Trust

Hil, what a thoughtful analysis. I never heard that aspect mentioned before. (You should try it out on your pen pal.) Secrets are intimate, aren't they?

Hilary...I think in both cases they were caught up in the emotion of the moment and their feelings for each other, which they had both tried to fight. In Lizzys case, Darcy happened upon her just as the reality of what Lydia had done to herself and to her family had reached Lizzy. She was distressed before Darcy entered the room and it just spilled out. In Darcy's case, he was appalled that anyone (especially Elizabeth) would think so unkindly of him and even consider that he was so ruthless as to stea away from Wickham the gift left to him by Darcy's own father. Remember that a persons reputation was very important to them. Darcy cared very much what others thought of him (consider the first proposal to Lizzy). I also think both of them, even though hiding their feelings from even themselves for so long, couldn't stand the idea of the other thinking unkindly about each other. Lizzie even says it out loud at one point to Jane "I can not bear to think that he is alive in the world and thinking ill o me." She won't even admit to herself at that point that she loves him. When Lizzy spilled out to Darcy the contents of Janes letter...she realizes that by his knowing he may be lost to her forever "I shall never see him again". So my answer is that I don't think it had anything to do with trusting each other...I think it was pure emotion...and by speaking thru that emotion, trust was earned...because they both respected each other for using the information given to them thru their emotions in a discreet manner. I have many times wondered how Lizzy could have kept all that she knew to herself. She did confide in Jane but she didn't even tell Jane everything (that Darcy had been the one to save Lydia and the Bennet family fro ruin). I would have burst keeping that important tidbit to myself!!!!

]Just as they recognise their similarity of 'not performing to strangers', on some deeper level Darcy and Elizabeth recognise the other's integrity regarding themselves. It turns vulnerability into a chance for blossoming, and for this reason I love it. I agree, I agree! (We should also note the importance Austen places on the ability to keep a confidence. Lydia shows her lack of character when she so readily reveals that Darcy was at the wedding ceremony, which was to be a secret. Elinor, in S&S, keeps Lucy's confidence, even though Lucy means nothing to her. Also, Col. Brandon senses in Elinor her trustworthiness and confides in her.)

Hilary, I absolutely agree with you on the trust issue. In fact, this becomes an important plot point in the novel DARCY'S STORY, but I don't want to divulge any details to those who haven't read. I understand what Linda is saying about circumstance and reputation: that Darcy happens upon Lizzy in the Inne when she's particularly vulnerable; that Darcy feels obligated to defend his good name. However, would Darcy have divulged the news of his sister's near-elopement with Sir William Lucas or Lydia? L kewise, could Lizzie have trusted even Charlotte with her secret of Darcy's proposal? I think these two realize early on that at their core, they are two people who can be trusted with each other's secrets. They both understand that the other has a great deal of personal integrity.

It's interesting that this would be brought up now. Saturday (2/8), our Jane Austen Society talked a little about the confidence issue. It was discussed that in JA novels when a character speaks badly of another one (particularly if it's another family member) you can be assured that this charchter will not meet with a "happy ending". We were discussing Mansfield Park and how Miss Crawford belittles her Uncle and this is the first sign to Fanny and Edmund that Mary is not a very good person (though it tak s Edmund much longer to stick with this idea). I inturn, feel that most all the charcters in MP are this way. I could not get excited about anyone, not even our heroine. If you think about the other novels, this is true in almost all cases. Nothing really harsh has to happen but it usually doesn't bode well for their destiny. The only charcter who isn't like this is Mr. Bennett. Am I missing anyone? I have to agree with Linda. I think JA wanted them to have to trust each other as a plot device. The information was disclosed in the heat of the moment (though they both ask the other to keep it as a confidence or keep quiet as long as possible) and we had to learn with them if the other would be true to the confidence shared. Darcy's Story does cover this. I just read that this weekend: Second half was killer.

I'm not sure if I understand exactly what Linda means when she says that Elizabeth's confiding in Darcy was "pure emotion" rather than trust--even though she says trust arises from the situation. I think Elizabeth confided in him because she trusted his discretion and also because by now she recognized the "good" side of him. The movie has Elizabeth saying, after Lydia's elopement all works out, that she wishes she had never told Darcy. (I don't think that line is in the book.) I have always been trou led by that movie. Elizabeth could never have married Darcy with the true circumstances of Lydia's elopement hidden from him. Their relationship would have to be built on openness and trust--which involves a mutual recognition of the other's integrity. Darcy had already exhibited his reliance on her integrity; she bad to demonstrate her reliance on his.

Oops! I see a mistake in my response! Please, please do not think I was troubled by the movie P&P2! I loved the movie, and I spent the last two nights watching it on A&E. I only meant that I was troubled by that line in the movie!

He confided in her to clear him of abuse toward Wickham. I think it was emotion confidence,because this way Mr. Darcy learns what should have been his responsibility to begin with. He should have spoken of Wickhams true character. She wishes she never told him This JA does too well leaving Lizzie wondering after the inn how Mr. Darcy really feels. I don't know why JA thought she had to leave it that way. I think she could have him be reassuring with out giving his true intentions away. (The idea being if he knew at the time at the inn "his idea" that he would leave for London. Then why not go instantly instead of wasting time?)This is another story). This is why the screenwriter left Lizzie to regret ever telling Mr. Darcy.All due to his reaction at the Inn. I do think to get this point across that Lizzie thinks he no longer wants anything to do with her and because she doesn't want him to think "ill" of her. She was definitely in love with him at this point.JA leaves us in such "turmoil". Myself at this point am about to pull my hair out.

Norma, I think Linda means that he walks in just as she finds out this dreadful news and she cannot help blurting it out. This is natural. Darcy tells Lizzie because his pride forces him to when he is feeling it wounded, probably like at no other time. This is what "pure emotion" meant to me.

] Norma, I think Linda means that he walks in just as she finds out this dreadful news and she cannot help blurting it out. __ I'd agree with this, except Lizzy would not have told just anybody. She's impulsive but collected at the same time, if that is possible?

I think that is possible, and its exactly what I meant, Amy. I know these were emotional crises for them, but they would not have blurted it out to anyone. We are told a lot about Lizzie's regret at Darcy knowing about Lydia, including that line as a thought, Norma in Ch. 50. Grace, I agree about the importance JA places on keeping confidences.

I think that is possible, and its exactly what I meant, Amy. I know these were emotional crises for them, but they would not have blurted it out to anyone. We are told a lot about Lizzie's regret at Darcy knowing about Lydia in Ch. 50. Grace, I agree about the importance JA places on keeping confidences.

[Norma, I think Linda means that he walks in just as she finds out this dreadful news and she cannot help blurting it out. This is natural.] The thing is, I don't think it was natural. For you and me today, yes. But I don't in those times it was natural at all. From what I have read, people were reserved in the extreme. Elizabeth would probably not have told Darcy of Lydia's elopement if they had not already 'had a history'. I have already said something to this effect in the 'Happiest Couple' thread in argument that Elizabeth and Darcy would have been the happiest couple of all JA characters. It starts with Elizabeth's telling Darcy exactly what she thought of him after his first proposal. Now that was NOT natural or normal. (She sure held back on Mr. Collins' proposal!) I think that she was the first human being that Darcy had ever come across who was totally honest with him. He may not have liked her message at irst, but as he said later, it was just. And when he then wrote her the letter afterwards, it was an honest response to her honesty with him, as well as the fact that he didn't want her to believe that he was dishonourable. I don't think that he would have defended himself to just anyone because he would have had to share his secret. The circle is then completed at inn when she has the opportunity to share her secret. Once again, if a stranger had come though that door, she certainly would not have confessed such a disgraceful thing. This sharing of secrets, this honesty, this intimacy is what makes their story so beautiful for their times and even today. They had each found someone they could be total nude with (emotionally). And that is why they were the happiest couple in Austen Valley. And Hilary, your opening was beautifully said.

Yesterday in the drawing room, I complimented Hilary on thinking of the trust issue. She said she'd been noodling on it for a time, ever since we spoke about Darcy's vulnerability some weeks or months ago. I think I'd like to explore another region of vulnerability. Here is an edited chat log (with a discussion of Cadbury's chocolate and Daniel Day Lewis drooling -- led by Cheryl -- extracted); you'll see why bringing it out into the open scares me a little. AMY: I'd still like to talk about another part of vulnerability. SAMAN: Sorry - who's vulnerability? HIL: You mean in realation to our liking for D, Amy, or in another way? AMY: Well, you are getting into vulnerability when you talk about trust. But I mean, the "do we want to mother Darcy," part of vulnerability. SAMAN: Do WE want to mother Darcy? Need you ask? AMY: Why do we like it so when he stammers and fidgets? HIL: Darcy's vulnerability, Saman. Oh I see, Amy. Yeah.... I see what you mean about half wanting to! CHERYL: ]Why do we like it so when he stammers and fidgets? it shows that he isn;t in as complete control as he likes to think, and we don;t want men who are too sure of themselves! HIL: Why do we like it fidgets etc....still think its because it indicates uncertainty, a chink in the armour. AMY: From:Amy(New Msg) at 2/10/97 3:01 PM ] ]Why do we like it so when he stammers and fidgets? it shows that he isn;t in as complete control as he likes to think, and we don;t want men who are too sure of themselves! __ So, it may not have anything -- or much -- to do with wanting to mother. But still, liking somebody not sure of himself, what does that say about us? SAMAN: I definitely identify with the vulnerability thing. When he stammers and fidgets I think "poor thing", which I guess means that I want to mother him. Maybe that's why Lizzy is so good for him - she possibly has the same initial reaction, but she doesn't (or can't) intervene to make him more at ease. CHERYL: ]But still, liking somebody not sure of himself, what does that say about us? men who are too sure of themselves are the ones who are arrogant, don't give your opinion as much weight as theirs. and who wants that? SAMAN: But there's something very dangerous about liking someone because of their vulnerability. HIL: Exacactly, Amy.. But still, liking somebody not sure of himself, what does that say about us? I think its the fact that no-one is so sure of themselves, and if you recognise that in yourself its good, and if you can see it in someone who is accomplished in many ways, it allows you to feel that they are as human/flawed as yourself. Puts you as equals in some way. CHERYL: ]But there's something very dangerous about liking someone because of their vulnerability. yes it is a fine line...you don't want someone who is wishy-washy or too needy... AMY: men who are too sure of themselves are the ones who are arrogant, don't give your opinion as much weight as theirs. and who wants that? ____ But can't their be respect and kindness and charity within a guy who is sure of himself. Does he have to feel somewhat bad about himself to make us like him or want him? SAMAN: Thanks Hil - that's what I was getting at too. If you're attracted to someone because they're vulnerable, chances are you'll try to change them. THey might be perfectly happy with (or oblivious to) their vulnerability, so that it's not a good idea to try and make them less vulnerable. CAROLYN: ]I think its the fact that no-one is so sure of themselves, and if you recognise that in yourself its good, and if you can see it in someone who is accomplished in many ways, it allows you to feel that they are as human/flawed as yourself. Puts you as equals in some way. Very good, Hilary, I was thinking along the same lines, but could not put it as elequantly as you did. CHERYL: yeah, Amy--what Hil said! ;-) HIL: 'But can't their be respect and kindness and charity within a guy who is sure of himself' Yes, I think so. AMY: yeah, Amy--what Hil said! ;-) __ She does have a nice way of saying what we would like to say, doesn't she? CHERYL: From:Cheryl(New Msg) at 2/10/97 3:15 PM ]She does have a nice way of saying what we would like to say, doesn't she? yep! she's so damn articulate! ;-) (oh sorry--there's that growing uop thing again...:-( ) HIL: Cheryl, we wouldn't want you any other way! (Then I neglected to capture the part about how Cheryl can be an analytical as anybody, she just gets distracted -- oh look... --- ! ! -- .. a bird!)

Norma and Amy....remember that Lizzy didn't even tell Jane everything...she didn't tell her till later about who was the benefactor that got the Bennets out of Lydias mess....if she wouldn't even release a confidence to her only confident..Jane...she would have never told Darcy...whom she was still holding at arms length..and whom she did not want to have know anything that may have put herself or her family in a negative light in Darcys eyes. Look how she reacted to their meeting at Pemberley...she was ghast at what he might think of her then...why would she in just two days time...tell him the most devastating thing that had happened to her and her family, Ever! It had to be because it was the heat of the moment..that he happened into the situation at that time...I do believe that because of her "being assured of his secrecy" that trust is earned...just as it is when Darcy writes his letter telling of the situation with Wickham and his sister. To take it even further...this trust that develops due to these circumstances most likely builds to the love that they are finely able to unveil when they take that walk down the lane that leads to their future together.

Did I say anything about Lizzy's intimacy with Jane? I don't remember saying anything about that. It is one of the impressions I try to guard against, having watched the film so many times and having become so married to Davies interpretation. Austen never meants for Jane to serve as confindante. She even says that Charlotte was closer to Lizzy. Davies used the bedroom scenes as a way to let us know what Lizzy was thinking. It works. I love those scenes. But she was not so close to Jane.

It's doubly sad then, that when Charlotte marries Mr. Collins, Lizzie loses her best friend & confidante (in fact, confiding to Charlotte as Mrs. Collins could actually be HARMFUL to Lizzie where Mr. Darcy is concerned, considering the Lady C. connection). Having read all of the opinions above, I just can't believe that Darcy would reveal "a scandal - involving his own sister even!" if he didn't implicitly trust Lizzie to the core. Of course, he wanted to clear himself, but if he didn't feel she would r n around Meryton crowing the news like Lydia, could he ever have revealed the intimate details of the near-affair between Georgiana and Wickham? Likewise, we know that Lizzy is highly distraut at the Inne when Darcy stumbles upon her. However, she could merely have said that "ugent business calls us home" -- Period. The age was reserved enough to make this perfectly acceptable -- no further revelation or explanation necessary. I very much subscribe to Sharon's opinion above: these two DO trust each o her. I think Lizzie understands that Darcy is a man to be trusted even when enmeshed in her dislike of him. And she validates his opinion of her by proving the soul of discretion with his secret.

]AMY: re: men who are too sure of themselves are the ones who are arrogant, ]don't give your opinion as much weight as theirs. and who wants that? ]_________ ]But can't their be respect and kindness and charity within a guy who is sure of ]himself. Does he have to feel somewhat bad about himself to make us like him or ]want him? Don't believe lack of thrust or simple vulnerability which can be experience as a man (or women) acknowledging being human and not always right, allowing oneself to wonder of its justness of decision and calculations is "to feel bad about oneself". This can be a positive experience allowing to grow as a person and not necessarely a repressive emotions to succomb to. ]Hil : I think its the fact that no-one is so sure of themselves, and if you ]recognise that in yourself its good, and if you can see it in someone who is ]accomplished in many ways, it allows you to feel that they are as human/flawed ]as yourself. Puts you as equals in some way. Well said, Hilary

I think it is important to differentiate between vulnerability and neediness. Those of us who mother tend (or tended at one time) to be attracted to needy men (a generalization, I admit). I think that the reasons for this are various and, in each case, are bound up with the myriad events that have made us who we are. I think I understand why this subject scares you, Amy. But vulnerability is not neediness. It is a part of honesty. We are all vulnerable in some way and, if we trust, we can reveal that vulnerability to another. When your cat rolls over on his back and exposes that soft belly to your touch, it is because he trusts that you will not take that opportunity to rip it open. When I expose my inner self, it is much the same. I trust that the person to whom I reveal this vulnerable area will not rip open my psyche. So, from my perspective, the admission vulnerability is not a revelation of weakness but of trust.

O.K., these are all great arguments with validity for all sides, but now the big question: Why does Darcy initially trust Lizzie? Does she really give him any reason to trust her? Think of all the scenes where he catches her in a whispered/private conversation (with Charlotte at the ball and Lucas Lodge). How about her frankness? Wouldn't that put him off in a time of reserve? When we clear this up we can ask the other question: Why Lizzie trusts Darcy, which I think is easier to answer.

] We are all vulnerable in some way and, if we trust, we can reveal that vulnerability to another. When your cat rolls over on his back and exposes that soft belly to your touch, it is because he trusts that you will not take that opportunity to rip it open. __ I like the way you explain this, Myretta. It could be that since I still have trouble allowing myself to be vulnerable, afraid my trust will be betrayed, that I fear the feeling of attraction to the vulnerability of others? That probably doen't make any sense to anybody but a fellow current or former co-dep.

Makes a LOT of sense

It could be that since I still have trouble allowing myself to be vulnerable, afraid my trust will be betrayed, that I fear the feeling of attraction to the vulnerability of others? That probably doen't make any sense to anybody but a fellow current or former co-dep. ____________ I think that history of co-dependency also makes us afraid that we can't distinguish vulnerability from neediness. And what a disaster that attraction is!

Dependency and neediness -- these are both very human qualities, are they not? The extremes, constant need for attention or affection or reassurance, for example, are the danger. People with an extreme neediness can become takers who never return your attention or affection or reassurances. On the other hand, people who are self-sufficient in the extreme do not appear to need us in any way, and what is attractive about that? I am talking about people who go beyond self confidence to arrogance and conceit, who know that nobody else could possibly do/know better. I feel that Darcy initially appears almost too self-sufficient (and maybe too self-satisfied), but his attraction to Elizabeth informs him of his need for her affection (and approval). He then allows his vulnerability to be visible -- to himself and to Elizabeth.

