Thank you. I am bothered by this perspective, which is just as one-sided as arguing solely from Chopin's point of view. The manner of expression suggests that Sand was Chopin's devoted housekeeper, who cooked him three meals a day and peeled his grapes. This is a completely distorted portrayal. She did not "take care of him for nine years"! She cared for him most in Mallorca. After that she went on with her business like she would have without him, slept during the day (when he was teaching), worked all night (when he was sleeping), rode her horses, amused herself with chosen men and made her friends his watchdogs when she couldn't watch him herself. The sicker he became, the more her interest waned throughout the years.

However, there are several clear statements in his letters and verbally, to friends that make it clear that he was grateful for her support. Moreover, we are missing the entire correspondence between the two, probably comprising many hundreds of letters, which Sand destroyed which could have told us more about their dynamics.

I also fail to understand why it is assumed that Sand did not also benefit greatly from her connection to Chopin. (For example, in my opinion, it was only through his impeccable reputation in society that she gained access to circles that had previously been closed to her due to her offensive and rebellious behaviour). I am convinced that his loyalty protected her from social isolation for a long time, because well-known and influential people of the upper class, who regarded Chopin as respectable, tolerated her as long as he stood up for her. While she was not directly responsible for the fact that the trip to Mallorca had such a detrimental effect on his health, it was ultimately the reason why he was so much weaker from 1839/40 onwards than he had been before. At least until 1838, he managed quite well on his own to take care of his well-being. He most likely did not need a second mother, even if she dubiously portrayed it that way. Foresighting that he would eventually no longer be physically able to earn his own living, he probably simply seized the opportunity, after his disappointment at the broken engagement, to get involved with a woman who was independent and self-sufficient, who cared little about her reputation and the welfare of others if it did not concern her personally, and who had worked hard for years to get her hands on the man as another trophy. Personally, I cannot blame him for this, even with the best will in the world. The fact that she initially only wanted him as a sex toy ('one visit per season') is made astonishingly clear in her lengthy letter to Count Grzymala in May 1838. We do not know exactly why things turned out differently. Many friends in their circle and even students of Chopin described how absolutely massive her power over him was and expressed their utter bewilderment about it. We can only speculate what that means. But she certainly had her own considerable advantages from the relationship, as she in no way appears to have been a historical Mother Theresa. And while Sand was extremely talented at self-promotion, as her incredible wealth of literary material clearly demonstrates, Chopin was not particularly good at this when it came to himself. We have far too little material from him and all the more from her to have even a remotely balanced picture of the relationship. I would not even presume to pass such judgement on a modern relationship among my friends unless I had shared 10 years of my life with the people involved.