|
|
Post by jeantre16 on Jan 11, 2007 19:49:54 GMT -5
Here's where we can discuss the character of Jacqueline Roget (aka: Jacques Le Pont).
For one, Dumas said it would be out of character for Jacqueline to kiss d'Artagnan...yet. But, what do you think?
1) when would that "yet" be? and
2) What do you believe makes it "out of character" for her to kiss d'Artagnan at this time?
|
|
|
|
Post by hedanicree on Jan 11, 2007 22:43:03 GMT -5
*cough* Leponte *cough* FYI (we got the spelling from Karen)
I think it would for the simple fact that, although she obviously likes him, Jacqueline is constantly guarding herself. She rarely lets her guard down, rarely lets people in, except when she is forced to.
I personally don't think she'll ever let anyone that close to her until major things in her life are resolved, namely, she isn't wanted anymore, or two, she learns within herself to let go and let people in. Therefore, at this point in her life, she is too guarded to let him in, and therefore it would be out of character for her to suddenly let her guard down and kiss him.
Thus be the reason for thus.
dani
|
|
|
|
Post by jeantre16 on Jan 12, 2007 0:34:02 GMT -5
L-e-p-o-n-t-e! Of course, I knew that! Wow, it's been some time since I've written that. And since then, I've seen so many other spellings of that name that I'm officially confused! Thank you.
Well said about Jacqueline's guardedness. How true of her. I agree she would certainly battle over the "when" being at some point when her life wasn't so uncertain.
Many fics take the thought that she wouldn't endanger d'Artagnan by entangling him with her issues. But, she already has by trusting him with her secret. So that wouldn't be her primary reason.
Somewhere in there must be her dream to fight for France and to live the musketeer life. On that thought, either she can no longer be a musketeer for some reason, or she can be one legitimately due to developments. Until then, she wouldn't compromise herself (but she was so close to walking when Charles swept her off her feet).
Don't forget, she's already kissed him in that wacky dream (or was that her evil twin compromising her true feelings?). And, she was going to kiss him by the campfire (granted the exlir wasn't influencing her). Would there be another sort of kiss, but not, in their future?
Another factor is that d'Artagnan also needs to mature to be the man she's ready for.
There's my two cents! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by kristanci on Feb 22, 2007 11:34:14 GMT -5
I think both of them are rash. So when the kiss happens (will have to play out in my imaginary episode haha) I think it will be in the heat of an argument. And she'll be the one to make the first move. Perhaps a more romantic setting will fill in later. Ah, love the imagination.
|
|
|
|
Post by queengwen on Jun 7, 2007 13:15:42 GMT -5
She trust him w/ her secret and her life, but she doesn't trust him w/ her heart. For good reason. He goes all 'mature' and 'noble' and the 'blows it' bu adding some 'cad like' comment and etc... That is prob a 'defensive' mechanism for him. He's afraid she'll reject him, and she's afraid he'll turn out like she thought and break her heart...thus...the 'real' problem. IMHO anyways... had to add my 2 cents worth.  |
|
|
|
Post by potc166 on Jun 19, 2007 14:03:19 GMT -5
I think she does like him(we see this is the invincable sowerd...when she sees what could be) we also see this in the way she treats him and looks at him...I think she has heard to many stores about him but she is slowly learing they are not true she justs doesn't know how to let go and let him in quite yet
|
|
|
|
Post by thedaringhattrick on Jul 19, 2007 11:02:33 GMT -5
It's all in the chemistry. Clearly, these two are crazy about one another, but, aside from what's been mentioned already, it is a matter of pride. Back then, women were very sheltered. In public, they had to be escorted by an older woman or a gentleman. Jacqueline is a tough girl. We see this in the very first scene of 'Wanted.' She's engaged in a playful duel with her brother, an opportunity likely granted because she was merely a country girl. It's a no-brainer that girls and swords wouldn't have mixed back then. But now, she's masquerading as a musketeer, can hold her own in a sword fight, is respected among men and women, as well as the royal court... can you blame her if she's enjoying her 'manly' independence? If she were to pursue a relationship with D'Artagnan, guess what role she would fall back into? And no matter how noble the man, no matter how good of a husband, the bottom line is, Jacqueline would go back to being confined to the domestic sphere. Wouldn't that suffocate her free spirit? So much for going on adventures when there's soup boiling in a pot and two children screaming their heads off. I think that's why D'Artagnan's marriage proposals and talk about children and cottages scares her. The sooner she admits that she's in love with him, the sooner that she gets her independence taken away. Not to say that Jacqueline might not want a married life or children on day. In Four Musketeers and a Baby, we definitely see a softer side to Jacqueline, but she's nonetheless awkward. I think if she were ever to settle down, it truly would have to be on her own terms...whether without the prospect of a suffocating domestic life or the promise that she can escape prejudice when going out adventuring as a woman. Furthermore, as a strong-willed woman, I'm sure she's confused as to why she's attracted to brash and daring D'Artagnan, the guy that all the other girls want. Maybe she doesn't like to think of herself as one of those girls, and therefore resists his charms... But one thing is definitely certain: sooner or later, it's going to happen. I mean, I would like to see it happen. Them giving into their passions, anyway  |
|
|
|
Post by potc166 on Jul 19, 2007 14:40:29 GMT -5
wow thedaringhattrick that makes a lot of sense..never really thought of it that way completly... |
|
|
|
Post by queengwen on Jul 19, 2007 14:48:21 GMT -5
I agree.
daring made an excellent observantion...
I may keep that in mind for my story...
|
|
|
|
Post by thedaringhattrick on Jul 19, 2007 18:46:27 GMT -5
Curious question. How old do you think Jacqueline is supposed to be? D'Artagnan? Siroc? Ramon? Also, this talk of suffocating female freedom had made me consider Jacqueline's situation more seriously. As a historical nitpick, I would first like to point out that, as a farmer's daughter, Jacqueline's rustic mannerisms and etiquette would stick out like a sore thumb in the city. After all, back then, town and country were as different as night and day, and the city-goers, the snobs that they generally were, would sneer at those that would evidently display rustic mannerisms. The British, and especially the French, were particularly sensitive to this divide. How do you think Jacqueline would go around this obstacle of social etiquette? Where do you think she would've picked up town decorum? In the same vein, considering the fact that Jacqueline seems to be fitting in quite well with the aristocrats (she knows how to formally address and speak to the King) and the upper-middle classes (aside from social customs being utterly and completely overlooked and ignored by the series writers) for argument's sake, lets suppose that this is because she is in fact well versed in aristocratic social codes. Where do you think she would've learned this coda? Remember that manners back then were taken very seriously. Girls from even a middle class family would be appointed Governesses (private tutors) from the age of eight until eighteen, studying every single, delicate aspect of proper lady-like behaviour concurrently with their choice of profession (although for most part, no profession was chosen as a young girl's life was dedicated molding her into the perfect wife; attracting a husband was the most practical way of achieving financial security). But I digress. My original point was that, with the average little girl subject to about ten years of etiquette education prior to her formal social introduction, and French's society's scrutinizing eye, I cannot help but wonder the particulars of Jacqueline's ability to blend so well. Furthermore, female and male manners were different. The customs appropriated to gentlemen (even soldiers) were actually quite complex. As I mentioned before, proper manners attributed to only one gender would take years to perfect. With Jacqueline masquerading as a man, how do you suppose she would pick up both a lady's and gentleman's etiquette? The more I ponder on this topic, the more I'm inclined to write a fanfiction detailing her life. But in the meantime, I thought I would share my thoughts and get the gears turning for the rest of you as well. This is not meant to be some pretentious lesson on history, just something to consider... maybe it'll give you some ideas for stories too |
|
|
|
Post by potc166 on Jul 20, 2007 1:27:39 GMT -5
well she did have a brother..so she could have learned that way..I'm not sure and was her brother younger or older?
|
|
|
|
Post by queengwen on Jul 20, 2007 6:31:56 GMT -5
her brother was younger wasn't he?
Based on the comments from 'Secrets' I think the general assumption is she is at least 20.
|
|
|
|
Post by vigilanti on Jul 20, 2007 10:03:37 GMT -5
YAY hattric, another historical maven to ad to the ranks! I knew quite a bit about female etiquette even that subtle and not so subtle messages could be passed from one to another simply by the manner in which they used their fans. But i'm not so clear on the what comprised 'manly ediquite' if you'd like to go into more detail, feel free to post it (or any other fun info you'd like to share) at length in the history section.
|
|
|
|
Post by thedaringhattrick on Jul 20, 2007 12:00:46 GMT -5
Not a historical maven, per say, my dear Vigilanti, but rather a student of Restoration and Victorian literature. I pick up a few things here and there in my classes. *sheepish* Although I do actually have a write up for specifically a Victorian Gentleman's etiquette and dress somewhere in my notes (I'm not quite certain if the social coda would've changed much from the 17th century; comparing Burney's and Austen's similar works, which are seperated roughly by a decade, I wouldn't say at all) but I will be glad to type it up and post it in the historical forums for interest sake sometime soon |
|
|
|
Post by vigilanti on Jul 20, 2007 18:31:55 GMT -5
nifty
|
|
