Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: No Subject

  1. #1
    kaly
    Guest

    No Subject

    <br>well, i think that it was a good book because it is well written and it is about a universal truth: every woman (including myself) wants to get marriage with a good guy and if he has a good social position, even better! woman who say that it is not true it's lying. the only think that I did not like it was the book is too long and descriptive these for me it is a little boring, but it was written!

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6

    Universal Truth?? Please!

    Quote Originally Posted by kaly
    <br>well, i think that it was a good book because it is well written and it is about a universal truth: every woman (including myself) wants to get marriage with a good guy and if he has a good social position, even better! woman who say that it is not true it's lying. the only think that I did not like it was the book is too long and descriptive these for me it is a little boring, but it was written!
    While I certainly agree that it's a good book I could not disagree more with the opinion that it is about a universal truth that every woman is out "to get" a guy with a "good social position." I think Austen shows in the novel that marriages based on these kinds of superficial attributes are destined to be miserable and ultimately fail. To lable the women who in life desire to be with a man who they really know and love for all the right reasons a lair is really out of line. I mean in high school we want to be socially accepted but at some point shouldn't we come into our own?

  3. #3
    Registered User shortysweetp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,055
    i agree qbee austen is using humor and being sarcastic when she says that first line. She describes the sisters that want to marry for position and wealth as silly and stupid for the most part. Look what happens with Lydia. Yes most women want to be married but not for the sake of being married but because they want someone that they can share their lifes with someone they LOVE. I think if someone marries for any reason other than love their marriage is a fraud and will be miserable.
    Trying to forget someone you love is like trying to remember someone you have never met.

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,564
    I think, with this subject, one must also consider the era and place - the late 18th century and early 19th century in England - a most conservative (I use that word with caution) time with very traditional minds. At this time, and one can see the same in Dickensian times, a great portion of society expected women to marry, sometimes getting betrothed prior, have many children, and serve to her husband. Perhaps, from a past perspective, it did seem . . . universal common sense out of human expectations.
    Needless to say, times have changed due to the Women's Rights Movement, Rosie the Riveter, women in politics, etc. Nowadays, in most Western cultures, a man or woman have few expectations to marry and have children, living, if they give themselves few choices, somewhat of a default outlook (though, believe me, I have nothing against marriage and children). The past centuries, due to war and a more self-reliant manner, the idea of women having the strong expectation, and pressure, to marry seems nearly diminished from increased autonomy, and far from a universal truth (a change for the better, in my opinion), as compared to a more hunter-gatherer companionship.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6

    However....

    Quote Originally Posted by mono
    I think, with this subject, one must also consider the era and place - the late 18th century and early 19th century in England
    Quite right mono. (love the handle) But Kaly was applying the line to current time and it set me off.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    6

    Mr. Darcy!! Your Britches!!

    R.E time and place (Regency England): Women-for some incomprehensible reason- were not given the same freedom and choice and the blokes and didn't have much choice but to marry for a comfortable life. I agree that marrying isn't the ultimate goal for all women (although I would like to get married one day) but given the choice between being called an Old maid, becoming a governess or being the permanent guest of a family member, it must've seemed an attractive prospect. It gave independance to a certain degree and guaranteed a secure future as the girls couldn't rely on inheriting (see the entail on Mr. Collins in P&P), and was certainly a status symbol. Having a flash carriage is like driving a Ferrari today- it gets you noticed and some people are attracted by a big fancy home and a confident manner. I suppose people don't really change. A lot of people marry in haste and repent at leisure, but today divorce is much more acceptable. Lydia (P&P) and Mary (Mansfield Park) are good reference points for this.

  7. #7
    For this discussion it's important to remember that Jane Austen never married, despite several offers. This I think shows that she at the very least didn't feel like rushing into matrimony.

Similar Threads

  1. No Subject
    By Unregistered in forum The Voyage of the Beagle
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-21-2010, 11:44 PM
  2. No Subject
    By Rita in forum 1984
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 05:29 PM
  3. No Subject
    By Captain_Crystal in forum A Tale of Two Cities
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-29-2005, 03:09 PM
  4. No Subject
    By Luis Cesar Nunes in forum Lord Jim
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2005, 06:07 PM
  5. No Subject
    By Leslie in forum Huckleberry Finn
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2005, 06:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •