The Reading Vent & Rant Thread

[4691mls]

I expect a lot of girls read Pride and Prejudice for the first time as teenagers and think it's romantic how Elizabeth and Jane both end up with wealthy, attractive men, and imagine themselves living in that era and ending up similarly situated. It's only as you get older that you realize you could very well have ended up as Charlotte or Mary....

[issybird]

I read a book about younger sons during the Regency and a fascinating statistic was offered: the typical affluent Regency family had six surviving children of whom four could expect to be worse off as adults.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by issybird

I read a book about younger sons during the Regency and a fascinating statistic was offered: the typical affluent Regency family had six surviving children of whom four could expect to be worse off as adults.

Yeah. There were certainly far fewer opportunities to improve your lot back then than there are now, even for men.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

I expect a lot of girls read Pride and Prejudice for the first time as teenagers and think it's romantic how Elizabeth and Jane both end up with wealthy, attractive men, and imagine themselves living in that era and ending up similarly situated. It's only as you get older that you realize you could very well have ended up as Charlotte or Mary....

Eh. Most of us would have been servants.

[hildea]

Originally Posted by issybird

Which it is! It’s a black mark against Elizabeth that she can’t understand Charlotte’s motivation.

Absolutely. Elizabeth is flawed, but that is part of what makes her an interesting character. Jane is the most perfect person of the sisters, and the most boring

Originally Posted by Hitch

(I also wonder, female heroism aside, if she really WOULD HAVE turned down Darcy. I mean, come on!!! It sounds good in P&P and all that, righteous anger, realizing that he wasn't all wrong, that her horrible family was weighing her down, etc.--and her denial drives him to acts of compassion and all that--but still. Would she really have declined, all things considered? Hard to believe so.)

You mean, if she were a real person, not a character in a book? I'm sure you're right, and most women would have accepted a proposal in that situation. But since the book became popular at the time, I have to believe that Elizabeth's behaviour wasn't seen as outrageously unrealistic by readers then.

(In the book she definitively does decline. He proposes, she answers literally "not if you were the last man on earth", and that's that. At the time she has no reason to believe he will ever renew his proposal, and if lady Charlotte hadn't meddled, he never would have.)

And if I hadn't read Austen, at a time in my life when I needed to, I wonder if I ever would have appreciated women's lack of choices, in that period? I doubt it. Those books, starting with P&P, really drove it home for me and made me grateful that I was a girl in the 60's and early 70's, when AT LEAST we had some rights and were actively campaigning for more/full rights.

Same here. (Well, I was a girl in the 70s and early 80s, but I recognize those feelings.)

[Renate]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Eh. Most of us would have been servants.

Why is everybody who believes in reincarnation previously of an exalted stature?

If I am a reincarnation it's a heck of a lot more likely that I was a toddler who died at three of dysentary.

[ownedbycats]

Probably a bad sign when you're reading a cozy mystery and you start cheering a bit when the killer tries to off the protagonist at the end.

Mostly because the protagonist was kind of annoying (and a terrible person), but this is what cinched it:

Spoiler:

Murdered Dude's Wife: I was having an affair with the woman who was having an affair with my husband. Please don't tell anyone about my sexual orientation!
Protagonist: OK.
Protagonist: goes and confronts that woman in front of at least five other people I KNOW ABOUT YOUR AFFAIR WITH THE MURDERED DUDE'S WIFE!!

I don't think I'll continue past the first book.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by hildea

Absolutely. Elizabeth is flawed, but that is part of what makes her an interesting character. Jane is the most perfect person of the sisters, and the most boring



You mean, if she were a real person, not a character in a book? I'm sure you're right, and most women would have accepted a proposal in that situation. But since the book became popular at the time, I have to believe that Elizabeth's behaviour wasn't seen as outrageously unrealistic by readers then.

