Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches? I'm posting this here after reading some of the comments on Peter's tale on the other board (to avoid intruding on his work) . My thread title is inspired by how a total outsider would see the Lizzie / Darcy affair. In points of order, Darcy first, and observing canon as much as possible: Darcy..... was rude, arrogant to the point of insult and considered most of the society that the Bennet's moved in way beneath him. At twenty seven he hadn't managed to involve himself in any relationship of mention with a woman, and didn't even seem to have many male friends outside of Charles Bingley and some hinted-at associates when in London. He made depreciating comment about Lizzie in private and, on the one occasion, however mildly,, in public. In his favour, he was reasonably handsome, disgustingly rich and seemed to love and care for his sister dearly. He knew little or nothing about Lizzie beyond her having fine eyes and found the briefest of conversations leaving him tongue-tied. Despite his university education where he must have had to converse, he comes across as remote and distant with little desire to mingle with society. In short, despite his wealth, is he really the sort of man to attract an intelligent woman as a husband, especially after listing all her discrepancies? ( The need of the period for women to marry security is not considered in the question). Elizabeth.... Described loosely as "pretty" with a light pleasing figure, intelligent, outspoken and high-spirited, Lizzie, shared her father's pastime of making fun of people ( what she gaily termed "the ridiculous" ). Despite her intelligence she swallowed Wickham's lies hook, line and brass-buttons. Without recourse to any information of the truth of his lies, she made no attempt to seek out the reality, preferring to let her dislike and prejudice against Darcy be her guide. She was outspoken against Charlotte Lucas for being content with security over romance and somewhat bossy in her opinion (for that is all it was at the time) of Caroline Bingley based on dislike. Without knowing the truth of things she gave Darcy a verbal tongue-lashing about his treatment of Wickham and laughed at his proposal (in fairness, most would). Quite what attracted Darcy to her is a little puzzling as she was relatively poor, had a mother who was a constant embarrasment in company and a family he regarded as too far below his own social level to even consider associationg with. What exactly was the attraction since they never really had a decent conversation and were uncomfortable in each others company? Therefore.....due to a total lack of competition ( Mr Collins was never that), would either have considered the other if a suitable alternative (as in Peter's Captain Bingley etc) had come along. Would Darcy have stepped up to the mark and made a determined effort to win Lizzie, or she even considered him with a suitable alternative on the scene..? I realise Madame Guillotine may await me for even asking such questions, but, hey-ho, it's a fan-fic site....(-:https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121106#msg-121106Mon, 20 Apr 2026 11:39:47 +0100 Phorum 5.2.22 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121235#msg-121235 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121235#msg-121235
My real point was that while all this is true, what Mrs. Reynolds says of him is also true (and Wickham says some of the same things though he makes excuses for it) and has been true all along.

We do see that Darcy can behave in a gentlemanly manner. But after the proposal he seeks out an introduction to the Gardiners and toward the end he behaves with civility toward Mrs. Philips, Sir William and Mr. Collins. This is what I mean by his manners have improved. He was always capable of good manners but now he is making more of a point of behaving well and toward a broader range of people.]]> Amytat Tea RoomWed, 04 May 2016 22:35:40 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121234#msg-121234 It was Elizabeth actually, but hey-ho..(-: N.F.Mhttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121234#msg-121234 Jim G.M Tea RoomWed, 04 May 2016 22:23:47 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121233#msg-121233 Please, the character's name was Lizzy, not Lizzie(nfm)https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121233#msg-121233 Margaret F Tea RoomWed, 04 May 2016 21:47:53 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121231#msg-121231 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121231#msg-121231
Pride and Prejudice is a very satisfying story from beginning to end, yet still leaves that strange sensation of never really getting inside any of the characters. I love its authentic, historical evoking atmosphere that gives the feeling of imparting much information loosely without actually defining anything. The lack of detail makes the readers mind work imparting their own mental suggestions instead of just taking in flat, unarguable statements of fact. The characters seem to drift in and out without the need of real-time and I particularly love Mr amd Mrs Bennet , the Reverend Collins and Lady Catherine as totally essential to the story whilst doing nothing of real consequence. Hope this makes sense.]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomWed, 04 May 2016 18:49:30 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121228#msg-121228 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121228#msg-121228 Peter Tea RoomWed, 04 May 2016 15:21:39 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121225#msg-121225 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121225#msg-121225
Jane Austen didn't waste many words on physical descriptions of her characters to let actions speak louder than words, as the saying goes, and, in the case of the primary males in Pride and Prejudice, little time even on them at all. Bingley disappeared from the scene entirely for eight months and Darcy flitted here and there appearing only in mention when Lizzie was involved or related to her.. It does give us licence to use our imaginstions (even if a little wildly at times).(-:

Darcy, is effectively a mystery man that we know very little of.]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomWed, 04 May 2016 13:02:26 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121221#msg-121221 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121221#msg-121221
The difficulty is that while Elizabeth's thought processes are open to us, Darcy's are not and must be inferred - leaving us aspiring writers full play in our imaginings. :)]]> Peter Tea RoomWed, 04 May 2016 01:39:16 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121218#msg-121218 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121218#msg-121218 Amytat Tea RoomTue, 03 May 2016 22:02:28 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121211#msg-121211 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121211#msg-121211 Sarah Waldock Tea RoomTue, 03 May 2016 19:54:59 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121210#msg-121210 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121210#msg-121210 Jim G.M Tea RoomTue, 03 May 2016 19:48:07 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121203#msg-121203 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121203#msg-121203 Peter Tea RoomTue, 03 May 2016 11:37:44 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121197#msg-121197 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121197#msg-121197 Amytat Tea RoomTue, 03 May 2016 01:51:08 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121196#msg-121196 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121196#msg-121196 Amytat Tea RoomTue, 03 May 2016 01:46:00 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121195#msg-121195 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121195#msg-121195
Quote

I hope you will forgive my facietiousness
Ah, sorry I didn’t catch your tone.

Quote

The very fact that we argue and have different interpretations of things shows that there is much content to do that over in her works and views.
Agreed. :)

Re Mrs. Reynolds: I have trouble imagining she’d be so enthusiastic about her family if she worked for Lady Catherine but if we are treating her as if she were real, it’s possible. However if we are treating her as a plot device it seems to me that the whole reason for her to say all this is for Lizzy to learn things about Darcy that she couldn’t have observed herself. Not to say that Mrs. Reynolds is unbiased, or doesn’t fangirl him a bit but IMO there’s meant to be a lot of truth in what she says.]]> Amytat Tea RoomTue, 03 May 2016 01:44:28 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121193#msg-121193 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121193#msg-121193 Jim G.M Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 22:58:13 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121192#msg-121192 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121192#msg-121192 Sarah Waldock Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 21:33:41 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121190#msg-121190 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121190#msg-121190 Sarah Waldock Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 21:30:17 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121189#msg-121189 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121189#msg-121189
http://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?5,120684,120684#msg-120684]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 18:49:04 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121187#msg-121187 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121187#msg-121187
I could see the 'fag' tie being veered when Darcy left school for university and re-established probably by accident at some social setting or other.]]> Peter Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 16:57:59 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121185#msg-121185 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121185#msg-121185Tom Brown's Schooldays, ( with Stephen Fry as the headmaster) only last week,which dealt with fags and bullying as its main theme.

The Bingleys came from a good family and certainly a wealthy one, but if you are right, then Darcy must have known something of Bingley's background. The topic of Darcy observing the class differences which Caroline concealed and looked down on has always puzzled me a little, given her snide remarks about Gracechurch Street and its trade associations.]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 16:48:50 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121183#msg-121183 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121183#msg-121183 Sarah Waldock Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 16:13:32 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121180#msg-121180 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121180#msg-121180happy endings and love conquering all Amy, when I say it was just that. One of my many faults. (-:

I've stated before that apart from Persuasion, I don't regard any of Jane Austen's stories primarily as romance works in the Barbara Cartland pink fluffy cloud land of romantic nonesense fiction, but intellectual studies ( or the much quoted social commentaries) in humour and everyday middle class life. If they were not so, I doubt many men would read them, for starters. I most certainly would not. I am quite happy to read good books by anyone, male or female (indeed Catherine Cooksons gritty northern sagas are utterly excellent and her Fifteen Streets very reminiscent of the area I grew up amongst in Lancashire) ), and Jane Austen indeed wrote good books. The very fact that we argue and have different interpretations of things shows that there is much content to do that over in her works and views. Historically, someone who lived the period they wrote of, Austen, Bronte, Dickens, Conan Doyle etc, I devour the works of for the very authentic historical revelations of travel, transport, waggon wheels and candle-lit, quill-written letters that they contain and were part of their everyday lives. That said, and despite the major social differences the era makes, many internal feeling are no different than today and probably we'll always argue over those as part of the human condition. Such is life. (-:

Re Mrs Reynolds, an excellent lady indeed, but a servant nevertheless. The faitful old housekeeper/family retainer beloved of all who can see no wrong in her Lord and master (he is paying her wages after all (-:) Her Christian attitude almost tells us she is not someone to find fault in much.]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 14:05:38 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121179#msg-121179 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121179#msg-121179
Quote
Deb P.
The novel tells us that Bingley and Darcy had a steady friendship, which implies to me that they'd been friends for years.

With the Bingleys being from the north ( possibly a big town or a port?) and having trade roots not likely to be in stately home land, and their father only having been dead a short time, I consider this unlikely. Firstly, there is the age gap. Darcy, at twenty seven, is five years older than Bingley's twenty-two at the end of the novel. This means that it would be unlikely they had met socially, or even at University, till after Bingley's father died due to the dreaded "trade" connections that Caroline made pains to conceal. Personally, I think it more likely that they had met in London during a season, possibly only a year back as Caroline obviously had met Georgiana ( who would only have been fifteen even then) and that would be unlikely to have happened in the north. There is certainly an unexplained situation as to how they met, and mine is but one view. I8'm sure this has been discussed in the past before I came here?]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 13:26:28 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121173#msg-121173 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121173#msg-121173
Quote

I hardly see "deeply-rooted dislike" as any sign of affection, never mind love.

Yes but her change from deeply-rooted dislike to affection is carefully documented. After his letter she stops hating him, after seeing him at Pemberley she isn't sure how she feels, after Jane's letter she feels she, "could have loved him", later She began to comprehend "that he was exactly the man who, in disposition and talents, would most suit her." Until finally she loves him (or that's what she tells her sister and father so I believe her.)]]> Amytat Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 05:14:24 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121172#msg-121172 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121172#msg-121172
I wish JA had given us the dialog of Lizzy conquering her father's incredulity. He goes from trying to talk her out of it to, “If this be the case, he deserves you. I could not have parted with you, my Lizzy, to any one less worthy." Quite the endorsement from Mr. Bennet

We aren’t told that they live “happily ever after”. The details we are given (like Lizzy persuading Darcy to seek reconciliation with his aunt) seem to bear out what Lizzy thought earlier: “It was an union that must have been to the advantage of both; by her ease and liveliness, his mind might have been softened, his manners improved…” This isn’t about an abrupt or total change.

Quote

But behavior-wise they were acres apart and the ridiculous class rules of the period extended that even further.
Lizzy proves at Rosings that she can hold her own in Darcy’s circle. She’s not intimated by his aunt but is always polite to her. She can talk with his cousin of music, books and travel. Her manners are not “those of the fashionable world” but her easy playfulness is a good balance for Darcy who doesn’t converse easily with strangers. In a social situation she would be good at starting conversations, catching people’s tone of conversation and taking an interest in their concerns. And then once the conversation moves on to issues of more substance, Darcy, who has more information and knowledge of the world can talk more.

Quote

Darcy probably had some of Lady Catherine's attitudes as regards to high living with servants catching dust motes before they landed on his riding boots and ordering hailstones not to make a noise on his conservatory roof. .
Not according to Mrs. Reynolds.

Quote

I know Jane Austen's approach ws that love conqueres all
I disagree. I don’t see this as a book where love conquers all. Among other things it seems to me to show how spouses can bring out the worst or the best in each other or fall somewhere in between. The Bennet’s bring out the worst in each other, Charlotte has a foolish husband but manages to keep him happy and make the best of it, Jane and Bingley are two very nice people who will make each other happy but there can be disadvantages to both of them being to amiable as Mr. Bennet points out, Darcy and Lizzy each have something the other is lacking.

Quote

Lizzie allowed he own first impression to become extreme prejudices on the basis of hasty judgments and Wickham's lies.
Yes and she has learned from her mistake. She's not likely to repeat this error. In fact Lizzy expects to benefit from Darcy’s judgment.]]> Amytat Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 05:07:52 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121171#msg-121171 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121171#msg-121171
The novel tells us that Bingley and Darcy had a steady friendship, which implies to me that they'd been friends for years. They apparently spent weeks and even months together, and yet at the time of Darcy's second proposal, Bingley didn't know about Ramsgate or Darcy's first proposal or that Darcy hadn't told him Jane had been in London or that Darcy had rescued Lydia and why he had done so. He may not even have known Darcy's whole history with Wickham. So at that point, is it accurate to say that he knew Darcy better than Elizabeth did?]]> Deb P Tea RoomMon, 02 May 2016 03:25:58 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121168#msg-121168 Re: Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121168#msg-121168
Quote
Peter
It has always been my impression that neither Darcy nor Elizabeth really knew each other all that well.

This is a point I too have made Peter. The story is Jane Austen's so, as you say, her decision prevails within it as to who wins who etc. Outside it, we are speaking here as observers, with our views more than likely colored by a sense of modern reality and even disgust that middle class attitudes of that era treated women badly and observed a class consciousness verging on pantomime. I think we have to accept that J.A was a mistress of head-shaking disbelief at some of the attitudes and misbehaviour that existed, and that she used her stories and characters to express her views on life. In the case of Darcy and Elizabeth, he is obviously the victim of a growing obsession with her that he sees as love. The instances of him seeing himself in danger of it and his eventual capitulation and declaration of such are in canon and make this very clear :

`In vain have I struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you.''

The very next lines show that Lizzie had no idea of his feelings and certainly held none for him at that time. This was six months after they had first met. A further two months(?) would pass before the meeting at Pemberley which Lizzie didn't know would happen and sought to avoid. :

Elizabeth's astonishment was beyond expression. She stared, coloured, doubted, and was silent...followed by: "In spite of her deeply-rooted dislike, she could not be insensible to the compliment of such a man's affection, and though her intentions did not vary for an instant, she was at first sorry for the pain he was to receive;"
I hardly see "deeply-rooted dislike" as any sign of affection, never mind love, and this is canon, not opinion. At this stage, I.M.O they were far from an ideal match and hardly compatible even as aquaintances. This is what my claims are based on.]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomSun, 01 May 2016 23:52:14 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121167#msg-121167 Just a thoughthttps://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121167#msg-121167
Whether it was a good or bad or indifferent or great match is, i think, something we have to allow JA to determine. She, who knew the charactyer of her times much better than ourselves, did not hesitate to present it as a reasonable outcome. What we are also left with is that Darcy's main faults are an overblown sense of pride in his station and extremely poor manners. Both got humbled by Elizabeth - quite decisively.She, on the other hand, was immature and vain with an overblown sense of pride in the correctness of her judgement. That was also humbled decisively.]]> Peter Tea RoomSun, 01 May 2016 20:58:51 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121166#msg-121166 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121166#msg-121166
Quote

As to your statement of them being a very good match; sorry, but for me, they were anything but. We are told at the end that they all lived happily ever after, but without details. Can I really believe that twenty seven year old Darcy, stated by Charles Bingley to be someone to avoid when bored, and a man who wanted to character analyse his best friend, would suddenly become a tamed lion and a doting father because of a woman he hardly knew outside of a few verbal debates? That he and Lizzie would agree any more than we are doing here? In strong views and not being shy to air them, they were a perfect match. As candidates for marriage, not so. Too much Yin and too little Yang in both.


