To anyone,

Can someone out there tell me the name of Mr Woodhouse's daughter?  He is the man who made a protege of the illigitimate Harriet Smith.  If you can - please mail me at k_broadbent@hotmail.com
Thank you!

Dear Kevin,

The novel you refer to is Jane Austen's Emma. "Emma" is the daughter of Mr. Woodhouse and she has a sister, Isabella. It is more accurate to think of Harriet as Emma's protege.

Dear Sir,

Still on the Bronte/Wollstonecraft theme, was Mary Wollstonecraft known to have any interest in the slavery question?  If so, would she have known, or known of (well, she must have known of) William Wilberforce?
Julie

Dear Julie,

I found nothing in the index of Tomalin's biography to indicate that they had ever met. The timing and the social class seem all wrong to me. Wilberforce began his publication in 1797 and Mary died in 1798. Also, he was educated at Cambridge and was a Member of Parliament - that is just not the kind of people that Mary mixed with. A typical acquaintance was Tomas Paine, who is so very important in American history (Common Sense), but he was a corset-stay maker and a tax collector among other things. It is likely that Wilberforce was influenced by Mary's coterie, as they were vehement and articulate abolitionists.

I may have this wrong, so please correct me if I am. I don't believe that there were many American ships involved in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. I believe that American ships, out of New England, carried bibles and other manufactured goods to the West Indies where they were traded for slaves and sugar. In turn, this cargo was taken to the southern colonies to be traded for cash, rum, and tobacco which was then brought back to New England. The slaves were brought to the West Indies by the dominant European naval power of the time - the Spanish, then the Dutch, and then the English. The English traders operated out of Bristol and Liverpool. Wilberforce was at the forefront of a parliamentary movement that forced an improvement of the conditions aboard slave ships in 1805. Jane Austen began publication in about 1811 and so we have that interesting exchange between Jane Fairfax and Mrs. Elton about activities in the latter's home town, Bristol. Or how about Mrs. Admiral Croft's self-conscious claim that she had never been in the West Indies. Jane Austen's time was not uneventful.

Dear Sir,

I should have checked the birth and death dates, and thereby answered my own question.  I was pursuing the Bronte/Wollstonecraft connection, and thought that there may have been a link there, as William Wilberforce partly sponsored Patrick Bronte's Cambridge education, and was known to the family, both as MP for Yorkshire, and as a friend of Mr Bronte's friend, Theodore Drury.  It is likely that the Bronte family heard Mr Wilberforce speak when he spent four days at Keighley in 1827.

I don't know anything about the slave trade as such, or whether or not American ships were involved. Mrs Elton is my main source of information in that area!
Julie

As I can't do much else at present, I have resorted, in desperation, to thinking, and I think(!) the Lucas/Collins marriage raises an interesting point, relative to the character of Elizabeth Bennet.  Elizabeth really gives it the gun when discussing Charlotte's marriage with Jane: '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.' Jane, of course, with a different temperament, calmy replies, more or less, that Elizabeth is going over the top.  What is interesting about Elizabeth's statement is that it is precisely what her father says to her, when he finds out of her engagement to Darcy: 'He is rich,to be sure, and you may have more fine clothes and fine carriages than Jane.  But will they make you happy? ....... I know your disposition, Lizzy.  I know that you could be neither happy nor respectable, unless you truly esteemed your husband  .....Your lively talents would place you in the greatest danger in an unequal marriage.  You could scarcely escape discredit and misery.'  What Elizabeth and Mr Bennet are both referring to is the possibilty of adultery - Charlotte's or Elizabeth's.  But the yardstick by which both are measuring is Elizabeth's temperament, not Charlotte's.

Charlotte's is not the only marriage of convenience to appear in a Jane Austen novel, and they are all appraised differently.  Perhaps the closest to Charlotte's is that of Mr Elton and Miss Augusta Hawkins, in Emma:   'the lady had been .... so very ready to have him (after a courtship of about a fortnight)  that vanity and prudence were equally contented.'  Though neither Mr nor Mrs Elton have much to recommend them, this obvious marriage of convenience seems to work well enough for the participants.  Similarly for that of Mr and Mrs Norris: 'Miss Ward found herself obliged to be attached to the Rev. Mr Norris', for whose loss she consoled herself by deciding 'that she could do very well without him.'  I must admit that the thought of the crippled Mr Norris at the mercy of his wife makes me shiver, however, this marriage of convenience also appears to have 'worked' well enough.  One suspects that the marriage of Mary and Charles Musgrove is somewhat in the same category, and that Charles was simply too lazy to look any further than the end of his own nose for a wife, and they present as thousands of young couples do today, once the stresses of small children have been added to an immature relationship: bickering, diverging in their interests; however, once again it appears that things work out 'well enough' for the participants.

