Pete’s comment > Likes and Comments

Actually, Brandon does not discover that Willoughby was responsible for ruining his ward until relatively close to same time the Miss Dashwoods leave to London. Also, i believe when a young lady is smitten...she will not believe any negativity regarding her love interest. She would probably have accused Brandon of jealousy. It would never have worked. I think at one time or another we have all experienced a Cad in our lives female or male and love IS blind.

But is this a good reason? I wasn't talking about him telling Marianne, I was thinking about him as a parent...a peer of Mrs Dashwood. He should have told HER. And really, it kind of bothers me to think that he'd let "she might not believe me" be a reason to hold back. SO WHAT if it wouldn't have worked, as Mr Knightley says, there is one thing a man can always do and that is his duty. Sorry for pressing the issue, but it is a most confusing plothole.

IOW it bothers me that he let his enfatuation direct his behavior and that folks seem willng to excuse him on that grounds. First and foremost a man does his duty and is honest...at least a man we want to judge a hero. It seems Austen, and indeed generations of readers allowed his "romantic" interest in Marianne to cloud his judgement. It should not be Mariannes eyes we should be looking through, but Elinors or better yet, Mrs Dashwood. Why isn't she incensed that this man failed to notify HER about this man he knew to be dissipated and extravagant and worse. Do we think SHE would NOT believe him. At least then he could take the moral high ground...even if it meant losing Marianne for ever...better to be right that jeopardize an honest girls future with a guy like Willoughby.

Lets say Brandon DID learn of Will's actions "about" the time Willoughby ran off. He dashes off a letter to the Dashwoods. At least it keeps Marianne from going off to London to make a fool of herself...her mother THEN would not be inclined to let her go. True she would learn about Will sooner, but better sooner than in a public setting where she is humilated in front of her obnoxious and snobbish relatives. And at least no one could come back and accuse Brandon of being cowardly. But I guess he needn't worry about that, it seems I'm the only one who feels that way about his behavior.

Pete wrote: "IOW it bothers me that he let his enfatuation direct his behavior and that folks seem willng to excuse him on that grounds. First and foremost a man does his duty and is honest...at least a man we..."

Well Pete all i can say is "writers privilege" i suppose....i know i had a personal experience once whereby i told my mother of some bad behaviour towards me on part of a cousins fiance. When she told my cousins parents..no one took it seriously enough to stop the wedding.. My cousin married him and lived a life of hell for several years before she finally threw him out. She has since remarried a great guy but honestly i don't think she has ever forgiven me for what happened. By the way he was trying to get it on with me just a few weeks before he was to be married. So, i learned to just mind my own business. Maybe Colonel Brandon senses a similar situation...whereby the mother and daughter would just think he was acting maliciously towards Willoughby because he is jealous. Food for thought.

I...guess so. IF you've had an experience like that, maybe the story works as written. Do you think you acted honorably by telling...even though it cost you? 'nough said. Thanks

I'm not going to belabor the point (much{:) and certainly will not continue to question your opinion...you make a good point. But it seems that in all of Austen's novels, while the "heros" all DO have some flaws, there is some sort of closure. I think the thing that I noted in SnS is that there seems to be no "closure" in the story addressing the hero's flaws. IOW, I could well imagine a man, failing to do the right thing at the right time. But as with the other novels, I would hope that he, the other characters and indeed the readers at large would be led to understand that it was addressed. EXA, Cot Wentworth acknowledges he might have been...I can't remember the wording, but something like vengeful and spiteful in his attitude toward Anne, but he OWNS to it and it seems like there is closure between him and Anne. Mr Knightley seems to feel like he maybe scolded Emma a little too much...but he admits it in her presence and we feel "closure." Edmund is obviously behaving irrationally in his blind infatuation with Mary, but, at least in some of the adaptations, there seems to be an acknowledgement of that flaw and an acceptance by Fanny. The Dashing Darcy behaves quite rudely and condescendingly at the beginning, but we see that he acknowledges this to Eliza, bringing closure to those flaws. Even the almost perfect Henry Tilney behaves somewhat abruptly toward the naive Catherine regarding her wild imaginings of what must have happened to the mother. But, at least in one film version of the story, he mentions it and there is closure, in my mind. But in SnS, there seems to be no recognition...by Brandon himself, the Dashwoods, or Austen as the narrator...anyone that what Brandon did was at all ungentlemanly. So that's why this story kind of sticks in my craw, so to speak. I understand, I think, that this was Austen's first novel...is that right? And I've read some who observe it could have done with a second draft and sometimes I think they are right. This story doesn't seem to hold together well IMHO.

I guess I have a life story that is somewhat opposite of yours. My sister married a guy, one of my friends from high school. They dated and married after I'd gone of to college, so I knew little of what was going on. Fairly soon after they married, she realized he was running around on her. They divorced...she was devastated, naturally. But what really hurt her and the rest of our family was later, we realized many of their friends in the church KNEW he was running around...even before they married, but said nothing to any of us. Now, while we realize we're supposed to forgive folks, we have trouble relating to that group because we believe they protected him and dissed our sister. IOW, I think we'd have appreciated a heads up before they married rather than let it pretty much ruin her life as it did. She was so ruined she never remarried. So maybe my sensitivities run the other way.

Pete wrote: "I...guess so. IF you've had an experience like that, maybe the story works as written. Do you think you acted honorably by telling...even though it cost you? 'nough said. Thanks"

Everyone has character flaws....i think Jane's heros are human. They are also shown to be underestimated by most until the story fully unfolds....writers technique..suspense. SNS was her first published novel. In my situation i actually thought i was telling my mother of the experience in confidence, i was young and never believed she would tell the rest of the family. I was very embarrassed by the experience. But, i trully believe that my cousin to this day sort of holds it against me, even though i was not at fault in any way. I'm sorry about your sister. She is probably a sensitive person. She should not let this ruin her. What seems so devasting at the time can heal. We must keep living. Sorry about the people at the Church, but again my point...often people...even good people hesitate to intervene...i wonder why??

I always assumed Brandon didn't say anything earlier because marriage was supposed to "settle" young men, and so it was somewhat accepted that a man could have his little affairs beforehand without it being an issue within the marriage.

If Willoughby had seduced a woman of a lower class, it would not have been such a big deal; it wasn't the act of seduction so much as who he seduced that was outrageous. Not that seducing the servants was approved of, either, but it was a considerably lesser crime.

There's also the fact that, even after his crimes are exposed, and even though she is distressed by his rudeness toward his wife, and even though he mostly ignores the pain he's caused Mariane AND says he'd be devastated by Marinne's marriage while not showing any concern for her health or recovery when she's quite ill, Elinor still struggles to hold him accountable after their last talk near the end of the book. She intellectually recognizes that she's responding to his wishes rather than to the facts of the case, and struggles to put her reason in charge rather than her feelings.

If he can sway Elinor that much, under those conditions, nothing Brandon would have said before Willoughby's engagement was known would have made a speck of difference with Marianne or her mother. Marianne still believed in him after it was clear he was avoiding her, and after he'd rejected her at the party. That trust would have survived a lot of things he'd done that she personally hadn't seen; given half a chance, she'd easily find a way to justify him to herself.