Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 25,26 (click to see context) from:
* Perhaps he was genuinely trying to help his brother. He may be selfish but he might not be wanting his brother to be disinherited selfish.
to:
* Perhaps he was genuinely trying to help his brother. He may be selfish but he might not be wanting his brother to be disinherited wanting-his-brother-to-be-disinherited selfish.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Honestly, nevermind what general society would or wouldn't criticize Edward for doing. It all boils down to Edward being a decent, LawfulGood young man who truly believed that Lucy loved him, right up until she ditched him for his brother. If he'd broken his youthful promise to marry her and left her heartbroken (as he thought) and exposed to social ridicule, he couldn't live with himself - even if it meant being free to marry Elinor instead. Edward's own kind heart kept him trapped in his stale engagement, and Lucy knew it and counted on it. His family's selfish disregard for honor is deliberately contrasted with this. They don't give two sniffs about how Lucy feels or what might happen to her if Edward discards her, any more than they cared about how the Dashwoods would support themselves. In the end, it's a delicious irony that Lucy's decision to jilt Edward for his brother sets him free without damaging his honor...while still saddling the cold, classist Ferrars with the penniless in-law they were so desperate to avoid!
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 17,18 (click to see context) from:
* He seems bland only to overly romantic Marianne who wants somebody more dashing for her beloved sister, but Elinor has simpler tastes. It isn't weird at all that an intelligent young man falls in love with an intelligent and beautiful woman when he's in her company. Who were Edward's other companions? Who were Elinor's companions? His mean and petty sister Fanny, jerkass Henry Dashwood and their small kid. Grieving Mrs Dashwood, emotional grieving Marianne and somewhat silly Margaret. It seems perfectly logical that Edward would fall for Elinor, and she would love him back if she felt that he preferred her. We know he's interested in her drawing, so we may infer they ''did'' spend a lot of time together in Norland. Moreover, I personally find Edward very sweet. For example the is the little scene when he gently teases Marianne about Willoughby and his hunting. Even Marianne "could not help smiling at the quiet archness of his manner".
to:
* He seems bland only to overly romantic Marianne who wants somebody more dashing for her beloved sister, but Elinor has simpler tastes. It isn't weird at all that an intelligent young man falls in love with an intelligent and beautiful woman when he's in her company. Who were Edward's other companions? Who were Elinor's companions? His mean and Fanny the petty sister Fanny, bitch, jerkass Henry Dashwood and their small kid. Grieving Then grieving Mrs Dashwood, emotional and grieving Marianne and somewhat silly Margaret. It seems perfectly logical that Edward would fall for Elinor, and she would love him back if she felt that he preferred her. We know he's interested in her drawing, so we may infer they ''did'' spend a lot of time together in Norland. Moreover, I personally find Edward very sweet. For example the there is the little scene when he gently teases Marianne about Willoughby and his hunting. Even Marianne "could not help smiling at the quiet archness of his manner".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 4 (click to see context) :
Deleted line(s) 6 (click to see context) :
Deleted line(s) 8 (click to see context) :
Changed line(s) 20,21 (click to see context) from:
* He seems bland only to overly romantic Marianne who wants somebody more dashing for her beloved sister, but Elinor has simpler tastes. It isn't weird at all that a young man falls in love with intelligent, beautiful and intelligent woman, when he's in company with her. Who were his other companions? His mean and petty sister Fanny, her jerkish husband Henry Dashwood and their small kid. Marianne is as intelligent as Elinor, but their personalities are not compatible. It seems perfectly logical that he would fall for her, and she for him, if she felt that he preferred her.
to:
* He seems bland only to overly romantic Marianne who wants somebody more dashing for her beloved sister, but Elinor has simpler tastes. It isn't weird at all that a an intelligent young man falls in love with intelligent, beautiful and an intelligent woman, and beautiful woman when he's in company with her. her company. Who were his Edward's other companions? Who were Elinor's companions? His mean and petty sister Fanny, her jerkish husband jerkass Henry Dashwood and their small kid. Grieving Mrs Dashwood, emotional grieving Marianne is as intelligent as Elinor, but their personalities are not compatible. and somewhat silly Margaret. It seems perfectly logical that he Edward would fall for her, Elinor, and she for him, would love him back if she felt that he preferred her.
