well youve painted a more flattering picture of him than i would have done, but i agree with most of your comments. totally didnt think about a mother figure. i dont think that she is a good mother figure though. Darcy on the other hand is a perfect object of respect for him. he could clean up that fawning attitude quickly i think.Originally Posted by olichka
I don't really know about that, I think that Mr Collins is way too vain to be "corrected" by Darcy. For exemple, the way he addresses him at the ball (in Meryton I think), without any prior introduction, that's a real lack of respect for good manners, and it points out the fact that he is over-confident and that he considers his own rank higher than it really is.
But it's true that the films tend to portray him as a small character, who looks clumsy and ridiculous, and they turn him into an even more despicable character.
I don't think that Jane Austen would have clearly said that Charlotte's marriage was like prostitution, which is only evoked implicitely, but if you think about it: she doesn't love him, she is ashamed of him, and she feels better when he's gardening, reading or whatever, as long as he's not near. From our modern perspective, you would almost call that prostitution: you're giving away your body in exchange for financial safety. But it was obviously not considered like prostitution at that time, especially when we know that a successful marriage was a marriage of interest more than love.
I could also imagine, as Sciencefan (I think) mentioned earlier, that Mr Collins and Charlotte's marriage is the marriage Jane Asuten could have had and refused. She probably felt quite desperate like Charlotte since her sentimental life was a mess, but she was rather looking for her soulmate, and Charlotte's marriage could be a supposition of what her marriage with her childhood friend could have been like.
But I don't remember the actual dates of the proposal she refused, and she revised Pride and Prejudice so many times that it's hard to tell to which extent it could be linked.
I know I originally posted that.
I copied and pasted the opinion from an introductory page on this web site.
I was only trying to help Silas at the time, and I had never personally studied the subject myself.
Now that I have looked into it myself, I reject the idea that she ever used that word, or that she intended to be that critical.
She was writing a fairy tale, for goodness sake.
A man who loves you in spite of all your faults and will sacrifice everything to have you?!
Darcy is a fairy tale!
I think the revisionists have misunderstood Austen.
I revert back to what I said in the beginning.
I think Charlotte and Mr. Collins got along just fine.
They were both very logical, as was their method of choosing a mate, and that doesn’t make it wrong. They BOTH married for socio-economic reasons. That was all that Charlotte or Mr. Collins needed out of life or marriage. It worked for them.
I think it was a true reflection of how marriages came about in those days.
Although Elizabeth would have died 10,000 deaths being married to him, Charlotte who had a different temperament and different expectations, was more easily able to get along with him.
This goes back to how a person defines a marriage relationship.
The definitions back then were very different than they are now.
And just because Elizabeth couldn’t be happy with Mr. Collins, doesn’t mean Charlotte couldn’t.
Marriage was an economic institution at that time.
Many marriages were arranged, and based on money.
When your parents arranged your marriage, they did not care about intellectual compatibility or looks, or chemical attraction.
It seems to me that Austen tried to put forward the idea that it would be nicer to marry for love than to marry for money, but as is quite evident with this story, many girls were forced to marry for money and not for love.
Darcy and Anne de Bourgh was a marriage arranged for money.
Wickham married Lydia for money.
Mrs. Bennett wanted Elizabeth to marry Mr. Collins for money.
She connived to get Mr. Bingley to fall in love with Jane, for money-
at first, knowing nothing about him, and not caring if Jane liked him.
And she wanted to throw her silly daughters in the way of other rich men, for money.
Apparently, money was many times the first consideration when it came to marriage.
Marriage based on physical attraction isn't always a success either- Mr. and Mrs. Bennett.
Last edited by sciencefan; 02-26-2007 at 09:42 AM.
Thanks for sharing all that background information about Austen's beau.
I'm glad Austen didn't marry him, for both of their sakes.
Perhaps he found a different woman who was able to appreciate him.
(Or was he the one who died shortly thereafter?)
As was mentioned in the beginning, Austen described the presence of the Collins/Charlotte marriage as a dose of bitterness in an otherwise cheerful novel.
Though that whole thing with Lydia was pretty miserable, too.
Would a woman actually marry a man who made her squeamish, of her own free will? Who knows. I find it hard to believe. But then if we take into account low self-esteem and other such factors, I guess it's possible.
I agree with you about the unfortunate film portrayals of Mr. Collins.
The Kiera Knightly Mr. Collins was even worse since the director believed Mr. Collins to be a sexual animal, which I do not see at all.
Those who are abused in childhood tend to believe they deserve further abuse. Perhaps Mr. Collins feels "comfortable" being "subjugated" by Lady C. precisely because of his abusive past. I can just see him kissing up to his father all the time, just to keep the peace.
In my opinion, I think in Mr. Collins and Charlotte we find two neuroses who understand each other. They are at the same level of social immaturity.
Hey Silas,
Glad you're keeping up on the postings.
When is your paper due?
Right. Collins has the idea that the clergy were equal to any other society, and maybe they were. I don't know anything about it. Too bad Mr. Collins has such bad manners. He just doesn't know how bad his manners are. He's too frank.
This is my main point.I don't think that Jane Austen would have clearly said that Charlotte's marriage was like prostitution, which is only evoked implicitely, but if you think about it: she doesn't love him, she is ashamed of him, and she feels better when he's gardening, reading or whatever, as long as he's not near. From our modern perspective, you would almost call that prostitution: you're giving away your body in exchange for financial safety. But it was obviously not considered like prostitution at that time, especially when we know that a successful marriage was a marriage of interest more than love.
Is Charlotte ashamed of him, or is she sometimes embarrased by him?
I think that's an important difference.
Elizabeth's feelings are not Charlotte's.
That's exactly what I meant. When Jane Austen wrote about Charlotte's marriage, she may have been speculating about the way her own marriage of convenience to a man she was squeamish about would have turned out.
She received the proposal when she was 27 yrs old, and, although I also don't remember when she made the revision, it must have been afterwards because Charlotte's age is also 27, and I do remember reading critics who mentioned that the inclusion of Charlotte's marriage was influenced by this unpleasant experience.
However, having written this, I just realized that Charlotte describes herself as " not romantic", that she's only asking a " comfortable home ". So, to what extent then is it a bitter situation in Charlotte's case ?
It would have certainly been bitter in Austen's case because she was romantic.
Last edited by olichka; 02-26-2007 at 01:57 PM.
He did find a woman who could love him, and they had 10 children together.
I think that Austen, with her high standards, fastidiousness and pride, not to mention sarcasm, would have made him miserable.
I did read an anecdote mentioning Jane's brutal reaction to a neighbour's miscarriage : she said that perhaps the poor woman miscarried out of fright when she happened to look accidentally at her husband.
Oh dear. Jane Austen seems to have been frightfully judgemental. That's an awfully cruel remark.
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.
Last edited by olichka; 02-26-2007 at 04:45 PM.
tee-hee
If Silas doesn't have enough time to re-read the whole thing,
I think another good idea which I mentioned earlier is to search the online version right here on this web site.
I actually have already posted almost all the references, but there were some I left out.
If he searched for:
1- Charlotte
2- Collins
3- Miss Lucas
I'm pretty sure he would find every instance where that character appears,
and be able to collect all the views concerning marriage beforehand and their situation afterward.
That's pretty much what I did because I didn't want to get outside influences and impressions mixed up with what is actually portrayed in the book.
Being an efficiency-nutthat is my recommendation.
I was looking around for that dose of bitterness comment, which by the way I believe is NOT an exact quote,
and I found this:
It adds a little more dimension to our discussion.
Invisible Adjunct
"And I think Perry is onto something when she points out that "the physical repugnance that we in the present century feel at the idea of sleeping with Mr. Collins is entirely absent in Jane Austen's treatment of the matter." Though Elizabeth Bennett is initially incredulous ("Engaged to Mr. Collins! my dear Charlotte, -- impossible!'') and dismayed, she does eventually reconcile herself to the match, and overall does not judge her friend very harshly for marrying for "a comfortable home." As Perry puts it:
The reason that Austen is able to imagine Charlotte's sleeping with Mr. Collins with equanimity is because sex had less psychological significance in eighteenth-century England than in our own post-Freudian era; it was less tied to individual identity, and more understood as an uncomplicated, straightforward physical appetite..."
Quoted from In "Sleeping With Mr. Collins" by Ruth Perry
When Darcy enumerated Lizzy's "faults" in his very brutally honest first proposal, he was referring to her lack of connections, wealth, position and to her ridiculous family. Those reasons were his main objections to his marriage with her, since he was very much the aristocrat, with traditional values of class, pride and family responsibility.
He loves Elizabeth for personal qualities which make her a much more vital and interesting woman than most women of his own class. A highly intelligent, energetic woman, she is his equal and his match. After struggling with himself and his class conditioning, he realizes, that it's more important for him to marry a woman that suits him personally, than to marry for wealth or status.
It's actually not that much of a fairy tale : marriages of economic and social "misalliance" did take place at that time, and at a much higher level. Didn't the son of George III ( George IV ) secretly marry a woman who was not royalty ? Elizabeth, although not of the highest aristocratic circles, is still gentry. She is attractive, intelligent, energetic and has character---all qualities that are necessary in a mistress of an exquisite estate like Pemberley. And if she exhibits more of those traits than any other woman of Darcy's aquaintance, then he is very justified in marrying her. Remember, that in his verbal duel with Miss Bingley, he refers to her as "one of the handsomest women of my aquaintance" --- he is obviously aware of her specialness.
In their marriage, I think, Austen was trying to reflect the changing values of the time---England was becoming more democratized and egalitarian, with lower aristocracy and middle class rising in importance.
Last edited by olichka; 02-26-2007 at 06:07 PM.
A very good piece of advice indeed.
I think that the tricky part with Austen is that she's so crafty in her use of irony and sarcasm that if you're digging a bit you can easily find out vey ambiguous words or sentences about almost everything. The parallel between Lizzie and Austen makes it even more difficult to differentiate their opinions because we tend to assimilate both...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote