Matters of the heart: Why we read P&P

I think that "true" love is too simplistic a concept to be fulfilling. While I'm not particularly into the "pimples-and-all" school, I do believe that to achieve the pinnacle of romance, a couple needs a history. Four or five months ago, I wrote that th e reason why I found the Darcy-Lizzy relationship so stimulating was due to the fact that both of them have to work, grow, and accept change in order deserve eachother. To reach Nirvana, they must realize where their assumptions are wrong, admit their mi takes, and move on. It's like pruning a lemon tree - whacking off old, familiar branches and leaves makes for an ugly, naked tree, but come summer, the rewards reaped more than make up for it. It's nice to know that someone wonderful has cracked his comfy little shell in order to understand you. In fact, part of the attraction itself lies in the fact that a potentially-decent guy has gone the extra mile for your favor. Effort and change on hi s part implies prior imperfection - or, at least, unrealized potential - and so you both benefit. Isn't that the meaning of "real" love? Both parties gain from the experience...EXPEREINCE being the operative word. Otherwise, what's the point? Sex? Perhaps the rub lies in the obvious shortage of worthy potential mates...people with genius, flare, and the divine spark who concurrently possess enough humility to perceive and appreciate the good qualities in others (namely, you). So many men and women are so wrapped up in themselves and their own problems that they neglect to appreciate others...and thereby forego the enrichment of communing with and learning from them. Why do the remarkable people always seem to be missing eachother?

Kal, I have heard you mention this "divine spark" before. What does that mean to you?

There is a book out called LOVE IS A VERB, but I think it is a definite noun. Love is a thing. Who knows when it starts, how it starts and when it stops. We are always looking for the perfect love, but most of us just settle for comfortability. When a young person finds love for the first time they are blind, figuratively and literally. That special feeling that goes right thru you is what people want. I guess that special feeling would be Kal's divine spark, but is there really. I know that when there is no romance in my life, I pick up a very romantic book to get that feeling. I can totally get lost in a book for hours. And I personally think that is much safer, than having my heart broken. I prefer to imagine that all of us are Lizzy and Darcy in our own way. Its what you make it out to be.

I find that the "ideal love" in novels like P&P and my own experience in reality are so disparate that they are separated by a chasm the size of the Grand Canyon. I was talking to an M.A. in psychology about the draw of P&P, and she said this was one of women's big fantasies: that a man will change for them.

Amy all I have to say is YES!!!! that is sooo true.

I think it definitely has something to do with the fact that someone would go to all that trouble to change for you. In P&P, though, Darcy changes not only for Elizabeth, but also because she is right about his imperfections. He is cold and does not tr y very hard to make himself agreeable. Isn't he a little like Emma in that at first he thinks that certain people are beneath him before he even gets to know them? They both change, not just for the person they love, but because it is the right thing to do. A person who loves you will help you be the best you possible can, not be the person they WANT you to be. I know that I read Jane Austen because I love a happy ending (there's much more to why I read her than that, but...). I think it kind of restores my faith in human nature and the world that good things still do happen to good people.

] Isn't he a little like Emma in that at first he thinks that certain people are beneath him before he even gets to know them? They both change, not just for the person they love, but because it is the right thing to do. __ Good point, Lynn. I never thought about that before. ] A person who loves you will help you be the best you possible can, not be the person they WANT you to be. ____ And I really like this idea a lot.

The divine spark...somebody famous once said that you can find in anywhere, even in green beans...what is it? That's the same sort of question as "what is love, and why do we fall into it?" It's the indescribable rightness of being...the proportion and organization of certain qualities which exhibits the graceful "symmetry of a Grecian urn" (to quote Ashley Wilkes). It's hard to explain if you've never experienced it, but when you see it, y ou know it. It's when what is remarkable in a person or thing or concept negates what is not. Sometimes, it takes quite awhile to realize it's there, especially regarding its presence in people. That's why it's a spark...it's a catalytic reaction which occurs someh ow between the other person and your mind and gut. It's an epiphany, really, which jolts your attention. There is a moment in which the truth darts through you with the speed of an arrow, and the value calculus in your mind is suddenly and completely th own into place, and you realize that the individual in question is more worthy - and deserving of your attention - than you ever realized. There's a magic to the divine spark, just as with real, nondelusional love...I guess it just goes to show that you have to let things happen...you can't engineer your life...

Thanks, Kal. I just needed somebody who had experienced it more recently to say it. I asked you because I knew your words would help me jog my memory.

Do you think real love can turn into true love? If we buy into the "bodice ripper" romance novels it can. The basis of all those relationships is intially either sex or the "Beatrice and Benedict Syndrome" I think we all dream of having these types of relationships. Hopefully we are mature enough to realize that they are unrealistic to a point. Don't we all have a list when it comes to men: The gotta-haves and the would-be-nice lists? The Darcy Factor falls under would-be-nice category. Mature enough is a key I think. I don't think it is impossible to find true love when you are young, but is is harder to distinguish. Also, I think modern society makes it easy for us to bail rather than try to work t ings out. We are supposed to do what makes "us" happy. Isn't this relationship thing supposed to be a we? The relationship ends when one of the parties does too much "me-me, I-I" stuff. I am trying to simplifiy this too much but I hope you see wher e I am coming from.