her. We know he's interested in her drawing, so we may infer they ''did'' spend a lot of time together in Norland. Moreover, I personally find Edward very sweet. For example the is the little scene when he gently teases Marianne about Willoughby and his hunting. Even Marianne "could not help smiling at the quiet archness of his manner".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14,16 (click to see context) from:
** Though it should also be recognised that, while duelling was illegal, it was still widely done by the gentry (even the DukeOfWellington, several years later, while he was Prime Minister, had a very public duel over what he considered a slander by an opponent.) The last time a man was tried for murder after a duel was in 1823 (in times when duelling was legal, the case would not have come to court at all); the sentence was suspended, which goes to show that the ''code duello''- at least for gentlemen- was tacitly acknowledged as valid even then. The end of duelling really came when increasing urbanisation caused men of consequence to stop carrying weapons, and the rise of the middle class- and more lawyers- turned people towards suing and associated litigation as a means of settling scores.
** Perhaps also worth noting that this was a point in the history of duelling where most duels were settled less "to the death" and more "to the showing up and maybe injuring the other guy a little bit". Honor would frequently be considered satisfied simply by both men showing up, putting on a decent display and either shooting the gun over the other person's head or considering the matter settled when the first person received a scratch on their arm. It was usually only the real hardcore fanatics (or the ''seriously'' pissed off) who insisted on making sure one party was dead at the end of it.
** Perhaps also worth noting that this was a point in the history of duelling where most duels were settled less "to the death" and more "to the showing up and maybe injuring the other guy a little bit". Honor would frequently be considered satisfied simply by both men showing up, putting on a decent display and either shooting the gun over the other person's head or considering the matter settled when the first person received a scratch on their arm. It was usually only the real hardcore fanatics (or the ''seriously'' pissed off) who insisted on making sure one party was dead at the end of it.
to:
** Though it should also be recognised that, while duelling dueling was illegal, it was still widely done by the gentry (even the DukeOfWellington, Duke of Wellington, several years later, while he was Prime Minister, had a very public duel over what he considered a slander by an opponent.) The last time a man was tried for murder after a duel was in 1823 (in times when duelling was legal, the case would not have come to court at all); the sentence was suspended, which goes to show that the ''code duello''- at least for gentlemen- was tacitly acknowledged as valid even then. The end of duelling dueling really came when increasing urbanisation caused men of consequence to stop carrying weapons, and the rise of the middle class- and more lawyers- turned people towards suing and associated litigation as a means of settling scores.
** Perhaps also worth noting that this was a point in the history ofduelling dueling where most duels were settled less "to the death" and more "to the showing up and maybe injuring the other guy a little bit". Honor would frequently be considered satisfied simply by both men showing up, putting on a decent display and either shooting the gun over the other person's head or considering the matter settled when the first person received a scratch on their arm. It was usually only the real hardcore fanatics (or the ''seriously'' pissed off) who insisted on making sure one party was dead at the end of it.
** Perhaps also worth noting that this was a point in the history of
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 33,34 (click to see context) from:
* To break off an engagement was to leave yourself open to being sued for [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_promise Breach of Promise]]. However, to do this, the wronged woman had to be able to show that the engagement existed. While no-one else doubted that it did (as not only Lucy but Edward had confirmed this), Edward's family were probably pretty sure they could claim that the engagement wasn't legally binding, or did not exist, or that Lucy was of infirm mind ... they had the money and the position to be able to threaten this, even if they would most likely have lost the suit should it have gone as far as court.
to:
* To break off an engagement was to leave yourself open to being sued for [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_promise [[BreachOfPromiseOfMarriage Breach of Promise]]. However, to do this, the wronged woman had to be able to show that the engagement existed. While no-one else doubted that it did (as not only Lucy but Edward had confirmed this), Edward's family were probably pretty sure they could claim that the engagement wasn't legally binding, or did not exist, or that Lucy was of infirm mind ... they had the money and the position to be able to threaten this, even if they would most likely have lost the suit should it have gone as far as court.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Perhaps he was genuinely trying to help his brother. He may be selfish but he might not be wanting his brother to be disinherited selfish.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Why was breaking the engagement considered such a bad thing??
