Dovrebanen wrote:To sum up the situation, I agree with you, Jadey. Putting it simple, it is like that in my opinionThe Dark Knight wrote:
I guess that make me the dark side,
I still maintain that Edward was in the dominate role. Yes, he gave Bella most everything she wanted, but being in the position to give it shows he could have done otherwise. When looking at any relationship whether political, economic, social or romantic the "Base" concept of dominance comes down to one thing; "He/She, who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." In the case of Bella and Edward, Edward was in control. He left her and in doing so destroyed a part of Bella.
Can you see my POV?
Ok, this question wasn't addressed to me. But I haven't been on Edward and Bella in ages (ehhm..a day tor two ), so I'll reply anyway.
Dark Knight, I can see your POV. But I don't agree with you. Yes, Edward was in the position that he could deny Bella certain things. But Bella knew that he wouldn't do that. At least not for long. He loved her and he would do absolutely anything for her. Even in regards to Jacob, she got her way eventually. So like ringswraith said, he overstepped the line in regards to her safety, but that was not because he wanted to control her. It was all in respect to keeping her safe. In my opinion, Bella had the more powerful role in the relationship. She subjected Edward to all kinds of hurt. She counted on his love for when she kept going to La Push. In my opinion, Bella had the power to break Edward, because he loved her so much and because he only wanted the very best for her even at the expence of himself. And I'm not saying that Bella used that consciously, but she was in a position to. Edward felt himself not good (enough) for her, and so he would give her anything.
And I'm not sure what you mean by the person who can destroy a thing, controls a thing. Do you mean that this is something that runs through their whole relationship? Because in my opinion, Edward was not in a position to destroy anything. He left because he saw no other option. I'll admit, he was wrong. But considering that he was a vampire, who had first brought James into her world, and then couldn't even protect her from his only family, I can't blame him for thinking that she would be better off without him. And he sincerly wanted her to have the life that she deserved, and he felt that a life with him was not for her. I think it was diane who said somewhere that Edward gave Bella the ultimate gift/sacrifice of love (sorry, can't remember the exact words), by leaving. He gave up his own happiness for her. It didn't turn out well, but his intentions were the very best.
I have to agree that Edward’s main motives where to keep Bella safe. It became his occupation for a time. As for Bella putting him in a world of hurt I get your POV and agree to some degree but if you read what I replied to Jadey (previous post), you can see that my POV is that Edward playing the nice guy was the hand behind her being able to go to La Push. Did it drive Edward Crazy; well I think we can all say YES. Is it part of the plan for Edward, yep?
The only way Bella could break Edward is by dying and that power lies in all love.
Let me see if I can better explain the quote of “the person who can destroy a thing, controls a thing.” In all forms of control the path in determining who has control can best be followed back to the person in charge by this simple quote. The person who can destroy a project, relationship or idea is the one in charge; everyone else is along for the ride. It’s a universal truth in nature and in relationships. In this case Edward demonstrates that he is the hand behind the relationship by leaving in NM. I don’t think Bella would have that ability, at least not in the books I read. Maybe you see it differently than that, “could Bella leave Edward?” I just don’t see her being able to do that.
This is why I think Edward is in control of the relationship and not Bella.