The Voices of Men in Praise
Of Jane Austen
Messages
Beginning April 11, 1999
Dear Folks,
Here is what I need: A good solid twenty minute talk that I could give on Jane Austen. I got to thinking about it today as I was driving back from a civic club where I had done my world famous talk, "The Civil War In Fifteen Minutes." I have several speeches rattling around loose in my head and can spring to a podium in a heartbeat. If I was any kind of man at all I could come up with something to say about our lady that would entertain instead of bore. The more I think about it the farther away I get from any ideas at all. Remember, the groups to which I talk tend to be adults who can just get up and run for their lives as opposed to school kids who are trapped.
Emma’s, "One half the world can not understand the pleasures of the other", could be re-worked to "99.999% per cent of the world is afraid that one of the remaining .001% will trap them and force them to listen to a talk about Jane Austen and her works." This situation is, as you might have heard me say before, completely the fault of teachers. Never the less, those of us who are still standing after the educational system has done its best to ruin us should be able to say something which will shed some light and at the same time entertain. The question is WHAT? We have biographical information on which to draw, but lets face it, Jane Austen is no Mary Wollstonecraft. (I can hardly wait for her birthday!) We have the six novels, but what do I say about them? I can not suggest throwing Marianne in the duck pond. Whereas my audience knows what a duck pond is, they would have no idea who Marianne Dashwood was. Of course, I could tell them, but how long would that take and would anyone still be awake?
I am beginning to see us as very similar to the bookpeople in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Here we are living in the woods talking about our books while the world spins off in another direction. And by the way, its not the language that keeps people from reading Jane Austen. Its perception. My very own wife (not the one that’s lost - the other one) says of Jane Austen, "Who wants to read that slow moving stuff?" Well, me for one, but she does have a point and it’s based on a perception. Go up to someone on the street and say to him or her. "Tell me how you feel about Jane Austen." What you are going to get back will be negative stuff like my wife’s feelings.
So, our work is cut out for us and I am having trouble coming to grips with it. If you guys would divide the time up and each give me five minutes worth of stuff, I could put it all together and presto, I would have the speech I need.
Or, I could just change my topic to Mary Wollstonecraft.
PS Oh, and I need a good punchline. I always leave then laughing.
Dear Ray,
How about a brief comparative study of the humour of Jane Austen, especially the private humour expressed in her letters, with the humour of modern Britain as expressed in, say, Fawlty Towers? The tone and style is remarkably similar - and it will give you an opportunity to quote lots of jokes, if nothing else!
Just a thought.
Julie
Dear Ray,
Well, for beginners, is Jane Austen so very different from the folks in your audience? I mean can't you connect her in that way. After all, our lady was a country woman, even a southern country woman at that. Well, there is one difference - most of your audience will have had a lot more formal education than Jane Austen. Her life was tied up in her family and she certainly did not belong to some intellectual or literary coterie. This is nothing like the Yankee ideal of the way a novelist should spend her life; our Lady wasn't even neurotic. Jane Austen was the great amateur who had the audacity to write some of the greatest novels in the history of our language - how dare she! Remember what Auden said about Jane Austen
"But tell Jane Austen, that is if you dare,
How much her
novels are beloved down here.
She wrote them for posterity, she
said;
'Twas rash, but by posterity she's read."
Of course, that whole damn family was audacious - didn't know their place - hadn't a clue. What was in that mama's cooking?
You don't have to wait for the 28th; if you already know what you want to say, just submit it to me now and I will sit on it before posting it on Mary Wollstonecraft Day.
(Neither you nor Julie need any coaching with punch lines.)
Dear Folks,
Well. I did not get five minutes from anybody but I did get some starting points. The thing about Jane Austen being much like us has potential. I could use the book What Charles Dickens Ate, What Jane Austen Knew, (or is it the other way around?) The humor thing I am not able to think about clearly. The humor in Jane Austen seems to me to be more of the brilliant insight or the clever turn of a phrase, not the kind of thing that would play out of context to a civic club audience. I often laugh out loud at our lady’s use of language, but how to pass that humor along out of the full context of the works? In short, forget irony--- give examples of laugh out loud humor in the works of Jane Austen. Miss Bates prattling on is funny as all get out, but how to give examples? Tilney’s gothic parody is hysterical, but to try and extract it and use it in a speech is beyond me. Mr. Woodhouse and his gruel are a hoot but who can make it funny out of context? It seems that I will be reduced to saying, "Hey, Jane Austen is really funny - read some and see." That is not going to work. I need some real help here. For instance - Fawlty Towers - ?? That strikes me as the opposite of Jane Austen. Clearly I have a lot to learn.
If I can pull this speech off, it will replace my speech entitled "The Librarian Goes to Europe, and Is Here Today to Show Us His Slides", as the speech with the most potential to be boring. Just imagine, you go to a meeting and the program for today is "The Librarian Speaks on Jane Austen, Her Works and Her Life." Man if that won't set them heading for the doors, I don’t know what will.