To pick up the question of whether "we" want to mother Darcy, I can only speak for myself -- NO. I have never had that tendency, nor have I played that part in any relationship (I have no children, and I am more of a friend to my nieces & nephews). So, I would say that Darcy's fidgets, etc. are attractive to me because they show his human side, and I find him quite an attractive human (for a literary character!).

It does make sense to me, Amy. Myretta, you say exactly what I was getting at with vulnerability. And likewise Amy2 and Sharon re theP&P trust. Linda, as to why Darcy should trust Lizzie, its an interesting question. He has been watching her and how she deals with people and behaves. But my main response would be: Don't you ever meet people and just know that you are on the same wavelength, and can trust them? Of course we can turn out wrong, and Darcy being wrong would be a whole new story, but he wasn't.

Thank you Myretta and Kathleen for making understandable what I wanted to say. Upon reading my post not even I understands what it means.

Sorry Hilary, but I guess I need something a little more tangible here. What would JA have us believe was the reason Darcy trusted her? Amy? By the way, I like my guys a little cocky (I think it's from growing up in a locker room). As long as their area of confidence doesn't opress me. I don't feel there is such thing as 100% confidence, it's an act, but I do believe they can feel confident in certain areas of their life i.e. sports, career, appearance (hmmm), talents, etc.. I know men like this. In some cases I think it's sexy.

Sharon, You expressed what I was trying to say, but you said it much better. Yes, Lizzy did blurt out the info to Darcy, but she would never have told just anybody--I can't think of any other character in the book she would have been so open with. People of the age were extremely reserved and controlled--like Elinor in S&S also. Linda, remember than when Lizzy first meets Darcy at Pemberly she is extremely embarrassed at what he might think of her by finding her there. However, his treatment of her co vinces her that he is still in love with her--remember the night when she works through it all and is convinced that "ardent love" explains friendly actions toward her and the Gardiners. Only because she is convinced of his love does she tell him the news of Lydia's elopement. Of course, she can't know what he will do with the information. Thanks to all of you who looked up the passage in the book. I find the relationship between Jane and Elizabeth interesting. I think Jane confides more in Elizabeth than the other way around. That seems to imply that Elizabeth does not trust Jane completely. Elizabeth is also very proud, of course, and if Darcy would not come back, she could not bear to be pitied as Jane had been pitied after the Bingley affair. I liked the point someone made that Elizabeth certainly did not tell Collins what she thought of him when he made his proposal. Only with Darcy is she totally honest--she is honest again in the inn in telling him about Lydia.

I just want to congratulate all the posters above. I've thoroughly enjoyed this whole topic, although I have nothing new or informative to add. I agree with so much of the above that it's just nice to read! I love listening in on such an intelligent conversation!!;-)

Dina, we might have to reconcile ourselves to disagree. I think JA used and enjoyed intangibility, and I certainly thrive on it.

Good point! I don't know if you read Darcy's Story, but I felt like the first half of the book didn't answer this question either. I am into additional insite when it comes to this book. That's why the constant viewings, the reading of sequels etc. Sometimes I think my whole life is a veritable intangible.

[...it's sad when Charlotte marries Mr. Collins, Lizzie loses her best friend & confidante ] Yes, Amy, and this kind of contributes to her part in the intimacey/trust which grows between her and Darcy. She loses respect in Charlotte's judgement to some degree and although they are still friends, it will never be the same between them. While on the other hand, she starts to see Darcy with new eyes and her respect for him grows. [ Why does Darcy initially trust Lizzie? Does she really give him any reason to trust her?] Dina, as I said, initially, she was totally honest with him about what she thought of him, and that was a new experience for him. She's a straight shooter. But he didn't really need for her to prove herself. He was drawn to her, wanted to believe she could be discrete, and on some level he was reaching out to her via the letter. [I think Jane confides more in Elizabeth than the other way around. That seems to imply that Elizabeth does not trust Jane completely.] Norma, it may not be trust that is missing here. I could be that Jane just does not see the world the way Elizabeth does and Elizabeth knows that. Jane may just not be able to understand Elizabeth and one of the things we seek when we trust and confide is understanding - and not for someone to agree, but just know where we are coming from. Look at the difference in the conversation of Lydia's elopement between Darcy and Elizabeth and Jane and Elizabeth. Darcy and Elizabeth jive very well. "You know him to well to doubt the rest." But then with Jane - forget about it. Jane still did not believe Wickham capable of 'such an attempt'.

And what about this, girls: Does Darcy even propose again? Did he even directly ask her? Or did they each just take it as a given since his sentiments and wishes had NOT changed and hers HAD. Think about it. If this is a marriage proposal, " You are to generous to trifle with me. If your feelings are still what they were last April tell me so at once. My affections and wishes are unchanged; but one word from you will silence me on this subject forever."; and her acceptance is to respond that her feelings had changed, then these two HAD to be pretty damn connected if each were clear on the point. What do you think, Hil?

"but one word from you will silence me on this subject forever" I think this line contains the implication of a proposal. A man only gets two chances to ask (unless he's Henry Crawford), this then is his second and last.

Sharon - I have to agree with Ann that his sentiments are a proposal. If he had said that to me, I would have thought it was a proposal. And the finality to the statement "but one word from you will silence me on this subject forever," it is similar to Wentworth says one look from you and I will enter your father's house tonight or never. I know I love Darcy/CF's stuttering and stammering because to me it shows how Lizzy has totally unnerved him. He has no control over himself in her presence. As has been posted, extreme dependency is bad but seeing a man so much in control of himself lose it is great! Sure its gushy, romantic stuff but seeing someone react in a way that corresponds to the butterflies and lightheadedness you feel when you are infaturated or in love is wonderful. BTW, this is a great topic; thanks for your insight Hilary and everyone else who has posted.

