|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Oct 4, 2014 16:22:56 GMT
I blame Snacky and Talbotrail for this.  Title: Symbolism Author: Fallenbelle Summary: A band of gold that represents eternity. Pairing: William and Julia Rating: T for very mild references of adult themes. Very mild-PG would be more like it. Notes: While wedding bands are almost mandatory nowadays, they were not at the turn of the 20th century-they didn't become popular until WWII when the soldiers went off to war wearing symbols of what they were fighting for. Warnings: Season eightish/post season eightish. No spoilers at all-this was a random thought that demanded to be written before I could resume my regularly scheduled life. Although, I'd certainly love it if this were to actually happen-but I doubt it. www.fanfiction.net/s/10734364/1/Symbolism |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Oct 5, 2014 1:21:07 GMT
I really enjoyed it.  I guess Darcy was rather 'feminine' then...I kinda doubt Julia asked him to wear a ring symbolizing their endless love.  |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Oct 5, 2014 2:30:45 GMT
I really enjoyed it. I guess Darcy was rather 'feminine' then...I kinda doubt Julia asked him to wear a ring symbolizing their endless love. Probably not. But she probably insisted that if she was going to wear one, so was he. But I think William would totally be a sucker for the romantic symbolism. Plus, I think he needs a ring to play with to replace the long gazed upon engagement ring now on her finger. It really did become a visible symbol of his feelings for her!  |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Oct 5, 2014 11:14:10 GMT
I really enjoyed it. I guess Darcy was rather 'feminine' then...I kinda doubt Julia asked him to wear a ring symbolizing their endless love. Probably not. But she probably insisted that if she was going to wear one, so was he. ♪Can you feeeeel the loooove toniiight!♪ |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Oct 5, 2014 13:23:49 GMT
Probably not. But she probably insisted that if she was going to wear one, so was he. ♪Can you feeeeel the loooove toniiight!♪ Are we talking about the Elton John version, or the film version? |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Oct 5, 2014 14:07:57 GMT
♪Can you feeeeel the loooove toniiight!♪ Are we talking about the Elton John version, or the film version? I didn't even know there WERE two versions.  The film version....with the hidden S E X in the background.  |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Oct 5, 2014 16:24:50 GMT
Are we talking about the Elton John version, or the film version? I didn't even know there WERE two versions. The film version....with the hidden S E X in the background. It's been eons since I've seen it, but you're right-that was totes foreplay! And we are talking W/J now and not D, correct? 'Cause I have no desire to watch foreplay between D/J. |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Oct 5, 2014 17:21:32 GMT
I didn't even know there WERE two versions. The film version....with the hidden S E X in the background. It's been eons since I've seen it, but you're right-that was totes foreplay! And we are talking W/J now and not D, correct? 'Cause I have no desire to watch foreplay between D/J. Those are bedroom eyes if I've ever seen them.  But uh, I swear I read somewhere that it literally had the word sex in the background...probably a joke since I've never seen it.  Or I misread the thing. Sure we are. I kinda just say whatever random stuff pops in my head. Darcy's idea of foreplay would be like, touching her shoulder once and squeezing it. "Maybe I didn't express my affection for you properly in the past, but I really do admire you Julia." Or whatever the heck he said before she wounded his 'manly pride'. |
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Oct 5, 2014 20:27:42 GMT
Darcy's idea of foreplay would be like, touching her shoulder once and squeezing it. "Maybe I didn't express my affection for you properly in the past, but I really do admire you Julia." Or whatever the heck he said before she wounded his 'manly pride'. I'd be wounding my husband's manly pride if all he could muster was how he may not have expressed the affection he feels. They've been married, what 18 months maybe at most, he should be telling her how much he adores her. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Oct 5, 2014 20:28:48 GMT
I blame Snacky and Talbotrail for this. Title: Symbolism Author: Fallenbelle Summary: A band of gold that represents eternity. Pairing: William and Julia Rating: T for very mild references of adult themes. Very mild-PG would be more like it. Notes: While wedding bands are almost mandatory nowadays, they were not at the turn of the 20th century-they didn't become popular until WWII when the soldiers went off to war wearing symbols of what they were fighting for. Warnings: Season eightish/post season eightish. No spoilers at all-this was a random thought that demanded to be written before I could resume my regularly scheduled life. Although, I'd certainly love it if this were to actually happen-but I doubt it. www.fanfiction.net/s/10734364/1/SymbolismI will proudly take the blame for all fanfic! Hopefully I can read this later tonight! |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Oct 6, 2014 2:39:05 GMT
