The first two sentences are declarative, but somehow contradictory. I read them over 10 times and cannot decipher their meaning. That could be my own ignorance, I admit, but after a platitude about what we “feel” and what we “leave to chance,” I fear I’ve gone blind.
The second paragraph has more personal beliefs delivered as facts, which I assume the author does because he/she is attractive and no one has ever told him/her that just because he/she has an idea does not mean that idea is correct. This time, the idea purports that all marriages were arranged until “pretty recently.”
Speaking of facts, the third paragraph is copied and pasted from a Daily Mail article about the apparent strength of arranged marriages. The Daily Mail is a tabloid but it’s used here as a source for the thesis, which is, I think, that we shouldn’t choose our partner because of love? Or we should? I don’t know, either way, using an article from The Daily Mail to support a thesis on the validity of arranged marriages is like using an article from The National Enquirer as support for the existence of aliens.
The next paragraph are concepts – written like declarations of previously veiled truth – about marriage and love that someone past the age of 18 already understands. That marriage is not just a 24 hour sex party, that it’s a partnership with bills and taxes and headaches but you enter into it because you think the person opposite you will help your way throughout those bills and taxes and headaches.
Now a paragraph about not settling and it’s the best one. Ironically, containing more truth than the paragraph with “facts.”
This next part reminds of Royal Tenenbaums when Owen Wilson’s character says, “We all know that Custer died at Little Big Horn. But what my book presupposes is, maybe he didn’t?”
After that, a paragraph consisting of one question with a word in italics. Using italics to emphasize one of the words in a sentence does not make the sentence more deep or memorable.
The word “thing” is used twice in the next paragraph, but there are only two sentences, and they’re about the same “thing.”
The next paragraph is other people’s supposedly stereotypical thinking about The One. Got it.
Now, how we’ll want to rekindle the flame because we choose The One for the wrong reasons. As an example, not the author’s, they liked to play chess and worked at a fair but now we play checkers and want to work at a theme park. Because we always base choosing The One using superficial things, apparently, it’s hard to bring back the magic, because we’re so different now. To emphasize this point, the author bolds the sentence, which is much more painful than italicizing.
The last paragraph starts with “I’m not suggesting we should,” which makes one want to stop reading. And so I do.