I don't think I've ever experienced that and I'm a mommy. I guess unconditional love just isn't the same thing.

The magic of P&P, like any great work, is difficult to define. I do reject though the notion that its appeal, at least in some measure, comes from a wish-fulfillment fantasy that many women have: a man will change for them. MAybe I am over-sensitive, but I have seen to many women screw up their lives because they thought they could change a man. It never works. Granted, Darcy is humbled by Lizzy and realizes "how insufficient were all my pretensions to please a woman worthy of being pleased." But, Lizzy c anges too-her prejudice led her to be taken in by Wickham's sad tale and charms. I like the way Davies and co. chose to end P&P2, contrasting the Wickham marriage with the Darcy and Elizabeth union: an equal, sparring partnership, based on mutual respect and love, tested and made stronger by circumstance and time. That's what we all want! One of the things I have always loved about P&P is the part where Lizzy tries to get Darcy to account for when/why he fell in love with her: "You were sick of civility, of deference, of officious attention. I roused and interested you because I was so unl ike them." How refreshing and wonderful! He fell in love with her fine eyes and lively mind. It goes beyond sex, although as we all know that's there too! For me, that is true love, whatever that is. Too many people fall in lust.

But the "man will change for you" in P&P is a FANTASY. This is still a novel, and in fictional terms, IT WORKS. Darcy does change for Lizzy -- and himself -- so that they can be together. As far as the "divine spark" -- Shaw mentions it in PYGMALION wh en Higgins says to Eliza: "I have my own spark of divine fire!" This, as she is walking out the door.

Yes-It's a fantasy, although not one of mine. But, I still think P&P's appeal goes beyond this. Darcy was always a good, decent, honourable person and kind, indulgent brother. Like he said, he was taught good principles, but led to follow them in pride an d conceit. It was his decision to change too.

I think the notion of a person loving you enough to change for you would become suspect if they changed too much. As Cassandra says, I think Darcy had the kindness in him he just needed to bring it to the surface. I think in reality we're just hopi ng we can get a guy that will take us to chick movies and pick his socks up off the floor. This is all the change we may hope to expect. But who wouldn't want the divine spark? I think a rare few do get it. It is not fiction only.

I had a thought...it's not one that will fit into our fantasy of Darcy...but... We only see Darcy before he marries Lizzy. People tend to do and be things during the courting or dating period that makes them better suited for the one who they are pursuing. After marriage...when real life sets in and all the pomp and cirmcumstance of the courtship is over...don't we slip back into some of that person we were before we changed. I wonder what Darcy is like when Lizzy is not unreachable anymore? Will Lizzy still think he is the best man she ever knew? When Lady Catherine makes a n t too complimentary remark about Lizzy...will he stand up to her as he did with Ms. Bingley? In short...will each of them take the other for granted, which happens alot in marriage? Maybe we like this relationship so much because we are seeing only that side of it that makes them be the best they can be because they are after what they want..each other?

Here's an opinion from somebody or other named "Jane Austen" ;-) "There are such beings in the world -- perhaps one in a thousand -- as the creature you and I should think perfection; where grace and spirit are united to worth, where the manners are equal to the heart and understanding; but such a person may not come in your way, or, if he does, he may not be the eldest son of a man of fortune, the near relation of your particular friend, and belonging to your own count y." -- letter of November 18, 1814, to Fanny Knight

That special feeling that goes right thru you is what people want. Laura, this is the best explanation I've seen about this -- that's it! A person who loves you will help you be the best you possible can, not be the person they WANT you to be. Did someone say Knightley? "You were sick of civility, of deference, of officious attention. I roused and interested you because I was so unlike them."...Too many people fall in lust.... Darcy does change for Lizzy -- and himself -- so that they can be together... I think the notion of a person loving you enough to change for you would become suspect if they changed too much...I had a thought...it's not one that will fit into our fantasy of Darcy...but...People tend to do and be things during the courti ng or dating period that makes them better suited for the one who they are pursuing. After marriage...when real life sets in and all the pomp and cirmcumstance of the ourtship is over...don't we slip back into some of that person we were before we change ...In short...will each of them take the other for granted, which happens alot in marriage? Linda, you have very eloquently expressed my own unpopular view about Elizabeth and Darcy -- they cannot keep this up!! One of the main reasons Darcy wants Elizabeth, without discounting his admiration for and appreciation of her sparkling personality, i s undisguised lust, pure and simple. It is an unfortunate trait of some men that they no longer want as much that which they now have. I am chagrined to say that I believe Darcy is one of those men. He has had everything he has wanted his entire life, nd although he had to work for Lizzy, he has her now, too. Is it possible that his disgust for her family, his knowledge that her standing is far beneath his -- and has cost him the respect of others in his sphere -- and even the way she made him (lower himself?) work to have her, will not recur in his thoughts at some point in time? To think not, I believe, is the real fairy tale. I realize that I am inviting flames, but please at least consider what I'm saying, ok?

