I admit it gives me a heart-twinge when a guy tears up as he realizes how badly he has maligned the heroine. As a mom, I just want to comfort him [instead of the ill-used girl] and say “it’s okay, dearie, she’ll forgive you” [thus preempting the girl’s prerogative to say no].
But…
be still, my beating heart! I’ve got a bone (make it a vertebrae) to pick with this dubious fellow.
First: face saving. I didn’t at all like the way the hero Sebastan used the non compos mentis defense to excuse his behavior. He rationalized his acusations as one colossal blunder of a lunatic and therefore, should be dismissed without prejudice. The heroine’s initial reactions were spot on: “Just like that. Amazing….[He could] pretend that everything was fine between them.”
Well, it’s always easier to spew out hostile words than to eat them.
But it wasn’t up to him to brush off the injury he had caused as if it were nothing relevant. Nor was it his right to demand that she simply forget that fiasco. As painful and embarrassing the memory of his unjust words was to him, his main focus shouldn’t have been to save face but to acknowledge that he has done her incredibly wrong.
Second: self-seeking. He wanted Rachel back so he bribed her with an island and villa. He wanted her as a lover so he arranged their wedding without her say-so. He wanted her to concede to his plans so he childishly sulked and withheld his presence from her. He needed her to admit that she was his. It's all about him and what he wants. All that was lacking in this one-man show was Ed MacMahon announcing, “And heeeeeeerre’s Sebastian!”
Like the hero's mother, we could revel in this alpha maleness as something romantic. But get this: no matter his score on the alpha-male-meter, true love doesn't seek its own gratification. Neither is it manipulative under the guise of it's-for-your-own-good,cher.
Last: embellishing. Ha! I nearly fell for that sweet talk he gave the heroine Rachel. With a straight face, he told her that a legal marriage between them was only ever necessary to make her his wife in name only because he was already committed to her in spirit the first time they had sex. He said that, while in the throes of passion, he consciously pledged to marry her. Scout’s honor, he said.
Even Rachel was flabbergasted and thought, “He couldn’t be serious.”
You see, the glaring problem of his exaggeration is this: how serious could he be in his decision, how convinced was he of his commitment, how determined could he be to marry the heroine, when in less than 3 hours later, he was able to turn around and back out of that promise given while in a sexual daze?
An iota.
Oy vey! This hero is so digging his own hole. But the trusting, loving heroine just grants him general amnesty like she's Andrew Jackson reincarnated.
This story proposed the twisted logic that the depth of the hero’s attraction corresponded to the vitriol of his attack. You know, how you always hurt the one you love the most song-and-dance.
In real life, however, the opposite is true: the depth of your love should be inversely proportional to the aggression of your words.
You know that bit about love is patient, love is kind, rejoices in the truth, believes all thing and all that jazz.