Added DiffLines:
* To break off an engagement was to leave yourself open to being sued for [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_promise Breach of Promise]]. However, to do this, the wronged woman had to be able to show that the engagement existed. While no-one else doubted that it did (as not only Lucy but Edward had confirmed this), Edward's family were probably pretty sure they could claim that the engagement wasn't legally binding, or did not exist, or that Lucy was of infirm mind ... they had the money and the position to be able to threaten this, even if they would most likely have lost the suit should it have gone as far as court.
* In addition, a promise was considered binding (so Edward's reputation rested on his keeping his word), and dastardly to the woman as it marked her as "not being good enough". If a young man did break off the betrothal, he was leaving her open to ridicule, censure, whispered rumours behind her back (did she perhaps have a history?) and pretty much likely to remain a spinster. In the day when marriage was the best a woman could hope for, this was pretty serious.
* So if Edward gave in to his family's pressure to break things off with Lucy, he would be considered a cad and a bounder at the very least. When Willoughby was writing to Marianne, everyone thought they ''must'' be engaged and thus his going off with another woman was considered a breach of promise, until Marianne confirmed that he had never actually asked the question. And thus Robert was sent to try and persuade Lucy to break the engagement, as a woman could be the instigator of the break without penalty. Of course, [[AttackBackfire what happened as a result]] stuffed things up even worse...
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 24 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Marianne's pianoforte would have a wooden frame, instead of modern steel, and the hammer mechanism would lack a number of refinements, but yes, it would be essentially the same instrument.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Perhaps also worth noting that this was a point in the history of duelling where most duels were settled less "to the death" and more "to the showing up and maybe injuring the other guy a little bit". Honor would frequently be considered satisfied simply by both men showing up, putting on a decent display and either shooting the gun over the other person's head or considering the matter settled when the first person received a scratch on their arm. It was usually only the real hardcore fanatics (or the ''seriously'' pissed off) who insisted on making sure one party was dead at the end of it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[WMG: Just how taboo ''would'' Edward breaking his engagement to Lucy have been at the time?]]
While not illegal, most of the cast (and other literature of the time) act like this was something you just ''did not do '''EVER''''' except in ''very'' exceptional circumstances... yet, Edward's family all act like he should immediately break it off with Lucy and marry Miss Morton, as if there's no obstacle stopping him, no reason why he can't, no expectation that he's bound to go through with it. They all badly ''want'' him to marry Miss Morton, but they never act like that option's off the table now, that Edward's engagement to Lucy is anything that can't be automatically discarded if he wills it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 25 (click to see context) from:
The third-person narrator states, "When Robert first sought her acquaintance, and privately visited her in Bartlett's Buildings, it was only with the view imputed to him by his brother. He merely meant to persuade her to give up the engagement; and as there could be nothing to overcome but the affection of both, he naturally expected that one or two interviews would settle the matter." This is no longer Edward's conjecture but the objective truth. Robert had no designs of his own on Lucy in the beginning -- that came later. So why did he want "to persuade her to give up the engagement"? Mrs. Ferrars left Robert everything when she disowned Edward purely because of his engagement to Lucy; Edward's engagement was the greatest thing that had ever happened to Robert, so would he try to stop it? He had nothing to gain and everything to lose from talking either of them out of it.
to:
The third-person narrator states, "When Robert first sought her acquaintance, and privately visited her in Bartlett's Buildings, it was only with the view imputed to him by his brother. He merely meant to persuade her to give up the engagement; and as there could be nothing to overcome but the affection of both, he naturally expected that one or two interviews would settle the matter." This is no longer Edward's conjecture but the objective truth. Robert had no designs of his own on Lucy in the beginning -- that came later. So why did he want "to persuade her to give up the engagement"? Mrs. Ferrars left Robert everything when she disowned Edward purely because of his engagement to Lucy; Edward's engagement was the greatest thing that had ever happened to Robert, so why would he try to stop it? He had nothing to gain and everything to lose from talking either of them out of it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[WMG:Why did Robert want to convince Lucy to leave Edward (initially)?]]
The third-person narrator states, "When Robert first sought her acquaintance, and privately visited her in Bartlett's Buildings, it was only with the view imputed to him by his brother. He merely meant to persuade her to give up the engagement; and as there could be nothing to overcome but the affection of both, he naturally expected that one or two interviews would settle the matter." This is no longer Edward's conjecture but the objective truth. Robert had no designs of his own on Lucy in the beginning -- that came later. So why did he want "to persuade her to give up the engagement"? Mrs. Ferrars left Robert everything when she disowned Edward purely because of his engagement to Lucy; Edward's engagement was the greatest thing that had ever happened to Robert, so would he try to stop it? He had nothing to gain and everything to lose from talking either of them out of it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[WMG:What does Marianne's pianoforte look like?]]
I have it in my head that "pianoforte" is the old term for the instrument we've shortened to "piano," although they were smaller back then than the big, black grand pianos you'd find in a wealthy home today. Is the instrument Marianne plays basically just a small, brown-colored version of the instrument we know as a "piano"?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 17,18 (click to see context) from:
I'm the one who added the InformedAttribute entry to the main page, because this honestly ''does'' bother me about the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book and Austen is my favorite author. But she really doesn't give us a whole lot of explanation for what happens between them. Do they spend a lot of time alone together, talking (like Thompson and Grant in the Ang Lee film)? Somehow, without a whole lot of description, it comes to pass that Elinor's in love and everyone is aware that Edward is returning her affections. It's just sort of odd.
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybe we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of HookedUpAfterwards...
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybe we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of HookedUpAfterwards...
to:
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybe we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of
* He seems bland only to overly romantic Marianne who wants somebody more dashing for her beloved sister, but Elinor has simpler tastes. It isn't weird at all that a young man falls in love with intelligent, beautiful and intelligent woman, when he's in company with her. Who were his other companions? His mean and petty sister Fanny, her jerkish husband Henry Dashwood and their small kid. Marianne is as intelligent as Elinor, but their personalities are not compatible. It seems perfectly logical that he would fall for her, and she for him, if she felt that he preferred her.
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Though it should also be recognised that, while duelling was illegal, it was still widely done by the gentry (even the DukeOfWellington, several years later, while he was Prime Minister, had a very public duel over what he considered a slander by an opponent.) The last time a man was tried for murder after a duel was in 1823 (in times when duelling was legal, the case would not have come to court at all); the sentence was suspended, which goes to show that the ''code duello''- at least for gentlemen- was tacitly acknowledged as valid even then. The end of duelling really came when increasing urbanisation caused men of consequence to stop carrying weapons, and the rise of the middle class- and more lawyers- turned people towards suing and associated litigation as a means of settling scores.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 13,14 (click to see context) from:
* That is what that means. Willoughby has effectively unmanned the Colonel by impregnating his ward and besmirched his honor. Brandon, being a man of honor, can not let Willoughby get away with this with out dueling with him on the field of honor and, ostensibly, teaching him a lesson. Even if Brandon were to die or to lose the duel his status as an honorable man, the protector of his household would be restored. Willoughby's actions betray him as a dishonorable man, for an honorable man would never have had sex with a woman he wasn't married or betrothed to to begin with. A duel in the Regency period would be done with pistols and generally they both aimed away. It was the act of the challenge and the meeting that made it valid rather than an actual contest for life. It's also interesting to note that the reason that Elinor is scared or startled by this is not just the implied violence which would worry a well bred lady. It's that dueling was illegal at the time. The Colonel would not have beat up Willoughby because that's not how gentlemen settle matters of honor.
to:
* That is what that means. Willoughby has effectively unmanned the Colonel by impregnating his ward and besmirched his honor. Brandon, being a man of honor, can not let Willoughby get away with this with out without dueling with him on the field of honor and, ostensibly, teaching him a lesson. Even if Brandon were to die or to lose the duel his status as an honorable man, the protector of his household would be restored. Willoughby's actions betray him as a dishonorable man, for an honorable man would never have had sex with a woman he wasn't married or betrothed to to begin with. A duel in the Regency period would be done with pistols and generally they both aimed away. It was the act of the challenge and the meeting that made it valid rather than an actual contest for life. It's also interesting to note that the reason that Elinor is scared or startled by this is not just the implied violence which would worry a well bred lady. It's that dueling was illegal at the time. The Colonel would not have beat beaten up Willoughby because that's not how gentlemen settle matters of honor.
