Tying the nuptial knot

Controversies and difference in opinions notwithstanding, marriage still has survived -- and hopefully will do so -- as an institution. Men like Bernard Shaw, though, had no doubt about the frivolity in the marriage ceremony where the couple vows to remain united 'till death do us part'. His main argument is that it is impossible to live throughout life in the heightened passion and yearning for each other when a couple falls in love. But love may not always be the only determinant factor of a marriage. Yet people tend to romanticise and in such an exercise they really do excel particularly when empathy is at work.
Reality though is different. Without being critical of the institution like Shaw, the aphorism that marriage is like 'Delhika laddu; jo khai o pastai, jo nehi khai o bhi pastai' (like sweet ball of Delhi; he who eats it is damned, he who does not eat is damned as well). When people vowed to long celibacy suddenly think they have enough of their bachelor life and must tie their nuptial knot at an age when they should have enjoyed the company of their grand children, the decision may be prompted by this 'laddu philosophy'. If it means to be damned without solemnisation of marriage, let it be so on tasting the proverbial 'laddu'.
Railway Minister Mujibul Haque could not perhaps end his bachelor's stint at a later time. He surely was a member of a bachelor society based at Comilla. Why so many people of Comilla formed a celibacy society  is a mystery. But the rule that one willing to tie the knot has to formally give up the membership of the society is strictly adhered to. At 67, the minister has to his credit one of the longest stints of bachelorship in his former society. It is no surprise that his marriage to a 29-year old woman will be followed with interests. It may not be a fairytale marriage but it certainly is one with a difference.        
When Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, then 52 years old, married 22-year old Margaret Sinclair after four years' courtship, even in that western society many an eyebrow were raised. At that time they were the most glamorous couple with greater focus on Margaret. In many ways she was the early version of Princess Diana.
In a country where older men were used to marrying girls much below today's marriageable age, such incompatible age is not going to be a big issue. The fact is that a minister or a premier is a public figure -and a very important one at that. So their actions are closely followed by the general mass. Those who have shunned marriage on this or that excuse, will now feel encouraged to take the plunge in the great unknown sea of a conjugal life. As for others married men who curse themselves taking the cue from the 'original sin' Adam committed at the instigation of Eve (Hawa) for their miseries in family life may also take heart. After all, not all is lost for themselves to mend fences. Age is no bar at all.
Has not Tolstoy made the matter explicit when he observed that all happy families are alike but every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way? Making a happy family depends on so many things but the essential ingredient is care, extra care on a daily basis to keep the flame burning.