The Absence of Children

[QuestingScholar]

I understood the argument to be that, in stories in which the characters regularly engage in sexual intercourse, why do the women not end up pregnant? I don't think Dark Muse was suggesting that all married couples need to have children. limajean, I agree with the necessities of the plot as you described (if the story does not require children thematically, they should not be there). However, I think Muse was questioning that, in a realistic story in which birth control is not utilized, but a couple constantly puts themselves in situations where pregnancy could be a result, why it results in no children.

Muse, I would suggest that, basically, it is due to story constrictions of plot, page numbers, and theme. Introducing a child into a relationship may provide new directions for the story that an author may not want to explore (perhaps favoring the other themese being explored). Of course, when such things do happen in literature, at least you will be plesantly surprised!

EDIT: I apologize! I hadn't noticed there was a second page! Basically ignore my comments until I figure out how to delete my post...

[Dark Muse]

Well in the books in question I do not think that we are to presume that the couples are being abstienent, in fact in many of the books it is quite clear that they are not. The idea of a married couple choosing not to have children, though might have occured in some couples was just not a common everday and accepted idea of that time period.

As I said many women simply refraiend from marraige to aviod having to be tied down with children, suggusting that they knew if they got married they were likely going to have children, if they wanted to or not. Not to mention the fact particuarly more so in the 1800's men wanted male heirs, becasue with the laws back then it was the only way in which thier property could stay in thier family name.

The fact that childbirth being dangerous and difficult back then, well that only suggests further the lack of real choice in the matter that women had, while perhaps not everyone, but many women tended to have a considerable amount of children, this was not done becasue they enjoyed it so much, but rather becasue they really did not have much say or choice in the matter.

The truth is the amount of married couples between the 1800's - early 1900's that would have no children is just very very few. Not saying it could never happen, but it would not be a normal or regular occurance. It would be a very slim exeception. For the most part, people back then just were not thinking. "oh we could get married and just not have children"

Really I do not think the reason why children are left out of books because the authors were trying to make some social statement about not having children. I do not think it is part of what Mono said about many of the books being written by men and men not having to really deal with the children, and part of it, becasue particuarly in the 20th century authors were writing with something very sepceific in mind they wanted to reveal, and so they simply left children out if children did not play into what they were trying to convey.

[Dark Muse]

I understood the argument to be that, in stories in which the characters regularly engage in sexual intercourse, why do the women not end up pregnant? I don't think Dark Muse was suggesting that all married couples need to have children. limajean, I agree with the necessities of the plot as you described (if the story does not require children thematically, they should not be there). However, I think Muse was questioning that, in a realistic story in which birth control is not utilized, but a couple constantly puts themselves in situations where pregnancy could be a result, why it results in no children.

Yes, that is exzactly what I was getting at. For me this was not a question of any sort of ideology about having children. It was the pure biology of it.

Muse, I would suggest that, basically, it is due to story constrictions of plot, page numbers, and theme. Introducing a child into a relationship may provide new directions for the story that an author may not want to explore (perhaps favoring the other themese being explored). Of course, when such things do happen in literature, at least you will be plesantly surprised!

I would tend to agree with this. I think that would be the main reason for why children would not be introduced in a situation where it should seem like they would naturally occur.