...
Show More
I've always been drawn to love stories where, when someone finds a soul mate, that person knows them inside and out, and loves them inside and out, with just the barest of interactions to go on. Such is the case with George and Lucy in this book. All it takes are a few stilted conversations, a harrowing encounter in Florence and a kiss in a Tuscan meadow--and he knows he loves her and is willing to bare his heart to her and help her find her true self through both actions and words. He fears no embarrassment and never doubts that she loves him too, even when she flat out denies any feeling for him. Who among us wouldn't swoon for someone like George?
In the real world, at least in my experience, the truth of love is more complicated. People can't read you that easily--or if they can, such clarity is impeded by the fact that we all doubt ourselves so much, and second guess ourselves so much, that both the one who needs to be brave and the one who needs someone to brave on their behalf dare not speak or act. Edwardian England was a strait-laced society. But we are equally bound today by our desire not to upset anyone or rock anyone's vision of themselves. So maybe a love as spontaneous and simple and true as George's for Lucy is still possible--and maybe it's also possible that a modern Lucy, willing herself NOT to feel as she does because she doesn't wish it, could still see the light. But I kind of doubt it. Someone who spoke as directly as Mr. Emerson, George's father, does to Lucy at the end could easily be branded as a creep. I know I would make that judgment. It's hard for me to imagine a circumstance where I wouldn't.
All the more reason to read and enjoy this romantic book. It has made me think about the restraints I once laid on myself when I was younger, the concerns I had for what others thought. I wonder how many of them are still there. I wonder to what extent they still hold me back from inappropriate actions, and what "inappropiate" really means.
In the real world, at least in my experience, the truth of love is more complicated. People can't read you that easily--or if they can, such clarity is impeded by the fact that we all doubt ourselves so much, and second guess ourselves so much, that both the one who needs to be brave and the one who needs someone to brave on their behalf dare not speak or act. Edwardian England was a strait-laced society. But we are equally bound today by our desire not to upset anyone or rock anyone's vision of themselves. So maybe a love as spontaneous and simple and true as George's for Lucy is still possible--and maybe it's also possible that a modern Lucy, willing herself NOT to feel as she does because she doesn't wish it, could still see the light. But I kind of doubt it. Someone who spoke as directly as Mr. Emerson, George's father, does to Lucy at the end could easily be branded as a creep. I know I would make that judgment. It's hard for me to imagine a circumstance where I wouldn't.
All the more reason to read and enjoy this romantic book. It has made me think about the restraints I once laid on myself when I was younger, the concerns I had for what others thought. I wonder how many of them are still there. I wonder to what extent they still hold me back from inappropriate actions, and what "inappropiate" really means.