I do not see the self-revelations of Darcy and Elizabeth to one another as much a matter of deep instinctive trust as a matter of pride - especially on Darcy's part. At the moment of his deep personal revelation, he has yet to recognize that his own pride is "excessive" and has not begun the change that is later to come following self-reflection stimulated by Lizzie's criticisms. In the novel after the second proposal he asks that Lizzie destroy the letter which was written in bitterness and anger. His main motives at the time were that the truth be known and that he not be though ill of unjustly. He places a high value on truth - disguise of every sort is his abhorrence. For this reason, too, he can not find any fault in his separation of Bingley from Jane. He believed his actions to be honorable and based on fact. Of course it is true that both Darcy and Elizabeth have characters which are fundamentally trustworthy, and neither had any reason to fear that a confidence would be broken by the other. When Lizzie receives the news about Lydia and Wickham, and as fate would have it, immediately encounters the one person in the world with whom she can speak regarding Wickham's duplicity, the one whom she knows has cause to understand just how devastating this news really is, she is far too upset to give a thought to what such a revelation might mean to any hopes that she might later be entertaining regarding the possibility of Darcy's renewing his addresses to her. She knows that he, among all ot ers, will understand what she is feeling, and that he will respect her confidence, and in the emotion of the moment, reveals all. She does not, however, trust him enough to believe that he could possibly have a good enough opinion of her to overcome the "pollution" of having Wickham as a brother-in-law. And she, too, has her pride. During the ensuing weeks in which the hasty wedding makes it possible that the scandal will not become universally known, she begins to regret ever having told Darcy anything about it. Even if she is never to see Darcy again, she does not want to be thought ill of. Davies condenses many pages of Lizzie's state of inner turmoil into a single line which she speaks to Jane, "I shall probably never see him again, [but] I cannot bear to think he is alive in the world and thinking ill of me." And in looking back, this is exactly what Darcy was feeling at the time that he had made his own unpleasant secret known. I shall probably never see her again, [but] I cannot bear to think she is alive in the world and thinking ill of me."

Joan, I love the way you connected the line Elizabeth speaks: "I can't bear to think that he is alive in the world and thinking ill of me" to Darcy's he same sentiment when he is writing his letter. Since they both trusted the other as a person of the greatest integrity (Darcy first, then Elizabeth later), you are right in that both would want to be understood by the other as a person of integrity himself. In response to the second proposal, I think it is implicit in the words "my affections and wishes are unchanged"--his wish was to marry Elizabeth. I also agree with those who commented that Darcy seems too self-sufficient at first. I think he was. Part of his humbling was recognizing his need for another person to complete his happiness. He becomes vulnerable by recognizing his need for intimacy.

Okay, everybody.You are teaching me something. So vulnerable isn't all bad. That's quite a concept for me.

Amy, I would say that human relationships are not even possible unless there's some vulnerability displayed on both sides. We have to open ourselves up enough to get hurt perhaps, but also to let the other person in. Now I have known desperately needy people who are looking to be "rescued," but that's an extreme example. It kind of comes down to the: "Better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all" mantra. If Darcy hadn't allowed himself to be at least somewhat vulnerable, he never wou d have proposed to Lizzy in the first place! Likewise, her vulnerability at the Inne when she is emotionally distraught & crying only _increases_ Darcy's attraction to her. As far as the trust issue is concerned, what did Lizzy do to deserve Darcy's before he writes his letter? She was utterly open to him about her opinion of the Collins' marriage, and thus displays her good sense. From their parrys at Netherfield (her stay, and at the ball) he sees she is a witty, intelligent person -- not frivolous r silly like her younger sisters. She also obviously cares deeply about her sister Jane as she needles him continually with this at Rosings. She has an insight into character -- she tries to understand his at the ball, and shows that she DOES understand him during the piano scene at Rosings. So if you put this all together, he realizes he's dealing with a smart woman possessive of extraordinary aplomb and integrity.

I think you have helped me answer my own question: Lizzie is honest but she is also mature. She even states at one point to her Aunt Gardiner (I think) that "we may have all been misled about Mr. Wickham" That is all she need say regarding him without divulging specific information. I think when she showed her concern for "a most beloved sister" he knows that she will keep his secret about his "most beloved sister". What do you think JA would make of all this analyzation? This has been very insightful.

Amy, Re: response #16....sorry! I guess when I think of P&P...I think more of the movie than of the novel....

] I guess when I think of P&P...I think more of the movie than of the novel.... __ Me too, Linda. I have to catch myself.

Dina, (#32) I'm sorry, haven't read Darcy's Story, so can't comment on that. '. It could be that Jane just does not see the world the way Elizabeth does and Elizabeth knows that. Jane may just not be able to understand Elizabeth and one of the things we seek when we trust and confide is understanding - and not for someone to agree, but just know where we are coming from. ' I think this is right. About the proposal: I absolutely agree with you, Sharon. I love that intangibility about the proposal. I don't think there is any doubt that is a proposal, but as others have said, it is implicit instead of stated directly. I too think they are 'pretty damn connected.' And even if they did talk about it more directly - Elizabeth recieved 'with gratitude and pleasure, his present assurances'- JA thinks we don't need to know in detail. Joan, I agree that pride has a lot to do with how they both react, but I also feel there is that deeper level of trust going on as well. BTW I really like your connection here: '." And in looking back, this is exactly what Darcy was feeling at the time that he had made his own unpleasant secret known. I shall probably never see her again, [but] I cannot bear to think she is alive in the world and thinking ill of me." I also like your connection, Dina: 'I think when she showed her concern for "a most beloved sister" he knows that she will keep his secret about his "most beloved sister". And lastly to Karen, 'seeing a man so much in control of himself lose it is great! Sure its gushy, romantic stuff but seeing someone react in a way that corresponds to the butterflies and lightheadedness you feel when you are infatuated or in love is wonderful.' I think the stammers and figets are the outward sign of the inner butterflies and lightheadedness. We all (men and women) get them all.

