ext_17827 ([identity profile] donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] donnaimmaculata 2007-01-05 05:58 pm (UTC)

"In love" isn't really defined except by being this true concept that's as real as being diabetic or dyslexic or from New Jersey.

Yes! Yes! Oh, this is a perfect definition.

"Love" is such an abstract concept that it can be safely used as a deus-ex-machina to propel any story - like, I feel, was done in "Blackpool". Irrational or illogical actions can thus be explained away: "Oh, they were in love." But I think that precisely because "love" is an abstract concept, a good author should not use the abstract itself but demonstrate the individual and distinguishing characteristics of that particular romance. In other words: show how the characters are in love, not tell that they are.

I find Lizzie and Darcy quite difficult, to be honest. I'm very much influenced by the BBC mini series, where the actors had such great chemistry, so that I can't judge objectively. So yeah, I suppose they work for me, because they work for me in the series. Plus, the characters are equals, intellectually and emotionally. They talk, they discuss things and they argue: as equal partners, not, as in case of Mr. Knightley, as the older man reprimanding the younger woman and telling her that he does that to educate her.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting