Skip to content

A Knight or a Prince?

September 13, 2010

I had a most interesting day at church today.  And for the record, I am writing this while the thought is still fresh in my mind (and because I need to think about it for a minute or two) and while I am waiting for inspiration for a paper that I have due tomorrow to come to my mind.

Today was interesting because they decided to combine the three student wards (a ward being a Mormon congregation) and have us all come to the stake center for Sacrament meeting, where the Stake Presidency would be speaking to us about various things.  The first guy was talking about dating, and how we needed to do more of it.  Which was… interesting.  For several reasons.  Firstly, because I have been informed several times that I am a man-hater, and I have agreed every single time.  Secondly, because even I have been wondering about dating a little bit lately.  However, this has nothing whatsoever to do with my story, except that it will inform you that dating has been stewing in my brain a little bit lately.

You know how there’s that thing in Breakfast at Tiffany’s where Audrey Hepburn is talking about “The Mean Reds?”  Which is completely different from the Blues?  How when you have the mean reds you’re afraid, and you don’t know what you’re afraid of?  By the by, if you haven’t seen Breakfast at Tiffany’s then you should.  Along with any other Audrey Hepburn film that you can lay your hands on.  She’s the woman that made being skinny popular, but I can’t think to hold that against her.  In all honesty she was a fabulous woman.  Did you know that she used to dance for German officers during World War II so that she could give money to the Resistance?  And that was long before she ever became an actress.  She was a heavenly sort of woman.

Well, I’m pretty sure I had the mean reds today.  It’s not terribly uncommon.  I managed to get through playing the prelude music with two other girls, a musical number with the same two girls and a guy, and I even made my way through another musical number singing.  There were quite a few musical numbers today.  More than there were speakers.  But as soon as it was over and everyone was getting all lined up for food (that they had graciously decided to provide us poor starving college students), I got the mean reds.  My fight or flight reflex went nuts.  Someone standing a good 4 feet away made me go insane.  But I lasted long enough to eat some food.  And then I found my violin and scriptures and keys and such, and I decided to start walking home.

Unfortunately, the Stake Center here is clear across town from where I live.  But I had (and still have) homework to do, and I couldn’t stand to wait around much longer.  I was going crazy (crazier).  So I pulled off my heels and started walking, and I was followed out the door by several reasonably good looking guys.  None of whom were paying any attention to me.  Which was fine.  I really didn’t want any attention.

Fortunately, as I started down the street, carrying cases and bags and shoes, a guy I met earlier this week (or last week) pulled over to the side and asked me if I was really planning to walk barefoot.  And of course my reply was that it hurt less than wearing heels.  Thank goodness he had the patience to stick around and ask if I wanted a ride.  And thank goodness that I was feeling tired, miserable, and humble enough to say yes.

Well, from what I’ve found out about this guy so far, he’s in the Army National Guard, which actually kind of suits me fine.  My family is very much a military type family, and this guy is doing the same thing as my brother.  It was nice to get a ride from this guy, not just because it would save my aching feet, but also because it felt pretty safe, and it helped to calm down the mean reds.

I don’t know if I ever could entertain thoughts about going out with this guy.  I question whether I’d be able to entertain thoughts about going out with any guy.  I’m not sure I’m emotionally capable or ready, especially when I start having the mean reds all over the place and I can’t hardly stay in control of my own brain.  But it is nice to think sometimes that there is that chance.  And maybe it’s just me being overly-romantic, but it’s nice that a guy that I’ve only met once pulled over and gave me a ride.  Which means that he has probably just achieved “Knight in Shining Armor” status.  Whether he really deserves it or not.

I’ve always wondered though whether I’m after a “Knight in Shining Armor,” or a “Prince on his Valiant Steed.”  My biggest problem is, how do you determine which is which?  I think I may have finally come up with a list to distinguish between the two.

