We, Engineer Husband and I and three of our own little women, went to see the new movie adaptation of Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women at the movie theater the day after Christmas. Engineer Husband, who is a very tender and sometimes emotional man but is never moved to tears, said the movie almost made him cry. That’s a powerful recommendation, if that’s the purpose of art, to appeal to the emotions.

 I could pick at this 2019 movie version of Alcott’s famous novel: the actress who played Amy was too old to be the young Amy although she made a valiant effort, and Laurie was too boyish and reserved and never really arrived at lovable or endearing. I thought one throwaway line in the movie was a particularly egregious case of pandering to progressive sensibilities and preoccupations. (I won’t say which line because I don’t want to draw attention to it or argue about it.) The downplaying, or over-dramatization, of Jo’s and Frederick’s romance at the end was bothersome. Was it real or was it just a chapter in Jo’s book? Was it unbelievable (the meeting under the umbrella) because it was basically untrue, not true to Jo’s character, or because it was untrue for Louisa Alcott? The blending of fact about Louisa May Alcott’s life and fiction about the March family was unnerving and distracting at this particular point in the movie.

Nevertheless, I thought it was a very good movie. It did make me re-think Little Women, as Karen Swallow Prior suggested in her review. It was a Little Women for our time, a bit ambiguous as to Jo’s actual fate, very meta-, sometimes confusing with all of the time jumps back and forth, but still true to the author’s intent, I believe, and with some sound truths to mull over.

Sound truth number #1: Marriage can be, and often has been for much of history, a mercenary affair. Jo says as much in the movie, and Aunt March preaches it. And little Amy, of all people, puts the entire concept into a blunt and truthful paragraph:

“I’m just a woman. And as a woman, there’s no way for me to make my own money. Not enough to earn a living or to support my family, and if I had my own money, which I don’t, that money would belong to my husband the moment we got married. And if we had children, they would be his, not mine. They would be his property, so don’t sit there and tell me that marriage isn’t an economic proposition, because it is. It may not be for you, but it most certainly is for me.“

Little Women, Amy March to Laurie

In some ways the economic aspect of marriage has changed. Nowadays women don’t worry about marrying for money as much as they did. And there are plenty of ways for a woman to make her own way, economically speaking, in the world. But women do worry about divorce and being forced to support their children by themselves, and they do hesitate to get married or to have children in the first place because of the responsibility that may fall upon the woman’s shoulders. Women have abortions, killing their own children, for many reasons, but often because they don’t see any way to support a child financially. And the father doesn’t consider the children to be his property or even his responsibility. So if marriage is not an economic proposition, it certainly entails economic considerations.

Sound truth #2: Jo says: “Women, they have minds, and they have souls, as well as just hearts. And they’ve got ambition, and they’ve got talent, as well as just beauty. I’m so sick of people saying that love is just all a woman is fit for. I’m so sick of it!”

But Meg chooses marriage and domesticity, telling Jo, “Just because my dreams are different than yours, it doesn’t mean they’re unimportant.” Both girls demonstrate that it’s not love that is all a woman is fit for. She’s also fit to be a full partner in marriage like Meg or to be independent like Jo or to marry for love and be the strong moral force within the marriage, as Amy does and is with Laurie.

These are just some of thoughts I had in response to the movie. I’d be curious to hear what you thought if you have seen it. All of the many versions and remakes of Alcott’s story add a little something to a classic story that has certainly stood the test of time and has given us all something to enjoy and think about over many years.

How “Little Women” Re-Reads the Original Novel by Karen Swallow Prior.

Greta Gerwig’s Raw, Startling “Little Women” by Anthony Lane in The New Yorker.

“Little Women” Is a Masterpiece by Tyler Huckabee in Relevant magazine.