This is so sweet that I just had to put it up. Pooky is just so cute!!! (Ok, compose yourself Joanna.)

Anyways, ahem. (trying to sound serious)

Here's one little thought for the day..

Yes, this is going to have something to do with S & S and crime. (don't blame me for being so academic here, afterall, my life revolves around studying/reading.)
Recall how Lucy Steeles is "labelled" social climber in the book? She first plots to get Edward to marry her (yes, poor dear Elinor has to suffer in silence as a result) then immediately switches over to Edward's brother when she finds out that Edward was stripped of his inheritance by his horrible mother. Lucy ends up marrying rich with her initial intention of wanting to snag a rich husband and be a tai-tai anyway.

Notice that Marianne ends up a tai-tai too (well, married to a much older but rich Brandon after she falls literally in and eventually out of love with Willoughby, the big-time jerk-loser-spendthrift) but no one(well, hmm Austen actually) calls her a social climber. Amazing isn't it? Both do the same act; one falls under the labelling but the other doesnt..

Diehard lit. pple will tell me this is because Marianne is a sympathetic character and all, but I prefer to link the reason why the label doesn't apply to her with some criminal law concept that I just got wind of today :) (Just bear with me, this is going to help get the concept into my head.If you've read this far anyway, it's either that you're very bored or you actually know what I'm talking about haha.)

You see, a crime consists of two things. To put it chimly, there is the prohibited act (actus reus) and the intention (mens rea). This chimology here simply means that to commit a crime you must:
1) Do something wrong
2) Do something wrong because you really want to do something wrong

Confused enough yet? Yeah? Ok, let's go on. haha..
The reason why Marianne isn't labelled "social climber" is because she didn't marry Brandon because she wants his money!! Yeah, strictly speaking, she commited a social no-no by being poor and marrying a rich guy. But no, she didn't quite do it for the money. Therefore, no social crime commited and thus no labelling for her.

While my mind was revolving around this reasoning, there was this sudden realisation that this concept of crime being "wrong deed with bad intentions" is not just for gruesome stuff like murder but also applied to various social norms! Perhaps it's better to say that stuff like murder are actually very very very extreme social taboos hmm...

Ok ok, I can picture people either rolling their eyeballs on this or just turning really green and dizzy now because I do realise I have a lot of wierd thoughts haha..