Everyone must have one novel which has moved them greatly; mine
is Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte. This classic novel encompasses a love
triangle as well as a twisted variation of negotiation.
The two main protagonists, Healthcliff and Catherine Earnshaw
are childhood sweethearts who are deeply in love. Healthcliff has no social
status and earns his way through his childhood as a servant boy to Catherine’s
family. Catherine, a woman of middle class status starts to place her interests
elsewhere, in an honourable, wealthy man named Edgar Linton. The alternative
Edgar provides for Catherine is complete opposite of what Healthcliff provides
and it is this extreme in alternatives. The use of a BATNA (best alternative to
the negotiated agreement) leads Catherine to marry Edgar despite her passionate
bond with Healthcliff (Felmlee et al, 1990; Brett et al, 1996). A series of
twists and turns occur in the plot until eventually, Catherine dies from
heartache.
Research into
relationship dissolution has shown that when an individual perceives that they
have access to an available alternative partner, they are likely to leave their
current partner to try to attract and maintain the alternative partner
(Simpson, 1987). Catherine’s character is alive in the context of 19th
century Britain. Women of a middle class status were encouraged to marry
wealthy men of a similar or higher social status to themselves. Therefore,
Catherine’s pre-marital contact with Edgar gave her a glimpse of how luxurious
her life would be if she married him. Catherine’s character was aware that if
she remained with Healthcliff, her social status would go down as well as her
aspirations to live a lavish life filled with chandeliers, a mansion and
servants. In psychological terms, Catherine was aware of her alternatives and this
is how she negotiated with her heart to choose money over love. According to
the equity theory, the relationship between Catherine and Healthcliff’s
characters would have been inequitable as Catherine would have been losing a
lot more than she would have been gaining (Michaels, Edwards & Acock,
1984).
Michaels et al
(1984) conducted research into the levels of satisfaction in romantic
relationships with an emphasis on females (who were predicted to report lower
levels of satisfaction). The comparison level, equality and relationship
satisfaction were all rated on self-report likert scales. The findings showed
that females held a more advantaged position in their relationships. The
overall result supported the notion of relationship satisfaction being a direct
outcome of an equitable relationship. In Catherine’s position, giving herself
to Edgar (who was strongly in love with her) for a lifetime of riches was her way
of maintaining equity.
Brett, J. F.,
Pinkley, R. L., & Jackofsky, E. F. (1996). Alternatives to having a BATNA
in dyadic negotiation: The influence of goals, self-efficacy, and alternatives
on negotiated outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 7, 121 –
138.
Felmlee, D.,
Sprecher, S., & Bassin, E. (1990). The Dissolution of Intimate
Relationships: A Hazard Model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53, 13 – 30.
Michaels, J. W.,
Edwards, J. N., & Acock, A. C. (1984). Satisfaction in Intimate
Relationships as a Function of Inequality, Inequity, and Outcomes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47, 347 –
357.
Simpson, J. A. (1989). The Dissolution of Romantic
Relationships: Factors Involved in Relationship Stability and Emotional
Distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 683 – 692.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.