Obviously, if you feel so strongly that Darcy and Elizabeth don't suit as a married couple, my arguments won't change your mind, but consider that the one who was intimidated by a bored Darcy was Bingley, not Elizabeth. Bingley was the one who did not like the lively debates at Netherfield - Darcy and Elizabeth enjoy them. Elizabeth also likes to analyze character traits of acquaintances.
Darcy was a devoted and doting elder brother-almost father figure to Georgiana, so I have no doubt he would be a devoted father to his own children on his own, not for E's sake.
E and D knew each other quite well, actually, not just from a few debates by the time of their marriage: they knew how the other would behave in an emergency in the family (E walked 3 miles and nursed Jane; D saved the day with Lydia); they had their first out-and-out row (Hunsford) so they knew how theother would be when very angry; they knew how the other would deal with their disagreeable family members; knew each other's strengths, weaknesses, thought processes.
There are a few paragraphs abouthow well they are suited - whenE thinks she lost him she realizes how well they complement each other; and Aunt Gardiner's comments about Darcy needing to learn liveliness from his wife.
Mrs. Reynolds' testimony doesn't support Darcy being all high-and-mighty and ordering the world around for his purpose - he seems a reasonable and responsible master of his servants.]]> Agnes Beatrix Tea RoomSun, 01 May 2016 16:32:10 +0100 https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121163#msg-121163 Re: Were Lizzie or Darcy really good catches?https://www.dwiggie.com/phorum/read.php?4,121106,121163#msg-121163
Disagreeing is what makes the world go round. What an awful world it would be otherwise. I make no claim to be right in my views, just the right to air them. (-:

We see things as we see them. I constantly keep in mind (because it's a point that always makes me think) that Jane Austen originally titled her book First Impressions. This is just a personal view, but I think it was changed to Pride and Prejudice better to highlight the wrongs of both more than just First Impressions which was a little all encompassing rather than relating to the two main characters. It could relate to the Meryton gossip society just as much as Mr Hurst's breakfast sausage. In Darcy and Lizzie's cases, their first impressions mattered little until a closer relationship was forged. Till then they were unimportant because they were as strangers. As an example, Caroline's impressions, first or otherwise, of anyone could be discounted because of her snobbery, false values and personal discrepancies, jealousy and overall spiteful personality. Pride, unless of the false variety is not a fault, prejudice is always one. Darcy actually suffered from both. His prejudices were against those below his level of breeding and wealth as insuffiecient to mingle with socially. ( socially, because he seemed to treat his workers, staff etc in a decent manner) and his pride was not just of achievement but of himself for being who he was and superior to others. Pride and Vanity combined then?

As to your statement of them being a very good match; sorry, but for me, they were anything but. We are told at the end that they all lived happily ever after, but without details. Can I really believe that twenty seven year old Darcy, stated by Charles Bingley to be someone to avoid when bored, and a man who wanted to character analyse his best friend, would suddenly become a tamed lion and a doting father because of a woman he hardly knew outside of a few verbal debates? That he and Lizzie would agree any more than we are doing here? In strong views and not being shy to air them, they were a perfect match. As candidates for marriage, not so. Too much Yin and too little Yang in both.

I don't speak much of class differences because Mr Bennet was a gentleman estate owner and the Bennets were not a poor family at the time of the story and lived well socially. But behaviour-wise they were acres apart and the ridiculous class rules of the period extended that even further. Darcy probably had some of Lady Catherine's attitudes as regards to high living with servants catching dust motes before they landed on his riding boots and ordering hailstones not to make a noise on his conservatory roof. . Lizzie allowed he own first impression to become extreme prejudices on the basis of hasty judgements and Wickham's lies. For someone intelligent, despite her claims of humour and loving to laugh, had she aired her views other than privately she would have looked really foolish later. I know Jane Austen's approach ws that love conqueres all, but in the case of Darcy and Lizzie it might have lost the battle..(-:

p.s: Anne Elliot would have better suited Darcy and Frederick Wentworth Lizzie.....but I'm not going dowen that path..(-:]]> Jim G.M Tea RoomSun, 01 May 2016 12:32:21 +0100