Posted by Anna on May 17, 1997 at 20:26:18:
In reply to Re: Mary Crawford: Impropriety v Hypocrisy posted by Zoe on May 17, 1997 at 15:03:16
] Mary's opinion of her uncle is justified. What is not
] justified is her speaking ill of him in company. She is
] violating the responsibility of someone who has accepted
] hospitality.
________
For me the question is, how much forbearance is owed in return for hospitality (or any other favour). The notion that favours bestowed earn the right to indulge in 'bad' behaviour without facing the consequences bothers me, especially when the power to bestow those favours arises from an accident of birth rather than any personal effort (I can see no reason to suppose that taking the Crawfords in caused the Admiral any hardship).
I can see that in the case of Mary and her Uncle the degree of obligation may be thought to outway the 'bad' behviour that Mary is supposed to keep quiet about, but it makes me very uneasy.
(nor do I suscribe to the notion that women should pretend to ignorance of such things, even in 1816)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.