9-11          

4/11/02 Diana Gardener - Four greats granddaughter of Admiral Sir Francis Austen

Dear Ash,

I have scanned your Jane Austen pages with great interest, being a four greats granddaughter of Admiral Sir Francis Austen.  The site is wonderful. On behalf of my branch of the family, thankyou.
Di Gardener
P.S. John Hubback was my 2 greats grandfather and Edith Hubback my great grandmother.

4/16/02 Linda - What a lovely surprise!

Dear Diana,

I had not thought about any of the Austen family's descendents of today, but I realize now there must be many. I now know who the Hubbacks are. I checked a "Persuasions" magazine I have for the article by Joan Austen-Leigh who was part of that work, but had to find her obituary to find out that she had children. It would be interesting to know if anyone has kept up a genealogy tree for the family.

I certainly must agree with you about the pages written by the Meister. That is why I am here. Do post your comments - someone has to keep the Meister straighened out!
Linda

4/10/02 Cheryl - On Godwin's political philosophy

I admit I don't spend a great deal of time reading political philosophy, but I have noticed among what I've read three basic problems with that sort of thing:

• 1. The class (demographic) is the man.  Just as standard physics breaks down at the sub-atomic level so does the "class" structure.  The "worker", the "capitalist", the "intellectual", the "liberal", the "conservative", the "teenager"—all of Godwin's workers are noble but poor because all of his landowners are greedy scum.  Yet the individual may be poor for many reasons:  ill health, too many children, addiction, low intelligence, laziness, or even a criminal nature.  While the rich ... well it should be noted that Richard the III's tenants admired him so greatly that even after his death (when such sentiments were dangerous) they continued to pay tribute to his good works and his just protection of the poor. (One may also note that Elizabeth Bennet seemed to take her opinion of Mr. Darcy from Godwin.)
• 2. The Goldilocks syndrome.  Invariably, only the writer and his friends (class) are fit to run things.  The poor are too oppressed and uneducated, and even worse, fail to spend their disposable income on a proper Godwinian education for their sons, or to protect the Brazilian rain forest, or whatever the writer considers most important.  The rich (richer than the writer at any rate) are unfit because they're all either degenerate aristos, capitalist oppressors, or thieving swine. Furthermore, they actively oppose the obvious wisdom of the writer's reforms, or worse yet, ignore him completely.
• 3. Absolutely enough.  Everything that's wrong with the world would be fixed if everyone just had "enough."  "Enough" is usually defined as whatever the writer has minus any luxuries that wouldn't inconvenience him too much.  We see the obvious fallacy of this idea every day.  How much is "enough" televised sport per day?  How many brussels sprouts are "enough" to qualify one for dessert? How many dead Israelis and Palestinians are "enough?" Two randomly selected people from different parts of the globe could hardly agree on the first two questions, let alone the third.

I would also disagree with most political writers that a classless society is possible, or even desirable. I'm talking about what might be call informal or "natural" classes rather than those dictated by laws. Every single political experiment to create such a society has had the same result: a two-class society consisting of those who are starved and murdered and those who do the starving and murdering.  The evils of India's caste system, or the British system of 200 years ago are great, but they provide(d) at least some protection for the individual which the "classless" Soviet Union or post revolutionary France citizens never did.
Cheryl

4/10/02 Cheryl - Addendum: Five reasons why my class is the only choice for world domination.

Here are five reasons why my own class (overweight women in their 40's) is the only choice for world domination.

• 1. A knick-knack based world economy is sustainable and has no growth limits.
• 2. The "mom look" and the "mom voice" are the two most powerful weapons in the world
• 3. Probably the largest single demographic in the world.
• 4. If we made everyone else pick up after themselves and do their own laundry, the world would be too exhausted to fight.
• 5. Free chocolate for everyone

Cheryl

4/8/02 Cheryl - New Books

Dear Meister,

I had to order birthday presents for a friend so I'm now in possession of Caleb Williams and John Halperin's biography of Jane Austen.  Of course time to read is the real problem, but I hope to make an attempt at Caleb this week as soon as I've finished some of my spring chores (replacing shingles,  moving some of the hardy plants out to the greenhouse, getting my new mini-tiller set up, etc.)  I have been reading Political Justice from this month's link when I get the chance. Which brings to mind the following question:  was there ever a political writer who didn't think that he and his friends were the only human beings competent to run things??
Cheryl

4/9/02 Linda - Halperin?

Dear Cheryl,

"John Halperin's biography of Jane Austen"  Gosh, another one I haven't heard of!  Let us know if it is worthwhile.  And I see that "time" is a problem for you, too.

