Quick Index Board Index Home FAQ Site Map
|GR: No need for a reason to fall in love then
Written by Candice Michelle
(8/11/2003 2:18 p.m.)
in consequence of the missive, GR: Movie Edward, penned by Cheryl
] I think it natural to want to know why someone fell in love, and in order to do that you need to see some interaction.
I think the modern reader/viewer is the key concept here. I too want to know why characters fall in love. But I think that's because we are of this century, and we think you have to really know someone to love them.
If we are to believe JA's depiction of lovemaking in her time, then no one needed a *real* reason to fall in love. Men and women met, found each other physically attractive, danced at a ball, took a few turns about the garden, and were ready to get engaged. No one ever just *liked* someone else, they were always *in love*.
And it makes sense, in a perverse way. The women had no education, no professions. The most you could expect of them was that they might know how to play the piano or might have an appreciation of literature. But you certainly couldn't talk to them. And the gentlemen really weren't much better. They might be a bit better educated, but they didn't really work, either. So it might make sense to make a choice based on someone being pretty, having a taste for art, and having a bit of common sense. And you could tell that easily enough after picnicking together a few times and then declare yourself "in love".
Sense & Sensibility is maintained by Barbara with WebBBS 3.21.