IV – Constantly talking isn’t necessarily communicating
The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
I’m trying to be more relevant this time, this might get boring.
If you have not seen this movie, I highly recommend it.
For a relationship to even begin, there must be opportunity for contact, as described by the Relational Formation and Development theory. (Proximity) I’m going to use the Knapp Model of Relational Development to show how the relationship of Joel Barish (Jim Carrey) and Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet) develops. Oh joy!
A man awakes dishevelled and impulsively, he skips work, heading instead to the shore. (Opportunity) On a chilly February day, a woman in orange, hair dyed blue, chats him up, she’s Clementine and the man’s Joel, shy and sad. By day’s end, he starts developing a liking for her. During the Initiation stage, it is the coming together of two individuals, constantly screening the opposite and Joel clearly displays this when him being very cautious and very conscious of his self-presentation. There’s also a slight crossing of the Experimentation stage – small talk on the train.
The next night she takes him to the frozen Charles River. After, he drops her off; she asks to sleep at his place. In this scene, Experimentation (Stage 2), the couple starts to disclose more about themselves to each other over the phone and by the river. There is also Intensification (Stage 3) with the increased commitment to each other and wanting to share their personal spaces when Clementine asks to sleep at Joel’s place.
I’m going to skip some parts now, it might get a little confusing, ask me for the show if you’re really interested.
Here’s a short write-up to ease the transition.
Joel is stunned to discover that his girlfriend Clementine has had her memories of their tumultuous relationship erased. Out of desperation, he contracts the inventor of the process, Dr. Howard Mierzwaik, to have Clementine removed from his own memory. But as Joel’s memories progressively disappear, he begins to rediscover their earlier passion. From deep within the recesses of his brain, Joel attempts to escape the procedure.
Now these scenes are in Joel’s memory.
The coming apart of the relationship based on Knapp’s Model of Relational Development are as follow – Differentiating (Communication and interaction marked by overt conflict), Circumscribing (Shrinking of relational interest and commitment), Stagnation (Alienation), Avoiding (Withdrawing physically and emotionally) and finally Termination (The breakup).
The point where Clementine decided to erase all her memory of her relationship with Joel would probably be at the Differentiating stage when they were constantly bickering and being the impulsive person she is, she went ahead with the procedure.
Recap.
Coming Together
Stage 1: Initiating
Stage 2: Experimenting
Stage 3: Intensifying
Stage 4: Integrating
Stage 5: Bonding
Coming apart
Stage 6: Differentiating
Stage 7: Circumscribing
Stage 8: Stagnating
Stage 9: Avoiding
Stage 10: Terminating
The stages are not linear though. As seen in this movie, Stages 4 (The “We are together” whooptydoo-stage) and 5 (Engagement/Marriage) are skipped. There wasn’t really a coming together of the couple and they were already at the coming apart stages.
Fret not; relationships do not always end at the Terminating stage. Ha, relieved? Relationships can regress or proceed through the stages, even skipping some.
Do you agree that relationships proceed through these stages? How would you create your opportunities say if you believe in the proximity concept? Which stage would you then realise that you’re in love? Love or Lust?
Whew. Hope you enjoyed this one.
Source: http://www.eternalsunshine.com/
i feel that knapp’s model is very detailed in the different stages of a relationship. sometimes 2 stages can occur at the same time. the model could be used to predict the outcome of a relationship should some symptoms are observed. it can also be used to change the course of a relationship for better of course. this is provided if both parties are willing to put in the effort to make this relationship work.
clown
October 3, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Interesting point you brought up – that 2 stages can occur at the same time, I presume you meant it as stage 3 & 4 etc, and not 3 & 9; what kind of bizarre relationship would that be eh?
Aloysius
November 8, 2009 at 9:26 pm
The proximity concept..we’re all assuming that everything will turn out well and good if both parties develop feelings for each other. But what if one feels that the other is not what he or she is looking for? Things will be quite different and possibly awkward in such a situation. Unless of course, friendship overrules!
uncannyfunnyclaydenn
October 3, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Situations turn awkward when you make them to be.
Aloysius
November 8, 2009 at 9:26 pm
of course there’s no fixed path. situations vary and different people react differently to a variety of approaches.
interesting point about love. the model only tells about the coming and together of people but it does not state the motives or emotions involved that makes every relationship ‘special’.
jun leong
October 4, 2009 at 4:02 pm
haha. somehow true. but i think stages 9 and 10 can be interchangable. pretty interesting article.
V
October 4, 2009 at 4:29 pm
I think stages are necessary for relationship. Intriguing and interesting article =)
I like!
Chuanxian
October 4, 2009 at 5:16 pm
I guess your points do make sense. However, as others have pointed out, the different stages of a relationship are not fixed. In fact, most of them are interchangeable depending on the maturity and level of the relationship. We can’t fix and concretely define something as complicated and complex as a relationship as it involves human emotions. Nonetheless, interesting article, I had a good read. The use of the movie, which in a surreal way, does somewhat represent what love, found and lost, feels like and the stages people go through. I would say this is a great effort on your part and good use of resources like the movie. Really impressed on how you connected the abstractness of the movie and broke it down to fit the stages of love.
wporchard
October 4, 2009 at 5:23 pm
The good thing about knapp’s model is that it clearly describes each stage and how one leads to the other. But I realise it is too rigid and systematic. It definitely does not describe how all relationships proceed. Aloysius, u mentioned about how Joel’s and Clementine’s relationship skips a few stages and goes straight to another. I agree with you. I think that happens in many relationships. Also, knapp’s model does not show how one can bounce back from the falling apart stages to the coming together stages. In short, it does not show how a relationship gone badly can be turned around. For example, A couple that is going through problems in the differentiating or circumscribing stage would probably go back to the intensifying stage if they were to make up, skipping the 1st 2 stages. The knapp model is just a methodical approach to organize the human relationship into different stages. Every relationship is unique and More often than not, a relationship chooses its own path. It’s up to people to decide where they want to go from each stage depending on the situation or circumstance. Lastly, I would like to say something about co-habitation, something that has become very common in the 21st century. Do you think it is a combination of the integration and bonding stage?
Leslie
October 4, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Yeah, the model’s more of a guideline – the model should be viewed as more fluid than rigid.
I believe co-habitation is still within the Intensification and Integrating stage, not so much the bonding stage because as the bonding stage is the formalising of commitment (marriage).
Aloysius
October 4, 2009 at 10:40 pm
i would believe that majority of relationships do follow these stages though there are also those who jump to the breaking up stage relatively fast (e.g. puppy love, infatuation).
personally i would realise the love part only if the relationship progresses to stage 5. that would be a confirmation of some form of commitment to the relationship.
Samuel
October 4, 2009 at 11:39 pm
I’m more interested in number 8 of coming apart. Stagnating. By this I supposed it is meant to be that the feeling both parties have are stagnant and no longer growing. From then on, it might slowly leading the last two steps of the model.
However, maybe we can put it in the perception of an old married couple whom have been together for say 30 over years? If they were the kind who are deeply in love, it would be likely that their “love” for each other has reached a stage where it could no longer progress further, and hence there remain stagnant. But this won’t mean that they are moving towards Avoiding and Terminating right?
So like any relationship, nothing is certain. A model is after-all a general guide for say 60%-70% of the human population.
P.S. I like the way you analyse the topics, and the materials you use to assist your analysis. Great work!
Si Hui
October 4, 2009 at 11:52 pm
The model doesn’t suggest that you HAVE to go through all the stages. Let’s say if you’re at “Stagnating” stage, you could possibly stay there all your life, and couples would probably term it as a “bad relationship”.
Aloysius
October 24, 2009 at 5:49 pm
i believe that proximity spells opportunity: for better or for disaster!
Usually, relationships do not progress through such systematic stages, in fact, the stages are as good as occurrences that occur throughout a dyadic relationship. Hence, there is no hard and fast rule, if not, why is communication between people is such a complex idea!
Audrey J Low
October 5, 2009 at 12:48 am
*May contain spoilers!*
I love this movie – it was amazing because it showed that though your memories get wiped out, the natural process of love or lust or just infatuation will happen. I remember the sub-plot with the assistant (Kirsten Dunst) and the guy (the old man i forgot his name), despite wiping out her memories she STILL fell for him after. It was like this inescapable cycle – just cause you wanna forget, doesn’t mean you escape the process of falling in love.
