This is really good. Whether I'm reading Emma or watching a screen adaptation, I always admire Mr. Knightley's insightful admonition of Emma, and I respect how she receives it humbly and allows the sting of it to make her a better person.
You are spot-on with your comments on how Austen gently portrays Miss Bates. I have just finished reading “Emma “ and agree that Austen has quite a knack for revealing the intricacies of human nature.
As I sit here watching Emma - the Masterpiece version, with Romola, not that hideous trash with Taylor or the insipid one with Beckinsale - this has been a great read. Especially, as more and more each day I feel like Mrs. Bates, and not a great heroine.
This is one of my favorite scenes from Emma! We are all both Miss Bates and Emma and called to be so much more. Thanks! I so enjoy your writing!! And fall always put me in an Austen mood so excited for the season shift! 🍁
Mrs. Bates tea!!! LOL. Doesn't she remark on her own loquacity somewhere? I like to think she'd have the self-awareness (by the end of the novel) to make such a joke herself. That Box Hill scene is probably my #1 secondhand embarrassment scene in all of literature! Have you ever read Miss Read? She continues that legacy of smiling at her characters without punching down.
I am so honored to be quoted. Thank you for a thought-provoking post!
I enjoyed this piece very much. But I think there is a sense in which Jane Austen does punch down. I am thinking of the character of Mrs. Bennet in Pride and Prejudice.
An author is the god of her little world; she arranges her characters and situations as she pleases. Austen has chosen to make Mrs. Bennet as contemptible as possible. She is selfish, foolish, prolix, and shallow. Her judgment of others is invariably bad. She is partial to her worst daughters, and dislikes her best. A regular comic note in the novel is her lightning changes of opinion of others based on how she perceives how they treat the family (Mr. Collins, Bingley, Mr. Darcy, Charlotte Lucas). Her change towards Mr. Darcy is so quick and so absolute as to be difficult to believe; but it definitely puts her in a bad light. Her sole virtue is her devotion to providing for her daughters in the only way she can, by getting them married; but her witlessness repeatedly destroys their prospects. And even her devotion to her immediate family seems more an expression of self-centeredness than genuine disinterested love.
Mrs. Bennet is such an unremitting ninny I find it difficult to believe that she could have a daughter as intelligent as Elizabeth or as warm-hearted as Jane. Austen makes it clear that she is badly mistreated by her husband, who exposes her to public ridicule for his own amusement. But at the same time Austen is exposing her to our ridicule for our amusement. And lest our amusement be spoiled by any scruples of conscience, she (unlike Miss Bates) never shows any consciousness that she is being ridiculed. She is, frankly, too thick to see what is being done to her.
At the end of the novel, Elizabeth and, I think, Austen revel in the future exclusion of Mrs. Bennet and her ilk from Elizabeth’s life. There is an indication that Mrs. Bennet will not be permitted to visit Pemberley (“With what delighted pride she afterward visited Mrs. Bingley, and talked of Mrs. Darcy, may be guessed.”). That is cruel; it’s not as if Pemberley isn’t big enough to keep her out of Mr. Darcy’s way. The end of Chapter 60 speaks for itself:
“Mrs. Phillips’s vulgarity was another, and perhaps a greater, tax on his forbearance; and though Mrs. Phillips, as well as her sister, stood in too much awe of him to speak with the familiarity which Bingley’s good humour encouraged, yet, whenever she did speak, she must be vulgar. Nor was her respect for him, though it made her more quiet, at all likely to make her more elegant. Elizabeth did all she could to shield him from the frequent notice of either, and was ever anxious to keep him to herself, and to those of her family with whom he might converse without mortification; and though the uncomfortable feelings arising from all this took from the season of courtship much of its pleasure, it added to the hope of the future; and she looked forward with delight to the time when they should be removed from society so little pleasing to either, to all the comfort and elegance of their family party at Pemberley.”
