Jane Austen discussion
Emma - the Novel 2010
>
So what is Mr. Knightley up to?
Sarah wrote: "What do we think about Mr. Knightley? Or should we call him "Knightley"?"If you are of Mrs. Elton's class and level of manners, you of course should call him Knightley. Or maybe Hey Rich Guy.
Everyman wrote: "Sarah wrote: "What do we think about Mr. Knightley? Or should we call him "Knightley"?"
If you are of Mrs. Elton's class and level of manners, you of course should call him Knightley. Or maybe He..."
Handsome rich guy!
If you are of Mrs. Elton's class and level of manners, you of course should call him Knightley. Or maybe He..."
Handsome rich guy!
Jeannette wrote: "Handsome rich guy!"Well, of course. Aren't all Austen's heros handsome?
To women, of course.
Actually, though, I wonder whether the women here think the Knightley in the current Emma film is handsome. To me, he doesn't seem so, but I'm of the wrong gender and age to judge the handsomeness of such a man.
Everyman wrote: "Jeannette wrote: "Handsome rich guy!"
Well, of course. Aren't all Austen's heros handsome?
To women, of course.
Actually, though, I wonder whether the women here think the Knightley in the ..."
As I said somewhere earlier, my heart belongs to Jeremy Northam. Johnny Lee Miller doesn't do as much for me, but quite a few of the younger ladies seem to love him. I think that the woman playing Jane Fairfax was lovely!
Well, of course. Aren't all Austen's heros handsome?
To women, of course.
Actually, though, I wonder whether the women here think the Knightley in the ..."
As I said somewhere earlier, my heart belongs to Jeremy Northam. Johnny Lee Miller doesn't do as much for me, but quite a few of the younger ladies seem to love him. I think that the woman playing Jane Fairfax was lovely!
Sarah wrote: "Does he have horses? Does he own a carriage? Does he care? Does Emma REALLY care about carriages, or is it banter?
What do we think about Mr. Knightley? Or should we call him "Knightley"?"
I think Emma is very much into image. She's young, she's at the top rung of her little society. The only person she places above herself is Mr. Knightley (rather odd that her brother-in-law, someone she grew up with, is still Mr. Knightley to her). JA tells us that Mr. Knightley doesn't have money to waste, unlike Darcy, and so Knightley doesn't bother to use his horses and carriage without good cause. Did they really use the carriage horses around the farm? This seemd to be the case in P&P.
I think Emma is very serious in her reactions to things, especially what she considers proper behavior.
What do we think about Mr. Knightley? Or should we call him "Knightley"?"
I think Emma is very much into image. She's young, she's at the top rung of her little society. The only person she places above herself is Mr. Knightley (rather odd that her brother-in-law, someone she grew up with, is still Mr. Knightley to her). JA tells us that Mr. Knightley doesn't have money to waste, unlike Darcy, and so Knightley doesn't bother to use his horses and carriage without good cause. Did they really use the carriage horses around the farm? This seemd to be the case in P&P.
I think Emma is very serious in her reactions to things, especially what she considers proper behavior.
From Emma: "Mr Knightley keeping no horses, having little spare money and a great deal of health, activity, and independence, was too apt, in Emma's opinion, to get about as he could, and not use his carriage so often as became the owner of Donwell Abbey."Mr. Knightley does have a carriage, but it's likely that the only horses he has access to are the farm horses, as with Mr. Bennet - remember when Jane was going to Netherfield, she could not have the carriage because the horses were wanted on the farm "much oftener than I can get them". Landed gentry, unless they were very rich, often had to make their plow horses do double duty; sometimes carriage horses could be hired from a local stable.
And, as I am a lady, I'll stick to "Mr. Knightley". Gentlemen who were on friendly terms addressed each other by their last names; female relations might affectionately refer to husbands or fiances by last name only (as when Elizabeth tells Jane "I love [Darcy:] better than I do Bingley"), but for a lady to refer to a gentleman by his last name was very coarse. I suspect Mrs. Elton thinks she is being very "modern", parading her more worldly manners before the locals, but it is not correct. Even married women, in public, referred to their husbands as "Mr. _____"
We could be really vulgar and call him Mr. K! LOL!I thought it weird at first that he didn't have horses, too. The thing that struck me most odd was that he doesn't seem to ride for pleasure or hunt. It seems he is a very busy and hardworking man! In his leisure time he is visiting neighbors and doesn't take part in many of the usual gentlemanly pursuits, besides playing whist.
If you'd like to know about what Mr. Knightley is thinking throughout the course of "Emma" you should check out this new series by Barbara Cornthwaite called George Knightley, Esquire. Only the first book "Charity Envieth Not" is out. It is in the same vein as Pamela Aidan's Trilogy and Susan Kaye's two books if you are familiar with them. I highly recommend it, here is my review of it: http://janeaustenreviews.blogspot.com...
In 1812, or about a year prior to her beginning to write Emma, Jane Austen wrote the following when her elder brother Edward formally changed his last name to Knight:"I must learn to make a better K"
And perhaps that's why JA has Emma say to Mr. Knightley:
"I will not promise even to equal the elegant terseness of Mrs Elton, by calling you Mr K. --"
Jeannette wrote: "I think that the woman playing Jane Fairfax was lovely! "That's funny! As I was watching I was thinking she was a perfect Jane Fairfax because she wasn't a beauty, which is perhaps one reason she worked so hard at accomplishments. Not that she's unattractive, not at all. But to my eye, she's got character and pleasantness and certainly accomplishment, but not loveliness.
Meredith wrote: "We could be really vulgar and call him Mr. K! LOL!I thought it weird at first that he didn't have horses, too. The thing that struck me most odd was that he doesn't seem to ride for pleasure or hunt. It seems he is a very busy and hardworking man! In his leisure time he is visiting neighbors and doesn't take part in many of the usual gentlemanly pursuits, besides playing whist. "
I didn't see where he was that busy or hardworking. The only time we see him working at all, that I recall, is when he talks with Mr. Martin about the farm, and there he really just gives Martin his head. He seems to spend most of his time lounging around Hartfield!
Everyman wrote: "Meredith wrote: "We could be really vulgar and call him Mr. K! LOL!I thought it weird at first that he didn't have horses, too. The thing that struck me most odd was that he doesn't seem to ride..."
He is also shown to be hardworking by his attending to parish meetings regularly at the Crown and by his being a magistrate (he didn't have to, and many landowners of his standing weren't doing it because of all the extra work it involved for no pay). He also works very closely with his bailiff, William Larkins, which means he was very involved with his farm and his tenants (compare Henry Crawford, who lets his less-than-sterling bailiff run everything while he idles his time away elsewhere). Even the strawberries he is growing show his attention to new developments in agriculture. I think he is very hardworking.
I think so, too. I think he spent his evenings at Hartfield, but during the day he attended to a lot of things. Remember, he was contacted concerning the gypsies, so he may have indirectly supervised their work, also.
Everyman wrote: "Jeannette wrote: "I think that the woman playing Jane Fairfax was lovely! "
That's funny! As I was watching I was thinking she was a perfect Jane Fairfax because she wasn't a beauty, which is per..."
I found her to be very pretty, in a sweet way. I think she was the prettiest of the cast. In all of the Austen films, who do you consider to be a beauty? (just curious)
That's funny! As I was watching I was thinking she was a perfect Jane Fairfax because she wasn't a beauty, which is per..."
I found her to be very pretty, in a sweet way. I think she was the prettiest of the cast. In all of the Austen films, who do you consider to be a beauty? (just curious)
I was just thinking that another reason Mr. Knightley didn't use his carriage was because he could walk everywhere he wanted to go (or go on horseback). He probably did shoot on his estate, but JA didn't mention it.
And, this book was all about Emma and her concerns, so we really don't get to see much of Knightley away from Emma.
And, this book was all about Emma and her concerns, so we really don't get to see much of Knightley away from Emma.
In all of the Austen films, who do you consider to be a beauty? "I'm not ducking the question, but I just don't have a good enough visual memory to be able to say. In this Emma, I think Harriet is the closest to a classic beauty. Jane Bennett is supposed to be the most beautiful of the Bennett sisters, isn't she? But I don't recall the actresses who play her in films. My mind just doesn't work that way.
For me, after all, there are only three truly beautiful women in the world -- my wife and my daughters.
Spoken like a true gentleman! What a happy household you must live in. :)
Mod
I chatted with GR member Darcy not long back and during our discussion about the economics of the time. She pointed out the widespread financial problems of the time.
I also found some great articles about money and Emma. Some of you may have read them, but if not you might check these out.
Money in Emma
http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-l...
The Cost of Keeping a Horse
http://www.janeausten.co.uk/magazine/...
So these gave me ideas of the bigger picture and why he might economize about his horses and carriage. Also, Austen might have created a different type of romantic main character in Knightley (ok, my manners may be lacking!)-- one that, in a period of unstable finances, is calmly making it work. Practical and able to take care of himself. He really isn't living the high life of characters in other Austen novels and he doesn't care about impressions enough to spend his troubled income on renting horses for his carriage to go to dinner.
The Money in Emma article mentions also that Knightley is impressive in his understanding of what others around him are going through. Emma sees the suffering of the poor and pays them visits and brings them food. But she doesn't see the true money struggles of her middle class friends -- the ones who try to maintain their place within her circle.
I think it is interesting too that the book Emma isn't really about showy wealth. These people are genteel but even Emma doesn't flaunt her wealth -- this story would have never worked if she had. And as the story concludes, Austen says that Emma and Knigtley "have no taste for finery or parade.."
Mod
Mod
I thought it weird at first that he didn't have horses, too. The thing that struck me most odd was that he doesn't seem to ride for pleasure o..."
Barbara Cornthwaite is that recently published Knightley variation/retelling, right?
Knightley also seems a very patient man, very attentive to Mr. Woodhouse and never seeming frustrated with him. He also seems to give attention to the little Knightleys of John's family. His pursuits seems more focused on family and village life, rather than hunting parties maybe. I am thinking of Bingley in P&P now, more carefree with the money rolling in, finding the good hunting spots and enjoying himself in London. But he was a great character too, kind and friendly and marrying his true love.
Sarah wrote: "Meredith wrote: "We could be really vulgar and call him Mr. K! LOL!I thought it weird at first that he didn't have horses, too. The thing that struck me most odd was that he doesn't seem to ride..."
Yes! Sorry I didn't include more about the book. It is a retelling of Emma through Mr. Knightley's eyes and it is fantastic! I loved finding out what Mr. Knightley thought about the whole Elton/Emma/Harriet thing, you know he suspected something! In addition, it is nice to see what he does all day, he is VERY busy. He is busy being the magistrate, is always at the Crown on parish business, checking on his tenants, improving his estate, discussing accounts with William Larkins, etc. It is a nice change to see the story through his eyes. I loved the book and cannot wait for book two to come out!
Here it is on goodreads:
George Knightley, Esquire: Charity Envieth Not
Isn't the cover lovely?
I'm now off to look at those articles you posted, Sarah! Thanks for posting them!
Mod
Mr. Knightley is one of the few Austen "heroes" without any baggage, so to speak. All the rest, except for Henry Tilney, have some personal battle going on: Darcy's pride, Wentworth's resentment, some obstacle they have to overcome. I really like that about Knightley, he is solid and constant, a very mature character.
Everyman wrote: "Jeannette wrote: "Handsome rich guy!"Well, of course. Aren't all Austen's heros handsome?
To women, of course.
Actually, though, I wonder whether the women here think the Knightley in the ..."
I'm actually fond of all of the Knightly's i've sceen so far. ^^ I'll take one of each. Course after learning he is a magistrate in the book my infatuation with him as gone up a notch. "I'll work for you Mr. Knightly. See See i have a degree that has the word law in it". ^^
Good for you, Melissa! We'll have to get rid of Emma somehow. :)
Jeannette wrote: "Good for you, Melissa! We'll have to get rid of Emma somehow. :)"^^ As bad as it sounds, i'd be willing to be the mistress for Mr. Knightly just as long as i could be with him. lol
I think you should have set your sights on Henry Crawford or William Elliot! I think Mr. Knightley is a bit too "upright" to take your offer. lol
Jeannette wrote: "I think you should have set your sights on Henry Crawford or William Elliot! I think Mr. Knightley is a bit too "upright" to take your offer. lol"I actually haven't gotten to read them yet so i'm not sure... ^o~ Anyways, i'm sure i can "loosen" up Knightly. I'll just bring some vokda and cocktails and we'll see where we are then. ^^
Melissa wrote: "Jeannette wrote: "I think you should have set your sights on Henry Crawford or William Elliot! I think Mr. Knightley is a bit too "upright" to take your offer. lol"
I actually haven't gotten to..."
Definitely Henry Crawford (Mansfield Park). Sounds like just the guy for cocktails!
I actually haven't gotten to..."
Definitely Henry Crawford (Mansfield Park). Sounds like just the guy for cocktails!
Jeannette wrote: "Melissa wrote: "Jeannette wrote: "I think you should have set your sights on Henry Crawford or William Elliot! I think Mr. Knightley is a bit too "upright" to take your offer. lol"I actually hav..."
I'm borrowing Mansfield park right now from someone and i might have to watch it now. It's the 4 hour edition one and i'm not really do anything tomorrow.... ^^
Have fun -- I'll be watching football. What year did the video come out? I've only seen the newest version, from last year.
Jeannette wrote: "Have fun -- I'll be watching football. What year did the video come out? I've only seen the newest version, from last year."I could never get into football. My father and brothers will be watching though. Probably best i'll be upstairs watching this. Things can get rowdy during football. lol
It was made the year i was born, 1986. It's from BBC and it stars Anna Massey & Bernard Hepton. It's 261 mintues long.
Hope you enjoy it! Great way to escape from your brothers!
Melissa wrote: "It was made the year i was born, 1986. It's from BBC and it stars Anna Massey & Bernard Hepton. It's 261 mintues long."Please tell me how you like it. I've been watching that version of Mansfield Park too, but am finding it pretty boring. I think the adaptations of Jane Austen's books have really improved since it was made.
Alicia wrote: "Melissa wrote: "It was made the year i was born, 1986. It's from BBC and it stars Anna Massey & Bernard Hepton. It's 261 mintues long."Please tell me how you like it. I've been watching that v..."
I will. ^^ I'm still watching it, but i plan to be finished some time early this week. I do agree that they're pretty... slow. The music is also a bit dated and doesn't help.
I have only seen the current production (2008). I hope you enjoy the story.
I know this sounds crass. Who is wealthier Emma or Mr. Knightley? My presumption after reading the novel is Mr Knightley. But sometimes I question this notion as Mr. Woodhouse is reluctant to give Emma the carriage (at some point in the novel) and so is Mr. Knightley to use one. Were they of the same social class? I assume so as Emma’s elder sister is married to Mr. Knightley’s brother. Thank you for responses in advance.
They were certainly of the same class in Highbury. The Woodhouses seemed to be financially independent. They owned their estate but didn't farm it (I think it was on the small side). And Emma spoke of being able to remain unmarried because her wealth gave her independence and kept her from looking silly (she said something like that!). Mr. Knightley owned all of the surrounding farmlands -- the Martins worked for him. I think Mr. Woodhouse didn't want Emma to ever leave the house, didn't want to trouble his coachman, James, etc. Knightley worked his estate and didn't want to use his horses to carry him about when he was quite capable of walking everywhere!
Mr. Knightley was richer than the Bennetts, but poorer than Mr. Darcy (P&P). Your question was not crass, because a good part of the book was about Emma being very conscious of her position among the "first" families of Highbury, and the relative poverty of Miss Bates and Jane Fairfax.
Hope that makes it a bit clearer. :)
Mr. Knightley was richer than the Bennetts, but poorer than Mr. Darcy (P&P). Your question was not crass, because a good part of the book was about Emma being very conscious of her position among the "first" families of Highbury, and the relative poverty of Miss Bates and Jane Fairfax.
Hope that makes it a bit clearer. :)
Mr. Knightley was "land rich and cash poor" as they say. The Woodhouses may have had more cash for luxuries, but their estate was small, not as important as Mr. Knightley's.
At one point in the novel, Mr. Knightley is said to have "little spare money" (one reason he doesn't keep horses). Donwell is entailed upon the male heir, whom Emma presumes will be Henry, Isabella and John's eldest son (of course a son of her's and Mr. Knightley's will precede him). Mr. Knightley's income would be derived from that - that is, income from working the farms and the rents.Mr. Woodhouse's reluctance to use the carriage seems prompted by his own desire to go anywhere and he expresses concern for James (evidently the groom) and the horses - when he protests that James will not like to put up the horses for a short trip to Randalls, Emma reminds him that James's daughter works there, and the trip will give him the opportunity to see her.
Emma has $30,000, a great deal - a very large fortune. Georgiana Darcy and Miss Morton (in Sense and Sensibility) have equal fortunes, and while Anne deBourgh's fortune is not mentioned (I don't think), it is "very large" - and the property isn't entailed away from her.
Which brings up an interesting question about Hartfield - it doesn't appear that it's entailed. Would it be bequeathed to one of the Woodhouse daughters, or both, in trust?
janetility.com
It certainly isn't mentioned what will happen to Hartfield when Mr. W. dies. I just assume it will stay in the family somehow, as Emma never complains about an entailment. And, she tells Miss Smith that she will be a happy spinster, able to live comfortably.
Jeannette wrote: "It certainly isn't mentioned what will happen to Hartfield when Mr. W. dies. I just assume it will stay in the family somehow, as Emma never complains about an entailment. And, she tells Miss Smi..."J. wrote: " At one point in the novel, Mr. Knightley is said to have "little spare money" (one reason he doesn't keep horses). Donwell is entailed upon the male heir, whom Emma presumes will be Henry, Isab..."