Maria Rushworth's marriage of convenience does not work out at all, at all, of course, and nor does Wickham's (I omit Lydia's name because she is too ditzy to be called a participant!) The thing is, I suggest that some of the negative comments made about Charlotte's marriage are actually projections of Elizabeth's feelings, rather than a just estimation of Charlotte's, who knew perfectly well that '(Mr Collins') society was irksome, and his attachment to herself imaginary.'  The woman knew what she was doing, and why   so did Mrs Elton, and so did Mrs Norris.  Interesting that they are all clergymen's wives!

I feel that Charlotte would have made a better job of being Mrs Collins than Mrs Norris did in her role - I can just see the peasants expiring from starvation at the door of the Norris rectory!

But from all of this, I cannot find any justification for hating Charlotte Lucas, because she thought and acted differently to Elizabeth Bennet.
Julie

Dear Julie,

Your posting is excellent. Thank you.

As you do, I have always interpreted Mr. Bennet's admonition to his daughter as a warning that she was headed into situation where her honor would be at risk. I was about to abandon that idea. Since everyone wants me to believe that a gentleman's daughter would not kiss a long-lost love on the street, I felt I could hardly expect to convince anyone that a gentleman (an invention of Jane Austen) could imagine his daughter capable of adultery to the point that he would seek to warn her. You saved me in the nick of time - thank God! I can restore my previous view of Jane Austen - No more of that cold bloodled version of Jane Austen for me - I am very happy.

However, I had never before made that connection with Elizabeth's speech about Charlotte, but I now think that you are dead-on correct. I do think though, that Elizabeth gives Charlotte too much credit.

I am not at all sure I agree about the Elton's. I think there is more love and suitability in that case then you will credit.

Let us cut to the chase - you are avoiding a discussion of that conversation between Elizabeth and Charlotte just after Elizabeth arrives at Hunsford. How do you interpret that?

Incidentally, has no one heard of vitamin C in Tasmania? I have been saving my allowance in order to send flowers to Winchester, but I would gladly divert those funds in order to send you vitamin C. You should be taking about 10 grams per day now. Yes, I do know where your husband hid the keys, but I completely agree with his actions.

Dear Sir,

What conversation?  I can find only two references to the Elizabeth's views on Charlotte's circumstances at the beginning of the Rosings visit, and neither of them occur in conversation. They are Elizabeth's musings on arrival: 'But though every thing seemed neat and comfortable, she was not able to gratify him by any sigh of repentance, and rather looked with wonder at her friend that she could have so cheerful an air, with such a companion.'  And a little further on: 'When Mr Collins could be forgotten, there was really a great air of comfort throughout, and by Charlotte's evident enjoyment of it, Elizabeth supposed he must be often forgotten.'  The Collinses had been married about three months (the Gardiners come to Longbourn for Christmas, and leave at about the same time as Charlotte does following her marriage, before which she asks Elizabeth to visit in March).  During this visit Elizabeth does, grudgingly, acknowledge the following: '..his friends may well rejoice in his having met with one of the very few sensible women who would have accepted him, or have made him happy if they had.  My friend has an excellent understanding - though I am not certain that I consider her marrying Mr Collins as the wisest thing she ever did.  She seems perfectly happy, however, and in a prudential light, it is certainly a very good match for her.'  At least in this conversation, Elizabeth is prepared to view Charlotte's actions with the same charity that she so misapplied when discussing Mr Wickham's attempted alliance with Miss King, regarding which Elizabeth did not quarrel, acknowledging his 'wish for independence.  Nothing, on the contrary, could be more natural .....' I'm afraid Elizabeth can't have it both ways, you know.

As for the Eltons, they loved themselves, certainly, but I don't know that they loved each other.  The emotions seem to me more mutual triumph - Miss Hawkins, because she managed to snare a husband and a 'comfortable home', and Mr Elton because he had caught 'substance and shadow', and could now afford to 'care nothing for Miss Woodhouse.'  I feel what we are seeing is their triumph at a successful business deal successfully completed - these two nasty people probably will grow close, however, as they have so much in common.   Mrs Elton absolutely revels in being a married woman - of being obliged to 'neglect her music', of being 'the chaperon of the party', of being 'no young lady on her preferment - married women may be safely trusted with these arrangements.'  But I don't know that she revels in adoration of her actual husband.  In any case, Charlotte's arrangements for her life appear even more benign when compared with the Eltons: she hurts nobody, and remains as calm and level-headed as she ever was.

Vitamin what?
Julie

Dear Collective,

I have a question. I've been trying to draw a connection between Anne Bronte and Wollstonecraft without any success. My last hope is to make this connection through J.Austen, who was Wollstonecraft's contemporary and whose work AB was very familiar with (& even imitated to some extent). Does anyone know of a direct connection between Austen and Wollstonecraft? That is, how familiar would Austen have been with W's work?

Apologies if this question has come up before.

Thanks for your help.

Dear Ms Pochop,

If you will examine the indices of the biographies by Honan and Tomalin, you will find efforts to make the connection you seek. I will mention a few things to whet your appetite and then I will express my view of your effort.

The clearest connection between M. Wollstonecraft and J. Austen is through the Austen neighbor, Sir William East. East's son studied with Mr. Austen and the father offered aid to Mrs Austen's sister-in-law during that woman's legal problems. It is said that his portrait hung at the Austen home in Steventon. East was also a supporter and friend of Mary Wollstonecraft, to the extent that he welcomed her into his home to recuperate after her suicide attempt. Tomalin suggests that Jane Austen's portrayal of Marianne Dashwood's self-destructive behavior may have been modeled on this incident.

It is known that Jane Austen's sister-in-law, Elizabeth Austen-Knight, was interested in radical causes including those of Mary Hays who, if anything, was a more radical feminist than Wollstonecraft herself. (Of course, the word "feminist" was an invention of the nineteenth century.) Hays was a good and loyal friend of Wollstonecraft.

On the other side, we should notice that Mary Wollstonecraft published severe indictments of the military and clergy - of the type of men including Jane Austen's beloved brothers and father. Mary gave lip service to atheism, was married to the best-known atheist, although her commitment here may not have been completely sincere. Jane Austen was sincerely religious. It is well known - I can prove this - that Mary Wollstonecraft hated the country gentry of whom Jane Austen wrote about with much understanding and affection.

To me, the crucial difference is the view of women put forth by these two famous contemporaries. Wollstoncraft's women are uniformly virtuous and are the victims of men - the typical feminist view to this day. All of the Austen heroines are fault prone and none, with the possible tepid exception of Catherine Morland, are victimized by men. Elizabeth Bennet's chief antagonist is Caroline Bingley, the Dashwoods' is the sister-in-law, Fanny fears Aunt Norris, Emma can't abide the reverend's wife, and Anne Elliot had better look out for her sisters. (Of course, there is Wickham's treatment of Georgianna and Willoughby's action in relation to Brandon's ward.)

You are quite correct in seeing the connection between the Brontes' view and Wollstonecraft's. I suspect that MW would have loved Jane Eyre and would have read The Tenant of Wildfell Hall many times over. But you say that Anne Bronte knew of Jane Austen. Why do you say that? That is a great surprise given that Charlotte had never heard of Jane Austen until she read the name in a review of Jane Eyre. Here is a link to that information.

Dear Irena and Ashton,

Charlotte Bronte's references to Jane Austen's works are from her correspondence:  the first in a letter to Lewes in January, 1848, regarding 'Pride and Prejudice' (read at Lewes' suggestion), and the second to an employee of her publishing firm, Mr William Smith Williams, written in April, 1850, regarding Emma - the firm used to send Charlotte parcels of books, and Emma was in one of them.  Anne Bronte died in May, 1849, and was already ill in 1848, and living at home again.

Don't forget, though, that Anne lived apart from the Haworth family for some years:  she began working for the Robinsons as governess in 1840, and remained there until 1845.  She had charge of the three daughters, Lydia, fourteen, Elizabeth, thirteen, and Mary, twelve.  Branwell later joined her as tutor to the only son, Edmund - and also, it would seem, to conduct an affair with Mrs Robinson, at no extra charge.  It would seem quite reasonable to me that Jane Austen's works would be some part of the reading in the schoolroom over the next five years, given the girls' ages?  If so, the daughters seemed to take some parts of the works as an object lesson: one, at least, eloped with an unsuitable young man.  Be this as it may, I cannot find any direct reference to Anne having read Jane Austen, but clearly Charlotte's readings and Anne's would have not been connected during this period.  I would be very interested to hear more, please.
Julie

From the Meister: I don't understand your point about the
novels being part of the girls' readings. That could not have
the case if Anne had not heard of Jane Austen beforehand.

I can't find any reference that says that Anne Bronte did or did not know of Jane Austen - Charlotte was the one who is recorded as not having heard of her before 1848.  My point was that, as a governess of three teenaged girls for a number of years, Anne would have been reading with them and they had to read SOMETHING, after all, and it is possible that Jane Austen's works were among those read. That was all, really, but the point to bear in mind is that Charlotte's experiences are no yardstick for Anne's, because they were leading very different lives at this period, and living apart.
Julie

Dear Folks,

I come creeping back to this board after returning home to find seventy two e-mails waiting my attention at the library and grass so high in my backyard that neither of my two very large dogs could be seen. I spent the last week wading through the e-mails and cutting the grass. About the time I got all that done I had to pack up again and head to the beach for our yearly family blast. Its one week with my children, their husbands, their children, my mother, her husband, my brother, his girl friend, her two children and one nanny.

I always cook for the whole crew on the first night and it was agreed years ago that everyone would praise my cooking no matter what. Yesterday it was 104, today 106. We all rush out to the beach in the morning, stand in the water for a few minutes then hurry back inside where we stay huddled around the AC til the sun goes down.

Be that as it may, I see from recent posting that I have missed out on a lot of back and forth. Let me try to play catch up here by reporting that our instructor in England quoted the director of the A&E P&P as saying that his direction to the actress playing Elizabeth was that she was to give the impression that Elizabeth would be "good in bed" (whatever that means-I forget). Anyway, that might answer some of the questions raised about her performance.

I read with some interest that Ash is lying in wait to get me straight on Darcy (again). It is my sad duty to report that if both Ash and Jane Austen herself should show up together in my office and then both of them point out the error of my interpretation, using all the text they wanted to use, I would be unswayed in my feeling that Darcy’s personality left a lot to be desired and that his interference in the Bingley-Jane liaison plus his cruel remarks about E’s family were beyond any explanation except that he us not my kind of guy. In short, I will never get Darcy "right" no matter what. Sorry, but there it is.

A bit of useless information from the trip: it takes exactly five minutes, moving at a proper funeral pace to walk from the house where Jane Austen died to the church where she is buried.

The best parts of the trip were being with people who loved our Lady, and being able to stand in so many places where she stood and see exactly what she saw when she stood there. Even as I was standing in Chawton and feeling so let down, I had the pleasure of knowing that I was standing in the very spot where Jane Austen stood. That, at least, drew me closer to her even if there was a sign on her desk saying "DO NOT TOUCH".

Dear Ray,

The director of the A&E version of P&P had a brilliant insight in that case. However, this doesn't seem like much of a stretch for Jennifer Ehle. I will reserve my ultimate praise for her until such time that Ms. Ehle convincingly plays an undesirable woman.

Heh, heh - you completely defeat your purpose when you allow me to escort Jane Austen to your terminal. Let me see, how would Jane Austen behave there? Based upon all contemporary accounts, we should say our Lady would say very little to you and would appear aloof, even haughty. You would decide that she didn't have much respect for you. The truth is that our Lady was so very shy that this was her defense. If fact, our Lady would like you very much and would regret this unfortunate first impression she was making - but, nothing can be done. In short, Jane Austen behaved in exactly the same manner as both Darcy siblings. Incidentally, the fact that Jane Austen would appear at your terminal is not the more improbable part of your hypothetical; the really impossible part is that our Lady would appear in my company.