Amy and Linda - I know Davies uses creative license with some scenes with Lizzy and Jane but they were close. True they may not be as close as Lizzy and Charlotte (until Mr. Collins) but I almost got the impression some of these posts were implying Jane and Lizzy did not have a close relationship.

Dina, that's a very astute connection I didn't make when I was thinking about Lizzy caring so much for Jane. I guess we can say that Lizzie conducted herself so honorably in all of her other relationships, Darcy figured she would continue to do so with their own.

In response to the second proposal, I think it is implicit in the words "my affections and wishes are unchanged"--his wish was to marry Elizabeth. This was my impression also. During the first proposal, he first says that she must allow him to tell her how ardently he admires and loves her ("my affections), then he asks her to end his suffering and consent to become his wife (his "wish"). I took his comments during the second proposal to mean that both of these remained unchanged

Amy: So vulnerable isn't all bad. That's quite a concept for me. Almost no quality (except, perhaps "evil"?) is all bad - but both extremes on any continuum are almost always "bad." Both total invulnerability and total vulnerability are undesirable character traits. One renders us inhuman and the other, a perpetual victim. In order to be accessible to others, to be able to form viable relationships with others, we must be willing to open ourselves up to a certain amount of vulnerability (and trust), but we must also have the strength of "character" to avoid becoming so vulnerable to everything tiny thing that life hands us that we become incapacitated and unable to function.

With regard to the second proposal, I think in those days that if a man declared his love for a woman then it was a proposal. In the first proposal the only reason Darcy said at the end of his speech if Elizabeth would do him the honor of becoming his wife, was so the audience at home would know he was proposing. But, in the second proposal Davis just hopes we realize that Darcy is proposing again. Willoughby never said he loved Marianne in Sense and Sensibility because if he did it meant he proposed.

Nice to see you back, Irene. How have you been?

Irene, good point about Willoughby! In order to be accessible to others, to be able to form viable relationships with others, we must be willing to open ourselves up to a certain amount of vulnerability (and trust), but we must also have the strength of "character" to avoid becoming so vulnerable to everything tiny thing that life hands us that we become incapacitated and unable to function. So how do we know where to draw the line? Where does discretion end and avarice begin? (Was that about Wickham or Darcy?) I could write a book about this and I have never been married/divorced. I am more the "don't-trust-enough-school" rather than a co-dependent. I am tired of getting hurt. It takes me 4- 5 years to psych myself up to get into more than just a casual relationship again (which I am, ironically, in the process of doing now). How can we end up as lucky as Lizzie? Maybe the fact that e even consider it means we realize there might be a bad ending. Grrrr!!!. I get so frustrated, I guess I think too much :-)

Dina: So how do we know where to draw the line? This is one of the major mysteries of life, is it not? (This and "why were we put here anyway?") And also the grist from which so much of great literature and other art forms are made. It is a topic which never ceases to fasacinate - probably because the answer is different for every individual. There is no magic formula to be had. Lizzie ends up lucky because her creator chose to have her be so, and as author had the power to make it so - though in real life it might well have been otherwise. Our creator has chosen to let us work it out for ourselves. And some of us do think too much! :-)

[I think in those days that if a man declared his love for a woman then it was a proposal.] Good point.-

spring won't accept this in one hit - I'm going to try it as 2 messages I've been reading this thread with great interest, but have been too busy to paticipate in the discussion. Today things are quieter and I can't resist the temptation to join in; the discussion has been complex, I can't address my comments as answers to any particular one of the earlier posts, so I'll just jump in. For me trust resonates and is very much tied up with love. I too have known people whom I liked and trusted almost at sight; some are still close friends but with others my first impression turned out to be wrong (much like love at first sight, at least as I've experienced it). Also I tend to trust the people I love; I can't imagine liking or loving an adult I couldn't trust, although there are people in whose integrity I trust but whom I cannot really like. For me, in the first heady, euphoric days of being in love, when one may not really know the beloved all that well but believes them possessed of all virtues, trusting the belvoed is part of being in love. I think Darcy trusts Elizabeth because he loves her. So far as we know he hasn't had a chance to assess her trustworthiness - all that he can really know is that her manners are good and she is pretty and witty and clever, but he is in love with her and can't bear to have her misjudge him and takes her trustworthiness on faith. I think the case is a little different with Elizabeth's confiding in Darcy. The letter Darcy wrote to her, and the visits to Pemberly have shown her that he is responsible, reliable, and she knows of his care for his sister and other dependents. Furthermore Elizabeth has just found out about Lydia, has no hope of concealing her distress and tells Darcy in the 'heat of the moment' when she might not have done so if he had arrived after she had spoken with the Gardiners. I think Elizabeth is begining to e in love with Darcy at this point, but she has more 'rational' grounds for trusting and loving Darcy at this point than he did to love and trust her. In fact JA specifically tells us that Lizzy is forming an attachment in 'a less interesting manner'.

part the second With regard to vulnerability, I find it attractive because of the (usually) implied trust - my maternal instinct is deficient, I rarely feel an urge to protect others, and almost never adults unless they're sick. Mostly if someone lets you see their weaknesses it's because they like and trust you, although occaisionallyit's because their distress is such that the facade cannot be maintained. When Darcy runs into Lizzy at Pemberly I think the latter case holds; I think he'd prefer to maintain the facade at that point, but Lizzy disturbs him so, and he had no warning. I find it cute for Lizzy's sake; if someone makes you uncomfortable it's nice to know they're not indifferent to you, and in this case we have reason to suspect it's because he's still in love with Lizzy. I find constancy in love attractive, when the beloved is worthy. Generally I distrust people who always maintain an unruffled facade, for much the same reasons as Anne Elliot; if I never see any burst of feeling, any sign of anger or delight, I don't feel I know the person at all, and I tend to wonder what it is they are concealing behind the mask. (I realise it may just be shyness, but on prolonged aquaitance such extreme reserve still makes me uneasey).

[I think Darcy trusts Elizabeth because he loves her. .... JA specifically tells us that Lizzy is forming an attachment in 'a less interesting manner.] Right on point, Anna. I don't think Darcy thought twice about trusting her. And it is true that everyone comes to Love and Trust in different ways. I think Elizabeth, realizing that the way she came to love him was this gradual process as she came to know him, was interested in HOW differently he came to love her. She knew he could not have known her at first as he then does. Even in his answer to her," I cannot fix on the hour, or the spot, or the words, or the look,...', he just DID.

Just as there are differences in degrees of vulnerability , there are differences in levels of trust which we accord to others. I would not hesitate to tell my closest friend the most intimate family detail; I trust her not to tell anyone else. While I might trust a colleague with information about a problem student, I would not be likely to tell him/her about my family problems. On the Spring here we share a lot, even though we do not know each other in the sense of meeting face to face. And, I trust everyone enough to lend out a video tape to some of you, as one of you has trusted me enough to let me borrow "Darcy's Story." I think we all make mistakes in trusting/not trusting certain people, but maybe we learn from these mistakes. Elizabeth made a mistake in trusting Wickham -- she believed he was telling the truth, and she assumed (I think) that he would not repeat anything she said. She was wrong, at least about believing him. But there were others she did not trust (at least as far as their motives), such as Miss Bingley when she flamed Wickham to Lizzy. While Elizabeth was correct in assessing Miss B's motives, she was wrong about the information given. I continue to try to learn from each new relationship, no matter what level of trust is required. I do not want to stop trusting, or what's the point of living in a society. I do want to make informed decisions, however, so maybe I try to decide with less emotion -- difficult at times, I know, but necessary perhaps. Just as vulnerability can be attractive, so can having someone trust you. It is a sign of great respect and affection to be trusted -- to keep a secret, to listen with an open mind, to be there as a friend when needed. So, Darcy trusting Elizabeth to keep his secret is incredibly gratifying, and attractive -- it shows how highly he thinks of her that he would risk his sister's reputation in order to explain himself to her.

I continue to try to learn from each new relationship, no matter what level of trust is required. I do not want to stop trusting, or what's the point of living in a society. I do want to make informed decisions, however, so maybe I try to decide with less emotion -- difficult at times, I know, but necessary perhaps. A very healthy and growth-oriented way to live, Kathleen! I applaud you.

Kathleen the Elder: That's a very cogent analysis, and I agree with every point. However, I would say in response to some of the above that Darcy trusts Lizzy _not merely because_ he loves her; she has proven to him through her words and actions that she is: 1) Intelligent and discerning in her opinions 2) Capable of forming and holding onto deep attachments, as with Jane & Charlotte 3) Ethical and not obsequious, as when they have their debate at Netherfield. His attraction and love for her of course increases his trust, but I think that she has, albeit unconsciously, inspired it just by being herself.

There are times when we all have a bad-luck-streak in relationships (with men and women) so we tend to get into that comfort zone where we don't make efforts with new people - causing us to possibly miss out on some great relationships. A comfort zone means no trust, which means, as Anna says, no growth. What is the point of life if not to grow (and learn)? I think as adults we all know this, but at times, it is easier said than done. In a way, that is why we gravitate to these Austen books. People who hazzard to trust, have success. Lizzie and Darcy trust and are then "blessed" for their efforts. Maybe it's not just the romance that is attractive, it's the taking of a chance, trusting, and being rewarded.

Anna, I agree that trust is part of love, and being in love. I think when you say D 'takes her trustworthiness on faith', and E comes to love in 'a less interesting manner', you are saying much the same as I was when I talked about their conscious relationship. But I must still agree with Amy2: 'His attraction and love for her of course increases his trust, but I think that she has, albeit unconsciously, inspired it just by being herself.' Kathleen said 'Just as vulnerability can be attractive, so can having someone trust you. It is a sign of great respect and affection to be trusted -- to keep a secret, to listen with an open mind, to be there as a friend when needed' I agree. I also think that since sexuality has as much to do with an attraction of minds as it does to attraction of bodies, that the offer of trust or vulnerability can enhance sexual attraction. And to Dina: 'In a way, that is why we gravitate to these Austen books. People who hazzard to trust, have success. Lizzie and Darcy trust and are then "blessed" for their efforts. Maybe it's not just the romance that is attractive, it's the taking of a chance, trusting, and being rewarded.' It is certainly this that continues my interest, except I would say that the importance is on the struggle to take the chance, to trust, to not give up on tackling the hard issues, whether you get rewarded or not. Both D and E do not know they will get rewarded, but they are driven to do what they think is right. But of course it is delicious for us that JA allows their trust to be rewarded! (I think my very first post was about this!)

I think what you folks have been discussing is: Does Darcy trust her because he loves her? or does he love her because he trusts her?--or both? These both seem to go hand in hand, each time trust is increased the ratchet of love moves up another notch, and every time love is increased the ratchet of trust moves up a notch.

Ann, that's a very wise remark. I couldn't agree more. Trust and love MUST GO hand-in-hand, if you don't want to head for the rocks in a relationship.

Going back to that chat room conversation: 'But can't their be respect and kindness and charity within a guy who is sure of himself'? The more I think about this, the more I think that that you are more likely to get that from guys who are (relatively - not arrogantly) sure of themselves. Confidence, self-acceptance, and being not too threatened yourself, usually give more capacity to accept others with respect, kindness, and charity, because you are not too worried about your own resilience.