One of the main reasons Darcy wants Elizabeth, without discounting his admiration for and appreciation of her sparkling personality, is undisguised lust, pure and simple. Not meaning to make a joke, but I am absolutely certain that this is the reason my husband wanted me. Yes, we were great friends but it was lust that made us marry at a relatively young age. But when the flames of that lust died dow n (as they must for everyone---no couple, not even Elizabeth and Darcy can maintain that head-over-heels feeling for a long time)---when the flames died down, we still had friendship, respect, caring---the quieter and more meaningful aspects of "love" (wi h a very sufficient amount of passion remaining) to give validation to the vows we had made to each other. It is an unfortunate trait of some men that they no longer want as much that which they now have. I am chagrined to say that I believe Darcy is one of those men. I'm sorry, but I do not believe that. I believe that Darcy wanted to marry. When Jane was ill at Netherfield, Bingley states, "I declare I do not know a more awful object than Darcy, on particular occasions, and in particular places; at his own house expecially, and of a Sunday evening, when he has nothing to do." I believe this line illustrates Darcy's loneliness and dissatisfaction with being a bachelor. Marriage is much more than sex and to seek it out of desire for a companion would not be o t of the ordinary.

expecially I am always especially displeased when I mess up so spectacularly!;-(

Nice quote Henry. Reminds me of a quote from A Little Romance starring Olivier. Diane Lane's character asks her new boyfriend something like" have you ever wondered if the person who is perfect for you was maybe born in another time or another pla ce walking around wondering where you are?" She put it much more sweetly but I have often wondered this myself. I know, break out the violins. Susan: Tsk, Tsk. Can't you tell he is really changed and not feeding her a line? Go back and READ the end of the book (not the show).

Susan...I agree with what you say...all of that will have to surface sometime...as handsome as Darcy is (at least in P&P2) I must agree that he can not be all perfection. As much change that has occured in him...there is still much pride and self preser vation in his own "community". There are to be many heated arguments forthcoming...but ah...the making up should be fun...and we won't be there to see it! Anyway.... The romantic in me wants to believe Henrys excerpt from the letter....and I have heard it to be true on rare occassion that once in a while...once in a great while....two people who are exactly right for each other meet...and as we loved to read in our youth..."live happily ever after". I would like to imagine that Darcy and Lizzy are two of those people. I am afraid the rest of us will just have to live in the real world (except when we turn the page or push play on the VCR).

Well, I must jump in to say that I never thought they would "live happily ever after". I think that they will have a very good, rich, full marriage, but it won't be a bed of roses. I see misunderstandings because of thier basic personalities, but the th ing that you need to get through these, a commitment to being happy with a certain person, drives you to resolve these as they come up, over and over. Also, I belive that the necessity to change is inherent in the human animal. People always change, based on the experiences that they live through. The person you marry is going to change; in fact, lots of people have a problem with a spouse changing; w itness those who sabotage a spouse's weight loss attempt, etc. Any ordinary, decent person will naturally emulate the types of behavior that they see being used successfully by others. And you have plenty of opportunity to observe the behavior of someon you live with. My husband has become more of a planner, and I more sponatenous, because we have appreciated the effect from living with each other. Lizzy and Darcy already know the traits that they admire in the other; that will continue, and will have it's natural effect. Of course, the "bad" traits will also come into play; but since they have both been shown to be creatures of self-reflection the re is every expectation that they will make efforts to maintain harmony by deciding on changes consciously. Lastly, I agree with Linda.. making up can be fun!

I know I am a romantic but I do live in reality. True Darcy could have been putting on an act, but why bother for so long. Especially when Caroline Bingley was there for the asking. Yes Elizabth was a challenge but...I just believe as Lynn put it Darcy changed not only for Lizzy but to improve in character. Ideally your partner should bring out the best in you and vise versa. Unfortunately I think today too many people believe they can't have perfection (and no one can because no one is perfect) so t ey settle and are miserable. I think you need to have high standards for your mate and if you don't find anyone who meets that criterion DON'T MARRY. I've seen women pull a Charlotte Lucas is the name of pragmatism but I know my friends who kept their s tandards are happier. No their marriages aren't 24 hours of bliss but they are good marriages. I think you can have romantic ideals and practical sensibilities. "Happily ever after" this is a fantasy term. What in life of consequence or meaning comes without some difficulty? Yes some of our friendships with women don't bring pain and suffering b ut that is different than a martial relationship. With my mother and my sister, I rarely have conflict but conflict does come (as it does in all relationships). It is how you handle the difficult times which determine the success of a relationship. What draws me back to JA time and again is that 200 years ago a woman created male hero who were an ideal. The fact that she hoped for men to unite such qualites (thanks HC) reaffirms to me that you should hope/desire the best. Don't cheat yourself for second best. The qualities that we admire in Darcy, Knightley and Wentworth are worthy attributes. The problem today is that fewer and fewer people are worthy (for a myraid of reasons) however, that is still no excuse not to wait for the best.