The way i understood things were that the next male in line gets the estate. That could be a cousin, second cousin, ect.. There was some cases though where an estate and title could be left to a female. I believe this was hard to do, but it's something i'm sure Mr. Woodhouse would take the time, effort, and money to ensure. It's a good possibility that the estate is to go to both Emma and Isabelle and upon their deaths go to Isabelle's heirs since she was the eldest.
Lady Catherine held on to Rosings, so women could keep property and wealth. I don't think all estates were entailed automatically, but I think a lot of families set things up that way, to keep things in the family, specifically so that a man couldn't marry into an estate.
An entail was a written document that specified, among other things, how the family property passed down. Not all property was entailed - unentailed property could be disposed of in a will. In fact, entailed property was not owned by the tenant - he was a sort of custodian. It was presumed that he would keep the property up to pass on to the next generation. Working farms, the sale of timber (when it was permitted) and income from marriage settlements were how a landed gentleman go his income. If he overspent his income, he might have to resort to vacating and renting out his property and renting less expensive quarters for himself and his family, as Sir Walter Elliot was compelled to do in Persuasion.Rosings was not entailed "away from" the female line, which meant that it would go to Anne deBourgh. Was Rosings the property of Lady Catherine, inherited from her family or Sir Lewis, entailed but not away from the females? Because if it had been the property of Sir Lewis, entailed upon his daughter, then it would have fallen to her upon his death - Lady Catherine might have something like a life interest, but Anne would be the mistress.
Entailed property might also go "through" the female line - if there were no sons, rather than going to a distant male relation, it might go to the son of a daughter. This was incorporated into the plot of "Lady Vernon and Her Daughter".
janetility.com
I have attempted to understand entailment on several occasions. If Emma and Mr. Knightley had a son, would he become an heir to Hartfield? Would he also receive a significant income from the farms of Donnell Abby? I am happy to know that entailment could go down the female line. Thank Heaven for that.
Any son of Mr. Knightley would inherit Donwell. That's why Emma kept defending little Henry's (John's son) claims to Donwell when Mrs. Weston hinted that Knightley might be considering marriage.
I'm not sure how Hartfield is set up. It wasn't really explained in the story.
I'm not sure how Hartfield is set up. It wasn't really explained in the story.
Jeannette wrote: "Any son of Mr. Knightley would inherit Donwell. That's why Emma kept defending little Henry's (John's son) claims to Donwell when Mrs. Weston hinted that Knightley might be considering marriage...."
I think it may go to both Emma and Isabel upon Mr. Woodhouse's death, but inevitably be left to Isabel's children since she was the eldest.
Could be. I haven't really studied 19th century British property law. :) I don't understand all the details in my own will! (I keep thinking about it.....)
Mod
I didn't know, as J. described, that an entail could allow property to pass to a daughter so that an unborn male would eventually take over the property. Was the daughter of the last generation looked at as the custodian, J.?
That is the end of my knowledge, but it is all interesting. It doesn't seem to come into play with the Woodhouses, because their investments must have been providing the wealth that Emma would inherit, rather than income from the land. I guess the Knightley family was more the ancient landowner and the Woodhouses were newer owners (comparatively) as was P&P's Charles Bingley -- although he was so new he hadn't even bought property yet -- but you get what I am saying.
The subject of the entail is complicated - this is the bare bones of it: Disposing of landed property was done in two ways - a "fee simple" or a "fee tail". "Fee simple" meant that the landholder owned the land and could dispose of it by will to anyone he or she wished. "Fee tail" was a document that restricted the inheritance of property; entailed land was not owned by the inheritor - he was a custodian and could not sell, mortgage or dispose of it in his will. Most fiction deals with the "fee tail male" (primogeniture), meaning the property would pass down to the eldest son (Darcy inherits Pemberley), or to the nearest male relation (Mr. Collins inherits Longbourn). "Fee tail" was not restricted to males, however - a woman could inherit property. An entail could be written on an inherited or purchased property - I think it's likely that when Bingley and Jane finally purchased their own property, an entail was written.It does not seem that Hartfield is entailed. There is nothing to prevent Mr. Woodhouse from writing an entail that would secure it for his daughters (it would probably go into a sort of trust), or his eldest grandson; this would seem most likely, as a son of Emma and Mr. Knightley would inherit Donwell.
What do we think about Mr. Knightley? Or should we call him "Knightley"?