Classics and the Western Canon discussion
Austen, Pride and Prejudice
>
Week 3: Vol. II: I - X (24 - 33)
date
newest »
newest »
I am convinced that one of the reasons this novel, and Austen's work in general, has survived for two centuries is the humor. Mrs. Gardiner, having described the latest London fashions, sits calmly through Mrs. Bennet's tizzy about Lizzy's refusal of Mr. Collins and some choice words Mrs. Bennet has about the Lucases, ending with, "However, your coming just at this time is the greatest of comforts, and I am very glad to hear what you tell us, of long sleeves."I laughed out loud--and I don't do that often when I'm reading!
Kerstin wrote: "Mrs. Gardiner warns Elizabeth about an attachment to Mr. Wickham, who is without fortune. She promises not to make any rash decisions."It may have been the way the narrator, Rosamund Pike, of my Audible audible book read this promise, but I detected something slightly more deceptive going on here. Elizabeth seems to qualify her statements here to keep her options open.
First she makes a broad statement to ease Mrs. Gardiner's concerns.
"All that I can promise you, therefore, is not to be in a hurry."Note she claims that is all she is capable of implying she will not or cannot do more. Then she more narrowly defines what she will not be in a hurry to do,
"I will not be in a hurry to believe myself his first object."Then she narrows it down even more by minimizing the restraint on her expectations to the single condition of when she is with him leaving her free to be wishing the rest of the time,
"When I am in company with him, I will not be wishing."Finally she gives herself the ultimate out by saying she can only try, which does not exactly rule out failure.
"In short, I will do my best."
David wrote: " I detected something slightly more deceptive going on here. Elizabeth seems to qualify her statements here to keep her options open."Ah, I should have worded it a little better, lol. But you are right, Elizabeth is evasive.
How common was it to have all of one’s daughters to be out? I feel that this is saying something about Bennet family but I am not sure what.
Mike wrote: "How common was it to have all of one’s daughters to be out? I feel that this is saying something about Bennet family but I am not sure what."Good question! and I have no answer, only speculation and more questions.
Elizabeth at one point says to Lady Catherine that her father hates London. Does this imply he doesn't care for the conventions and expectations of the establishment? If he were more engaged, wouldn't he be driving the effort of his daughters to get well situated? But it is Mrs. Bennet who devotes all her energies to it. Is she doing it because he won't? Is he letting her because he couldn't stop her anyway?
One thing I will say for Mr. Bennet, he is providing for his family. An estate has to be run efficiently to produce a steady income.
Mike wrote: "How common was it to have all of one’s daughters to be out? I feel that this is saying something about Bennet family but I am not sure what."Lydia is a favourite with her mother, whose affection had brought her into public at an early age.
By contrast, when Charlotte's engagement is announced The younger girls formed hopes of coming out a year or two sooner than they might otherwise have done.
And in chapter 29, Lady Catherine criticizes the Bennets for having so many daughters out in society at once. So it would seem that in respectable, well-run households, the younger daughters had to wait, but as we know about Mrs Bennet The business of her life was to get her daughters married.
I think it is interesting Elizabeth is very understanding and forgiving when Wickham shifts his attention away from her toward Miss King who has just inherited a great deal of money. The sudden acquisition of ten thousand pounds was the most remarkable charm of the young lady, to whom he was now rendering himself agreeable; but Elizabeth, less clear-sighted perhaps in his case than in Charlotte’s, did not quarrel with him for his wish of independence. Nothing, on the contrary, could be more natural; and while able to suppose that it cost him a few struggles to relinquish her, she was ready to allow it a wise and desirable measure for both, and could very sincerely wish him happy.
Why does she think it is perfectly reasonable for Wickham to seek financial security in marriage but is highly critical of Charlotte for doing the same thing? Surely it should be the opposite since Charlotte’s options were far more limited. Does Elizabeth have a double standard—one for men and a different one for women?
I noticed the narrator interjected a note of criticism by hinting at Elizabeth's poor judgment: . . . but Elizabeth, less clear-sighted perhaps in his case than in Charlotte’s . . .
Tamara wrote: "I think it is interesting Elizabeth is very understanding and forgiving when Wickham shifts his attention away from her toward Miss King who has just inherited a great deal of money. The sudden a..."
My personal reading, which may not be supportable by the text, is that Elizabeth really cares little about Wickham personally, except that he is a pleasant acquaintance. And, is not connected to Miss King. Besides not being jealous, she can judge the financial advantage of the presumed match without much real concern for the happiness of either of those involved, although she might politely wish for it.
She cares enough about Charlotte to be shocked that her friend will be chaining herself for a lifetime (his or hers) to someone she doesn't love, and can't even respect. This concern masks for her the fact that, by the same financial (and social) standards, Charlotte is making a "good match," one better than she might have ever hoped for.
Tamara wrote: "Why does she think it is perfectly reasonable for Wickham to seek financial security in marriage but is highly critical of Charlotte for doing the same thing? Surely it should be the opposite since Charlotte’s options were far more limited. Does Elizabeth have a double standard—one for men and a different one for women?"I don't see a double standard for men and women in this case. I think Elizabeth liked the attention Wickham gave her, but ultimately wasn't emotionally invested.
In chapter 13 Elizabeth's father reads Mr. Collins's letter and she has a strong negative reaction to him and her father agrees.
"He must be an oddity, I think," said she. "I cannot make him out.—There is something very pompous in his style.—And what can he mean by apologising for being next in the entail?—We cannot suppose he would help it if he could.—Could he be a sensible man, sir?"In the next chapter after Mr. Collins's arrival, Mr. Bennet's reaction is confirmed.
"No, my dear, I think not. I have great hopes of finding him quite the reverse. There is a mixture of servility and self-importance in his letter, which promises well. I am impatient to see him."
Mr. Bennet's expectations were fully answered. His cousin was as absurd as he had hoped, and he listened to him with the keenest enjoyment, maintaining at the same time the most resolute composure of countenance, and, except in an occasional glance at Elizabeth, requiring no partner in his pleasure.Both Mr. Bennet and Elizabeth have made up their minds about Mr. Collins. So I do think Elizabeth is really perplexed by the attention Charlotte gives Mr. Collins. When we fast forward to this week's segment, we see that Charlotte and Mr. Collins are far better matched than was apparent at first. In Chapter 28 (Vol. II, V) she is making peace with this whole situation.
Elizabeth, in the solitude of her chamber, had to meditate upon Charlotte's degree of contentment, to understand her address in guiding, and composure in bearing with, her husband, and to acknowledge that it was all done very well.
On reading Elizabeth's comment on Wickham's defection ".... mortifying conviction that handsome young men must have something to live on, as well as the plain.", I couldn't decide whether there was some bitterness or irony. If she's so generous on the handsome taking advantage of their looks, could she not be even more generous to the plainer Charlotte for taking advantage of the situation?When I read P&P a long time ago, I suppose I was influenced by the movie as I found this novel and Elizabeth much more romantic and idealized. Now I'm beginning to wonder whether the narrator, like the narrator of the Netflix Bridgerton series, is critical of all the characters, including Elizabeth and only Elizabeth is unaware of her own flaw like Austen's other novels like Emma and Persuasion.
In her talk with Jane, Elizabeth says "You wish to think all the world respectable, ... I only want to think you perfect, and you set yourself against it." Jane's optimism and Elizabeth's pessimism might both be too firmly set against each other!
"The more I see of the world, the more am I dissatisfied with it; and every day confirms my belief of the inconsistency of all human characters, and of the little dependence that can be placed on the appearance of either merit or sense."
(Is our misanthrope Elizabeth the embodiment of Jane Austen's own attitude toward humanity?)
As Jane said, Elizabeth does not 'make allowance enough for difference of situation and temper'. Whereas she thinks worse of Charlotte's 'understanding' or 'her heart' in her regard for Mr. Collins despite her situation and 'prudence', and even degrades the 'prudence' as being 'selfishness':
"You shall not, for the sake of one individual, change the meaning of principle and integrity, nor endeavour to persuade yourself or me, that selfishness is prudence, and insensibility of danger, security for happiness."
Now, even I thought this was a bit harsh especially to her friend while she excuses Wickham with handsome men having to find something to live on!
I watched the 2005 movie again and in the movie, Charlotte makes a more emphatic protest against her choice and Elizabeth looks sort of defeated and seems to look at her friend with a more sympathetic expression with some kind of acknowledgement of her situation. Maybe this was why I didn't have such an impression of her being a bit so much of her own prejudice in the first reading.
I don't think Elizabeth was as emotionally involved in Wickham to be as upset as she was by Charlotte but I don't think she was all that cool and dandy with his defection, either. Her conversation with her aunt shows an even more cynical outlook on humanity."my dear aunt, what is the difference in matrimonial affairs, between the mercenary and the prudent motive? Where does discretion end, and avarice begin?... A man in distressed circumstances has not time for all those elegant decorums which other people may observe." Does that sound like the speech she made to Jane about prudence and selfishness? A touch of bitter sarcasm there?
And finally, "I am sick of them all. .... Stupid men are the only ones worth knowing, after all."
As her aunt suggested, that speech 'savours strongly of disappointment'.
I haven't read up on Jane Austen's biography yet, but has she been 'jilted creditably' in her days and has it contributed to her somewhat cynical wit?
Mr Bennet's remark comes to mind: .
"Next to being married, a girl likes to be crossed in love a little now and then. It is something to think of, and gives her a sort of distinction among her companions."
"... but it is a comfort to think that, whatever of that kind may befal you, you have an affectionate mother who will always make the most of it."
Oh my dear Mr Bennet.. :-)
Although Jane finally accepts her wrong judgement on Caroline Bingley, she says that her 'confidence was as natural as' Elizabeth's suspicion. We tend to think that being pessimistic and suspicious is being wiser than being trusting and optimistic, but is that really true? I'm reading Daniel Kahnemann's book at the moment, and people's judgement and intuition seem to be wrought with bias even when they're experts and think they're being wiser.I think Elizabeth's admitting that she might not be so wise to be an accurate judge is so far the wisest remark she's made on people's judgement.
"..how can I promise to be wiser than so many of my fellow creatures if I am tempted, or how am I even to know that it would be wisdom to resist?"
Borum wrote: I'm reading Daniel Kahnemann's book at the moment, and people's judgement and intuition seem to be wrought with bias even when they're experts and think they're being wiser.Thinking, Fast and Slow? Great book! I think Austen's point is supposed to be that although Elizabeth fancies herself a great judge of character, at every turn she makes snap judgements and is very slow to change her mind. So she decides she doesn't like Darcy, then Wickham shows up and manipulates her into thinking even more poorly of him. When Caroline Bingley tries to warn her about Wickham, she dismisses her, and it's only when her aunt confirms that Wickham is a bad seed that she starts to believe it.
I read chapter 27 last night, and one line stood out to me:On the stairs were a troop of little boys and girls, whose eagerness for their cousin's appearance would not allow them to wait in the drawing-room, and whose shyness, as they had not seen her for a twelvemonth, prevented their coming lower.
This is happening in March, and the Gardiners were in Longbourn for Christmas. In the same paragraph we learn It was a journey of only twenty-four miles, and they began it so early as to be in Gracechurch Street by noon. So they left their kids alone for a week over Christmas. I can understand that packing up the kids and the servants would have been a bigger burden and would have meant more coaches and more expense for the Gardiners, not to mention the extra mouths to shop for and feed for the Bennets. I also understand that this is pre-Victorian and pre-Dickens, so it's not the child-centred festival of lights and commerce that is on its way. To me it's an example of how even though these characters are so relatable to us in some ways, the past is still a different country.
Another example of the past being a different country is Elizabeth and Mrs Gardiner at the theatre, where they completely ignore the performance to discuss Jane, the Bingleys, and Mr Wickham. At one point, Elizabeth even cries out a response (as in louder than usual, not tears). Now of course we can't even imagine behaving that way in a theatre, but we also don't go. Statistically, we attend a live performance approximately once every four years, and we go to the cinema less than once a month. Living in London, the Gardiners presumably go all the time.
Thinking, Fast and Slow? Yup, you’ve got it!
Borum wrote: "Now I'm beginning to wonder whether the narrator, like the narrator of the Netflix Bridgerton series, is critical of all the characters, including Elizabeth and only Elizabeth is unaware of her own flaw...I think the narrator is critical of the characters.
Elizabeth is criticized because she is arrogant and makes hasty judgements, refusing to budge when she's made up her mind. When she doesn’t like a person, she dismisses him/her and actively seeks information to justify her attitude while ignoring information which may cause her to change her views. We saw her greedily pursuing negative information about Darcy with Wickham and dismissing Caroline’s warning about Wickham because it would call into question her assessment of Darcy.
I also see the narrator as being critical of Jane. Jane is the opposite of Elizabeth in that she thinks well of everyone, doesn’t impugn their motives, and gives the benefit of doubt to all. These are all good qualities. But Jane takes things to extreme to the degree it blinds her to what is happening right in front of her. She is also very passive. She is a wallflower, waiting for a letter from Caroline or a visit from Bingley. She doesn’t take an active role in going after what she wants. She reminds me of a Disneyfied Sleeping Beauty or Snow White—females who are supine and awaiting Prince Charming to wake them up.
The Regency period was a time of cultural refinement. We see this most prominently here in the way people socialized. There was a certain ritual to formal visits, how they proceeded from welcome to dinner, at the end of which the women moved to the drawing room while the men stayed behind for cigars and business talk. They then re-joined the women for more entertainment, often with music and singing, or perhaps a game of cards. It was also required of young ladies to be “accomplished.” In the formal social setting, this meant they should be able to play the instrument and/or sing – though I think boys were instructed in playing instruments as well. There is an interesting exchange between Lady Catherine and Elizabeth on the very topic. Lady Catherine can hardly believe that Elizabeth’s education, while not completely lacking, was not as stringently adhered to than convention demanded.
Do Elizabeth and her sisters lack cultural refinement?
When you look at the way people socialized, the formal invitations, the visits, the balls, do you find some aspects appealing? What aspects would you have a hard time with?
Tamara wrote: "Borum wrote: "Now I'm beginning to wonder whether the narrator, like the narrator of the Netflix Bridgerton series, is critical of all the characters, including Elizabeth and only Elizabeth is unaw..."Another wallflower that comes to mind is Mr. Darcy. Jane's 'shyness' is considered acceptable as she 'doesn't need to' go actively after men and her passive attitude is even defended by Elizabeth. Mr. Darcy's 'pride' turns out to be another expression of his shyness, and his pride was accepted by others as reasonably supported by his status and wealth.
Wallflowers are often described as introverted people with social anxiety and lack of self-esteem. It's interesting to see these two characters with beauty and wealth to boost their self-esteem are the ones who shy away from the opposite sex/crowd.
Whereas Charlotte's and perhaps the other Bennet female members' active pursuit of men seems to be looked down upon by Elizabeth.
I think you're right in the narrator's criticism of Jane as being too optimistic and naive as well as being too passive. She is also criticizing Elizabeth's attitude of condoning and defending Jane while criticizing the other more 'active' ones (whereas her attitude towards Wickham is superficially tolerant whereas hidden resentment may still reside deeper underneath.) Austen is working through many subtle layers of criticism and I find her more close to Mr. Bennet than Elizabeth.
Jen wrote: "Another example of the past being a different country is Elizabeth and Mrs Gardiner at the theatre, where they completely ignore the performance to discuss Jane, the Bingleys, and Mr Wickham. At on..."Gone are the boisterous audiences of Shakespearean plays at the Globe. I've read an article on how the audience grew so quiet at some point in the late 19th century. Nowadays we talk (or shout) over the music in live concerts and clubs.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentis...
Kerstin wrote: "The Regency period was a time of cultural refinement. We see this most prominently here in the way people socialized. There was a certain ritual to formal visits, how they proceeded from welcome to..."I'd have a hard time answering all those questions. It was more like a job interview than a dinner party. I'd also have hated to play (or perform anything for that matter) off-hand and out of the blue in front of people. Also, do these people ever have anything better to do than play cards?
Borum wrote: "Wallflowers are often described as introverted people with social anxiety and lack of self-esteem."Yes, introverted people do get characterized like that all too often, but it is hardly true. Social anxiety is not a mark of introversion, neither is lack of self-esteem. I can see how the need of the introvert for peace and quiet, even solitude, is perplexing to extraverts. ...I'm speaking from experience ;-)
Part of the reason for the misunderstanding is that we live in a very extraverted culture, and it doesn't know what to do with folks whose inclinations don't include the around-the-clock, hop, skip, and jump.
I've liked the character of Mr. Darcy from the get go, precisely because he doesn't have to be front and center. He is quiet, only speaks when he has something to say, not because there is a pause in the conversation.
In turn, I never could warm up to Mr. Collins, not because he is absurd - that makes him funny, but because the guy can never shut up. He has to be front and center in all his pompous glory, is a busybody as ever there was one, ogling the street constantly who comes down the lane. To the introvert that's too exhausting!
Borum wrote: "I'd have a hard time answering all those questions. It was more like a job interview than a dinner party.That's a good way of putting it, a job interview, or even an interrogation. I was debating to put that word in the introduction for this section. Lady Catherine didn't think she would get push back, now did she?
I'd also have hated to play (or perform anything for that matter) off-hand and out of the blue in front of people.
The performing part is probably a hard one for many today. We are not used to it anymore. Listening to music no longer requires mastering an instrument. The investment in proficiency and repertoire previous generations readily engaged in is something we have lost.
Also, do these people ever have anything better to do than play cards?"
Lol!
In their defense, I can recall many family gatherings where the older generation sat around the card table playing for hours.
I got to chapter 28 last night, where Elizabeth is observing the Collineses:When Mr. Collins said anything of which his wife might reasonably be ashamed, which certainly was not unseldom, she involuntarily turned her eye on Charlotte. Once or twice she could discern a faint blush; but in general Charlotte wisely did not hear.
And you know what? That's pretty much every marriage. Where I live, the first pandemic lockdown was for over 2 months last spring. My husband and I quickly figured out that we were having a daily argument called 'I wouldn't do it that way!' and that nobody was winning. So we agreed to ignore like, 99% of what the other one does for the sake of getting actual work done. Fortunately we have a house that's big enough that we don't have to try and work in the same room.
Reading chapter 29 last night, Elizabeth admits that the Bennets' education was spotty at best, but also says, 'We were always encouraged to read, and had all the masters that were necessary.'Do you think she means that the books provided all the instruction necessary? Or did they get instruction in the other accomplishments on Mr Darcy's list: A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages? We know Elizabeth and Mary play piano and sing and none of them draw. They do dance a lot, and Elizabeth is critical of Mr Collins' ineptitude when she is partnered with him in Meryton. So did they have dancing masters? Would they have had a master in modern languages?
Borum wrote: "Jen wrote: "Another example of the past being a different country is Elizabeth and Mrs Gardiner at the theatre, where they completely ignore the performance to discuss Jane, the Bingleys, and Mr Wi..."Interesting article, Borum. Thanks for sharing!
I live near New Haven and have frequently attended productions put on by Yale Repertory Theatre. The pretentiousness is sometimes insufferable while at the same time amazing theatre is being made. But, shoosh, please. Unwrap your cough lozenges before we begin. Do not show up late or you will not be seated. They do work at getting the community in the seats, and they have taken this year off to retool themselves, with a clear understanding of the exclusivity that has become the norm in theatre (always with an "re," not the American "er"), so I am very interested to see how they will reinvent themselves. I remember one production that was so unusual the audience was left speechless at the end. You could tell everyone was stunned into trying to figure out how they were going to talk about this with any intelligence or give it a positive spin. I wanted so badly to laugh out loud--not at the show, but at the audience! OMG, it almost makes me laugh out loud to think of it now.
Which, I think, brings us to "lit'rature." I am delightedly reading a copy of P&P that was originally my daughter's when she read it for school, peppered with her annotations in pink pen. I have several times come across her "WTF" in the margins, which also makes me laugh. I'm quite sure that reaction was not permissible in the classroom, but what if we taught our high schoolers to push back more against what they were reading, to have more boisterous conversations in the classroom that might extend into adulthood and make reading more relevant and fun?
This group, of course, is filled with dedicated readers, but as we probably all know, we are the fringe, not mainstream.
Kerstin wrote: "The Regency period was a time of cultural refinement. We see this most prominently here in the way people socialized. There was a certain ritual to formal visits, how they proceeded from welcome to..."It's easy to imagine life would be fun with the Bennets, but I recall watching the PBS Regency House series awhile back and being swiftly disabused of any such notions. The women, in particular, were extremely bored by the entire exercise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regency...
I can't, honestly, think of a single thing I'd prefer then over now!
Kerstin wrote: "I've liked the character of Mr. Darcy from the get go, precisely because he doesn't have to be front and center. He is quiet, only speaks when he has something to say, not because there is a pause in the conversation."Nicely said. Your comment makes me appreciate him more! I think I've been allowing the other characters' views of him to sway my own--which is, of course, what Austen is hoping for. :)
Kathy wrote: "It's easy to imagine life would be fun with the Bennets, but I recall watching the PBS Regency House series awhile back and being swiftly disabused of any such notions. The women, in particular, were extremely bored by the entire exercise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regency...I can't, honestly, think of a single thing I'd prefer then over now!"
I'll have to see if I can stream the program.
I don't doubt the extensive idleness of these ladies of leisure. It must have been worse the higher up the rank you got. I imagine the lower ranks of the landed gentry still had duties to perform. They couldn't afford nor needed the vast staffs of the truly large estates.
Did Mr. Bennet have a paid foreman to oversee and manage the estate or did he perform this duty? Did Mrs. Bennet have a paid housekeeper to oversee the work done in the house or did she oversee it herself? My hunch is they weren't completely idle.
As to boredom, that's an interesting question. We are so bombarded today with stuff to fill our time with we don't know how to occupy our time when left to our own devices.
We don't live in their world anymore, without motorized transportation, without screens, or big box stores to satisfy every material whim. One could turn this around and ask, are we more bored today because we've been inoculated with the artificial demands of consumerism we no longer can be content with a daily game of cards?
I read chapter 30 last night, and this was my favourite paragraph:Elizabeth soon perceived that, though this great lady was not in the commission of the peace for the county, she was a most active magistrate in her own parish, the minutest concerns of which were carried to her by Mr. Collins; and whenever any of the cottagers were disposed to be quarrelsome, discontented, or too poor, she sallied forth into the village to settle their differences, silence their complaints, and scold them into harmony and plenty.
You know what? We need people like Lady Catherine! I once had neighbours who were sociopathic about any noise. They'd start off by banging on their ceiling, then ringing my doorbell, then throwing rocks at my window, then trying to fight us when we went outside. The police had zero interest in helping, they'd only tell us we needed to talk to the people who told us to walk on tiptoe under threat of rock throwing if we didn't. I had another neighbour whose brother would come over to get drunk, throw all of his windows open, and turn his stereo up to the maximum and blare music at the whole neighbourhood. Asking him to stop only got you a torrent of homophobic abuse. That was just his go-to insult, it didn't matter if you really were queer. He would sometimes wander off to buy himself more beer and forget his keys, so he would start ringing our doorbell to let him in, since we shared a staircase and their door was broken. We ignored him then since he didn't actually live there. One time he convinced the police to come by (the only time the police were helpful) and they made us open the door. After that we disabled our doorbell and told people to text us when they arrived. I really could have used a magistrate in both those situations.
