Love a t Goon excer pt
By Debor a h Blu m
LOVE LE SSONS
New in sigh t s in t o t h e biology a n d chem ist r y of con n ect ion sh ow
t h a t love is t h e foun da t ion of h ea lt h, h a ppin ess a n d life it self.
In t he ea r ly spr in g light , t he Hen r y Vila s Zoologica l P a r k
r em a in s a lm ost color less, a pla ce of bla ck br a n ch a n d pa le gr ou n d.
Th e u pper Midwest sh a kes off win t er slowly. Th is is a sm a ll zoo,
a n d In t h e ch ill, one ca n be gr a t efu l t h a t t h is is a sm a ll zoo; a
visit or wa lkin g fa st ca n t r a vel fr om r ept ile h ou se t o pr im a t e hou se
in a ba r e five m in ut es
I’m a pr im a t e ju n kie m yself. My foot st eps, hollow -sou n din g
on t h e cold gr ou n d, inevit a bly ca r r y m e t o t h is bu ildin g. I will
st a n d a dm ir in g t he plu m y-t a iled colobu s a n d t he st on e-fa ced
a n cien t , power fu l or a n gu t a n s —a lm ost weigh t less in t h eir gr a ce —
u n t il m y ch ildr en dr a g m e a wa y.
Th e psych ologist H a r r y H a r low —t h e m a n who lit er a lly
br ou gh t love fr om t h e pr ovin ce of t he poet s a n d st r a igh t in t o t h e
la bor a t or y —bega n h is wor k her e. H a r r yH a r low h im self died
som e t wen t y yea r s a go, bu t h e for ever ch a n ged t h e wa y we t h in k
a bou t h u m a n r ela t ion sh ips. He believed t h a t h u m a n a ffect ion
cou ld be st u died, even m ea su r ed. H is exper im en t s on pr im a t es
wer e som et im es bea u t ifu l a n d som et im es pr ofou n dly t r ou blin g,
bu t in t he en d t h ey pr oved t h e power of love, of con nect ion —a n d
h ow t h e la ck of eit h er cou ld der a il a n ent ir e life. Wh o ca n for get
t h e st a r t lin g im a ges of lit t le m on keys clin gin g t o a r t ificia lly
wa r m ed, wir e a n d clot h “m ot h er s”?
H a r low’s exper im en t s sh owed u s t h a t bein g t ou ch ed a n d
h eld wa s cr it ica l, a n eed t h a t wa s h a r dwir ed int o ou r bodies a n d
sou ls. Befor e h is fa m ou s pa r ent in g st u dies , lea din g psych ologist s
a r gu ed t h a t love wa s det r im ent a l in r a isin g ch ildr en , t ha t
a ffect ion wou ld m a ke you n gst er s wea k. H a r low’s exper im en t s
com plet ely cou n t er ed t h ose a r gu m en t s. He fou n d t h a t ba by
m on keys bon ded t o a m ot her wh o pr ovided “cont a ct com for t”. Th e
in fa n t s r a ised wit h a soft , cu ddly m ot h er wer e fa r m or e wella dju st ed a n d secu r e. Th e ba by m on keys r a ised wit h a m ot her t h a t
didn ’t offer t ou ch or com for t – su ch a s t he wir e m ot h er – wou ld
visibly despa ir , h u ddlin g int o a ba ll. H a r low deliber a t ely a n d
pr ovoca t ively t it led h is r esu lt s “The Na t u r e of Love.”[Need 1-3
sen t en ce su m m a r y of h is m on key wor k fr om a ut h or ] A sligh t ,
sa r don ic m a n , a wor ka h olic m or e in volved wit h scien ce t h a n wit h
h is ch ildr en , H a r low wa s in som e wa ys a n u n likely cr u sa der for
love. H e a dm it t ed on ce t h a t he h a d been a lonely ch ild .; h e
st r u ggled h im self wit h r ela t ion sh ips. An d yet he t a u ght u s
ir r efut a ble t r ut h s: t h a t love a lon e is t h e fou n da t ion u pon wh ich
we bu ild ou r lives— or it sh ou ld be.