Yes, that's what I mean. Seriously. One of 5 sisters, with zero prospects, especially now, having burnt Mr. Collins, that repugnant toady. She doesn't yet know that Wyckham is a fiend, though, granted and he's expressed some prior interest in here, but by the time of the proposal, hasn't he already latched on to the young lady that's getting, what 15K pounds? I think so. (I freely grant that this part may occur after Elizabeth knows about him being a seducer of girls, etc.) I don't recall exactly, but she knows, one way or the other, or strongly suspects, by the time of the proposal, I believe, that Wyckham isn't going to be her future hubby.

So...yes, in a real-world scenario, arrogant or not, offended or not, I gotta think that given women's options at this time, she'd have accepted that proposal.

(In the book she definitively does decline. He proposes, she answers literally "not if you were the last man on earth", and that's that. At the time she has no reason to believe he will ever renew his proposal, and if lady Charlotte hadn't meddled, he never would have.)

Oh, yes, no doubt 'bout it. Her declination is one of the great bits in the book. (I also thought that they did a fantastic job with it in the '90's P&P with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle.)

Same here. (Well, I was a girl in the 70s and early 80s, but I recognize those feelings.)

Yup. When I read it, I was already starting to do my "bit" for Women's Lib. Of course, back then, we were mostly fighting for "equal pay, equal work." Honestly, that's still how I feel--if you can support yourself or you and yours, everything else is manageable. But hey, that's just me.

Originally Posted by Renate

Why is everybody who believes in reincarnation previously of an exalted stature?

I say that all the time. I mean, Princess this or Empress that. What a load of hooey. Given the odds--I mean, even in the UK, in the late 1700's-early 1800's, they had what, the Upper 10K? 10K people of "noble" status? Out of the entire population? So if you were a reincarnated Brit, wouldn't you more likely be the scullery maid, improperly accused of theft when you turn down m'lord's advances, thrown out on the street w/o a reference and thence turned to Ho'ing? I mean, come ON.

If I am a reincarnation it's a heck of a lot more likely that I was a toddler who died at three of dysentary.

Yup, or an impressed sailor who died on his first trip, or some other equally horrible life for the average person.

Hitch

[ekbell]

I think that it's worth remembering that Jane Austen had turned down a 'good' proposal herself despite not being financially independent.

As for reincarnation, after spending time considering how many human being exist now vs how many human being have existed in the past, if reincarnation was a real thing most of our previous reincarnations would have either died before being old enough to be counted or more likely would not have been human.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by ekbell

I think that it's worth remembering that Jane Austen had turned down a 'good' proposal herself despite not being financially independent.

Yeah, but, didn't JA have a fantastic relationship with her brother and a reasonable belief that she wouldn't end up out on the street, starving? Or am I mistaken in that? (I freely admit I could be!)

As for reincarnation, after spending time considering how many human being exist now vs how many human being have existed in the past, if reincarnation was a real thing most of our previous reincarnations would have either died before being old enough to be counted or more likely would not have been human.

I figure I'd be lucky to have been an abused camel. I've spent pretty much my entire life in work-related drudgery, (Nope, doesn't really matter if it's your own biz. In fact, that's usually worse.) so...yup, abused camel.

Hitch

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ekbell

As for reincarnation, after spending time considering how many human being exist now vs how many human being have existed in the past, if reincarnation was a real thing most of our previous reincarnations would have either died before being old enough to be counted or more likely would not have been human.

I think it's not impossible that many humans living today are doing it for the first time (i.e. have never been reincarnated before).

Not that I firmly believe in reincarnation, but I've not found any of the other theories to be more believable, either.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

I think it's not impossible that many humans living today are doing it for the first time (i.e. have never been reincarnated before).

Not that I firmly believe in reincarnation, but I've not found any of the other theories to be more believable, either.

Hard to argue that^.

Hitch

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by ekbell

As for reincarnation, after spending time considering how many human being exist now vs how many human being have existed in the past, if reincarnation was a real thing most of our previous reincarnations would have either died before being old enough to be counted or more likely would not have been human.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

That's deep, man. Very deep.

[Renate]

I like people to do exactly what I say.
Especially when I'm helping somebody unbrick their device and I say, "Now type this..."
In other realms I show a bit of reticence in telling people what to do.