I realised that this summer when I realised I empathised with Blair Waldorf.
Blair Waldorf from Gossip Girl.
The same Blair Waldorf that runs around concocting absurd schemes to 'takedown' people if they attempt to ruin the life of her best friend Serena or herself, who gets a chauffer driven town car around Manhattan and allegedly attends Columbia University (one of the most pretigious universities in the world) but only ever seems to go shopping and look down on poor people.
Don't get me wrong, she's one of the best TV characters ever created but I would never normally identify her. Especially in the situation she'd got herself in. Her dilemma was the three different men who were in love with her. Her true love the billionaire (who she will ultimately go back to in the end because they always do and you know, its Chuck and Blair- if you watched GG you'd understand) wants her back but she instead longs for the stability the french prince/her fiancee(yes really) will provide but (as much she does love him) it is not the same love as she felt for the billionaire. And then there is this penniless writer (who was also the above mentioned best friend's first love and current step-brother, as well as been the adopted step-brother of the billionaire) who is in love with her also and she is completely obvious and doesn't return his feelings.
Still with me?
However, I do understand her dilemma about choosing between what you want and what you should want. Luckily for her its all being handed to her, I unfortunately don't have that option. But I think it is good that the producers made her choose the nice, safe prince (for now at least). Its more realistic (if you take out the prince part) because what you want isn't always the best option. Its destructive and more often than not it'll not work out and go up in smoke. He make take two years to tell you he loves you, he may destroy your preexisting relationship with your first boyfriend who happens to be his best friend (and this boyfriend also lost his virginity to your best friend at a wedding and later started dating her three years later after she ends her affair with his married cousin- I love this show) or maybe he'll trade you to his dastardly uncle for control of his hotel.
Or maybe these things only really happen in Gossip Girl.
Anyway the point is, choosing the safe option isn't always a bad thing. I remember back in the summer when Wendi Deng turned into a ninja in parliament in order to defend Rupert Murdoch from his not-quite pie in the face. I read a piece in the Independent Viewspaper about settling. It was very sarcastic but the essential point was: if Wendi Deng is settling who are we to judge her? I doubt she married Murdoch for his looks but he gives her stability and maybe she never wanted love. She's a bit too scary for love I think.
The point of this very, very long ramble is; what we think we know we don't. I'm not a cynic, I do believe in love I just don't understand it and I am starting to think all the energy, poems and love letters that go into it really can't be worth it. It always ends, whether its on his deathbed after 60 years, when he runs off with his secretary after 20 years or when he gets bored after 2 months. If it happens, it happens but maybe in certain cases your better off with comfort and stability.
Even if your prince is kinda a wuss.
Finally, what provoked this late night ramble? Downton Abbey o'course! I'm identifying with one of them at the moment (won't say which one- not the angry footman or the wet ladysmaid though) but its mainly because the preview next week featured a line by the excellent Maggie Smith (there should be a spin off where they exclusively follow her around all day) where she says 'I'm a women, I'll be as contrary as I like!'
I can't help but agree.
A really compelling post. You don't have to be a Blair Waldorf, though, to avail of a chauffeur. Lots of chauffeur services out there with reasonable rates.
ReplyDeleteRichard @ RDP Chauffeurs