Most people consider marriage to be a sacred pack legally and morally. Since a popularity in partnership versus actual legal binding marriage is on an upward trend, the same principal can be applied as would to marriage because they act the same for the most part outside of the legal side. Taking this ideal into account, the actions of the Ryder in The Wife of His Youth can be see as reprehensible nowadays, but would the lack of acknowledge of his previous relationship have been back then? The groups in class informed us that slave marriages were not considered legal until after the Civil War and when the proper legal documents are filled out. So, legally it is fine for him to remarry but would society still be okay with it? In my opinion, not entirely because it can reflect what he might do in the future, especially since he admitted that he thought of his first wife as his legal wife in all ways but actually legal.
The Passing of Grandison reflects another take on marriage. Love is not in the equations and for the time period that would not be uncommon because marriage was more legal than emotionally. Should she marry the guy? Is pity enough? Isn't the slave's love for his family truer even though it is less legal because he gives up his own freedom for it? Would Grandison have even left if not pressured into it? What does marriage mean during this time?
Hi,
ReplyDeleteFor the Wife of His Youth story I thought that back then for him not to acknowledge her would have been okay in societies eyes, but perhaps morally it would not have been. I think ultimately that was the true driving force behind him telling everyone that she was his wife. I know that the story made it seem like he was asking permission of society, but I think that if that were truly the case, then he would not have had her there, but would have brought her in later. Just my take on the story. For the Passing of Grandison, I do not believe that a slaves love is less truer than the love of anyone else. It was just the time period and the white slave owners believing that they were better than their slaves. I also think that Grandison would have left. I think he played dumb and like the family meant the world to him because he had to, but that given the chance he would have left and sought out freedom. This is ultimately what he did, with help of course, but then he made connections and returned for his family and the love of his life, showing that true love has no skin tone.
AmyN
I like your comparison between the love Grandison has for his family and the "love" that Charity displays for Dick. It seems to me that the love amongst slaves was greater than that amongst whites at the time because of the legal side of things. While whites worried about who they married because of the money they had, status, etc, blacks did not have to worry about these things because, legally, a slave didn't have belongings or status. This allowed slaves to be more emotionally connected to their partners without the legal and economical implications.
ReplyDelete-Stefanie Eggers
The "legal versus moral" idea is important in both these stories, as you say, Kristen, and that's a good point about Grandison's love being greater even though he's willing to leave (and then come back).
ReplyDelete