Changed line(s) 17 (click to see context) from:
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybed we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of HookedUpAfterwards...
to:
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybed Maybe we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of HookedUpAfterwards...
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
These are reviews, not headscratchers
Deleted line(s) 15,20 (click to see context) :
[[WMG: Edward being unable to Spit It Out.]]
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austen's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of the films?
* He probably didn't write a letter because it felt cowardly not to tell Elinor to her face - that seems like it would go with his personality - but found that harder than he expected.
* Also, at the time, men and women only wrote to each other if they were family or engaged (Darcy's letter to Elizabeth in Pride & Prejudice was quite irregular); you can see this in Elinor's admission that she will believe Willoughby and Marianne are engaged if she finds that they are corresponding, to which her mother responds "And if you saw them at the altar, you might assume they were going to be married!"
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austen's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of the films?
* He probably didn't write a letter because it felt cowardly not to tell Elinor to her face - that seems like it would go with his personality - but found that harder than he expected.
* Also, at the time, men and women only wrote to each other if they were family or engaged (Darcy's letter to Elizabeth in Pride & Prejudice was quite irregular); you can see this in Elinor's admission that she will believe Willoughby and Marianne are engaged if she finds that they are corresponding, to which her mother responds "And if you saw them at the altar, you might assume they were going to be married!"
Changed line(s) 23,33 (click to see context) from:
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybed we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of HookedUpAfterwards...
[[WMG: Edward's disinheritance]]
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.
* That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
[[WMG: Marianne's ending]]
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.
* "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
* While it would have been much greater to put it in the story outright, it always seemed pretty clear that the Colonel's highly romantic backstory would have won over the highly romantic Marianne without overmuch difficulty, as soon as she'd actually gotten over her first heartbreak.
[[WMG: Edward's disinheritance]]
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.
* That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
[[WMG: Marianne's ending]]
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.
* "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
* While it would have been much greater to put it in the story outright, it always seemed pretty clear that the Colonel's highly romantic backstory would have won over the highly romantic Marianne without overmuch difficulty, as soon as she'd actually gotten over her first heartbreak.
to:
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybed we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of HookedUpAfterwards...
[[WMG: Edward's disinheritance]]
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.
* That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
[[WMG: Marianne's ending]]
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.
* "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
* While it would have been much greater to put it in the story outright, it always seemed pretty clear that the Colonel's highly romantic backstory would have won over the highly romantic Marianne without overmuch difficulty, as soon as she'd actually gotten over her first heartbreak.HookedUpAfterwards...
[[WMG: Edward's disinheritance]]
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.
* That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
[[WMG: Marianne's ending]]
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.
* "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
* While it would have been much greater to put it in the story outright, it always seemed pretty clear that the Colonel's highly romantic backstory would have won over the highly romantic Marianne without overmuch difficulty, as soon as she'd actually gotten over her first heartbreak.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 32 (click to see context) from:
* "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
to:
* "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.MarryForLove.
* While it would have been much greater to put it in the story outright, it always seemed pretty clear that the Colonel's highly romantic backstory would have won over the highly romantic Marianne without overmuch difficulty, as soon as she'd actually gotten over her first heartbreak.
* While it would have been much greater to put it in the story outright, it always seemed pretty clear that the Colonel's highly romantic backstory would have won over the highly romantic Marianne without overmuch difficulty, as soon as she'd actually gotten over her first heartbreak.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 19 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Also, at the time, men and women only wrote to each other if they were family or engaged (Darcy's letter to Elizabeth in Pride & Prejudice was quite irregular); you can see this in Elinor's admission that she will believe Willoughby and Marianne are engaged if she finds that they are corresponding, to which her mother responds "And if you saw them at the altar, you might assume they were going to be married!"
