53 of 56 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Eyes Wide Open, July 22, 2008
This review is from: Emotional Infidelity: How to Affair-Proof Your Marriage and 10 Other Secrets to a Great Relationship (Paperback)
The opening of Stanley Kubrick's last film, "Eyes Wide Shut," presents the depiction of contemporary marital relationship enlightenment: A well-educated upper middle class couple go to a Christmas party where, individually, the husband and the wife are approached by members of the opposite sex. The husband has meaningless banter with two women and the wife shares conversation and a dance with an older man. The husband's encounter is interrupted when his services as a doctor are required by the party's host, a rich man having an affair virtually under his wife's nose, and the wife counters her dancing partner's increasingly suggestive advances by holding up her hand, displaying her marital band, and stating ". . . I'm married."
Soon after, the wife needles her husband with his actions at the party, asking what he did with the two women who approached him, while the man asks about "that guy you were dancing with." This prologue triggers a psychological odyssey by both partners wherein they ultimately come to realize, perhaps with tragic insufficiency, that they have been playing with each others feelings while being almost completely unaware of their own motivations.
Gary Neuman's book similarly delves into the psyche of its readers, challenging us to examine our own encounters with members of the opposite sex. He asks us to question what it is we are honestly looking for when we meet or speak with someone outside of our primary relationship, and he doesn't allow us to get ourselves "off the hook" easily.
Unfortunately several critical reviews of this book border on naivete. I don't see where the author is suggesting that strong emotional ties can't exist outside of a committed relationship. The danger comes when, in such a relationship, people lack the self-awareness to understand, if not their own motivations, those of the person they have developed such a bond with. People often trick themselves, wittingly or unwittingly, into believing that an emotional attachment outside of their primary relationship is healthy when, in fact, it is taking time and attention from one's committed partner. One need only look at the divorce rate to understand that there is a serious problem with commitment and fidelity in our current society, and, as statistics prove, those who stray often do so with someone they have developed a previously platonic bond with.
Vigilance needs to be the catch-word in one's relationships with anyone outside of a primary relationship; vigilance in assessing one's own motivations as well as those of the supposedly platonic partner. I have witnessed numerous instances of people who, although open with their spouses about their own intentions and dealings with a friend, are completely unaware of the friend's true intentions (which can change and grow over time). Things to consider: Is the friend in a committed relationship or single (and does the friend's own significant partner, if any, know of and approve of this alliance)? Does the primary partner know of the friendship in all detail? Has the committed partner met this friend and approve of the friendship? A very important thing to determine is how the primary partner assesses the actions of the friend, either in meeting him or her for the first time, or over the tenor of the friendship. Being a man, I've seen male "friends" exhibit territorial behavior when the spouse or significant other is on the scene. An extremely important observation for this spouse to make is how does one's partner react when concerns about the "friend" are raised? For example, are the spouse's observations about the "friend" valued or dismissed? I have observed numerous relationships wherein the legitimate concerns of one's committed partner are downplayed or discarded, and often with the retort that such comments indicate that the partner concerned about the friendly relationship is "controlling" or "jealous" (ie, "you don't want me to have friends"), or that any problem down the road can be contained ("whatever my friend's motivations, mine are pure"). A similar comment to be aware of is "I'm not doing anything wrong, and I'm not responsible for how the other person ultimately reacts."
In recommending Neuman's book, I made an observation to a friend recently, a single woman, who told me that she often sought the company of married men for conversation because "they were safe" (ie, in a committed relationship and, therefore, unlikely to make advances on her) that it was very likely the men were acting, as Neuman would say, in an emotionally unfaithful manner with their respective marital partners by engaging with an unmarried woman. I saw where at least one of these men became territorial when this single woman was approached or spoke with other men, all but looking on more than one occasion to cut them off. In speaking further with this woman, I learned that her conversations went beyond the ordinary everyday, and that she was openly speaking with these married men about issues she was encountering with the men in her dating life. As Neuman would say, these men had no business advising anyone about anything, as they weren't professionals, and were endangering their own relationships by speaking with a single woman about her intimate life.
Shortly thereafter, this woman confided to me that she had run into one of these married men who she had spoken to individually at least a few days a week for several months when he was out one day with his children. When she went up to him to say hello, thinking he would introduce her to his kids, he became distant, as if he didn't want his family to see her. She then got the "hint" that this man was keeping his encounters with her, and his conversations with her, as part of a private life he did not share with his wife and family, and that he wanted to keep it that way.
I told her that, contrary to the belief of many, married men (and women) are not "safe." They are, instead, married, and their practice of engaging with an opposite sex partner about intimate personal details outside of their marriage was a patent form of infidelity.
Often these alliances outside of one's primary relationship indicate that the one in the friendship is "seeking something," and is not an indication of problems or issues with one's significant other, but rather of a lack with oneself. Often such "friendships" are entered into for the sake of vanity, with the participants liking the attention they receive. Occasionally they are a means of domination and control, both of one's primary partner, and of the "friends". I have observed where people have, through their own actions and comments, all but invited inappropriate advances or overtures (overt or tacit) from the friend, only to retreat behind the maxim "you know I'm married (or in a relationship) and that things can't progress." This person gets the psychic charge they "need" from this advance, while, likely, causing significant upset in the primary relationship. One's committed partner needs to be especially vigilant about patterns that the partner in these friendships exhibits.
And something to be especially aware of is the fact that the supposedly platonic advance is a means of exploiting the proverbial "chink" in the armor of someone in a committed relationship.
Also, even "enlightened" (ie, psychologically astute, self-aware) people can trick themselves into misunderstanding their own motivations, as well as thinking themselves above forming an inappropriate relationship with a friend.
A question anyone needs to ask themselves in forming a bond outside of their primary relationship is "why?" What is the purpose of this relationship, and what are both parties getting out of it? I have seen innoucous work and commuting relationships disrupt, damage and destroy relationships and marriages and, invariably, these start as little more than two people passing the time by speaking of common interests.
Something to always remember is that, with work and other commitments, the time one spends with one's primary partner is extremely limited. I often counsel people, at work, on the commute, or while travelling on business, that, instead of having what appears to be innocuous chit-chat with a "friend", to spend this "down time" on the primary relationship. Pick up the phone or write a letter or e-mail to the significant other, or, most significantly, take time to write a journal entry about this supposed "friend" and one's own motivations (or journal about one's signifiant other).
Accordingly, I applaud the author's commitment to his primary relationship, and especially that he limits new opposite sex encounters to little beyond "shaking hands." This is hardly, as some reviewers claim, limiting one's experience to "half of the population," but is, instead, a discipline that people should themselves try before denouncing. I experimented with this myself on numerous occasions and found that limiting my encounters with members of the opposite sex to the proverbial "business at hand" made such encounters more productive and respectful than those of my associates who engaged in "chit-chat" under the same circumstances.
Over time, Kubrick's brilliant film "Eyes Wide Shut" will be seen as the cinematic symbol of supposed twenty-first century enlightenment. As the characters all but state to each other at the end, "No dream is ever just a dream," and very little is ever what, on the surface, it appears to be.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