I won der a bou t t h a t fu n da m en t a l lesson h is lesson s a s I
st a n d in side t h e pr im a t e hou se, sh u t t in g t he gla ss door s on t h e
slow t h a w ou t side. The or a n gut a n s a t t h e Vilia s zoo h a ve a new
ba by. Th e m ot h er h olds it , hea r t t o hea r t , a s if let t in g go wou ld
viola t e a ll t he n a t u r a l la ws of life. P er h a ps scien ce is fin a lly
ca t ch in g u p wit h com m on sen se, a s H a r r y liked t o sa y. P er h a ps
t h e a n swer is a s sim ple a s t h e view t h r ou gh t h e gla ss: m ot h er a n d
ch ild so close t oget h er t h a t you m igh t im a gin e t he t wo hea r t s
bea t in g a s on e.
WH Y BABIE S F ALL IN LOVE
No scient ist h a s ever fou n d a n object in t he u n iver se t h a t a
ba by wou ld r a t h er see t h a n a m ot h er ’s sm ilin g fa ce. A m ot h er ’s
fa ce is a lwa ys bea u t ifu l. H a r r y H a r low ca m e t o believe t h a t , a n d
on ce sa id, “A m ot h er ’s fa ce t h a t will st op a clock will n ot st op a
ba by.” H e cou ldn ’t design a m ot her ’s fa ce t h a t wou ld t ur n a ba by
a wa y, n ot even clot h m om wit h h er r ed st a r e a n d h er fla t gr een
sm ile. Sh e cou ld ha ve a bla n k fa ce, a bu g fa ce, a n y fa ce— a s lon g
a s it wa s m om ’s fa ce. In t h e look of her m ot h er , t he in fa n t sa w t he
gor geou s a ppea r a nce of secu r it y, t h e com m it m ent of ju st bein g
t h er e.
P er h a ps t her e’s a ca r r yover effect ; beyon d m om , ba bies love t o
look a t fa ces, per iod. P sychologist s ha ve com e t o m a r vel a t h ow
pa ssion a t e ba bies a r e a bout n a t u r e’s a ssem bly of eyes, n ose a n d
m ou t h. Cu r ve of lips, a r ch of br ow, n a r r owin g of eyes — t h er e a r e
cou n t less m ea n in gs in t h is h u m a n ca n va s. A ba by will peer
in t ent ly a n d t r y t o deciph er t hose flicker in g expr ession s. In
syst em a t ic t est s wh er e in fa n t s a r e shown pict u r es of people wit h
va r yin g expr ession s, r esea r cher s fin d dir ect eviden ce t h a t t h e
in fa n t s deft ly in t er pr et fa cia l m ea n in g. Ver y you n g h u m a n s st a r e
h a ppily a t a bea m in g sm ile, look som ber ly ba ck a t a fr own .
Ba bies sca n fa ces, it seem s, for a n swer s t o t h eir m ost
im por t a n t quest ion s. Am I doin g t he r igh t t h in g? Am I m a kin g
you h a ppy? Ar e you pa yin g a t t en t ion t o m e? Am I sa fe? Am I
loved enou gh t o m a t t er ? In on e cla ssic exper im en t , ca lled t h e
“visu a l cliff t est ,” resea r ch er s pu t in fa n t s on a r a ised pla t for m , a
clea r pa nel set in t h e m iddle. A ba by cr a wlin g a long t h e pla t for m ,
lookin g down , would su dden ly see a dr op t o t h e floor t hr ou gh t h e
t h ick P lexigla s. Th e pa n el wa s a s st u r dy a s t he r est of t h e
pla t for m , bu t t h ey didn ’t know t h a t . Ch ildr en wou ld t r em ble
t h er e, fin ger s st ill gr ippin g t he opa que boa r ds of t h e pla t for m ,
st a r in g down t h a t st eep vir t u a l cliff.
Th e ch ildr en in t h is st u dy wer e t en m on t h s old. If t h eir
m ot h er s sm iled a nd n odded, m ost of t h e ba bies wen t on over . If
t h eir m om s looked fea r fu l or dou bt fu l, t h e ba bies wou ld slowly
ba ck a wa y. In psych ology, t h e cliff exper im ent is ju st ly fa m ou s. It
st a n ds a s a st u n n in g exa m ple of h ow m u ch ch ildr en look t o t h eir
pa r en t s for a n swer s —a n d r eceive t h em —wit h ou t a wor d spoken .
Th e t est is a lso a r a r e exa m ple of fa it h in a n ot h er per son .
H ow m a n y people in ou r lives t r u st us so m u ch t h a t if we nod a n d
sm ile, t hey will cha n ce a t u m ble down a cliff? At t h is m om en t in
t h eir lives, in fa n t s give a bsolu t e t r u st .
“Clea r ly, t h e em ot ion a l st a t e of ot h er s is of fu n da m ent a l
im por t a n ce t o t h e in fa n t ’s em ot ion a l st a t e,” sa ys H a r va r d ch ild
psych ia t r ist E dwa r d Tr on ick. His choice of t he wor d ot h er s r a t h er
t h a n m ot her s is deliber a t e. Ch ildr en for m m a n y im por t a n t
r ela t ion sh ips wit h a du lt s. A “m ot her ” m a y be biologica l, a dopt ive,
gu a r dia n , fost er , gr a n dpa r en t , r ela t ive, fr ien d. In r ecogn izin g t he
fu ll r a n ge of em ot ion a l con n ect ion a nd in t im a cy, ou r societ y h a s
begu n t o em br a ce a closer r ole for fa t h er s a s well. In fa n t s m a y
a lso sca n a da d’s fa ce for com for t a n d for t h e kin d of un con dit ion a l
love t h a t u sed t o be seen a s a m ot h er ’s specia lt y.
Ba bies sen d t h eir pa r en t s n on ver ba l m essa ges, t oo. In fa n t s
sm ile when t hey a r e plea sed; clin g wh en t hey n eed con t a ct ; follow
wit h t h eir eyes when t h ey a r e wor r ied t h a t we m a y lea ve. Ba ck in
1983, E d Tr on ick a t H a r va r d bega n t o con sider t h e power of t h is
in t er a ct ion bet ween pa r ent a n d ch ild. It occu r r ed t o h im t h a t t h e
I-sm ile-you -sm ile-ba ck kin d of r ela t ion sh ip cou ld be t he ba sis of
a n in t er est in g exper im en t . It wa sn ’t t he ph ysica l sm ile t h a t
in t er est ed h im so m u ch . It wa s wh a t it r epr esen t ed —t h e give a n d
give ba ck bet ween m ot h er a n d ch ild.
WH E N F ACE S GO SILE NT
Wh a t if n ot h in g a ba by does elicit s a r espon se? Wh a t if a n
in fa n t cou ld coo a n d ca ll a n d coa x a nd fin d t h a t h e h a s n ot h in g in
t h e box of socia l skills t h a t will get h im a r espon se? It wa s in
t h ose quest ion s t ha t Tr on ick t hou gh t h e sa w a wa y t o t u g a t t h e
m ot h er -ch ild bon d. He ca m e u p wit h wh a t he ca lled t h e F a ce-t oF a ce St ill-F a ce P a r a digm . H e a n d a collea gue, J effr ey Coh n ,
a sked t h e m ot her s of t h r ee-m on t h -olds sim ply t o go bla n k for a
few m in u t es wh ile lookin g a t t heir ch ildr en. Th e “st ill fa ce” t est
dem a n ded on ly t ha t —a t ot a l la ck of r espon se. No a n ger or t h r ea t ,
n o h u m or or love. Th e a ll-im por t a n t fa cia l m a p wou ld sh ow
n ot h in g bu t em ot ion a lly em pt y t er r a in .
“The effect on t h e in fa n t is dr a m a t ic,” Tr on ick wr ot e in a n
ea r ly pu blica t ion, ech oing h is own init ia l a st on ish m en t a t t h e
power of t h a t st ill fa ce. “Infa n t s a lm ost im m edia t ely det ect t he
ch a n ge a n d a t t em pt t o solicit t he m ot h er ’s a t t en t ion .” Wh en a
m ot h er st ill r efu sed t o r espon d, ba bies t r ied self-com for t . Th ey
su cked t h eir t h u m bs. Th ey looked a wa y. Th en t h e ba bies t r ied
a ga in . They r ea ched for t heir best t ools t o en ga ge t heir m ot h er s,
sm ilin g, gu r glin g. An d a s or der ed, t he m ot h er s wou ld r et u r n
n ot h in g. The ba bies wou ld com for t t hem selves a ga in, a nd t r y
a ga in . An d a ga in . Ba bies know t h is m a t t er s. They’r e st u bbor n
a bou t it . Bu t a ft er a wh ile, con fr on t ed wit h on ly t h a t bla n k fa ce,
ea ch ch ild st opped t r yin g.
“I r em em ber when I fir st did t h e st ill-fa ce pa r a digm ,” sa ys
Tr on ick, who t oda y h ea ds t h e pedia t r ic r esea r ch division a t
H a r va r d Medica l Sch ool. H e is a t a ll, elega nt m a n wit h silver
h a ir , br illia n t blue eyes, a n d a h a bit of sa yin g ver y pr ecisely wh a t
h e t h in ks. “I sa id t o people, look, it ’s like t h e m on keys in H a r low’s
st u dy. Look a t t h is em ot ion a l r ea ct ion .” Yet t h e psych ologist s h e
sh owed t he pict u r es t o t h ou ght t h a t wh a t t h ey sa w couldn ’t
r epr esent em ot ion. It seem ed t o Tr on ick t h a t h is collea gu es wer e
a lm ost per son a lly u n com for t a ble wit h t h e idea t h a t t h e con nect ion
bet ween m ot h er a n d ch ild cou ld be so st r on g, t h a t r ela t ion sh ips
cou ld m a t t er t h a t m u ch . “P eople don ’t wa n t t o believe t h a t a ch ild
cou ld be so h u r t — or t h a t we cou ld be so h u r t fu l.”
TOUCH : TH E CHE MISTRY OF CONTE NTME NT
Th er e is a sin gu la r ly com for t in g body ch em ist r y t o being
h u gged by a pa r ent who loves you . Scien t ist s h a ve lea r n ed wa ys
t o m ea su r e t h a t int er n a l biology. If a m ot h er m on key scoops a
ba by close a ga in st h er chest , hea r t r a t es dr op ; if scien t ist s
m ea su r e st r ess hor m ones, t hey ca n ch a r t t h em dr opping a wa y.
An iden t ica l r ea ct ion ca n be seen in h u m a n ch ildr en. A ch ild
t u cked a ga in st h is m ot h er ’s sh ou lder seem s lu lled in t o t h a t ea sy
ch em ist r y of con t en t m ent .
On e of t he scient ist s who h a s done t he fir st a n d best wor k on
t h e ch em ist r y of t ou ch is Sa u l Sch a n ber g of t h e depa r t m en t of
ph a r m a cology a t Du ke Un iver sit y. Sch a n ber g su ggest ed t h a t ou r
in t en se r espon se t o t ou ch is a pr im it ive su r viva l m ech a n ism .
“Beca u se m a m m a ls depen d on m a t er n a l ca r e for su r viva l in t h eir
ea r ly weeks or m on t h s,” sa ys Sch a n ber g, “t he pr olon ged a bsen ce of
a m ot her ’s t ou ch t r igger s a slowin g of t he in fa n t ’s m et a bolism .”
Th a t a llows t h e in fa n t t o su r vive a lon ger sepa r a t ion fr om t h e
m ot h er . On ce she r et u r n s, her t ou ch r ever ses t h e pr ocess.
P r em a t u r e ba bies wh o a r e st r oked for fift een m in u t es, t h r ee t im es
a da y, gr ow 50 per cen t fa st er t h a n st a n da r d, isola t ed pr e em ies.
Th e ba by wh o h u ddles in t o h is cr ib, or t he lit t le m on key wh o cu r ls
u p a t t he edge of her ca ge, a ppea r h opeless. Bu t we shou ld be
a wa r e t h a t som e of t h is h u ddlin g is a ct u a lly con ser va t ion . As t hey
h u n ker down, t h e ba bies a r e wa it in g for t h eir m ot h er s t o com e
h om e a n d for ever yt h in g t o be a ll r igh t . Th e bot t om lin e is t h a t
t ou ch is good for you r hea lt h , you r im m u n e syst em , you r sleep,
you r a n xiet y level, you r life.
LIF E AS TE AM SP ORT
Sa lly Men doza , cha ir of t he psych ology depa r t m en t a t t h e
Un iver sit y of Ca lifor n ia Da vis, (sh e’s st epped down a s ch a ir sin ce
t h e book wa s pu blish ed) h a s lon g in sist ed believed t h a t t h e wa y
we con n ect is a bsolu t ely, fu n da m en t a lly im por t a n t in
u n der st a n din g ou r selves. Sh e believes t h a t we r a r ely a ct in
isola t ion , a n d t h a t socia l con n ect ion s in flu en ce m a n y of ou r
beh a vior s a n d decision s. Men doza is con vin ced t h a t ou r socia l
in t er a ct ion s a ct u a lly ch a n ge ou r in t er n a l ph ysiology a n d
ch em ist r y. Beh in d h er idea lies a pr ovoca t ive t heor y: t h a t ou r
in dividu a l body chem ist r y is n ot so in dividu a l a t a ll, t ha t ea ch of
u s is designed, in pa r t , ju st t o r espon d t o t h e ot h er people in ou r
lives.
If so, t h en t h e lyr ic in sist en ce of t he seven t eent h -cent u r y
poet J oh n Don n e t h a t “no m a n is a n isla n d’ t a kes on a scien t ific
lit er a lness. We becom e in sepa r a ble fr om t h e fine fr a gile fa br ic of
ou r r ela t ion sh ips. “Wit hou t socia l suppor t ,” sa ys Men doza , “you
a r e in r ea l t r ou ble. We spen d a h u ge a m ou n t of t im e in
r ela t ion sh ips. Th a t shou ld t ell u s t h a t it ’s in or din a t ely im por t a n t ,
t h a t r ela t ion sh ips a r e cr it ica l t o biology.”
Ou r bodies kn ow t h is. Ou r br a in s r ecogn ize it
su bcon sciou sly, even if we ca n n ot a ccept it in t ellect u a lly. Or so
Men doza suggest s. We spen d m a n y of ou r lim it ed wa kin g m in u t es
on ea ch ot her . P a r en t s wit h dem a n din g jobs st ill h u ddle over
h om ewor k wit h t h eir ch ildr en , ch eer t h em a t soccer ga m es, fa ll
a sleep r ea din g t o t h em a t n igh t . E ven office life t h r ives on gossip,
jokes a n d fr ien dsh ips. Oft en t he ver y best m in u t es of ou r da ys a r e
t h e con n ect ed ones. If you t h in k of t he n a t u r e of love a s a
m u lt ifa cet ed gem of a n idea , t h en our n eed t o belon g is a m a jor
fa cet .
Men doza a n d h er collea gues h a ve been t r yin g t o bet t er
defin e t h e br a in a n a t om y a n d n eu r och em ist r y t h a t helps su st a in
t h ose bon ds. Sh e h a s looked a t t h e in t r ica t e squ ir r el m on key
societ y a s a n exa m ple. If she t a kes a squ ir r el ou t of h is gr ou p, sh e
ca n m ea su r e a su dden spike in t he a n im a l’s st r ess hor m on es. The
r ise isn ’t on ly in t h e sepa r a t ed in dividu a l. Th e h or m one bla zes
a cr oss t he gr ou p, even in m on keys wh o r a r ely spen t t im e wit h t he
m issin g a n im a l. Ever yone r egist er s t h a t som eone is m issin g. Sh e
su spect s t h a t h u m a n s r espon d sim ila r ly t o m in or r ela t ion sh ip
ch a n ges.
“One per son m a y go t o a sin gle r ela t ion sh ip for ever yt h in g
t h ey n eed. I r ely on a r ich n et wor k of fr ien ds,’ Men doza sa ys. We
ca n a n d do ext en d ou r fa m ily cir cle wit h fr ien dsh ip. If on e fa ils
u s, t her e a r e st ill ot h er s t o keep t h e net st r et ch ed ben ea t h u s.
Th er e m a y be ph a ses of ou r lives when fr ien dsh ips or pa r t n er sh ips
seem m or e power fu l t h a n ou r or igin a l fa m ilies. But ou r a bilit y t o
for ge t hose la t er r ela t ion sh ips m a y well depen d on wh a t ea ch ch ild
get s fr om h is or h er pa r en t s.
Am er ica n cu lt u r e, h owever , oft en a r gu es a ga in st t h a t weight
of com m it m en t . Mer edit h Sm a ll, pr ofessor of a n t h r opology a t
Cor n ell Un iver sit y a n d a u t hor of Ou r Ba bies, Ou r selves, not es
t h a t ou r cu lt u r e is “bu ilt on in dividu a l a ch ievem en t . You ’r e t old t o
be in depen den t , self-r elia n t , get t h r ou gh life on you r own . An d
t h a t ’s in dir ect con flict wit h how h u m a n s a r e designed. We’r e n ot
like a bu n ch of wildebeest s on t h e sa va n n a . We’r e su pposed t o be
depen den t on ea ch ot h er .”
