Hmm. Well. OK. (r) -- La Femme Nikita Fan Fiction Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, February 01, 09:50:25pm
Author: JayBee
Subject: Hmm. Well. OK. (r)
In reply to: Nell 's message, "I think the reason that I was interested in this (r)" on Wednesday, February 01, 09:13:49am

We've strayed pretty far from adultery (or sexual infidelity) at this point, which was kind of my point in the very beginning of our discussion (on the original thread, in fact). I saw sexual infidelity (and you really did seem to be limiting the discussion to that back then?) as being very much overshadowed in importance by other kinds of personal betrayals -- even in the case of Michael and Elena, as I tried to explain.

Reviving the discussion here, you indicated that you meant to discuss adultery/sexual infidelity as more of a symptom or an indicator: that one could tell a lot about a person's broader character by looking at whether he or she engaged in this more specific behavior. Which might be true, but my response was that we don't *know* enough about whether many of the characters engaged in infidelity or not to use this as a means of analysis. A symbol or metaphor, after all, can only take on the meaning of the larger referent if the symbol is present in the first place.

Now, you seem to be saying that you didn't mean sexual infidelity per se, but rather any sort of bad behavior/lack of *general* (that is, not limited to sexual) fidelity toward someone who might have been a sexual partner. And I can't help but think that we've come back around to the very point I was trying to make (in our original discussion about Michael and Elena) at the beginning! So forgive me if I'm a little confused about exactly what your premise is. At this point, I can't tell if we're agreeing or not! ;-)

I'll come back to specific points about Paul in a follow-up reply.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Drifting back - -- Nell, Saturday, February 11, 09:01:43am
- Re: Drifting back - -- JayBee, Saturday, February 11, 03:01:02pm