"- Eddie is cheap and poor and "
Oxymoron.
You can't be cheap AND poor. I mean, it's somewhat possible, I suppose, but how do you KNOW someone is cheap, if they're poor? Poor people aren't 'cheap', they just can't afford to appear 'non-cheap', because they don't have the resources.
Only rich people can be cheap, because the very definition of being cheap, is 'being able to pay handsomely, but only paying a tiny amount', or 'being able to buy expensive things, but buying cheap things instead'.
When you remove the ABILITY to buy something expensive, there's no 'cheap'. If you have 10 cents and you buy something that costs 10 cents, you're not being cheap, you don't have any OPTIONS to buy anything more expensive.
If you have 100 bucks and you buy something that costs 10 cents because you want to save money, although you could easily afford the 10-dollar one or the 80-dollar version, only THEN can you ever be cheap.
"Cheap AND poor" is an oxymoron, even if someone poor IS actually cheap, you can never KNOW they're cheap, as long as they remain poor, because they don't have the opportunity to show that they're actually cheap, since they're _FORCED_ to buy cheap stuff because of lack of money and resources.
Eddie could be REALLY generous and non-cheap, and would buy the most expensive and extravagant things, if he HAD MONEY - you don't know! So please refrain from accusing a character of being something you have no way of knowing they are. I mean, it's possible that Eddie is cheap, but considering how generous and well-meaning he really is, I don't think it would fit his character.
Being cheap fits the character of some wealthy miser, not a poor guy with an overly big family.
reply
share