Princes:

  1. Bring flowers
  2. Give jewelry (HELLOOO, why else would there be crown jewels floating around the world?)
  3. Take a girl out to dinner.
  4. Go dancing.

Princes in Literature include:

  1. Paris/Alexandros
  2. The Phantom of the Opera
  3. Raoul
  4. Mr. Bingley
  5. Hector
  6. Achilles
  7. Edward Cullen (But he rates about a zero on the awesome-o-meter!)

Knights/Warriors (and yes, I did get the picture just because it has a pretty gorgeous black horse):

  1. Take a girl out to ride on a fox-hunt or teach her how to ride a motorcycle, or some such thing
  2. Challenge all the princes to duels, which makes us roll our eyes
  3. Are more gruff and less charming than princes
  4. Tend to be quite flawed.

Knights in Literature include:

  1. Mr. Darcy
  2. Mr. Rochester
  3. Inigo Montoya.
  4. Potentially Achilles and/or Hector, but we’re reserving judgement on that.  You notice, they all seem to fall into the tall, dark, and handsome category, usually with the tortured nature.

Basically, very few Princes have any use or any form of awesomeness.  A rare few do (Mr. Bingley, Hector, potentially Achilles).  Meanwhile, the Knights are… hmph.  I’m not quite sure how to put it.  Princes are the ones you fall for when you see them, and they always get the woman they love, who is always beautiful and sweet, etc. etc.  Knights are the ones that would honestly leap to defend your honor, etc. etc., and in my opinion, they’re the ones worth killing for.  I of course use this only as a figure of speech.  Please, no killing on anyone’s account.

My most recent conclusion is that I’m stuck with getting a Mr. Rochester (from Jane Eyre) someday after a few fistfights and punches to the nose (most likely from Pride and Prejudice).  And so therefore, I must be stuck with a Knight.  But I wonder if I could handle being with a Knight.  It would require a level of stamina and passion and so on and so forth that I wonder if I really have.

But I’m not sure I’d be able to love a Prince.  They’re beautiful, and it seems like I don’t ever want to settle for less, but would I honestly be able to stand to be with a prince for the rest of my life?  In a way, it seems like it would be a dull and tiring existence.   I would go nuts, and I think there’s a chance that I would die of boredom after a few years, and that love would simply fade.

If you could have any man in the world fall in love with you, simply because you fell in love with them, who would it be?  Would it be a Knight or a Prince?  And could you spend the rest of your life that way?  Would you feel like you could always love that person for eternity, or would you feel burdened by your connection?

See, this is why falling in love is so dang hard, and this is exactly why I’ve never succeeded.  Wouldn’t it be nice if Heavenly Father could just drop you into whatever place you needed to be, whenever you needed to be, point you in the correct direction, and say, “You see that guy right over there?  That’s the one you’re supposed to be with.  Have a great happily ever after?”

Sheesh.  This whole concept just had to be complicated, didn’t it?

*

Okay, by the by, winner of a fabulous brownie-mix (because it’s easier to ship than brownies, and it will taste fresher and lovelier for longer) will be announced soon.  When it is, I will also post instructions for how to give me your address and information confidentially so that I can ship it to you.  That is, if you want it.  Otherwise, it goes to the runner-up.

Have a fabulous day, and make sure to smile at someone you don’t know today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

maidens cartoons, maidens cartoon, maidens picture, maidens pictures, maidens image, maidens images, maidens illustration, maidens illustrations

Advertisements
26 Comments leave one →
  1. September 13, 2010 3:05 am

    riv, i have a personal struggle with long posts. i sometimes force myself to read them, or read some now and some later—i think it relates to being forced to read stuff for 12 years of schooling—but i did not have to wrestle my brain to finish this post, not at all! it’s awesomeness wearing a red felt hat.

    i’m deliberately not answering your fantastic question, but i hope others do. maybe my partner should answer… because it’s possible that i’m the knight in this sitch.

    oh and i owe you an email! that’s where i should put my verbalage. verbiliousness. verbs.

  2. September 13, 2010 3:10 am

    i’ll also add that i often wish i was more of a prince than a knight. BUT i also am glad i am who i am, even though i’m still stomping down this path of self-discovery and growth. see? a prince(ess, if you like) would walk down the path, or glide, or something delicate. but i kind of stomp. i stop stomping now and then and poke sticks in puddles, but then i keep on going. it works for me.

    i will say that when we met, my honey likely thought i was more of a prince type. now he knows. that’s what happens when you do NOT date, and you get engaged after a week, and married a week later. yeah, surprises ensue.

    so why why why were you being told to date MORE? was it: get out there and meet each other? or was it: try a lot of different people out for size? i’m so curious because i grew up being told not to date and part of me continues to assume (despite evidence to the contrary) that any kind of focused religious setup would say the same.

  3. September 13, 2010 5:22 am

    I’ve fallen in love with a man who fits the description of prince (at this point in his life) more or less. I’ve fallen in love with a man who fits the description of knight (at this point in his life) more or less. The man I’m engaged to and plan to spend the rest of my life with falls somewhere in the middle, or maybe even off the grid. In my experience, in real life, such archetypes rarely hold true in terms of finding an actual, livable, long-term or lifetime relationship (although they may make for a nice fantasy/bed-time reading). And such expectations of archetypes frequently devastate relationships (or the possibility of them). If you’re (universal you) waiting for Mr. Darcy, you’re going to be waiting a long freakin’ time.

    To me it’s like wanting someone who looks a certain way. A lot of men want women who are thin and cute and able, and get devastated when their wives gain weight during marriage, become disabled, or, God forbid, “let themselves go.” (Women do the same thing, to be fair, I just have seen this more with men.) Well, news flash. If you actually want a relationship that’s going to last, you’re going to have to accept that people change. People get sick and get old and get gray hair and sometimes even gain weight and get stretch marks. They get tired of going out every night or they get too fatigued to work a certain number of hours a week or they end up in wheelchairs and can’t escort you to parties or take you out camping.

    I understand that there are certain things that usually don’t change, or that make sense to hold onto when looking for a mate, like…wanting someone who enjoys reading or watching movies, or someone who doesn’t like to drink. But even hobbies change sometimes. I’m not saying we should throw ALL lists & standards & what not out the window. But the fact is, usually the person you end up with WON’T fit what you thought you wanted. But they will often be the best thing that ever happened to you.

    “If you could have any man in the world fall in love with you, simply because you fell in love with them, who would it be? Would it be a Knight or a Prince? And could you spend the rest of your life that way? Would you feel like you could always love that person for eternity, or would you feel burdened by your connection?”

    I’ve had men who were knights and princes fall in love with me, or at least men who wanted to be knights and princes who thought they were in love with me. And it was a burden because they were in love with their idea of me and wanted me to be in love with my idea of them and wanted some fantasy of a relationship based on what we were supposed to be as human beings. I can’t spend my life like that, because as much as I love romance novels and Bollywood movies, real life isn’t like that.

    The man I fell in love with, who fell in love with me, who I plan to spend my life with, is practical but has flights of fancy. He’s a little bit of a knight and a little bit of a prince and a lot of other things. We’re not a happily ever after sort of fantasy novel, but we are happy and blessed. If I’d had to answer this question a long time ago or make a list of what I wanted in a man, he would have fallen short in all sorts of ways. But it turns out he is everything I want.

    • September 13, 2010 11:57 am

      /sigh

      That was wonderful. Kind of makes a person wistful and sad but also so happy that everything you wrote above is true for you.

      No internet, I will not splatter my soul across my keyboard because IT ISN’T PRETTY. Also I have kind of warped aim, so it would probably hit my sister, behind me.