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 18 (click to see context) from:
to:
* He probably didn't write a letter because it felt cowardly not to tell Elinor to her face - that seems like it would go with his personality - but found that harder than he expected.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 26,27 (click to see context) from:
** That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
to:
Changed line(s) 30 (click to see context) from:
** "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 29 (click to see context) from:
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.
to:
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.have.
** "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
** "''she never once thought about any other view to any topic''" This egocentrism is the norm for teenagers; Marianne is only 16. Such egocentrism is eventually outgrown (in normal human mental/emotional development); one of the final paragraphs about Marianne's "extraordinary" fate (to reset her opinions and see her personality change) is completely ironic because nothing is less extraordinary in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. The point of Marianne's illness is not to break her spirit (unlike Louisa's accident in ''{{Persuasion}}'') but to teach her that a lost love isn't worth throwing away your life - which has pleasant feminist implications. Louisa may be punished directly for her liveliness, but Marianne was punished for the very {{wangst}} that annoys you (and me and Elinor). Her liveliness and spirit is exactly what attracts Colonel Brandon to her, in fact; while observing her one evening, he disagrees with Elinor's wish that her sister will sober up as she grows up, and he admires Marianne's defense of Elinor to Mrs. Ferrars that shocks everyone else. Colonel Brandon appreciates the qualities about Marianne that her society and her acquaintance disdain (besides her mother, and that for the wrong reasons). It is too bad that they HookedUpAfterwards and we didn't get to see how their courtship went between the end of the book and their marriage (Austen's own niece felt the same way about ''MansfieldPark''), but WordOfGod states at the end that Marianne did fully love her new husband, so there's no fear that Austen violated her creed of MarryForLove.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 26 (click to see context) from:
** That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
to:
** That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.wrote.
[[WMG: Marianne's ending]]
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.
[[WMG: Marianne's ending]]
Now I never really liked Marianne. Mostly because she reminded me of the worst parts of myself and she never once thought about any other view to any topic (something I almost can't do). She bugged me through the entire story and her reactions always rubbed me the wrong way, happy or sad. But her ending ruined any sweetness from Elinor and Edward finally getting together. The age difference doesn't bother me. Personally I love Jo's ending in LittleWomen because I feel her professor really gets her but I never got that feeling from Colonel Brandon, he just seemed to put her up on a pedestal and leave her there. The entire story seemed to be about breaking Marianne's spirit and life, then marrying her to an old man to prove it. It doesn't help that it's cannon that Marianne didn't love Brandon when they got married. It might work in a different story but in a romance? I want them to be in love when they get married OR I want to see them fall in love over the course of a story. Despite my dislike of Marianne, I still feel like the story is about destroying what positive traits she DID have.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 25 (click to see context) from:
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.
to:
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.amusing.
** That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
** That's explained. Edward's mother cuts off Edward, leaving Robert as sole heir, meaning there's no way to cut his purse strings. He's fully independent and able to do what he likes. Lucy is a very flattering girl and Robert is egotistical, so they work well together. High on his new independence Robert proves he can do as he likes. As Austen wrote.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 21 (click to see context) from:
to:
* After Edward moved into Norland with the John Dashwoods for a few months after Elinor's father died, they spent a lot of time together and are already in love by the time the main events of the novel (the Dashwood women moving to Barton) begin. Maybed we need a Hooked Up Before equivalent of HookedUpAfterwards...
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!
to:
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!it!
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.
* ...Which the narrator comments on. Human hypocrisy and {{Karma Houdini}}s are nothing if not amusing.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 20 (click to see context) from:
I'm the one who added the InformedAttribute entry to the main page, because this honestly ''does'' bother me about the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book and Austen is my favorite author. But she really doesn't give us a whole lot of explanation for what happens between them. Do they spend a lot of time alone together, talking (like Thompson and Grant in the Ang Lee film)? Somehow, without a whole lot of description, it comes to pass that Elinor's in love and everyone is aware that Edward is returning her affections. It's just sort of odd.
to:
I'm the one who added the InformedAttribute entry to the main page, because this honestly ''does'' bother me about the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book and Austen is my favorite author. But she really doesn't give us a whole lot of explanation for what happens between them. Do they spend a lot of time alone together, talking (like Thompson and Grant in the Ang Lee film)? Somehow, without a whole lot of description, it comes to pass that Elinor's in love and everyone is aware that Edward is returning her affections. It's just sort of odd.odd.