Resea r ch er s su ch a s Sm a ll wor r y t ha t ou r cu lt u r e t en ds t o
pu sh u s a wa y fr om h ea lt h y depen dency, t h a t ou r lifest yle – a blu r
of fin a n cia lly-st r essed pa r ent s, fr a n t ic sch edu les a n d fr a gm ent ed
fa m ilies – oft en m a kes su ch com m it m en t a n in con ven ien ce.
[Tr a n sit ion needed fr om a u t h or a bou t societ y t hese da ys, wor kin g
pa r en t s, bu sy schedu les, fr a gm en t ed fa m ilies, et c] In 1947, ju st 12
per cen t of m ot h er s wit h ch ildr en u n der t h e a ge of six wor ked
ou t side t h e h om e. In 1997, t h a t n u m ber h a d r isen t o 64 per cent .
[a n y n ewer figu r es a va ila ble? Not t h a t I h a ve, t h is wa s fr om a 50
yea r com pa r ison by NICH D] [t r a n sit ion needed, su ggest ed: How
does t h is im pa ct ou r h ea r t s a n d sou ls, a s in dividu a ls a n d a
cu lt u r e? ok] In h er book, Mot h er Na t u r e, Ca lifor n ia a n t h r opologist
Sa r a h Bla ffer H r dy bu ilds a n im a ge of a good m ot h er ver y
differ en t fr om t he a r ch et ypa l, 1950’s lon ely bu t devot ed n u r t u r er .
Th e m ot h er H r dy h a s in m in d is a lso fier cely pr ot ect ive of h er
ch ild, bu t som et im es she is ju st pla in fier ce. H r dy wou ld h a ve u s
get r id of t h a t m ilky Ma don n a st er eot ype. She r em in ds u s t h a t
m ot h er s a r e st ill wom en wit h pa ssion, a n d a m bit ion s, a n d yes,
in t er est s beyon d t h e ch ild. An d a s lon g a s we a r e get t in g r id of
st er eot ypes, H r dy poin t s out , wh y sh ou ldn ’t we con n ect in a m or e
givin g com m u n it y of a u n t s or u n cles or cou sin s or gr a n dpa r en t s?
Wh y shou ld we ca st ou r socia l su ppor t net so ver y n a r r owly?
Cr a ig a n d Sh a r on Ra m ey, bot h pr ofessor s of psychology, y
(I.D. n eeded) a t t he Un iver sit y of Ala ba m a , h a ve t est ed su per in t en sit y pr esch ool pr ogr a m s for ch ildr en , m ost ly ch ildr en fr om
disa dva n t a ged fa m ilies who a r e likely t o h a ve h igh ly dist r a ct ed
pa r en t s. Con sist en t ly, t h e ch ildr en in t h ose pr ogr a m s t h r ive.
Ra m ey su ggest s t h a t h is pr ot ot ype da y ca r es —on e t o t h r ee r a t io,
lot s of h u ggin g a n d t ou ch in g —a r e designed t o m im ic t h e ext en ded
fa m ily n a t u r e of hu m a n evolut ion .
We m igh t a lso, in t h ese m or e m oder n t im es, con sider fu r t h er
em ph a sizin g t he r ole of t he fa t h er . As H a r r y H a r low’s wor k
sh owed a ll t oo clea r ly, a n d a s som e of u s kn ow a ll t oo well, t h er e’s
n o gu a r a nt ee t h a t you won ’t en d u p wit h a weir d m ot h er or a
bor ed m ot h er or even a m on st er m ot her . On e of t h e r isks of t h e
on e-on -one a t t a chm en t is t h a t you cou ld en d u p wit h a “wir e on ly”
m ot h er a n d n o on e else t o h old you . If you sh a r e in sever a l
ca r et a ker s, you m a y m iss t h e a dva nt a ge of get t in g t he t ot a l
a t t en t ion of t h e wor ld’s best m ot h er . Bu t you a r e never a s
vu ln er a ble t o t h e wor st .