  4. September 13, 2010 5:29 am

    & I’m with Maryam…churches telling you to date MORE definitely strikes me as a little odd! LOL. But I’ve been to churches (including LDS ones) with singles groups and the like before. So I guess not so odd. I just find it slightly strange that they had a whole focus on that today.

  5. Kaimalino permalink
    September 13, 2010 6:18 am

    A prince or a knight? I’ll take an accountant. 🙂

    OK, in explanation of LDS dating lectures (which I understand seem incongruous with many people’s standards), remember that in LDS doctrine, “marriage is ordained of God” and “the family is central to the Creator’s Plan,” (from “The Proclamation to The World on the Family,” a statement we see as prophetic and beautiful). You’re meant to meet enough people so that when you do find a compatible marriage partner, you’ll know it. Building your very own eternal family is every Mormon’s ultimate goal, and you can’t do it alone. Hence, appropriate dating is encouraged, both to gain greater perspective on compatibility and to meet your spouse.
    But also remember that in LDS culture, dating is not hanging around in nightclubs and LDS people observe the Law of Chastity, which seems all kinds of old-fashioned to most of the world and all kinds of good sense to me.
    Young people are strongly discouraged from dating before age 16 (making 16 a big birthday for us, since it usually means you can get your driver’s license, too) and then are encouraged to “group date,” and attend wholesome activities with several couples, instead of pairing off alone. LDS standards also suggest avoiding any exclusive dating until courtship is seriously considered (often after a boy has returned from serving a two-year religious mission, around at least age 21), making sure dates have a set plan with a beginning and end time (to avoid hanging around alone together) and to involve dates in activities with your family (because, as all of us married folk know, you marry the whole family!).

    It’s a common saying among LDS parents of teens and young adults that “The Holy Ghost goes to bed at 11 (or whenever curfew is)!” Meaning, you must end your date before fatigue interferes with your ability to have good judgment and respond to spiritual promptings.

    LDS singles are also encouraged to date only those who share their standards and, ideally, their faith.

    I know Muslims are asked not to “approach zinaa” (probably spelled that wrong, forgive me) and that goes along with LDS counsel to “avoid even the appearance of evil,” at least in concept if not in exact practice.
    It is fascinating after a lifetime of being perceived as an uptight prude to be perceived as a wild harlot! Not really, but you know what I mean, I hope. The Bible talks about God asking his people to be a “peculiar people,” and live standards different from the acceptable norm for the rest of the world. Muslims and Mormons are definitely their own kinds of lovely peculiar.

  6. Allumer permalink
    September 13, 2010 12:16 pm

    I think everything is a leap of faith. Well, normally I just say, “Love is a crap shoot. End of story.” But leap of faith sounds better and people don’t think you are talking about poo when you are really referring to gambling. Sigh.

    I will say that in Islam marriage is called “half the deen,” meaning, in my humble interpretation, it’s hard as hell (even when you love the person), it’s a protection from temptation and evil, it can be a delight that mirrors some aspects of Paradise, and it’s a great way to practice daily the qualities we need most.

    Love? I think that for most Americans, and perhaps Europeans (totally not qualified to speak on any other group here) it’s an unreal concept. Literature dating back centuries has propagated this false ideal of romantic (chivalrous) love being the end all, be all, as if life will somehow be sunbeams and violins after finding it.

    It’s not like that. As Noor pointed out – sometimes EVERYTHING can change. If you love and appreciate the core of who your man is, then things will usually be alright. Anything beyond that can change. Also, people have different perceptions of love (have a post on this coming up!). Some view love as the wife obeying a control freak husband. Some view love as being mommied. Some view love as being left alone to think. Love is fluid and it doesn’t really have a good definition.

    But your mention of Mr. Darcy did remind me of this:

    • Allumer permalink
      September 13, 2010 12:28 pm

      Whoops – misquoted Noor – not EVERYTHING changes. But a lot can change, and if your love is based on some of those things, well…

      And who is that girly looking dude in armour?

