Originally Posted by
Newcomer
Interesting! Are you writing from a perspective of a TV soap opera or a Hollywood melodrama? That you might have Jane Austen's prose in mind seems rather far fetched.
You wrote of Mr Collins and Charlotte marriage as based purely on money. A clergyman's living was about 200 -300 pounds per annum. Let's suppose Lady Catherine was very generous, five hundred would still be but one quarter of the Bennet's income which was barely adequate to keep a comfortable home. I do not think that Mr. Collins and Charlotte fall in the love/fortune formula.
Mr.Bennet's marriage was based on love, mistakenly according to Elizabeth, but the example is minor, outside of Austen's main theme.
To characterize Lydia's and Wickham's marriage as “based purely on sexual attraction or lust”, is in my opinion, much too modern an interpretation. Austen was surely aware of sexual attraction but in the barnyard not in the courtship of either the merchant, nor of the country squires, not of the aristocracy. Had you suggested such to Austen, I suspect she would have been astonished and wondered who had invited such a rustic to the drawing room. Informed that you represented the view two centuries hence, I could imagine that she would have wished for a second Norman conquest: the French to teach manners to the modern Britons. According to her letter, Lydia marries for love and it is your job to differentiate how love differs, but lust was foreign to Austen's style.
To suggests that Elizabeth's happiness depends on the potpourri of love, fortune and sex, is a juvenile misreading of Pride and Prejudice, in my opinion.
I am willing to be shown mistaken in this view, debate is the best function of a forum.