03:19.868
and by Sunday, both the Today Show
and Good Morning America had called.

00:03:19.868 --> 00:03:25.255
Within a month, the article
would receive over 8 million views,

00:03:25.255 --> 00:03:27.530
and I was, to say the least,

00:03:27.530 --> 00:03:31.454
underprepared for this sort of attention.

00:03:31.454 --> 00:03:34.403
It's one thing to work up
the confidence to write honestly

00:03:34.403 --> 00:03:36.632
about your experiences with love,

00:03:36.632 --> 00:03:39.209
but it is another thing to discover

00:03:39.209 --> 00:03:42.112
that your love life
has made international news --

00:03:42.112 --> 00:03:43.528
(Laughter) --

00:03:43.528 --> 00:03:47.057
and to realize that people
across the world

00:03:47.057 --> 00:03:52.212
are genuinely invested in the status
of your new relationship.

NOTE Paragraph

00:03:52.212 --> 00:03:54.534
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:03:54.534 --> 00:03:59.224
And when people called or emailed,
which they did every day for weeks,

00:03:59.224 --> 00:04:02.103
they always asked the same question first:

00:04:02.103 --> 00:04:05.284
are you guys still together?

00:04:05.284 --> 00:04:07.467
In fact, as I was preparing this talk,

00:04:07.467 --> 00:04:09.789
I did a quick search of my email inbox

00:04:09.789 --> 00:04:11.670
for the phrase "Are you still together?"

00:04:11.670 --> 00:04:14.525
and several messages
popped up immediately.

00:04:14.525 --> 00:04:17.265
They were from students and journalists

00:04:17.265 --> 00:04:20.121
and friendly strangers like this one.

00:04:20.121 --> 00:04:22.791
I did radio interviews and they asked.

00:04:22.791 --> 00:04:26.437
I even gave a talk, and one woman
shouted up to the stage,

00:04:26.437 --> 00:04:30.129
"Hey Mandy, where's your boyfriend?"

00:04:30.129 --> 00:04:33.379
And I promptly turned bright red.

NOTE Paragraph

00:04:33.379 --> 00:04:36.351
I understand that this
is part of the deal.

00:04:36.351 --> 00:04:39.811
If you write about your relationship
in an international newspaper,

00:04:39.811 --> 00:04:43.549
you should expect people to feel
comfortable asking about it.

00:04:43.549 --> 00:04:48.170
But I just wasn't prepared
for the scope of the response.

00:04:48.170 --> 00:04:52.512
The 36 questions seem
to have taken on a life of their own.

00:04:52.512 --> 00:04:55.809
In fact, the New York Times
published a follow-up article

00:04:55.809 --> 00:04:57.550
for Valentine's Day,

00:04:57.550 --> 00:05:01.567
which featured readers' experiences
of trying the study themselves,

00:05:01.567 --> 00:05:04.864
with varying degrees of success.

NOTE Paragraph

00:05:04.864 --> 00:05:08.951
So my first impulse in the face
of all of this attention

00:05:08.951 --> 00:05:13.200
was to become very protective
of my own relationship.

00:05:13.200 --> 00:05:16.674
I said no to every request
for the two of us

00:05:16.674 --> 00:05:19.205
to do a media appearance together.

00:05:19.205 --> 00:05:22.479
I turned down TV interviews,
and I said no to every request

00:05:22.479 --> 00:05:25.218
for photos of the two us.

00:05:25.218 --> 00:05:27.680
I think I was afraid that we would become

00:05:27.680 --> 00:05:32.045
inadvertent icons for the process
of falling in love,

00:05:32.045 --> 00:05:36.155
a position I did not at all
feel qualified for.

NOTE Paragraph

00:05:36.155 --> 00:05:39.336
And I get it:

00:05:39.336 --> 00:05:42.029
people didn't just want to know
if the study worked,

00:05:42.029 --> 00:05:45.071
they wanted to know if it really worked:

00:05:45.071 --> 00:05:49.343
that is, if it was capable of producing
love that would last,

00:05:49.343 --> 00:05:55.101
not just a fling, but real love,
sustainable love.

