Yeah, the reason she was impressed with his home was because the housekeeper spoke so warmly about him. As did the rest of the people around the area. You can judge a lot about a person by how well they treat those who are «below» them in the social hierarcy. Darcy obviously treated people well, and was loved by the comunity.

@@MissCaraMint yes, she loved how he cared for his people

@@lulubelle4850 yes, plenty of times she praises how deeply he cares for those he holds dear. She values how civil and gentle he is towards her after the rejection. She expected him to be upset but rather than that he was more attentive towards her AND her family. She saw that he was doing his best to change and she appreciated it. She also valued how concerned he was for her well-being when she received the letter informing Lydia's elopement, even without him going after Wickham, she was grateful that he cared for her emotions when that happened.

And it also shows those people have no understanding of Lizzie’s sense of humour or basic reading comprehension. Austen even spelled it out for them that Lizzie was joking when she told Jane her attachment started at her first seeing Pemberley and still they fail to understand it.

her opinion of him definitely changed at that point 😌 but i am going to give her the benefit of the doubt and say she gave him a second chance after he handled lydia and wickham

It’s definitely a winning combination if there’s both present Marriage requires a lot of work on yourself and as a couple, in order to invest all that effort we do need to be passionate about the person. And if we’re not mostly compatible from the start (in core beliefs and desires for life) even a lot of effort won’t help

I mean, he was rich, he could afford to be consuming and passionate. He also had a comfortable estate and the ability to drag Elizabeth's family out of the muck. The Bennett girl's couldn't afford to let love be "consuming and passionate" in the same way because their situation was too tenuous.

Yes, and to add to this the almost reversed rolls when it came to affection. So much of the literature has the woman's love portrayed as obsessive, passionate, and inconsolable, while men's love is grounded solid and rational. However Austin turns these ideas on their head.

She did have some excellent advice on the topic!

I just wish she had got to experience a romantic relationship herself :'(

@@monmothma3358 she did a few times, but amounted to nowhere

@@swymaj02 Well, it did: she enjoyed it for a while. Only because she never got married, doesn't mean she never loved or was loved .

@@adrianamatei7372 but who did she? If I am missing someone but the only person she loved rejected her, if I am not wrong. (Tom Lefroy)

😂 That is definitely a swoon worth line!!! 😂

You go girl!! 😅

Lol I just tried this and got a "ahhhh... thank you" 🤣🤣🤣

Yes, I remember that. It was after she knew his character better. She was seing how he treated her uncle and aunt. They were socially lower than her own parents but they were well educated and well behaved. Darcy had no problem with them and treated them as equals, further showing that his earlier problems with her family were more to do with lack of decorum than with lower social status. I dare say she was starting to entertain the thought of his affections remaining unchanged or that perhaps they could be rekindled because now she had a different understanding of his personality. She was enjoying his attentions for the first time. And then Lydia elopes and she's certain that now Darcy will never consider her again. It's like stealing someone's cake just when they are about to take a bite out of it.

It is easy to understand Elizabeth's dislike of Darcy in the beginning of the novel. He is arrogant. When someone mentions Elizabeth to him he says she is "tolerable". Elizabeth expresses her feelings about it when she says, "I could forgive his pride if he had not mortified mine." Also, Darcy's comment, "I am not in the mood to take what other men have spurned" is another example of his foot in mouth disease. Darcy has trouble expressing himself politely. He is almost gruff. But he is high minded and willing to own up to his mistakes, and those qualities changed the picture I had of him.

@@georgepalmer5497.

🧐 Excellent points

And we know that Darcy would be perfectly honest, because disguise of every sort is his abhorrence.

And that’s a big reason why we still love her books.

Yes!

People like to ignore that nowadays tho. They think talk about finances is "not romantic" and respect is nothing in face of love.

@@joiceraiana Yes, I agree. When I first started reading Shakespeare, I was astonished that no one in his plays seemed to find any conflict between marrying for love and marrying for money - which was a big conflict in most Victorian novels I read. But I think Shakespeare was right to think you could have both. My great-grandmother used to quote the line from Gentlemen Prefer Blondes: 'It's just as easy to fall in love with a rich man as a poor one!' While meant to be funny, obviously, I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to be financially secure before starting married life with someone: the highest percentage of divorces occur for financial reasons, so we can't deny that practical considerations matter; we aren't purely emotional creatures! But at the same time I would NEVER think two people could be happy marrying JUST for financial reasons without an emotional connection: life and relationships require balance.

