This is a really exciting book in many ways. Haag supports my suspicion that romance has been declared an enemy nowadays and that this development didn’t make anyone happy. At least according to Haag’s research, the highest rate of divorce occurs in the so-called ‘companionate’ or ‘mature’ marriages, which are also often pretty much sexless. It was also affirming to read her view that being semi-happy, or mildly sad isn’t good enough. This is what I believe too. And we both think that the current cult of children and view of a couple as a ‘team’ are killers of personal happiness. I disliked this book largely because it makes sweeping truth claims on the basis of very weak evidence. She does have an advanced degree; she doesn't have one in the field she's writing in. It shows. I strongly dislike pseudo-science.The book could benefit, in my opinion, from a more open acknowledgement of its nature as an argument for married polyamory. There is a large market for it less likely to feel cheated of serious social analysis or less single-focused marital advice. The title seems to suggest broad scope, but the book is quite narrowly-focused.I think if I hadn't gotten the impression it was about various methods used to enrich marriage, then revised that to seeing it as an analysis of existing marriage trends, I might have a slightly higher opinion of the work. I don't really understand why it wasn't marketed (or why she doesn't admit in the text that it is) a pro-polyamorous philosophy of marriage potential. It does a terribly poor job of its advertized work and a great job at something it seems ashamed to admit it is really about.
What do You think about Marriage Confidential (2011)?
Couldn't finish it, read about half and realized it wasn't telling me anything that I didn't know,
—purplepanda1220
Interesting insights. A compendium of items on related subjects.
—memeblue
Interesting and irritating in equal measure.
—Dylanswife
