oldfashionedbooklove

[oldfashionedbooklove]

The reason Mr Darcy is an iconic literary character whose appeal has endured for more than two centuries is not because he's somehow simultaneously both a brooding, Byronic romantic hero and a poor socially awkward shy boy who's too nervous to talk to his crush.

The reason Mr Darcy has enduring appeal is because he transforms from a rich, conceited and utterly unpleasant snob into the best version of himself after a thorough rebuke from the heroine. Instead of resenting Elizabeth when she tells him how much she dislikes him, he realises that she was correct, that he cannot stand the person he has become either. Darcy listens, learns and grows as a person following her reproach of him. For all this, he expects absolutely nothing in return for it from her. Not her love, or her approval, or her thanks. Nothing.

Mr Darcy's character arc is a beautiful example of redemption; of a man turning into the best version of himself he possibly can be out of love not just for the heroine but for his fellow human beings... because being a better person is the right thing to do.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

The craziest thing about Mr. Darcy's first proposal is that he goes on a passionate rant about how awful her family is and somehow he expects Elizabeth to accept him.

He spoke well; but there were feelings besides those of the heart to be detailed, and he was not more eloquent on the subject of tenderness than of pride. His sense of her inferiority, of its being a degradation, of the family obstacles which judgment had always opposed to inclination, were dwelt on with a warmth which seemed due to the consequence he was wounding, but was very unlikely to recommend his suit.

Which means that he either:

Didn't think she would care (clearly he hasn't learned the "I can insult my family but you cannot" rule)

Thought that she would be flattered by how her awesomeness/the strength of his love has overcome his hesitations

Was too wrapped up in his own struggles to even consider what she would think about his rant

And this all kind of goes back to how his big first line isn't that romantic, it's so much about him:

“In vain have I struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you.”

He has struggled, he loves, he has feelings, and they must come out, but where is consideration for Elizabeth? It sets such a contrast to the second opening line. His feelings can now be repressed, if she desires it:

“You are too generous to trifle with me. If your feelings are still what they were last April, tell me so at once. My affections and wishes are unchanged; but one word from you will silence me on this subject for ever.” (emphasis author's)

(add to this that he says that he respects her family in the line prior)

The first proposal is so much about him. The growth between the two is beautiful.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

please stop writing "viscous" when you mean "vicious", it produces the weirdest mental images ever

[oldfashionedbooklove]

How will the world end?

it’s genuinely not something i think too much about. there are people to love and dishes to do in the meantime.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

A translation of British sayings, what non-British people think they mean, and their actual meaning.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

The Way to Make a Book, by L.M. Montgomery, 1915

[oldfashionedbooklove]

[oldfashionedbooklove]

your life is not an optimization problem

[oldfashionedbooklove]

From The Great Redwall Feast and A Redwall Winter's Tale written by Brian Jacques, illustrated by Christopher Denise.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

guys I had this realization the other day that Redwall works really well for reading aloud, and kinda half-remembered something about the author reading to kids? So I looked it up to see if I had made a connection.

And it turns out, yes, actually, because he read aloud to kids at a school for the blind. But all the books they gave him to read were depressing. So he wrote Redwall, a story about heroism and courage and making it through struggles, and filled it with so many sensory, visual details so he could give them something better and I just-- that's so wholesome-- help

[oldfashionedbooklove]

What’s not talked about enough is that although Jane admits Rochester is not conventionally handsome, she’s still deeply attracted to him—just not in terms of looks. Her attraction is rooted in his masculinity: his physical strength, commanding presence, and protective nature. There’s a powerful energy in how he moves through space, how he holds himself, and Jane feels drawn to it.

Rochester seems aware, at least on some level, that Jane is physically affected by him. He often initiates physical closeness—through hand-holding or simply being near her.

A key moment in this dynamic is the night Jane saves him from the fire in his bed. It’s charged with sensual tension. The darkness, the intimacy of the situation, and the adrenaline of the moment stir something physical in Jane. It’s not the reason she loves him, but it’s the moment she becomes aware of a deeper, more visceral attraction. That night awakens her to feelings she hadn’t allowed herself to fully understand before—a kind of feverish desire that catches her off guard.

This physical undercurrent becomes especially important during their engagement and breakup. Jane initiates a no contact rule during their engagement month, as she doesn’t want to be swept up in the ecstasy of touch before knowing this is all really happening. During their breakup when Rochester’s words fail to persuade Jane to stay, he turns to his body. He closes the distance between them, trying to embrace her to make her yield—attempting to move her flesh when her spirit won’t be swayed.

Jane is fully aware of this. She knows how susceptible she is to him physically, which is exactly why she insists on keeping her distance. It’s an act of emotional self-defense, a refusal to let physical desire cloud her judgment or compromise her values. It’s a clear assertion of control, a way to protect her values and autonomy when her emotions are still very much entangled.

What makes all of this especially poignant is the irony that, by the end of the novel, Rochester loses many of the very physical qualities Jane once found compelling. After his injury, he struggles to believe that Jane still wants him. He wonders why she would return when his strength and independence—qualities he assumes she admired in him—are gone. But that’s the beauty of it. Jane may have been drawn to his physicality, but it was never the foundation of her love. Her feelings were always rooted in something deeper: the connection of their minds and souls. Her return proves that what she loves in Rochester transcends appearance, strength, or dominance. It’s the essence of who he is.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

Who’d’ve thought I’d find a kindred spirit in Ulysses S. Grant.

Ulysses S. Grant 🤝 Cousin Stickles

[oldfashionedbooklove]

WHERE ARE ALL THE LM MONTGOMERY BLOGS ON THIS WEBSITE

[oldfashionedbooklove]

I truly hate the word "unalive." There are so many other euphemisms that fictional Italian mobsters worked so hard to provide you with and you just ignore them.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

🥹🥹🥹

They should invent a method of asking for reassurance that nobody secretly hates you that doesn't make people secretly hate you.

[oldfashionedbooklove]

It’s possible that Montgomery never intended to stick to a chronology. Here’s my theories:

- We know Jem is 21 in Rilla of Ingleside (chapter 1) and RoI is set in 1914. That means Jem has to be born in 1893. Rilla is 15 (chapter 2) in 1914, so she was born in 1899, making Jem 6 when she’s born. This somewhat contradicts Anne of Ingleside, because when Rilla is born Jem is 7 (chapter 3), but it’s very possible Jem turns 22 right after Rilla turns 15.

- We know Marilla is 85 in Rainbow Valley (chapter 2) and Jem is 13 (chapter 3). That means RV is set in 1906, and Marilla was born in 1821, and was 72 when Jem was born. This fixes the Rilla timeline a bit though, because she is 6 and 13-6=7. Nan & Di are 10 in RV, making them 3 years younger than Jem, which holds up with AOI, where they’re 7 when he’s 10.

- We know Marilla is at least 50 when AOGG happens (chapter 9), though in Anne of Avonlea, which is set 5 years later, she says she lived there for 60 years (chapter 17). But in Anne of the Island she says, “out of her sixty years she had lived only the nine that had followed the advent of Anne” (chapter 22). 60-9=51, so Marilla is 51 in AOGG. Anne turns 20 in chapter 19 of AotI, so she and Marilla are around 40 years apart. 1821+51=1872, setting AOGG around 1872; 1872-11=1861, making Anne born in 1861.

- If Marilla is 85 in RV, 85-40=45—Anne is 45 in RV. Jem is 13 in RV, and 45-13=32, making Anne 32 when Jem is born. We know Anne married at 25 (Anne’s House of Dreams, chapter 2) so that puts her wedding in 1886. That’s a gap of 7 years between her marriage and Jem’s birth… which is incorrect, because when Anne is married, Dora Keith is 15 (chapter 2) and after Jem is born, Dora is 17 (chapter 36). Which is correct, because in Anne of Avonlea, Anne is 16 and Dora is 6, making them 10 years apart (chapter 1).

- Also, in RoI it’s mentioned Gilbert and Anne were married 24 years (chapter 20). 1886+24=1910. So we’re 4 years off.

- That means Anne is 27 years older than Jem. 1893-27=1866. Marilla is 72 years older than him, because 85-13=72. But 72-27=45. It’s not possible for Marilla to be 45 in AOGG. So the timeline is definitely 5-7 years off.

Here’s the interesting thing. In December 1893, Prince Edward Island had a general election. According to Wikipedia, “This was the first general election of Prince Edward Island won by the Liberal Party” [1] I grant you that’s not exactly what Montgomery describes in AHoD, but it could serve as inspiration. Also, in AOGG Marilla describes a Conservative Canadian premier as having “such nose” (chapter 18). Now Sir John A. Macdonald, a Conservative, apparently served as Premier of Canada from 1855-1867 [2], then as Prime Minister from 1867-1873 and 1878-1891. If Anne is born in 1866, she’s 11 in 1877. But if she’s born in 1861, she’s 11 in 1872. In 1872 OR in 1877, Macdonald might definitely have visited PEI for political reasons and he would certainly be describable as having “such a nose.”

None of this is conclusive, really, but in my opinion Montgomery wrote about her experiences regardless of where they fit in the real historical timeline.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1893_Prince_Edward_Island_general_election

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_joint_premiers_of_the_Province_of_Canada

Rilla of Ingleside created a new timeline...

Anne's House of Dreams mentioned a historical event - a federal election: “Mistress Blythe, the Liberals are in with a sweeping majority. After eighteen years of Tory mismanagement this down-trodden country is going to have a chance at last.” (AHoD).

From Wikipedia: "The 1896 Canadian federal election was held on June 23, 1896, to elect members of the House of Commons of Canada of the 8th Parliament of Canada. Though the Conservative Party, led by Prime Minister Charles Tupper, won a plurality of the popular vote, the Liberal Party, led by Wilfrid Laurier, won the majority of seats to form the next government. The election ended 18 years of Conservative rule."

It wouldn't be surprsing, but... it was also the year in which Jem Blythe was born! The election took place few weeks after his birth: "When Anne came downstairs again, the Island, as well as all Canada, was in the throes of a campaign preceding a general election." (AHoD).

So... according to this timeline, Walter was born a year later (1897), then the twins (1899), Shirley (1901) and Rilla (1903).

The point is... at the outbreak of the war, Walter would have been only 17 years old, the twins 15, Shirley 13, Rilla 11...

Shirley would have been too young to participate in the war and Walter would have barely turned nineteen at the time of the Battle of Flers-Courcelette in September of 1916...

Someone in one of my older posts noticed that puff sleeves fashion suggested that Anne of Green Gables took place in 1880s rather than 1870s... so it would make sense!

I wonder why Montgomery chose Rilla as her teenage heroine (according to the original chronology, Rilla should have been only 11 years old), while there were 15-year-old twins...

Can you imagine Nan and Di as the main characters of the war book? Two young girls at Queen's, trying to come to terms with rapidly changing world? Rilla and Shirley at Ingleside, growing closer in such trying times? Teenage boys - Jem and Walter - who had to choose if they wanted to sacrifice their life at even younger age - at eighteen? Walter, never reaching the age of twenty (or maybe - dare I hope - coming back home safely)? Anne and Gilbert in their 40s, trying to collect all the broken pieces that was once their family?

It would have been equally good, in my opinion. I wonder... why Montgomery felt she had to suddenly change a whole chronology?

Side note: of course, I love Rilla of Ingleside. But I am just curious... (Nan and Di of Ingleside would be a good book, too!).

@diario-de-gilbert-blythe @gogandmagog @pinkenamelheart @valancystirling48

[oldfashionedbooklove]

They are not long, the days of wine and roses:  Out of a misty dream  Our path emerges for a while, then closes  Within a dream.

— Ernest Dowson