      • September 13, 2010 5:32 pm

        Prince Caspian aka Ben Barnes!

        I actually think Prince Caspian is awesome, especially in the Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I hated Ben Barnes but then he grew on me. Much in the same way I hated Matthew McFadyen (sp?) as Mr Darcy but then that one grew on me, too.

        I do have a real response to this somewhere in my brain, but 3-liners are much easier >_>

        Most awesome video, btw. Totally reminds me of that Bronte Power Dolls ‘advert’:

      • Allumer permalink
        September 13, 2010 7:07 pm

        I can absolutely never accept Matthew MacFadyen as Darcy. But I never really loved Colin Firth either, he’s tolerable.

        And I totally didn’t mean to sound depressing! I love love! Love is Great! I’d eat love if I could! Nom Nom! Remember, my version of everything is skewed from an anti-social, loner perspective! Rivenheart, I’m sure he’s on his way to banish the mean reds! (Can anyone tell I just stuffed a handful of chocolate into my face?)

      • September 14, 2010 12:57 am

        ohhh it is ‘MacFadyen’ is it? I had a lecturer whose name was ‘McFadzean’ but pronounced the same way, so I got confused. I prefer my lecturer’s spelling.

        You know what is awful?

        Two things:

        – Hugh flipping Grant cast as Edward Ferrars. SACRILEGE TO MR FERRARS

        – That person whoever he was who was, cast as Mr Knightley opposite Gwyneth Paltrow. Jeremy Northam, I just looked him up. He was inneffective and…and…not Mr Knightleyish.

        And also the entire cast, pretty much, of Pride & Prejudice 2005. Ewwwww.

        Yes, of course this is a conversation about Austen in adaptation >_>

        Allumer – do you suppose Colin Firth tolerable, but not handsome enough to tempt you?

        /gigglesnort

  7. Zpurpleify permalink
    September 13, 2010 1:55 pm

    Definitely a knight I think… but with princelike qualities. I liked the article, thanks Rivenheart 😀

  8. chuuurls permalink
    September 13, 2010 8:23 pm

    I OBJECT TO THIS HARSH DICHOTOMY BUT I’M GOING TO PARTICIPATE ANYHOW! BECAUSE IT’S FUN AND A LEGITIMATE QUESTION

    No matter what, I think I’d pick the Knight. On its head, it seems like a terrible idea, but come on now. I cannot look at myself and say I am one with Princely qualities–and I don’t think it’s wise to expect from others what one cannot expect from themselves. In any case, you ought to pick the one who is most fulfilling to you, and what appeals to me is someone “emotionally diverse”, or at the very least, interesting. So I feel you don’t get that with the Prince example.

    Anyway, thinking of it, I would date Inigo Montoya, but I would not date Achilles. One has some legitimate gripes with life, one is the CURSED SON OF A GOD?? I don’t know, that’s kind of, that’s kind of a lot, man. ( To approach the other examples makes me uncomfortable, because my response is going to be a “swoon or sneer over classic romnovel characters” sort of thing and it isn’t even relevant.)

  9. Rivenheart permalink
    September 13, 2010 9:52 pm

    So many phenomenal replies, and now I feel obligated to reply to them all!!!!! I will do my best to be brief(ish).

    First for Maryam: I am totally a knight myself. And I honestly don’t think it really would be fair to push myself and all of my issues on a prince. And I think being a knight is actually quite awesome. I think I used to want to be the pretty girl that could wear a dress and cry and get her way, but I think I’ve discovered that being a knight and poking a stick in mud-holes and wrestling with all of my male acquaintances totally makes up for the disappointment of not being the belle of the ball, damsel in distress, and all that other good stuff.

    For noor: Thank you for reminding me that my categorization is completely unfair and judgemental, and my right to judge is 0. Completely 0. But I think I need to point out that for me, this is quite a kind categorization, because normally I would be sitting there categorizing men into two groups: Jerk vs. Not Complete Jerk. But you’re right. Things do change, and it’s the core of a person that really counts. And noor? You’re right; you are indeed very blessed. At least by the sound of things.

