Response Post

William N. Jennings, c. 1882

Response to Diana's Blog

In Diana's blog she asks

“Who hasn't been victim of an infidelity or better yet who hasn't seen an old flame and felt a burning sensation on their chest?”

This leads me to wonder about how readers connect(or don't) with this text. 

So I have been there and been there.  I would like to add that I have self-control and morals (unlike Calixta and Alcée).  Even with the shared feelings I found it hard to connect with this story.  Maybe it is because this story is not that emotional. 

It is sexual, but it does not attach the reader to the characters very well.  For some reason I feel this this trashy novel-porn style detachment, and it kind of bothers me (I do not read either of those things!).  

What is the author's point again?   

It is interesting because the more I think about this story the more I do not understand what the point is.  I know it has been called an early piece of feminist literature but I don’t see that at all.  This seems to be an extremely romantic interpretation of the ideal affair. 

Perhaps the author was hoping this kind of affair could exist.  Did she just want to give the characters the opportunity to sleep with each other? Maybe there is no deep meaning about life and marriage?

Lightning strikes the Space Shuttle Challenger
 before the launch ofSTS-8. 

I don’t think it would be that strange for an author to want to write something like this because they want their characters to have it all.  Maybe this story was more about fulfilling the author’s needs of completion and hope in happy ending romances.

How can an affair just end with everyone happy? 

Because she wrote it that way! Oh, the power of writing. Wah ha ha ha! Realism is not necessary.  I wrote it that way because I wanted it that way and there is not a darn thing you can do about.  Don’t understand? No real reason? Tough. (I just realized one of the reasons why I like to write is because I am controlling.K)

Diana's said 

“…if she respected the compromise and respect a marriage involves she wouldn't have done it”

Agreed.

And why is this not explored? I think to understand this story it might be easier to explore what is not there.

I just don’t get it (or at least enough to satisfy my curiosity).