Why does Westley have to go away and earn money before he can marry Buttercup? “No money for marriage”? So what? Buttercup has her own farm and Westley already lives there and works it. They need only tie the knot, move Westley into Buttercup’s bedroom, and carry on as before.
A fortune hunter like you might do that, but Westley had some pride.
One of those social stigma things that was of vital importance to people in long-ago days, but which we enlightened westerners don’t pay a lot of attention to. Social class divisions were frightfully strict in, say, Victorian England.
A lady of the gentry marrying a – sniff – servant? Well! No one will invite her to dinner, and the parson will refuse to allow them a reserved pew.
It had nothing at all to do with Wesley and Buttercup, Grandpa threw that in there as a moral lesson for Fred Savage. “Don’t grow up to be no man whore!” 
You have to read the original story, not the good parts version. It describes over 32 pages why Westley has to go earn his fortune.
It’s clear in the book that Buttercup cares not a fig for her social position; if she did, she would have accepted Humperdinck’s proposal without hesitation.
Westley finally worked up courage to say something other than “As you command”, which was “will you marry me?” She said “yes” - onto the kissing bits …
Actually, sound a bit like the porn version?!!
I’d always assumed based on the movie alone that Buttercup’s parents owned the farm - based on her being too young to own it herself - and the parents are just not shown for the sake of brevity. Course that’s probably completely wrong based on the book but that’s how I’d rationalised it myself.
Yes, but when you read that, make sure you skip the 120 pages about Humperdink’s formative years: no one needs to know that much about a man that slimy (except for Florinese historians that is) .
Good Lord, woman! That’s liek suggesting somebody skip over the serwers of Paris parts of Le Miserables!
Those chapters are essential in understanding Humperdinck’s motivations, why he dropped the “c” from the spelling of his name, and why nothing about pudding made it into the movie.
Hey, what happened to the other 87 posts in this thread? I didn’t log in to read just the “good parts” version!
Is this a kissing thread?
Inconceivable!
You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Wait - just wait.
Well, I don’t mind [the kissing parts] so much…
All this talk about wuv, twue wov, and no one cares that Westley became a man of means by mass murder? Remember, the Dread Pirate Roberts takes no prisoners.
Kinda funny, how they skip THAT part. After all that, he doesn’t even kill Humperdink, but what about the nameless ship crew and passengers? Does no one care about them?
Must be the ‘good parts’ version of the story.
The Piracy chapters have a wealth of detail about sailing. There are indications that Patrick O’Brien had a copy translated from the original Florinese that he used to “borrow” much of the “fascinating nautical” material in his Jack Aubrey stories.
Yes, I think the original poster would probably be surprised how many English novels are based on the premise: “Oh no! The person I love comes from a slightly different economic background than me!”
There are men *today *who don’t want to get married to someone they can’t provide for. It’s not as common as it was in the PB universe, but it’s not terribly uncommon either.