Elizabeth is moving to a more rarefied aristocracy. It is an aristocracy of genuine excellence rather than of birth, which is why the Gardiners are admitted. But it is exclusionary nonetheless.
(I think a similar analysis could be made of the character of Harriet Smith in Emma, but I am less familiar with that novel.)
Non sequitur: have you ever read Pamela? It may not be your cup of tea, since basically it’s about a woman taming her would-be rapist. But it’s a strange sort of proto-P&P, if all the main characters were cavemen and -women. Could England really have become that much more civilized between 1740 and 1813?
Thank you so much for this insightful and thought-provoking comment! I'm sorry it took a little while for me to respond-- I wanted to give it the time and consideration it is due.
I think you are spot-on that Elizabeth chooses to revel in the exclusion of her mother from her future life. I have to admit, I'm not sure I blame her. Were I in a similar position, I don't know that I would act differently. As a devotee of Austen, I want to defend her, the author and narrator, against an accusation of unjustness, but I'm not sure I can. I think you are right that she feels amused and uncompassionate toward Mrs. Bennet at the end of the story, and doesn't give her any opportunity for redemption or self-improvement. She is a silly woman who is doomed to be a silly woman for all time.
From a purely worldly perspective, of course, Mrs. Bennet does get a happy ending that she perhaps does not deserve. Several of her daughters are married, and at least two to men of consequence, and she will never be poor and alone like Jane Austen and her mother and sister were in real life. One could say Mrs. Bennet should be content with what she got, especially considering she never made any attempt in her earlier life to join the "aristocracy of genuine excellence" you mentioned. I do sometimes wonder how much of Mrs. Bennet may have been inspired by Jane Austen's own mother; if the elder Cassandra Austen was as difficult in real life as Jane's letters hint, and if she was even a fraction as oblivious as Mrs. Bennet, she might have been very accurately portrayed on the page by a daughter who chose to be passive-aggressive in venting her feelings, secure in the knowledge that her mother would never be able to recognize herself.
It's a sombering thought. I still maintain the bones of my argument; that Austen does not ask us to laugh at people who cannot help being the way that they are. I think the very fact that Jane and Elizabeth *are* good and insightful (respectively) shows that Mrs. Bennet could have taken a different course in life, had she bothered to trouble herself. In that sense, I don't think our amusement at Mrs. Bennet's foibles is altogether unkind. But I do think you've raised a very good point and it's making me consider if, perhaps, in some ways Elizabeth Bennet is one of the least admirable of Austen's heroines despite her overarching likability. (new essay?? Must think on it some more.)
Well thanks for this thoughtful response! I know nothing about Austen’s life or family — if she could be the product of a mother like Mrs. Bennet, then so could Jane and Elizabeth.
I’d be very interested in any further thoughts you had about Elizabeth. I admire her very much, despite my comment — I think she shows Homeric-level bravery in the confrontation with Lady Catherine and even Darcy’s first proposal. For most of us our vices are the opposite side of the coin from our virtues; I think her tendency toward pride is far outweighed by her courage and self-possession. As a young woman in her marriageable years and with that family/economic situation, she is under terrible pressure from the beginning of the novel to the last few pages.
Check out “The Other Bennet Sister,” which is told from Mary’s POV. Mrs. B & Mary live with Jane after Mr. B’a death. Mary, the target of Caroline Bingley, then moves in with Elizabeth & Mr. Darcy. The author captures the insularity of the Darcys quite well. It’s also well-written.
Thanks for the link. Interesting observations and now I can’t help wondering what a Mr. Collins and Lydia relationship would look like. And what Lady Catherine would think of it!
This is really good. Whether I'm reading Emma or watching a screen adaptation, I always admire Mr. Knightley's insightful admonition of Emma, and I respect how she receives it humbly and allows the sting of it to make her a better person.
Yes! It's a master class in how to rebuke a friend and how to proceed after a rebuke from a friend.
