Sex and the City author/creator Candace Bushnell has a great interview with The Guardian. I’ve seen Bushnell in interviews and I read Four Blondes like everybody else, but I never really developed much of an opinion – love or hate – for her. I think her column, which became the HBO show, was part of a sort of bygone era for women. The mid-90s, the late 90s, and the early aughts. It seemed like so long ago, and some parts of the show haven’t aged particularly well. Anyway, this Guardian interview is really good, and Bushnell comes across well. She talks realistically about what she would have changed about Sex and the City and and why Carrie and Mr. Big wouldn’t have really ended up together. Some highlights:
What would the ‘Sex and the City’ column would look like today: “I suppose it would be on some kind of blog, and people would be responding with their own stories. But back then the Observer had an audience, a very specific one, and we were just trying to reach that audience. Whereas today, everybody wants to appeal to everybody. The column wasn’t designed that way and yet, ironically, it took off and appealed to a great many people.
Whether Carrie & Big really should have ended up together: “Well, I think, in real life, Carrie and Big wouldn’t have ended up together. But at that point the TV show had become so big. Viewers got so invested in the storyline of Carrie and Big that it became a bit like Mr Darcy and Elizabeth Bennett. They had become an iconic couple and women really related to it; they would say “I found my Mr Big” or “I just broke up with my Mr Big.” It became part of the lexicon. And when people are making a TV show, it’s show business, not show art, so at that point it was for the audience and we weren’t thinking about what the impact would be 10 years later.
Whether a present-day SATC would address politics more overtly: “I actually think the characters would be involved in politics in some way. I think Miranda would probably be marching for human rights and the show would address it in a bigger way. But at the time, in 1998, everything was on a big upturn. The housing market was coming back, the stock market was going up. I think people worried a bit less. Until 9/11, it was a fairly carefree time, at least compared to today.
The heightened sense of feminism these days: “When the show started that was really a time when women were starting to say, “Oh, I’m not a feminist.” In the 80s, everybody I knew was a feminist. You had to be to survive. There was no pretending sexism didn’t exist because it was in your office every single day. But it wasn’t like Donald Trump. It was a little more jocular, I suppose. Then you started to get these TV shows, like Say Yes to the Dress or Bridezillas. There was really a proliferation of shows that turned away from feminism and towards the idea, once again, of marriage as the ultimate goal. But I think it’s lessening now, and we’re swimming back in the right direction.
I was prepared to yell about comparing Big and Carrie to Elizabeth Bennett and Darcy, but really… she’s sort of right. I mean, Lizzie Bennett and Darcy are iconic romantic heroes, but the story of Big and Carrie was such a big deal in pop culture. Personally, I think the show could have gotten away with not putting Big and Carrie together at the end, if only Carrie had met someone she could truly be with forever. Aiden wasn’t that guy – although I still love the fact that one of the biggest TV shows in the world had its lead character break off an engagement because SHE had cold feet, because she didn’t want to get married. Mikhail Baryshnikov’s character could have been the one, only Carrie has to be the center of attention at all times, so of course that couldn’t work out. Maybe Bushnell is wrong – maybe Carrie and Big did belong together. They were the only ones who could feed each other’s drama-queening perfectly.
Photos courtesy of WENN, HBO.
Those characters were both too narcissistic and self involved to have sustained a relationship long term. I would buy that they ended up married, but it would’ve been the preamble to a bitter, protracted divorce.
This x infinity. Horrible characters.
Right? The same mistakes, over and over, it was exhausting and boring, after while. Too many women are ‘poisoned by the fairy tale’–the idea of some rich hunk swooping into their lives and making everything wonderful for evermore. That is not, and never has been, how life is. Reality and Fantasy–important to know the difference.
My friends and I hated Big. I remember rooting for Carrie to dump him.
I know it was created by a woman, but I’ve always thought the characters seem like they were written by someone who hates women, which is weird. If I were a misogynist who wanted to show the world how terrible women are (gold diggers, back stabbers, shrews, shallow narcissists), this is the show I would make. I never knew why some women fawned all over the show, when I found it so insulting to women.
Think you’re onto something. I never got into it and maybe this is why. I couldn’t relate to any of these women and I was exactly the age range and demographic with my own career. Surrounded by men all day may have impacted this for me too.
I went to see the movie with my husband and when I came out I felt so pissed off. All the women treated the men in their lives disgustingly, and when the men finally pushed back, they were the villains. Carrie planned a huge wedding with her fiance as the prop, didn’t listen to a word he said about that, and then went ballistic that he bailed in stress on the day. Miranda treated her sweet husband like something she’d scraped off her shoe, in every possible way, and then after the marriage had been dead other than living in the same house so he could manage all the childcare, sexless for two years or so and not a single pleasant word indicated either, he finally met someone and slept with them… and he was the evil cheater from hell. I can’t remember the other two stories but they weren’t better. And that is feminism? Treating men like shit and then being the victim when they react? It pisses me off because it’s narcissistic bullshit in a world that is already so slanted against women. It felt like a man’s idea of feminism and women’s preoccupations – Carrie knew Big was the one because he built a room to store her shoes, from memory. Just GTFO.
The correct choice in reality for any woman to make among all of Carrie’s bf on the show would be Aiden, hands down. He was the only one presented who was the marrying type if you wanted stability and long-term happiness. The rest were players or unsure of themselves. Among the other women, their long term partners were much more believable in that they would realistically stay together for a long time.
I always thought if the show wouldn’t have become its own prisoner because it got so big and so many fans were heavily invested in the story, it would have had a more realistic AND mature ending. I hated the whole “Carrie, you are the One” mess. It was really Cinderella style awful.
In real life Carrie never would have any long term friendships either. She was not a good friend.
Thank you!!! I will never understand why people idolized the friendships in this show. They were all horrible to each other, Carrie being the absolute worst. Like the time she legit got pissed because Charlotte didn’t offer to BUY HER APARTMENT for her!?!?! Ugh. Hate.
or the time she left miranda on the floor naked in her bathroom and send AIDEN to go help her! bahaha. crap friend.
I’m very much a Miranda and would have told a friend like carrie to STFU about mr. big after awhile of them dating on/off and Carrie running back to him like he was the only pen*s left in NYC.
@ MissAmanda. I remember her calling Carrie to come over and Carrie telling her that she had an appointment with her editor and had to work something out. Then Aiden offered to go and help. I know she was a crap friend but that was just horrible timing and honestly, one of the more realistic situations in that season.
@Tiffany, I see your point.
But work was more important.
and after all that Miranda did for Carrie over the seasons, work was STILL more important.
It def. made Aiden look too good to be with someone as selfish as Carrie. lol
I was thinking of that episode too.
You d be surprised by the big number of half assed full of hypocrisy friendship which go on for too long.
Some people are so insecure and effrayed by solitude they will stay in toxic relationship.
I ve seen one member of my family do that because she needed some services from her fake friend, and vice versa . They were despising each other as the first was a narcissist snob and the second a passive aggressive shady one.
It was as depressing to see as their conservative and disillusioned views on marriage.
LOL you guys, you realize that this was a tongue-in-cheek comedy show, right? I disagree with the fact that they were terrible friends to and for each other. They were self-absorbed NYC TV characters that loved and supported each other through their silly narcissistic New York TV melodrama. People like that are so wrapped up in their own shiz that they don’t waste too much time being offended by everyone else’s- and if they do, they love the feeling! I find it hard to believe that everyone doesn’t know a few people that act like this.
There is a difference between knowing narcissists and continuing to be friends with them or continuing to let them step on you.
Wow…if they do they love the feeling… I had no idea this was a thing. Gross. Painful!
I’m with Merritt. Just cleared out all the narcissists here and life is infinitely better.
I don’t think they were horrible to each other either. I think the apartment thing and Sam being weird about Miranda’s mother dying were the only bad moments.
“There was really a proliferation of shows that turned away from feminism and towards the idea, once again, of marriage as the ultimate goal.”
*sigh* You can be a feminist and still have marriage as an ultimate goal for your life. I do wish that people would stop relating feminism to a desire to be in a relationship. One actually has nothing to do with the other.
But shows like Bridezilla and Say Yes to the Dress don’t make marriage the ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is the wedding.
agreed!
people tend to care more about being engaged if their friends all all, or having a wedding to impress the guests, rather than worrying about the marriage itself.
I’m pretty sure the ultimate goal of Say Yes to the Dress is to buy a ridiculously expensive gown. The wedding and marriage don’t matter much.
Yes. I think that SATC and its wedding industrial-complex successors are bosom buddies. I also agree with KatieBo’s statement.
Yes to this statement. The marriage can be sh–ty but by god I will have an amazing wedding my friends and acquaintances will remember for a lifetime. Carrie could have had her Vogue wedding and she and Mr. Big would have still ended up divorced. The wedding industrial complex fools young women that having a fairy tale wedding itself is a major accomplishment in life, and that you should try to achieve it at any cost, even if you are getting with an abusive or horrible guy who will make you miserable after the wedding.
YES! I have gotten so much shade from saying I would like to be married! I would! AND I happily call myself a feminist.
Nothing wrong with wanting a life partner. After all, someone has to wipe up your drool 😉
There is a big difference between desiring to get married someday and whining to your friends that you’re not engaged yet, browsing rings and dresses when you just started dating somebody, etc. (many people do this).
Just today a co-worker lamented to her friend that ‘nobody is going to care about or help me with my wedding now that ____ and ____ (two mutual friends) just got engaged’
^ THAT sh*t is so pathetic IMO.
@MissAmanda. No Lies Detected.
No one said that you can’t be a feminist if you are in a happy heterosexual marriage. The issue is that for far too long throughout history, women have been told that (heterosexual) marriage is the most important goal in life. That even if you have a degree from the Ivy League, a great job, and great friends, you aren’t whole or truly fulfilled unless you are married with children. There is more pity in society for successful women who aren’t married than for unhappy women in unhealthy marriages. I think SATC did address that issue several times, and those episodes stick out the most for me. Especially the fact that we are forced to spend literally thousands of dollars attending celebrations and buying gifts for people’s weddings and childbirth, but if you are single and childless, no one ever celebrates that.
She said the “ultimate” goal. Not that it couldn’t be one of many goals.
Semantics are important here.
Actually, the semantics of “ultimate goal” or “one of many goals” do not matter here. Being a feminist has nothing to do with a romantic relationship. Period. It should not be equated as such.
Thank you, KatieBo. That comment rubbed me the wrong way too. I always wanted to be married–not because I wanted to be some pampered stepford, but because I wanted to find someone to share my life with like my parents, who had a good marriage. In some ways, yes, it was always my ultimate goal. Now I am married and have kids, but I also work a full time job with my kids in a daycare, and I have my own ideas and opinions. And I also love my wife role along with all my other roles. A feminist can still want to be and enjoy being married. I hate when people–especially women–say that shit and imply it’s one or the other.
+10000000
I’ve been a SAHM for 20 years. What I wanted more than anything else was to be happily married and have a bunch of kids. I am also pro-choice and a feminist.
“Now I am married and have kids, but I also work a full time job with my kids in a daycare”
Being a feminist has actually very little to do with one’s workplace or work description; it has everything to do with being a rounded and self-reliant person, and with following one’s own choices. (So, a housewife absolutely can be a feminist. What is NOT feminist is bashing anyone’s desire to stay at home and be a home-maker; many self-proclaimed “feminist” career women are anything but.)
@KatieBo:
Of course wanting to be a in a relationship is not contrary to feminism. To make marriage in itself (i.e. not linked to a specific person that one already knows) the “ultimate goal”, however, is anything but. Nothing wrong with that; nobody HAS to be a feminist. I am just saying, that is not feminist.
@Mel:
You cannot be self-reliant when you’re unemployed unless you come from money. Seriously, even a few years out of the workforce is devastating for a woman’s career options. Not doing anything (education or volunteering) in the years you stay home is just not an option for women in the 21st century. I feel like housewives are only an option for marriages where a man makes a ton of money or where you’re inclined to saving more than spending and knowing how to budget properly. Otherwise I expect the woman to be financially independent and secure BEFORE marring somebody. To get married without your own money and rely on your husband’s income is trapping yourselves economically as the control goes to the man just like in the old days.
So yes, you can choose that housewife life but that’s also choosing to limit your future in employment as women will most likely NOT be of pension age when the children are out of the house and then your husband is also still working so what is the woman going to do then? Even before they leave the house, teenagers do not require 24/7 care like small children so a big portion of the use of being a housewife gets lost real quick once they go to school.
I get anxiety just thinking about not working to be financially independent and do my own thing, let alone relying on a man for an income.
And I’ve seen both sides of this arrangement, I’ve seen women in poverty after going through a devastating divorce and they’re still fighting everyday to get a better job as life is expensive when you’re a single parent and struggling. Kids witness the structural change of a mother who simply cannot keep the house spic and span and the food ready on time when they come from school or even the school run as they have to take jobs that intervene with this routine (shift work) and the kids are not used to doing things themselves or helping as many housewives relish into getting this routine on point (fair play if the house situation remains the same). I’ve seen women barely managing on benefits who cannot even get into the workforce as they were in relationships since leaving highschool and have no transferable skills, previous job record heck some of them couldn’t even type a formal letter or a CV over age 30. It’s tragic. I helped my own friend with this as her Master degree educated long-term partner gets great jobs and during fights berates her for being ‘stupid’ but that’s all for jokes of course…
Then there’s my friend who had her own house and was living on benefits (she couldn’t rely on the father) so she was better off and she’s smart but then after the baby turned 1, she went into crazy party mode. She loved her baby but she was depressed due to being a single mother and her ex-partner abusing her before, during and after the baby was born. She was isolated at home and friends without kids turned away from her. She lost herself as single motherhood saw her stuck in a house with not much adult company for long periods of time. Her party mode ruined the few jobs she held.
Staying at home is great when you have the money and the lifestyle prior to marrying a man but it seems terrible when you don’t.
@Mel, I hope you are not implying for even a second that I am bashing anyone who chooses to stay home. Please see my comment further down. I think if staying home, with kids or no kids, it is absolutely a great decision if that’s what makes them happy. That’s my point of feminism–doing what works for YOU and making yourself happy on your own terms.
I thought she was simply implying that it shouldn’t be posited as the only choice available for a woman.
She got married, so I doubt she’s completely against marriage.
But what if some woman’s dream is honestly just to stay at home and take care of her family, whether that family includes children or just a spouse? While that might seem outdated, some people really want that. And there’s nothing wrong with that. This is where it gets fuzzy these days because there still are people who yearn for that kind of life. It doesn’t automatically mean they can’t be a feminist. But women often get automatically labeled as traders to feminism when they opt for a stay at home life, especially when there are no kids. To me, part of feminism is doing what makes you happy, whether society approves or not. Housewives should be included in that just as much as female doctors, lawyers, scientists, etc.
If that’s an individual woman’s dream, that’s fine. That’s her choice. I don’t see her slamming any individual woman’s choice. She mentioned those shows in relation to “ultimate goal”, so I believe she’s talking about how women should have an array of choices (like men), and choose the best choice for them (whether that be a job, or a marriage, or both).
My impression is that feminism overall is about having choices (which comes with equality), which is why she framed that word against the phrase “ultimate goal” (when something is posited as the “ultimate”, that could potentially limit other choices).
And, like I said, she did get married (and probably divorced after that), so I really don’t think she could be totally against the idea of marriage.
In the context of sexism in the workplace and equality that she talked about in this statement, I think she meant that the media went back to promoting the picture that women are obsessed with weddings and dresses and going crazy about that.
The beginning of feminism happened so that women could vote, didn’t have to get married and be the doting housewife. Because that was the norm, therefore the need of feminism.
I mean she’s talking about the 80s, where women were only just accepted having jobs equal to men. They still had to fight to be taken seriously. Women were trying to be portrayed as hard working.
Then, she says, when the show started, most women didn’t see the need of feminism anymore and the notion of “women just want to get married” was in again.
I don’t know if my explanation makes any sense, but I think you have to see it in the context of her statement and of history.
At least that’s how I took it.
One of the things that always bothered me about Carrie and Big was that Carrie just chose not to listen. Big, honestly, did not lie to her about who he was and the things he did. I mean, he said these things flat out and yet, he was the villian. Also, looking back, good lord Carrie was a horrible friend and person and I was completely shocked how Miranda, of all people, put her on a pedestal (her in the delivery room and then being Brady’s Godmother even after all the selfish crap she pulled over the series. THIS is the woman that can possibly look out for your kid if something were to happen to you or Steve).
But the true turning point for me was when she judged Samantha after catching her in the act in her office with the delivery guy. It seems that Carrie had forgotten that she just ended her affair with Big and who was there for her, with no judgement, Samantha.
agreed, Carrie def. did whatever she felt was right at the time for her, but judged hardcore if anybody else did something she didn’t approve of.
Carrie could make mistakes and cry to everyone, but nobody else could mess up…or it was judgement and the city!
Agree with you on all of your points. Carrie could be a real pain in the a…
Samantha is an icon though! 😍
Yes! to every single goddamn word you typed.
Discovered Sex and the City after the fact. I never got the this is a timeless romance from Carrie and Big. To me they were a version of Ben A. and Jennifer G..(just keeping the theme). Carrie wanted Big to be something he wasn’t. And she was clingy and desperate to me. Always pushing. And he always had to be pushed. Only wanted her when he was between other people or she was with someone else. All he had to do was smile and she came running. And that first wedding. OMG. That should have been the wake up call. But no we then get; OK.. here are some shoes; marry me in a simple outfit and all is right with the world.
They are nothing like Lizzie and Darcy. Elizabeth was never that needy and desperate. Carrie was like smoke and mirrors and not the feminist she was portrayed to be. Not even close
I think Carrie’s confusion and insecurities got in the way of her actions being in any way ‘feminist’. She judged herself, she judged her friends, she wanted everyone around her to be exactly who she wanted and needed and when they weren’t, she’d cry and complain and play the victim…lol
One of my favorite moments in the show was when Miranda snapped on Carrie about how she no longer wanted to hear about Big. Carrie allowed herself to be treated like a total doormat and sucked everyone else in her drama while being a sh*tty friend. She was the worst part of SATC.
absolutely agree with the last sentiment. I re-watched the series a few months back and was rage-yelling at the TV any time these two drama-queens were on-screen together. They’re crazy, insufferable, dramatic, selfish, etc etc.
They are the ONLY ones who could tolerate each others nonsense. But it was their own special love so I love them anyways LOL
Love Bushnell. Just bought her book Killing Monica a few days ago for reading on my summer holidays.
People are so harsh on this TV show, which I coincidentally watched a few days ago. I agree that it perhaps didn’t “age well”…… or are we just in such a terrible tailspin as a country right now that we can’t laugh along with the frou-frou? But it was the 90s! Bushnell is right. It was the time of milk and honey- Clinton, a great economy, the rise of the dot.coms, property values rising exponentially, the Spice Girls’ girl power, openness about sex….. life was a party! Maybe it says more about the moment we’re in right now that it doesn’t land so well anymore.
I always hated that they disclosed his first name. It would have been epic to end the show without anybody knowing his name. He would have always be Mr. Big, not just John.
I agree that the show got too hyped, with the fashion and the guest stars. The first seasons were much deeper.
Four Blondes is one of my favorite books. Lately I’ve been so nostalgic for the 90s. Before Princess Diana died, before John and Carolyn died, before 9/11. I feel like the only good things we have currently is the Cubs winning the World Series and Game of Thrones. Sex and the City was always fun for some escapism. I think Candace herself would be someone fun to be friends with in real life.
Mermaid, I’m a Chicagoan and I will never get over the fact that the Cubs finally won the World Series and only 5 days later Trump “won.” Unfortunately the two events will always be connected.
@minx
I’m a Chicagoan also!!! I know we went from such a high point with the Cubs and then a huge crash with the election. I’m going to check out Killing Monica I didn’t know Bushnell had written a new book.
I’m not a Chicagoan but I did just get my nails painted Cubs blue because Im going to see them play Friday!! Squuuueeeeee!!!
Amen. Bring back the 90s NOW.
It was the happiest time of my life.
I would have liked the show to end with Carrie realizing what a needy person she is and deciding that she needs to be alone to work on herself. She never actually learned anything, did she? I mean when it comes to relationships. There was always some kind of epiphany in every episode, but I’m not sure Carrie ever learned anything from it.
I loved how Miranda snapped at her after the funeral (of the woman who fell out of the window) after Carrie told her she decided to go to Paris with Petrovsky. Because that was (once again) one of Carrie’s romantic dreams, which was more about Paris and acting so in love than an actual adult decision. If it wasn’t for Miranda I wouldn’t watch the show ever again, but I love her.
Miranda got on her case a lot from what I recall. There were times where it was clear that Carrie was a sh** friend.
Agreed. Miranda called her out on her b.s. all of the time. As did Charlotte and Samantha (not as much, but still…). And Carrie usually saw the error of her ways and attempted to make amends for them. Was she perfect? Not at all. None of them were. But that’s what made them (mostly) relatable, and also human. But the show was also a fantasy, set in modern times. A heightened “reality” about life in NYC and of love. Escapism. At least that’s how I always saw it. 🤷♀️
Reading these comments made me think of my favorite SATC scene . . . When sweet demure Charlotte has lunch with her college sorority girlfriends, has too much to drink, and shares that Trey can’t “get it up” and veers into a wild description of what would rid her of her sexual frustration. “Sometimes don’t you just really want to be pounded hard?” I loved her in that scene and the writing of it. And while on the subject of writing, when Carrie was at Aiden’s country house and attempts to make a pie crust and lists milk as an ingredient. Huh? Whoever wrote that script had NO idea how to make an apple pie from scratch. Thank you for letting me vent.
LOL- I always thought about that! WHAT APPLE PIE CALLS FOR MILK.
What? Pie crust needs either ice-cold water or milk (most recipes mention using either one) to make the dough moist enough to roll out. This is, in fact, completely accurate.
(long time lurker; first time poster)
That’s the episode with the squealing, right?
Oh, that squeal. I wasn’t particularly crazy about Carrie before, but that squeal was the final deal-breaker: I don’t like her.
(I did like SJP as her, though, if you know what I mean.)
Like most people I know I really liked Miranda and related to her the most. She was fantastic, and loved that she snapped at Carrie for dumping her to go to Big’s for some ‘fabulous veal’.
I wish the show had ended with Carrie thinking she was far happier and better off single – and realising the love of her life was New York City itself.
Carrie is an insufferable character but so brilliant played by SJP I think, who is such a charming actress.
And Candace Bushnell’s books are good. I am going to re-read Four Blondes now.
“Carrie is an insufferable character but so brilliant played by SJP I think, who is such a charming actress.”
Absolutely. Just like you said: Carrie was insufferable, but I like SJP as her.
She made the whole thing SO watchable. Well – they all did, but SJP really was brilliant.
I really think part of the reason people wanted Carrie to end up with Big was because Chris Noth was so fricking awesome in that role.
I do think that’s part of it! I always love Noth, no matter what part he plays.
That must be it, because I saw a picture of the real Mr. Big and I was like “say what?”
I agree with you. I think the appeal lies specifically with Chris Noth. Not so much the Mr. Big character.
“I think the appeal lies specifically with Chris Noth. Not so much the Mr. Big character.”
This. Abso-f*cking-totally.
Agreed! I love Chris Noth & he is pretty much the only reason I wanted them together.
Noth was just doing his Jack Nicholson imitation. I loved how mystifying and indecipherable the character of Big always seemed. Just maddening!
I liked her with Aiden. With Mr. Big she became a child and he treated her as such.
The director’s cut of the show said they had to break Carrie and Aiden up because they couldn’t have Carrie settled with someone at that point, and they had painted themselves into a corner by putting her with the perfect guy.
I loved Aiden. She should have ended up with him.
Aiden was too good for Carrie.
I don’t understand the hate for Carrie. All the characters lived carefree single lives (I feel like this may be where the narcissism comments are coming from), but I think she loved her friends and Aiden.
I don’t hate Carrie, but in the case of Aiden, she was pretty awful to him. Hello, she cheated on him…repeatedly. She was not living a single life at that time–she was in a relationship with him. I could maybe understand her making a one time mistake with Big, but she took it too far. She chose to sneak around in hotels in neighborhoods where they wouldn’t be recognized and repeatedly lied to his face about where she was. She only stopped because she got busted by Natasha. So I repeat, Aiden was too good for Carrie.
I was referring to comments about Carrie being terrible generally as a person. Of course it was terrible that she cheated on Aiden, but she felt awful about it and redeemed herself once they got back together.
I couldn’t stand Aiden. I always remember the scene where they’re walking down the street and he says, “let’s get you a donut,” like she needed him to tell her what she wanted.
It didn’t help that he bore a strong resemblance to an extremely unpleasant former coworker.
I loved Aiden and am still waiting for my Aiden to come around. LOL
I read an interview with Candace from years ago, where she explained that the reason she wasn’t planning on them ending up together was because the whole Mr Big relationship was based on her real life relationship with her own “Mr Big”, aka Ron Galotti (also a millionaire playboy – publisher for Vogue, GQ and Vanity Fair at the time). In the SatC book, they didn’t end up together. In real life, they eventually married other people.
She should have gone with Aiden, but she was so superficial. Personally I liked Harry and Charlotte. Very funny story line.
I loved Carrie and Big and they deserved each other. Two peas in a pod! Aiden was too good for her. I never understood why people thought she should have ended up with him. She treated him like DIRT and he deserved better. The Russian didn’t respect her career and friends. However, in “reality”, Big wouldn’t have settled down and married her. Or if he had, they would have divorced within a year LOL
SATC gets a lot of crap, but I love the show and each time I re-watch it, I find something new I relate to as I get further into my 30’s. The 5th season was the only crap, toss-away one.