When I was an undergrad student, I took a British novel
course. Someone in the class with me, looking at the reading list, asked why
aren’t we reading any Jane Austen? We were promptly told by our male professor
that Austen was “sentimental drivel.” I think some of this derives from the
popularity of Austen as an author for a demographic that this professor would
not fall into.
While there are valid criticisms about Austen’s prose style,
this is not what it seems he was referring to. I can fully admit that I
struggle with reading anything other than Pride
and Prejudice. It’s the same issue I often have with the Brontës; I enjoy
the narrative but struggle with the style. However, by calling the works of
Austen “sentimental drivel,” it is not the prose style which is being
criticized but rather the subject matter.
Criticisms of the subject matter often come from the fact
that the women in the novels are involved in situations where they are
searching for a husband. On the surface, this seems to be counter to feminist
ideals. However, when you look a little closer at the female protagonists, it
is not a marriage at all costs situations. I want to take a look at the
subversive nature of some of her novels when it comes to the male-female dynamic.
First, let’s begin with Emma.
Emma Woodhouse is subversive in that the
heroine of the novel is someone that people shouldn’t much like. She is
spoiled, stubborn, and meddlesome. Her own faults and prejudices against those
of a lower social ultimately caused her friend more pain. Miss Woodhouse is ultimately
a selfish character even though she was trying to play matchmaker and seems to
have good intentions. Additionally, she was unlike the other heroines of Austen
in that she was wealthy and seems to be immune to romantic attractions. It isn’t
until her best friend, Harriet, confesses feelings for Mr. Knightley that Emma
is willing to admit that she in fact loves him. This is not even the first time
that Emma stands in the way of Harriet’s romantic prospects.
The next novel that I want to examine is Sense and Sensibility. This novel is
subversive particularly when you look at the character development of Marianne
Dashwood. Elinor Dashwood is the more reserved of the two and looks at the
issue of marriage and love from a practical perspective. She understands the
limitation of their position without a respectable dowry. Marianne is much more
romantic. This is why she unabashedly shows her feelings for Willoughby. She is
unconcerned of the social conventions which would demand that she be less
forward in her affections. However, it is precisely this sensibility that
causes Marianne such heartache until she finally recognizes the value of
Colonel Brandon and falls in love with him. While Wollstonecraft completely dismissed
the idea of sensibility or emotionality in her own works, Sense and Sensibility does not explicitly show preference to sense
(good judgment) over sensibility (emotionality). Instead, Austen’s work
maintains that a balance between the two is ideal.
Now to Pride and
Prejudice. This is probably the most beloved of Austen’s works. When talking
to my girlfriends, it’s hard to find one who doesn’t relate to Elizabeth Bennet
and love Mr. Darcy. One of the key reasons that we love Lizzie is that she does
not find it necessary to marry for security. She truly believes that marriage
should be based on mutual respect and refuses the proposal of Mr. Collins for
this reason. Elizabeth sees herself, perhaps rightfully so, as being above Mr.
Collins in terms of intelligence. Mr. Darcy also can be a complete ass. His
initial proposal to Elizabeth comments on their different social standing and
class as an impediment to the match. Both are flawed characters. However, they
become aware of their flaws and seek to correct them.
In part what makes the works of Jane Austen subversive is
the overall sense that marriage is not the most important achievement for a
woman. This ran counter to social norms at the time. It is telling that the
first line of Pride and Prejudice looks at marriage from the male perspective
[emphasis added]: “It is a truth universally acknowledge that a single
man in possession of a good fortune must be in
want of a wife.”
No comments:
Post a Comment