That's a ripper post, Laura. Jan Sardi sounds like a good choice of interviewer."upnhrbne" captcha, sounds like Hobbit-speak for something.
That's interesting. I would have agreed with AD about Col Brandon's characterisation being lacking...until I read what you had to say. But do you really think Col B appears to have enough going for him by the end of the book? I can't really remember, myself, which might suggest that he doesn't or that my memory is too clouded by the Emma Thompson S&S film.I mean, based on Alan Rickman's performance, I would have written him off with 'icky older man with smoker's teeth and a strange muffled voice. Anyone can read poetry to a sick person.'As for Willoughby, I would have thought the point was that he's a bit of a rake onto which any young woman would project her fantasies. But agree that might make for rather thin television after a while.
No, I don't think Colonel B has a lot going for him in by the end of the novel. He has *some things* going for him. That sob story he tells Elinor about the two Elizas is really meant to establish him as a sentimental hero. And he really does like music. But the novel on purpose and deliberately marries Marianne to a man who deserves her and is worthy of her, but with whom she is not passionately in love. And that's OK. Happiness is attainable in lots of ways. Elinor and Marianne's romantic trajectories swap. Elinor gets the love match and Marianne gets the man who is suited to her.Willoughby - well, it think it matters greatly that Marianne not be entirely wrong about him and the genuineness of his feelings for her. It matters less that he is weak and changeable. If he has really been a bastard all along, then Marianne is entirely mistaken to have any faith in her own perceptions. That really buggers up the novel; it becomes thin like you say.
Post a Comment