Thoughts on the Nature of Love

Throughout the stories told in Pride & Prejudice, Much Ado About Nothing, & Jane Eyre, we see the theme of romantic love fleshed out in multiple relationships and in a variety of forms. While the stories do differ, there are some commonalities between the sets of lovers that are interesting when reflecting on the causes of romantic love, and the factors to consider when one is trying to achieve a successful outcome (happily ever after). Let's look at the different couples we have.

**Hero & Claudio - this couple starts out simple, but reveals the problems inherent in ignorant love. Knowledge is important because it is the basis of trust. Intimacy, which characterizes mature love, cannot exist without knowing the beloved. These two progress so quickly to matrimony they skip this process...and it almost destroys them. Thinking about their tumultuous "engagement", one has to wonder: can we expect Hero & Claudio to experience happiness in marriage? Why, or why not?

**Beatrice & Benedick - this couple is at once an unlikely duo, and yet they are universally expected to fall for one another; why is that? What makes opposites attract when it comes to love? Is that actually what is happening (are they truly opposites? are they merely so alike that their similarities are what sets them against each other originally, and brings them together eventually, etc.)? Why is Benedick the only man who does NOT jump to conclusions based on a rumor...and why is Beatrice almost the only person not prepared to simply dismiss Claudio's slander as par for the course when it comes to love? What do they understand about love that others seem to miss? Why do they "get it"?

**Jane & Bingley - is this couple another version of Hero & Claudio? Jane has more to say than Hero, and Bingley is more honorable than Claudio...are they a "believable" couple? Does such innocent happiness exist, and if it does, is their love as true or as deep and abiding as Elizabeth & Darcy's love?

**Elizabeth & Darcy - it is also easy to wonder if this couple is merely another version of Beatrice & Benedick. They are also "similar opposites"; however, they do allow us to consider another question which the others don't explore quite so directly. When we think about Darcy & Elizabeth, we see for the first time an instance where we can ask if there are things which should disqualify the one we are inclined to love (be it station, society, familial obligations, etc)? Love may bloom anywhere, but should we encourage it when what is blossoming is less of a rose and more of a common daisy (to the outside observer)? Are all loves equal, if they are true?

**Jane & Rochester - this couple brings the questionable problem of the disparity between lovers into its greatest clarity. Jane is smart, but poor and plain. Rochester is rich...perhaps not wildly good looking, but still out of her class. What role does/should attraction play in love?

We have asked, is love a fancy or a feeling? Do we choose who we love, how we love, when we love, why we love...or are we compelled as servants of love to an end which may ruin us? This tension is evident in each of these relationships; we must consider which ones are successful, and why.