P.S. For years I have been trying to come up with a title which would be the opposite of the most boring title and my nomination for the title that would keep the civic club guys waiting in eager anticipation is this: "The Librarian Goes to Nevada and is Here Today to Show His Slides of the Houses of Prostitution In That State".
From Tasmania: Oooh!! Do
tell about Nevada! -
Julie
Dear Ray,
Perhaps you should just go with the trite and true: The Unified Theory of Jane: all modern western culture is derivative of Jane Austen:
Next week you could give the companion speech which shows how Charlotte
Bronte is responsible for nuclear proliferation, ozone depletion, drive by
shootings, loud rap music, and chainsawing dead animals in half then calling it
"performance art."
Cheryl
Dear Ray,
I am the one that started the ripple of fussy complaints about teachers concentrating on "irony" and that grew into a community-wide critique of teaching. This has been a wave that did not carry me along with it entirely. Still, there is an important truth in all this that I would characterize in the following way. To a certain extent, schooling is a renewal of class boundaries and, therefore, school is the cradle of the next elite group. This is done by placing intellectual barriers between people. A specific example is the teaching of jargon in English courses; a jargon that can only be learned by the more intelligent and more diligent who, thereby, can separate themselves from the less inclined. In this way, young people are taught the gang signs that are used to quickly identify other elite. (What a wonderful contribution that psychology and the other voodoo arts have made to these educational goals in our century.) Of course, a price has to be paid; the non-elite are forever alienated from the great writers - it can't be helped. This is crazy! It is the equivalent of alienating the villagers from the wiser village elders and placing them under the influence of the village idiots. My sense is that you might agree with this and it is your struggle to move against this tendency - Bravo. You seem to be the populist librarian - why else would you think so hard about what to say about Jane Austen to a civic group? Perhaps these notions of mine help explain my first post in this conversation.
If I have this right, then your focus should be to put her human face back onto Jane Austen. In fact, this sort of thing has been done, unconsciously, by many others; I am thinking about the Jane Austen Societies which, to me, seem populist organizations. Also, we are told of the everyman style of management of today's Chawton Cottage. I suppose that I am being too serious because when one appears for fifteen minutes before a civic group, he had better be funny for about ten of those minutes or he won't be invited back. Still, I would try to integrate some humanizing anecdotes about Jane Austen's life.
April 21st is the 240th anniversary of Mary Wollstonecraft's birth date. Mary was a contemporary of Jane Austen and, in their day, was far more famous than Jane. She was a political radical, a radical feminist, and a radical, bisexual, free-love advocate. She was a woman of the nineties (the 1790s). If you have never heard of her, that is not her fault, and here is a link to far more than you can possibly want to know of Mary Wollstonecraft. I am in a love-hate relationship with her memory, but mostly love; so, in her honor, I am declaring April 28 as
The First Annual Mary Wollstonecraft Day
a.k.a.
Male Voices
Political Postings Day
You are invited to make a political posting on that day on nearly any subject. You might do that because you are political or because you think it might be fun to simulate that style. Perhaps you are pro-choice or perhaps you are pro-life - post in either case. Perhaps you are against the death penalty or perhaps you prefer to make a modest proposal to reinstate human sacrifice - let us hear about it. On the other hand, you might choose to be more profound by posting on Kosovo or on our President or by submitting a tightly reasoned thesis on why the county library system of south Georgia can serve as the model for world government. There is only one restriction - no fascism, not even in jest. I may not be making myself clear because Mr. Anonymous of northern New Jersey has informed me that he is going to use this occasion for submitting his "Why I think Dr Ross should return to ER". Well - OK - I will post that, but that is not exactly the sort of thing I had in mind. You want a guideline? OK! - try to excite Mary Wollstonecraft's ghost and make Jane Austen's smile.
Dear Meister,
A simple one, really. Are we defining fascism by the dictionary (for purposes of international relations I'm using the Macquarie): a governmental system with strong centralised power, permitting no opposition or criticism, controlling all affairs of the nation (industrial, commercial, etc.), emphasising an aggressive nationalism, and (often)anticommunist. 2 the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism. A fascist movement, esp. the one established in Italy by Mussolini in 1922, whence its influence spread to Germany and elsewhere. Dissolved in Italy in 1943.
OR the modern definition of: anyone who doesn't see that my personal political views are the only possibly correct ones. See: "political correctness", "multiculturalism", "feminism", "whiny baby boomers" ???? Sorry, but it had to be asked.
Dear Cheryl,
There are no definitions other than the dictionary definitions of words - anything else is ignorance and rhetoric. The number "2" entry in your dictionary comes closest to my intent, but Webster's dictionary adds this crucial phrase: "...belligerent nationalism and racism, glorification of war, etc. ..." Lord knows that racists have enough forums on the internet and don't need another one here.
