Kim Kardashian's marriage to Kris Humphries famously lasted 72

"Kim Kardashian's marriage to Kris Humphries famously lasted 72 days, and was reported in the tabloids as being all about the big bucks paid by magazines for the bridal photos: it is a spectacle of a bride-to-be as entrepreneur, not as romantic heroine; the groom, in this scenario, is nothing but a prop." With these words, Naomi Wolf presents a stark critique of the modern spectacle of marriage, where the romantic ideal has been replaced by a commercialized and performative view of love. The brief marriage between Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries highlights a troubling trend where the institution of marriage—once a sacred bond—is increasingly seen as a vehicle for profit, publicity, and self-promotion. In Wolf’s analysis, the romantic heroine, once celebrated for her love and devotion, has been overshadowed by the figure of the bride as a businesswoman, with the groom reduced to little more than an accessory in a media-driven narrative.

In the ancient world, marriage was understood as both a personal and social contract, often bound by duties and obligations. The Greeks viewed marriage as essential to the preservation of family lines and the stability of society. For example, in Homer’s Odyssey, Penelope, the wife of Odysseus, is portrayed as the epitome of romantic devotion. Her loyalty and faithfulness to her husband, despite his prolonged absence, is a symbol of the ideal of marital love. Penelope is not concerned with fame or fortune; her marriage is built on love, trust, and commitment, and she endures the pain of separation in the hope of reuniting with her husband. This idealized notion of marriage as a union of souls and not commodities stands in stark contrast to the contemporary view depicted by Wolf, where the bride is seen not as a romantic heroine, but as an entrepreneurial figure—focused more on the profit and publicity than on the personal connection.

The ancient Romans, too, while often engaged in political marriages, placed significant emphasis on the moral obligations that came with the union. Augustus, the first Roman emperor, entered into a marriage with Livia that, while politically strategic, was also deeply personal. The Roman ideal of marriage was based on the idea of a shared life’s work—building an empire, raising children, and maintaining moral integrity. In contrast, the Kardashian-Humphries marriage, according to Wolf, represents a shift where the celebration of love is replaced by a display of wealth and self-promotion, a marriage that exists not as a sacred bond, but as a commercial event. The groom, in this context, becomes less of a partner and more of a prop—a mere accessory to the main event: the bride as the star of the show.

Wolf’s critique extends beyond just this particular celebrity marriage. She highlights a broader trend in modern society, where relationships—particularly those in the public eye—are increasingly defined by image, commercial value, and marketability. This is a far cry from the romantic ideals of yore, where marriage was seen as a sacred covenant and the bride and groom were partners in a journey of love and growth. In ancient cultures, a wedding was often a rite of passage, imbued with spiritual significance and social responsibility. The love between the couple was meant to be a reflection of family bonds and community ties, and not just a public spectacle for personal gain.

The lesson here is profound: when we reduce love and marriage to mere commodities—driven by media attention, profit, and exploitation—we lose the essence of what makes these unions truly meaningful. Wolf urges us to reclaim the integrity of romantic relationships and to view them not through the lens of publicity or commercialization, but through the lens of mutual respect, trust, and personal connection. Just as ancient societies revered marriage as a union that transcended the material, we must strive to restore the sacredness of love and the commitment that marriage represents.

In our own lives, we must remember that true love is not about spectacle, wealth, or public image. Whether in romantic relationships, friendships, or family bonds, we should strive to cultivate connections based on authenticity, commitment, and emotional depth. Let us resist the temptation to treat relationships as transactional or performative, but instead cherish them as profound expressions of connection and growth. Just as Penelope’s devotion or Augustus and Livia’s partnership were grounded in deeper values, we too must seek relationships that are based on a foundation of mutual respect and genuine love, not superficial displays or external rewards.

In doing so, we will create a society where the true meaning of love and marriage is restored—where partnerships are celebrated not as mere spectacles for others to admire, but as real and sustaining bonds that foster growth, support, and personal fulfillment. Let Naomi Wolf’s critique serve as a reminder that love, in its truest form, is not about what can be gained externally, but what can be shared and grown within. Only then can we approach relationships as sacred commitments, not commercial enterprises.