"it is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife." it wasn't until very recently that social status played such a small role in screening out who we could ideally fall in love with. our economic statuses are so fluid now, and can change so abruptly, that money hardly matters (to most people) as a dating consideration. most women have willingly exchanged a fat wallet for "drive" and "ambition." men don't have to bring home the bacon so much as show that they at least tried -- and will keep trying. score one for us.

in the past, the argument for love over money was a losing one indeed. many of our greatest (love) stories spawn from this aladdin-esque princess and street rat dynamic. poor man must make his way in the world in order to win the approval of the rich woman's family and friends -- and thus her hand. classic tales like "the princess bride" echo this theme and if we were to compile a list of romances that fell into this category, we would never get a wink of sleep.

i suppose the modern day "pride & prejudice" (which i just saw) would be "pretty woman" wouldn't it? rich man finds himself falling in love with a woman beneath his station. he does glamorous things -- ie. spend money -- in order to win her love. same thing happens in pride & prejudice. darcy proves himself to have a heart and spends money in order to help out the bennets. elizabeth is flabbergasted by such fine gestures and can't help falling in love with the reticent, but now kindly, darcy. hello, he's still a selfish prick. him spending money on you means nothing.

the whole affair calls into mind the question of romantic philanthropy. is it meaningful that they gave anything at all, or is it less meaningful because they spared what they have in abundance? if i had two million dollars and gave you ten thousand, should that be accounted as more generous than the man who gives a dime when he only has a dollar?

i guess some women are wooed by the objective reality of ten thousand dollars, while others are more charmed by the subjective gift of a dime. which woman would i rather be? it's simple isn't it? i'd take the money and run. if darcy had shown elizabeth his home (the amazing pemberley estate) sooner in the movie, i'm sure she would have been won over quite a bit easier. nothing spells "l-o-v-e" like a fantastic home and a generous "living."

what is comes down to is that no woman wants a poor man, even if he is charming, bodacious, and the spitting image of perfection. in totally unrelated news, i think i'm taking a job, starting next tuesday. off into the world i go to make my fortune.