Dear Cheryl,
I've had a look in my wardrobe, and I find that I do have a spare sense of
humour, that you are most welcome to borrow, if you think it might be
useful. Of course, it's an Australian one, but as you have a Macquarie
dictionary, you would probably be able to sort out any small glitches, caused by
differences in dialect.
Julie
Dear Sir,
I've tried and tried, but I'm afraid I can't agree with you about your estimation of that evening at Netherfield, and I'll show you why, from the text. The conversation in question actually originated between Darcy and Bingley:
'It is amazing to me,' said Bingley, 'how young ladies can have patience to be so very accomplished as they all are. ...... 'They all paint tables, cover skreens and net purses. I scarcely know any one who cannot do all this, and I am sure I never heard a young lady spoken of for the first time, without being informed that she was very accomplished.'
'Your list of the common extent of accomplishments,' said Darcy, 'has too much truth. The word is applied to many a woman who deserves it no otherwise than by netting a purse, or covering a screen. But I am very far from agreeing with you in your estimation of ladies in general. I cannot boast of knowing more than halfa dozen, in the whole range of my acquaintance, that are really accomplished.'
'Then,' observed Elizabeth, 'you must comprehend a great deal in your idea of an accomplished woman.''Yes, I do comprehend a great deal in it.'
'Oh! certainly,' cried [Miss Bingley], 'no one can be really esteemed accomplished, who does not greatly surpass what is usually met with. A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages, to deserve the word and besides all this, she must possess a certain something in her air and manner of walking, the tone of her voice, her address and expressions, or the word will be but half deserved.'
'All this she must possess,' added Darcy, 'and to all this she must yet add something more substantial, in the improvement of her mind by extensive reading.'
'I am no longer surprised at your knowing only six accomplished women. I rather wonder now at your knowing any. ....... 'I never saw such a woman. I never saw such capacity, and taste, and application, and elegance, as you describe, united.'
Neither have I, incidentally. Now, from this, I can't see where Darcy was defending Elizabeth? What strikes me most about the exchange is that Darcy seems to ruin his quite reasonable point about education versus 'accomplishment', by agreeing with Miss Bingley that 'all this she must possess', thus appearing to acknowledge her silly assertation of the necessity of 'a certain something in her air and walk.'
And I would have thought, given the means for education for women at the time, it would be hard to achieve the combined requirements of Miss Bingley and Mr Darcy much before the age of fifty!
When Darcy does defend Elizabeth is during the conversation that follows
immediately after, when she has left the room. And he allows himself to
reel Miss Bingley in a little, while he is about it.
Julie
Dear Julie,
I don't think you tried very hard at all. If you had, you would not have started the quote so late in the passage. If you had only started the quote a few paragraphs sooner, my point would have been made. Here is the vital preamble that you omitted.
"...On entering the drawing-room [Elizabeth] found the entire party at loo, and was immediately invited to join them; but suspecting them to be playing too high, she declined it, and making her sister the excuse, said she would amuse herself, for the short time she could stay below, with a book. Mr. Hurst looked at her with astonishment.
'Do you prefer reading to cards?' said he; 'that is rather singular.'
'Miss Eliza Bennet', said Miss Bingley, 'despises cards. She is a great reader, and has no pleasure in anything else.'
'I deserve neither such praise nor such censure,' cried Elizabeth; 'I am not a great reader, and I have pleasure in many things.' "
THAT is the part of the conversation that sets Darcy to boiling and THAT is what he is reacting to with his "accomplished women" comments. And how do we know he is boiling? We know that because of the advanced state of his feelings for Elizabeth. We are told of those only a few paragraphs still further back during a conversation that occurred in the morning of that same day. Bingley's sisters are giggling about the lowliness of Elizabeth's relatives when Bingley and then Darcy react in this way." 'If they had uncles enough to fill all Cheapside', cried Bingley, 'it would not make them one jot less agreeable.'
'But it must very materially lessen their chance of marrying men of any consideration in the world,' replied Darcy."
Where did that come from? - No one was talking of marriage. But Darcy was already thinking of it and was already in that emotional turmoil that would boil over eventually in Kent. Little wonder that he would react the way he did that evening. Many readers believe that Jane Austen should be read literally and without reference to the psychological - that Darcy's admonition about marriage should not be read as a inner conflict. I don't agree.
Finally, there is a still wider context that I mentioned last April - the context of the controversy over the Blue-Stocking Society: here is the link to that (see the final paragraph).
Dear Julie and Ashton,
My sympathies in the scene you quote are all with Mr. Hurst.
