Posted by MaryC on June 18, 1997 at 23:51:08:
In reply to Re: S&S and Emma posted by Kathy F. on June 08, 1997 at 18:07:03
] ] ] Why was the secret engagement of Jane Fairfax and Frank Churchill so morally reprehensible in Emma but the secret engagement of Lucy Steele and Edward Ferrars no big problem in S&S? Was it that people object to LS so violently that the bad morals of the secrecy was not thought of?
] ] ] Thanks for any input.
] ] ] Kathy
] ] ________
] ] Frank was openly flirting with Emma and everyone was expecting their engagement. Only Elinor and her mother and sisters were really aware of Elinor's relationship with Edward. (If I remember correctly, I haven't re-read S&S in a while.)
] Mrs. John Dashwood suspected it and told her family, which led to their preferment of Lucy Steele to Elinor when they were all in London--simply because she was not Elinor. I agree that only Elinor's family suspected her attachment, but I believe that all of his family suspected his attachment to Elinor. But that made it all the worse, perhaps, when the engagement was actually "announced" to the family. For one thing, it showed them how mistaken they were in slighting Elinor--almost a near relation--and moving a silly ignorant girl like Lucy into their home. Maybe their pride was damaged the most--not just the engagement to someone like Lucy, but that they had so openly encouraged Lucy and simply to hurt Elinor.
I enjoyed the poetic justice and the come-uppance Fanny Dashwood experienced when she found out Lucy was attached to her brother. Tsk Tsk :)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.