Theory about Alcott/Jo/Laurie
Hi, I'm new here, but this discussion is exactly why I joined. Below is an exerpt from an article I wrote at another time, but have always wanted a response from a literary crowd. You can't imagine my delight at having lighted upon this site, this forum, and this particular discussion. :) Please read, respond, and tell me what you think. Thanks. :)
Little Women actually ends before any of the marriages and romances begin, which is something that I think we all tend to forget from time to time, largely because of the prevalence of so many plays and movies which depict them as one. Alcott wasn't keen on writing Little Women, and only wrote Good Wives in response to the wide fanbase who wanted more. So really, Little Women should have ended before anyone married.
Furthermore, Alcott said that she intended for Jo to end a "literary spinster," like Alcott herself, and I think most of us would have loved this more than the Professor pairing. Alcott also seemed to dislike the pairing, but more or less said that she took a perverse delight in thwarting the Jo/Laurie relationship, simply because so many people wanted it, and so gave them a "silly match." At the time society was all about women getting married, and I kind of think this was Alcott throwing one up in the face of conventionality.
Really, I think many of the events of Good Wives happened simply because publishers caught Alcott at the wrong time, when she happened to be in a particularly peevish mood. Judging by her own comments on Jo's fate, I think she may have at least partly regretted choice, and I console myself by thinking that really, much of what was in Good Wives never should have happened, which allows me to ponder what she might have written if she hadn't felt pressured to come up with a match for her famous character.
I'd like to think that Alcott, on some quiet night, before hearing the outcry of her fans for Jo to marry, had a nice life for Jo planned, where Teddy's interest only increased with her obstinance against marrying. I think we may have seen the first of what would later become a long line of romances, where the man becomes attracted to a rebellious, unconventional, blue stocking, suffragette type and the attraction only increases with the level of nonconformity.
I content myself with this theory, and though I like Alcott's writing, I'll stick to Little Women, and continue to marvel at the many mysteries we still have about the woman who created one of the finest pieces of American literature. :)
What are your thoughts Alcott fans? Do you agree with my theory? Do you like it? Do you have more to add to it? :) Thanks for having me here. :)
The courtship that could have been
Quote:
Originally Posted by
debbie
I couldn't agree more !! I feel that Jo and Laurie were the perfect match. In fact I've read all 3 books over and over again since the time I was 14 and I feel that Laurie was in love with Jo till the end and Jo loved him too. I think Jo refused him 'cos she thought that she was not good enough for him, in spite of loving him. I really really wish it could have ended otherwise.
I completely agree! Jo even uses that exact line when she refuses him, and tells him he's too good for her (he too thinks she's too good for him, but also that despite that he can't help himself, he must ask her). For years I stopped reading Little Women at Laurie's proposal, so disheartened I was with how things would work out ... Finally I wrote a novel about this, for all of us who wonder how things might have worked out differently (it's called the Courtship of Jo March, listed on GoodReads.com).