"I have been reading Political Justice from this month's link" - Lord, I forgot that one!  I am still in the midst of getting my computer sorted out with browser change overs, retrieving my address books, book marks, new all-in-one machine, etc. - so it is a job to do any computing.

"Which brings to mind the following question:  was there ever a political writer who didn't think that he and his friends were the only human beings competent to run things??" Thank goodness for Cheryl, you keep me laughing.  But it is not really "funny" because once again you have hit the nail on the head!  I am in the middle of Caleb and your remark is so true even today because those people are still around.

BTW the Meister mentioned the French Philosophes and coincidentally I found something called Diderot Encyclopedias (Encyclopédie, ou Dictionaire Raisoné des Sciences, des Arts et des Métiers) (published 1751-1777) at the Louisiana State Museum in New Orleans which has a first edition written in French for sure.  I had no idea it was there.  Now to finish Caleb.
Linda

4/10/02 Cheryl - John Halperin ...

... is the editor of a book my husband got me several years ago called Jane Austen Bicentenary essays and apparently a mover and shaker in the world of Jane Austen.  I enjoyed his essay "Jane Austen's ninteenth-century critics: Walter Scott to Henry James" and the majority of his choices for the book (he's also in my "20th Century critical voices" book) so when I saw he'd written a biography I had to have it.

Frankly I'd much rather be on the roof than dealing with a new computer.  I feel the same about computer set up as I do about plumbing: I can do it if I have to, (with much cursing) but I'd pay someone else to do it for me.
Cheryl

4/3/02 Katie Dick [gotta__be__kd@hotmail.com] - confused about P&P

Dear Sir,

I had recently read Pride and Prejudice and to my surprise I greatly disliked it. I had not expected this. I am writing to you in hopes that you can help clear up some of my confusion. I am doing an essay and presentation for my OAC english class so any clarification would be great.

The first thing that had caught my attention while reading the book was the fact that all the characters were only concerned with love and marriage. None of them had any hobbies or interests. I found the book predicable and did not for a moment believe that Elizabeth would not marry Darcy.

I have some concerns about the book. I have been told it is a satire but to me it seems more like a romance. Everything that happens in the book is extremely unrealistic, especially Mr. Darcy's love for Elizabeth. I have read through what was on the web site about P&P and can agree with most of it. However, I cannot agree that such a man would ever exist in the times of P&P. This is what leads me to dislike the book. It would be a great romance novel if that is what it was called, but I am being taught that this is a realism. However, according to what I have read about women and marriage of those times it is not realistic at all.

I am also very curious about the first sentence: "It is a truth universally known that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife" (page 1). Now I have been told that this sentence is ironic because, "not all single men want a wife, much as the mothers of unmarried daughters would like to think they do" (last page of Intro for P&P). However, in this book all the rich single men are in want of a wife and the whole book seems to follow this stereotype about men.

I think men and women are horribly misrepresented in this book. Women seem to have nothing on their minds but rich men (or is the fact that Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy are rich, just a coincidence), and men  seem to be concerned only with their true loves and marrying them. I somewhat doubt that many men in those times would marry as shown in the book, with no concern of social status.

I have many more questions about the book and I and desperately trying to figure out what Jane Austen had intended this book to show.

If you could write me back and let me know of your opinions, or even refer me to some site which deal with my concerns I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you for your time and consideration.
Katie Dick

4/8/02 Bree - P&P Confusion

Dear Katie,

I think the bottom line about why Pride and Prejudice is so successful is the very fact that Jane Austen wrote a predictable plot and made it so fascinating that I, for one, could not put it down either in my teens or now in my 50's.  She is an author who could have re-told "The Three Bears" and have made you want to read it!  Also, regarding hobbies, the young women of that time who had what was considered a suitable education could read, do needlework, or instrumental or vocal music.  However, they were also encouraged to "take regular exercise", and walking and riding were a very important part of their lives.  Elizabeth Bennet did like to read, especially when closted in a drawing room with the sisters of Mr. Bingley!

4/5/02 Bruce - To Katie

Dear Katie,

Although all of the regular posters on this board love Jane Austen’s novels, you have hit on precisely some of those criticisms with which Pride and Prejudice can be accurately skewered. However, you also make some errors: Austen was no romantic; she was a rationalist.

As much as I hate to disagree with our honored leader Ashton, the opening sentence of Pride and Prejudice IS meant to be ironical.  However, the irony is not that the mothers who think the rich single men are the rightful property of some one or other of their daughters are wrong ­ the irony is that they are right.  Austen is pretending to make fun of these mothers.  She leads her readers to laugh at the matchmaking moms, and then forces the readers to laugh at themselves when they recognize that the matchmaking moms were actually practical, reasonable, and correct.  Thus Mrs. Bennet (with whom the reader cannot sympathize) is actually right most of the time, and Mr. Bennet (with whom the reader generally agrees) is wrong.

Many critics find Darcy and Elizabeth’s romance a bit incredible. The sudden swings in the opinions of both can strain the reader’s credulity.  Indeed, although P&P is Austen’s most popular novel, a number of critics think it is her worst novel, because it is the least realistic.  The Cinderella plot, the farcical, unrealistic characters (like Mr. Collins or Lady Catherine), and the unbelievable mood swings are among the novel’s weak points.  Austen, after all, practically invented fictional "realism" (as opposed to the romanticism of her contemporary Sir Walter Scott, or the farce of her predecessor Henry Fielding).  Counteracting P&P’s weaknesses, its strengths include a charming, witty heroine, a romantic plot, and an inordinate amount of almost slapstick humor.

Finally, Austen (along with Twain) is the funniest of all great novelists. If you don’t like Darcy polishing Miss Bingley off with a cryptic quip, or Lady Catherine (by memory) scolding her tenants into prosperity, give up on reading Austen.  The real Austen fans laugh out loud several times a chapter.

4/3/02 Ashton Dennis - Don't be afraid to talk of love

Dear Katie,

You are doing a lot of good around here. We have become so set in our Janeite ways, that we have forgotten that others might challenge our views. We have become a Jane Austen choir. You remarks are intelligent and thought provoking. Thank you.

In my reply, I will try to answer your specific questions and to challenge you in return. I should begin by also confessing that your instructor is better qualified than I, and that I even agree with some of what you are being taught. I agree that Jane Austen's writing is realistic, but I find it nonsense to think Pride and Prejudice is a satire. It is conventional to think so, just as it is orthodoxy to imagine the first line of Pride and Prejudice to be ironic - I think that nonsense as well.

At the root of my interpretation is an understanding that you must find alien. I believe that love, especially the love between a man and a woman, is a thing worth talking about. Yes, Jane Austen's novels are about love - well, the early development of love - and that is precisely why they are so important. Do you talk of love with your friends? Do you think of love? I suspect not - if you do not, then why is that? You better had think and talk about love, that might prevent you making the greatest mistake of your life. I don't know why love is so taboo these days, but I have noticed some things. Love is sand in the industrial machine. Better a woman goes to work than marry because she can then be used to reduce the cost of labor. (Just don't let the young ones know that most jobs aren't worth having, and, most often, those that are worth having don't work out.) Better the woman remains isolated from men and family so that she can become a transportable, interchangable cog.

The first line of P&P, "It is a truth universally known that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife", is not meant as irony. The best proof of that is the one you suggest - nearly every man does seem to want to marry. This myth about the irony of that line says more about our present-day attitudes than about those of Jane Austen's time. The line must be read in context with those following few lines, so that its true meaning - Jane Austen's intent - becomes clear.

As to marrying without regard to class, I have a couple of things to say. I first remind you of what Elizabeth said to Lady Catherine, "He is a gentleman and I am a gentleman's daughter, so far we are equal." So, Darcy will not marry beneath his class. The real problem in Elizabeth's background is not class, it is economic situation. Elizabeth can bring no money to a marriage but she will bring relations - "connections" - that could well prove to be a drag on the wealth of Pemberley. Think about the cost that had already accrued to Darcy from one of Elizabeth's more intimate connections, her sister Lydia. Remember, this was a time when there were no agricultural subsidies or government bail-outs. Darcy's fortune would rise or fall based solely on his management of his affairs.

Also, don't think of Jane Austen's time as you would the later Victorian period. Think of hers of more like our 1960s. It was drugs, sex, and revolution. There were many famous examples of men marrying below what Victorians would call "their station." Even at this site, I have discussed the examples of the marriage of Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin to Percy Shelley and of Mary Lyons' to Lord Hamilton and her liason with Lord Nelson. If you are identifying the attitudes of Jane Austen's time with those of the Victorian, then I suggest you are making a mistake.

You say "no hobbies or interests", so you are forgetting that Elizabeth Bennet, Mary Bennet, Georgianna Darcy, and Miss Bingley were musicians. Don't discount that - think of this; this was a time when there was no recorded music. So, on an evening at beautiful Pemberley, how would you hear music? Think about your own life - imagine that you could have no access to recorded music and of what value you would place on a musical friend's talent in that case. There is little wonder that Darcy placed so much emphasis on this accomplishment in Elizabeth and in his sister.

No, no one ever doubts that Elizabeth will marry Darcy; the sexual tension is palpable throughout the novel. No one should doubt that and yet someone does - Elizabeth Bennet herself.

4/2/02 sarah star_princess33@hotmail.com - pure speculation...

To All,

You all seem like quite intelligent types - so this may seem a bit trite to you all - but has anyone got any suggestions on what Mr Darcy's actual name is?! I decided on William, but if anyone has any real information relating to this I'd be grateful.

4/2/02 Ashton - Good guess, you almost have it

Dear Sarah,

The answer is Fitzwilliam. Notice that his cousin's name is Colonel Fitzwilliam. My assumption is that the cousin is Darcy's mother's nephew which means that "Fitzwilliam" was her maiden name. Perhaps you noticed that the Darcy-like character in Bridget Jones' Diary is named William Darcy.

Beginning students of Jane Austen are as welcome around here as any of those crusty old Janeites that usually haunt this place.

4/1/02 Linda - Andrew Davies again

Dear Voices,

Tonight on Masterpiece Theater (PBS) they are running Part 1 of "The Way We Live Now" by Anthony Trollope.  Part 2 - 4 is on succeeding Monday nights. I thought it might be of interest because Andrew Davies is the screenwriter.

Sorry to be so late posting this but I stubbed two toes this morning running to get the baby.
Linda

4/2/02 Ashton - Dear Tripsichore

Dear Tripsichore - I mean Terpsichore,

Good tip! I am enjoying that. Thank you.

Grandmother care-givers are like professional football players - they have to will themselves to "play hurt" - must be able to face the opponent while injured.

4/2/02 Bruce - K2

Dear Ashton,

I have no idea who William Godwin was.  However, it comes to mind that the second tallest mountain in the world, now generally called "K2", was once called Mt. Godwin-Austen (or was it Mt. Goodwin-Austen?).  I have no idea why I mention this, except that it seems strangely appropriate.

4/3/02 Linda - Mt. Godwin-Austen

Dear Bruce,

That name is intriguing so I 'Googled' K2 and found this site. Here is a page from Bartleby.com for Henry Haversham Godwin-Austen. There is a photo of him here.

The dates for Henry Haversham are 1834-1923 which places him near William Godwin who died in 1836. So he is not his son, but I do wonder what ever became of Godwin's son by his marriage after Mary Wollstonecraft died.  I did a 'google' for Godwin-Austen but with no results about his family.  There must be a Godwin and Austen connection somewhere which should prove to be interesting.  The 'connection' sounds like an oxymoron.  I may possibly find something in the edition of the Caleb Williams book that just arrived.  I will have to keep my eyes open. Thanks for the heads up, Bruce.

4/4/02 Bree - Lady Susan

Dear Stashton,

Reading through Lady Susan letters again and savoring every minute.  Finally figured out POLLY WALKER could do it (play Lady Susan).  Check her out in Enchanted April - she is really a femme fatale (with a different hair style of course), absolutely unreal eyes (gorgeous) and talent. (For some reason,she absolutely disappeared in Emma 96, which turned Jane Fairfax into a nonentity). Another possibility, Miranda Richardson.  She is not exactly the physical type, but her acting ability would make this work I think.  She could definitely carry it off. Shall we go on to the others?  There must be a role for Justine Waddel in there somewhere.  Just don't let Rozema get her hands on it!  Happy Easter

From the Meister: Actually, the performance that
may qualify Polly Walker for Lady Susan was the
one she gave in Restoration. Did you see that?

4/4/02 Bree - Restoration

Dear Stashton,

Where can I find Restoration?  (the film, I mean)

From the Meister: Here is a link to another
web site for a description of Restoration.

4/4/02 anonymous - agree to disagree

Dear Ashton,

Professional engagements forced me to be away for a while, but I wanted to drop by to thank you for the Waldron recommendation. I enjoyed it.

Your non-feminist critique is still not very clear to me—again, I suspect a little problem with definitions, but it does not matter... I know what I’ll get from you.

I laughed when I read your reply.  Considering that after all my years on this earth I have never stumbled into a vacuum that was not artificially created it is probably wiser to leave it alone... sometimes it is best to agree to disagree.

Best regards,
Anonymous

Links