Jane Austen discussion
General Discussion
>
Austen as Game Theorist?
date
newest »
newest »
Interesting! I don't know if she could be called the founder of game theory, but she managed to create such different characters - yet they all wanted something, and set about getting those things differently.
I disagree with his analysis of the scene between Lady Catherine and Elizabeth. Elizabeth was not deliberately managing Lady Catherine. Elizabeth, as we know from her scene with Mr. Darcy, had the ability to express her feelings (perhaps inherited from her always-expressing-her-feelings mother?). She had long been ticked off by Lady Catherine's treatment of her, and of others, but had held her tongue for the sake of Mrs. Collins. However, after this scene in P&P, Elizabeth realizes that LC will go to Mr. Darcy - and Elizabeth thinks she may have blown it. It is not Elizabeth who is manipulating, but Jane Austen, when LC's appeal to her nephew has the opposite effect.
Jane Austen was certainly mathematically aware. There is a passage in Emma in which Jane Fairfax shows her ability to estimate the size of the parish at Maple Grove.
Megan, how do you find such things?
I think Jane Austen was a genius. I find it fascinating to see all things that people say she was doing with her work. I think she wrote incredible novels which gave voice to her personal viewpoints on life as she knew it - the division of classes in society, the marriage market, the ton, the position of women in society, etc etc. Her glorious writing let's us know what she thought of people who were manipulative, liars, naive, pompous, etc. Her heroines are women who want some independence and "more" than society's expectations for them. They have "spunk". She also writes what she thinks a "good" man is - though it might take him awhile to get there. Her work has many many facets and I am very pleased that it is appreciated by such different areas of study. Do I agree with all the theories? Probably not - I just love the worlds she created and her characters. That is more than enough for me!
Megan wrote: "I think Jane Austen was a genius. I find it fascinating to see all things that people say she was doing with her work. I think she wrote incredible novels which gave voice to her personal viewpoint..."Oh, I agree! She observed and she was able to portray. She was good and yet was realistic: liars and cheaters often win - think of Lucy Steele!
the article is very interesting. thank you Megan. I'm not at all surprised by the content; I always thought Austen had a great insight into human nature and a great awareness of the differences between men and women. her characters are very convincing and so vivid and real.
my opinion of her seems to have acquired a scientific background. Dr. Chwe's analysis is interesting; indeed nearly all Austen's novels are characterized by manipulation. however it was very subtle it would appear natural and quite spontaneous. I think that Elizabeth was to an extent manipulating Lady Catherine, I understood as much from Elizabeth's last and conciliatory conversation with Mr.Darcy... she was indeed sending him signals that she was still interested.
all this adds to my admiration of Austen and proves that her novels were not mere shallow love stories.
I agree, Megan, that she was a genius. It always frustrates me when people think Jane Austen wrote nothing but romance. Her books are works of art in terms of the characters she created and her study of human nature. There is so much more to them than just the coming together of two people (though I do LOVE the romantic part too!) lol What other author could resonate so strongly with her readers after 200 years? What she has achieved is phenomenal in writing stories that can stand such a test of time. (Am I gushing now?!?)
Mod
Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/boo...
Book:
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/fa...