That scene from S&S was originally in this video’s script! 😂 But I had to cut so much out because of timing. 😩😂

@@EllieDashwood Oh no! You should’ve added it.

@@EllieDashwood oh no :( now i need the full version!!! :D

We’re those words of Marianne in the novel (She was rather out there!) , or was a more modern, milder, meaning projected onto Kate’s attitude?

That's so cute! Love that for both of you.

lol, I hope you always enjoy your differences, that they keep you both on your toes and fresh in surprising admiration of admirable qualities in each other!

A story straight out of Barbara Cartland! I love it. Thank you for sharing.

That's so cool! Thank you for sharing!

OMG please give me your blessing. I want this. Huhu. Pride and Prejudice has raised the bar for me. Although… if my love story is like this, then that means I’ll have a bad first impression of him.

I think that might have taken awhile, though, because Austen does say that initially Lizzie was a little unhappy because Darcy "had not yet learned how to laugh at himself." Implying that he DOES learn how to laugh at himself, but not at first.

When you look at how the Bennett’s interact as a couple, then you see that Mr Bennett may at one time have been playful with Mrs Bennett to a similar degree, but because she didn’t have the same intellect it then fell into a routine where Mr Bennett ends up being an antagonist to Mrs Bennett. Elizabeth chose a partner she knew was at or just above her intellectual level, and being like her father, she looked for a best friend in her partner. In this case, because she chose well, it worked in her favour over time.

@@laurastephanieingram3114 Yes, I disagree with the people who say that Mr B is verbally abusive to Mrs B. I think he's trying to do with Mrs B exactly what Lizzie and Darcy end up doing with each other. The difference is that Lizzie and Darcy understand what's going on, while Mrs B does not. Mr B is certainly somewhat callous to the fact that Mrs B does not understand and is not enjoying it, but I think it's from cluelessness, not malice.

They do learn so much for each other in a very complex story! I think it would have been awesome if Jane Austen had written a sequel so we could see what their marriage had turned out like. 😂

Lizzie wasn't from a lower social class! Lizzie and Darcy are more or less equals (Darcy is slightly above Lizzie, but in the same class). Ellie actually has a video where she explains this very thing :)

@@harrietpotter649 same class maybe but from opposite sides within that class.

@@EllieDashwood She never wrote about married couples, at least not as main characters.

@@rebeccaholcombe9043 Darcy is very near the top of his class, Lizzie is hovering around the middle. She isn't poor; her parents could have saved adequate dowries for her and her sisters if they had thought ahead even a little.

That’s such a good point! I think maybe people just confuse attraction with love. I think movies definitely contribute to reinforce that sometimes. 😂

I have experienced both, separately. They exist. I still prefer getting to know someone before following up on either!

My grandparents were a product of a one sided love at first sight (Grandpa had to convince her to give him a chance), and at the end their relationship was so strong that when my grandma died of cancer my grandpa followed soon after. I've experienced similar situations that were non-romantic in meeting all my best friends. The way I would describe it is recognizing a soul and then following the normal getting to know you process to learn why they matter to you. At least, the real stuff. There's definitely lust at first sight which gives love at first sight a bad name.

My grandparents were a "love at first sight across a crowded room" couple. He was 25 and she was 18 so he had to do a lot of convincing to her father to be able to marry her. They were incredibly well-matched and had a very happy 54-year marriage until Grandpa passed away. Sixteen years later I caught a glimpse of my 18-year-old Grandma when she told me the story of how they met. Her face absolutely glowed while talking about him. The memory of that moment still makes me tear up.

I think love at first sight is more like you found someone to whom you clicked instantly and it actually works. Like you guys saw each other across the room, liked each other, talked and instantly clicked and it turnes out it works over time.

His timing was so perfect!!!! 😂😂😂 I wondered if anyone was going to notice his contribution.

I replayed it because I wasn't sure if I had just lost my mind and was imagining cats. 😂

A superb piece of comic timing. I wonder if you can train the cat to meow at different words, Ellie? :)

Sweet baby just wanted to be in the video!

Baby don't hurt me

Oh man, I’m so sorry. Did it end up a bit happier for you?

@@jaimicottrill2831 life is never so simple as a well written novel 😕 we are both in therapy and are on a journey of renewed commitment to one another but our relationship will never be the same. We married so very young and with so much trauma and baggage that it's a wonder we made it as long as we did before the trainwreck.

@@InThisEssayIWill... good luck to you! Very rarely does life come neatly wrapped like novels.

Same…

A friend once said she thought people tend to marry the person they're dating when they're ready to get married. I don't know if this is what happened to you but I know, for many, there is truth in what she said.

That is romance in one of its most advanced forms. 💕😂

Was this written by Anne Elliot by any chance? 😂 Hope you found your Captain Wentworth!

Recently I saw a celebrity kids post and I forget who it was but someone has a kid called Elliotte Anne.

Heehee.

It amazes me people, women especially, throwing around the word gold-digger as if beauty/youth has not been sought after by men. Should women get nothing in return?

Funny, I kinda got the exact opposite impression, that the subjects she writes on (marriage, morality, etc) are so timeless that her wisdom will continue to be wisdom. And was wisdom even before her time.

I completely agree, I see Austen to be way too introverted to ever be the cool popular girl

Prince Albert.

Yes, up until Queen Victoria, British subjects were used to their monarchs marrying purely for diplomatic reasons, not love, and openly flaunting their mistresses, while treating their royal wives like baby factories. Monarchs werent people you would choose as a role model. But with Victoria, British subjects actually had a monarch they could respect in her personal life --as well as her public life. She totally raised the standard of what a monarch could be, and what ordinary people could expect from royalty.

@@a24-45 Queen Victoria was against women having equal rights. Also, she was a horrid mother. No, I do not respect her.

@@a24-45 Also, she was treated like a baby making machine. Apparently, Prince Albert kept her knocked up so he could exert more power over the empire.

​@@sophieruby9135 I am not surprised to hear that Victoria's parenting skills were poor; but they were probably typical of how the nobility as a whole parented; and I doubt she was any worse a parent than every other British monarch -- right up to the present day included. The British monarchy has a long sad history of misguided parenting. As for her politics, she was a typical conservative, which was what you would expect for someone of her social class. ( though we can thank her conservatism for prompting her to reject a bill outlawing lesbianism - apparently she refused to sign the legislation because she didn't believe such an orientation existed LOL). However she can't be blamed for holding the nation's democratic progress back; the monarch is not supposed to be a political role. What I think is worthy of respect is simply this -- that in regard to marriage, she was not a hypocrite. Unlike earlier monarchs who paid lip service to marital fidelity and morality overall. Victoria was the real deal, she didn't just talk the talk, she walked the walk in terms of her marriage vows. People appreciated that with Victoria, what you saw was what you got. I don't agree with her politics -- but then I don't agree with the politics of many public figures of today, let alone the outdated views of 150 years ago -- but I can appreciate what it meant in the C19th to, for once, have the throne occupied by a person of integrity.

@kshamwhizzle Truth is stranger than fiction indeed.

@kshamwhizzle Good luck - maybe he just needs time to accept that you're asking because you really care about being with him? A lot of guys tend to think the girls they really respect are 'too good' for them, which leads to the aggravating situations in which a guy 'lets a girl go' for her own sake, and I'm thinking 'it's not going to do her any good if what she WANTS is to be with you; you'll make her more unhappy by leaving her for a 'better guy' she doesn't want to marry!' Hopefully your friend will come to understand this.

There’s a story missing from this thread.

Kind of what I was thinking, I may be biased because I don't really experience the crazy passionate feelings people say love is. To me love always seems gentle, consistent, unflinching, honest, and caring. A steady fire in the fire place that warms you all night as opposed to the passionate blazes that are so intense they burn your house down, and before morning even dawns, all that's left is ashes. People who say that only passion is what real love is seems crazy to me. It seems so unstable and easily doomed to failure and unhappiness. Not that love is risk free but there's a difference between taking a risk and jumping out of a plane without a parachute.

I think one can (and should) have both! Obviously if you're forced to choose, a life companion is better than a passionate fling. But intense passion was the beginning of my (now) marriage! At first, my family and friends saw the match as shallow and misguided. But it was deep, and simply incompatible with their view of me. (This is something they have admitted to me several years later.) I developed a passionate crush on my husband because of an irresistible chemistry between us. We both quickly realized that our compatibility was deep. We look for ways to make each other happy every day, and we are a good team. We make each other laugh and we make the boring moments sexier, sillier, sweeter. I wish this level of happiness for everyone. I have watched the women around me face the consequences of terrible choices in love. So maybe I learned to be repulsed by ill-mannered men, and incidentally fell for a kind person. But either way, I have a good life, and I didn't sacrifice passion for it.

@@Aelffwynn I think you misunderstand. It is about how we conceptualize the idea of "love" and which kind we consider "romantic" vs. marriage socially now and then. Most people cannot retain that sort of intense passion forever, so sooner or later it either turns into something more akin to what they sought to begin with, or the feelings between people just cools- with divorce as a likely result. Perhaps the ideal would be something midway between our romantic idea of love and their practical idea of it. But I am happy for you and your husband- that your marriage turned out happy and long.

Warm and friendship-like love is definitely the mature way to go. It’s so important that your actions come from a place of certainty rather than impulses and neurochemistry.

I think you are spot on. What Lizzie has is admiration and respect, Darcy is fully in love.

Well, he's very good looking, so that helps. He adores her, he rescued her and her entire family from disgrace, he's smart (I've always fallen for intelligent men), and he's eminently trustworthy at the highest levels. I would crawl over broken glass for a man like that.

@@edennis8578 Me too. And his passion for her makes him the most desirable man.

@@asdabir oh yes.

She respects him and admires his qualities. She also starts to welcome and feel flattered by his attentions before Lydia elopes. This is something that will last, unlike whatever her parents felt for each other when they first married. She'll probably grow to love him even more. It doesn't need to be ardent/intense/burning/whatever to be considered love and to be considered successful.

And “sex = love” is pushed on us, hard.

That was forced though. Louisa may Alcott fought/tried to keep Jo single, but the writers had a married or dead rule for female characters. Her choice in a much older, not physically attractive man for Jo was to snub the female fans that felt they saw themselves in Jo and demanded for when she will end up with laurie (the book was originally released in two parts and the first ended with Megs marriage). I could be mistaken, but I think there's a louisa quote where she says she choose Jo's love interests precisely to disappoint people or because it made her laugh. Jo was based off louisa herself, and her real 3 sisters. Jo was supposed to stay single like louisa was (til death) after the book made her rich.

I was very young when I read "Little Women." I have never forgiven Louisa May Alcott for having Jo reject Laurie and marry that old professor. Yuck! I cried more about that and Laurie marrying that brat, Amy, more than I did the death of Beth. It's been almost 60 years and I still hate the end of that book. I read "Little Men" only because I hoped that somehow Jo and Laurie would get together. Disappointed again....

@@maheenm.k1015 Yeah, she copy pasted her dad with a German accent, which is why Laurie is a 3D character we all know and love, and most people don't know Her husband's first name. (I think it was Frederick)

That’s so interesting!!!

I'm not entirely sure about Charlotte and Mr Collins... it's insinuated that Charlotte makes sure she and Mr Collins stay away from each other as much as possible - she encourages his gardening and taking long walks "for his health", and she set up her private parlour so that he would not want to sit in it, because he had no view of the road to Lady Catherine's. That sounds like they certainly have no friendship. Elizabeth even noticed that Charlotte was embarrassed by Mr Collins on a few occasions, even though she didn't say anything overtly, and I don't think you can really respect somebody who embarrasses you. That's just my opinion though - others might see it differently

​@@kiarona. I agree, Austen explicitly states , when Charlotte and Lizzy are talking about love, that Charlotte has a low opinion of men in general, that is why she can never be "romantic" as Charlotte says herself. I think Charlotte is doomed to becoming bitter and hard - because she believes she can manipulate and control Mr Collins, but he is too selfish, egocentric and patriarchal to ever compromise, or to ever put her needs ahead of his own. The only way she can keep him "content" is to give in to him on absolutely everything.

I think Charlotte will be happy because she had a realistic view of what she was getting into. She is not expecting love and she got the house she dreamed of. She appeared to be trying to find a way to live with Mr. Collins and have a safe place to live.

Sorry I have to disagree with you here. It expressly said that Charlotte accepted him out of the pure disinterested desire for an establishment. Which back then meant a home and a place of her own away from her parents. Basically there's a very good chance that Charlotte was possibly gay or at the very least asexual. She understood her role in society and picked someone who at the very minimum would not be abusive to her. He was too dumb for that. He was perfectly happy to be guided and counseled by his wife and that's exactly what she was capable of doing because her dad was just as big a dumb dumb as Mr Collins was. Jane Austen even hints at this by giving them both the first name william. What Charlotte and Mr Collins marriage actually shows is how marrying for necessity can work out if you're careful about it. It's showing not an ideal relationship but an acceptable marriage that some girls would have to suck it up and take because Charlotte was 27. With the Napoleonic Wars raging the number of eligible men was diminishing as they were constantly getting killed in war. And poor Charlotte had to take what was available to her. Missed your Colin Society is specifically described by Charlotte as irksum (annoying) and that the stupidity by which he was favored by Nature prevented his courtship from having any charms that would make a woman wish for its continuance. Basically she's saying he's a complete bumbling idiot but he's a harmless bumbling idiot and therefore she'll have him because that's what's available to her cuz she doesn't have the Dowry to get anyone better interested in her. It even says "at 27 without having ever been handsome she felt all the good luck of it." Meaning she knew that she had neither the cash nor the pretty face to get anything better and she was resigned to take a man who would eventually inherit longborn and she could go through the motions of daily life with a general expectation that he would not be stupid enough to be physically violent to her. As a clergyman he would have his reputation to protect so he would have no motivation to do that anyway.

I think a good marriage is possible, but unlikely. They would both have to make concessions that I doubt either would want to make.

Especially back in that time I'm married people kissing would have been social suicide so they did not have the advantage of that tool. Being able to kiss somebody and see your future with them is exactly what made me give up on one of my very early relationships because when I kissed him I literally watched him die. I knew that if I married him it would put him on a life path where he would be dead and I would be stuck raising at least two small children. I bailed the f*** out of that relationship so fast it's not even funny. He still died but many years after the date I saw it happen if I had stayed with him. He got 12 good years with the woman he did marry. His fate was still sealed but at least the children were older. Knowing that I have this ability I know that I could not have made it back in Jane Austen's time where that tool was not available to me.

I'm actually quite skeptical about love at first sight, as odd as it my seem considering that my husband and I started dating the day after we met in a party where we made up. What I believe that exists is attraction at first sight but actual love comes with friendship, companionship, respect and compability. That's what has keep us together all those years. I'm not dismissing attraction, it has it's value but it's not love. The problem is that people tends to mistake them.

Congrats on 20 years.

Aww this was so nice to read. Glad to know you are aware of what you have. It’s a rare find.

My husband is my rock as well. He can make me fall in love with him all over again because of the little things he pays attention to. I hate the big romantic gestures in movies and books. Give me a man that helps around the house any day over bouquets of flowers and serenades.

Good for you! You found rock solid love. What you wrote is similar to my situation. I wouldn’t trade it for anything!

Oh, I love this line! Thank you for giving me a new quote!

👀

Yes, I agree!

Marianne's turning point was when Brandon himself went to go get her mom when they thought she was dying. To be loved and cared for like that is pretty irresistable. She couldn't help but to slowly fall in love with him. I've had this notion that falling in love with someone is a conscious decision. There is a moment when you think, this person, I'm going to fall in love with them. And then all your actions start heading towards that "goal," if you may. Love doesn't catch us by surprise. At least from my own experiences and from watching those around me. With my best friends, if I've been around them too much, I can pretty much predict which people they will fall in love with, just based on watching that "conscious decision" and changes in action of directing all of one's good will towards a specific person.

In the book, Marianne doesn't really fall in love with Brandon. The book is much more cruel to Marianne. She marries him, and he's not the faithless jerk that Willoughby is, but in the book she's settling for a "good match" rather than following her heart. Emma Thompson's screenplay makes it into a better story, because Brandon's a better, more interesting person than he is in the book, so Marianne does fall in love with him.

@@Cat_Woods I didn't read it at all as not falling in love, just a different type of love. Her first "love" (actually just an intense teenage crush) was all about passion and her feelings in the moment, and turns out she didn't even really know him and it was all superficial and not real. Knowing someone adores you and that you admire them and trust them and feel safe with them and can share a good life together is a pretty good basis for falling in love slowly, while steadily getting to know each other. It doesn't sound as hot as love at first sight but actually makes a much better relationship than one mainly based on passion.

@@Cat_Woods Alan Rickman was so great!

@@Cat_WoodsDidn’t Austen say that Marianne could never do anything by halves & so progressed from gratitude & liking to passionate love? Or something to that effect.

It could be called Lizzie and Darcy. You could have episodes where Darcy rolls his eyes at Mrs. Bennett all the time. Bingley could pop in as jester of sorts.

There has been a modern side sequel written called Longbourne, the name of the Bennett's home ( can't remember the author and I am not at home to be able to get it for you ) also,there is the new side novel , The Other Bennett Sister and the novel taken from REAL diary entries from over the time of a young man's life from approximately aged 10 to a married man of the Jane Austen time, this novel ,is called Mr Darcy's Diary & side reads to Pride & Prejudiced . Sorry I am not able to give any of the Authors ( I do own the books but am away on holidays for a time)

I did read a P&P sequel about a decade ago I think it was called Pemberley it's supposed to be set 1-2 years after the end of P&P and the invented drama to give the plot something to do was that Lizzy & Darcy had no child yet while Lydia has produced 3 (the eldest of whom is 4 because who needs maths) Jane has 1 or 2 and so Lizzy thinks she's a failed wife and decides she should leave Darcy so he can marry a better, more fertile, wife. The fact that divorce and re-marriage isn't something that was feasible in Georgian England never seemed to enter the author's mind (I think there may have been legal provision for divorce based on desertion if the partner has been uncontactable for 10+ years). It was very much in the modern 'romance novel' style.

@@ElizabethJones-pv3sj that is very interesting. 'Longbourne' Is definitely a suitable mix with P&P and includes perspectives from the Bennett's house staff who like all good servants really did see most of what was going on for the families who employed them. I thoroughly enjoyed 'Mr Darcy's Diary ' and was gobsmacked to read on the last pages that it was then from a real Diary accidentally discovered just a few years back by an antiques assessor in a secret draw in a writing desk that had been sent in to be auctioned by very well known upper crust family. No one in the current family even knew about the secret draw and the furniture dated from . the Jane Austen era..The authenticated diaries tell the P&P story from the man's point of view.. it was at first thought that the 'diaries ( 5 books ) just HAD to be forgeries but they were authenticated to the correct era by walnut ink and the particular style of the books & bindings. The diaries just stop a couple of years after the man is married. When I first read it I thought oh what a good idea to write from Mr Darcy's point of view( so of the entries you could just shake him but it was typical of young wealthy men of the day. Some of their days were SO boring with NOTHING of real value to occupy them except a great fast ride in the park or a visit to a prostitute. Or their 'club' to gamble.. it is not until the very back of the book that there is an addendum that explains about the writing desk sent to auction and the discovery of the 5 leather bound diaries. Certainly made the novel all the more interesting. Some of the Diary entries are in a different font /script with often explanations at the bottom. So if the Diaries Real this seems to be the method of denoting copying. Unfortunately I am away from home so I am not able to give you the authors name but the author is apparently well known in another field but not a novelist usually. . Very interesting I think

@@ElizabethJones-pv3sj I have just googled for the authors . MR DARCY'S DIARY, By Maya Slater.is definitely the one I have read BUT there is also one of the same title by Amanda Grange. LONGBOURNE is by Jo Baker. THE OTHER BENNETT SISTER by Janice Hadlow ( I haven't read this one yet as is has just arrived at my book store . Happy reading. The Maya Slater book was printed about 2007/8. I found mine 2nd hand

I love the cheese scene.

@@adorabell4253 “do you like cheese 🧀?😉😂 my favourites Gouda..”

Haha, I love She’s the Man, it's problematic but it had its charm.

Awwww! Thank you! Hi to Brazil!!! 👋👋👋 I’m so glad you like the videos 😃😃😃😃

That’s so sweet!!! Thanks so much for watching!!!

She was his best friend’s sister who was trying to attract him. He was mildly put off but generally seemed to treat her like background, something that comes along with his friend whether he likes it or not.

And he did not, or not much.

Aww, I truly believe friendship is the root of all good relationships. If you can't be friends with your lover, parents, teacher, or whatever then can you really have a lasting good relationship with them?

Just be sure your definition and his match. Too many people think love is just that initial honeymoon period, when the “love” chemicals in the brain are still going strong. Love is work. Marriage is work. Recapturing those first feelings is important, but can get more difficult as the years go by and as we get busier.

Haha, I'm sixteen and I've been reading romance novels since the seventh grade...but, I think fifth grade started my addiction and affinity for them.

I don't think vanity/being flattered comes that much into play. Elizabeth IS deeply flattered when Darcy first proposes, but even before he starts rudely insulting her family and condition in life, she never considers accepting him. At this point, she thinks so poorly of him (as a man who, she thinks, destroyed her sister's happiness out of pride and ruined his father's protege's prospects out of jealousy and spite) that pride and flattery couldn't possibly change her feelings so completely. Imo, at Pemberley later on, his change in manners makes an impression more as a testament to his actually having a good character/disposition (being polite and kind, being a good brother etc.) than as proof of her influence over him. Don't get me wrong, she is clearly flattered, but I don't believe that would have a larger impact on her feelings if not for everything else - all that made her able to "esteem" him, as Ellie said

Good question. Did her stories reflect society’s attitudes, or argue against them?

😃😃😃