Quick Index Board Index Home FAQ Site Map
|Is Darcy's meddling justifiable?
Written by Jasmine D
(4/26/2013 8:49 p.m.)
In his letter, Darcy admits that he was responsible for breaking up Bingley and Jane. Is such meddling justifiable?
Darcy offers his explanation. One of the reasons was that Jane did not seem in love with Bingley:
Your sister I also watched. Her look and manners were open, cheerful, and engaging as ever, but without any symptom of peculiar regard, and I remained convinced from the evening's scrutiny, that though she received his attentions with pleasure, she did not invite them by any participation of sentiment.
He wanted to believe that Jane was in love, but he could see no evidence in Jane's behavior. As a result, he tells Bingley that Jane is indifferent to him and recommends that he cease the acquaintance.
Even though Darcy had scruples about the Bennet family, Bingley did not. The information that made him decide to end his relationship with Jane was that Darcy told him that she was indifferent:
But, however this remonstrance might have staggered or delayed his determination, I do not suppose that it would ultimately have prevented the marriage, had it not been seconded by the assurance, which I hesitated not in giving, of your sister's indifference.
So, what do you think of Darcy's behavior? It seems like he has inherited a little bit of his aunt's propensity for meddling in other people's affairs. I think that Mr Knightley of Emma would have censured Darcy for such meddling.
I'm sure Darcy meant well. He didn't want to see his good friend give his heart a way to a young lady who had no interest in him. But meddling with someone's love life is a delicate affair. Perhaps there might have been a better way to deal with the situation? Maybe he could have consulted with Elizabeth to see if Jane were really as indifferent as she appeared?
Groupread is maintained by Myretta with WebBBS 3.21.