L&T question on remarriage
Written by MarianneR
(10/6/2008 5:57 a.m.)
In ch.1 we read:
"That Lady Russell, of steady age and character, and extremely well provided for, should have no thought of a second marriage, needs no apology to the public, which is rather apt to be unreasonably discontented when a woman does marry again, than when she does not;"
I should have thought that it was very reasonable for a woman in our period to marry again in order to be provided. Why was the public opinion opposed to it? I see that the word "unreasonably" implies that JAīs opinion differed here. Did people think differently concerning remarriage of a widowed man? I suppose so as Mr. Elliotīs refusal to marry again has to be explained further. Questions over questions...