Although these steps don’t clearly define a relationship which is too complex in nature, it’s got the main gist.
I recommend the movie to everyone too!
Nina Reyes
October 5, 2009 at 12:58 am
i do not deny the fact that knapp’s model is true to a certain extent. but still, it does not reflect the true complexity of the process of falling in (or out of) love. because entering/breaking a relationship can be made up of so many factors that mere words cannot describe at all.
but generally, it appears that knapp’s model is usually the case with most relationships but we should not forget that it is not a necessity to conform to those stages as stated by knapp.
Dwayne
October 5, 2009 at 1:53 am
I would actually like to disagree with your statement that not all relationships end at the Terminating stage. I’m more inclined to think that most relationships actually do go through the process mentioned above, even that of the terminating stage.
Every relationship has to end somewhere does it not?
I’m not talking about things such as divorce, but what
about death, the forced separation between a couple?
They have to accept life and death as part and parcel of life, whether this separation is chosen or not, even if they still do love each other.
Then again, there are also relationships such as pre-arranged marriages that go through Bonding before the couple actually get to know each other better, so it’s probably a structure much too rigid.
Sounds like an interesting movie though, will go check it out sometime (:
weixin
October 5, 2009 at 3:44 pm
You brought up a really good point. The thought of seperation due to other causes than our own, death for example, can also be considered as “Termination”.
Thanks.
Aloysius
October 9, 2009 at 10:39 am
Here’s my take: I feel the models somewhat detailed, and I can’t really argue against it? But,then again, it may be too rigid a structure in explaning interpersonal development, and sometimes maybe even a tad inaccurate.
For instance, the ‘Avoiding’ theme was categorised under ‘coming apart’. Yet there are instances where couples that avoid each other actually develop a longing for one another and thus grow in the relationship. In fact, their reconcilation may not only be swift, but it strengthens the bond. That said, ‘Avoiding’ may not be that all bad and may not even be rightly placed just before ‘Termination’. A flawed model, I’d say.
chervinlam
October 7, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Well i guess that’s because in most cases, when a couple have to avoid each other in a relationship, things are not going too good. I don’t think all relationships need to come to a moment where their relationship comes to a standstill. But then again, that will be like an all-perfect fairytale relationship that is unrealistic.
Nevertheless, i think the model isn’t flawed. I think it is simply put to cater to the majority of the people.
kelly0831
October 8, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Hey i feel a relationship need not follow these stages. A relationship is sucessful when there is communication between the couple. Even if they have their differences, it won’t bring them apart as they can talk it out and reach to a compromise. This shows their understanding and respect towards each other which is very important for a relationship to last. As long as they have these, nothing can come between the two of them.
Aakansha
October 10, 2009 at 4:19 pm
If one supports the concept of Promexity, then he would have loved taking public transport during peak hours.
The 10 stages will exists and is a ritual but the length of each stage differs from people to people. We have heard people getting married within a day of meeting each other. The stages of experimenting and intensifying could just mean an exchange of few sentences while integrating bonding could take the larger role in a longer span of a few hours.
Similar, in break ups, avoiding could just mean a day or two for some people, while others escalate it into weeks. In fact, for stagnation, couples could be in that stage for months or even years.
As the length of each stage differs from people to people, it very much appears that stages could be skipped. But open an observant eye and one could actually notice that the relationship can be on a bullet train or on the back of a snail.
Shawn
October 25, 2009 at 11:53 pm
I think our relationship are pretty much described by these 10 stages, though I don’t think that the sequence is always fixed. Some stages can be interchangeable and many people also tend to skip through some stages. And as you have mentioned, not all relationships will end at the Terminating stage. of course, neither will they always stop at the Bonding stage. I am being cynical as usual. :p
Ying Jie
November 1, 2009 at 10:19 pm
That is some interesting psychology model you got there.
Jonathan Chan (JCNK)
November 7, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Hi!
i think that there shouldnt be any formula, equation or steps when it comes to love and relationships.
kim
November 8, 2009 at 9:18 pm