Thank you, Mari! I was trying to figure out how to say just this! No, my life isn't as "romantic" as I would sometimes like to have it, but then again, it's pretty darn great all around! No, I don't get flowers sent to me all the time, but every now and then I get a wonderful surprise that was dreamed up by him, not th e Hallmark folks! Everything in real life involves compromise, so if we're trying to visualize Lizzy and Darcy in their real post-P&P life, it will certainly involve plenty of compromise, as well. Courting may end for some at the wedding, but compromise (read "change") does not!

I've enjoyed all these thoughts. It is romantic to think a hero like Darcy will change due to love, because it doesn't happen in true life. I don't have my book, but at the end didn't Lizzie refain from teasing Darcy, because he wasn't ready?? Maybe he didn't change so much as blossom (its a beautiful spring here)? Also as an American, I would love to swept up by a Darcy like man and live at Pemberly! (if it had central heat and running water, I'm not all that romantic!) But you all know what I mean. Do I need to add that watching CF play Darcy reinforced the hero status? He didn't save anyone's life or anything! But he is a hero. My paultry thoughts...

I had a few more thoughts today, and then I'll be quiet about this. First of all, I didn't mean to imply that Darcy was putting on an act. I believe he truly loves Lizzy -- I'm simply speculating on how well that love can survive when real life intrudes , and when a man who has always had everything he's ever wanted gets one more thing he wanted, but at great cost. Is it not possible that Lizzy's very unavailability is one of the factors that makes Darcy have to have her? But -- I believe it was Ellen Moody on Austen-L who pointed out that these are characters in a book and not real people, even though we like to ascribe real-people feelings to them. Karen also mentioned in an earlier thread that we need to separate the b ook from the adaptation. Therefore, I can compare E & D to real-life people, but they are JA's creation and she can have them be whatever she wants. In this case, she has created something I don't think real life would sustain, but that is her prerogati e. Why, then, do I read P&P? Because I like that happy-ever-after fantasy, quite regardless of believing it possible.

I suppose none of us re-read P&P just because of the love story w/ the happy ending, though these are very good reasons. I know that I do not read other love stories, happy endings or not. Jane Austen's books are special, and I re-read them for many reasons. I think the several layers of pleasure, including a well-matched heroine and hero, keep me coming back. Could I enjoy a book w/ an unhappy ending written by JA? Could she have writte n such a book? I'll never know. I love her heroines and heroes. They are part of my life, and I feel as if I know them, as if they were real people. That's another reason I come back to them -- they are dear friends whom I must visit at least occasionally. I suppose other authors hav e similarly loyal readers, but I do not know them. As to whether these couples will be happy ever after . . . of course they will. Because Jane Austen never told us otherwise! Real life doesn't need to intrude. Real people may not always be "happy" but they can be content if they are open to it.

I have to agree with what Mari said. Darcy and Lizzy will have a very good, rich, full marriage, but there will be conflicts involve. These conflicts, when resolved, will add to the marriage experience. Although, their basic personalities will not easily change, smaller aspects will as they grow as a couple. According to what I read in the old BB archives regarding each of their Myers-Briggs personality types they have near shadow personalities, which enhances each other's weaker side. Because of the nature of MB personality typing, you can be one facet or it s opposite for four different characteristics in varying degrees that then become sixteen possible personality types. Thus, one can be an Extravert (E) or Introvert (I), Sensing (S) or iNtuitive (N), Thinking (T) or Feeling (F), Judging (J) or Percieving P) person. Lizzy is an ENFJ and Darcy is an ISTJ (according to two posters who took the test for him) or INTJ (according to the Myers-Briggs listings on the web). Where Lizzy is strong, Darcy is weak and vice-versa. It is because of this shadowing that on e brings the other to their full potentials and also lessens each other's extremes. The change we see in Darcy after the first proposal is movement on his part away from the Introvert and Thinking extreme toward the Extravert and Feeling aspect that Lizzy is. It is this shift that brings the romance into P&P that we love so much. Conversely, Lizzy will compliment him after marriage because she, as the Extravert Feeler, can deal with most, if not all, the social responsibilities that comes with being the Master and Mistress of Pemberley. With each doing what is strong in their basi c personality, there is balance. It is this balance that we all want in our lives, but do not always get. At least this is why I read P&P. (Sorry, I have a tendency to ramble ...) :-) P.S. For more information about MBTI, the book Please Understand Me by Kiersey and Bates is good or you can find a number of good sources on the web through Yahoo.

Keirsey Temperament Test link : http://sunsite.unc.edu/jembin/mb.pl This is so fun, haven't done this poppsy in eons. We share a similar background Cheryl!

Johanne: We share a similar background Cheryl! I could extrovertedly and intuitively feel and perceive that Johanne! ;-)

Hil ] In discussing this, lets for now ignore the other reasons why we read books like P&P : humour, observation of character, wit, wonderful language etc. I don't think I would re-read P&P if it did not also contain these elements - but I am also attracted by the way the romance is presented. The reasons I like the romance in P&P have changed over the years. I first read P&P when I was 12. I immediately fell in love with Elizabeth Bennet, I thought she was perfect and I accepted the surface view of her love as perfect at the end of the story. I no longer believe in 'true love' as Hil defined it, the stuff of Mills and Boon andallmark cards. However, I still accept Elizabeth and Darcy's love as 'real' (ie a convincing depiction thereof), because when I look at P&P nowadays I see a depiction of realistic people, all with some good and some bad, although the proportion varies; I agree with those that think the Darcys will have a good marriage, with ups and downs, a few disagreements and many moments of harmony. The novel finishes on an up note, as all good romances should, but I don't think JA asks us to believe that they will have 'perfect' happiness, but a predominance of love and good times. That is why I still find the romance in P&P attractive - I think such a relationship is possible in the real world. It takes luck, in meeting a compatible person at the right time, and hard work and a realistic attitude (don't give up after the first nor the 20th disagreement), but it is possible. And although the euphoria of acute love, lust and the illusion of perfection of the early days isn't sustainable one can still reivisit it from time to time.

I can remeber when I studies P&P at school writing an essay based on the final paragraph of chapter 58. Lizzy restrains herself from making a witty comment to the effect that Bingley had been a delightful friend to Darcy because he was so easily guided. She stops herself because "he had let to learn to be laught at, and it was rather too early to begin" We had to consider whether or not this was a bad sign for the future: is Lizzy restraining her normal wit and humour in order to conform with Darcy's sense of pride? When will it be early enough to teach him to start laughing at himself? Will she always end up checking herself in this way, so that eventually she loses the facility to laugh at him? She seems to be showing a degree of caution that she had not shown before (eg while staying at Netherfield) when she didn't care about him at all. And yet her wit is what he likes. Is she going to take his importance (to hjmself and to her) too seriousl y? This passage is a tiny little ambiguous clue that things will not always be rosy and easy.

Thanks Kate. I can't see either Darcy or Lizzie restraining themselves too long. Even Auntie noticed he needed to lighten up some. (BTW - Did you write the letter from Auntie G? That was good.)

have you ever wondered if the person who is perfect for you was maybe born in another time or another place walking around wondering where you are?" She put it much more sweetly but I have often wondered this myself. I know, break out the violins. Dina, your comment reminded me very much of a song by country singer George Strait, which I thought I would post, even if it is off-topic: Our Paths May Never Cross Lady, I know you're out there somewhere Like me, you're feeling lost. Lady, I know you're out there somewhere, But our paths may never cross. People like us never find each other, Love is our greatest loss. Lady, right now we both need each other But our paths may never cross. We're two people who should be together, 'Cause we're lonely at the very same time. But there's a million too many good reasons Why your love can never be mine. Maybe this song was written for you. Listen -- don't turn it off. I wish you could learn it, and come sing it with me, But our paths may never cross. It was never a hit, but has a slow, piano-bar-type tune and is very catchy. Come to think of it, shouldn't he be over at drool? :) This theme was also explored somewhat in "Somewhere in Time," a really excellent movie.

(BTW - Did you write the letter from Auntie G? Yes, and thanks

Susan...I'll vote for George Strait to go on the Drool...saw him from a front row seat one time....was definitely worth the price! Anna...good point about that we don't always read books for the happy endings...that is true...but in this case, I was glad it was.

re: 31 Thanks for putting in the link, Johanne. I'm still getting use to the software and HTML. I will learn to add links before the next time I reference something. :-) Angela

I think JA helped me decide to get out of my marriage. I'd settled into a Mr and Mrs Bennet situation -- but worse -- and had very nearly decided that was all there would ever be for me. Now, five years, later maybe that is all there ever will be for me, but at least there is a possibility now. Some of my hokey new age mentors say you have to make room for the good to come in.

Dina, have you ever seen On a Clear Day You Can See Forever with Barbara Streisand and Yves Montand? Talk about romance from opposite ends of time and space! But seriously...you've got me thinking...it's a beautiful sentiment...it offers a small degree of comfort when it seems that you'll never find happiness. And Susan, thanks for the song...

I don't know, Kate. Let's see. He likes Miss Eyre a lot too.

I cannot say whether I got my philosophy from my parents, or Jane Austen, or other "mentors," but I would say that we should never settle for less than we need and deserve. (I do not mean perfection -- that does not exist.) As an eight-and-forty, never-married female, I can say that there is life without marriage. And very good life at that. It would be nice to have someone with whom to share my everyday joys & concerns, but it is not essential. Of course, a Darcy or a Knightley would be wonderful, but not necessarily the best match for me. Not only would I never wish to settle for a Mr Collins, I would not want an Edward Ferrars if I thought I needed/deserved a Col Brandon. In the meant ime, I am content with my family, my friends, and my life. I do read JA's books, especially P&P, partly for the romance. But when I return to reality, I take only that portion of the books which continue to give pleasure to my life -- no regrets that I cannot have a Darcy, but contentment that I chose not to be Charlotte Collins!

I would not want an Edward Ferrars if I thought I needed/deserved a Col Brandon. Well-said, Kathleen! I am all admiration. :*]

I don't know how I did it, but I replied here to a question of Kate's posed in the Dalton Jane Eyre topic.

Weird stuff like that has happened to me, too, Amy. Yapp is possessed by the devil.

I wonder who your hokey new age mentors are, Amy. (There will be many new possibilities). Was it the sting of the Bennets, or the promise of better?