    For Maryam, noor, and Kaimalino: Kaimalino hit it straight on the head. Dating in our church is both a “get married” thing and a “get to know people” thing. It’s kind of strange though, because when I was younger they always told us to be careful about dating, follow curfew, etc. Now, they tell us to date as hard as we can, and it’s a little confusing. But they didn’t devote the whole sacrament meeting to that one subject. Just one of the speakers did. The others also had very important things to say. Like about the importance of the Sacrament and about how we needed to come here and actually live life to the fullest and get involved as much as we could in everything (except for the going out and getting drunk). And thank you for explaining it all Kai!!!

    Saya, feel free to do some soul-splattering. Because I just did. A lot of it. A whole post of it. And mine was not only soul-splattering, it was depressed, red means, exhausted, sleep-deprived, homework spasming, soul-splattering. Much-lots embarrasing. 🙂

    And Allumer? I think I am a little bit with you on that one. What’s that line in Kate and Leopold, where she describes love and romance as being kind of like a grown-up version of Santa Clause? It’s really kind of sad in a way, because it’s so cynical, but then we all know that in some sense or another it’s true. I honestly have a very hard time falling in love. Probably because I’d much prefer to fall into chocolate. 😉

    And Ben Barnes is… hmm. From what I’ve seen, he seems okay, but I’m still reserving judgement on the character of Prince Caspian. I know that’s how he was written in the script, but I’d like to point out that in the book he and Peter both manage to act like kings, not like whiny teenage brats like myself. Much more respect for a king than for a whiner. But I’m a knight, what can I say?

    And those two movies are completely and totally awesome!!! The Jane Austen fight club is just hilarious, and I’m completely impressed by the Bronte sisters right now. I think they’re awesome and wonderful, so making super-hero action figures out of them is pretty cool.

    Zpurpleify: You can’t just leave us all hanging like that. What kinds of princely qualities would you like in your knight?

    chuuurls (chuuuuuuuuuuurls….): I always wondered why no one was ever dating Inigo Montoya. I mean, there’s always the Prince and the Pirate, who describes himself as being the King of the Sea, and then I’m always looking around going, “but hey, what about the guy with the sword? The one with the revengeful obsession? That doesn’t seem HORRIBLY AWESOME to anyone?”

    In all honesty, I’ve never really cared for Achilles. If I got my pick out of the whole Trojan War battalions, I’d probably go with Hector, or actually Patroclus, who isn’t the self-obsessed son of a god that likes to kill people and sits in his tent when Agamemnon takes his girl, but the guy who steals his cousin’s armor and rushes off to battle and leads the men so that they have a chance to win the day. THAT is a freakishly awesome warrior to me.

    Yeah, can you see why I prefer a knight to a prince yet? I have a curious mind for that sort of thing.

    • September 13, 2010 9:59 pm

      “Thank you for reminding me that my categorization is completely unfair and judgemental, and my right to judge is 0. Completely 0. But I think I need to point out that for me, this is quite a kind categorization, because normally I would be sitting there categorizing men into two groups: Jerk vs. Not Complete Jerk.”

      Nonono, I wasn’t trying to knock you for being unfair and judgmental at all, because I have the tendency to go all anti-man and do so frequently. I was more trying to point out something I think we (as human beings) do a lot which is look for someone who fits a certain fantasy/stereotype when I feel like in reality people just aren’t like that and relationships never work out that way (and if they start out that way, they usually end badly, in my experience). Men do it to women as well. But yeah, I seriously hit the man lottery in my relationship (and that doesn’t mean he doesn’t do really really aggravating jerky things sometimes too). I can definitely understand though. Because I have those days when Ben & Jerry are the only decent men on the face of the earth.