] Confidence, self-acceptance, and being not too threatened yourself, usually give more capacity to accept others with respect, kindness, and charity, because you are not too worried about your own resilience. __ Right. And being secure about -- forgive the pop psych talk -- one's personal power insures against the temptation to use over power over another.

I agree. The more messed up a person is, the less likely they're going to be able to have a successful relationship.

I have just discovered this thread and read with great interest all the comments posted here. I could not help but post my own rreaction, although I 'm sure someone has already expressed the same and much more eloquently than I can possibly do. Here we are discussing characters from a 200-year-old novel as though they were our friends, family, and acquaintances. For many of us, I'm sure, Elizabeth and Darcy have been part of our daily lives for over a year. For an author to have created such livin characters, with such nuances of personality, and for us to discover new and different facets of those characters and personalities (after all these months of dissecting!) and to find a new source of relevance to our own lives ... this to me, as a wannabe and frustrated writer and incurable ropmantic, is absolutely mind-boggling. Thank you, Jane Austen.

She had some magic, didn't she, Genie?

The enduring quality of Austen's work truly is amazing. I wonder what other writer has inspired so much devotion (maybe Shakespeare)? It's true -- in my daily life, I can always point to people & say, "There's Mr. Collins! There goes Lady Catherine!" The universality of JA's characters endures even after 200 years.

Amy2 - Oh yes! In terms of universality, she's right up there. I've always thought that she and Chaucer shared the unique ability to reveal characters that are instantly recognizable, without being cariacatured "types." And they (JA and Chaucer) share a sense of humor about their characters as well, which helps me enormously when I encounter these folks in real life.....

Amy2, Oh, dear! Yes, one does find Mr. Collinses and Lady Catherines in daily life, but I hope you find some Darcys, Elizabeths, and Mr. Bingleys, too! Jane

In the film industry, I run into a great deal of Lady C's & Mr. Collinses, Alas!

A little gem (amidst a treasure trove) from 'Middlemarch': 'He distrusted her affection; and what loneliness is more lonely than distrust?

Hilary -- that is beautiful. Good writing shows, does it not, in the ability to use just the right word in the best way. Would Darcy have completely trusted Elizabeth's affection if she had accepted his first proposal? At some future time, when the physical attraction was not so strong, would he have wondered whether she married him for his money/position etc.? If so, the distrust could have caused intense loneliness.

I agree about the right words, Kathleen. The other is too hypothetical! But I know what you mean. 'The Look' scene, both in book and on film is all bound up with mutual love and trust, too, sandwiched neatly in between the two letter scenes. Lizzy is showing him that not only is his secret safe, but that she can be trusted to actively help protect his sister.

Oh, yes, Hilary. The first part of the look is almost like saying "this is too good to be true." Elizabeth is beautiful, but he sees that she is so much more. She is kind to Georgiana (encouraging G. to perform) as well as protective of her feelings and reputation. Elizabeth, much as she clearly resents Miss Bingley's comments, does not retaliate even though she could probably more than hold her own in a battle of wits. She acts in the best interest of the people who are becoming important to her. I love the description of Darcy's LOOK in the novel. "While she [Elizabeth] spoke, an involuntary glance shewed her Darcy with an heightened complexion, earnestly looking at her . . . . Elizabeth's collected behaviour, however, soon quieted his emotion; . . . and the very circumstance which had been designed to turn his thoughts from Elizabeth, seemed to have fixed them on her more, and more cheerfully."

Sigh.

Kathleen writes: I love the description of Darcy's LOOK in the novel. "While she [Elizabeth] spoke, an involuntary glance shewed her Darcy with an heightened complexion, earnestly looking at her . . . . Elizabeth's collected behaviour, however, soon quieted his emotion; . . . and the very circumstance which had been designed to turn his thoughts from Elizabeth, seemed to have fixed them on her more, and more cheerfully." He was quieted. In the film, he looked relieved. Lizzy played hero! She rescued Georgiana. How nice it can be to be around strong women sometimes, he might have been thinking. How nice to be able of offload the hero duties.

If Elizabeth had accepted Darcy after his first proposal. . .she never would have done do unless she were in love with him, and in their future marriage, I'm sure he could pick that up. As far as Lizzy rescuing Georgiana: I've often wondered why she didn't let Miss Bingly have it when she goes off about Wickham; but you're right, she was more concerned with trying to protect Georgiana. In fact, I've noticed that Lizzy rarely responds directly to Caroline's frontal attacks. She either lets them pass, or makes some concilatory remark. Great forebearance!

'How nice it can be to be around strong women sometimes, he might have been thinking. How nice to be able of offload the hero duties.' What a good point, Amy. Do you think there is an element of feeling Caroline's social superiority in Lizzy's reactions to her, Amy2? I know she is not usually cowered by this, but sometimes I think proprietry it a reason for her holding her tongue.

] Do you think there is an element of feeling Caroline's social superiority in Lizzy's reactions to her, Amy2? I know she is not usually cowered by this, but sometimes I think proprietry it a reason for her holding her tongue. __ I hope Lizzy would not admit any difference in their classes. ("I am a gentleman's daughter?") On the other hand, she is usually the guest when she is around Caroline, since Caroline does not often visit Lizzy. So maybe it is propriety, but not the class-conscious kind?

I think Lizzy knows Caroline very well, better than Caroline knows herself, perhaps. Lizzy is superior to Caroline, but does not feel the need to flaunt it. And Amy, you are probably right about Lizzy being the guest -- she talks to Caroline at Netherfield when Jane is sick & again at the ball, then she at Pemberley. But she does answer Caroline cuttingly when the Wickham warning is given at the ball. And she does stand up for herself when Caroline comments on Lizzy having no pleasure in anything but reading. Caroline's rudeness is at least partly due to the fact that she sees Lizzy as a rival for Darcy's attention. In the first part of the novel Lizzy doesn't see that, and wouldn't care anyway.