Kathleen said: "we should never settle for less than we need and deserve." This bring to mind when I was in my very early twenties, I went with my mother to visit some long time friends of hers. The man had suffered for years with MS and was very much disabled and wheelchair bound, the woman looked a very stereotypical more tha n middle aged housewife. She had made the comment that when she looked at him, he was still her Clark Gable. And he replied that when he looked at her, she was still his Betty Grable. It was at that precise moment that I decided that I would never settle for less -- to be able to love someone so much as not ever to resent the constant care of him that she had to undergo and after so many years to be able to look at each other still as Darcy looks at Lizzie.

Whoa -- so sorry about the above :-(

This is a test...only a test --- Did I finally close that pesky tag?

Did I finally close that pesky tag? Who cares, Candace? What a beautiful, uplifting story!

Kathleen: Well said!!! I think I will memorize that and use it on my Dad next time he rags me about being a five and thirty never married. He'll actually get the P&P comparisions.

``Miss Gentle Reader, let me persuade you to follow my example, and take a turn about the all italic topic. -- I assure you it is very refreshing after viewing so long in one attitude.''

Mari second chuckle from you today. You are funny.

That's a beautiful story Candace. And Mari, thanks for the LOL!;-)

test

It won't let a mere mortal enter a closing tag without an opening on in the same message; we'll have to wait for a magician to drop by...

I can put in an end tag, though I am mortal, but did not see the need as my page looks okay.

if you reload from about 50 it'll all be italicised, but as you say Amy it is a transient phenomen...

I "froze" this topic for a few minutes to fix the HTML problem; it should be OK now...

Thank you, Amy and HC -- I am extremely embarrassed **BLUSH**

You're too cute, Candace. :)

okay, I was trying to find the place where I ragged on my husband for never (ever!) sending me flowers, but I can't figure out if this was it anyway, I finally found what I'd been looking for since the time I did that. My Don, dear sweetie that he is, doesn't like to present things because they might be expected. He does bring tears to my eyes every now and then, however. On Jan. 2, 1996, he called me at work, read me the following poem, said, "I love you, Cindy", and hung up. Needless to say, I was a mess! Okay, here goes: (he gave me permission to share this) "Echoes, No.XXV" W. E. Henley In the year that's come and gone, love, his flying feather Stooping slowly, gave us heart, and bade us walk together. In the year that's coming on, though many a troth be broken, We at least will not forget aught that love hath spoken. In the year that's come and gone, dear, we wove a tether All of gracious words and thoughts, binding two together. In the year that's coming on with its wealth of roses We shall weave it stronger yet, ere the circle closes. In the year that's come and gone, in the golden weather, Sweet, my sweet, we swore to keep the watch of life together. In the year that's coming on, rich in joy and sorrow, We shall light our lamp, and wait life's mysterious morrow.

Very romantic, Cindy. You are both fortunate to have found each other.

God, Cindy, my husband wouldn't even know where to find something like that! But, he does show his love in other ways.

God, Cindy, my husband wouldn't even know where to find something like that! But, he does show his love in other ways.

Yes, Cindy -- I believe that those verbal boquets are much more special!

Wow! Cindy sounds like you have your own Mr KNightley!!

One of the first times I read P&P, I remember being struck uncomfortable by the fact that Lizzy was grateful, maybe more than anything, to Darcy. The more I think about it, though, it is not such a bad thing. What does anybody else think? What place should gratitude have in love?

] I can remeber when I studies P&P at school writing an essay based on the final paragraph of chapter 58. Lizzy restrains herself from making a witty comment to the effect that Bingley had been a delightful friend to Darcy because he was so easily guided. She stops herself because "he had let to learn to be laught at, and it was rather too early to begin" We had to consider whether or not this was a bad sign for the future: is Lizzy restraining her normal wit and humour in order to conform with Darcy's sense of pride? When will it be early enough to teach him to start laughing at himself? Will she always end up checking herself in this way, so that eventually she loses the facility to laugh at him? __ Kate, I meant to comment on this earlier because I think it does raise a red flag. Has Lizzy already begun to hid her light under a bushel basket? Will she subdue her very self to please him? Will he find her pert opinions less charming as the years wear on? Will he, who has been used to having his own way, resent her need to have her own way? Seems to me that guys love the idea of independent women; the reality of them is not so appealing to many men.

"We had to consider whether or not this was a bad sign for the future: is Lizzy restraining her normal wit and humour in order to conform with Darcy's sense of pride? Will she always end up checking herself in this way, so that eventually she loses the facility to laugh at him? " Perhaps, it was meant to show that Lizzy has to grow to accomodate more than her own opinion on matters, trivial or otherwise- as she has learnt throughout the novel. A marriage of minds?

I agree Serena, but I still think there's a danger here. Of course, I would. Kate you never said on what side you came down. On the old board, way back, probably in September or earlier, Arnessa mentioned that the men in her office found Jane to be more appealing. I thought that was really really really very very interesting. Jane fairly screams of "sure you may control me;" Lizzy doesn't. Okay, enough of my bitter woman view. Somebody tell me why this should not be.

Amy, I'm not really sure what side I come down on. I think JA intended that they would have a long and happy life together. But I can't help thinking that she is teasing us by introducing this little niggle. I mean, to be perfectly honest, if any of my friends told me they were going to marry someone on the basis of a few conversations at parties or dinner with lots of other people present, that she hated him at first, but then found out that he was a nice person, that he did something wonderful for her sister (because he liked HER) and that since she had discovered she liked him they had met maybe three times and not had one serious conversation AND that he had lots of money, I would say she was crazy. GET TO KNOW HIM A BIT FIRST I would say. Particularly if he was obviously quite stong willed and used to getting his own way. Very unromantic I know, but. Anyway, what I meant to say is that I really worry that Lizzy will lose that sense of unguarded joy and delight that she experiences, and become too much concerned about being the mistress of Pemberley and a good wife to Darcy. Being a good wife to him may mean not laughing at him. I really HOPE that she quickly teaches him to learn to laugh at himself, and that they spend their whole lives laughing at and with each other. But...I'm not ABSOLUTELY certain that they do.

I think Jane Austen was pretty clear on the future of Lizzy and Darcy's marriage, and she did not forsee Lizzy holding herself in check, as it were; Pemberley was now Georgiana's home; and the attachment of the sisters was exactly what Darcy had hoped to see. They were able to love each other even as well as they intended. Georgiana had the highest opinion in the world of Elizabeth; though at first she often listened with an astonishment bordering on alarm at her lively, sportive, manner of talking to her brother. He, who had always inspired in herself a respect which almost overcame her affection, she now saw the object of open pleasantry. Her mind received knowledge which had never before fallen in her way. By Elizabeth's instructions, she began to comprehend that a woman may take liberties with her husband which a brother will not always allow in a sister more than ten years younger than himself.

Perhaps, it was meant to show that Lizzy has to grow to accomodate more than her own opinion on matters, trivial or otherwise- as she has learnt throughout the novel. A marriage of minds? I think this is important. I have mentioned before, what is life if not to learn and, hopefully, grow from our mistakes. In love, isn't it the same? Is not one of the true signs of love thinking of the other persons feelings first, before our own? When this is gone (by one of the parties in the relationship) that is when the love is gone. I am still amazed at my as-much-as-can-be-expected-from-a-64-year-old feminist mother still thinks of my father first and vice-versa. Lizzie's thinking of Darcy's feelin (by curbing her tongue, or whatever) is not wrong. If he truely loves her, he is doing the same thing. I am not trying to be naive. How many people on this sight who are divorced can chock it up to this, in a nut shell?

"I really HOPE that she quickly teaches him to learn to laugh at himself," I think we see her getting over her initial reservation before the novel is done. Not only does Austen give us the comment about their life together at Pemberley and Lizzy's sportive manner, but we also see them together after the engagement (those scenes which Davies/Birtwhistle so cruelly left out). She does tease him in the book about when he fell in love with her, and he seemed to enjoy it just as much as before. I think she would maintain her personality after the marriage, but accomodate her partner to some extent too, as would he.

Doesn't it say that he had not yet learned to laugh at himself? Wouldn't the "yet" imply that this is to come?

On Lizzy curbing her natuaral tendency to razz people, I agree with whoever said it did ring little alarm bells, but that we trust from what we know of E and D that this is not a bad omen, rather a maturity, just as he has to curb some attitudes too. I was also 'struck uncomfortable' by the gratitude, Amy. I haven't yet sorted out what I feel about it exactly, except that I too don't think its necessarily a bad thing. Maybe it depends on why you think you are being appreciated. For instance, if you feel someone likes you for yourself, and things you like about yourself too, then it would be different from if they liked you because you represented something like status or a good deal or a way out. Also, maybe our culture is so bound up with the idea of falling in passionate love, that we tend to avoid acknowledgeing feelings like gratitude in those circunstances. The thing about male work colleagues liking Jane better is interesting. I think I read somewhere that people tend to seek out mates of about the same intellegence. I wonder if that is another aspect of it....? How does intellegence tie in with control, if at all? Do both change with different types of intellegence?...here I am thinking of Lydgate and Rosamund.

Re: Elizabeth's gratitude to Darcy The passage Amy quotes (resp #69) takes place the night after Darcy has brought Georgiana to meet Elizabeth at Lambton. Her gratitude covers the fact that he loved her, and that he has forgiven the manner in which she previously rejected him, and he is not acting totally weird about her (positively or negatively). [Think about how Mr Collins reacted when E rejected him!] But, gratitude is not why she is falling in love with him. While it is attractive for someone else to be attracted to you, it is not enough to keep you going. And, Elizabeth has known about Darcy's feelings for four months or so, and she never had any reason to regret her decision before. I think the gratitude is just part of the whole change in her feelings. After Darcy leaves Elizabeth at the inn (after learning about Lydia & Wickham), Jane Austen writes, "If gratitude and esteem are good foundations of affection, Elizabeth's change of sentiment will be neither improbable nor faulty. But if otherwise, if the regard springing from such sources is unreasonable or unnatural, in comparison of what is so often described as arising on a first interview . . . and even before two words have been exchanged, nothing can be said in her defence" [italics mine] So, Jane Austen knew about "love/lust at first sight" which is so often substitued for "love" in the movies. And, Elizabeth does not feel that for Darcy; she feels esteem and gratitude and respect, and all of that grows into love. And fortunately they have a meeting of the hearts as well as of the minds. [IMO, of course!]

