Quick Index Board Index Home FAQ Site Map
|the omniscient narrator thinks otherwise
Written by Karen G
(5/22/2010 4:49 p.m.)
in consequence of the missive, Repayment, penned by Bridget D
"And may I ask -- " said Elizabeth; "but the terms, I suppose, must be complied with."
So, it's Mr. Bennet himself who brings the payment up. If he's to shirk it, why would bring it up the first place?
And then this is what the omniscient narrator tells us in Ch. 50: He was seriously concerned that a cause of so little advantage to any one should be forwarded at the sole expence of his brother-in-law, and he was determined, if possible, to find out the extent of his assistance, and to discharge the obligation as soon as he could.
Why would the omniscient narrator tell us this if it weren't true? That Mr. Bennet was seriously concerned that Lydia's marriage to Wickham should be forwarded at the sole expense of his brother-in-law, and to discharge that obligation?
I do not interpret "discharging of an obligation" to mean "getting out of it". They are two opposite things.
Groupread is maintained by Myretta with WebBBS 3.21.