I don't understand why people are hating on John.He works hard and at that time if you weren't born rich it was quite hard to make your own fortune,you had to do a regular job. I understand Meg wanting the dress,it's normal to want nice things but think about it, is it more important to have a new dress merely for satisfaction or coats for winter and food on the table?Near the end of their conversation I don't think John was trying to make her feel guilty I think he was genuinely sorry.
feminism and lesbianism - 'i hate men' culture today meaning the rise of wanting men dead or heartbroken. Men, get your passports. the west is finished
And also the next day he apologised and set up an appointment for her dress to be made only to find she already sold the fabric so he could get a new coat. They compromised for each other that is true love ❤
I feel like people are picking a right and wrong side in this scene when really, neither person is the bad guy. Meg wanted more, John felt he couldn't give her that, and later on he told her he wanted her to have the dress and was fully ready to keep his old coat, only to find that she had already sold the fabric so he could have a new one. They both went out of their way to make a compromise for each other, and it shows how much they love each other. Marriage isn't easy.
I feel that Meg was pressured into buying the fabric because Sally was convincing her that she needs a new dress, but she promised a coat for John and her children some new clothing, while Meg grew up poor and the idea of buying something elegant was too tempting for her to buy it.
50$ then is roughly 1700$ today. Such a painful and realistic scene. Wanting to escape the reality of one's situation and then being painfully reminded of it. Feel for both of them.
Peggy Olson's first paycheck as secretary in MANHATTAN in 1960 was $35 a week. This scene was late 1860s... in a suburban area. John was understandably crushed by the cost of that fabric
Dang why are all the feminists trynna make her husband the bad guy in these comments? Her husband works hard and is lovely to her. She complains about being poor and he apologises for not being perfect when she spent 50 dollars on a rag? But hes the bad guy right?
And also the next day he apologised and set up an appointment for her dress to be made only to find she already sold the fabric so he could get a new coat. They compromised for each other that is true love ❤
Since I pretty much started this whole argument in the comments I’ll try to make my point more clear. Meg named her daughter Daisy... the name that was given to her when she went to the ball (the pink dress scene). Given that she named her daughter Daisy only proves that she is still seeking for that luxurious life. She willfully wanted to be a part of that “higher society” appose to Amy who was basically pressured to become one (by their aunt). But Laurie made her feel guilty for the things she liked and wanted to be a part of. Even Jo wanted Meg to become an actress because she saw a potential in her to be Great. Meg just made the wrong choice, that’s it.
Daisy is a very common nickname for Margaret, which is her daughter's name. They explained in the book that they called her Daisy because they didn't want to have two Megs (Same reason why Amy's daughter is called Bess instead of Beth, and Meg's other daughter is called Josie instead of Jo). The problem with the girls calling Meg "Daisy" is because she already had a nickname, and they chose to disregard that and call her by a new name and dress her up, like she was their plaything (which she was). Little Daisy's nickname was just something Meg chose for her. These two things are not remotely the same. Now, the scene with Laurie... The thing is, the 2019 movie went in a wildly different direction than the book. In the book, the point of that scene was to show Meg that in an effort to keep up with people above her class, she had lost herself (being dressed up like a doll, losing her identity (being called Daisy) and later being whispered about by the other guests). At the end of the night, she realized she was being made a laughingstock and that there were malicious rumors being spread about her being a gold-digger. The 2019 movie didn't include any of that, instead making the ball about her "last chance to have fun", basically derailing Meg's entire character arc, leading people to deeply misunderstand this scene. Meg being a decent actress is similarly only briefly touched upon in the books, which the movie expanded upon, but even within the movie, Meg still ended up teaching an acting class at Jo's school, so it's not like she gave up on it entirely. Meg didn't make the wrong choice. The entire point of Little Women is that even if adulthood turns out harder than you expected, and even if your dreams don't completely work out the way you imagined, you can still make a life for yourself. It might be different, but that doesn't mean it's bad. That's the reality of life.
@@hkc8544 This changes everything... I made my points only based on the 2019 version of little women. I’ve never watched any other adaptation or read the book, but your response answers a lot of questions and makes Megs story complete. From watching the movie I got the impression that Megs story is supposed to teach the “Be grateful for what you have” lesson. But even if it is what they were going for with the movie, it still made me feel unsatisfied especially knowing that deep down Meg did want a “better” life and COULD have the life she wanted.
I wish that people had understood the importance of sustainable clothing like Emma Watson at that time. She took a drastic step for preserving the environment. Even her Charecters didn't had to suffer and struggle for a new garb. Lots of love and prayers Emma.
Meg felt pressured into buying it because Sally wanted her to have something nice, and reminding herself she had grown up poor, and the promises of buying John a coat and her children new clothing, it tempted her but forgot about her social statuses between a rich friend and a poor friend
seriously he should be spoiling his wife with beautiful gifts every once in a while. I mean you call that a life, living in a house too small and not appreciating your wife like you should. i think he forgets how much Meg actually does for this family
I think you're underestimating exactly how much $50 was back then. She was sorry the instant she did it because she knew it would completely break their finances, and he's not too angry with her anyway. He's just sad that he can't provide what he thinks she deserves, and she's sad that she's making him feel like he's not enough. That's a lot of emotional toll on both of them.
In the books (the tree of them, counting the history of their children) HE is the mayor example of hard working, responsible family man, when he dies, all the children in the school, especially his son and the eldest of them realize the kind of man that is gone, his death changed them and after the first night without him, they became adults, wanting to follow the figure of John. He was a very respected image.
He was just venting. Any good husband wants to give their wife nice things but at the same time he knows they have to live within their means, not just for their own sake but also for their kids. Though he may have been a bit of a jerk here, if John doesn't make Meg feel bad about blowing their money extravagantly then she may end up wasting more money on other frivolous purchases and soon they will have no money left to buy food to feed their kids.