Som e of u s a r e m ovin g in t h a t dir ect ion . Br u ce P er r y, ch ief
of ch ild psych ia t r y a t H ou st on ’s Ba ylor Un iver sit y, a r gu es t h a t
ou r biology is design ed for a m or e com plex socia l wor ld t h a n even
a good n u clea r fa m ily m a y pr ovide. “Ou r cu r r en t livin g syst em s
a r e disr espect fu l of t he br a in ’s pot ent ia l,” he sa ys.” P er r y h a s
wor ked wit h t ou ch t her a py, da n ce, a r t , st or yt ellin g a n d dr a m a , a s
t ech n iques t o h elp n eglect ed ch ildr en . By con du ct in g br a in
im a ger y st u dies, he’s been a ble t o see t h a t su ch a ct ivit ies h elp
st r engt hen specific pa r t s of t h e br a in . The ch ildr en wh o benefit
t h e m ost fr om t h is, he sa ys, a r e neglect ed ch ildr en. One of t h e
m ost im por t a nt im pr ovem en t s is in socia l skills.
St u dies of n eglect ed ch ildr en fin d t h a t oft en wh a t t hey see is
a st ill-fa ce, no m a t t er wh a t t h e expr ession . Ma n y of t hem la ck
ba sic fa ce r ea din g skills. Of cou r se, t h is m a kes com plet e sen se.
Wh o wou ld t ea ch t h em t o r ea d a fa ce? Th e m ot h er who h a d n o
in t er est in t hem ? Th e fa t h er who wa sn ’t t h er e? As H a r r y
H a r low’s st u dies— a n d t h e st u dies t h a t h a ve gr own ou t of t h em —
sh ow, socia l isola t ion h a s deva st a t in g effect s. “Ma n y people st ill
do not a ppr ecia t e h ow ba d t h e effect s a r e,” sa ys psych ologist Ir win
Ber n st ein , of t h e Un iver sit y of Geor gia . (ID needed).
We n eed not ju st t o be loved, bu t t o feel loved. Wh a t ’s
im por t a n t is n ot t h a t t h e m ot her —or a n y of u s —get s it r igh t
ever y t im e. It ’s fixin g m ist a kes t h a t m a t t er s —even ju st t h e
willin gness t o t r y a ga in . The r equ ir em en t is ju st t o st a y in t her e.
H a r r y’sH a r low’s r esea r ch t ells u s t ha t love is wor k. So do a ll t h e
st u dies t h a t follow. Th e n a t u r e of love is a bou t pa yin g a t t en t ion
t o t he people who m a t t er , a bou t st ill givin g wh en you a r e t oo t ir ed
t o give. Be a m ot her wh o list en s, a fa t h er wh o cu ddles, a fr ien d
wh o ca lls ba ck, a h elpin g n eigh bor , a lovin g ch ild.
Th a t em ph a sis on love in ou r ever yda y lives m a y be t he best
of t h a t qu iet r evolu t ion in psych ology, t h e on e t h a t ch a n ged t h e
wa y we t h in k a bout love a n d r ela t ionsh ip a lm ost wit h ou t ou r
n ot icin g t h a t h a d h a ppen ed. We t a ke for gr a nt ed n ow t h a t
pa r en t s sh ou ld h u g t h eir ch ildr en , t h a t t a kin g ca r e of ea ch ot h er is
pa r t of t h e good life. It is su ch a good fou n da t ion t h a t it ’s a lm ost
a st on ish in g t o con sider h ow r ecen t it is. F or t h a t fou n da t ion we
owe a debt t o H a r r y H a r low a n d t o a ll t he scient ist s who believed
a n d wor ked t owa r d a psych ology of t h e h ea r t .
At t h e en d, in H a r low’sr y’s h a n diwor k, t h er e’s n ot h in g
sen t im en t a l a bout love, n o su n lit clouds a n d glor y not es — it ’s a
su bst a n t ia l, ea r t h -bou n d con n ect ion, gr ou n ded in effor t , kin d n ess
a n d decen cy. Lea r n in g t o love, H a r r y liked t o sa y, is r ea lly a bout
lea r n in g t o live. P er h a ps ever yda y a ffect ion seem s a sm a ll fa cet of
love. P er h a ps, t hou gh , it is t h e m odest , st ea dy r espon ses t h a t see
u s t h r ough da y a ft er da y, t h a t st r et ch in t o a life of close a n d lovin g
r ela t ion sh ips. Or , a s H a r r y H a r low on ce wr ot e t o a fr ien d,
“P er h a ps one shou ld a lwa ys be m odest when t a lkin g a bou t love.”