Seriously? I just got a review for Vistitations that basically said my writing was good but too bad I was historically incorrect because women wore modest nightgowns made of cotton. Um, really? That was law? All women were required to wear identical nightgowns? I'll have you know I researched nightgowns at the turn of the century, and found plenty of silk options that were quite revealing. Methinks you've based all of your conceptions about 19th century women on Little House on the Prairie, and while I'm sure that lots of women did wear nightgowns made of cotton, to insist that all women did so, and leave an anonymous review where I can't defend myself is something else. Google "edwardian nightgown" and go to images. There are some demure pieces, but many silk or even sheer ensembles that were definitely scandalous. I think that a wealthy woman like Julia would have such a piece. I'm good, just needed to vent.  |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Oct 6, 2014 2:45:23 GMT
Darcy's idea of foreplay would be like, touching her shoulder once and squeezing it. "Maybe I didn't express my affection for you properly in the past, but I really do admire you Julia." Or whatever the heck he said before she wounded his 'manly pride'. I'd be wounding my husband's manly pride if all he could muster was how he may not have expressed the affection he feels. They've been married, what 18 months maybe at most, he should be telling her how much he adores her. And that's it right there-why Darcy didn't get Julia. She's not some demure, fragile flower who would wilt if he showed her passion. She doesn't just want affection, she also wants passion. No, I don't think William has ever said such passionate things, but she can sense something beneath the propriety that tells her his passions run very deep. |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Oct 6, 2014 2:48:11 GMT
Darcy's idea of foreplay would be like, touching her shoulder once and squeezing it. "Maybe I didn't express my affection for you properly in the past, but I really do admire you Julia." Or whatever the heck he said before she wounded his 'manly pride'. I'd be wounding my husband's manly pride if all he could muster was how he may not have expressed the affection he feels. They've been married, what 18 months maybe at most, he should be telling her how much he adores her. Quite right. It's good to know that your husband feels affection for you, but yes, he also better be feeling other things of a scandalous nature as well. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Oct 6, 2014 4:12:38 GMT
Seriously? I just got a review for Vistitations that basically said my writing was good but too bad I was historically incorrect because women wore modest nightgowns made of cotton. Um, really? That was law? All women were required to wear identical nightgowns? I'll have you know I researched nightgowns at the turn of the century, and found plenty of silk options that were quite revealing. Methinks you've based all of your conceptions about 19th century women on Little House on the Prairie, and while I'm sure that lots of women did wear nightgowns made of cotton, to insist that all women did so, and leave an anonymous review where I can't defend myself is something else. Google "edwardian nightgown" and go to images. There are some demure pieces, but many silk or even sheer ensembles that were definitely scandalous. I think that a wealthy woman like Julia would have such a piece. I'm good, just needed to vent. I call troll on your visitor.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Oct 6, 2014 4:32:46 GMT
Seriously? I just got a review for Vistitations that basically said my writing was good but too bad I was historically incorrect because women wore modest nightgowns made of cotton. Um, really? That was law? All women were required to wear identical nightgowns? I'll have you know I researched nightgowns at the turn of the century, and found plenty of silk options that were quite revealing. Methinks you've based all of your conceptions about 19th century women on Little House on the Prairie, and while I'm sure that lots of women did wear nightgowns made of cotton, to insist that all women did so, and leave an anonymous review where I can't defend myself is something else. Google "edwardian nightgown" and go to images. There are some demure pieces, but many silk or even sheer ensembles that were definitely scandalous. I think that a wealthy woman like Julia would have such a piece. I'm good, just needed to vent. I call troll on your visitor. It's FICTION, you can have any nightgown you wish, including no nightgown at all if that's what you want. The cheek of some people. They probably couldn't write if they tried, NO IMAGINATION. |
|
The film version....with the hidden S E X in the background. 
But uh, I swear I read somewhere that it literally had the word sex in the background...probably a joke since I've never seen it. 
Or I misread the thing.
