Rupert Birkin's Idea of Love

We didn't really talk about this in class today, but I wanted to. I just can't get over Birkin's idea of love and what transcends it. He says that he wants an immediate bond between himself and a woman- a bond that forces them to walk in one direction, only one, and leave out the others. He says that it is freedom, but irrevocable, and it's like balancing two stars. He tells Ursula that his idea is not love, it's something more than that. Is that even true though? Society tells us that true love is the strongest bond between two persons and it is everlasting. To me, Birkin is describing true love in this passage. And then he tells Ursula what love is not- it is not something to feed one's ego or a process of subservience.

I suppose that in the beginning, when I read this passage, I thought that Birkin just had to completely wrong idea. I thought that he was taking out the romance in love and putting in a sort of bondage. After reading more of the book and understanding the society they live in better, I see it is Ursula who wishes bondage. She wants love and marriage for societal reasons, for logical reasons. I also believe that she just wants someone to love her. She pleads with Birkin for him to say that he loves her, but she doesn't say it back or care if he even means it. She and the rest of her society warped love into exactly what Birkin describes- a way to serve themselves, to make themselves more important. Birkin is actually the one who has it right by today's standards when he wants a mystical and natural connection to someone. Something more than the society's definition of love.