Mark, I beg to differ . . .
Posted by Rachel on December 01, 1997 at 22:02:56:
In response to Please don't confuse P&P with P&P2! (long), written by Mark on December 01, 1997 at 19:39:28
It's OK, Mark. That made me think for a second; but to love a person, do you not have to have some respect from them in the beginning? When I speak of love here, I don't mean familial duty-type love, but true love for another person that you would marry.
Definetely, she would not marry for love alone, but I believe that would be principal in her decision. She would consider finantial and social issues in her decision; as somewhat shown in her talk with her aunt Gardiner about Wickham (but she knew she really didn't love him anyway, so that was not the same concern.)
And you are right, Lydia is the only one in the book that marries totally for love, but even there I have to wonder; did she really know what love was? I mean, truly? Also, didn't she want to marry just for the sake of being a married woman?
Also, I think the reason JA never says when exactly Lizzie first loved Darcy is for several reasons. 1)That would take away from the whole suspence from the book, if you argue from the theory that she loved him all the way through; 2) or if you argue she eventually loved him, what do you think goes on during that meeting at the Inn after getting the letters over the Wickham Affair?
. . . Elizabeth soon observed, and instantly understood it. Her power was sinking; every thing must sink under such a proof of family weakness, such an assurance of the deepest disgrace. She could neither wonder nor condemn, but the belief of his self-conquest brought nothing consolatory to her bosom, afforded no pallitation of her distress. It was, on the contrary, exactly calculated to make her understand her own wishes; and never had she so honestly felt that she could have loved him, as now, when all love must be vain. (pg. 245; Vol. III, Ch. 4)
You may argue on that point of "could have," but JA follows this up soon with her paragraph that starts with,
If gratitiude and esteem are good foundations of affection, Elizabeth's change of sentiment will neither be improbable or faulty . . .(pg. 246)
See? Lizzie did love him; also esteeming him.
But the characters who end up in wonderful marriages (Jane and Lizzie) both had love very high up on their lists, but that love could not have come into being unless they had respected their mates.
I am sorry about this defence; it is haphazard and wild, but I hope it gets my point across. Thank you for your post, Mark. I enjoyed it.
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.