      • Kaimalino permalink
        September 14, 2010 2:40 am

        Cracking up here. I married Jerry. His best friend is Ben. And they are, in fact, decent.

    • Allumer permalink
      September 14, 2010 12:08 am

      Oh man, I sound like some callous old biddy. I do believe in love. Love? I am cynical, but I was born that way. I just don’t believe in the fallacies surrounding love. I don’t believe it is everything. I don’t believe it will make you happy. I don’t believe it will solve problems. And, as Saya said, I don’t believe it is enough. Being religious, I think there is a reason for this. I think that the only true happiness and fulfillment comes from Allah (God) so we aren’t actually supposed to find completion with human romantic love. Or mother love, or any love. Or anything. Only Allah is perfection. Only He is true love. Only he can help you.

      That being said, I do love and am loved. It is a wonderful conflagration of ecstasy and annoyance. And can I just put a vote in for cowboys, since we are categorizing?

      • September 14, 2010 5:12 am

        I wish I had a like button. Cause I like this a hundred times over 🙂

  10. September 13, 2010 10:34 pm

    I gigglesnorted my way through that Chuuurlish comment XD XD

    What, serious answers?

    My siblings and I ‘play’ a ‘game’ of ‘if there was A or B, what would you choose? You have to choose one or you have to have both/won’t get either’ (the classic one being, ‘would you rather be a pig or a dog? You have to choose one or you have to be both’ (don’t ask, we have a rich intellectual existence).

    So if the question is, ‘if you could only marry a knight or a prince, which would you choose? You have to choose one or you won’t get married ever and you will die alone and unloved’ – then I have to go with knight by your definition, because the princes seem kind of dry and boring and a bit priggish.

    But as with all big questions, the best answer is probably a bit of both. Like if anyone’s read the Green Rider series by Kristen Britain, King Zachary is the BEES’ KNEES. Also, in the Seer and the Sword by Victoria Hanley, Landen is a prince – a very knightly prince. Landen has been one of my favourite boy-characters for like, a decade now. And the classic Austenian knightly character is, DUH, Mr Knightley – and he’s…there’s a powerful and commanding aspect about him, which is what Emma always submits to.

    I think, then, it is the chivalry of knights, and the power of princes/kings that are what some women find attractive. Couple that with an assumption of physical proficiency (knights) and good looks (princes), you kind of have probably constructed a little girl’s fantasy guy.

    Most of all, though, you don’t want to MARRY one – you want to BE a princely knightly superhero who is skilled and brave and good and also humble, with a flying horse and Talent/Skill/talking with animals and really geeky tendencies that you won’t ever tell ANYONE about.

    ‘If you could have any man in the world fall in love with you, simply because you fell in love with them, who would it be?’

    I’m not sure love is always enough. You can love someone, and they can love you, and it will only cause you PAIN, and in the end…yeah, it might not be enough. Karigan G’ladheon* knows. Jane Eyre knows.

    What that question should really be is ‘if all the other laws of the universe could accommodate your union with someone, including their loving you for like, EVER, who would it be?’ – at which point those single amongst us will decline to answer either out of maidenly shyness or not having a clue (or because everyone in the list is fictional?).

    You know Raoul of #3 in the princes list? Which Raoul is this? I can only think of Lord Raoul of Goldenlake of Tamora Pierce’s Tortall/Protector of the Small series. Who was awesome but definitely a knight.

    Where do non-prince, non-knight types fit in? I think they’re my cup of tea. The more complicated, the better. Also geeky and with the capability to be a jerk.**

    *Read the Green Rider series, guys! Then we can talk about it. It’s fantasy, so right up your streets!

    ** cf. Anne:

    “Fred Wright has a fine farm and he is a model young man.”

    “He certainly isn’t the wild, dashing, wicked, young man Diana once wanted to marry,” smiled Anne. “Fred is extremely GOOD.”

    “That’s just what he ought to be. Would you want Diana to marry a wicked man? Or marry one yourself?”