Kerstin wrote: We are so bombarded today with stuff to fill our time with we don't know how to occupy our time when left to our own devices. Neither do these people, though. I love the scene at Netherfield where nobody wants to play cards so Mr Hurst goes to sleep. Louisa sits on a sofa and plays with her rings and Caroline watches Darcy write a letter. Even if they wanted to get into a hobby, most of them wouldn't be socially acceptable. The ladies might tend to a small flower garden, but they can't learn to grow vegetables or have a large formal flower garden because that's a servant's job. They likewise couldn't even learn to make toast. Darcy can ride around Pemberley and make note of fences that need repair or plan a new addition to his formal gardens or a sun room, but he wouldn't get his hands dirty digging post holes or planting bushes or hanging wallpaper.
Kerstin wrote: "When you look at the way people socialized, the formal invitations, the visits, the balls, do you find some aspects appealing? What aspects would you have a hard time with?"It is only fair I put in my 2-cent's worth too :-)
I wouldn't like the lack of creature comforts, freezing hallways and staircases in winter or like Jane getting surprised by rain and arriving a cold soggy mess.
What I do find appealing is the closer human interaction and community life. My late mother-in-law used to fondly recall the dances she went to growing up in a small farming community. How much fun everyone had and that sadly her children and grandchildren rarely, if at all, got to experience. There is something that feeds the soul when we interact face-to-face, as opposed to mind-numbingly sitting side-by-side glued to screens.
Jen wrote: "Kerstin wrote: We are so bombarded today with stuff to fill our time with we don't know how to occupy our time when left to our own devices. Neither do these people..."
It seems that people both past and present who do not know how to occupy their time turn to the busybody's hobby of finding fault in others.
David wrote: "It seems that people both past and present who do not know how to occupy their time turn to the busybody's hobby of finding fault in others...."A question that P&P has been leading myself to ask, are all the judgements we (continuously) make about people and their behavior in of themselves examples of "prejudice" -- judgements often based on our own values?
This musing has been prompted between possible perceived differences (I don't even trust my own judgement on what I am going to say here.) between discussions of the characters in P&P and of the characters in Demons. But, somehow, in some ways, it has felt as if contributors often just described (the outrageous?) behavior of the Demon characters without commenting on the appropriateness of the behaviors, as if simply trying to understand, whereas I feel as we have subjected Jane's characters to a running assessment according to our own judgements of shoulds, should nots, should haves.
David wrote: "It seems that people both past and present who do not know how to occupy their time turn to the busybody's hobby of finding fault in others."LOL!
So true.
Mrs. Bennet’s brother, Mr. Gardiner and his wife spend Christmas at Longbourn. Mrs. Gardiner warns Elizabeth about an attachment to Mr. Wickham, who is without fortune. She promises not to make any rash decisions.
Charlotte and Mr. Collins marry and immediately depart. Jane spends time with the Gardiners in London. She slowly comes to the conclusion that the Bingleys and Charles are out of the picture. Mr. Wickham moves on to a rich girl, and Elizabeth realizes she had no real feelings for him after all.
Elizabeth is to visit Charlotte in her new home. She travels with Sir Lucas and his daughter Mary. They stop in London where she gets to see Jane.
They finally arrive and Mr. Collins eagerly shows his visitors the house and garden, though not without giving Elizabeth a dig on what she missed out on by refusing him. The next day they are all invited to dinner at Lady de Bourgh’s. Both Mr. Collins and Charlotte soak up the attention given them by the de Bourghs.
They have a stately dinner at Rosings, and Lady Catherine shows herself to be a very authoritative and self-important woman with a tendency to cross the line into impertinence.
Sir Lucas leaves after a week fully satisfied his daughter couldn’t be better situated. Soon visitors arrive at Rosings, nephews of Lady Catherine, Mr. Darcy and his cousin, Colonel Fitzwilliam. Over the following weeks they see much of one another, meeting on walks, in Lady Catherine’s drawing room or the men visit at the parsonage. From Colonel Fitzwilliam Elizabeth learns that it was Mr. Darcy who likely advised Mr. Bingley to sever ties with Jane.