Yes, Kathleen, I agree with you. JA writes in P&P, after Darcy, Bingley and Georgiana visited the Inn at Lambton, "Gratitude, not merely for having once loved her, but for loving her still well enough, to forgive all the petulance and acrimony of her manner in rejecting him, and all the unjust accusations accompanying her rejection. . . . For to love, ardent love, it must be attributed." I think from their first surprise meeting at Pemberley, Lizzie not only feels gratitude that he doesn't totally ignore her, but she grows to respect, esteem, and love him so that by the time she leaves Lambton she would really rather have stayed there! I also think that Lizzie continues to be playful and teasing with Darcy, as JA mentions in the last chapter. It's just during that first walk she considers it to be too soon -- after all, they've just been through a lot of emotional stuff and this wasn't the time to be teasing the man you love!

Kathleen, you say it so well. I was truely inspired by what you wrote above.

"We had to consider whether or not this was a bad sign for the future: is Lizzy restraining her normal wit and humour in order to conform with Darcy's sense of pride? Will she always end up checking herself in this way, so that eventually she loses the facility to laugh at him? " I think it is not a question of conforming to his pride, but more of recognizing that one cannot instantly mold others into what we wish that they would be, any more than we would wish to be forced into such a mold by our S.O. Any changing that happens is going to be a graduaL process and one that the changee wishes to participate in. Now I think I left a quote earlier in the wrong topic. (Forgive the re-run) How can anyone ever love you for who you are if you become someone else to be with t em? I think Lizzie is wise in not expecting this of Darcy. And this is one of the chief charms of this "romance", I think - neither of them expects the other to be someone other than who they really are. Re: the gratitude thing, I always thought that the gratitude was for the fact that he had treated her civilly when she felt that she had no cause to expect or deserve such kindness after having jumped all over him unfairly regarding Wickham's misrepresentation of the facts.

I completely agree with you, Joan. Very well-put. Why should Mr. Darcy be expected to become the perfect gentleman-slave, while at the same time, we expect Lizzy to be able to say and so exactly as she pleases, even if it sometimes upsets her very worthy husband? He is entitled to just as much "molding" in Lizzy as she is of "molding" in him. Somebody said earlier that it's give-and-take, and I agree.

This post does not follow the line of discussion of the last 10, 20 or even 30 posts but I cannot think of another topic to place it under. I apologize. Ignore it if it pleases you. In thinking of P&P, the heroines, heroes and love stories as discussed in this topic from the very beginning (for I read all it this afternoon) I thought of the following message from another list I am on. Quoting Valerie Clarke, who quotes Jeanette Winterson in her post: Here's one point of view that was offered by the wonderful, young British writer Jeanette Winterson on the subject of writing but is applicable to all art: ..."one writes with generations at her back. There is more. No matter how brilliant, no matter how perfect are certain lines and certain passages, a book, a poem has to work altogether to be complete, and in its completion to cast light on its whole self. At the end of a piece of work there should be a feeling of inevitability; this could not have been made in any other way! Again to quote Winterson: "...when we close the book there is only one voice we can hear; the writer's own." Peace. VC I do think this is true of Austen; it is why I return to her novels. It is spring break - time to pull out P&P again! Andrea

Gratefulness can be a part of love as it is felt on evidence that the other tries to do things for you, easing your burdens; Making you happy or less sad or distressed. If someone does this repeatedly it is a token of love in my opinion.Part of the necessary labour to keep love alive. To experience this is to know someone cares for you, and is bound to cause some feelings towards that person. But it is not enough, it must be done in a manner to please you, by someone who understands or at least tries to f gure out what you like. And if this person is likewise able to overlook and forgive your faults and errors, when you ask for it...and is able to laugh at him/herself and has warm eyes or a lovely voice or divine thighs and an outlook on life in the nearness of your own Then I would not be surprised if love was the result.

How have I missed this thread? this is so interesting. I have been reading JA for over 30 years, but I have never thought about how JA influences my life. I do scold myself a lot over missed lessons that I SHOULD have learned from JA. And I recently sometimes see a little Mrs. Bennett and Lady Russell in myself that I never expected to see - like seeing my mother in the mirror, I guess. Who do we love, and who should we marry? Every person has an inner core that does not change. To have a happy marriage you have to know your partner's core and love it and be loved by that person who can see and love your own inner core. the external characteristics can change. Money, beauty, health all change. If a couple can still find and like and respect and love each other through the job losses and hair losses and the disappointments and the triumphs, they will have a good marriage. (I hope tha makes a little sense. I never tried to write it before) But that vaguely defined inner core. We know it when we see it (if we are lucky).

I see what you mean, Kate.

Ann2 and Katy, I agree with you.

I does make more than a little sense :)