"Mrs. Hurst and Miss Bingley both cried out against the injustice of her implied doubt, and were both protesting that they knew many women who answered this description, when Mr. Hurst called them to order, with bitter complaints of their inattention to what was going forward. As all conversation was thereby at an end, Elizabeth soon afterwards left the room."
Darcy wants to flirt with Elizabeth, Elizabeth wants to tweak Miss Bingley and argue with Darcy, and Miss Bingley wants to trash Elizabeth and ingratiate herself to Darcy. The upshot: no one is paying attention to the card game! We readers, who want to hear more of the flirtatious blather, are quick to blame Mr. Hurst for putting an end to it. Let's be realistic, though. Mr. Hurst is the aggrieved party. Elizabeth refuses to play cards, and then (apparently she is, in fact, NOT a great reader) interupts the game to argue with Darcy and Miss Bingley.
Mr. Hurst may be an indolent fellow, and he is certainly not a favorite with Miss Austen or her chararacters, but he has my sympathies here. Anyone who likes games must, in fairness, join in Mr. Hurst's bitter complaints.
From the Meister: Right on, Bruce! It
is about time
that someone noticed that.
The main irony that I've found in that particular part of P. and P. is that for all of Miss Bingley's attempts to draw attention to Elizabeth's faults, she just keeps making her look better in Darcy's eyes. She forces him to defend her and all of her faults which makes him see the positive aspects of her personality more than the negative. It's also ironic that Darcy is defending her at all because at this point in the novel Elizabeth is not too keen on him.
From the Meister: You are right on all counts. But,
why doesn't
Elizabeth simply ignore Darcy? I don't know about you, but
when
I am not too keen on someone, there is no way that I would be
trapped
into any kind of conversation with him.
To all,
First of all, what is it with this pathological dislike of The Scarlet Letter around here? Of course Hester Prynne and Arthur Dimmesdale are crazy...they're supposed to be crazy! Hawthorne wrote Romances (in the original sense of the word meaning fantasy) you're not supposed to take TSL literally.
I never thought of Elizabeth's Ramsgate remark as an attempt to be spiteful or witty. The worse I can think of Elizabeth here is the delight we all take in secret knowledge about someone which others believe we don't know or are not in on themselves. We have no reason to believe that the housekeeper has any idea of Georgiana's planned elopement if all the action was at Ramsgate.
Elizabeth's sharp tongue and constant witticisms may be no more than an attempt to emulate her father. She is his favorite and there's a comment about how Elizabeth, seeing the improper way Mr. Bennet treats Mrs. Bennet, is nonetheless grateful for his kind treatment of her. I wonder if her father's delight in embarrassing her over Mr. Collins letter (warning of Lady Catherine's displeasure over a possible marriage) may not be Elizabeth's first introduction to just how insensitive and unkind her past remarks might have been.
As for Mr. Darcy and women of accomplishment, he shows himself every bit Elizabeth's equal in making his true opinion known even while observing the rules of formal politeness. When Darcy disengages himself from conversation with Miss Bingley and later Lady Catherine he's making it clear that while he respects society's forms which give precedence to sex, familial relationship, age, and rank they are less important to him than his respect for intellect and character as demonstrated by Elizabeth. Miss Bingley and Lady Catherine know they've been slighted and why.
I've got lots more to say on this subject, but work calls...let me just add
that DARCY doesn't disagree with Elizabeth when she wonders at his knowing six
accomplished women, nor does Darcy ever, in his own words, define accomplished
-- he merely chooses not to disagree with Miss Bingley and Mrs.
Hurst.
Cheryl
From the Meister: Well said, Cheryl; you make a
number
of excellent points. Perhaps you and I will debate TSL some
day,
but I don't want to intrude with any of that here.
Dear Sir,
I don't disagree with any of what you say, but it wasn't what I was talking about, at all, at all. My comments about the divergence of English into formal and informal forms has more to do with the development of what I called 'TV English'. It is more obvious in countries other than the U.S., I fear, because the form is that of American English, which is spoken, naturally enough, in America. It is very obvious in this country, at least, that our language is being increasingly americanised, both in written and spoken form, and that it is very, very different from the English spoken before the advent of television. Incidentally, for many years after the advent of T.V. in Australia (which was 1952 or thereabouts in the cities), announcers for both television and radion were required to produce the most B.B.C. accent that ever came out of London!
My daughter's English class devoted quite a bit of time to the comparative study of media and written English, and some members of the class had major problems with the latter adult education runs many classes also for people who, though not illiterate in the everyday sense, nevertheless lack the language skills to read a form or complete a job application. I suppose I was extrapolating these points when thinking of difficulties American students may encounter in reading 18th or 19th century English literature, the forms of which are even further removed from your own modern, spoken language, than they are from our own.
As for relic accents from another time - I watched a programme on Newfoundland the other evening, and was fascinated by the accents - a most peculiar mix of Irish and I-couldn't-tell-what. I wonder what it is a relic of?
Links