Darcy was the best of friends to Bingley and took good care of his friends. As did Elizabeth who tried her very best to interfere in the Lukas-Collins liaison. Darcy was as aware as you of the mercenary aspirations of Mrs. Bennet and he believed that Jane Bennet was basically indifferent to Bingley although - as Darcy must have surmised - Jane might have found Bingley's income attractive. Also, Bingley was constitutionally vulnerable: "I have often seen him in love". Unlike yourself, Elizabeth remembered that others seemed to agree with Darcy about Jane's indifference, and that Darcy said nothing about her family that she did not say herself. Of course, the coarseness and unfairness of Elizabeth's public statements about Darcy were never matched by Darcy himself.

Darcy is my kind of guy - almost exactly! Except - well - I don't have any money.

To All,

The thing is, I've had the flu.  Being me, no ordinary flu would do - I haven't been out of bed in a week, and I certainly wasn't any good whilst in it, either.  I had to stay there in the finish, because my husband took away my car keys.  Don't worry, he'll keep.

But anyway, I'm back now, and while not all that well, I'm certainly well enough to argue. When, pray, did Elizabeth 'do her best to interfere with the Lucas-Collins relationship'?  Apart from her initial 'Engaged to Mr Collins!  My dear Charlotte, impossible!', which was no more than Charlotte herself expected, Elizabeth did not remonstrate with her friend.  In fact, if you remember, she did her best to support Sir William Lucas when he had to bear the brunt of Mrs Bennet's rudeness.  There is not none other single recorded instance of Elizabeth making any comment whatsoever to Charlotte on the subject  - indeed, it would have been impossible for her to have done so.  She was a long time in reconciling herself to the marriage, certainly, but that is not the same thing as impeding it.  Charlotte's marriage does place her in an interesting position relative to the Longbourn family, as she becomes, virtually, the heiress of the estate, unless Mr Collins should get eaten by his own pigs prior to Mr Bennet's demise.

I agree that Darcy was shy - a little.  But one cannot hang all his faults on that one peg. Edward Ferrars was shy, too, as was Edmund Bertram  as was, for that matter Mr Knightley.  None of them made the following kind of crack: 'Darcy, on the contrary, had seen a collection of people in whom there was little beauty and no fashion, for none of whom he had felt the smallest interest, and from none received either attention and pleasure.  Miss Bennet he acknowledged to be pretty, but she smiled too much.'  Darcy was also arrogant, quite right in his own later estimation of himself, in fact.  The grace and charm of his character come when he is able to look himself squarely in the face, acknowledge that he was behaving like a typical upper-class English prat, and do something about it.  It takes a man indeed to make the kind of confessions that he made about himself to Elizabeth at the end of the novel.  As for Bingley, well, I agree with Elizabeth's estimation, and do not have much respect for a man so easily manipulated by his friend.  Darcy calls him 'unaffectedly modest.'  Maybe.

Now I'm exhausted.  I wish I could find those bloody car keys!
Julie

Dear Ashton and Hentie,

Frankly, it has been a long time since I have seen any of these films, but I have never seen the Doran-Godwin version of Emma.  Like Emma Thompson’s S&S, I thought Paltrow’s Emma contained just a tad too much Hollywood.  I do love the story, so I gained some pleasure in watching some version of it unfold, and the cinematography, location and costumes are often enough for me to get my money’s worth.  It seems to me that Paltrow’s Emma Woodhouse was pretty close to my idea.  If anything about her disturbed me, I can’t remember now what it was.

I didn’t care much for Thompson’s Eleanor, but I was pleasantly surprised at how well Hugh Grant’s role was performed.  Ms. Thompson’s heroic attempts to act very young were thwarted by the fact that she is a well-known performer who has acted her age in many other films. Consequently, I found myself distracted by my certain knowledge that Eleanor was not the age she ought to have been.  Though the movie was entertaining enough, I must confess that S&S itself is not one of my favourite novels, so I may be prejudiced against the story in any form.

I don’t know which version of Far from the Madding Crowd I saw.  They showed it in school in the 70’s.  It’s a pretty dark and humourless version, compared to the book, but then, as has been pointed out, it’s hard to translate into film a turn of the narrator’s phrase.

I didn’t know the history of Olivier’s script, but I can’t help thinking that if the sort of Darcy that Ray conjures up when he reads P&P is identical to the one Olivier delivered, then I don’t blame Ray one bit for developing negative impressions.  And what was with Lady Catherine?  I nominate that actress and her director and screenwriters for the absolute worst interpretation of any literary character in the history of movies, and that’s saying a lot.

Links