The Voices of Men in Praise of Jane Austen
Messages on the Bulletin Board - c. July 10, 2000

To All,

In addition to John's excellent post on the Beatitudes as depicting Fanny Price I will add what I have found - my two cents worth.

On the Jane Austen Information Page at the Republic of Pemberley there is a psychological profile for Fanny Price and I quote:

Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 11:07:22 -0500
From: Theresa

The discussion about Fanny Price has been interesting, and leads me to offer my thoughts. My background is in psychology, and I couldn't help but to try to identify what puts so many Austen fans off about this particular heroine.

I believe that in Fanny, Jane Austen has developed a perfect INFP personality type (in the Jungian or "Myers-Briggs" classification). INFP stands for Introvert, iNtuitive, Feeling and Perceptive as dominant traits. In a word: an "Idealist".  Interestingly, only 1 percent of the population fits into this group.

Consider this brief portrait: INFPs --

After reading the above, as Lizzie might say, I finally knew myself!  BUT - only in some aspects, not all, by any means - I'm not that good!  I do wish to be more like Lizzie - I do hate to think of myself as a "draught animal"!

Cheryl said, "Either she [JA] felt enough confidence in her abilities not to define Fanny in a single paragraph, ... ".   Well, our Lady came close.  There are descriptions throughout MP but here is one paragraph that says a lot.  Henry is speaking to Mary.

Mansfield Park - Vol. II, Chapter 12

As soon as her eagerness could rest in silence, he was as happy to tell as she could be to listen; and a conversation followed almost as deeply interesting to her as to himself, though he had in fact nothing to relate but his own sensations, nothing to dwell on but Fanny's charms. Fanny's beauty of face and figure, Fanny's graces of manner and goodness of heart, were the exhaustless theme.  The gentleness, modesty, and sweetness of her character were warmly expatiated on  that sweetness which makes so essential a part of every woman's worth in the judgment of man, that though he sometimes loves where it is not, he can never believe it absent.  Her temper he had good reason to depend on and to praise.  He had often seen it tried.  Was there one of the family, excepting Edmund, who had not in some way or other continually exercised her patience and forbearance?  Her affections  were evidently strong.  To see her with her brother!  What could more delightfully prove that the warmth of her heart was equal to its gentleness?  What could be more encouraging to a man who had her love in view?  Then, her understanding was beyond every suspicion, quick and clear  and her manners were the mirror of her own modest and elegant mind.  Nor was this all.  Henry Crawford had too much sense not to feel the worth of good principles in a wife, though he was too little accustomed to serious reflection to know them by their proper name  but when he talked of her having such a steadiness and regularity of conduct, such a high notion of honour, and such an observance of decorum as might warrant any man in the fullest dependence on her faith and integrity, he expressed what was inspired by the knowledge of her  being well principled and religious.

The next quote is just one example of her character that struck me most particularly.

Mansfield Park - Vol. III Chapter 5

She [Mary] was determined to see Fanny alone, and therefore said to her tolerably soon, in a low voice, "I must speak to you for a few minutes somewhere"  words that Fanny felt all over her, in all her pulses and all her nerves.  Denial was impossible.  Her habits of ready submission, on the contrary, made her almost instantly rise and lead the way out of the room. She did it with wretched feelings, but it was inevitable.

"Her habits of ready submission" are so very typical of me, my Mother, and Grandmother.  I have seen that habit at work much too often.  Now I lay no claims to being an exact replica of Fanny Price but there are general similarities.

Cheryl: You might not find it too hard to find something we could talk about, since I also enjoy gardening, composting, etc.  Furthermore, I have been an assistant beekeeper, house builder, mechanic, body repairwoman, astronomer, engineer of "N" gauge trains, go-kart builder and driver, etc. - not to mention teacher, baby sitter, secretary, health researcher, nutritionist, etc.

Also, I had noticed that the "Bruce" on RoP and this board must be the same person.

Bruce:  Now I understand why in some instance you sounded so intelligent and at other time so "whatever" - you were tweeking, or performing an amusing exercise.  I had suspected that there was some of that going on.  You have admitted to teasing over here (lust) so I will be careful as to whether to take you serious or not!

BTW, at RoP I am "Linda Fern" but I have not said anything over there worth mentioning.  That board was my introduction to the world of the Internet and JA.  RoP is helpful in keeping up with what is happening around town--er, the globe.  For instance, I haven't read any mountaineering books or visited all the museums that you have.  I can't believe that I lived right across the river from NYC in New Jersey for 4 years and only visited the Museum of Natural History.  I am heartily ashamed of myself!

I'll throw in the next quote for free.  In my opinion it is our Lady describing herself because this is exactly the trait she exercised in her novels.

Persuasion Chapter 24

There is a quickness of perception in some, a nicety in the discernment of character, a natural penetration, in short, which no experience in others can equal, and Lady Russell had been less gifted in this part of understanding than her young friend.

As Bruce said, "Unlike the "moral satire" faction, I think Austen was a genius at understanding character, and motivation, and at elucidating it."  (God help us, I hope he was serious on this one!) :-)

Fetching breath one last time, Cheryl you said you were suffering from over exposure to religious types.  Next time it happens throw this at them:

God's Plan

GOD IS LOVE.  PERIOD.

Well, He is sort of like a Webmeister who creates his site and therefore can do what he pleases with it!  :-)

And this from a Southern Baptist who heard and believed without question many hellfire and brimstone sermons: "That ought to just about get them off your case!  End of my sermon."

You dear ones have stretched my mind a bit with Derrida, relativism, Wellington, space-time, etc. and have put me in the same boat with Cheryl - I don't know enough to join in an intelligent discussion.  Now I want to concentrate on the "Passionate Passages" in MP - not to mention the fact that our family is moving by the first of the month.

So, "I will leave you now."  - Darcy, P&P-A&E

But, "I'll be back." - The Terminator
Linda

Dear Bruce,

I sometimes stop by the Republic of Pemberley, mostly to see you stirring the pot, and came across some comments you made about Captain Wentworth's choice of profession.  I must take issue with your comments for two reasons.  First, because of your (apparent) belief that smiting the French is not a worthy profession in and of itself.  I will grant you that it is not necessarily an heroic one ("Ladies, I have seen their backs before." -- Wellington, I believe) but that's hardly Wentworth's fault.

Your comment about Wentworth's riches being paid for by "the blood of his men" (I'm quoting from memory) doesn't, if you'll pardon the expression, hold water. Total RN battle deaths for the 22 years (with short breaks) of the American Revolutionary War and Napoleon Wars was 1,875, including marines. (Dudley Pope "Life In Nelson's Navy") Compare that with 2403 American deaths at Pearl Harbor, though that figure includes civilian dock workers, and area residents (USN quoted by Ed Morrow "The Grim Reaper's Book of Days")  Life at sea was horrible, with death, mostly though disease, a daily event.  But Captain Wentworth couldn't escape cholera or yellow fever any more than his men could.

Of course this doesn't answer your basic question as to whether Captain Wentworth is more admirable than Sir Walter, merely because Wentworth is a "self made man."  I think a major theme of "Persuasion" is that a man must be judged by his own worthiness, not that of his ancestors. Nor can he be judged by his profession:  Admiral Crawford doesn't admire all of his brethren-- " ... the peace has come too soon for that younker,"-- merely because they're naval officers.  He judges them by their merits as individuals.   This is part of my theory of Mansfield Park and Persuasion as companion novels showing the two sides of a changing society.  But I won't bore you with that one again.
Cheryl

Dear Cheryl,

As you correctly surmised, many of my posts at Pemberley are designed as much to tweek the faithful as to represent my true opinion.  I'm no fan of Napolean or his minions, and I'm glad the Royal Navy did it's part to defeat him.  I do think that the British Navy prize money system was one step removed from the privateer system, and only two steps removed from piracy.

On a general, philosophic note, I don't think anyone is a "self-made man" (I was responding to google eyed admiration of Wentworth for being such).  We are all the product of our culture, society, and closer relationships, and should recognize that fact.

Supposedly, Wellington was standing in Spain with one of his aides when a company of fresh recruits marched into camp, all spit and polish.  "I don't know what effect they may have on the enemy," said Wellington.  "But, by Gad sir, they certainly scare me."

Dear John, Dave, et al,

Some of John’s and Dave’s criticisms of my recent posts seem to be the result of misunderstandings.  Here’s a clarification.  When I said that Fanny was not "pure of heart" because she was hiding a secret love, I did so as an amusing exercise in applying the beatitudes to Fanny.  I neither think that it is horrible to harbor a secret love, nor that Fanny is blameworthy for doing so.  I do think that it (like all such secrets) influences Fanny and those around her.  Fanny is protected from Henry’s wooing in part by her own moral judgements, but also in part by her secret love for Edmund (I admit to calling it "lust" to tease you guys).  As I pointed out, Austen says that she would probably marry Henry shortly after Edmund married Mary, so this is hardly an unsupported, idiosyncratic opinion.  My point: the "purity" of Fanny’s moral judgements is tainted by her secret prejudices.  Unlike the "moral satire" faction, I think Austen was a genius at understanding character, and motivation, and at elucidating it.  Fanny’s motivations (even her strict moral judgements) are all influenced by her love for and worship of Edmund.

I don’t think Edmund should "condone an immoral act", John.  I think, however, that he need not bad mouth Mary Crawford for her practical approach to dealing with Henry and Mary’s social (as well as moral) problems.  Also, John, it is very clear in the novel that the affair between Henry and Maria doomed the potential marriage of Mary and Edmund.  That’s what I meant by sour grapes.  For Edmund (as Mary’s former lover) to "break up" with Mary by telling her he "wished he could still think well of her, but he can’t" is cruel, rude, and in the worst of form.  Since the romance is over anyway, isn’t charity called for?  What excuse does Edmund have for such unkindness?

Also, John, I don’t think that Austen wrote satires, like Swift.  Her genius is that she wrote (practically invented) realistic, humorous fiction.  Swift’s satires are often almost allegorical.  Austen’s character’s motivations are inevitably complex and realistic.

Also, Dave, if I prefer race horses to draught animals, certainly that is my prerogative. I hope I am able to appreciate Fanny’s merits (which are many), and if I sometimes complain that she (like the rest of us) is imperfect, I continue to think that I see her no differently than Austen herself did.

Dear Bruce,

"When I said that Fanny was not "pure of heart" because she was hiding a secret love, I did so as an amusing exercise in applying the beatitudes to Fanny."

You will teach us not to believe a word you say.

In Aesop's fable, it was impossible for the fox to reach the grapes. It dismissed its inadequacy by deciding that the grapes were sour, anyway. It was physically possible for Fanny to put herself under the protection of Mrs Grant and so send word to Henry that she would marry him, but Henry had soured himself and lost Fanny's modified feelings for him. Henry had remained within Fanny's reach but she had proof that the grapes were sour.

Dear John,

I don’t have the slightest idea what you are talking about.  Fanny’s heart is impure because it harbors a secret (and forbidden) love.  Pure hearts, like pure water, are transparent. Surely I can amuse myself without being accused of lying.

My "sour grapes" comment was aimed at Edmund, not Fanny.  It is clear in the book that Sir Thomas believes that Edmund and Mary’s relationship is assuredly doomed by their siblings’ infidelity.  Edmund knew that the romance was over when he visited Mary.

Here’s the evidence:

"She was mistaken, however, in supposing that Edmund gave his father no present pain. It was of a much less poignant nature than what the others excited  but Sir Thomas was considering his happiness as very deeply involved in the offence of his sister and friend; cut off by it, *as he must be*, from the woman whom he had been pursuing with undoubted attachment and strong probability of success  and who, in everything but this despicable brother, would have been so eligible a connexion."

And,

"That Edmund must be for ever divided from Miss Crawford did not admit of a doubt with Fanny.

Despite this knowledge, our boy Ed could not resist telling Mary that he had lost all his esteem for her:

"Hers are faults of principle, Fanny; of blunted delicacy and a corrupted, vitiated mind. Perhaps it is best for me, since it leaves me so little to regret. Not so, however. Gladly would I submit to all the increased pain of losing her, rather than have to think of her as I do. I told her so."

"Did you?"

"Yes  when I left her I told her so."

Great way to part company with your ex-girlfriend, Ed, old chum.  You’re a class act!  I think everyone who ever breaks up with his girlfriend should bad-mouth her.  How else can she learn self-improvment?  If Fanny were really "pure of heart" she would have rebuked Ed as soon as he told her about it.  To Fanny's credit, the "Did you?" can be interpreted ambiguously ­ but it certainly seems that anything Ed does is OK with her, no matter how classless, heartless, and lacking in charity.

Your suggestion that Fanny could ignore Henry’s infidelity and marry him anyway is incredible.  Nobody would do that, especially not Fanny.

Dear Meister and everyone,

No, I'm not mad at anyone.  I just don't know enough about Derrida to join an intelligent discussion.  I feel that deconstructionism has degenerated into a cult of personality -- one step away from a true religious cult.  As such, it no longer deserves serious discussion.

Softball:

"My Dear Niece, ... I must confess myself surprised by your application.  I did not expect it from you. ... Your uncle is as much surprised as I am, and nothing but the belief of your being a party concerned would have allowed him to act as he has done."

The Gardiners clearly believe that Elizabeth is in on the "secret" and that things have progressed so far with she and Darcy that he would keep her posted on his progress. He hasn't, of course, and when Elizabeth thanks him for his role in helping her sister, he is shocked and surprised at her knowledge.

' "I am sorry, exceedingly sorry," replied Darcy, in a tone of surprise and emotion, "that you have ever been informed of what may, in a mistaken light, have given you uneasiness." '

Darcy's concern is very natural.  In a "mistaken light" Elizabeth might have thought Darcy was trying to buy what he couldn't earn ... Elizabeth's love and hand in marriage.  I'm sure other things influenced Darcy to maintain secrecy:  Georgiana's reputation and feelings needed to be spared and Lady Catherine's interference avoided as much as possible.

High & inside:

I agree with John that Darcy could not deal with Mr. Bennet without compromising Elizabeth. Elizabeth herself is being very secretive ... no one, not even Jane knows what went on at Pemberley. Some more practical considerations would be the likelihood of Mr. Bennet's pride allowing a near stranger, half his age to make such decisions about his family.  Mr. Gardiner only agreed because he suspected Darcy of "another motive ... " Without such a suspicion, I doubt anyone would have been satisfied without a full disclosure of Georgiana's imprudence. Darcy must be aware of the general dislike the Netherfield neighborhood had for him.  The Gardiners, on the other hand, were disposed to like him and treat with him more fairly than Mr. Bennet would have. And last, but not least, Darcy could not know how much influence Mrs. Bennet had on her husband's decisions.  Do any of us think Mrs. Bennet would have been satisfied with a mere ten thousand pounds for her daughter?  Darcy would have had to purchase Netherfield for Mr. and Mrs. Wickham before Lydia's mother was satisfied.

Split finger:

Good thing there's no one on base because that one was in the dirt before it got near the plate.