    “Oh, no. I wouldn’t want to marry anybody who was wicked, but I think I’d like it if he COULD be wicked and WOULDN’T. Now, Fred is HOPELESSLY good.”

    “You’ll have more sense some day, I hope,” said Marilla.

    (Chapter 28: A June Evening, Anne of the Island)

    • Kaimalino permalink
      September 14, 2010 12:28 am

      Love Anne. And you. And, heck, Gilbert, too. And the wicked-jerk streak is what allows someone to be so very clever and witty so you can have a thousand inside jokes–indispensible! Are Knights more likely to be witty than Princes? Then no contest. But I’m still putting in a good word for the Accountants.
      And Raoul–you know, from “Phantom of the Opera”!–I fear he is a bit “hopelessly good.” Never turned my head, not that I had a thing for The Phantom, either. Spider-Man, maybe, but not the Phantom of the Opera.

      • September 14, 2010 10:53 am

        Oh, hah, no I actually don’t know Phantom of the Opera!

        And I have never read nor watched the Princess Bride.

        But hey, I haven’t ever watched Star Wars either, so I’ve already been ejected from the Geek Club.

        Spiderman I know, though. We’re chums. The real cartoon Spiderman, not that Toby boy.

        Gilbert! How could I forget him? But but but I (finally) read the Blue Castle a couple of months ago, and Maryam is so right: Barney Snaith. Exactly the person Anne is describing in the above quote.

  11. September 14, 2010 2:48 am

    OMG I LOVE THIS TRAIN OF COMMENTS. allumer, i just laughed out loud at your, um, third (?) post (the disclaimer with chocolate one). kai, thank you for explaining. i really think it sounds good. now i wish i’d been brought up mormon, if nothing else for the dating rules (instead of not supposed to do it, sneakin’ around, disappointing your mother, up waaaay too late, move out so this is easier, man i wish i’d never met him…). riv, i don’t think you meant this all to get so heavy, huh? i shoulda just said “knight! mr. rochester to be exact!” chuuuuurls, dude, thanks—now i can’t stop thinking hot stuff about inigo montoya. man. and now i vote 100% for a cowboy category. (in my real life case, carpenter, but it’s similar enough.) oh what am i saying? i’m the cowboy in this scenario. the cowboy and the carpenter.

  12. Zpurpleify permalink
    September 14, 2010 4:08 pm

    Rivenheart, in response to your response…

    My knight is a little rough aroudn the edges, he constantly pushes me (in his own Knightly way) to strive to do things which I wouldn’t have considered otherwise (like give up Jacket potatoes as he thinks potatoes are “filler food – It was a tough road, but I have to say, I can see the benefits.) He doesn’t believe in always being pristine with his shaving so has the rugged look for about 3-4 days until I tell him he’s too scratchy (a prince would be clean shaven and baby soft ALL the time, I think!)

    He does have his princelike qualities, he bought me TWO gorgeous handbags (and I don’t mess with the kind I like) wihtout any kind of hinting on my part! He wrote me a very sweet little letter on our wedding day, I was floored by it and felt so lucky to be marrying him (I, on the other hand, aren’t as “romantic” but I’m trying)

    So, in conclusion, I like my Knight with Princelike qualities, it’s best to have a little bit of both 😀

  13. Kat permalink
    September 16, 2010 5:55 am

    Aloha! I always had in mind the kind of amazing guy who would sweep me off my feet, and I fell madly in love a few times searching for the prince/knight. What ended up happening is I met a guy who I wouldn’t even consider dating, but he liked me so he worked hard to become my friend. He just kept coming around till he grew on me, and then I devolved feelings for him, then realized that I loved him. Not a lot of rockets or roses, but 8 yrs later I love him even more than I did when I married him.

Trackbacks

  1. The Business of Love (NO! Get Your Mind Out of the Gutter!) «
  2. And Thus Romance Takes its Revenge «

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: