truth hurts

In my opinion, when you're proposing to someone, it's probably best not to do it by saying how the person you're proposing to is not nearly the best choice out there, and how they are socially inferior in just about every way. But no! I've fallen for you despite all of this! So will you marry me?

Elizabeth is understandably frustrated when Darcy proposes to her in such a manner, on top of the fact that tensions had already been pretty high between them because of Elizabeth's prejudices against him.

It's a well known fact that Darcy prides himself for his honesty, but I just have to ask: where is the line? Yeah, the title of the novel is Pride and Prejudice, but still. I just wonder, how would this scene have played out had he not gone ahead and said the things he did?

Pish Posh, etc

While reading Pride and Prejudice I caught myself stumbling on words and phrases and getting lost in the language. The way Jane Austen writes is high class but drawn out. It seems like she aims to exhausts as much description and wordiness as possible at times. I personally do not dislike the story, but I am not fond of the way its is written, it is just not my style. While reading, I marked some times where this wordiness and excessive writing was portrayed, here is an example: "Her teeth are tolerable, but not out of the common way; and as for her eyes, which have sometimes been called so fine, I never could perceive any thing extraordinary in them." (Austen 184). I guess my main take-away or question from this observation is, do we think this story would hold the same value had it been written in a more simple/short style, or does the style of the writing have too much to do with the importance the novel has gained over the years since it was published? 

Omniscient Benefits

“Mrs. Collins did not think it right to press the subject, from the danger of raising expectations which might only end in disappointment; for in her opinion it admitted not of a doubt, that all her friend’s dislike would vanish, if she could suppose him to be in her power” (132, in my edition). 

The first and only time that I had read through the original text was five years ago in my freshman year of high school, and I don’t remember much from the experience other than having a difficult time understanding what was happening. Since then, I’ve become familiar with the text by consuming several P&P remixes. Besides spending the entire novel mentally noting which scenes were most dramatized in different versions, one of the most enjoyable parts of re-reading Pride and Prejudice was the insights from the secondary characters like Mrs. Collins here before Mr. Darcy’s proposal in Kent and the Gardiners during Lizzie and Darcy’s reunion Derbyshire. In film especially, we miss out on a lot of that, and I enjoy having those different perspectives as a reader because it demonstrates just how narrow Elizabeth’s understanding of a situation can be.  Those other characters don't necessarily have a more accurate understanding, but their perspective offers the reader a better scope of the scene. 

Darcy's Inner Struggles: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/107101297364631424/ 

Status and Wealth in Pride and Prejudice

While we all know that Austen is writing Pride and Prejudice to be set in late-1700s early-1800s England and things were very different then, I still couldn't help but notice the very obvious focus on status and wealth. As I said, because this theme is so obvious, I want to delve a little deeper into the character of Elizabeth Bennet and how she perceives status.

In the very beginning, it seemed as if Elizabeth wasn't too caught up in trying to find a wealthy husband, even though she practically had to in order to stay "relevant" in society. Seeing as her father wasn't an incredibly wealthy man and wouldn't be able to leave his estate to his daughters, marrying rich really was the only option for the Bennet girls. However, while Elizabeth thought very highly of Mr. Bingley, she wasn't enthralled with the fact that he was rich. She simply respected the fact that he was a true gentleman, and later, that he treated Jane well.

If Lizzy really did care about status and wealth, she would have accepted Mr. Collins's proposal of marriage. She, however, responded with: "I am very sensible of the honour of your proposals, but it is impossible for me to do otherwise than decline them" (77). At this point, I figured Lizzy was a romantic and really just wanted to find someone she actually had feelings for (i.e. Mr. Darcy), but when she visited Pemberley, my entire opinion of her shifted.

While I believe Elizabeth's change in heart did not derive directly from seeing the grounds at Pemberley, I do think that the setting certainly didn't hurt. The kind words from Mrs. Reynolds the housekeeper definitely made Mr. Darcy seem much more marketable to Elizabeth, and while walking the grounds, she started to picture herself as the mistress of Pemberley. While of course she also wanted to get back at Miss Bingley and make her feel badly about her own feelings for Darcy, I believe Elizabeth may not have had such strong feelings for him if she hadn't visited the estate.

If all of that had happened at Longbourn, would she have felt the same way, or was it the air of wealth and success of Pemberley that pushed her affection along?

Image from giphy.com

Pride and Prejudice as Reality TV

It looks like I’m not the only first-time reader of Pride and Prejudice here.  Like Mike, I struggled significantly in finishing this book.  Every time I sat down to read, my phone instantly became the most interesting thing in the world comparatively.  How was I supposed to be interested in rich people making the poor decisions only rich people can make?  Why should anyone worry about what Lady Catherine De Bourgh thinks about people? The internet isn’t even around, Elizabeth! It’s not like she can go on a Twitter tirade about how low class you are!

It was only once I got some perspective from my girlfriend that I was able to really appreciate the book.  She told me to think about Pride and Prejudice as if it were reality TV.  Contemporary Austen readers didn’t have 90 Day Fiancé, Big Brother, or even The Real-World Road Rules Challenge to keep them occupied.  Characters in Pride and Prejudice are not unlike people on reality TV today.  Mrs. Bennet is flaky and air-headed, Mr. Wickham is a low-life, and Mr. Collins is more full of himself than anyone has any reason to be.  434 pages may be a bit intimidating, but cut this story into 30-minute segments, and most of America will surely tune in.

Secondary Characters in Pride and Prejudice

I read the annotated version of Pride and Prejudice as well as watched the film from 2005.  One of the main things I noticed about the story was the difference in the treatment and endings between the main and secondary characters.  The Bennett household was not particularly wealthy or of a high status in comparison to the Bingley or Darcy households.  Mrs. Bennett pushes Jane and Elizabeth to get married so the family can be taken care of if something were to happen to Mr. Bennett.  Despite their lower social class, Jane and Elizabeth manage to win the hearts of Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy.  They have the opportunity to marry for love rather then circumstance.  Charlotte Lucas represents the more realistic situation for young women in the period.  She does not choose to marry Mr. Collins because of love, but as a way to live her life honorable.  On her engagement to Mr. Collins she says to Elizabeth: “‘I am not romantic, you know.  I never was.  I ask only a comfortable home; and considering Mr. Collins’s character, connections, and situation in life, I am convinced that my chance of happiness with him is as fair as most people can boast on entering the marriage state.'”(PP Ch.22)  Looking at the character of Anne De Bourgh, we do not learn that much about her except that she is sickly and has not been presented to society.  She was also betrothed to Darcy.  What can be made about her character?  Was it her destiny to live out her life as a spinster?  The freedom that the Bennett sisters have is much greater then most of the secondary female characters in the novel, they are able to break social norms.  Why did Austen create this juxtaposition between those sets of characters?

Image Source: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/108156828531539012/

My Favorite Pride and Prejudice Quote

“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.” (first page, first sentence)

This quote really speaks to me. Standards of a quality life have changed from the past to present. In current times, men with money do not always want to settle down. This goes for old or young. There are also a lot of women who are not looking to be a wife.

Is Mr. Collins secretly the hero? No.

Who is the target audience of Pride and Prejudice? I think there's a good deal of irony in the fact that it's widely touted as a rom-com, a genre that sees women as its target demographic. And yet the title and the central theme of the book take to task the persistent habit of people to rely too heavily on first impressions and false judgments. And if women are still (today) the target demographic, what are we to glean from the story? I'm sure this is a widely debated topic, but how do we view this through a feminist lens? I can't help but make a few comparisons to Jane Eyre - how both Rochester and Darcy are wealthy, titled, arrogant men who struggle (to put it generously) with how to convey their affection to their poor, young loves, and how both Jane and Lizzy are furiously angry at the way they (or others) are treated by the men. Both women are trapped by both their gender and their socio-economic status, and are fully conscious of the power imbalance their relationship must have. 

Endofmarch. "Jane Eyre & Mr. Rochester/Elizabeth Bennet & Mr. Darcy." Flikr, 26 Sept. 2011, https://www.flickr.com/photos/endofmarch/6183231306 , Accessed 26 March 2020.

In a completely unrelated note, I love the scene where Mr. Collins proposes to Elizabeth, and insists that he is well aware that "it is usual with young ladies to reject the addresses of the man whom they secretly mean to accept" (77). This is profound for two reasons: first, Mr. Collins' words prove to be entirely correct, as Lizzy will first reject Darcy's proposal and later accept it. (What a lovely tie-in to the theme - perhaps we all were too quick to despise Mr. Collins out of hand!) Second, this highlights such an important social custom that has complicated relationships for centuries: how can we lambaste men for not taking "no" for an answer when social custom dictates that women feign resistance to prevent being labeled as, for example, a whore for wanting to have sex? (Harsh example, I know, but there are so many ways that women are expected to be coy and coquettish as an expression of femininity that directly interfere with clear communication.) 

Was Jane Austen ever relevant

We often Lord Jane Austen as the first main stream female success story in literature. But perhaps due to the time in which she lived it is very hard to examine her as a historical figure. Yes she wrote about the hypocrisy of the era between the rain George the third and the rain of William the fourth, but as the political movements that would inspire women in the world over in the 19th century we’re not at fruition Austin is alone on an island. She died the generation before temperance and abolition came to full force in Britain she did not know of a society where even most men could cast a vote for an election to the house of commons. Perhaps that’s what makes for literature as time tested as it is because she’s holding up a mirror to a society that cannot endure by any means. By the timer for deaf millions of an in franchise man lived in Glasgow EdinburghLiverpool Birmingham Manchester Cardiff Swansee Dublin and Belfast maybe the most important thing we can learn from Austin it’s not so much the difficulty of being a woman before property voting rights for granted to them although that is an important angle we should also consider that Austin is commenting on a society that had no staying power and was desperately in need of reform. I don’t think Austin was a wig or a liberal I do think she understood the society around her. And in that way the way she Challenges early 19th century prescriptions for how to be a woman how to love how to coexist in community and society I think that is her most enduring legacy. She foreshadowed an age she would not live to see one of tremendous industrial and political progress that would see abolition temperance and even universal enfranchisement come to pass she couldn’t see it but I think somewhere deep inside she know it’s coming and I think that is what we can learn from her.

what is love?

"No," said Darcy, "I have made no such pretension. I have faults enough, but they are not, I hope, of understanding. My temper I dare not vouch for. It is, I believe, too little yielding--certainly too little for the convenience of the world. I cannot forget the follies and vices of others so soon as I ought, nor their offenses against myself. My feelings are not puffed about with every attempt to move them. My temper would perhaps be called resentful. My good opinion once lost, is lost forever."

(I LOVE Matthew Rhys lol)

I love this quote because it addresses the biggest issue of the novel (obviously) which is misunderstandings. It becomes clear that Darcy had good intentions and Elizabeth misunderstood him greatly. Their relationship is deep because of this. My question is, does it take a rift or misunderstanding for a relationship to be 'valid'? As in, is the impulsive passionate love between Romeo and Juliet just as valid as the long and flourishing love of Elizabeth and Darcy? 

The Plight of Pride and Prejudice in Pop-Culture

I am equal parts excited to discuss Pride and Prejudice and completely dreading it. I wouldn't say I idolize Jane Austen; however, I can fully admit she's my favorite writer and at times I can be extremely bias. Now that being said this particular work is my second-to-least favorite Austen text. As a result of this class, I am now being forced to analyse why exactly it comes up short among the six completed novels. I also want to explore why P&P garners the most attention in pop-culture.

To start P&P feels more juvenile than Austen's later work. When comparing P&P to the works Austen wrote after her hiatus the plot is noticeably thinner than say Emma or Persuasion. For example, Austen deals her later heroines harsher consequences and forces them to examine their own personalities and the responsibility they have when making choices. Anne Elliot (Persuasion) rejects Captain Wentworth due to his lack of social status and must live with that choice for six years. After that she must watch as a twenty-six year old--a spinster in the Regency Era--as he peruses different romantic partners before they finally resolve their relationship. In contrast, Lizzie Bennet waits an insignificant amount of time to gain her happy ending after initially rejecting Darcy.

Now my personal issues with Lizzie Bennet. Again my issue becomes one of comparison: when you line up Lizzie with Anne Elliot or Emma Woodhouse she is not nearly as strong or well developed. I have always been fascinated by people's love of Lizzie Bennet- their reasoning being her strong-willed personality. Yes, Lizzie can be strong willed and have a bit of an attitude (in a good way), but the consequences of that attitude are minimal. The greatest tribulation Lizzie must overcome is a lack of dowry and her ridiculous family. Anne Elliot must be alone for six years and Emma Woodhouse is forced to completely take stock of her actions and refine her entire personality, all while thinking she lost the love of her life to one of her closest friend.

With all that being said my main frustration with P&P? It is often times the only work of Austen's that people are familiar. Leading me to ask why? Austen has five other novels that are just as, often times more, entertaining. When I talk with people I am happy to hear they at least know something of Sense and Sensibility, but usually just P&P. Additionally, most people are only familiar with the 2007 Keira Knightley adaption or the Colin Firth BBC mini-series; and not the novel.

One possible conclusion: it's the first published work. Doesn't seem to be enough, though. The multiple adaptations and re-mixes of P&P are definitely a leading factor. Why is this the most appealing Austen work to adapt to film or re-mix? I personally believe it comes back to our instinctual love of fairy-tales; and P&P has all the elements of a Cinderella story. In fact, as an undergrad I wrote an entire paper charting the characters of P&P with their Cinderella archetype. Quick summary: Lizzie = Cinderella, Mrs. Bennet/Catherine de Bourgh = evil step-mother, Ugly Step-Sisters = Lydia and Kitty/Caroline Bingley, Fairy God Mother = Mrs. Gardiner, etc. You get the point, we love the familiar (as we have all learned in this class, nothing groundbreaking) and I personally feel much of P&P is familiar to our childhood stories.

All that being said? I still love P&P. It is still one of my favorite novels. Why I personally love the novel is different than other peoples. My favorite characters? Mrs. Bennet and Charlotte Lucas. Mrs. Bennet while annoying and ridiculous faces a difficult reality: five daughters who cannot inherit and so must marry to survive. She is smart enough, and loves her daughters enough, to know if they remain unmarried after their father's death the world will be a cold place for them. Charlotte Lucas faces a similar reality as Lizzie, but doesn't exactly get her happy ending. She is realistic, though, making the best of the situation she is in and marries Mr. Collins not out of weakness but strength, knowing it is her way to get by.

Alright rant over. I can't wait to read others thoughts. And please, if you haven't already, read some of Austen's other work. Emma is my personal favorite, Mansfield Park is my least (I do not recommend reading it next). 

We Stan Men Putting Aside Their Pride!!!!!

"'In vain I have struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you.' Elizabeth's astonishment was beyond expression. She stared, coloured, doubted, and was silent. This he considered sufficient encouragement, and the avowal of all that he felt and had long felt for her, immediately followed. He spoke well, but there were feelings besides those of the heart to be detailed, and he was not more eloquent on the subject of tenderness than of pride. He sensed her inferiority--of its being a degradation--of the family obstacles which judgement had always opposed to inclination, were dwelt on with a warmth which seemed due to the consequence he was wounding, but was very unlikely to recommend his suit." (131)

Mr. Darcy's suddenness here of his first proposal to Elizabeth was a significant point in the novel--for the first time Mr. Darcy is setting aside his pride to admit what he really wants--it's the first sign that he is willing to better himself for her. This act of love shocks Elizabeth, and intrigues her. This is one of the moments that always stands out the most to me--and I'm intrigued, especially by the male members of the class, what everyone thinks of this moment? Was he overstepping? Was it too much? Was this a sign of sincerity or his first sign of maturity? Because for me, this novel was filled with a lot of romantic gestures that made my heart swell, and this was really the first one of them. I love that both Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy bettered themselves for one another!!

I Did It!

Eight hours and 23 minutes later, I finished Pride and Prejudice for the first time.  I'm not going to sugar coat this: it was a struggle.  I should note that my favorite character in the book was Mr. Bennett!  What voice, what humor, what relief!  Immediately after reading the book, I turned to the back of my edition to see what other authors had to say about her, specifically, the comments of Mark Twain (my favorite author).  Twain states, "Whenever I take up "Pride and Prejudice" or "Sense and Sensibility," I feel like a barkeeper entering the Kingdom of Heaven. . . She makes me detest all her people, without reserve. Is that her intention? It is not believable. Then is it her purpose to make the reader detest her people up to the middle of the book and like them in the rest of the chapters? That could be. That would be high art. It would be worth while, too. Some day I will examine the other end of her books and see."  Leave it to Mark Twain to sum up my feelings about this book.  He crystalized my thoughts eloquently!  I made it through the book, and I'm willing to have a discussion of her book.  I will also accept that there are MILLIONS of people who adore these books.  I'll be the last person to throw a stone at other people and their tastes.  We all have our faults, right?  I mean, I adore Disney movies.