You are spot-on with your comments on how Austen gently portrays Miss Bates. I have just finished reading “Emma “ and agree that Austen has quite a knack for revealing the intricacies of human nature.
As I sit here watching Emma - the Masterpiece version, with Romola, not that hideous trash with Taylor or the insipid one with Beckinsale - this has been a great read. Especially, as more and more each day I feel like Mrs. Bates, and not a great heroine.
What a beautifully written piece. The best kind, for it contains a lesson within.
This is one of my favorite scenes from Emma! We are all both Miss Bates and Emma and called to be so much more. Thanks! I so enjoy your writing!! And fall always put me in an Austen mood so excited for the season shift! 🍁
Mrs. Bates tea!!! LOL. Doesn't she remark on her own loquacity somewhere? I like to think she'd have the self-awareness (by the end of the novel) to make such a joke herself. That Box Hill scene is probably my #1 secondhand embarrassment scene in all of literature! Have you ever read Miss Read? She continues that legacy of smiling at her characters without punching down.
I am so honored to be quoted. Thank you for a thought-provoking post!
I enjoyed this piece very much. But I think there is a sense in which Jane Austen does punch down. I am thinking of the character of Mrs. Bennet in Pride and Prejudice.
An author is the god of her little world; she arranges her characters and situations as she pleases. Austen has chosen to make Mrs. Bennet as contemptible as possible. She is selfish, foolish, prolix, and shallow. Her judgment of others is invariably bad. She is partial to her worst daughters, and dislikes her best. A regular comic note in the novel is her lightning changes of opinion of others based on how she perceives how they treat the family (Mr. Collins, Bingley, Mr. Darcy, Charlotte Lucas). Her change towards Mr. Darcy is so quick and so absolute as to be difficult to believe; but it definitely puts her in a bad light. Her sole virtue is her devotion to providing for her daughters in the only way she can, by getting them married; but her witlessness repeatedly destroys their prospects. And even her devotion to her immediate family seems more an expression of self-centeredness than genuine disinterested love.
Mrs. Bennet is such an unremitting ninny I find it difficult to believe that she could have a daughter as intelligent as Elizabeth or as warm-hearted as Jane. Austen makes it clear that she is badly mistreated by her husband, who exposes her to public ridicule for his own amusement. But at the same time Austen is exposing her to our ridicule for our amusement. And lest our amusement be spoiled by any scruples of conscience, she (unlike Miss Bates) never shows any consciousness that she is being ridiculed. She is, frankly, too thick to see what is being done to her.
At the end of the novel, Elizabeth and, I think, Austen revel in the future exclusion of Mrs. Bennet and her ilk from Elizabeth’s life. There is an indication that Mrs. Bennet will not be permitted to visit Pemberley (“With what delighted pride she afterward visited Mrs. Bingley, and talked of Mrs. Darcy, may be guessed.”). That is cruel; it’s not as if Pemberley isn’t big enough to keep her out of Mr. Darcy’s way. The end of Chapter 60 speaks for itself:
“Mrs. Phillips’s vulgarity was another, and perhaps a greater, tax on his forbearance; and though Mrs. Phillips, as well as her sister, stood in too much awe of him to speak with the familiarity which Bingley’s good humour encouraged, yet, whenever she did speak, she must be vulgar. Nor was her respect for him, though it made her more quiet, at all likely to make her more elegant. Elizabeth did all she could to shield him from the frequent notice of either, and was ever anxious to keep him to herself, and to those of her family with whom he might converse without mortification; and though the uncomfortable feelings arising from all this took from the season of courtship much of its pleasure, it added to the hope of the future; and she looked forward with delight to the time when they should be removed from society so little pleasing to either, to all the comfort and elegance of their family party at Pemberley.”
Elizabeth is moving to a more rarefied aristocracy. It is an aristocracy of genuine excellence rather than of birth, which is why the Gardiners are admitted. But it is exclusionary nonetheless.
(I think a similar analysis could be made of the character of Harriet Smith in Emma, but I am less familiar with that novel.)
Non sequitur: have you ever read Pamela? It may not be your cup of tea, since basically it’s about a woman taming her would-be rapist. But it’s a strange sort of proto-P&P, if all the main characters were cavemen and -women. Could England really have become that much more civilized between 1740 and 1813?
Thank you so much for this insightful and thought-provoking comment! I'm sorry it took a little while for me to respond-- I wanted to give it the time and consideration it is due.
I think you are spot-on that Elizabeth chooses to revel in the exclusion of her mother from her future life. I have to admit, I'm not sure I blame her. Were I in a similar position, I don't know that I would act differently. As a devotee of Austen, I want to defend her, the author and narrator, against an accusation of unjustness, but I'm not sure I can. I think you are right that she feels amused and uncompassionate toward Mrs. Bennet at the end of the story, and doesn't give her any opportunity for redemption or self-improvement. She is a silly woman who is doomed to be a silly woman for all time.
From a purely worldly perspective, of course, Mrs. Bennet does get a happy ending that she perhaps does not deserve. Several of her daughters are married, and at least two to men of consequence, and she will never be poor and alone like Jane Austen and her mother and sister were in real life. One could say Mrs. Bennet should be content with what she got, especially considering she never made any attempt in her earlier life to join the "aristocracy of genuine excellence" you mentioned. I do sometimes wonder how much of Mrs. Bennet may have been inspired by Jane Austen's own mother; if the elder Cassandra Austen was as difficult in real life as Jane's letters hint, and if she was even a fraction as oblivious as Mrs. Bennet, she might have been very accurately portrayed on the page by a daughter who chose to be passive-aggressive in venting her feelings, secure in the knowledge that her mother would never be able to recognize herself.
It's a sombering thought. I still maintain the bones of my argument; that Austen does not ask us to laugh at people who cannot help being the way that they are. I think the very fact that Jane and Elizabeth *are* good and insightful (respectively) shows that Mrs. Bennet could have taken a different course in life, had she bothered to trouble herself. In that sense, I don't think our amusement at Mrs. Bennet's foibles is altogether unkind. But I do think you've raised a very good point and it's making me consider if, perhaps, in some ways Elizabeth Bennet is one of the least admirable of Austen's heroines despite her overarching likability. (new essay?? Must think on it some more.)
Well thanks for this thoughtful response! I know nothing about Austen’s life or family — if she could be the product of a mother like Mrs. Bennet, then so could Jane and Elizabeth.
I’d be very interested in any further thoughts you had about Elizabeth. I admire her very much, despite my comment — I think she shows Homeric-level bravery in the confrontation with Lady Catherine and even Darcy’s first proposal. For most of us our vices are the opposite side of the coin from our virtues; I think her tendency toward pride is far outweighed by her courage and self-possession. As a young woman in her marriageable years and with that family/economic situation, she is under terrible pressure from the beginning of the novel to the last few pages.
Check out “The Other Bennet Sister,” which is told from Mary’s POV. Mrs. B & Mary live with Jane after Mr. B’a death. Mary, the target of Caroline Bingley, then moves in with Elizabeth & Mr. Darcy. The author captures the insularity of the Darcys quite well. It’s also well-written.
In his article from December of 2023, Joshua Gibbs makes a pretty convincing case for Elizabeth Bennet being much like her mother. You'd probably enjoy perusing it. https://circeinstitute.org/blog/reflections-on-reading-pride-prejudice-nine-times-in-the-last-three-years/
Thanks for the link. Interesting observations and now I can’t help wondering what a Mr. Collins and Lydia relationship would look like. And what Lady Catherine would think of it!
this is lovely and evergreen for people who try to be virtuous online, thanks.
it brings to mind a letter that robert louis stevenson wrote in defense of fr damien (with the lepers of molokai) against a pastor who criticized him. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/281/281-h/281-h.htm