NOTE Paragraph

00:05:55.101 --> 00:05:59.165
But this was a question I didn't feel
capable of answering.

00:05:59.165 --> 00:06:01.951
My own relationship
was only a few months old,

00:06:01.951 --> 00:06:07.616
and I felt like people were asking
the wrong question in the first place.

00:06:07.616 --> 00:06:12.260
What would knowing whether or not
we were still together really tell them?

00:06:12.260 --> 00:06:15.302
If the answer was no,
would it make the experience

00:06:15.302 --> 00:06:20.898
of doing these 36 questions
any less worthwhile?

00:06:20.898 --> 00:06:23.707
Dr. Arthur Aron first wrote
about these questions

00:06:23.707 --> 00:06:27.785
in this study here in 1997,

00:06:27.785 --> 00:06:32.777
and here, the researcher's goal
was not to produce romantic love.

00:06:32.777 --> 00:06:34.826
Instead, they wanted to foster

00:06:34.826 --> 00:06:38.216
interpersonal closeness
among college students,

00:06:38.216 --> 00:06:40.793
by using what Aron called

00:06:40.793 --> 00:06:45.878
"sustained, escalating, reciprocal,
personalistic self-disclosure."

00:06:45.878 --> 00:06:48.920
Sounds romantic, doesn't it.

00:06:48.920 --> 00:06:51.497
But the study did work.

00:06:51.497 --> 00:06:54.144
The participants did feel
closer after doing it,

00:06:54.144 --> 00:06:59.507
and several subsequent studies have also
used Aron's fast friends protocol

00:06:59.507 --> 00:07:03.757
as a way to quickly create trust
and intimacy between strangers.

00:07:03.757 --> 00:07:07.077
They've used it between members
of the police and members of a community,

00:07:07.077 --> 00:07:11.814
and they've used it between people
of opposing political ideologies.

00:07:11.814 --> 00:07:13.732
The original version of the story,

00:07:13.732 --> 00:07:15.822
the one that I tried last summer,

00:07:15.822 --> 00:07:20.233
that pairs the personal questions
with four minutes of eye contact,

00:07:20.233 --> 00:07:22.485
was referenced in this article,

00:07:22.485 --> 00:07:25.434
but unfortunately it was never published.

NOTE Paragraph

00:07:25.434 --> 00:07:29.823
So a few months ago, I was giving a talk

00:07:29.823 --> 00:07:32.005
at a small liberal arts college,

00:07:32.005 --> 00:07:34.908
and a student came up to me afterwards

00:07:34.908 --> 00:07:37.369
and he said, kind of shyly,

00:07:37.369 --> 00:07:42.523
"So, I tried your study,
and it didn't work."

00:07:42.523 --> 00:07:45.472
He seemed a little mystified by this.

NOTE Paragraph

00:07:45.472 --> 00:07:49.861
"You mean, you didn't fall in love
with the person you did it with?" I asked.

NOTE Paragraph

00:07:49.861 --> 00:07:52.908
"Well..." He paused.

00:07:52.908 --> 00:07:57.482
"I think she just wants to be friends."

NOTE Paragraph

00:07:57.482 --> 00:08:01.243
"But did you become
better friends?" I asked.

00:08:01.243 --> 00:08:04.912
"Did you feel like you got to really
know each after doing the study?"

NOTE Paragraph

00:08:04.912 --> 00:08:06.282
He nodded.

NOTE Paragraph

00:08:06.282 --> 00:08:09.208
"So, then it worked," I said.

NOTE Paragraph

00:08:09.208 --> 00:08:13.433
I don't think this is the answer
he was looking for.

00:08:13.433 --> 00:08:17.799
In fact, I don't think this the answer
that any of us are looking for

00:08:17.799 --> 00:08:20.097
when it comes to love.

NOTE Paragraph

00:08:20.097 --> 00:08:23.301
I first came across this study
when I was 29

00:08:23.301 --> 00:08:26.761
and I was going through
a really difficult breakup.

00:08:26.761 --> 00:08:29.803
I had been in the relationship
since I was 20,

00:08:29.803 --> 00:08:32.032
which was basically my entire adult life,

00:08:32.032 --> 00:08:34.029
and he was my first real love,

00:08:34.029 --> 00:08:39.439
and I had no idea how or if
I could make a life without him.

00:08:39.439 --> 00:08:41.853
So I turned to science.

00:08:41.853 --> 00:08:46.335
I researched everything I could find
about the science of romantic love,

00:08:46.335 --> 00:08:52.070
and I think I was hoping that it might
somehow inoculate me from heartache.

00:08:52.070 --> 00:08:53.858
I don't know if I realized this

00:08:53.858 --> 00:08:55.506
at the time --

00:08:55.506 --> 00:08:58.989
I thought I was just doing research
for this book I was writing --

00:08:58.989 --> 00:09:01.868
but it seems really obvious in retrospect.

00:09:01.868 --> 00:09:05.908
I hoped that if I armed myself
with the knowledge of romantic love,

00:09:05.908 --> 00:09:12.201
I might never have to feel
as terrible and lonely as I did then.

00:09:12.201 --> 00:09:16.659
And all this knowledge
has been useful in some ways.

00:09:16.659 --> 00:09:19.840
I am more patient with love.
I am more relaxed.

00:09:19.840 --> 00:09:23.090
I am more confident
about asking for what I want.

00:09:23.090 --> 00:09:26.922
But I can also see myself more clearly,

00:09:26.922 --> 00:09:31.287
and I can see that I what I want
is sometimes more

00:09:31.287 --> 00:09:34.677
than can reasonably be asked for.

00:09:34.677 --> 00:09:38.090
What I want from love is a guarantee,

00:09:38.090 --> 00:09:40.412
not just that I am loved today

00:09:40.412 --> 00:09:42.687
and that I will be loved tomorrow,

00:09:42.687 --> 00:09:49.259
but that I will continue to be loved
by the person I love indefinitely.

00:09:49.259 --> 00:09:52.578
And maybe it's this possibility
of a guarantee

00:09:52.578 --> 00:09:54.761
that people were really asking about

00:09:54.761 --> 00:09:58.174
when they wanted to know
if we were still together.

NOTE Paragraph

00:09:58.174 --> 00:10:02.563
So the story that the media told
about the 36 questions

00:10:02.563 --> 00:10:06.185
was that there might be
a shortcut to falling in love.

00:10:06.185 --> 00:10:09.923
There might be a way to somehow mitigate
some of the risk involved,

00:10:09.923 --> 00:10:12.222
and this is a very appealing story,

00:10:12.222 --> 00:10:15.821
because falling in love feels amazing,

00:10:15.821 --> 00:10:18.235
but it's also terrifying.

00:10:18.235 --> 00:10:21.045
The moment you admit to loving someone,

00:10:21.045 --> 00:10:24.528
you admit to having a lot to lose,

00:10:24.528 --> 00:10:28.893
and it's true that these questions
do provide a mechanism

00:10:28.893 --> 00:10:31.215
for getting to know someone quickly,

00:10:31.215 --> 00:10:33.769
which is also a mechanism for being known,

00:10:33.769 --> 00:10:38.204
and I think this is the thing
that most of us really want from love:

00:10:38.204 --> 00:10:43.242
to be known, to be seen, to be understood.

00:10:43.242 --> 00:10:46.005
But I think when it comes to love,

00:10:46.005 --> 00:10:49.697
we are too willing to accept
the short version of the story,

00:10:49.697 --> 00:10:53.273
the version of the story that asks
"Are you still together?"

00:10:53.273 --> 00:10:57.267
and is content with a yes or no answer.

NOTE Paragraph

00:10:57.267 --> 00:11:01.330
So rather than that question,
I would propose we ask

00:11:01.330 --> 00:11:03.304
some more difficult questions,

00:11:03.304 --> 00:11:05.068
questions like:

00:11:05.068 --> 00:11:08.124
How do you decide who deserves your love

00:11:08.124 --> 00:11:10.098
and who does not?

00:11:10.098 --> 00:11:14.138
How do you stay in love
when things get difficult,

00:11:14.138 --> 00:11:17.621
and how do you know
when to just cut and run?

00:11:17.621 --> 00:11:19.702
How do you live with the doubt

00:11:19.702 --> 00:11:22.743
that inevitably creeps
into every relationship,

00:11:22.743 --> 00:11:24.415
or even harder,

00:11:24.415 --> 00:11:27.480
how do you live with your partner's doubt?

00:11:27.480 --> 00:11:31.242
I don't necessarily know
the answers to these questions,

00:11:31.242 --> 00:11:36.535
but I think they're an important start
at having a more thoughtful conversation

00:11:36.535 --> 00:11:40.018
about what it means to love someone.

NOTE Paragraph

00:11:40.018 --> 00:11:42.549
So, if you want it,

00:11:42.549 --> 00:11:46.752
the short version of the story
of my relationship is this:

00:11:46.752 --> 00:11:49.886
a year ago, an acquaintance
and I did a study

00:11:49.886 --> 00:11:52.255
designed to create romantic love,

00:11:52.255 --> 00:11:54.391
and we fell in love,

00:11:54.391 --> 00:11:56.193
and we are still together,

00:11:56.193 --> 00:11:58.910
and I am so glad.

NOTE Paragraph

00:11:58.910 --> 00:12:04.529
But falling in love is not
the same thing as staying in love.

00:12:04.529 --> 00:12:08.360
Falling in love is the easy part.

00:12:08.360 --> 00:12:12.748
So at the end of my article, I wrote,
"Love didn't happen to us.

00:12:12.748 --> 00:12:16.092
We're in love because we each
made the choice to be."

00:12:16.092 --> 00:12:19.575
And I cringe a little
when I read that now,

00:12:19.575 --> 00:12:23.150
not because it isn't true,

00:12:23.150 --> 00:12:26.006
but because at the time,
I really hadn't considered

00:12:26.006 --> 00:12:29.466
everything that was contained
in that choice.

00:12:29.466 --> 00:12:34.713
I didn't consider how many times
we would each have to make that choice,

00:12:34.713 --> 00:12:38.173
and how many times I will continue
to have to make that choice

00:12:38.173 --> 00:12:42.236
without knowing whether or not
he will always choose me.

00:12:42.236 --> 00:12:47.298
I want it to be enough to have asked
and answered 36 questions,

00:12:47.298 --> 00:12:52.801
and to have chosen to love someone
so generous and kind and fun

00:12:52.801 --> 00:12:58.908
and to have broadcast that choice
in the biggest newspaper in America.

00:12:58.908 --> 00:13:01.996
But what I have done instead
is turn my relationship

00:13:01.996 --> 00:13:06.198
into the kind of myth
I don't quite believe in.

00:13:06.198 --> 00:13:09.742
And what I want, what perhaps
I will spend my life wanting,

00:13:09.742 --> 00:13:13.202
is for that myth to be true.

NOTE Paragraph

00:13:13.202 --> 00:13:17.985
I want the happy ending implied
by the title to my article,

00:13:17.985 --> 00:13:19.749
which is, incidentally,

00:13:19.749 --> 00:13:23.534
the only part of the article
that I didn't actually write.

NOTE Paragraph

00:13:23.534 --> 00:13:25.670
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:13:25.670 --> 00:13:31.057
But what I have instead is the chance
to make the choice to love someone,

00:13:31.057 --> 00:13:34.726
and the hope that he will choose
to love me back,

00:13:34.726 --> 00:13:37.280
and it is terrifying,

00:13:37.280 --> 00:13:39.209
but that's the deal with love.

NOTE Paragraph

00:13:39.209 --> 00:13:39.773
Thank you.

NOTE Paragraph

00:13:39.773 --> 00:13:40.523
(Applause)