r/janeausten

This observation may have been addressed before, but why does it seem that commenters (of Sense and Sensibility) and even Elinor make Edward Ferris to be honorable even though he did the same as Frank Churchill in Emma. They were both engaged and pretended that they were not and "formed attachments." Edward did lead Elinor on and Frank Churchill did the same with Emma. I'm new to period dramas so help me make sense of this supposed dichotomy.

I honestly didn't appreciate the Netherfield interactions enough when I first read Pride and Prejudice; but they are a great example of Austen's ability to reveal character traits without stating them directly. I'm thinking of one exchange in particular, where Bingley is being naturally charming and accidentally interesting, while Darcy is likely performing for Elizabeth and indirectly boasting.

>"Whatever I do is done in a hurry," replied [Bingley]; "and therefore if I should resolve to quit Netherfield, I should probably be off in five minutes. At present, however, I consider myself as quite fixed here."
"That is exactly what I should have supposed of you," said Elizabeth.
"You begin to comprehend me, do you?" cried he, turning towards her.
"Oh yes—I understand you perfectly."
"I wish I might take this for a compliment; but to be so easily seen through, I am afraid, is pitiful."
"That is as it happens. It does not necessarily follow that a deep, intricate character is more or less estimable than such a one as yours."
[...]
"I did not know before," continued Bingley, immediately, "that you were a studier of character. It must be an amusing study."
"Yes; but intricate characters are the most amusing. They have at least that advantage."
"The country," said Darcy, "can in general supply but few subjects for such a study. In a country neighbourhood you move in a very confined and unvarying society." (ch. 9)

On the morning when Mrs. Bennet visits Netherfield, Elizabeth and Bingley fall into the type of easy banter Darcy can't navigate.

On one hand, Bingley is effortlessly friendly. He's not trying to impress Elizabeth; he simply converses in a manner that makes him pleasant to be around. When Elizabeth says that she has been studying him, he turns it into a joke about being too easily understood. He unintentionally does something Darcy struggles with throughout the novel: he makes his flaws socially attractive by owning them without ego, which causes Elizabeth to treat his impulsiveness as endearing.

On the other hand, Darcy reacts very differently in this situation. The moment Elizabeth reveals that Bingley has captured her attention (by admitting she's been observing him) AND mentions that she enjoys studying "intricate characters," Darcy abruptly inserts himself into a conversation he was previously not participating in. It's a strange shift. Bingley and Elizabeth were in a playful mood, and suddenly Darcy turns the discussion into something more serious and abstract. There's an element of jealousy here; I don't mean romantic jealousy, but a jealous impulse on the basis of competence. Bingley can easily entertain Elizabeth, the woman Darcy is attracted to, while Darcy can't match his friend's sociability. With Elizabeth's comment about complex people, Darcy suddenly has an advantage over Bingley. He is precisely that sort of difficult-to-know person she claims to enjoy studying, and he instantly tries to establish himself as the deep thinker in the room.

>"That will not do for a compliment to Darcy, Caroline," cried [Bingley], "because he does not write with ease. He studies too much for words of four syllables. Do not you, Darcy?"
"My style of writing is very different from yours."
[...]
"My ideas flow so rapidly that I have not time to express them; by which means my letters sometimes convey no ideas at all to my correspondents."
"Your humility, Mr. Bingley," said Elizabeth, "must disarm reproof."
"Nothing is more deceitful," said Darcy, "than the appearance of humility. It is often only carelessness of opinion, and sometimes an indirect boast."
"And which of the two do you call my little recent piece of modesty?"
"The indirect boast; for you are really proud of your defects in writing, because you consider them as proceeding from a rapidity of thought and carelessness of execution, which, if not estimable, you think at least highly interesting. The power of doing anything with quickness is always much prized by the possessor, and often without any attention to the imperfection of the performance. When you told Mrs. Bennet this morning, that if you ever resolved on quitting Netherfield you should be gone in five minutes, you meant it to be a sort of panegyric, of compliment to yourself; and yet what is there so very laudable in a precipitance which must leave very necessary business undone, and can be of no real advantage to yourself or anyone else?"
"Nay," cried Bingley, "this is too much, to remember at night all the foolish things that were said in the morning. And yet, upon my honour, I believed what I said of myself to be true, and I believe it at this moment. At least, therefore, I did not assume the character of needless precipitance merely to show off before the ladies." (ch. 10)

Later that evening, Bingley makes a joke at Darcy's expense, which paints him as overly pretentious and formal. At first, Darcy reacts dismissively, but once Elizabeth joins in to praise Bingley's humility, Darcy seems to become more self-conscious about his own stiffness and launches into a lecture to compensate with intellect. He simply can't let Bingley win points for being both charmingly flawed and humble.

Provoked by Elizabeth's earlier comment that "intricate characters" are fascinating, as well as that she enjoys studying people, Darcy almost seems to begin dissecting Bingley's behavior in order to present himself as the better reader of character. Essentially, he hijacks the spotlight from his friend in an attempt to prove to Elizabeth that he's the one worth studying. Of course, I'm not sure how much of this is conscious. That's part of what makes it interesting: Darcy may not even realize what he's doing at this point in the narrative.

Notably, Bingley doesn't respond by turning the same analytical lens on Darcy, even though Darcy has clearly escalated things; he does make a comment about Darcy's brooding on Sunday evenings though (but with the intention of putting an end to it). Rather than defending himself further or competing for more attention, he eventually asks Elizabeth and Darcy to postpone their argument until he leaves the room, which reveals a great deal about his personality. If he was petty and prideful, he would have responded with a counterattack, but his instinct is to smooth things over rather than win the argument.

---

Thinking about this made me realize that Bingley and Darcy are literally the male versions of Serena and Blair from Gossip Girl and now I'm laughing.

One of the common misconceptions about the Regency era is that women lost all their property when they married but no, they didn't always. Things could be kept in their name despite their losing their legal identity and it actually shows up in several novels from the time, as we see here in the fragment of Sanditon by Jane Austen:

>Lady Denham had been a rich Miss Brereton, born to wealth but not to education. Her first husband had been a Mr. Hollis, a man of considerable property in the country, of which a large share of the parish of Sanditon, with manor and mansion house, made a part. He had been an elderly man when she married him, her own age about thirty. Her motives for such a match could be little understood at the distance of forty years, but she had so well nursed and pleased Mr. Hollis that at his death he left her everything—all his estates, and all at her disposal. After a widowhood of some years, she had been induced to marry again. The late Sir Harry Denham, of Denham Park in the neighbourhood of Sanditon, had succeeded in removing her and her large income to his own domains, but he could not succeed in the views of permanently enriching his family which were attributed to him. She had been too wary to put anything out of her own power and when, on Sir Harry's decease, she returned again to her own house at Sanditon, she was said to have made this boast to a friend: "that though she had got nothing but her title from the family, still she had given nothing for it."

How was this possible since women were not a separate person before the law? It was done through trusts:

family lawyers set up what was called "separate property" and/or a "separate estate" for brides, especially if they were heiresses. This was basically a trust overseen by the Chancery Court which gave the women access to all her property and money upon application to a trustee, but kept it out of control so her husband couldn't "kiss or kick it" out of her, nor his creditors take it to pay his bills.

What Jane Austen Ate and Charles Dickens Knew, Daniel Pool

Now was this common? This I don't know, and I doubt it was super common, but if a woman was extraordinarily wealthy, she could get lawyers just as good as her husband's and make it happen. I think it's telling that Lady Denham is older and very well off, she has the money and the knowledge to keep her wealth protected.

This is also probably exactly what Darcy set up for Lydia, with the £1000 settled on her. That is her protected dowry and jointure, kept in trust so Wickham can't burn through it:

You know pretty well, I suppose, what has been done for the young people. His debts are to be paid, amounting, I believe, to considerably more than a thousand pounds, another thousand in addition to her own settled upon her, and his commission purchased. - Pride & Prejudice

I like to think that Sophia Grey from Sense & Sensibility kept a lot of her fortune in separate property and she uses that to keep Willoughby in line. The way the narrator talks about his wife "not always being out of humour" makes me think she was holding something over him, and we know she was filthy rich. I also feel like Mrs. Ferrars might have had a lot of separate property, since she is the one controlling all the wealth after her husband dies, instead of it going to her eldest son.

Anyway, this is why marriage articles and not eloping was so important!

(Edit for quote fixing)

Essentially, Mr Knightley seems to want the Coles included in society where Emma doesn't ("Emma did not want to be classed with the Mrs. Eltons, the Mrs. Perrys, and the Mrs. Coles, who would force themselves anywhere;" "The Coles were very respectable in their way, but they ought to be taught that it was not for them to arrange the terms on which the superior families would visit them. This lesson, she very much feared, they would receive only from herself; she had little hope of Mr. Knightley, none of Mr. Weston.") because they are from trade and not gentility like herself/Bateses/Jane Fairfax/Westons/etc. Whereas Mr Knightley seems to thinkt hey should be treated as equalish parts of their society.

But then with Harriet, Mr Knightley's issue is that she is probably a decently wealthy girl from trade, whereas Emma thinks she must be gentility, which he warns Emma about. He doesn't like Emma's elevation of her, because from his perspective, it goes against the class order, whereas he is doing a similar thing with the Coles, not considering himself that much above them. He says,"I am not to be talked out of my dislike of Harriet Smith"

I am just having trouble understanding this discrepancy. With Harriet, Knightley seems to want Emma to learn that she is not superior, she is not part of their class, and is in fact lower than Mr Martin. Whereas with the Coles he seems to think they should be permitted into their society, and that Emma should learn the same.

Essentially, what am I missing here? Is Mr Knightley for or against a small erosion of the class system or does he think it should be strictly maintained?

So many to choose from. One of the things I love about Regency-era English is the exquisitely refined way in which you can insult someone, to the point that (to a modern ear) it may take a moment to recognise it as an insult. I personally think Lizzy Bennet takes the crown.

'In such cases as this, it is, I believe, the established mode to express a sense of obligation [...] But I cannot [....] The feelings which you tell me have long prevented the acknowledgment of your regard can have little difficulty in overcoming it after this explanation.”

Closely followed by

'“You are mistaken, Mr. Darcy, if you suppose that the mode of your declaration affected me in any other way than as it spared me the concern which I might have felt in refusing you, had you behaved in a more gentlemanlike manner.”

And finally 'These would be heavy misfortunes indeed' when Lady Catherine tells her she will never be spoken of again by her family if she married Darcy.

“He had, in fact, though his sisters were now doing all they could for him, by calling him 'poor Richard,' been nothing better than a thick-headed, unfeeling, unprofitable Dick Musgrove, who had never done anything to entitle himself to more than the abbreviation of his name, living or dead.”

I’m reading Persuasion for the first time so I’m sorry if this is common knowledge but is Jane Austen literally calling him a dick? As in would that have been an insult at the time or is she just saying he doesn’t deserve respect in general? If it was not a common insult back then, what a funny layer time has added!

"...Fist my bump?"

My husband and I just finished watching Project Hail Mary and afterwards, I picked up my copy of Emma to read before bed. I read him a little passage to show him how extreme the switch was from Andy Weir to Austen. He laughed and said "Fist my bump" as he left the room. Which led to my question: How could I have answered in Austen-speak? 😅

Does Elinor mean that Lucy Steele is literally illiterate and cannot read, or that she isn’t interested in reading and improving her mind?

I’m a big fan of Jane Austen. I’ve read some of her books and they are on my top ones. My absolute favorite book by her is Pride and Prejudice of course. The “guilty pleasure” of many.

Reading her biography, I came to realize that Emma sounds a lot like Jane herself. Of course not entirely, as it’s not an autobiography, but quite a lot. Here’s the thing though, I find this book to be boring. Just plain on boring with no meaning. It’s like going through the longest gossip magazine in existence. A *ton* of completely unimportant information, that are irrelevant with the main plot, that make the book an ordeal to go through. I still haven’t finished it yet but good God. I absolutely *dread* every page. I can’t even believe I’m saying this for Jane Austen.

I love the way she writes. Her language and grammar. This isn’t the usual rant about how *selfish* and *mean* Emma is. I absolutely adore Emma and I find her cute as she slowly realizes her mistakes. She’s a good person just a little sheltered and spoiled, which I don’t mind! I do like Mr. Knightley too and I only hoped we saw more of them. And oh, Mr. Woodhouse. *(I adore you!)* But I am on page 300 out of 416 and barely nothing has happened. I can’t seem to find the point of the book. I do realize the slight irony and humor in there but it’s so dim and barely there, that passes nearly unnoticed.

Who knows? I most likely am on the wrong here. English isn’t my first language, so I might not catch such a delicate yet confusing dialect of the Victorian Era. My friend gave me this book as a birthday gift, because we spoke about it as a great book by Jane Austen. Both me and he, read positive comments from so many people and we agreed on reading it together. Just a side note, me and him, resemble so much Emma and Mr. Knightley as personalities, so perhaps that’s why I adore them both. Anyway, I hope Volume III proves me wrong and the book climbs up to my top favorites! I’d like to hear your thoughts.

In all the screen adaptations of «Emma», Emma is more attractive than Harriet. In the book I think Harriet is described as attractive as Emma if not more.

If the actresses were reversed and you see Harriet being more attractive, then I do think Mr. Knightley could fall for her instead. Despite the issue of her birth. (Not Elton cause he needs $).

What do you think?

My daughter is reading Emma for the first time (she read Pride & Prejudice for the first time a few months ago). Sometimes when she loses a little momentum, I will read a few chapters with her aloud and today we ran across this delightful witticism in Chapter 18. Emma and Mr. Knightley are arguing about Frank Churchill and his absenteeism and Emma's witty response to Mr. Knightley made me laugh out loud.

Here is a snippet of their argument–here Mr. Knightley is arguing (with Emma's response following):

>'Respect for right conduct is felt by every body. If he would act in this sort of manner, on principle, consistently, regularly, their little minds would bend to his.'
>
>'I rather doubt that. You are very fond of bending little minds; but where little minds belong to rich people in authority, I think they have a knack of swelling out, till they are quite as unmanageable as great ones.' 

ahahahaha. I just love the playfulness that Emma infuses into her debates with Mr. Knightley.

Edit: what stood out to me was interpreting this as Emma teasing Mr. Knightley (in a self-deprecating way) about him bending her small mind... I had never read it this way before... So hilarious!

Was dumped by my gf 5 days ago over text. Been grieving but I also want to get back into reading again. My friend loves Jane Austen and I thought I’d give it a try and was wondering if there were any recommendations people have from her to help get over a breakup? thanks.

Darcy: Not hot. Everyone agrees that were it not for his wealth, nobody would turn around for a second look. He's not ugly, mind you, he's just Not Hot. Also, he's kinda short. That, more than anything else, accounts for his gruffness and awkwardness around people- he's shorter than Bingley and Fitz (the cousin), everyone knows it, he knows it, and it pisses him off mightily.

Knightley: Nice body, leading such an outdoorsy life (I feel like there was a comment about his fine upstanding figure in the book?)- his face is ok, but again, it's more his position and authority which gives him his aura, rather than good looks. Not hot.

Tilney: Hottish. He has the kind of nerdy, spectacled good looks that we're not immediately supposed to find hot, but then grows on us. His glib humour is his awkward attempt to draw attention to the fact that he is, actually, quite good-looking.

Wentworth. Obviously, objectively hot. Folk can't stop gushing about him. Anne is pining for him after ten years. Star looks. Probably the hottest of the bunch.

Edmund. A close second. The book is full of phrases referring to the whole family's good looks- starting with the acerbic comment on Lady Bertra's ability to snag a husband far beyond what she merited. Mary considers marrying him, a lowly second son! Oh yes, he's a hottie.

I'm reading Sense and Sensibility and Gaskell's North and South (third time for S&S and second time for N&S) and just... there is not enough internet discourse about Mr. Thornton as a leading man to rival Darcy, Knightley, and Wentworth. And that final chapter! UGH:

Still lower went the head; more closely hidden was the face, almost resting on the table before her. He came close to her. He knelt by her side, to bring his face to a level with her ear; and whispered-panted out the words: --

"Take care. -- If you do not speak -- I shall claim you as my own in some strange presumptuous way. -- Send me away at once, if I must go."

This, imho, is just as good as -- maybe better? -- than "If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more" and "I am half agony, half hope" and "One word from you will silence me on this subject forever."

Please just join me in loving on Austen's spiritual daughter's very capable writing here.

Hi friends, a strange query maybe, but I am not a scholar on this time period.

Would it be out of the question for rich men like Mr. Darcy or Mr. Bingley to settle a small sum on their wives sisters? I understand it's only customary for their fathers to give them a dowry, or they will inherit a sum from their mother. However, can other relatives do the same if it is not an inheritance?

Darcy is very concerned that Elizabeth's sisters aren't up to snuff. Would it be considered appropriate if he endowed them with a sum to induce good prospects? Elizabeth states that only a fool would consider them with their 1000 pounds portion of their mother's settlement, after her death.

He might consider this to only have good connections on his wife's side.

Of course, they will not be interested in doing it likely, but it was just a thought.

I’m going to be traveling to London on Friday for a week, and going to Bath for a day trip - what is the one thing I should see and try to buy that’s Jane Austen related? I’m going to be with my husband and two sons, who will indulge me for a while, but not for too long, lol.

Once I'm done with my first read-through of Persuasion (and I have some opinions about chapter 21!), what order should I watch any adaptations? Or should I watch any at all? Should I avoid any?

Tell me your recommendations, I should like to hear them.

Edit: A huge thank you to everyone who chimed in; I will probably watch the 95, 07, and netflicks horrors and spend my time yelling at the writers and actors. perhaps I can do a reaction podcast. "What are you wearing Anne? WHERE IS YOUR BONNET?????"

Also: do we do an adaptation watch through? lol. see above.