Help on Pride and Prejudice?

[Matrim Cuathon]

Hi ! How's your essay coming along ?

When is it due ? How long does it have to be ? Are you a high school or university student ?

After all this, I'd like to make a few suggestions with regard to your assignment :

Since we've all been going around in circles with this discussion, due to our being influenced in our views by various sources ( critics, film adaptations, someone else's or our own unfounded opinions or hasty conclusions--- I think we're all being passionate, rather than logical in our analysis ), I suggest you re-read the ACTUAL NOVEL really carefully, with particular attention to how all the marriages turned out.

Then decide for your self whether Charlotte's marriage is that bad.

Consider her expectations--not romantic, wanting financial stability, and Mr.Collins'---only gets married for reasons of propriety necessary in his position as a minister.

Is their actual lifestyle bad ?

Is Mr.Collins all that bad ? Re-read passages detailing his exact character and his background.

Can he be influenced in a positive way ?

After establishing the true value of Charlotte's marriage, decide whether Austen herself would really consider it a bad marriage and why. Check the sources that refer to Charlotte's situation as a " dose of bitterness " ( whether Austen herself said that , or a critic ) and discuss whether her marriage warrants this description from Austen's point of view.

My God, you got me so passionate about this topic, that now I want to write an essay about it.

im quite happy that i was able to read the novel with no prejudice.
even though i saw the movie i didnt bother to actually watch it, and i always seperate movies from books anyhow, a movie never does justice to a book and is really all about graphic effects and short attention spans.
as much as i respond emotionally, i tried to remove all of that from my analysis. originally i found collins to be detestable, but i found that if i considered my penchant for Sci-Fi/Fantasy, most of which are quite romantic in any love relationships, and the difference between now and then, that he really wasnt all that horrible.

as for Darcy being a fairytale, one notes that Austen always has at least one main character marry happily. and one thinks that she avoided obvious wishywashyness with plausible reasons. from her books i get the impression that if a man is really, really rich, his marrying down is reasonable. the man is not lowered, the women is elevated. and the very rich can afford not to worry about money if they wish. darcy is not so strange, he is simply not money obsessed.

[sciencefan]

I am not going to find all the references now because they're spattered throughout the story and it would take me too long.

It was a vivid impression I got while I was reading, which in fact- if I may be so bold as to bare my soul to you all- reminded me of the unconditional and condescending love of Jesus.
Anyway, Austen shows Elizabeth very many times- too many times for my pleasure- talking herself out of believing that Darcy still loves her or wants her.

Yes, the original list given in the first proposal is bad enough, and actually at first, did prevent him from considering marriage with her.

“His sense of her inferiority -- of its being a degradation -- of the family obstacles which judgment 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.” ch 34

“``I might as well enquire,'' replied she, ``why, with so evident a design of offending and insulting me, you chose to tell me that you liked me against your will, against your reason, and even against your character?” ch 34

“``...cried Darcy, ... But perhaps... these offences might have been overlooked, had not your pride been hurt by my honest confession of the scruples that had long prevented my forming any serious design. These bitter accusations might have been suppressed, had I with greater policy concealed my struggles, ... Could you expect me to rejoice in the inferiority of your connections? To congratulate myself on the hope of relations, whose condition in life is so decidedly beneath my own?''” ch 34

Austen rightly supposes such a decision able to fall back to the negative by one more straw on the camel's back.

And yet there was not one more straw, but many throughout.

Lady C. thoroughly and heatedly describes, in her visit to Longbourn, the absolute horror that such a polluting alliance would be to all the family. I can't list them all. ch 56

“He [Darcy] had followed them purposely to town, he had taken on himself all the trouble and mortification attendant on such a research; in which supplication had been necessary to a woman whom he must abominate and despise, and where he was reduced to meet, frequently meet, reason with, persuade, and finally bribe, the man whom he always most wished to avoid, and whose very name it was punishment to him to pronounce. He had done all this for a girl whom he could neither regard nor esteem. ... Brother-in-law of Wickham! Every kind of pride must revolt from the connection. ... They owed the restoration of Lydia, her character, every thing, to him. Oh! how heartily did she grieve over every ungracious sensation she had ever encouraged, every saucy speech she had ever directed towards him. For herself she was humbled; but she was proud of him. Proud that in a cause of compassion and honour, he had been able to get the better of himself.” ch 52

“Let me thank you again and again, in the name of all my family, for that generous compassion which induced you to take so much trouble, and bear so many mortifications, for the sake of discovering them.''” ch 57

Darcy spent over one year's income to bribe Wickham!!
just so he could turn around and be his brother-in law!!


It is mind-boggling.
There could be no further condescension or mortification than that,
nor could any further proof of his completely unconditional love be necessary.


That's the way I see it.

[olichka]

had followed them purposely to town, he had taken on himself all the trouble and mortification attendant on such a research; [B]in which supplication had [/B]been necessary to a [I]woman whom he must abominate and despise[/I] ... He had done all this for a girl whom he could neither regard nor esteem...

I think that here Elizabeth is referring to Lydia as a girl whom he could not respect, not herself. At this point Elizabeth still doesn't know that he actually did it for her sake : when she later thanks him and tells him that her family owes him a great deal, he replies that her family owes him nothing, he did it all for her. Then the 2nd proposal follows.

[Matrim Cuathon]

where does it say he spends a years income?

[Silas]

Hey Silas,

Glad you're keeping up on the postings.

When is your paper due?

Yes, the posting is getting rather interesting; I enjoy it quite a lot. Well, for your information, my paper is due in three weeks; and when I get it back, I'll be sure to let you know how it went! Thank you.

[Silas]

Hi ! How's your essay coming along ?

When is it due ? How long does it have to be ? Are you a high school or university student ?

After all this, I'd like to make a few suggestions with regard to your assignment :

Since we've all been going around in circles with this discussion, due to our being influenced in our views by various sources ( critics, film adaptations, someone else's or our own unfounded opinions or hasty conclusions--- I think we're all being passionate, rather than logical in our analysis ), I suggest you re-read the ACTUAL NOVEL really carefully, with particular attention to how all the marriages turned out.

Then decide for your self whether Charlotte's marriage is that bad.

Consider her expectations--not romantic, wanting financial stability, and Mr.Collins'---only gets married for reasons of propriety necessary in his position as a minister.

Is their actual lifestyle bad ?

Is Mr.Collins all that bad ? Re-read passages detailing his exact character and his background.

Can he be influenced in a positive way ?

After establishing the true value of Charlotte's marriage, decide whether Austen herself would really consider it a bad marriage and why. Check the sources that refer to Charlotte's situation as a " dose of bitterness " ( whether Austen herself said that , or a critic ) and discuss whether her marriage warrants this description from Austen's point of view.

My God, you got me so passionate about this topic, that now I want to write an essay about it.

Well, olichka, my paper is due in three weeks and I am indeed in college right now--this paper is due for my romantic and Victorian literature class, and it has to be between 1000 to 1300 words Well, I guess it's not sooo bad but probably my longest paper yet. Although I like to thank you again for yet another generous dose of advice. I'm still organizing information in my pre-writing, and, like I mentioned before, the more the better! Thank you greatly not only to you and sciencefan, but everyone else, too, thus far! I'll make sure to keep you guys updated

[sciencefan]

[/I][/B]
I think that here Elizabeth is referring to Lydia as a girl whom he could not respect, not herself. At this point Elizabeth still doesn't know that he actually did it for her sake : when she later thanks him and tells him that her family owes him a great deal, he replies that her family owes him nothing, he did it all for her. Then the 2nd proposal follows.

I know it's pretty tough to discern right there, but I'm pretty sure this is referring to Mrs. Younge, Georgiana's former governness who ended up being a friend of Wickham's.

In Chapter 52, in her letter, the aunt explains how Darcy found Wickham and Lydia by finding Mrs. Younge first.

This must be the woman Darcy despises since she conspired to help Wickham almost elope with Georgiana.

Hunting down these despicable people and facing them again stirs up all the awful pain and feelings of betrayal from before.

Lydia is the girl he could "neither regard nor esteem".

[sciencefan]

where does it say he spends a years income?

I guess it's assumed when they say Wickham would be a fool to accept less than 10,000 pounds.
I guess we don't really know for sure,
but I don't really see him having mercy on Darcy.

"``Yes, yes, they must marry. There is nothing else to be done. But there are two things that I want very much to know: -- one is, how much money your uncle has laid down to bring it about; and the other, how I am ever to pay him.''

``Money! my uncle!'' cried Jane, ``what do you mean, Sir?''

``I mean that no man in his senses would marry Lydia on so slight a temptation as one hundred a year during my life, and fifty after I am gone.''

``That is very true,'' said Elizabeth; ``though it had not occurred to me before. His debts to be discharged, and something still to remain! Oh! it must be my uncle's doings! Generous, good man; I am afraid he has distressed himself. A small sum could not do all this.''

``No,'' said her father, ``Wickham's a fool, if he takes her with a farthing less than ten thousand pounds. I should be sorry to think so ill of him in the very beginning of our relationship.''

``Ten thousand pounds! Heaven forbid! How is half such a sum to be repaid?''" Ch. 49

Mr. Darcy has ten thousand a year.

"Mrs. Bennet had been strongly inclined to ask them to stay and dine there that day; but, though she always kept a very good table, she did not think any thing less than two courses could be good enough for a man on whom she had such anxious designs [Bingley], or satisfy the appetite and pride of one who had ten thousand a year [Darcy]." Ch. 53

[Matrim Cuathon]

ah, i dont think think he actually got that much but he might have. stupid ambigous writing.

[sciencefan]

stupid ambigous writing.

LOL! I know how you feel!

[olichka]

stupid ambigous writing.

Yes, it's the frequent ambiguity that makes this novel so difficult to analyze.

It's as if Austen is playing a joke on her readers, not telling them exactly what's happening and making them guess !

Or is it because she herself isn't sure what is the appropriate/realistic scenario in all her situations ? Is she being "wishy--washy" , not wanting to go too far, or being unrealistic ?

Or is she actually depicting life the way it really is--ambiguous, events and people difficult to explain, with everyone interpreting according to their expectations, wishes and " pride " ?

Could she be trying to prove to her readers in this way that it's the ambiguity that is the essence of " prejudice " ?

[olichka]

I guess it's assumed when they say Wickham would be a fool to accept less than 10,000 pounds.
I guess we don't really know for sure,
but I don't really see him having mercy on Darcy.

" No,'' said her father, ``Wickham's a fool, if he takes her with a farthing less than ten thousand pounds. I should be sorry to think so ill of him in the very beginning of our relationship.''

Mr. Darcy has ten thousand a year.

"Mrs. Bennet had been strongly inclined to ask them to stay and dine there that day; but, though she always kept a very good table, she did not think any thing less than two courses could be good enough for a man on whom she had such anxious designs [Bingley], or satisfy the appetite and pride of one who had ten thousand a year [Darcy]." Ch. 53

True, Darcy does have ten thousand a year, we've been told that actually at the very beginning, however, it doesn't mean that's what he actually gave. Mr. Bennet is speculating/ jumping to conclusions here that this is the sum that Wickham might demand, and perhaps he did, but I also think that Mr. Bennet, not liking or respecting Lydia much ( you know, how some parents underestimate their children ? ), thinks that this would be the price extorted to marry her !

( With regard to Wickham's demand, it's true that he might not take mercy on Darcy, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he would demand quite that much. However, on the other hand, he might demand even more. Who knows---he's arrogant enough ! In any scenario, I think that paying that much money ( 10,000 pounds ) would not be that great of a loss to a fabulously wealthy and capable landowner as Darcy---he can always make up for it through efficient management of his estate.

It's worth noting also that in paying off Wickham, (and thus providing Lydia with a dowry ), he seems ironically to be the one himself paying a dowry to ensure his own marriage prospects ( as opposed to the other way around when he previously expected Lizzy's family's resources to provide her dowry ) : in other words, by putting up money for Lydia, he's ensuring Lizzy's becoming his wife --- I hope I'm clear here !!! ).

Or, perhaps, Austen is teasing the readers here, hinting slyly ( slyness was one of Austen's traits ) that Wickham was paid off by Darcy, for who else in the novel is associated with " 10, 000 pounds " ?

Or, perhaps both ?

Go figure !!! Ambiguity again !

[sciencefan]

Yes, it's the frequent ambiguity that makes this novel so difficult to analyze.

It's as if Austen is playing a joke on her readers, not telling them exactly what's happening and making them guess !

Or is it because she herself isn't sure what is the appropriate/realistic scenario in all her situations ? Is she being "wishy--washy" , not wanting to go too far, or being unrealistic ?

Or is she actually depicting life the way it really is--ambiguous, events and people difficult to explain, with everyone interpreting according to their expectations, wishes and " pride " ?

Could she be trying to prove to her readers in this way that it's the ambiguity that is the essence of " prejudice " ?

I frequently have this problem with the British.
Except for Narnia, I don't think I have understood one British movie I have ever seen!
I have an awful time with allegories, too.

[sciencefan]

True, Darcy does have ten thousand a year, we've been told that actually at the very beginning, however, it doesn't mean that's what he actually gave.

You’re right, it doesn’t, since we’re not told outright.

Mr. Bennet is speculating/ jumping to conclusions here that this is the sum that Wickham might demand, and perhaps he did,

Right, but being that English authors and I frequently don’t get along well, I thought this was one of those places where I had to have to figure things out for myself.
“Wickham’s a fool”... Wickham is shrewd and conniving; he is no fool.
“if he takes her with a farthing less”... he would not accept a farthing less- I think that’s like saying “not a penny less”.
To me, this was Austen’s way of communicating how much Darcy gave Wickham.

In Ch.47 Elizabeth says “Wickham will never marry a woman without some money.”
The aunt’s letter, “...Wickham still cherished the hope of more effectually making his fortune by marriage in some other country.” Ch. 52

but I also think that Mr. Bennet, not liking or respecting Lydia much ( you know, how some parents underestimate their children ? ), thinks that this would be the price extorted to marry her !

I can see what you are saying, and could be right.
“Wickham of course wanted more than he could get; but at length was reduced to be reasonable.” Ch.52
We know he chased after women who had 10 – 30 thousand pounds.
Did he want 20 or 30 and get 10?

( With regard to Wickham's demand, it's true that he might not take mercy on Darcy, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he would demand quite that much. However, on the other hand, he might demand even more. Who knows---he's arrogant enough !

Right.

In any scenario, I think that paying that much money ( 10,000 pounds ) would not be that great of a loss to a fabulously wealthy and capable landowner as Darcy---he can always make up for it through efficient management of his estate.

Everybody’s broke at different levels, I always say. Darcy probably planned to spend that 10,000 pounds on something else, I would think. It’s still a whole year’s income. I would think that would be a sacrifice to anybody.

It's worth noting also that in paying off Wickham, (and thus providing Lydia with a dowry ), he seems ironically to be the one himself paying a dowry to ensure his own marriage prospects ( as opposed to the other way around when he previously expected Lizzy's family's resources to provide her dowry ) : in other words, by putting up money for Lydia, he's ensuring Lizzy's becoming his wife --- I hope I'm clear here !!! ).

You mean unwittingly, right, since he doesn’t yet know Elizabeth has changed her mind about him?

Or, perhaps, Austen is teasing the readers here, hinting slyly ( slyliness was one of Austen's traits ) that Wickham was paid off by Darcy, for who else in the novel is associated with " 10, 000 pounds " ?

Wickham was paid off by Darcy.
Austen just doesn’t come right out and tell us how much in a straightforward way.
It is possible it was less, like 5,000 pounds.
It just seemed to me that the way Mr. Bennett spoke was meant to direct us to the conclusion that he got ten.
He goes on further as though he KNOWS he’s right...
``Ten thousand pounds! Heaven forbid! How is half such a sum to be repaid?''"

Or, perhaps both ?

Go figure !!! Ambiguity again !

Yes. LOL!

It is an interesting side note that in a MonkeyNote Edited by Diane Sauder
She summarizes “Darcy convinces Wickham to marry Lydia, gives him ten thousand pounds, pays up his debts, and persuades him to settle in the North of London.”

The writer of CliffNotes also surmises as much.

So I guess I’m glad I’m not entirely alone in my thinking.