[[WMG: Edward's disinheritance]]
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!
[[WMG: Edward's disinheritance]]
I know that Edward was far happier getting to be a vicar but it's kind of ridiculous. Edward gets disinherited for refusing to break his engagement to Lucy who wasn't good enough for him and Robert is the new heir. What does Robert turn around and do? Actually marry the girl Edward got disinherited over with nothing even remotely negative happening to him because of it!
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 16,17 (click to see context) from:
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of the films?
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of the films?
to:
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's Austen's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of thefilms?films?
[[WMG: Why exactly did Elinor fall in love with Edward in the first place?]]
I'm the one who added the InformedAttribute entry to the main page, because this honestly ''does'' bother me about the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book and Austen is my favorite author. But she really doesn't give us a whole lot of explanation for what happens between them. Do they spend a lot of time alone together, talking (like Thompson and Grant in the Ang Lee film)? Somehow, without a whole lot of description, it comes to pass that Elinor's in love and everyone is aware that Edward is returning her affections. It's just sort of odd.
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of the
[[WMG: Why exactly did Elinor fall in love with Edward in the first place?]]
I'm the one who added the InformedAttribute entry to the main page, because this honestly ''does'' bother me about the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book and Austen is my favorite author. But she really doesn't give us a whole lot of explanation for what happens between them. Do they spend a lot of time alone together, talking (like Thompson and Grant in the Ang Lee film)? Somehow, without a whole lot of description, it comes to pass that Elinor's in love and everyone is aware that Edward is returning her affections. It's just sort of odd.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15,16 (click to see context) from:
[[WMG: Edward being unable to Spit It Out]]
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
to:
[[WMG: Edward being unable to Spit It Out]]
Out.]]
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams"IdiotBall"!"IdiotBall"!
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of the films?
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams
* To which specific incident are you referring? And is it in the book or one of the films?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 13 (click to see context) from:
* That is what that means. Willoughby has effectively unmanned the Colonel by impregnating his ward and besmirched his honor. Brandon, being a man of honor, can not let Willoughby get away with this with out dueling with him on the field of honor and, ostensibly, teaching him a lesson. Even if Brandon were to die or to lose the duel his status as an honorable man, the protector of his household would be restored. Willoughby's actions betray him as a dishonorable man, for an honorable man would never have had sex with a woman he wasn't married or betrothed to to begin with. A duel in the Regency period would be done with pistols and generally they both aimed away. It was the act of the challenge and the meeting that made it valid rather than an actual contest for life. It's also interesting to note that the reason that Elinor is scared or startled by this is not just the implied violence which would worry a well bred lady. It's that dueling was illegal at the time. The Colonel would not have beat up Willoughby because that's not how gentlemen settle matters of honor.
to:
* That is what that means. Willoughby has effectively unmanned the Colonel by impregnating his ward and besmirched his honor. Brandon, being a man of honor, can not let Willoughby get away with this with out dueling with him on the field of honor and, ostensibly, teaching him a lesson. Even if Brandon were to die or to lose the duel his status as an honorable man, the protector of his household would be restored. Willoughby's actions betray him as a dishonorable man, for an honorable man would never have had sex with a woman he wasn't married or betrothed to to begin with. A duel in the Regency period would be done with pistols and generally they both aimed away. It was the act of the challenge and the meeting that made it valid rather than an actual contest for life. It's also interesting to note that the reason that Elinor is scared or startled by this is not just the implied violence which would worry a well bred lady. It's that dueling was illegal at the time. The Colonel would not have beat up Willoughby because that's not how gentlemen settle matters of honor.honor.
[[WMG: Edward being unable to Spit It Out]]
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
[[WMG: Edward being unable to Spit It Out]]
Okay, I get it. People kept walking into the room. But he was trying to tell Elinor about the promise to Lucy. This was important information he wanted to convey. A letter could've done it. The book (and Austin's other novels, for that matter) loved using letters for plot exposition. This entire situation just screams "IdiotBall"!