Mr. Bennet delights in making those around him as uncomfortable as possible.  Elizabeth is his favorite, so naturally he tries harder to get her goat than anyone else's. I don't think it reveals anything about his character that we don't already know, except perhaps a true fondness for Darcy as well.
Cheryl

Mr Darcy and Mr Gardiner both knew full well that approaching Mr Bennet directly was not an option: a gentleman does not offer money to another gentleman.  Mr Darcy was responsible for buying 'whatever credit' could be purchased for Lydia  he knew that  Mr Bennet did not have the money to buy his daughter's sexual respectability  Mr Darcy, however, had the means.  How could he possibly have insulted Mr Bennet, his senior, and the father of his beloved, by offering him money to buy Lydia out?

Consider the Bates family, in Emma:  'There is so little that one can venture to do,' says Mr Woodhouse:  and there is no impropriety under consideration here.  Mr Woodhouse, Mr Knightley - Mr Weston, even - had the money, the means and the inclination to make Mrs and Miss Bates comfortable, but to do so would have made the ladies supplicants, and as such, less than gentlewomen.  Emma herself acknowledges eventually that her generosity to the Bates ladies has been careless and insulting, inasmuch as it induced her, for a time, to give her equals less than their due, simply because they were poor.

Mr Darcy and Mr Gardiner, between them, handled Lydia's situation with great delicacy: Darcy's horror, upon finding that Elizabeth all, is a measure of just how much tact was required. I mean, really:  had Darcy marched into Netherfield with a fistful of money and offered to solve the problem, does anybody seriously think that Mr Bennet could possibly have accepted?

Mr Bennet, however, remains a 'true philosopher', and enjoys comfort where it is to be found: once satisfied that Darcy is a worthy husband for his Elizabeth, he is willing to laugh at the former's randiness:  'these young lovers will have things their own way:  I will offer to pay him - he will rant and storm about his love for you ... '

Absolutely.
Julie

Dear Ashton Dennis,

A wink and a nod to your note, but it's pretty obvious why I don't post. Dave would have to make coherent sentences of my thoughts!

An addition to "split finger": In P and P, Mr. Bennet's daughter, Jane, offers to write a letter for him to Mr. Gardiner, a letter of such importance and yet we get the feeling he is resenting having to do this much. Especially after his comment after the affair is settled about how little inconvenience on his part was required.

By the way I read in one of the forwards to P and P that it was a comedy, and lately I seem to be laughing an awful lot at the flaming hoops Jane Austen has her characters jump through. Have you seen Melina Mecouri(not sure about spelling)in Never on Sunday? Her character is laughing at a production of Medea.

Dear Meister and everyone,

I've spent the last 1/2 hour trying to find something printable to say about Fanny and the beatitudes, but have failed miserably. I'm in one of my intolerant moods, due to recent over exposure to religious types.

Re: Fanny and Mansfield Park, I'm afraid I agree almost completely with Bruce, except that I see no reason for forgiveness from Sir Thomas, or even Edmund.  (Why should Edmund forgive something that Mary doesn't feel needs forgiving?)  I don't find any reason to believe that JA would suddenly create a "perfect" heroine in Fanny.  She is meant to have her faults, same as Elizabeth Bennet, and Emma Woodhouse.  The fact that we can't seem to agree as to what those faults are shows how much Jane had matured as a writer by time Mansfield Park was published. Either she felt enough confidence in her abilities not to define Fanny in a single paragraph, and/or she was attempting something new with Mansfield Park.  My own opinion is that she was trying to move away from comedy to more important issues.  Had Jane lived to write another 6 novels, Mansfield Park would be considered a transitional work.  Not a failure by any means, but not a complete success.

For myself, Fanny Price isn't the only Austen heroine whom I would find it a chore to spend an evening with.  I haven't much admiration for either of the Dashwood sisters ... Elinor is too self-righteous, and Marianne too much the angst-ridden teenager.  And I prefer the Gwenyth Paltrow and Alicia Silverstone Emmas to Jane Austen's. It's not about religion, it's about personality.  Fanny could be Zoroastrian for all I care ... she would still be a manipulating passive/aggressive somatic type.

Links

Back to the Bulletin Board

Table of Contents

Index & Archive

References & Links

The Male-Voices Home Page