Quick Index Board Index Home FAQ Site Map
|I'm not sure D relating his concerns to B was even wrong.
Written by Jen83
(4/27/2013 4:10 a.m.)
in consequence of the missive, Is Darcy's meddling justifiable?, penned by Jasmine D
If Jane had been truly indifferent to Bingley, and marrying him for purely mercenary reasons, I think it would be wrong for Darcy not to bring that to Bingley's attention if he knew Bingley was unaware of it. Assuming his belief in Jane's indifference was sincere, and his concern for Bingley's happiness was genuine, I don't think he did anything morally wrong - his judgment was mistaken, but that was all.
He's not responsible for Bingley's decision to accept it as fact (when he had to know it was merely speculation, and that Darcy wasn't the most socially astute individual), and to proceed on that basis without making any effort to verify it himself. Bingley is a grown man, and his choice to rely on Darcy's judgment rather than his own doesn't make him any less morally responsible for his own actions.
Concealing her presence in London is harder to justify, but at that point, Bingley had already decided not to pursue things further. Since that was entirely his own choice to start with, I can understand why Darcy would think it better for him not to see her - if he'd decided not to marry her, what would be the benefit in seeing her? I don't think it's morally correct, but it does make some logical sense.
Groupread is maintained by Myretta with WebBBS 3.21.