(Untitled)

[snowystingray]

Nicked from crumpeteer: a discussion of five fictional loves. You are forewarned about my strange tastes -- this post may shed some light on the reason why I've never actually had a significant other. Also, this is by no means a comprehensive list. I really hate how everything is always broken down into a "top five" or "best of" list, as if I could really

Comments

[crumpeteer]

I personally thought all along that Laurie liked Jo. It wasn't just a passing fancy of "oh she's pretty" like with Meg or a feeling of compassion like with Beth or rebound like with Amy, Laurie loved Jo on that basic seeing eye to eye level in that they had a meeting of the minds. Like I said, I never bought into Jo's reasons for turning him down mainly because Alcott didn't seem to buy into them either. It's like she wanted her character to be independent and self reliant and realized she couldn't do that with her married so she had her turn down Laurie, then decided to marry her off anyway.

[snowystingray]

Alcott didn't seem to buy into them either

You know, I always wondered if there was something personal that caused her to write relationships the way she did. I'm definitely not the most informed person about her life, but after reading Little Women I went through several of her books and seem to remember the same events coming over and over again; girl spends book developing relationship with boy, and then ends up choosing somebody else. Again, it has been ages since I've read any of them -- I'm scared to write this in case I am proved wrong! It's just an impression I remember having, I'm not sure if there is actually anything to it

[crumpeteer]

Basically, the lesson seems to be that you should marry somebody you can lead a comfortable, respectful life with but not somebody who would ever inspire passion or feelings of naughtiness. Because... you know. Naughty!!Exactly. There's like this prudish standard there. Laurie and Jo would have had a passionate relationship. They would have bickered, they would have had fun, they would have had passionate love; all things that would have come because they were friends first and completely comfortable with each other. It's like Alcott decides to trade that in so Jo and Laurie can have platonic, tepid relationships with other people. Jo's husband is old enough to be her father and I never get the impression at any point that Jo's thinking "he's just so studly I can't wait to get him to the boudoir". There's no passion there. It's like she's marrying so she can have a professor in the house. With Laurie, while Amy might be easy on the eyes, there's no meeting of the minds there. You can't tell me clever, wild, unconventional Laurie isn't

[snowystingray]

I've read quite a bit of her earlier stuff and it's all gothic and full of romance and passion

Ooh, heh, now I feel a bit silly for rambling on about that for so long, because of course you already know what I'm talking about! I've never read any of her earlier books, only the usual ones that you find in the children's section of the library (Eight Cousins, Little Men, etc.). Now I am quite curious about her works in a different genre... Do you have any recommendations?

Is Laurie going to be content with Amy? Not unless he gets a lobotomy.

Haha, I couldn't help but laugh at that. Because it's so true! I think Laurie sees Amy as something of a novelty; she's a part of the family he has come to rely on, but she's also a part of the cultured, fashionable world now. It's like the girls he flirted with in college because Jo wouldn't let him make love to her have suddenly smushed together with somebody who kind of sort of reminds him of Jo if he squints his eyes and tilts his head just this way. Once that wears off, I don't think they