NOTE on the use of the term "mother-in-law" in the video. In the early 19th century, the term "mother-in-law" was used more loosely than it is today. Austen herself refers to the relationship between John Dashwood and Mrs Dashwood as "mother-in-law" and "son-in-law", so that's what I've used here: * "He survived his uncle no longer; and ten thousand pounds, including the late legacies, was all that remained for his widow and daughters. His son was sent for as soon as his danger was known, and to him Mr. Dashwood recommended, with all the strength and urgency which illness could command, the interest of his mother-in-law and sisters" (ch.1). * "No sooner was her answer dispatched [accepting Barton Cottage], than Mrs. Dashwood indulged herself in the pleasure of announcing to her son-in-law and his wife that she was provided with a house, and should incommode them no longer than till every thing were ready for her inhabiting it." (opening of ch.5)
Thank you for clarifying! This makes a lot of sense. I think today we are so used to the “in-law” term to mean the family you marry into. But I’ve heard it used synonymously with “by-law” in period pieces and it makes sense when describing what we now call step parents and step children.
I think the logic of their day was that he was her son only by right of her marriage to his father , so in that sense he is a son in law. Where we would call someone a sister-in-law Jane has them call each other “sister” and “brother”
Amazing note. In polish translation a step-mother and step-son is in use. I also read and re-read the original and never noticed the different term :) very interesting!
I think Charlotte’s marriage to Mr Collins wasn’t that bad, sure they didn’t love each other but Collins even though overbearing, irritating and cringey wasn’t abusive or cruel. Charlotte managed to be financially secured and the lady of her own home which ultimately what was she wanted and she definitely seemed to be able to manipulate Mr Collins, managing to keep him out of her way as much as possible. There’s at least some respect there.
I also believe that Charlotte wouldn't have been like Fanny Dashwood, and actually had Mr. Collin help the Bennets, if Jane and Lizzy hadn't married Bingley and Darcy, because of her friendship with Lizzy. I mean Charlotte always seemed a good friend especially when she warned Lizzy that Jane should be more affectionate and we later found that Darcy thought Jane wasn't in love with Bingley because she wasn't so outwardly affectionate.
He was cruel, though. He tried to bully Elizabeth into marrying him by telling her that probably nobody else would want her, and when Lydia ran away, he came to Longbourne to gloat and tell her sisters she'd be better off dead.
I always thought Fanny's mother & father (Mansfield Park) had the worst marriage. They had so many children, lived in abject poverty, & he was an alcoholic. My worst nightmare.
I think Charlotte was quite happy having her own home, and a marriage, and independence. Also, in Lizzie's visit, she makes it clear that she has set up routines and patterns for the days that make it work.
Agreed. I think of the Collins as a very good marriage since both of them are getting exactly what they want in life, thanks to Charlotte's practicality and Mr. Collins' obliviousness.
Mr. Collins/Charlotte Lucas: Realist Mr. Bingley/Jane Bennet: Idealist Mr. Darcy/Elizabeth Bennet: Rationalist Mr. Wickham/Lydia Bennet: Fantasist Mr. Bennet/Mrs. Bennet: Absurdist
The Hursts in Pride and Prejudice seems pretty miserable. Do they have their own home, or do they just sponge off Mr. Bingley? Mr Hurst is constantly drunk and embarrassing.
I don't think they aren't well off and just live off of Mr. Bingley. It was quite common in Regency England to have prolonged family visits that could last up to several months and we are never really told how much money Mr. Hurst has at his disposal.
I think people are too hard on Charlotte. Lizzy had the luxury of being able to refuse Collins (or pr*ck-Darcy) and wait for someone better because she was 6 years younger than Charlotte and prettier than Charlotte, so she knew she had at least some chances to find someone else. Also, she had a father who didn't want her to marry someone like Collins...not every father would object to that marriage. In the context, Collins was Charlotte's only and last chance to ever have a life, that at the time meant a house and a family. The alternative for Charlotte was not between Collins and someone better than him, it was between Collins and staying in her parents' house till her father's death and then who knows.. maybe living with one of her brothers or her sister if she ever got married, being the 'poor relative'. I'm sure Charlotte would have been happier to marry someone as good natured as Bingley or someone as intelligent as Darcy rather than Mr. Collins, but sadly they would never ever look at her...and she knew it, that's the point. She had good sense, she was perceptive and intelligent, but she was plain and not as charmingly quick-witted as Lizzy nor as conventionally beautiful as Jane, so she contented herself with what she could realistically have. Had she not married Collins, she would have lived her whole life in her parents' house dreaming of a better man who would never come. Lizzy contented herself with the best, but not everyone is given that chance. I've always thought that when Austen makes Charlotte say that she's always been pragmatic and not romantic, the character is in a way lying to herself. She had to learn to be pragmatic, because there was no alternative. I think she was relatively happy. Certainly there would be bad days when she secretly envied her friends who got it all and maybe she secretly thought unfair she couldn't have both love and security when they could, but she would prevent those thoughts from destroying her serenity comparing her own situation and spinsterhood.
Continuing this thought -- Charlotte Lucas was already nearing that dangerous age of 28. She had a younger sister who could marry better if Charlotte led the way. And she had her parents and other siblings to consider. She observed William Collins as a suitor for her best friend Lizzy Bennet. Upon finding that the offer of marriage had been made and rejected, she did the hard calculus. Charlotte could remain as an aging spinster in her parents' home, and eventually as a poor relative living with a sibling. Or she could become the wife of an upwardly mobile young clergyman under the patronage of Lady Catherine de Bourgh. And upon Mr. Bennet's death she would be Mrs. Collins, the mistress of Longbourn. She would raise her family near her parents' home at Lucas Lodge, and she would be in a position to take up her former life in Meryton, now as a leading member of the community. Charlotte would probably face the same problem with the entail on Longbourn that troubled Mrs. Bennet. As long as she provided one male heir to inherit upon Mr. Collins' death, her place would be secure. Mr. Collins, in turn, married the daughter of a knight, a practical and supportive soul who made his home life more convivial than a Miss Elizabeth ever could.
Absolutely! To say nothing of the fact that unmarried, middle/upper class women who weren't lucky enough to inherit any property or money basically had no rights or independence. Their only career options, as it were, were marriage, to become a companion to some wealthier relative or friend of the family or whatever, or else become a governess. We see that plight highlighted in Emma with Jane Fairfax, her aunt and grandmother. Charlotte's family are not implied to be particularly well off; Sir William was knighted because of his being mayor of Meryton, and had made his money in trade I'm pretty sure, so they were technically a lower class than the Bennets as well. I thought the youtube series the Lizzie Bennet Diaries updated Charlotte's choice really well. It's basically the choice between choosing a less than ideal, but stable, job and gaining that financial security and independence with the possibility of being able to improve the situation with time (she is clever enough that she could totally steer Collins to a promotion I'm sure, as well as his prospects of inheriting Longbourn), vs choosing the path of idealism and 'not selling out' which might work out and bring great rewards, but could equally completely fail leaving you forced to compromise and make the stable choice later, but with the downside of now being completely disillusioned. Lizzie is lucky enough to escape the latter ending, but her romantic notions could very easily have resulted in that kind of life (and she does joke about becoming an old maid to Jane). In many ways too I think Lizzie is a great deal more like Lydia than she (or many readers) would like to think; they are both very romantically minded, stubborn, and somewhat inclined to be dismissive of other people. The difference is the fact that as Lizzie is the second born her father paid more attention to her, whereas he'd sort of given up by the time Lydia arrived..
I agree completely, and I also always thought she would have protected the Bennet girls from being thrown out of their home if any were still unmarried when their father died. Considering they already have the parsonage right next to Lady Catherine, I think Charlotte would have had an easy job convincing Mr. Collins to appear generous and caring by allowing his cousins to remain at Longbourne at least for some time until they could marry or their mother passed and that dowry being split among them.
@@patriciauselton6460 I especially love your point about Charlotte having to consider her family. Both her father and sister, when visiting the married couple, seem happy with the match - and especially impressed by Lady Catherine de Bourgh. Lady Catherine even offers Miss Lucas and Lizzie a private carriage for their return trip, and hosts them both at Rosings. Mr Collins may not have been the most attractive man in the novel, but he was respectable, set to inherit a good estate, and had desirable social connections. Charlotte not only chose the best option she had available to her personally, she made an advantageous union for her family
Elizabeth certainly had more advantages than Charlotte. As has been mentioned already, she was younger than Charlotte and was good-looking. Moreover, she was of higher birth for she was born into the landed gentry whereas the Lucas family were newcomers to upper class circles. Consequently, it was not unrealistic of Elizabeth to think that she could attract the affection of a gentleman she could love and respect.
I do not believe that Lydia is smart enough to even realize that she is in a bad relationship. She is so distracted by all the frivolous thoughts in her own head and the external activities around her that she doesn't even pick up on the fact that Wickham doesn't even love her.
One of the things I love most about Jane’s novels is that the worst people don’t suffer the slings and arrows of what we might like them to, or even what they might truly deserve. Just like in real life.
Great point. I agree - a robust refusal to accept such moralising novelistic conventions runs throughout Austen's novels. In _Sense and Sensibility_ we might think of Lucy Steele, who remains comeuppance free (unless you think being married to Robert Ferrars is a comeuppance, which Lucy doesn't seem to), or John Willoughby: "But that he was for ever inconsolable, that he fled from society, or contracted an habitual gloom of temper, or died of a broken heart, must not be depended on-for he did neither. He lived to exert, and frequently to enjoy himself. His wife was not always out of humour, nor his home always uncomfortable; and in his breed of horses and dogs, and in sporting of every kind, he found no inconsiderable degree of domestic felicity." (ch.50)
@@DrOctaviaCox I've always felt she was particularly mean about Mary Bennet though, both within the body of the novel and at the end where she is left alone at home, moralizing over every morning visit with Mrs Bennet. Maybe Mary's flaws were really the ones that Jane Austen disliked most!
@@zillie8167 Maybe when she wrote "Pride and Prejudice", at least. But when I read "Mansfield Park", I couldn't help feeling that Fanny Price and Mary Crawford felt a bit like Mary and Elizabeth Bennett, as written by an older Austen who had come to like Mary more and like Elizabeth a heck of a lot less.
@@christophertaylor2462 exactly. I've also compared those two characters - brave and spontaneous Elizabeth (walking to see her sister etc) and as brave and spontaneous and also charming Mary Crawford - how differently treated in these two novels! (From thise two I feel "safer" reading Mansfield Park, cause I was always more like Fanny or Mary B. than any atrractive, brave young women ;) and I wonder what influence Jane A. was expecting to have on young women - her readers - in both cases - and why :) )
I would have to disagree about Lydia. I think because of when, in the novel, and how it happens we don't see the fall out of it, but Wickham's character is is really shown to have a pattern of behavior, a viciousness and recklessness that has never really been punished for. I don't think we are expected to believe he's learned anything and I think the reading of text is to lead us to believe bad things await her in the future, particularly once she grows up and understands her situation. I don't think Lydia's ignorance regarding her marriage is the same thing as being happy or not being unhappy like Charlotte.
I agree, the book itself says that they Lydia is always getting money from Jane or Elizabeth and that they are always in dept. It also says they take separate vacations and Lydia herself stops loving Wickham at some point fairly early on.
I think it would take quite a lot for Lydia Wickham to be unhappy. Through the whole book, she acts only for herself, and never bothers to consider how her behavior affects others. Wickham is also selfish and manipulative, but I think his own self-interest would prevent him from acting too cruelly to her-- there would be considerable risk of her family intervening, and with many more resources than they had when he met them. Lydia also takes after her mother the most out of the five sisters, and Mrs. Bennet, although her marriage could not be described as "happy," clearly built up her own little reality to inhabit, centered around gossip and matchmaking. She's not "punished" for her inappropriate conduct like Eliza Brandon is, or like Marianne Dashwood is. She never shows repentance or gratitude for all her family has done for her. I know we have different ideas about teenage development now than during the Regency, but I guess I assumed Lydia was never going to grow out of her ways, so a marriage that would certainly have served as a punishment for another heroine is just a minor inconvenience to her.
Wickham is vicious and reckless. However, I don't think he respects Lydia enough to be deliberately cruel to her, if that makes sense. I don't think he quite regards her as a person, but an asset or hindrance. He resented Darcy because Darcy sees through him and has things he wants. Lydia does not see or hear anything she doesn't want to. She will probably go through life thinking he's wonderful because it's most convenient for her. Her willful ignorance will keep her safe.
Plus Lydia would end up permanently pregnant and Wickham would go off with prostitutes when she was to heavily pregnant, he'd be risking catching the pox too. Being married to Wickham would be an awful fate indeed.
I don't know: Lydia didn't strike me as someone who'd ever grow up. She appeared to have a similar disposition to that of her mother, and we see, Mrs. Bennet hasn't really grown up much/
I agree that Lydia won't likely regret her marriage. Mr. Wickham might have regrets, but who cares how he feels, lol. Also, I imagine he will have a mistress or two at some point.
We are told in the final chapter that Wickham would go, without Lydia, "to enjoy himself in London or Bath" (ch.61). I think we can guess what that means...
At the end of the book, we’re also told that whatever initial attraction Lydia and Wickham had shared quickly vanished, and they ended up very indifferent toward one another. As for finances, the Wickhams end up mooching off the Bingleys to the point where the Bingleys talk about the possibility of asking the Wickhams to move out. So Wickham obviously continued his profligate ways, and Lydia would have been no source of restraint.
Wickham was given a commission to the Newcastle militia in Pride and Prejudice. Although Austen couldn't know that when she wrote her book, this militia ended up at Waterloo and almost all the officers were killed in action. Lydia probably ended up a widow.
Regarding "Pride and Prejudice", I thought that Elizabeth's first reaction to Charlotte’s engagement to Collins was rather unfair. She comdemned Charlotte using her personal idealistic beliefs even if Charlotte has been rather clear about hers. I think this may be because at that point in her life, poverty with all its hardships, and most possible loneliness due to not being able to marry (in her own terms) didn't seem like a reality to Lizzy, and reminds me of "The house of Mirth" As a practical person, from the beginning I appreciated Charlotte's stance regarding Collins because in a time were probably many marriages weren't out of love, she was able to find someone which won't harm her, without vices, and to whom she could be a good companion, they may even be able to forge a good longterm relationship, and be as happy as possible
I agree Charlotte and Mr. Collins shouldn't be on the list because although Mr. Collin's is not a great man, his stature in life and his respectability would ensure a comfortable life for Charlotte. Charlotte knew of his character before she was married to him and understood that she might not have another offer, so she took it because although Mr. Collins is who he is, he would provide her with a comfortable life and home. Because of the restrictions of the time, and lack of opportunity for Charlotte it was a choice that was good for both her and Mr. Collins. Lady Catherine was right, Mr. Collins needed to marry and marry well -- Charlotte was a better choice than Lizzy ==
And Charlotte does fit the bill of Mr Collins's wife wish-list according to Lady Catherine! Mr Collins says "she said, ‘Mr. Collins, you must marry. A clergyman like you must marry. Choose properly, choose a gentlewoman for my sake; and for your own, let her be an active, useful sort of person, not brought up high, but able to make a small income go a good way. This is my advice. Find such a woman as soon as you can, bring her to Hunsford, and I will visit her’" (ch.19).
I agree! I love Lizzy, but she could not have borne the life offered by Mr. Collins and she would have made them both miserable. Charlotte is more suited to the life and better able to make her own happiness wherever she is. She understands that life needs practicality and purposefully chooses a practical and beneficial marriage. I have always thought of their union as a successful match, not a negative one. It's quite a happy ending for both Mr. Collins and Charlotte, given the times. And, it's beneficial for the Benners, as well, as Charlotte would never allow Mr. Collins to be cruel to the Bennet ladies when Mr. Bennet dies.
Yes, I agree. I also think it possible that Charlotte could be a positive influence on Mr. Collins. I don't think he would change tremendously but he could develop a tenderness for her and for a child that could soften him a bit.
I feel that the worst marriage of all was in Sense and Sensibility. That of Colonel Brandon's older brother to their cousin Eliza, " against her inclination". At 17 years old "she was allowed no liberty , no society, no amusement, till my father's point was gained".
@@annnee6818 it’s a factor she took into account, but her father didn’t force her into marriage against her inclination, she made a free choice to marry Rushworth.
@@annnee6818 It's Julia who married to escape their father if I remember well, Mr Bertram asked Maria during her engagement wether or not she was sure of her decision.
currently re-reading Sense and Sensibility and I feel really bad for Miss Grey, aka Mrs. Willoughby. Her husband seduced, knocked up (got pregnant), and then abandoned a _fifteen_ year old girl. Yiiiiikes. And then he played with the heart of *another* teenager only to end up marrying the third woman to pay off his debts. I think of Anne Bronte's The Tenant of Wildfell Hall and I suspect Miss Grey had a similar marriage.
Sad for her but she’s a rich woman so it would be easy for her. I think she’ll have as many affairs as Willoughby but Willoughby wouldn’t divorce her since she’s the one with money.
@@Girl-rj3qe my dear, all the money a lady possessed became the property of the husband as soon as she married, unless there was some annuity set in her dowry or prenuptial agreement. Of course, social norms dictated the husband was to provide for his wife and we do not see abusive cruelty from Willoughby towards his wife other than that he was unfaithful.
@@julijakeitNo, it didn't. It became BOTH their property, which yes did mean a husband could gamble away his wife's money - or a wife her husband's! - unless there were legal settlements which Miss Grey undoubtedly had or her family would not have let her marry someone poor. I get so tired of this 'wife's property became the husband's' argument. 'With all my worldly goods I thee endow' is said by the HUSBAND in the marriage contract, not the wife. I have read of so many Victorian husband's ruined by paying their wife's debts, because his money was legally hers to spend!
His sister, Mary, gives us a little insight into what it would have been, with her astonishingly cynical prediction of "when love ceased", plus her worldly acceptance of a "regular flirtation" between Henry and Maria at family visits....
I've always though that a few years into Fanny and Henry's marriage they would have been like Stepan (Stiva) and Darya (Dolly) Oblonsky from Anna Karenina.
I know a lot of people are pissed off with that, but I love how Austen destroys the cliché of "virginal goody-goody girl changes bad boy into good boy", and slaps the reader with "Nope, that doesn't happen if the guy does not want to change". I have always loved how much Jane kicks Romantic ideals until they are left bleeding on the ground.
@@isabelguzmanmiranda5025 Yes. Even in Pride and Prejudice Elizabeth doesn't change Darcy, instead her and our perspectives are shifted and we see that he wasn't a bad person in the first place. Not because all his actions suddenly make sense, but because we realise he didn't actually do the worst things that he's been accused of in the first place. They both then meet on the middle ground.
John Dashwood did not really mind Fanny pushing him to be selfish, because he is fundamentally selfish. It benefits him, so he’s fine with it. His spinelessless is a convenient way to avoid making hard decisions.
If he had been a good sort of man, he would have put his foot down. Then told Fanny to zip it. Usually our mates amplify the worst of our traits. Or exploit them
I don’t think he is fundamentally good man or that the video is trying to portray him as such, the video says they bring worts out of each other. If his wife has been someone like Jane like the example she would never have been fine with his sisters not being taken care of and he didn’t have a spine to go against societies expectations on his own, even if he wanted to since he was greedy as well.
I have just been re-reading S&S and I agree - John Dashwood is a vile character: in Ch 33 he complains to Elinor of the cost of replacing the china, linen etc bequeathed to her (Elinor's) mum. "He (their dad) had an undoubted right to dispose of his own property as he chose, but in consequence we have been obliged...to supply....what was taken away". Later, in Ch 41 (after Edward Ferrars has been disowned and cut off by his mother) Edward has been offered the living which is within Col. Brandon's gift), John Dashwood cannot understand this action - "He could have sold this for £1,400......what could be the Colonel's motive?" - (Elinor replies) "A very simple one - to be of use to Mr Ferrars". John Dashwood simply cannot understand this. This conversation goes on with a bit of sexual politics: "We think now" said Mr Dashwood "of Robert's marrying Miss Morton." (she had previously been lined up for Edward). Elinor, smiling (replied) "The lady, I suppose, has no choice in the affair." "Choice! - how do you mean?" 21st century satire couldn't - doesn't - do it better.
I think all this is beside the question. Were John and Fanny happily married? I’d say ‘yes’. They are both mean and selfish and this unites rather than divides them.
The marriage of Colonel Brandon's brother with his father's ward, Eliza, is only briefly described, but it's surely one of the worst, if not the very worst.
Yes, awful - I have another video about the narrative of Mrs Eliza Brandon's marriage here which may be of interest: th-cam.com/video/kKxNYZja4eg/w-d-xo.html
We should also probably include Brandon's mom and dad's marriage because we know his dad is a self-dealing bully who has two sons and forces his WARD to marry the one that DOESN'T love her when the son that does would have equally entitled him to steal all her money. What a lout. Another example of Austen showing that the "Great and Transparent Men of England" is really just a veneer of civility over a whole wealth of oppression and wrongs eating at the soul of England.
@@mayrnibird9224 That was super common at the time - Mr Knightley is something like 16 years older than Emma. That alone isn't something that should lead to a "worst marriage in Austen" label.
If we are considering off-stage marriages, we must include both of the Elliot men, especially William Elliot: marrying his poor, unsuitable wife for her money and clearly not caring a fig to even mourn her properly. Perhaps Sir Walter is better placed in the worst parents in Austen category, but I always wonder about that marriage, since he is so unfeeling to two of his daughters, especially when Anne is supposed to be so much like her mother.
Yes, excellent shout re Mr Elliot and his wife. Mrs Smith tells us of Mr Elliot's reasons for choosing his wife: "Money, money, was all that he wanted. Her father was a grazier, her grandfather had been a butcher, but that was all nothing. She was a fine woman, had had a decent education, was brought forward by some cousins, thrown by chance into Mr Elliot's company, and fell in love with him; and not a difficulty or a scruple was there on his side, with respect to her birth. All his caution was spent in being secured of the real amount of her fortune, before he committed himself." And exactly as you say, his mourning is superficial - he's already making calculations about his next wife! Anne makes clear the impropriety of this: "My dear Mrs Smith, Mr Elliot's wife has not been dead much above half a year. He ought not to be supposed to be paying his addresses to any one." (Persuasion, ch.21)
Yes, indeed: "Lady Elliot had been an excellent woman, sensible and amiable; whose judgement and conduct, if they might be pardoned the youthful infatuation which made her Lady Elliot, had never required indulgence afterwards.--She had humoured, or softened, or concealed his failings, and promoted his real respectability for seventeen years; and though not the very happiest being in the world herself, had found enough in her duties, her friends, and her children, to attach her to life, and make it no matter of indifference to her when she was called on to quit them.--" ('Persuasion' ch.1).
@@DrOctaviaCox I wonder if at least part of the reason why Mr. Elliot pursued Anne as opposed to her sister Elizabeth is because he thought Anne might be easier to control.
@@legendarymermaid To me it always seemed like Mr. Elliot did enjoy intelligence and Elizabeth wasn't as quick witted as Anne. He also didn't mind doing something morally wrong but by the same token didn't try to draw attention to it. He liked being a bit in the shadow where his actions would go more unnoticed. Elizabeth liked being the center of attention too much. And also your point. It even ties into the attention point: Anne would never make a scene even if she was unhappy. Elizabeth on the other hand... Just my interpretation though. Been a while since I read the book.
It’s amazing Edmund and Fanny ended up in a happy marriage. Fanny is an amazing character who does what is right despite being trying to be bullied into an unhappy marriage.I have a lot of respect for her.
I felt sorry for Charlotte because of Lizzie's treatment to her. It's her best friend and she was so quick to judge her for what she did, but even as a 13 year I could see that Charlotte had little other choice. What was she meant to do for the rest of her life, she needed to be looked after, anf there was no other offer. It was poorly done on Lizzie's side.
@@pippiecarr9378 I think Lizzie probably thought Charlotte would be as miserable in the marriage as she would have been and said what she said out of concern for someone she loved. That doesn't make it any more sensitive of course, but it was from wanting to protect and not attack.
I was always surprised when I reread Northanger Abbey that we were persuaded to think of the main character as "just a silly girl" for imagining General Tilney murdered his wife. He very obviously abused her at least and for Catherine to take the leap that he caused her death in some way is not that far fetched. Especially considering how many murders are committed by one spouse or the other.
The way young Tilney felt it incredibly necessary to force the idea of his parents' 'love' onto Catherine is so telling. General Tilney absolutely neglected his wife's illness , if anything, that's abuse .
Yes, this is always a point that I think is overlooked when Catherine's 'naivete' is mocked. She's actually completely correct that General Tilney is a cruel man, she just has a more dramatic idea of what that cruelty consists in. I think JA was trying to make the point that real-life cruelty tends to be far less obvious than in books, and you need to watch out for it, which Catherine DOES. It also adds another layer to her relationship with Henry. I've heard it critcized for him 'knowing' more than her, but he actually doesn't. His automatic impulse is to defend his father, but he actually realizes Catherine is more right about him and stands up to him in the end. He would probably never have been brave enough to do that without Catherine's example.
I would love a counterpart to this video: Jane Austen's best marriage. I think this would be really interesting and entertaining, especially given all the side characters throughout her works that would be fun to investigate. The first couple that comes to mind, my personal favorite couple, is the Admiral and Mrs. Croft from Persuasion... but there are so many!
I'm convinced that Lydia is not punished because she is the punishment - what Wickham did as a cold-blooded predator is miles worse than a sixteen-year-old's self-absorbed ignorance, and I know the BBC adaption added a wonderful little second when Lydia is gushing over Wickham and he rolls his eyes to himself with this withering resignation 😂 his entire character has been acted, fake, a mask, and so he's doomed to play chipper, dashing husband to Lydia's relentless enthusiasm to the end of his days - truly poetic, without being so heavy handed as him having an alcohol-induced heart attack in a brothel at age 33 😂
Please please please do the best marriages in Jane Austen writing! And what it means: what characteristics of relationship she thought indicates a good marriage.
I really enjoyed your analysis, but I think you underestimate the damage of the Bennet marriage. Mr. Bennet’s winding up of his wife makes an unstable woman even more unstable. Even Lizzy, who is heavily biased in her father’s favor, recognizes this. That Jane and Lizzy escape mostly unscathed is due to nature more than nurture, and that Kitty and Lydia don’t end up much worse off than they do is thanks to Jane and Lizzy in the former case and Darcy in the latter case. Mary could definitely have benefited from a guiding hand from her father. I think all that earns the Bennet marriage a spot in your top three. Still, a really interesting analysis. I just discovered your channel today, and I look forward to exploring it.
I agree. I think it is made clear that Mr. Bennet does not respect his wife and at one point I think he regrets not having taken better care of his daughters, but if you really look at it, in the end he is really happy to let other people sort out his problems. He sais he is utterly ashamed of himself but that it will pass soon enough. While intelligent and well-mannered he is some sort of lethargic enabler in a way. That is what an unhappy marriage does to you.
This is the only Austen novel I've read, and she had me hooked right out of the gate with the painful accuracy of the Mr. and Mrs. Bennett dynamic. Stuff I've seen up close and personal!
I would argue that Mr. Bennet is actually a bit worse than Sir Thomas. Sir Thomas at least seemed to have realized his failings after Maria's elopement and his part in it. He realized he hadn't been the best father and regrets that. Mr. Bennet on the other hand, learns nothing. He does, briefly, mourning his failings, but then it passes and he just goes on as before. Nothing learned.
From personal observation, unhappily married people create a « dysfunctional system » that affects all the people in their orbits. In thinking about the Bennetts, which to me was a disastrous union, I always wondered where the goodness of Jane and the down to earth wisdom of Lizzie came from. They each have their blind spots, but they are not self centred in the way their younger sisters were. They seem less touched by their mother’s egocentricity or their father’s escapism than the other girls. I don’t really think it’s possible to rank unhappiness in a marriage....there are too many varieties of unhappiness, and Jane Austin gives us such great examples! Some people’s coping mechanisms are better than others, but are they really happy?
The question of why Jane and Lizzie turned out so well, especially in comparison to their sisters, is a really interesting one. In considering the five-factor model of personality, it is estimated that 30 to 60% of those factors are influenced by genetics. So part of the answer to the question is possibly that Jane and Lizzie got better genes. In addition, there is a mention that Jane and Lizzie visited the Gardiners in London frequently, while the same thing is not said of the younger three sisters. It could be that the Gardiners were an important influence on how Jane and Lizzie turned out as well. Ultimately, of course, it’s impossible to know why people turn out the way they do (considering the Bennet girls as if they were real people rather than fictional characters), since sometimes people in appalling situations turn out very well, while people in ideal situations turn out badly.
While I agree that the marriage of Sir Bertram and Lady Bertram has problems, I think it has some small saving grace. Lady Bertram in all her indolence does love Sir Thomas as shown by how happy she is to be with him once he is home. Sir Thomas is never shown to be unkind to Lady Bertram and seems to have an affection for her. While I think Sir Thomas does abuse his power and is somewhat responsible for his daughters' recklessness and allows Fanny to be abused by Mrs Norris, he does truly love his children. He was very happy to be home and see his family again. He showed restraint when he found out about the play and he tried to promote Fanny's happiness later in the novel. He took on her sister Susan, encouraged Mrs Bertram to go without Fanny so she could go to the ball and tried to have her well married. He was not privy to Henry Crawford's actual character and at the end of the novel he is happy for Fanny and Edmund. He out of all the parents of Austen learns from his errors and tries to make amends.
Hmmm. I’m afraid I’m not convinced about Sir Thomas’s goodness. Yes, Lady Bertram is content to be with Sir Thomas, but she’s also happy to be with her Pug! And does he really love his children? - Other than how they reflect back on to him? Here are Sir Thomas’s thoughts on the same moment in the novel as the Maria quotation I examined in the video: “Sir Thomas was satisfied; *too glad to be satisfied, perhaps, to urge the matter quite so far as his judgment might have dictated to others* . It was an alliance which he could not have relinquished without pain; and thus he reasoned. Mr. Rushworth was young enough to improve. Mr. Rushworth must and would improve in good society; and if Maria could now speak so securely of her happiness with him, speaking certainly without the prejudice, the blindness of love, she ought to be believed. Her feelings, probably, were not acute; he had never supposed them to be so; but her comforts might not be less on that account; and if she could dispense with seeing her husband a leading, shining character, there would certainly be everything else in her favour. A well-disposed young woman, who did not marry for love, was in general but *the more attached to her own family* ; and the nearness of Sotherton to Mansfield must naturally hold out the greatest temptation, and would, in all probability, be a continual supply of the most amiable and innocent enjoyments. Such and such-like were the reasonings of Sir Thomas, happy to escape the *embarrassing evils of a rupture, the wonder, the reflections, the reproach that must attend it* ; happy to secure a marriage which would *bring him such an addition of respectability and influence* , and very happy to think anything of his daughter's disposition that was most favourable for the purpose.” (ch.21) His reasonings about Maria’s marriage to a man he knows she doesn’t value include: that she’ll be at Mansfield more often because she'll be more attached to her own family rather than her husband, that he can escape any “embarrassing” rupture, and - most crucially (and damningly) - that the marriage will bring himself “an addition of respectability and influence”. Not good reasons! In the opening sentence here, the narrative voice implies that he ought to have thought about the matter more, that his personal “glad[ness]” outweighs the judgement & consideration others would have felt the matter dictated. Did he try to promote Fanny’s happiness? He banished her to Portsmouth when she refused to marry Henry Crawford, and only allowed her to return after Henry had publicly disgraced himself, and when she would be useful to him as a nurse / carer / companion for Lady Bertram. He took on Susan when Fanny was no longer there to attend to Lady Bertram (essentially as an unpaid companion). I read Sir Thomas as one of the most selfish characters in all of Austen’s novels. And I think we can read this in the closing paragraphs of the novel. For instance, “Fanny was indeed the daughter that he wanted. His charitable kindness had been rearing a prime comfort for himself”. A prime comfort for himself! - hardly the point of ‘kind’ charity. The very last mention of Sir Thomas I think exposes his self-conceit too: “Sir Thomas saw repeated, and for ever repeated, reason to rejoice in what he had done for them all” (ch.48). Yes, what *he* has done for everyone else is what’s important! Perhaps I read Sir Thomas too harshly?
@@DrOctaviaCox those are excellent points and he was very selfish and concerned about appearances. I suppose he enjoys having a complacent wife who follows his direction as it boosts his ego. While he does harm I'm not entirely sure it is the marriage at fault. Lady Bertram is such a non entity as a parent it causes problems too.
Oh yes absolutely - Lady Bertram's parenting skills are severely lacking! But I think the marriage is central to the failings of both parents because I think each exacerbates the flaws of the other. Lady Bertram's indolence allows for Sir Thomas to call the shots completely, and Sir Thomas' self-conceit, self-importance, & belief that everyone else should do what he wants is encouraged by a wife who is happy for him to do everything (because it means she doesn't have to do anything). Lady Bertram does virtually nothing for her children at all during the novel. She indulges her children when it is not an "inconvenience" to her, and the narrative voice even tells readers that she thinks more of her dog than her children! : "To the education of her daughters Lady Bertram paid not the smallest attention. She had not time for such cares. She was a woman who spent her days in sitting, nicely dressed, on a sofa, doing some long piece of needlework, of little use and no beauty, thinking more of her pug than her children, but very indulgent to the latter when it did not put herself to inconvenience, guided in everything important by Sir Thomas..." (ch.2) Lady Bertram is very content to be "guided in everything" by Sir Thomas, because it means she does not have to have the inconvenience of doing anything herself. This is a woman who does not have "time for such cares" as the "education of her daughters"! [I have to confess, though, that I have rather a fondness for Lady Bertram as a character, because Austen is so biting and funny in the depiction of her!]
@@DrOctaviaCox regarding the last part of your comment about readers loving characters because of Austen’s description of them are so full of humour and sarcasm and are so entertaining that we sometimes miss their actual qualities or flaws. I think this may also apply to Mrs Bennet. Her hysterics and nervous disposition are described in such hilarious terms that we tend to overlook the fact that her concerns for her daughters marriages are genuine and legitimate and not misplaced, although the manner in which she approaches this might not be the best. But she’s doing the best she can given her limited education and understanding. At least she’s doing something. But all this is not expressly stated in the book but left for the readers to work out.
Absolutely nidhird - I couldn't agree more. We dismiss Mrs Bennet's legitimate concerns because of her personal character flaws. Not dissimilarly, I think readers often overlook & dismiss Miss Bates because of her conversational style.
In my opinion the worst marriage in Austen's novels is the one between Eliza and Brandon's older brother, because it shows that Cathrine's anxiety about a gothic patriarch is right: Brandon's father locked the girl, whom was his ward, until she said yes to the proposal. That plot narrated by colonel brandon is like a mini "wuthering heights" inside an austen novel; and like in Bronte's book the effects of "unnatural deeds" spread like a doom to the next generation with another Eliza... In marriages Austen talks about women's condition showing that their power of refusal (the only one they have, according to henry tilney) is under siege ( I don't remember who said so, maybe Claudia Johnson). At last a quote from mary crawford: "Everybody is taken in at some period or other...in marriage especially...I see that it is so; and I feel that it must be so, when I consider that it is, of all transactions, the one in which people expect most from others, and are least honest themselves". About positive marriages, except the ones between heroines and heroes which we don't actually see, I count 1...2 at most.
Ha! be bly - you have pre-empted me! I’m planning another video in which I discuss Eliza and the elder Brandon brother’s marriage (and various surrounding circumstances), in which I argue that Austen presents it in the background as a ‘conventional’ novel/gothic narrative in order to highlight how her own novel (Sense and Sensibility) thwarts those expectations.
Absolutely - Claudia Johnson in _Jane Austen: Women, Politics, and the Novel_ : "Gothic novels teach the deferent and self-deprecating Catherine to do what no one and nothing else does: to distrust paternal figures and to feel that her power of refusal is continuously under siege." A really seminal work of criticism.
Incidentally, I have now published this video on Colonel Brandon's description of Mrs Eliza Brandon, which you can watch here: th-cam.com/video/kKxNYZja4eg/w-d-xo.html In the video I argue that Brandon's narrative account is deliberately Gothicised.
I’m can totally understand wanting to escape your parents at a young age. I got married rather young to escape a abusive family. Luckily my husband is a good man and I didn’t turn out to be a bad marriage. But wanting to escape I could see the only way out being married at a young age.
Mr. Collins was actually a pretty good match for Charlotte who was looking down the barrel of old maidhood. His station was pretty good even if his character was extremely flawed and she went in with eyes wide open. Shouldn't even get a dishonorable mention imo.
Indeed. Mr. Collins got himself a practical, intelligent woman like his patron demanded (and very useful given his character), and Charlotte got a stable and comfortable future instead of uncertain spinsterhood, dependent on the charity of family to not fall into poverty. Not married for love, of course, but they both got a good catch.
Agree too. I'm a bit biased as I have a bit of a soft spot for Mr Collins. Yes he's silly and pompous but he has some good qualities - a sense of family obligation and he wants to be on good terms with his and Charlotte's family; a need to be independent (Wickham in Mr Collins' situation would be happily living off his expectations); and, he respects women more than most characters (Charlotte arranges their home as she wants and he explicitly says he would not bring up his wife's lack of money). He's quite young, desperately insecure and, given Charlotte has the ability to guide him and make him feel valued, he has more potential than a lot of Austen's male characters. I think the Collinses have a good chance at a happy marriage.
I think the reason this video makes so much sense is that there's a vibe all through Austin's books that marriage is hardly ever an informed choice, and unlikely to be an authentic matter of feeling first of all. These are largely books about women trying to make wise life choices and get their romantic bearings while everyone around them is trying to maneuver them and anyone else unmarried into relationships that serve goals other than authentic choice. The scary part, often played for humour, is how random these matches are and how little can be predicted at the outset. People often know so little before they take the plunge, or are pushed into marriage.
Yes, indeed Myra. When looked at through the lens of distance, it seems such an odd way to organise society! And of course virtually an irreversible decision (it was extremely difficult to get a divorce at the time, and even required an act of parliament). An apt phrase, I think, "marry in haste and repent at leisure", comes from William Congreve's late 17th century play _The Old Batchelor_ (1693): Thus grief still treads upon the heels of pleasure: Married in haste, we may repent at leisure. (Act V, scene 8) Charlotte Lucas seems to recognise this point exactly in her comment that "Happiness in marriage is entirely a matter of chance. If the dispositions of the parties are ever so well known to each other or ever so similar beforehand, it does not advance their felicity in the least. They always continue to grow sufficiently unlike afterwards to have their share of vexation; and it is better to know as little as possible of the defects of the person with whom you are to pass your life" ( _Pride and Prejudice_ ch.6 ) I can only agree with Lizzy's response, "it is not sound. You know it is not sound".
@Dr Octavia Cox I was literally scrolling to see if you would bring up Charlotte Lucas and her commentary on marriage. Charlotte knows her assertions are both the truth and absurd, even though she says it in a light hearted tone. But, as the narrative says, she’s an educated lady so she has to play the game and take a chance anyway. It’s awful to think that her life would have actually been worse for her if she didn’t accept Mr Collins. In the modern world Charlotte wouldn’t have had to make that choice .
No, indeed, Rebecca - she would have had far more options available to her. And she would have been able to put her considerable skills to better use! There must have been _so_ many women like her... It makes me rather sad to think about it.
The Lizzie Bennet Diaries has an excellent take on the modern version of Charlotte's choice: unemployment in a harsh market or a mind numbing/frustrating job
I think we should remember that many of the attitudes to marriage discussed in Jane Austen's novels still existed within living memory. My grandparents' generation- born in the late 1880s/early 1890s- contained many women with 'modern' attitudes who managed to make a respectable living for themselves (they were all born working class) before marriage and in some cases went on working after. However none of them would have turned a hair at the suggestion that a woman should marry if she got the chance, even if the man in question was 'beneath her' in understanding, intelligence, manners- or indeed even if he was potentially a bully. They would have believed that it was a woman's job to make the best of marriage, and be grateful. A woman who sort divorce because of domestic abuse was still regarded as reckless and foolish, quite apart from any moral questions raised. My immediate family seemed to have had happy marriages, but I knew women who blossomed in widowhood, even late in life, because at last they were able to live as they wanted, not as their husbands demanded.
Oh, if it was only the generation of a hundred years ago! Women still seek protection in their relationships. We try to buy safety with sex and hardly even realise it. If we at least knew, we could choose our partners accordingly instead of inviting the next enemy into our beds. At least leaving has become easier...
I think the worst marriages is Col Brandon’s brother to Eliza, his teenage cousin. Of all the marriages mentioned by Austen, it is the most mercenary of all the matches.
Lydia and Wickham has got to be the worst. He would have stuck around only long enough till the money Mr Darcy had given him had run out. At that point he would have gone most likely to America and reinvented himself as single and honed in on a young rich heiress. Lydia, abandoned with two or three children would be left dependent on her sisters generosity with the indignity of having been abandoned. The family might have tried to present a situation of widowhood for her but that might have been difficult - like Anna in Clayhanger. Bigamy was and still is, a serious offence.
I love the way that you expressed that the advice of absolute power is a command. You’re so right, and it really does describe that dynamic extremely well. I totally agree with your list, but I think I would rank Mr and Mrs Bennett’s marriage as worse than you did, simply because I think the way that he incessantly mocks and belittles her is a different kind of cruelty that has equally long lasting and profound psychological effects. I think we are meant to laugh at her ‘nerves’ and her hypochondria, but it’s very easy to see where that kind of anxiety comes from. The fact that she doesn’t have the ‘strength of character’ (as Austen might conceptualise it) it to process her distress with sense or grace shouldn’t mean that it is deserved or allowed. She may even have been able to develop that character if she had been loved and nurtured by her husband instead of dismissed and to disdained by him. There’s a lot of evidence in the text to imply that the way that he has treated her for the several decades of their marriage is really quite unconscionable. I believe I’d be a nervous wreck if I were bullied and laughed at every day by someone I knew to be much cleverer than me, and on whom my livelihood and welfare depended. I’d even go on to assert that by your criterion of injury to children in the marriage as being a key determinant of its quality, the Bennetts also end up pretty far down the scale. I think we can draw a direct line from the way Mr and Mrs Bennet treat each other to Lydia’s thoughtlessness, Kitty’s nerves, and Mary‘s pomposity and absurd airs. They’re all extremely anxious and/or neglected young women whose problematic behaviour is evidence of the poor parenting they received from two people who couldn’t respect each other enough to raise their children with attention and care, or set them and even passable example of a decent marriage. I think we forgive mr Bennett because we love Lizzie and he’s at least clever enough to do so too, but his cruelty to Mrs Bennett should rank him among the worst husbands, no matter how ridiculous she is.
Whenever I think of Mr Bennets behavior towards Mrs Bennet, I’m reminded of Mr Knightlys behavior towards Miss Bates. Both women are small-minded gossips but while Mr Bennet belittled and mocked his wife, Mr Knightly treats miss bates with respect and compassion. He is the picture of a gentleman, one who does not use his position to his abuse.
Absolutely agree with the choice of 'all the marriages in Mansfield Park'. When I read it as a teenager I almost couldn't stand the whole book because I hated every character so much and it was such a hostile environment for everyone!
Bravo for putting General and Mrs. Tilney at the top of your list! It seems a fortuitous coincidence to me that I only just happened on your site for the very first time today, when just last night I was watching the 2007 production of Northanger Abbey, and was brutally reminded of how absolutely terrifying he is. (Great praise to the actor who played him, though; his performance was chillingly brilliant
Interesting choice. I find judgment of that union problematical because of the gloss Catherine's imaginings place on it and because we never meet Mrs Tilney. I would observe that the marriage produced two relatively well balanced and decent children, especially Henry, so psychological theories would tend to suggest the General was not all bad and the Tilney children had some good parental and relationship modelling in their birth family.
Thank you for opening my eyes towards the worst marriages in Jane Austen’s Novels. i so much detested Lucy steele in ‚Sense and Sensibility‘ ( brilliantly Played in Ang Lee‘s Film) so that she perfectly fittet to the hollow and arrogant Robert Ferrars.
Fantastic examination of these marriages. Captain Tilney certainly terrified me. That repressed anger covered over with controlled politeness and superficial extravagance all blended together to create a very scary character-so real. (I was married to him for a while.) And like you said, we as the reader see the effects on the poor children-girls who can’t wait to get out of the house, or who, like Mary Crawford become jaded & cynical; young men who have no respect for their family name, estate or money, for morality or for women. A very accurate portrayal of the devastating effects of abuse, violence & repressed anger.
Worst marriage: The admiral and Mrs Crawford. By Dr Cox's standard (marriages that harm others) this is one of the very worst. Though the Bertram's marriage provides no guidance to their daughters (or to Mr Bertram), Admiral and Mrs Crawford lead astray two of the brightest lights of the Austen canon: Henry and Mary Crawford. These are two very charismatic, intelligent, talented individuals who have not been given good values and this lack of values ruins them as people. And it's clear from the novel that all the characters feel sorry for how bad an upbringing they have had. They are jaded, grasping, seducers and Austen makes pretty clear it's the reasonable outcome of their terrible childhood.
I just happened upon this channel today and was entranced by this analysis of marriages. Now I must re-read all of these novels with this perspective in mind. Delightful!
I felt Charlotte was regarded with more of a sympathetic look by Austen than necessarily by Lizzy at times. Charlotte is described as a very practical woman who doesn’t hold out for love, all she wants is the comfort and safety of a marriage. And while Mr Collin might be a very annoying and ridiculous character, he isn’t abusive, nor poor, nor of bad character. He is just really, really bad company and the novel describes in detail all the ways Charlotte manages their lives together to spend as little time with him as possible. Not what I’d call a great match, but it seems to work out just fine for both of them within the restrictions of their time. Similarly Mr and Mrs Bennet are surely beyond any kind of love at the point of the novel, but they have built a life together that nevertheless seems to function and keep them both somewhat happy. Lydia I always thought was a much more tragic story. No, she doesn’t end up in a poor house, but that seems largely due to her sisters financially supporting the couple. Maybe it is harder to accept that it ends up loveless because she did in fact love her husband at one point. Love lost is more tragic than a sensible arrangement. And let’s not forget too, that she’s only 16 when she has to marry “such a man”. So, yes, I would’ve put her marriage on the list personally.
I would also like to add few instances where the people involved are so greedy, arrogant, selfish/conceited or just plain foolish , that readers feel like they thoroughly deserve each other . Like the Eltons in EMMA, Lucy Steele and Robert ferrars in S and S, and Wickham and Lydia in P and P.
I like in Death Comes to Pemberley (the TV version at least :) ) that it becomes obvious Lydia and Wickham's marriage has been in many ways disastrous, but Lydia, true to form, has enjoyed the wild ride every step of the way.
I'm so happy! Before clicking on this I thought "#1 should be General and Mrs. Tilney, but there's no way that'll happen." 🤭 I think people fundamentally misunderstand Catherine Morland, who is one of my all-time favourite Austen heroines, and Henry Tilney for that matter. Catherine isn't stupid; she's naive and a bit dramatic, but her suspicions are based on her intuitive feelings that are proven *right* ...At the same time, Henry is more sensible, but he tries to rationalize and justify his father's behaviour and is ultimately proven *wrong* ... Thank you! I have to go read Northanger Abbey again.🥰
I adore Catherine Morland, she is one of my favourite Austen heroines as well. Northanger Abbey is a wickedly funny novel, with some of my favourite Austen lines.
On the Bertram's: they raised extremely spoiled children. When Sir Thomas sees the issue, he finally takes steps to correct their behavior-and goes from too lax to too controlling. At the same time, he started recognizing Fanny's character. It wasn't until Maria runs off from her marriage that he finally recognizes Fanny's qualities though. Sir Bertram does not appear controlling of Fanny after that, and their home seems much happier. (Would Fanny have allowed her younger sister at MP if Sir Thomas was overly controlling?)
I also disagree that the Betrams have such a bad marriage. Much of the bad behavior of Tom, Maria, and Julia (especially Maria) comes from the over indulgeance of Mrs. Norris. I think her influence cannot be ignored. Also Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram seem genuinely fond of each other. I rank the Bennett's marriage as worse, because they are unhappy and this severely damages their younger daughters, particularly Mary.
It is so pleasant to hear you discussing all these Austen relating topics. I feel like one doesn't get enough of her novels and wants to dive deeper and to converse about her works, and to learn about her life. I don't have such an opportunity in real life, so I enjoy it here, on your channel😊 thank you for your work, it is such a balm!
I always felt that Mr. Collins really loves Charlotte. Charlotte fulfills Lady Catherine's requirements and keeps him comfortable and that is really all he needs. As for Charlotte: ""I see what you are feeling," replied Charlotte. "You must be surprised, very much surprised-so lately as Mr. Collins was wishing to marry you. But when you have had time to think it over, I hope you will be satisfied with what I have done. I am not romantic, you know; I never was. I ask only a comfortable home; and considering Mr. Collins's character, connection, and situation in life, I am convinced that my chance of happiness with him is as fair as most people can boast on entering the marriage state." I believe she was happy. She knew how to manage Mr. Collins and her household.
I don't know if Mr. Collins loves Charlotte, but I do think he is happy with her, which is close enough. She ticks every box in his requirements for a wife (or rather Lady Catherine's, same difference 😆). Charlotte is practical, intelligent, and good natured.
I'm not sure about that. Charlotte only fullfilled Lady Catherine's demands he gets married. He did go to The Bennet's with the goal of choosing a wife. After Lizzie turns him down Charlotte was available and willing.
@@einezcrespo2107 I don't think he loved Charlotte when he asked her to marry him. I think that after the marriage he grew to actually love Charlotte by the time Elizabeth comes to visit.
It's fun to speculate on how the Hunsford parsonage might change after Lady C's death. The legatee of Rosings probably will discourage Mr. Collins fawning and gossip. Charlotte might be able to mitigate his behaviors when the person who enables and colludes with those behaviors is gone. Her own father was a silly, obsequious man as well. She was well schooled in living peaceably with foolishness. I actually love Charlotte more than Elizabeth. I prefer a strong woman able to deal with real life over a romantic idealist.
@@cs3742I think Anne de Burgh, who I hope married Col Fitzwilliam, probably had hidden depths she kept from her mother. She would have run the estate differently!
Mrs. Dashwood is John’s Stepmother - not his mother-in-law! In other literature, a classic ‘bad marriage’ with accompanying punishment would be Mr. Rochester’s original marriage in Jane Eyre. The whole setup is really that ‘punishment’ in so many horrific resulting ways. Great vids - thanks!
IMO Mr. and Mrs. Bennet's marriage seems like the most unhappy to me. There is so much contempt from Mr. Bennet towards his wife. Granted, she is high strung, but her worries are not without reason. Her daughters truly need to make good marriages or the future will be bleak for them. Mr. Bennet doesn't seem to take things as seriously as he should. It is also clear they don't take pleasure in each other's company. Their bad marriage is actively harmful as it leads to embarrassing behavior from both parents in public which further damages their daughters' chances in marriage, as Darcy points out.
I think Sir Thomas is very flawed, but ultimately, redeemable. He was ready to extract Maria from her catastrophic marriage had she only given him a hint that was what she wished. He ordered the fire to be lit for Fanny in her cold East chamber, even though he was displeased with her; (very subtly, at this point, Fanny's star began to rise, although it still had far to travel).
I think that a much more nuanced reading of Mansfield Park is called for. Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram are portrayed as caring for and respecting one another. They are both very flawed people but they have a good marriage. It is their personal flaws that detrimentally affect their children, and the greatest of these flaws is that of depending upon Mrs. Norris, who really is the villian of this story. Although Mary and Henry can be seen as the most corrupting influences, in actual fact, the corruption is started by Mrs. Norris and fed by her throughout the entire book. Sir Thomas is clearly portrayed as having a manner that does not communicate it's affection and dedication to his children. He is a good man and they do not have a bad marriage. If anything, his defect is that he allowed his wife to be indolent, accepting her as she was, and not requiring more of her once they had children to raise together. Because of his extreme politeness and correctness, he does not prevent Mrs. Norris from having undue influence on his wife, his children, and even himself. But they do not have a bad marriage. This simply isn't in the text.
I agree completely. I was enjoying the video and mostly agreeing until she came to the part about Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram. They're shown to be relatively happily married. He cares for her comfort and she's glad to have him home. Their marriage is no worse than Mr. and Mrs. Bennett's, and arguable better since he doesn't ridicule her in front of the children. As for the argument that Sir Thomas is some heinous villain... He isn't. His daughters are so eager to "escape" from him because he holds them to a higher standard of behavior than they want to adhere to. The biggest piece of tyranny we see him guilty of in regards to his daughters is breaking up the play, which was a scandalous play anyway. He's shown again and again to be trying to be a good father. He's just bad at it. He worries about Maria's happiness with Mr. R. He makes a point of bringing Tom with him to Antigua to get him away from the bad crowd, then sends him home when they've been gone a long time. He gets upset of Fanny's behalf that Mrs. Norris doesn't want her to have a fire... He's not a *great* man, but he's certainly not the monster Dr. Cox interprets him as.
@@nataliet1260 There is a disgusting movie version of this book that portrays Sir Thomas in a way that I won't even describe. The author is very clear about her view of him at the end of the book. He's a good man. Just like most other characters in Austen's stories, he's also a flawed one. The more I listen to and reread Persuasion, for example, the less I like Captain Wentworth for these very reasons. I think your comments about why his daughters wanted to escape from him are just. Remember in Persuasion, the narrator talks about the Musgroves thusly: "The Musgroves, like their houses, were in a state of alteration, perhaps improvement. The father and mother were in the old English style, and the young people in the new." This dichotomy is clear in Mansfield Park as well. The "perhaps" in the above quote is important. There is a way of being in the new style that is also consistent with the values and integrity of the old, and these are embodied in Edmund and Fanny. Part of the old English style was marrying for position. It is understandable that Sir Thomas takes this into consideration for Maria, but it doesn't end up being the right choice for people "in the new" style. He learns his lesson. I think learning from one's mistakes is an important element in all Austen's books. And the people who don't (Lydia and Wickham are perfect examples) suffer and/or make others suffer on their behalf when they themselves don't suffer but should. We are lucky in this book that both Maria and Aunt Norris get to enjoy eternity together and that all the others are separated from them. And it is clear that Austen purposefully gives this respite to Sir Thomas (and the readers) because he deserves it for learning and changing. Thanks for your comments, Natalie.
Mrs Norris, the villain of the story... how interesting that JK Rowling chose that name for Mr Filch's cat. Another Austen novel I must revisit now. Heck, all of them, thank you, Dr Cox. Wonderful analyses!
Very few readers of Mansfield Park seem to realise that Sir Thomas Bertram's visit to the West Indies (with his son Tom) implies (or confirms) that his wealth is derived from slavery in one way or another. To describe him as a good man is therefore ridiculous even if, by the standards of the time, it was regarded as acceptable. He must have seen what life was like for the people on the plantation and yet took it for granted that he was entitled to the proceeds of their enslavement.
@@darthlaurel I disagree. Sir Thomas is not a good man for most of the novel; the fact that he dramatically changes at the end does not alter who and what he was the previous years. And that is part of Austen's point. While Sir Thomas does come to understand and regret his errors and see the consequences of them, he cannot change them and must live with them. And Austen does not give Sir Thomas respite because he earned it; she gives it because she chooses not to "dwell on guilt and misery." One thing about Austen was that she never really "punishes" her bad guys. Sir Thomas, Gen. Tilney, Henry Crawford, John Dashwood, John Willoughby, etc. rarely suffer much from what they've caused. Women like Maria, Mrs. Norris seem to suffer more from their misdeeds. And interestingly enough, of all the realizations Sir Thomas comes to, giving up slave owning doesn't seem to be one of them.
I think Maryanne would have had a terrible marriage with Willoughby. He was very self absorbed, focusing on his own happiness and making sure he had money no matter what. She got a gem with Colonel Brandon.
I'm surprised that the Chiurchills from Emma didn't even get a mention. we don't learn much about them but Mrs Churchill's death is implied to be a welcome event by everyone who knew her and this says a lot, I think, about her character and marriage to such a person must be a horrible one.
That's a great addition. Yes, it's hard to know what the Churchills' marriage was like because it's filtered through Emma's (often) perception of Frank's account. But there is something telling in the comparison between these two reactions, placed near each other in the text. First is the collective view of "Every body" on Mrs Churchill's death: "...what would Mr Churchill do without her? Mr Churchill's loss would be dreadful indeed. Mr Churchill would never get over it...". And then comes Frank's report: "Mr Churchill was better than could be expected" (vol.3, ch.9). It looks like he will get over it!
I agree with the choice of Mr. and Mrs. John Dashwood. However I disagree with Wickam and Lydia rating only a dishonorable mention. While no subsequent consequences are mentioned, we can deduce some things from circumstances. First, Darcy paid Wickam’s existing debts (10K) and secured him a regular army commission in return for marrying Lydia. That accomplished, Wickam can no longer hold the Bennet family reputation hostage, which protects Darcy and Elizabeth’s position. I believe it can be stated with certainty that NO further assistance will come from Darcy. Second, I believe there is no indication that Wickam can or will change his ways. Although given a blank slate, he will certainly repeat his previous behavior and greatly outstrip his Army income. He will most likely be greatly in debt within a year, and with nothing to hold over Darcy, will end up in prison or more likely fleeing the country. Finally, it is also clear that Lydia is too stupid and self-centered to even try to appreciate the situation or encourage him to change. She likely be left with nothing but Wickam’s child and have to throw herself back on her parents to survive. Thus both continue to be terrible people who damage each other and those around them. What do you think of the “off screen” marriage between Col. Brandon’t brother and Eliza Williams? Granted they are off-screen characters, but they are narratively important to the story. Based on Col. Brandon’s description (who should be a reliable narrator) the marriage was by far the worst mentioned within Austen’s novels. Eliza was literally imprisoned and Brandon packed off to another relation in order to secure her unwilling marriage to Brandon’s brother. “My brother had no regard for her; his pleasures were not what they ought to have been, and from the first he treated her unkindly.” It would be interesting to take a speculative dive into this situation.
Wow, I've been binging your Austen content and I just feel compelled to comment on the quality of your videos. I've gained a much greater appreciation for Austen's work and how clearly you're able to articulate your thoughts. You've certainly earned your PhD, I hope you're a professor! As an aside, the recent upgrade in audio quality is amazing!
I would like to hear a commentary on Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax’s secret romance in Emma. Are they both in agreement in their ruse or is Churchill the scoundrel he is often accused of being?
I think they were in agreement. I think Jane may have worried that his aunt would pressure him to break the engagement and that would be upsetting for her friends and family to see her disrespected like that, even if Frank refused it would get ugly. I don't think Frank is a scoundrel, but basically the male version of Emma: spoiled and carrless and has a lot to learn, but I think he's good at heart. Jane is the character I most identify with, and I can see why she is attracted to Frank; I like fun people and am relatively tolerant of their failings. So I think they'll actually be pretty happy.
I see someone else downthread has mentioned Sir Walter and Lady Elliot, and I 100% agree. Your point about the worst villains in Austen being men who shirk their duties to look after and protect women is so poignant, considering how much Jane and her mother and sister depended on her brothers for protection and shelter after the death of her father. Their lives literally hung in the balance of whether or not their brothers could provide for them, and more importantly were inclined to. That must have been utterly terrifying. It certainly makes Mrs. Bennet's fears seem less silly.
Dr. Cox. I want to thank you for posting this series of videos. It has really been both enlightening and enjoyable to listen to your analyses. listening to you I feel as though I am at a book club discussing the details of my favorite stories and characters.
As a Classics major who has read some of Horace and Juvenal, I am pleasantly surprised to hear these words applied to English literary critique and I think the comparison is spot on.
It is much harder to find *good* marriages in Austen than it is to find bad ones.The only genuinely happy ones (not considering the marriages of our well deserving heroines) I can think of are The Gardiners, The Crofts, and The Morlands, and those are also people that are kind and considerate, and don't gossip as much as the rest.
Okay, I literally just reread Pride and Prejudice, Mansfield Park, Emma, and Persuasion over the past few weeks. Now I will start them all over and pay closer attention. I have enjoyed your analysis, tho I think The Bennet's marriage needed to be included as the damage done by watching their father ridicule, and treat as stupid, their mother cannot be underestimated.
Great question! And one I find it hard to answer. On the one hand, Jane Fairfax seems to have been miserable during the months covered by the novel, exacerbated in no small degree by Frank's behaviour. For example, by flirting with Emma in front of her face - which was completely unnecessary if not actively provocative. Also, the piano he sends her - while obviously a nice gift - does expose her somewhat, which is something he must have known would happen. On the other hand, he is found being kind to the Bateses (e.g. fixing Mrs Bates' spectacles). Perhaps his kindness will be brought out during the marriage?
We do have this tit-bit from Austen's nephew's memoir (James Edward Austen-Leigh, _Memoir of Jane Austen_ (1869)): "She would, if asked, tell us many little particulars about the subsequent career of some of her people ... [including] that the letters placed by Frank Churchill before Jane Fairfax, which she swept away unread, contained the word ‘pardon’" (ch.10). So, according to Austen (although not within the novel itself), Frank did apologise to Jane. So perhaps there is hope for them?
@@DrOctaviaCox do you think the same fate as lady elliot may befall jane fairfax in the long term as frank churchill is shown to be selfish and vain and often acts rashly. he may change a little for the better over time under jane's influence but maybe more likely she will continually make allowances for him. although they love each other and are devoted , their characters are so markedly different , that long term marital felicity seems dubious. frank is also somewhat lacking in the morals department, ( as often pointed out by mr knightley) and jane abhors any kind of deceit.
@@DrOctaviaCox I think it could go either way. Frank was thoughtless and immature. But he did love Jane and was remorseful and mortified by his actions. Like Emma he had lessons to learn. If Jane hadn’t broken their engagement I believe he would have continued with his inconsiderate behavior. Like Mr. Knightly I hope with Jane’s influence his character will improve.
I would have said that the Bertram's marriage in Mansfield Park is the worst but I hadn't thought of General Tilney's marriage in Northanger Abbey, probably because that marriage ended prior to the events in the novel. I don't think Charlotte Lucas has a bad marriage. She goes into it with her eyes open and by Lizzie's visit is already managing her situation well. She has financial security and the prospect of wealth in later life when her husband inherits the Longbourne estate. With a child on the way by the end of the novel things are working out well for her.
Also, I think that Catherine Morland was able to see/feel such villany from Mr. Tilney more easily because of the picture of a married life in her parents. You see when Henry kind of berates her for what she is implying about Mr. Tilney, that he defends him by saying “as much as he could”, because he knows nothing else; to him, although not giving him a great feeling, it was “normal” in his family life
Everyone thinks what they grew up with is normal, because it was normal for them. There has to be some revelation before people think to question whether what they know is different from others.
@@judithstrachan9399Yes, I love how this gives Henry an opportunity to grow in the novel. Even though he initially defends him to Catherine, he clearly thought it through and ends up standing up to him. Shows how much he respected her 😊
I had wondered about this when I was watching the video. But then, I don't know if their marriage is deeply dysfunctional in the way some others are, and a case could be made that Mrs Palmer actually ameliorates the more toxic elements of Mr Palmer's personality.
Oh, the comic relief. Mrs Palmer was indefatigable so hard to know if it was their couple shtick, or she was a form of Mrs Bennet... great example, though. 😭
Although his methods were sneaky, there is no reason believe that Jane and Frank would not have been happy together. The mutual attraction was certainly there, and as he had his own fortune, it's not like he married Jane for money...
Mr. Knightley (while I don't think ever thought of Jane romantically) sees Jane in the best light always. Jane and Frank might not be top ten couples material, but they love each other and will have plenty of money to live on. Frank accepts and cares for Jane's family and has a generous heart. Jane is highly intelligent and has excellent taste and judgement. She will run the household to perfection. Frank's wealth and position will give Jane the access to the finer things in life she's always been one step removed from her entire life. I think they will be at least reasonably happy together.
So very proud of myself for also choosing General and Mrs Tilney! Clearly, I have to re-re-re-re-read Mansfield Park because I have not been able to catch to utter oppression of the Bertram girls, although Tom is an excellent representation of abusive parenting even today. Thank you, Dr Cox, for bringing sunlight into my gloomy hours of 4pm sunsets.
I think there is something odd in the fact that the late Mr. Dashwood, though master of a great estate and probably with thousands in annual income, did not secure dowries for his daughters or a jointure for his second wife. The estate was entailed, but not the cash income from it. He should have been able to make some provision for them.
I agree. He was scandalously negligent of the future welfare of his wife and children, much like Mr. Bennett in Pride and Prejudice. I wonder if JA took this character type from a real life example, or if it was a common failing?
I think the Bennets were principal inhabitants of their area, but not that rich either. So the little inheritance money mentioned would already contain what Mr Bennett could put aside +maybe 2 cents from the mother's money after paying for a growing number of daughters. Mr. Dashwood sen. though.......
@@edennis3202 He did not inherit as much as he expected to ("he left it to him on such terms as destroyed half the value of the bequest") and that most was left to John Dashwood for Harry. It seemed that he planned to live economically and "lay by a considerable sum" but that he died less than a year after inheriting the estate.
One of the best analysis I’ve heard of one of my favorite author’s works. Very few talk about northanger abbey or Mansfield park (which is actually my favorite of her works, partially because it is so unapologetically heartbreaking) well done Dr. keep it up...my second favorite is Persuasion so please do some more about Anne Elliott
Northanger Abbey & Mansfield Park are my top two favorite works of Jane Austen! I'll even go out on a limb and confess that Henry Tilney is my favorite "hero"...after all, is very amusing and knows muslin quite well..
I thought the last chapter in pride and prejudice said that Lydia and Wickham didn't do well. He never was in love with her, he got bored and frustrated with her; She was in love or lust with him but ended up in the same place he was. Plus they were always asking Elizabeth and Jane for money. I agree that Charlotte would probably be okay since she got what she wanted: a house, a kid, and the ability to shove her husband out so she didn't have to deal with them. It would be interesting to see what happened when they took over longbourn.
I read Northanger Abbey so long ago that I remember nothing of it. However, Jane, being an astute observer, might have discovered but not named Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Austen very much conformed to her time period in that it was usually better to be married, even imperfectly, than to be alone. Also, we're talking about Jane Austen here, not the Brontes. She was part of a society that sought practical advantages, rather than romantic love, in marriage and does not condemn people for seeing the world that way. If anything, she is rather derisive of people like Marianne, who are looking for great passions.
In Sense and Sensibility Mrs. Jennings daughter Charlotte was married to a Mr. Palmer! . His Mother in law seemed quite enamored with him, bragging on him. But he was always correcting his wife Charlotte for something she said, and he acted annoyed with her, "rolling his eyes" at her or hiding behind his newspaper making snide remarks to her. He seemed unhappy most of the time over something she said, and he responded sarcastically or contradicting her, implying she didn't know what she was talking about. .it didn't seem like a happy marriage at all.
Yes, I’ve thought of this myself. In the film version, as played by Hugh Laurie, he comes across as somewhat sympathetic, in part due to the respect & consideration he shows to Elinor and Marianne, but also because Charlotte is silly, annoying, and gossipy-not really interested in a husband as a person, but more as a necessary accessory. She doesn’t seem unhappy at all! But I’m sure her husband has “buyer’s remorse.”
Am I the only one who didn’t read Sir Thomas Bertram as being a particularly bad character? A little distant and harsh, maybe, but certainly not abusive.
Berating Fanny and sending her to Portsmouth as a "remedy" I would say is abusive. He had good intentions, at least he believed he had, that doesn't excuse his method though. I think he redeems himself in the end, but he really have a lot to make up for.
I agree. He's misguided but not bad. He tries to do what he thinks is the right thing. I remember one critic pointing out that Sir Thomas has financial anxieties which may suggest he is "new money." That would account for the fact that he didn't try harder to dissuade Maria from marrying Rushworth. He was sooooo anxious to shore up the family's legitimacy and fortune. I always found it odd that he was so eager to fob off Fanny to Mrs. Norris as if he wished to reduce the expense of keeping her. He was also assured by Mrs. Norris that she was saving whatever she could from her income to leave to his children. If he had anything like a substantial fortune, why would her assurance of this mean anything to him? So I excuse some of Sir Thomas's behaviour on the fact that he let money override common sense. He's redeemed at the end because he finally recognizes Fanny's worth and becomes "sick of ambitious and mercenary connexions, prizing more and more the sterling good of principle and temper." Any character that grows and becomes self-reflective is not bad. Note that Mrs. Norris never changes. I also think Maria's and Rushworth's marriage to be the very worst in all of the novels.
This was quite fascinating and I apprecaite your diligence in being so thorough. I love Northanger Abbey and you've given me quite a lot to think about - so thank you so much!
I just finished Northanger Abbey for the third time. It's difficult to focus on the real life cruelties in marriages in this book because Catherine is very flighty and influenced by the books she has been reading. And Henry encourages her dramatic thinking when they are discussing Gothic novels and when he describes the contents of the room at Northanger which Catherine would be staying in. But you're right, Dr Cox, that the hints are there in the text about general Tilney's cruelty. Even when Henry describes what happened to his mother and tries to defend his father, Catherine is still horrified that his father was not present when his mother was dying. As you said, Catherine felt that even if he didn't actually take a hand in murder his wife, he may have killed her with neglect or habitual harshness--perhaps both. The relationship between General Tilney and his wife frames Catherine's stay at the Abbey, in a way similar to the mentally deranged wife in Jane Eyre. Mrs. Tilney's presence is very strong in the house, even though she is not seen in person, and Catherine cannot let go of it. Then General Tilney reveals his truly cruel nature to Catherine personally, confirming for everyone that he is so enflamed with his own expectations, demands, and prejudice, that anyone who might interfere with them is going to receive a disproportionate response from him.
NOTE on the use of the term "mother-in-law" in the video. In the early 19th century, the term "mother-in-law" was used more loosely than it is today. Austen herself refers to the relationship between John Dashwood and Mrs Dashwood as "mother-in-law" and "son-in-law", so that's what I've used here:
* "He survived his uncle no longer; and ten thousand pounds, including the late legacies, was all that remained for his widow and daughters. His son was sent for as soon as his danger was known, and to him Mr. Dashwood recommended, with all the strength and urgency which illness could command, the interest of his mother-in-law and sisters" (ch.1).
* "No sooner was her answer dispatched [accepting Barton Cottage], than Mrs. Dashwood indulged herself in the pleasure of announcing to her son-in-law and his wife that she was provided with a house, and should incommode them no longer than till every thing were ready for her inhabiting it." (opening of ch.5)
Thank you for clarifying! This makes a lot of sense. I think today we are so used to the “in-law” term to mean the family you marry into. But I’ve heard it used synonymously with “by-law” in period pieces and it makes sense when describing what we now call step parents and step children.
You tell ‘em!
I think the logic of their day was that he was her son only by right of her marriage to his father , so in that sense he is a son in law. Where we would call someone a sister-in-law Jane has them call each other “sister” and “brother”
Thank you for the explanation. I admit I was somewhat confused by the expression.
Amazing note. In polish translation a step-mother and step-son is in use. I also read and re-read the original and never noticed the different term :) very interesting!
I think Charlotte’s marriage to Mr Collins wasn’t that bad, sure they didn’t love each other but Collins even though overbearing, irritating and cringey wasn’t abusive or cruel. Charlotte managed to be financially secured and the lady of her own home which ultimately what was she wanted and she definitely seemed to be able to manipulate Mr Collins, managing to keep him out of her way as much as possible. There’s at least some respect there.
And Charlotte was in her late twenties.
I also believe that Charlotte wouldn't have been like Fanny Dashwood, and actually had Mr. Collin help the Bennets, if Jane and Lizzy hadn't married Bingley and Darcy, because of her friendship with Lizzy. I mean Charlotte always seemed a good friend especially when she warned Lizzy that Jane should be more affectionate and we later found that Darcy thought Jane wasn't in love with Bingley because she wasn't so outwardly affectionate.
He was cruel, though. He tried to bully Elizabeth into marrying him by telling her that probably nobody else would want her, and when Lydia ran away, he came to Longbourne to gloat and tell her sisters she'd be better off dead.
But she had to share a bed with him. Ugh!
@@erikab1317 Agreed, if "he's not a mind reader" was a thing people said, she would have said it.
I always thought Fanny's mother & father (Mansfield Park) had the worst marriage. They had so many children, lived in abject poverty, & he was an alcoholic. My worst nightmare.
I think Charlotte was quite happy having her own home, and a marriage, and independence. Also, in Lizzie's visit, she makes it clear that she has set up routines and patterns for the days that make it work.
Agreed. I think of the Collins as a very good marriage since both of them are getting exactly what they want in life, thanks to Charlotte's practicality and Mr. Collins' obliviousness.
Mr. Collins/Charlotte Lucas: Realist
Mr. Bingley/Jane Bennet: Idealist
Mr. Darcy/Elizabeth Bennet: Rationalist
Mr. Wickham/Lydia Bennet: Fantasist
Mr. Bennet/Mrs. Bennet: Absurdist
@@renshiwu305 Thats pretty apt
"Independence" was only possible because Collins was easily led😛
@@annnee6818 I agree
The Hursts in Pride and Prejudice seems pretty miserable. Do they have their own home, or do they just sponge off Mr. Bingley? Mr Hurst is constantly drunk and embarrassing.
I couldn't agree more but Mrs Hurst doesn't seem. particularly unhappy either
Totally agree, but they are well off, even if it isn't his!
@@lizziebkennedy7505 yes mosquitos are bloodsuckers but it's grosser to US as the ones they have to bite, than to a mosquito, I'm sure ha ha ha
I don't think they aren't well off and just live off of Mr. Bingley. It was quite common in Regency England to have prolonged family visits that could last up to several months and we are never really told how much money Mr. Hurst has at his disposal.
@@minemarei768 no, but the book does say he was a man of “more fashion than fortune,” or something like that.
I think people are too hard on Charlotte. Lizzy had the luxury of being able to refuse Collins (or pr*ck-Darcy) and wait for someone better because she was 6 years younger than Charlotte and prettier than Charlotte, so she knew she had at least some chances to find someone else. Also, she had a father who didn't want her to marry someone like Collins...not every father would object to that marriage. In the context, Collins was Charlotte's only and last chance to ever have a life, that at the time meant a house and a family. The alternative for Charlotte was not between Collins and someone better than him, it was between Collins and staying in her parents' house till her father's death and then who knows.. maybe living with one of her brothers or her sister if she ever got married, being the 'poor relative'. I'm sure Charlotte would have been happier to marry someone as good natured as Bingley or someone as intelligent as Darcy rather than Mr. Collins, but sadly they would never ever look at her...and she knew it, that's the point. She had good sense, she was perceptive and intelligent, but she was plain and not as charmingly quick-witted as Lizzy nor as conventionally beautiful as Jane, so she contented herself with what she could realistically have. Had she not married Collins, she would have lived her whole life in her parents' house dreaming of a better man who would never come. Lizzy contented herself with the best, but not everyone is given that chance. I've always thought that when Austen makes Charlotte say that she's always been pragmatic and not romantic, the character is in a way lying to herself. She had to learn to be pragmatic, because there was no alternative. I think she was relatively happy. Certainly there would be bad days when she secretly envied her friends who got it all and maybe she secretly thought unfair she couldn't have both love and security when they could, but she would prevent those thoughts from destroying her serenity comparing her own situation and spinsterhood.
Continuing this thought -- Charlotte Lucas was already nearing that dangerous age of 28. She had a younger sister who could marry better if Charlotte led the way. And she had her parents and other siblings to consider.
She observed William Collins as a suitor for her best friend Lizzy Bennet. Upon finding that the offer of marriage had been made and rejected, she did the hard calculus.
Charlotte could remain as an aging spinster in her parents' home, and eventually as a poor relative living with a sibling.
Or she could become the wife of an upwardly mobile young clergyman under the patronage of Lady Catherine de Bourgh. And upon Mr. Bennet's death she would be Mrs. Collins, the mistress of Longbourn. She would raise her family near her parents' home at Lucas Lodge, and she would be in a position to take up her former life in Meryton, now as a leading member of the community.
Charlotte would probably face the same problem with the entail on Longbourn that troubled Mrs. Bennet. As long as she provided one male heir to inherit upon Mr. Collins' death, her place would be secure.
Mr. Collins, in turn, married the daughter of a knight, a practical and supportive soul who made his home life more convivial than a Miss Elizabeth ever could.
Absolutely! To say nothing of the fact that unmarried, middle/upper class women who weren't lucky enough to inherit any property or money basically had no rights or independence. Their only career options, as it were, were marriage, to become a companion to some wealthier relative or friend of the family or whatever, or else become a governess. We see that plight highlighted in Emma with Jane Fairfax, her aunt and grandmother. Charlotte's family are not implied to be particularly well off; Sir William was knighted because of his being mayor of Meryton, and had made his money in trade I'm pretty sure, so they were technically a lower class than the Bennets as well. I thought the youtube series the Lizzie Bennet Diaries updated Charlotte's choice really well. It's basically the choice between choosing a less than ideal, but stable, job and gaining that financial security and independence with the possibility of being able to improve the situation with time (she is clever enough that she could totally steer Collins to a promotion I'm sure, as well as his prospects of inheriting Longbourn), vs choosing the path of idealism and 'not selling out' which might work out and bring great rewards, but could equally completely fail leaving you forced to compromise and make the stable choice later, but with the downside of now being completely disillusioned. Lizzie is lucky enough to escape the latter ending, but her romantic notions could very easily have resulted in that kind of life (and she does joke about becoming an old maid to Jane). In many ways too I think Lizzie is a great deal more like Lydia than she (or many readers) would like to think; they are both very romantically minded, stubborn, and somewhat inclined to be dismissive of other people. The difference is the fact that as Lizzie is the second born her father paid more attention to her, whereas he'd sort of given up by the time Lydia arrived..
I agree completely, and I also always thought she would have protected the Bennet girls from being thrown out of their home if any were still unmarried when their father died. Considering they already have the parsonage right next to Lady Catherine, I think Charlotte would have had an easy job convincing Mr. Collins to appear generous and caring by allowing his cousins to remain at Longbourne at least for some time until they could marry or their mother passed and that dowry being split among them.
@@patriciauselton6460 I especially love your point about Charlotte having to consider her family. Both her father and sister, when visiting the married couple, seem happy with the match - and especially impressed by Lady Catherine de Bourgh. Lady Catherine even offers Miss Lucas and Lizzie a private carriage for their return trip, and hosts them both at Rosings. Mr Collins may not have been the most attractive man in the novel, but he was respectable, set to inherit a good estate, and had desirable social connections. Charlotte not only chose the best option she had available to her personally, she made an advantageous union for her family
Elizabeth certainly had more advantages than Charlotte. As has been mentioned already, she was younger than Charlotte and was good-looking. Moreover, she was of higher birth for she was born into the landed gentry whereas the Lucas family were newcomers to upper class circles. Consequently, it was not unrealistic of Elizabeth to think that she could attract the affection of a gentleman she could love and respect.
I do not believe that Lydia is smart enough to even realize that she is in a bad relationship. She is so distracted by all the frivolous thoughts in her own head and the external activities around her that she doesn't even pick up on the fact that Wickham doesn't even love her.
One of the things I love most about Jane’s novels is that the worst people don’t suffer the slings and arrows of what we might like them to, or even what they might truly deserve. Just like in real life.
Great point. I agree - a robust refusal to accept such moralising novelistic conventions runs throughout Austen's novels. In _Sense and Sensibility_ we might think of Lucy Steele, who remains comeuppance free (unless you think being married to Robert Ferrars is a comeuppance, which Lucy doesn't seem to), or John Willoughby:
"But that he was for ever inconsolable, that he fled from society, or contracted an habitual gloom of temper, or died of a broken heart, must not be depended on-for he did neither. He lived to exert, and frequently to enjoy himself. His wife was not always out of humour, nor his home always uncomfortable; and in his breed of horses and dogs, and in sporting of every kind, he found no inconsiderable degree of domestic felicity." (ch.50)
@@DrOctaviaCox All Austen’s most dislikable (to us 21st-century readers) characters share a semblance of shamelessness.
@@DrOctaviaCox I've always felt she was particularly mean about Mary Bennet though, both within the body of the novel and at the end where she is left alone at home, moralizing over every morning visit with Mrs Bennet. Maybe Mary's flaws were really the ones that Jane Austen disliked most!
@@zillie8167 Maybe when she wrote "Pride and Prejudice", at least. But when I read "Mansfield Park", I couldn't help feeling that Fanny Price and Mary Crawford felt a bit like Mary and Elizabeth Bennett, as written by an older Austen who had come to like Mary more and like Elizabeth a heck of a lot less.
@@christophertaylor2462 exactly. I've also compared those two characters - brave and spontaneous Elizabeth (walking to see her sister etc) and as brave and spontaneous and also charming Mary Crawford - how differently treated in these two novels! (From thise two I feel "safer" reading Mansfield Park, cause I was always more like Fanny or Mary B. than any atrractive, brave young women ;) and I wonder what influence Jane A. was expecting to have on young women - her readers - in both cases - and why :) )
I would have to disagree about Lydia. I think because of when, in the novel, and how it happens we don't see the fall out of it, but Wickham's character is is really shown to have a pattern of behavior, a viciousness and recklessness that has never really been punished for. I don't think we are expected to believe he's learned anything and I think the reading of text is to lead us to believe bad things await her in the future, particularly once she grows up and understands her situation. I don't think Lydia's ignorance regarding her marriage is the same thing as being happy or not being unhappy like Charlotte.
I agree, the book itself says that they Lydia is always getting money from Jane or Elizabeth and that they are always in dept. It also says they take separate vacations and Lydia herself stops loving Wickham at some point fairly early on.
I think it would take quite a lot for Lydia Wickham to be unhappy. Through the whole book, she acts only for herself, and never bothers to consider how her behavior affects others. Wickham is also selfish and manipulative, but I think his own self-interest would prevent him from acting too cruelly to her-- there would be considerable risk of her family intervening, and with many more resources than they had when he met them. Lydia also takes after her mother the most out of the five sisters, and Mrs. Bennet, although her marriage could not be described as "happy," clearly built up her own little reality to inhabit, centered around gossip and matchmaking. She's not "punished" for her inappropriate conduct like Eliza Brandon is, or like Marianne Dashwood is. She never shows repentance or gratitude for all her family has done for her. I know we have different ideas about teenage development now than during the Regency, but I guess I assumed Lydia was never going to grow out of her ways, so a marriage that would certainly have served as a punishment for another heroine is just a minor inconvenience to her.
Wickham is vicious and reckless. However, I don't think he respects Lydia enough to be deliberately cruel to her, if that makes sense. I don't think he quite regards her as a person, but an asset or hindrance. He resented Darcy because Darcy sees through him and has things he wants. Lydia does not see or hear anything she doesn't want to. She will probably go through life thinking he's wonderful because it's most convenient for her. Her willful ignorance will keep her safe.
Plus Lydia would end up permanently pregnant and Wickham would go off with prostitutes when she was to heavily pregnant, he'd be risking catching the pox too.
Being married to Wickham would be an awful fate indeed.
I don't know: Lydia didn't strike me as someone who'd ever grow up. She appeared to have a similar disposition to that of her mother, and we see, Mrs. Bennet hasn't really grown up much/
I agree that Lydia won't likely regret her marriage. Mr. Wickham might have regrets, but who cares how he feels, lol. Also, I imagine he will have a mistress or two at some point.
We are told in the final chapter that Wickham would go, without Lydia, "to enjoy himself in London or Bath" (ch.61). I think we can guess what that means...
At the end of the book, we’re also told that whatever initial attraction Lydia and Wickham had shared quickly vanished, and they ended up very indifferent toward one another. As for finances, the Wickhams end up mooching off the Bingleys to the point where the Bingleys talk about the possibility of asking the Wickhams to move out. So Wickham obviously continued his profligate ways, and Lydia would have been no source of restraint.
I’m sure Lydia would take lovers as well .
Wickham was given a commission to the Newcastle militia in Pride and Prejudice. Although Austen couldn't know that when she wrote her book, this militia ended up at Waterloo and almost all the officers were killed in action. Lydia probably ended up a widow.
@@happybkwrm Thank you. That's an interesting piece of information.
Regarding "Pride and Prejudice", I thought that Elizabeth's first reaction to Charlotte’s engagement to Collins was rather unfair. She comdemned Charlotte using her personal idealistic beliefs even if Charlotte has been rather clear about hers. I think this may be because at that point in her life, poverty with all its hardships, and most possible loneliness due to not being able to marry (in her own terms) didn't seem like a reality to Lizzy, and reminds me of "The house of Mirth"
As a practical person, from the beginning I appreciated Charlotte's stance regarding Collins because in a time were probably many marriages weren't out of love, she was able to find someone which won't harm her, without vices, and to whom she could be a good companion, they may even be able to forge a good longterm relationship, and be as happy as possible
I agree Charlotte and Mr. Collins shouldn't be on the list because although Mr. Collin's is not a great man, his stature in life and his respectability would ensure a comfortable life for Charlotte. Charlotte knew of his character before she was married to him and understood that she might not have another offer, so she took it because although Mr. Collins is who he is, he would provide her with a comfortable life and home. Because of the restrictions of the time, and lack of opportunity for Charlotte it was a choice that was good for both her and Mr. Collins. Lady Catherine was right, Mr. Collins needed to marry and marry well -- Charlotte was a better choice than Lizzy ==
And Charlotte does fit the bill of Mr Collins's wife wish-list according to Lady Catherine! Mr Collins says "she said, ‘Mr. Collins, you must marry. A clergyman like you must marry. Choose properly, choose a gentlewoman for my sake; and for your own, let her be an active, useful sort of person, not brought up high, but able to make a small income go a good way. This is my advice. Find such a woman as soon as you can, bring her to Hunsford, and I will visit her’" (ch.19).
I agree! I love Lizzy, but she could not have borne the life offered by Mr. Collins and she would have made them both miserable. Charlotte is more suited to the life and better able to make her own happiness wherever she is. She understands that life needs practicality and purposefully chooses a practical and beneficial marriage. I have always thought of their union as a successful match, not a negative one. It's quite a happy ending for both Mr. Collins and Charlotte, given the times. And, it's beneficial for the Benners, as well, as Charlotte would never allow Mr. Collins to be cruel to the Bennet ladies when Mr. Bennet dies.
Yes, I agree. I also think it possible that Charlotte could be a positive influence on Mr. Collins. I don't think he would change tremendously but he could develop a tenderness for her and for a child that could soften him a bit.
An excellent observation Rebecca. I hadn't considered that before. Yes, Charlotte would be much kinder than a - for example - Fanny Dashwood type!
Yes, I completely agree. Because she went into that marriage with both eyes wide open, she was able to arrange things in a way that suited them both.
I feel that the worst marriage of all was in Sense and Sensibility. That of Colonel Brandon's older brother to their cousin Eliza, " against her inclination". At 17 years old "she was allowed no liberty , no society, no amusement, till my father's point was gained".
The outcome was certainly damning. Much like Maria Bertram's.
@@einahsirro1488 except Maria Bertram went into her marriage willingly, for money and position in society.
@@Bandomeme Not quite. She was also fleeing from her fathers oppressive control.
@@annnee6818 it’s a factor she took into account, but her father didn’t force her into marriage against her inclination, she made a free choice to marry Rushworth.
@@annnee6818 It's Julia who married to escape their father if I remember well, Mr Bertram asked Maria during her engagement wether or not she was sure of her decision.
currently re-reading Sense and Sensibility and I feel really bad for Miss Grey, aka Mrs. Willoughby. Her husband seduced, knocked up (got pregnant), and then abandoned a _fifteen_ year old girl.
Yiiiiikes. And then he played with the heart of *another* teenager only to end up marrying the third woman to pay off his debts. I think of Anne Bronte's The Tenant of Wildfell Hall and I suspect Miss Grey had a similar marriage.
Mr. Willoughby will have many mistresses, Miss Gray will end up being unhappy but she will not let anyone know.
Sad for her but she’s a rich woman so it would be easy for her. I think she’ll have as many affairs as Willoughby but Willoughby wouldn’t divorce her since she’s the one with money.
@@Girl-rj3qe my dear, all the money a lady possessed became the property of the husband as soon as she married, unless there was some annuity set in her dowry or prenuptial agreement. Of course, social norms dictated the husband was to provide for his wife and we do not see abusive cruelty from Willoughby towards his wife other than that he was unfaithful.
I've always wondered why Elinor has any sympathy at all for him at the end of the novel when he visits while Marianne is ill.
@@julijakeitNo, it didn't. It became BOTH their property, which yes did mean a husband could gamble away his wife's money - or a wife her husband's! - unless there were legal settlements which Miss Grey undoubtedly had or her family would not have let her marry someone poor.
I get so tired of this 'wife's property became the husband's' argument. 'With all my worldly goods I thee endow' is said by the HUSBAND in the marriage contract, not the wife. I have read of so many Victorian husband's ruined by paying their wife's debts, because his money was legally hers to spend!
I think the worst marriage in Jane Austen is the one that never actually happened. Henry Crawford and Fanny Price would have been a tragic marriage.
His sister, Mary, gives us a little insight into what it would have been, with her astonishingly cynical prediction of "when love ceased", plus her worldly acceptance of a "regular flirtation" between Henry and Maria at family visits....
I've always though that a few years into Fanny and Henry's marriage they would have been like Stepan (Stiva) and Darya (Dolly) Oblonsky from Anna Karenina.
I know a lot of people are pissed off with that, but I love how Austen destroys the cliché of "virginal goody-goody girl changes bad boy into good boy", and slaps the reader with "Nope, that doesn't happen if the guy does not want to change". I have always loved how much Jane kicks Romantic ideals until they are left bleeding on the ground.
@@isabelguzmanmiranda5025 Yes. Even in Pride and Prejudice Elizabeth doesn't change Darcy, instead her and our perspectives are shifted and we see that he wasn't a bad person in the first place. Not because all his actions suddenly make sense, but because we realise he didn't actually do the worst things that he's been accused of in the first place. They both then meet on the middle ground.
Yes absolutely!
John Dashwood did not really mind Fanny pushing him to be selfish, because he is fundamentally selfish. It benefits him, so he’s fine with it. His spinelessless is a convenient way to avoid making hard decisions.
I totally agree!
If he had been a good sort of man, he would have put his foot down. Then told Fanny to zip it. Usually our mates amplify the worst of our traits. Or exploit them
I don’t think he is fundamentally good man or that the video is trying to portray him as such, the video says they bring worts out of each other. If his wife has been someone like Jane like the example she would never have been fine with his sisters not being taken care of and he didn’t have a spine to go against societies expectations on his own, even if he wanted to since he was greedy as well.
I have just been re-reading S&S and I agree - John Dashwood is a vile character: in Ch 33 he complains to Elinor of the cost of replacing the china, linen etc bequeathed to her (Elinor's) mum. "He (their dad) had an undoubted right to dispose of his own property as he chose, but in consequence we have been obliged...to supply....what was taken away".
Later, in Ch 41 (after Edward Ferrars has been disowned and cut off by his mother) Edward has been offered the living which is within Col. Brandon's gift), John Dashwood cannot understand this action - "He could have sold this for £1,400......what could be the Colonel's motive?" - (Elinor replies) "A very simple one - to be of use to Mr Ferrars". John Dashwood simply cannot understand this.
This conversation goes on with a bit of sexual politics: "We think now" said Mr Dashwood "of Robert's marrying Miss Morton." (she had previously been lined up for Edward). Elinor, smiling (replied) "The lady, I suppose, has no choice in the affair." "Choice! - how do you mean?"
21st century satire couldn't - doesn't - do it better.
I think all this is beside the question. Were John and Fanny happily married? I’d say ‘yes’. They are both mean
and selfish and this unites rather than divides them.
I think that the real burden for anyone married to Mr. Collins would be having to deal with Lady Catherine for a neighbor
The marriage of Colonel Brandon's brother with his father's ward, Eliza, is only briefly described, but it's surely one of the worst, if not the very worst.
Yes, awful - I have another video about the narrative of Mrs Eliza Brandon's marriage here which may be of interest: th-cam.com/video/kKxNYZja4eg/w-d-xo.html
We should also probably include Brandon's mom and dad's marriage because we know his dad is a self-dealing bully who has two sons and forces his WARD to marry the one that DOESN'T love her when the son that does would have equally entitled him to steal all her money. What a lout. Another example of Austen showing that the "Great and Transparent Men of England" is really just a veneer of civility over a whole wealth of oppression and wrongs eating at the soul of England.
also marianne and colonel brandon. he was a million years older than she was.
@@mayrnibird9224 That was super common at the time - Mr Knightley is something like 16 years older than Emma. That alone isn't something that should lead to a "worst marriage in Austen" label.
@@SchlichteToven common for pedophiles doesn't make it right or good. he could have married marianne's mom if he was an honorable man.
If we are considering off-stage marriages, we must include both of the Elliot men, especially William Elliot: marrying his poor, unsuitable wife for her money and clearly not caring a fig to even mourn her properly. Perhaps Sir Walter is better placed in the worst parents in Austen category, but I always wonder about that marriage, since he is so unfeeling to two of his daughters, especially when Anne is supposed to be so much like her mother.
Yes, excellent shout re Mr Elliot and his wife.
Mrs Smith tells us of Mr Elliot's reasons for choosing his wife: "Money, money, was all that he wanted. Her father was a grazier, her grandfather had been a butcher, but that was all nothing. She was a fine woman, had had a decent education, was brought forward by some cousins, thrown by chance into Mr Elliot's company, and fell in love with him; and not a difficulty or a scruple was there on his side, with respect to her birth. All his caution was spent in being secured of the real amount of her fortune, before he committed himself."
And exactly as you say, his mourning is superficial - he's already making calculations about his next wife! Anne makes clear the impropriety of this: "My dear Mrs Smith, Mr Elliot's wife has not been dead much above half a year. He ought not to be supposed to be paying his addresses to any one."
(Persuasion, ch.21)
The novel says Anne's mother's one mistake was marrying sir Walter and she just went made the best of it that she could.
Yes, indeed: "Lady Elliot had been an excellent woman, sensible and amiable; whose judgement and conduct, if they might be pardoned the youthful infatuation which made her Lady Elliot, had never required indulgence afterwards.--She had humoured, or softened, or concealed his failings, and promoted his real respectability for seventeen years; and though not the very happiest being in the world herself, had found enough in her duties, her friends, and her children, to attach her to life, and make it no matter of indifference to her when she was called on to quit them.--" ('Persuasion' ch.1).
@@DrOctaviaCox I wonder if at least part of the reason why Mr. Elliot pursued Anne as opposed to her sister Elizabeth is because he thought Anne might be easier to control.
@@legendarymermaid To me it always seemed like Mr. Elliot did enjoy intelligence and Elizabeth wasn't as quick witted as Anne. He also didn't mind doing something morally wrong but by the same token didn't try to draw attention to it. He liked being a bit in the shadow where his actions would go more unnoticed. Elizabeth liked being the center of attention too much. And also your point. It even ties into the attention point: Anne would never make a scene even if she was unhappy. Elizabeth on the other hand...
Just my interpretation though. Been a while since I read the book.
It’s amazing Edmund and Fanny ended up in a happy marriage. Fanny is an amazing character who does what is right despite being trying to be bullied into an unhappy marriage.I have a lot of respect for her.
JA touched on their marriage so little that I feel like Fanny was a second choice.
Mr and Mrs Hill in Pride and Prejudice must have had a pretty strong marriage. They would have shared a lot of laughs about their employers.
"Mrs" was often a courtesy title. Did Mr Hill even exist?
I don’t remembers a Mr Hill mentioned. She (Mrs Hill) was probably never married.
There is a Mr. Hill in the movie, not in the series, if I remember correctly.
I felt sorry for Charlotte because of Lizzie's treatment to her. It's her best friend and she was so quick to judge her for what she did, but even as a 13 year I could see that Charlotte had little other choice. What was she meant to do for the rest of her life, she needed to be looked after, anf there was no other offer. It was poorly done on Lizzie's side.
@@pippiecarr9378 I think Lizzie probably thought Charlotte would be as miserable in the marriage as she would have been and said what she said out of concern for someone she loved. That doesn't make it any more sensitive of course, but it was from wanting to protect and not attack.
I was always surprised when I reread Northanger Abbey that we were persuaded to think of the main character as "just a silly girl" for imagining General Tilney murdered his wife. He very obviously abused her at least and for Catherine to take the leap that he caused her death in some way is not that far fetched. Especially considering how many murders are committed by one spouse or the other.
The way young Tilney felt it incredibly necessary to force the idea of his parents' 'love' onto Catherine is so telling. General Tilney absolutely neglected his wife's illness , if anything, that's abuse .
Yes, this is always a point that I think is overlooked when Catherine's 'naivete' is mocked. She's actually completely correct that General Tilney is a cruel man, she just has a more dramatic idea of what that cruelty consists in. I think JA was trying to make the point that real-life cruelty tends to be far less obvious than in books, and you need to watch out for it, which Catherine DOES.
It also adds another layer to her relationship with Henry. I've heard it critcized for him 'knowing' more than her, but he actually doesn't. His automatic impulse is to defend his father, but he actually realizes Catherine is more right about him and stands up to him in the end. He would probably never have been brave enough to do that without Catherine's example.
I would love a counterpart to this video: Jane Austen's best marriage. I think this would be really interesting and entertaining, especially given all the side characters throughout her works that would be fun to investigate. The first couple that comes to mind, my personal favorite couple, is the Admiral and Mrs. Croft from Persuasion... but there are so many!
I'm convinced that Lydia is not punished because she is the punishment - what Wickham did as a cold-blooded predator is miles worse than a sixteen-year-old's self-absorbed ignorance, and I know the BBC adaption added a wonderful little second when Lydia is gushing over Wickham and he rolls his eyes to himself with this withering resignation 😂 his entire character has been acted, fake, a mask, and so he's doomed to play chipper, dashing husband to Lydia's relentless enthusiasm to the end of his days - truly poetic, without being so heavy handed as him having an alcohol-induced heart attack in a brothel at age 33 😂
Please please please do the best marriages in Jane Austen writing! And what it means: what characteristics of relationship she thought indicates a good marriage.
A great idea. Thanks for the suggestion! Octavia
Yes, please!
Ha! - duly noted. Octavia
Yes please x
Principles on both sides probably would do the job :) whatever other features could be...
whenever Jane Austen uses the word "inconsolable" you know some delicious irony is lurking just beneath the surface.
I really enjoyed your analysis, but I think you underestimate the damage of the Bennet marriage. Mr. Bennet’s winding up of his wife makes an unstable woman even more unstable. Even Lizzy, who is heavily biased in her father’s favor, recognizes this. That Jane and Lizzy escape mostly unscathed is due to nature more than nurture, and that Kitty and Lydia don’t end up much worse off than they do is thanks to Jane and Lizzy in the former case and Darcy in the latter case. Mary could definitely have benefited from a guiding hand from her father. I think all that earns the Bennet marriage a spot in your top three.
Still, a really interesting analysis.
I just discovered your channel today, and I look forward to exploring it.
I agree. I think it is made clear that Mr. Bennet does not respect his wife and at one point I think he regrets not having taken better care of his daughters, but if you really look at it, in the end he is really happy to let other people sort out his problems. He sais he is utterly ashamed of himself but that it will pass soon enough. While intelligent and well-mannered he is some sort of lethargic enabler in a way. That is what an unhappy marriage does to you.
This is the only Austen novel I've read, and she had me hooked right out of the gate with the painful accuracy of the Mr. and Mrs. Bennett dynamic. Stuff I've seen up close and personal!
I would argue that Mr. Bennet is actually a bit worse than Sir Thomas. Sir Thomas at least seemed to have realized his failings after Maria's elopement and his part in it. He realized he hadn't been the best father and regrets that. Mr. Bennet on the other hand, learns nothing. He does, briefly, mourning his failings, but then it passes and he just goes on as before. Nothing learned.
From personal observation, unhappily married people create a « dysfunctional system » that affects all the people in their orbits. In thinking about the Bennetts, which to me was a disastrous union, I always wondered where the goodness of Jane and the down to earth wisdom of Lizzie came from. They each have their blind spots, but they are not self centred in the way their younger sisters were. They seem less touched by their mother’s egocentricity or their father’s escapism than the other girls.
I don’t really think it’s possible to rank unhappiness in a marriage....there are too many varieties of unhappiness, and Jane Austin gives us such great examples! Some people’s coping mechanisms are better than others, but are they really happy?
The question of why Jane and Lizzie turned out so well, especially in comparison to their sisters, is a really interesting one.
In considering the five-factor model of personality, it is estimated that 30 to 60% of those factors are influenced by genetics. So part of the answer to the question is possibly that Jane and Lizzie got better genes.
In addition, there is a mention that Jane and Lizzie visited the Gardiners in London frequently, while the same thing is not said of the younger three sisters. It could be that the Gardiners were an important influence on how Jane and Lizzie turned out as well.
Ultimately, of course, it’s impossible to know why people turn out the way they do (considering the Bennet girls as if they were real people rather than fictional characters), since sometimes people in appalling situations turn out very well, while people in ideal situations turn out badly.
While I agree that the marriage of Sir Bertram and Lady Bertram has problems, I think it has some small saving grace. Lady Bertram in all her indolence does love Sir Thomas as shown by how happy she is to be with him once he is home. Sir Thomas is never shown to be unkind to Lady Bertram and seems to have an affection for her. While I think Sir Thomas does abuse his power and is somewhat responsible for his daughters' recklessness and allows Fanny to be abused by Mrs Norris, he does truly love his children. He was very happy to be home and see his family again. He showed restraint when he found out about the play and he tried to promote Fanny's happiness later in the novel. He took on her sister Susan, encouraged Mrs Bertram to go without Fanny so she could go to the ball and tried to have her well married. He was not privy to Henry Crawford's actual character and at the end of the novel he is happy for Fanny and Edmund. He out of all the parents of Austen learns from his errors and tries to make amends.
Hmmm. I’m afraid I’m not convinced about Sir Thomas’s goodness. Yes, Lady Bertram is content to be with Sir Thomas, but she’s also happy to be with her Pug! And does he really love his children? - Other than how they reflect back on to him? Here are Sir Thomas’s thoughts on the same moment in the novel as the Maria quotation I examined in the video:
“Sir Thomas was satisfied; *too glad to be satisfied, perhaps, to urge the matter quite so far as his judgment might have dictated to others* . It was an alliance which he could not have relinquished without pain; and thus he reasoned. Mr. Rushworth was young enough to improve. Mr. Rushworth must and would improve in good society; and if Maria could now speak so securely of her happiness with him, speaking certainly without the prejudice, the blindness of love, she ought to be believed. Her feelings, probably, were not acute; he had never supposed them to be so; but her comforts might not be less on that account; and if she could dispense with seeing her husband a leading, shining character, there would certainly be everything else in her favour. A well-disposed young woman, who did not marry for love, was in general but *the more attached to her own family* ; and the nearness of Sotherton to Mansfield must naturally hold out the greatest temptation, and would, in all probability, be a continual supply of the most amiable and innocent enjoyments. Such and such-like were the reasonings of Sir Thomas, happy to escape the *embarrassing evils of a rupture, the wonder, the reflections, the reproach that must attend it* ; happy to secure a marriage which would *bring him such an addition of respectability and influence* , and very happy to think anything of his daughter's disposition that was most favourable for the purpose.” (ch.21)
His reasonings about Maria’s marriage to a man he knows she doesn’t value include: that she’ll be at Mansfield more often because she'll be more attached to her own family rather than her husband, that he can escape any “embarrassing” rupture, and - most crucially (and damningly) - that the marriage will bring himself “an addition of respectability and influence”. Not good reasons! In the opening sentence here, the narrative voice implies that he ought to have thought about the matter more, that his personal “glad[ness]” outweighs the judgement & consideration others would have felt the matter dictated.
Did he try to promote Fanny’s happiness? He banished her to Portsmouth when she refused to marry Henry Crawford, and only allowed her to return after Henry had publicly disgraced himself, and when she would be useful to him as a nurse / carer / companion for Lady Bertram. He took on Susan when Fanny was no longer there to attend to Lady Bertram (essentially as an unpaid companion).
I read Sir Thomas as one of the most selfish characters in all of Austen’s novels. And I think we can read this in the closing paragraphs of the novel. For instance, “Fanny was indeed the daughter that he wanted. His charitable kindness had been rearing a prime comfort for himself”. A prime comfort for himself! - hardly the point of ‘kind’ charity. The very last mention of Sir Thomas I think exposes his self-conceit too: “Sir Thomas saw repeated, and for ever repeated, reason to rejoice in what he had done for them all” (ch.48). Yes, what *he* has done for everyone else is what’s important!
Perhaps I read Sir Thomas too harshly?
@@DrOctaviaCox those are excellent points and he was very selfish and concerned about appearances. I suppose he enjoys having a complacent wife who follows his direction as it boosts his ego. While he does harm I'm not entirely sure it is the marriage at fault. Lady Bertram is such a non entity as a parent it causes problems too.
Oh yes absolutely - Lady Bertram's parenting skills are severely lacking! But I think the marriage is central to the failings of both parents because I think each exacerbates the flaws of the other. Lady Bertram's indolence allows for Sir Thomas to call the shots completely, and Sir Thomas' self-conceit, self-importance, & belief that everyone else should do what he wants is encouraged by a wife who is happy for him to do everything (because it means she doesn't have to do anything).
Lady Bertram does virtually nothing for her children at all during the novel. She indulges her children when it is not an "inconvenience" to her, and the narrative voice even tells readers that she thinks more of her dog than her children! :
"To the education of her daughters Lady Bertram paid not the smallest attention. She had not time for such cares. She was a woman who spent her days in sitting, nicely dressed, on a sofa, doing some long piece of needlework, of little use and no beauty, thinking more of her pug than her children, but very indulgent to the latter when it did not put herself to inconvenience, guided in everything important by Sir Thomas..." (ch.2)
Lady Bertram is very content to be "guided in everything" by Sir Thomas, because it means she does not have to have the inconvenience of doing anything herself. This is a woman who does not have "time for such cares" as the "education of her daughters"!
[I have to confess, though, that I have rather a fondness for Lady Bertram as a character, because Austen is so biting and funny in the depiction of her!]
@@DrOctaviaCox regarding the last part of your comment about readers loving characters because of Austen’s description of them are so full of humour and sarcasm and are so entertaining that we sometimes miss their actual qualities or flaws. I think this may also apply to Mrs Bennet. Her hysterics and nervous disposition are described in such hilarious terms that we tend to overlook the fact that her concerns for her daughters marriages are genuine and legitimate and not misplaced, although the manner in which she approaches this might not be the best. But she’s doing the best she can given her limited education and understanding. At least she’s doing something. But all this is not expressly stated in the book but left for the readers to work out.
Absolutely nidhird - I couldn't agree more. We dismiss Mrs Bennet's legitimate concerns because of her personal character flaws. Not dissimilarly, I think readers often overlook & dismiss Miss Bates because of her conversational style.
In my opinion the worst marriage in Austen's novels is the one between Eliza and Brandon's older brother, because it shows that Cathrine's anxiety about a gothic patriarch is right: Brandon's father locked the girl, whom was his ward, until she said yes to the proposal. That plot narrated by colonel brandon is like a mini "wuthering heights" inside an austen novel; and like in Bronte's book the effects of "unnatural deeds" spread like a doom to the next generation with another Eliza...
In marriages Austen talks about women's condition showing that their power of refusal (the only one they have, according to henry tilney) is under siege ( I don't remember who said so, maybe Claudia Johnson).
At last a quote from mary crawford:
"Everybody is taken in at some period or other...in marriage especially...I see that it is so; and I feel that it must be so, when I consider that it is, of all transactions, the one in which people expect most from others, and are least honest themselves".
About positive marriages, except the ones between heroines and heroes which we don't actually see, I count 1...2 at most.
Ha! be bly - you have pre-empted me! I’m planning another video in which I discuss Eliza and the elder Brandon brother’s marriage (and various surrounding circumstances), in which I argue that Austen presents it in the background as a ‘conventional’ novel/gothic narrative in order to highlight how her own novel (Sense and Sensibility) thwarts those expectations.
Absolutely - Claudia Johnson in _Jane Austen: Women, Politics, and the Novel_ :
"Gothic novels teach the deferent and self-deprecating Catherine to do what no one and nothing else does: to distrust paternal figures and to feel that her power of refusal is continuously under siege."
A really seminal work of criticism.
But this was an anecdotal memory, though, not actual characters.
Yes - Eliza's marriage to the elder Brandon brother happens off-stage and is narrated to us by Colonel Brandon.
Incidentally, I have now published this video on Colonel Brandon's description of Mrs Eliza Brandon, which you can watch here: th-cam.com/video/kKxNYZja4eg/w-d-xo.html
In the video I argue that Brandon's narrative account is deliberately Gothicised.
I’m can totally understand wanting to escape your parents at a young age. I got married rather young to escape a abusive family. Luckily my husband is a good man and I didn’t turn out to be a bad marriage. But wanting to escape I could see the only way out being married at a young age.
It is why I joined the army. I was working 3 pt jobs and still couldn’t afford to get out of my family home. Never even considered marriage.?
Mr. Collins was actually a pretty good match for Charlotte who was looking down the barrel of old maidhood. His station was pretty good even if his character was extremely flawed and she went in with eyes wide open. Shouldn't even get a dishonorable mention imo.
Yes, Charlotte really did make the best of her situation and was quite a practical minded woman.
Indeed. Mr. Collins got himself a practical, intelligent woman like his patron demanded (and very useful given his character), and Charlotte got a stable and comfortable future instead of uncertain spinsterhood, dependent on the charity of family to not fall into poverty. Not married for love, of course, but they both got a good catch.
Agree too. I'm a bit biased as I have a bit of a soft spot for Mr Collins. Yes he's silly and pompous but he has some good qualities - a sense of family obligation and he wants to be on good terms with his and Charlotte's family; a need to be independent (Wickham in Mr Collins' situation would be happily living off his expectations); and, he respects women more than most characters (Charlotte arranges their home as she wants and he explicitly says he would not bring up his wife's lack of money). He's quite young, desperately insecure and, given Charlotte has the ability to guide him and make him feel valued, he has more potential than a lot of Austen's male characters. I think the Collinses have a good chance at a happy marriage.
I think the reason this video makes so much sense is that there's a vibe all through Austin's books that marriage is hardly ever an informed choice, and unlikely to be an authentic matter of feeling first of all. These are largely books about women trying to make wise life choices and get their romantic bearings while everyone around them is trying to maneuver them and anyone else unmarried into relationships that serve goals other than authentic choice. The scary part, often played for humour, is how random these matches are and how little can be predicted at the outset. People often know so little before they take the plunge, or are pushed into marriage.
Yes, indeed Myra. When looked at through the lens of distance, it seems such an odd way to organise society! And of course virtually an irreversible decision (it was extremely difficult to get a divorce at the time, and even required an act of parliament). An apt phrase, I think, "marry in haste and repent at leisure", comes from William Congreve's late 17th century play _The Old Batchelor_ (1693):
Thus grief still treads upon the heels of pleasure:
Married in haste, we may repent at leisure.
(Act V, scene 8)
Charlotte Lucas seems to recognise this point exactly in her comment that "Happiness in marriage is entirely a matter of chance. If the dispositions of the parties are ever so well known to each other or ever so similar beforehand, it does not advance their felicity in the least. They always continue to grow sufficiently unlike afterwards to have their share of vexation; and it is better to know as little as possible of the defects of the person with whom you are to pass your life" ( _Pride and Prejudice_ ch.6 ) I can only agree with Lizzy's response, "it is not sound. You know it is not sound".
@Dr Octavia Cox I was literally scrolling to see if you would bring up Charlotte Lucas and her commentary on marriage. Charlotte knows her assertions are both the truth and absurd, even though she says it in a light hearted tone.
But, as the narrative says, she’s an educated lady so she has to play the game and take a chance anyway.
It’s awful to think that her life would have actually been worse for her if she didn’t accept Mr Collins.
In the modern world Charlotte wouldn’t have had to make that choice .
No, indeed, Rebecca - she would have had far more options available to her. And she would have been able to put her considerable skills to better use! There must have been _so_ many women like her... It makes me rather sad to think about it.
@@rebeccasperring1747 Which is why Charlotte and Mr. Collins have a conventional marriage, for the time period.
The Lizzie Bennet Diaries has an excellent take on the modern version of Charlotte's choice: unemployment in a harsh market or a mind numbing/frustrating job
I think we should remember that many of the attitudes to marriage discussed in Jane Austen's novels still existed within living memory. My grandparents' generation- born in the late 1880s/early 1890s- contained many women with 'modern' attitudes who managed to make a respectable living for themselves (they were all born working class) before marriage and in some cases went on working after.
However none of them would have turned a hair at the suggestion that a woman should marry if she got the chance, even if the man in question was 'beneath her' in understanding, intelligence, manners- or indeed even if he was potentially a bully. They would have believed that it was a woman's job to make the best of marriage, and be grateful.
A woman who sort divorce because of domestic abuse was still regarded as reckless and foolish, quite apart from any moral questions raised.
My immediate family seemed to have had happy marriages, but I knew women who blossomed in widowhood, even late in life, because at last they were able to live as they wanted, not as their husbands demanded.
Oh, if it was only the generation of a hundred years ago! Women still seek protection in their relationships. We try to buy safety with sex and hardly even realise it. If we at least knew, we could choose our partners accordingly instead of inviting the next enemy into our beds. At least leaving has become easier...
I think the worst marriages is Col Brandon’s brother to Eliza, his teenage cousin. Of all the marriages mentioned by Austen, it is the most mercenary of all the matches.
Lydia and Wickham has got to be the worst. He would have stuck around only long enough till the money Mr Darcy had given him had run out. At that point he would have gone most likely to America and reinvented himself as single and honed in on a young rich heiress. Lydia, abandoned with two or three children would be left dependent on her sisters generosity with the indignity of having been abandoned. The family might have tried to present a situation of widowhood for her but that might have been difficult - like Anna in Clayhanger. Bigamy was and still is, a serious offence.
I love the way that you expressed that the advice of absolute power is a command. You’re so right, and it really does describe that dynamic extremely well.
I totally agree with your list, but I think I would rank Mr and Mrs Bennett’s marriage as worse than you did, simply because I think the way that he incessantly mocks and belittles her is a different kind of cruelty that has equally long lasting and profound psychological effects. I think we are meant to laugh at her ‘nerves’ and her hypochondria, but it’s very easy to see where that kind of anxiety comes from. The fact that she doesn’t have the ‘strength of character’ (as Austen might conceptualise it) it to process her distress with sense or grace shouldn’t mean that it is deserved or allowed. She may even have been able to develop that character if she had been loved and nurtured by her husband instead of dismissed and to disdained by him. There’s a lot of evidence in the text to imply that the way that he has treated her for the several decades of their marriage is really quite unconscionable. I believe I’d be a nervous wreck if I were bullied and laughed at every day by someone I knew to be much cleverer than me, and on whom my livelihood and welfare depended. I’d even go on to assert that by your criterion of injury to children in the marriage as being a key determinant of its quality, the Bennetts also end up pretty far down the scale. I think we can draw a direct line from the way Mr and Mrs Bennet treat each other to Lydia’s thoughtlessness, Kitty’s nerves, and Mary‘s pomposity and absurd airs. They’re all extremely anxious and/or neglected young women whose problematic behaviour is evidence of the poor parenting they received from two people who couldn’t respect each other enough to raise their children with attention and care, or set them and even passable example of a decent marriage. I think we forgive mr Bennett because we love Lizzie and he’s at least clever enough to do so too, but his cruelty to Mrs Bennett should rank him among the worst husbands, no matter how ridiculous she is.
I agree. Bennet was cruel to his wife
Whenever I think of Mr Bennets behavior towards Mrs Bennet, I’m reminded of Mr Knightlys behavior towards Miss Bates. Both women are small-minded gossips but while Mr Bennet belittled and mocked his wife, Mr Knightly treats miss bates with respect and compassion. He is the picture of a gentleman, one who does not use his position to his abuse.
Absolutely agree with the choice of 'all the marriages in Mansfield Park'. When I read it as a teenager I almost couldn't stand the whole book because I hated every character so much and it was such a hostile environment for everyone!
Bravo for putting General and Mrs. Tilney at the top of your list! It seems a fortuitous coincidence to me that I only just happened on your site for the very first time today, when just last night I was watching the 2007 production of Northanger Abbey, and was brutally reminded of how absolutely terrifying he is. (Great praise to the actor who played him, though; his performance was chillingly brilliant
Interesting choice. I find judgment of that union problematical because of the gloss Catherine's imaginings place on it and because we never meet Mrs Tilney. I would observe that the marriage produced two relatively well balanced and decent children, especially Henry, so psychological theories would tend to suggest the General was not all bad and the Tilney children had some good parental and relationship modelling in their birth family.
Thank you for opening my eyes towards the worst marriages in Jane Austen’s Novels.
i so much detested Lucy steele in ‚Sense and Sensibility‘
( brilliantly Played in Ang Lee‘s Film) so that she perfectly fittet to the hollow and arrogant Robert Ferrars.
Fantastic examination of these marriages. Captain Tilney certainly terrified me. That repressed anger covered over with controlled politeness and superficial extravagance all blended together to create a very scary character-so real. (I was married to him for a while.) And like you said, we as the reader see the effects on the poor children-girls who can’t wait to get out of the house, or who, like Mary Crawford become jaded & cynical; young men who have no respect for their family name, estate or money, for morality or for women. A very accurate portrayal of the devastating effects of abuse, violence & repressed anger.
Worst marriage: The admiral and Mrs Crawford. By Dr Cox's standard (marriages that harm others) this is one of the very worst. Though the Bertram's marriage provides no guidance to their daughters (or to Mr Bertram), Admiral and Mrs Crawford lead astray two of the brightest lights of the Austen canon: Henry and Mary Crawford. These are two very charismatic, intelligent, talented individuals who have not been given good values and this lack of values ruins them as people. And it's clear from the novel that all the characters feel sorry for how bad an upbringing they have had. They are jaded, grasping, seducers and Austen makes pretty clear it's the reasonable outcome of their terrible childhood.
I just happened upon this channel today and was entranced by this analysis of marriages. Now I must re-read all of these novels with this perspective in mind. Delightful!
I felt Charlotte was regarded with more of a sympathetic look by Austen than necessarily by Lizzy at times. Charlotte is described as a very practical woman who doesn’t hold out for love, all she wants is the comfort and safety of a marriage. And while Mr Collin might be a very annoying and ridiculous character, he isn’t abusive, nor poor, nor of bad character. He is just really, really bad company and the novel describes in detail all the ways Charlotte manages their lives together to spend as little time with him as possible. Not what I’d call a great match, but it seems to work out just fine for both of them within the restrictions of their time.
Similarly Mr and Mrs Bennet are surely beyond any kind of love at the point of the novel, but they have built a life together that nevertheless seems to function and keep them both somewhat happy.
Lydia I always thought was a much more tragic story. No, she doesn’t end up in a poor house, but that seems largely due to her sisters financially supporting the couple. Maybe it is harder to accept that it ends up loveless because she did in fact love her husband at one point. Love lost is more tragic than a sensible arrangement. And let’s not forget too, that she’s only 16 when she has to marry “such a man”. So, yes, I would’ve put her marriage on the list personally.
I would also like to add few instances where the people involved are so greedy, arrogant, selfish/conceited or just plain foolish , that readers feel like they thoroughly deserve each other . Like the Eltons in EMMA, Lucy Steele and Robert ferrars in S and S, and Wickham and Lydia in P and P.
Perhaps Mr Elliot and Mrs Clay in _Persuasion_ too?
I like in Death Comes to Pemberley (the TV version at least :) ) that it becomes obvious Lydia and Wickham's marriage has been in many ways disastrous, but Lydia, true to form, has enjoyed the wild ride every step of the way.
I'm so happy! Before clicking on this I thought "#1 should be General and Mrs. Tilney, but there's no way that'll happen." 🤭
I think people fundamentally misunderstand Catherine Morland, who is one of my all-time favourite Austen heroines, and Henry Tilney for that matter. Catherine isn't stupid; she's naive and a bit dramatic, but her suspicions are based on her intuitive feelings that are proven *right* ...At the same time, Henry is more sensible, but he tries to rationalize and justify his father's behaviour and is ultimately proven *wrong* ...
Thank you! I have to go read Northanger Abbey again.🥰
I adore Catherine Morland, she is one of my favourite Austen heroines as well. Northanger Abbey is a wickedly funny novel, with some of my favourite Austen lines.
On the Bertram's: they raised extremely spoiled children. When Sir Thomas sees the issue, he finally takes steps to correct their behavior-and goes from too lax to too controlling. At the same time, he started recognizing Fanny's character. It wasn't until Maria runs off from her marriage that he finally recognizes Fanny's qualities though. Sir Bertram does not appear controlling of Fanny after that, and their home seems much happier. (Would Fanny have allowed her younger sister at MP if Sir Thomas was overly controlling?)
I also disagree that the Betrams have such a bad marriage. Much of the bad behavior of Tom, Maria, and Julia (especially Maria) comes from the over indulgeance of Mrs. Norris. I think her influence cannot be ignored. Also Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram seem genuinely fond of each other. I rank the Bennett's marriage as worse, because they are unhappy and this severely damages their younger daughters, particularly Mary.
It is so pleasant to hear you discussing all these Austen relating topics. I feel like one doesn't get enough of her novels and wants to dive deeper and to converse about her works, and to learn about her life. I don't have such an opportunity in real life, so I enjoy it here, on your channel😊 thank you for your work, it is such a balm!
I always felt that Mr. Collins really loves Charlotte. Charlotte fulfills Lady Catherine's requirements and keeps him comfortable and that is really all he needs. As for Charlotte: ""I see what you are feeling," replied Charlotte. "You must be surprised, very much surprised-so lately as Mr. Collins was wishing to marry you. But when you have had time to think it over, I hope you will be satisfied with what I have done. I am not romantic, you know; I never was. I ask only a comfortable home; and considering Mr. Collins's character, connection, and situation in life, I am convinced that my chance of happiness with him is as fair as most people can boast on entering the marriage state." I believe she was happy. She knew how to manage Mr. Collins and her household.
I don't know if Mr. Collins loves Charlotte, but I do think he is happy with her, which is close enough. She ticks every box in his requirements for a wife (or rather Lady Catherine's, same difference 😆). Charlotte is practical, intelligent, and good natured.
I'm not sure about that. Charlotte only fullfilled Lady Catherine's demands he gets married. He did go to The Bennet's with the goal of choosing a wife. After Lizzie turns him down Charlotte was available and willing.
@@einezcrespo2107 I don't think he loved Charlotte when he asked her to marry him. I think that after the marriage he grew to actually love Charlotte by the time Elizabeth comes to visit.
It's fun to speculate on how the Hunsford parsonage might change after Lady C's death. The legatee of Rosings probably will discourage Mr. Collins fawning and gossip. Charlotte might be able to mitigate his behaviors when the person who enables and colludes with those behaviors is gone. Her own father was a silly, obsequious man as well. She was well schooled in living peaceably with foolishness. I actually love Charlotte more than Elizabeth. I prefer a strong woman able to deal with real life over a romantic idealist.
@@cs3742I think Anne de Burgh, who I hope married Col Fitzwilliam, probably had hidden depths she kept from her mother. She would have run the estate differently!
Mrs. Dashwood is John’s Stepmother - not his mother-in-law!
In other literature, a classic ‘bad marriage’ with accompanying punishment would be Mr. Rochester’s original marriage in Jane Eyre. The whole setup is really that ‘punishment’ in so many horrific resulting ways.
Great vids - thanks!
IMO Mr. and Mrs. Bennet's marriage seems like the most unhappy to me. There is so much contempt from Mr. Bennet towards his wife. Granted, she is high strung, but her worries are not without reason. Her daughters truly need to make good marriages or the future will be bleak for them. Mr. Bennet doesn't seem to take things as seriously as he should. It is also clear they don't take pleasure in each other's company.
Their bad marriage is actively harmful as it leads to embarrassing behavior from both parents in public which further damages their daughters' chances in marriage, as Darcy points out.
I think Sir Thomas is very flawed, but ultimately, redeemable.
He was ready to extract Maria from her catastrophic marriage had she only given him a hint that was what she wished.
He ordered the fire to be lit for Fanny in her cold East chamber, even though he was displeased with her; (very subtly, at this point, Fanny's star began to rise, although it still had far to travel).
I think that a much more nuanced reading of Mansfield Park is called for. Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram are portrayed as caring for and respecting one another. They are both very flawed people but they have a good marriage. It is their personal flaws that detrimentally affect their children, and the greatest of these flaws is that of depending upon Mrs. Norris, who really is the villian of this story. Although Mary and Henry can be seen as the most corrupting influences, in actual fact, the corruption is started by Mrs. Norris and fed by her throughout the entire book.
Sir Thomas is clearly portrayed as having a manner that does not communicate it's affection and dedication to his children. He is a good man and they do not have a bad marriage.
If anything, his defect is that he allowed his wife to be indolent, accepting her as she was, and not requiring more of her once they had children to raise together. Because of his extreme politeness and correctness, he does not prevent Mrs. Norris from having undue influence on his wife, his children, and even himself. But they do not have a bad marriage. This simply isn't in the text.
I agree completely. I was enjoying the video and mostly agreeing until she came to the part about Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram. They're shown to be relatively happily married. He cares for her comfort and she's glad to have him home. Their marriage is no worse than Mr. and Mrs. Bennett's, and arguable better since he doesn't ridicule her in front of the children.
As for the argument that Sir Thomas is some heinous villain... He isn't. His daughters are so eager to "escape" from him because he holds them to a higher standard of behavior than they want to adhere to. The biggest piece of tyranny we see him guilty of in regards to his daughters is breaking up the play, which was a scandalous play anyway. He's shown again and again to be trying to be a good father. He's just bad at it. He worries about Maria's happiness with Mr. R. He makes a point of bringing Tom with him to Antigua to get him away from the bad crowd, then sends him home when they've been gone a long time. He gets upset of Fanny's behalf that Mrs. Norris doesn't want her to have a fire... He's not a *great* man, but he's certainly not the monster Dr. Cox interprets him as.
@@nataliet1260 There is a disgusting movie version of this book that portrays Sir Thomas in a way that I won't even describe. The author is very clear about her view of him at the end of the book. He's a good man. Just like most other characters in Austen's stories, he's also a flawed one. The more I listen to and reread Persuasion, for example, the less I like Captain Wentworth for these very reasons.
I think your comments about why his daughters wanted to escape from him are just.
Remember in Persuasion, the narrator talks about the Musgroves thusly: "The Musgroves, like their houses, were in a state of alteration, perhaps improvement. The father and mother were in the old English style, and the young people in the new." This dichotomy is clear in Mansfield Park as well. The "perhaps" in the above quote is important. There is a way of being in the new style that is also consistent with the values and integrity of the old, and these are embodied in Edmund and Fanny. Part of the old English style was marrying for position. It is understandable that Sir Thomas takes this into consideration for Maria, but it doesn't end up being the right choice for people "in the new" style. He learns his lesson.
I think learning from one's mistakes is an important element in all Austen's books. And the people who don't (Lydia and Wickham are perfect examples) suffer and/or make others suffer on their behalf when they themselves don't suffer but should. We are lucky in this book that both Maria and Aunt Norris get to enjoy eternity together and that all the others are separated from them. And it is clear that Austen purposefully gives this respite to Sir Thomas (and the readers) because he deserves it for learning and changing. Thanks for your comments, Natalie.
Mrs Norris, the villain of the story... how interesting that JK Rowling chose that name for Mr Filch's cat. Another Austen novel I must revisit now. Heck, all of them, thank you, Dr Cox. Wonderful analyses!
Very few readers of Mansfield Park seem to realise that Sir Thomas Bertram's visit to the West Indies (with his son Tom) implies (or confirms) that his wealth is derived from slavery in one way or another. To describe him as a good man is therefore ridiculous even if, by the standards of the time, it was regarded as acceptable. He must have seen what life was like for the people on the plantation and yet took it for granted that he was entitled to the proceeds of their enslavement.
@@darthlaurel I disagree. Sir Thomas is not a good man for most of the novel; the fact that he dramatically changes at the end does not alter who and what he was the previous years. And that is part of Austen's point. While Sir Thomas does come to understand and regret his errors and see the consequences of them, he cannot change them and must live with them. And Austen does not give Sir Thomas respite because he earned it; she gives it because she chooses not to "dwell on guilt and misery." One thing about Austen was that she never really "punishes" her bad guys. Sir Thomas, Gen. Tilney, Henry Crawford, John Dashwood, John Willoughby, etc. rarely suffer much from what they've caused. Women like Maria, Mrs. Norris seem to suffer more from their misdeeds. And interestingly enough, of all the realizations Sir Thomas comes to, giving up slave owning doesn't seem to be one of them.
I think Maryanne would have had a terrible marriage with Willoughby. He was very self absorbed, focusing on his own happiness and making sure he had money no matter what. She got a gem with Colonel Brandon.
I'm surprised that the Chiurchills from Emma didn't even get a mention. we don't learn much about them but Mrs Churchill's death is implied to be a welcome event by everyone who knew her and this says a lot, I think, about her character and marriage to such a person must be a horrible one.
That's a great addition. Yes, it's hard to know what the Churchills' marriage was like because it's filtered through Emma's (often) perception of Frank's account. But there is something telling in the comparison between these two reactions, placed near each other in the text.
First is the collective view of "Every body" on Mrs Churchill's death: "...what would Mr Churchill do without her? Mr Churchill's loss would be dreadful indeed. Mr Churchill would never get over it...".
And then comes Frank's report: "Mr Churchill was better than could be expected" (vol.3, ch.9).
It looks like he will get over it!
This was a lovely video but also MA'AM THIS IS SUCH A GOOD LOOK, that shirt or dress is stunning on you
I agree with the choice of Mr. and Mrs. John Dashwood. However I disagree with Wickam and Lydia rating only a dishonorable mention. While no subsequent consequences are mentioned, we can deduce some things from circumstances. First, Darcy paid Wickam’s existing debts (10K) and secured him a regular army commission in return for marrying Lydia. That accomplished, Wickam can no longer hold the Bennet family reputation hostage, which protects Darcy and Elizabeth’s position. I believe it can be stated with certainty that NO further assistance will come from Darcy. Second, I believe there is no indication that Wickam can or will change his ways. Although given a blank slate, he will certainly repeat his previous behavior and greatly outstrip his Army income. He will most likely be greatly in debt within a year, and with nothing to hold over Darcy, will end up in prison or more likely fleeing the country. Finally, it is also clear that Lydia is too stupid and self-centered to even try to appreciate the situation or encourage him to change. She likely be left with nothing but Wickam’s child and have to throw herself back on her parents to survive. Thus both continue to be terrible people who damage each other and those around them.
What do you think of the “off screen” marriage between Col. Brandon’t brother and Eliza Williams? Granted they are off-screen characters, but they are narratively important to the story. Based on Col. Brandon’s description (who should be a reliable narrator) the marriage was by far the worst mentioned within Austen’s novels. Eliza was literally imprisoned and Brandon packed off to another relation in order to secure her unwilling marriage to Brandon’s brother. “My brother had no regard for her; his pleasures were not what they ought to have been, and from the first he treated her unkindly.” It would be interesting to take a speculative dive into this situation.
Horatian, Juvenalian...Dr Cox, I always listen to you Carefully. Love your PhD analysis and pearls of knowledge you dispense, more please...
Wow, I've been binging your Austen content and I just feel compelled to comment on the quality of your videos. I've gained a much greater appreciation for Austen's work and how clearly you're able to articulate your thoughts. You've certainly earned your PhD, I hope you're a professor! As an aside, the recent upgrade in audio quality is amazing!
Thank you so much Mace. Much appreciated! Octavia
[Ha! - it's completely _not_ my forte, but I am slowly trying to improve the tech side.]
I have no idea how the TH-cam algorithm works, but I am very happy it introduces me to your channel!
The worst marriage is Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax. This lady seemed so unhappy despite being engaged to the most eligible bachelor.
I would like to hear a commentary on Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax’s secret romance in Emma. Are they both in agreement in their ruse or is Churchill the scoundrel he is often accused of being?
I think they were in agreement. I think Jane may have worried that his aunt would pressure him to break the engagement and that would be upsetting for her friends and family to see her disrespected like that, even if Frank refused it would get ugly.
I don't think Frank is a scoundrel, but basically the male version of Emma: spoiled and carrless and has a lot to learn, but I think he's good at heart. Jane is the character I most identify with, and I can see why she is attracted to Frank; I like fun people and am relatively tolerant of their failings. So I think they'll actually be pretty happy.
Other than the Rushworths, you picked some marriages I would not have thought of. I enjoyed this very much!
Oh good - I'm glad you enjoyed it! Octavia
I think you should do one on the unhappiest marriages. Cause as this video shows "unhappiest" and "worst" aren't necessarily the same thing.
Well said. John and Fanny Dashwood are certainly both bad but there is no evidence of their being unhappy together.
I see someone else downthread has mentioned Sir Walter and Lady Elliot, and I 100% agree. Your point about the worst villains in Austen being men who shirk their duties to look after and protect women is so poignant, considering how much Jane and her mother and sister depended on her brothers for protection and shelter after the death of her father. Their lives literally hung in the balance of whether or not their brothers could provide for them, and more importantly were inclined to. That must have been utterly terrifying. It certainly makes Mrs. Bennet's fears seem less silly.
I strongly agree with your list, and I can't wait for the video on Eliza and Brandon's older brother.
Excellent! Thank you.
Dr. Cox. I want to thank you for posting this series of videos. It has really been both enlightening and enjoyable to listen to your analyses. listening to you I feel as though I am at a book club discussing the details of my favorite stories and characters.
As a Classics major who has read some of Horace and Juvenal, I am pleasantly surprised to hear these words applied to English literary critique and I think the comparison is spot on.
I like Eleanor and Edward Ferris from Sense and Sensibility the most because they are good friends as well as sweethearts
The closing of "everyday villany" and "abuse of domestic power" was such an excellent wrap up to the theme of this list.
It is much harder to find *good* marriages in Austen than it is to find bad ones.The only genuinely happy ones (not considering the marriages of our well deserving heroines) I can think of are The Gardiners, The Crofts, and The Morlands, and those are also people that are kind and considerate, and don't gossip as much as the rest.
Okay, I literally just reread Pride and Prejudice, Mansfield Park, Emma, and Persuasion over the past few weeks. Now I will start them all over and pay closer attention. I have enjoyed your analysis, tho I think The Bennet's marriage needed to be included as the damage done by watching their father ridicule, and treat as stupid, their mother cannot be underestimated.
What are your thoughts on the marriage between Jane Fairfax and Frank Churchill? Does it have any chance of being a happy one?
Great question! And one I find it hard to answer. On the one hand, Jane Fairfax seems to have been miserable during the months covered by the novel, exacerbated in no small degree by Frank's behaviour. For example, by flirting with Emma in front of her face - which was completely unnecessary if not actively provocative. Also, the piano he sends her - while obviously a nice gift - does expose her somewhat, which is something he must have known would happen. On the other hand, he is found being kind to the Bateses (e.g. fixing Mrs Bates' spectacles). Perhaps his kindness will be brought out during the marriage?
We do have this tit-bit from Austen's nephew's memoir (James Edward Austen-Leigh, _Memoir of Jane Austen_ (1869)):
"She would, if asked, tell us many little particulars about the subsequent career of some of her people ... [including] that the letters placed by Frank Churchill before Jane Fairfax, which she swept away unread, contained the word ‘pardon’" (ch.10). So, according to Austen (although not within the novel itself), Frank did apologise to Jane. So perhaps there is hope for them?
What do you think Ruth?
@@DrOctaviaCox do you think the same fate as lady elliot may befall jane fairfax in the long term as frank churchill is shown to be selfish and vain and often acts rashly. he may change a little for the better over time under jane's influence but maybe more likely she will continually make allowances for him. although they love each other and are devoted , their characters are so markedly different , that long term marital felicity seems dubious. frank is also somewhat lacking in the morals department, ( as often pointed out by mr knightley) and jane abhors any kind of deceit.
@@DrOctaviaCox I think it could go either way. Frank was thoughtless and immature. But he did love Jane and was remorseful and mortified by his actions. Like Emma he had lessons to learn. If Jane hadn’t broken their engagement I believe he would have continued with his inconsiderate behavior. Like Mr. Knightly I hope with Jane’s influence his character will improve.
I would have said that the Bertram's marriage in Mansfield Park is the worst but I hadn't thought of General Tilney's marriage in Northanger Abbey, probably because that marriage ended prior to the events in the novel. I don't think Charlotte Lucas has a bad marriage. She goes into it with her eyes open and by Lizzie's visit is already managing her situation well. She has financial security and the prospect of wealth in later life when her husband inherits the Longbourne estate. With a child on the way by the end of the novel things are working out well for her.
Also, I think that Catherine Morland was able to see/feel such villany from Mr. Tilney more easily because of the picture of a married life in her parents. You see when Henry kind of berates her for what she is implying about Mr. Tilney, that he defends him by saying “as much as he could”, because he knows nothing else; to him, although not giving him a great feeling, it was “normal” in his family life
Everyone thinks what they grew up with is normal, because it was normal for them. There has to be some revelation before people think to question whether what they know is different from others.
@@judithstrachan9399Yes, I love how this gives Henry an opportunity to grow in the novel. Even though he initially defends him to Catherine, he clearly thought it through and ends up standing up to him. Shows how much he respected her 😊
Dear Dr Octavia, could you also do a video on good marriages. Thank you.
Absolutely agree on your assessment of Mansfield Park. It’s a horror story !!
The Palmers in Sense and Sensibility.
Mr Palmer certainly seems to be more interested in his newspaper than his wife!
This. Good observation!!
I had wondered about this when I was watching the video. But then, I don't know if their marriage is deeply dysfunctional in the way some others are, and a case could be made that Mrs Palmer actually ameliorates the more toxic elements of Mr Palmer's personality.
Yes!
Oh, the comic relief. Mrs Palmer was indefatigable so hard to know if it was their couple shtick, or she was a form of Mrs Bennet... great example, though. 😭
You did not mention Jane Fairfax and Mr. Churchill. At least Mr. Knightley would think she deserved better. Loving your videos
Although his methods were sneaky, there is no reason believe that Jane and Frank would not have been happy together. The mutual attraction was certainly there, and as he had his own fortune, it's not like he married Jane for money...
Mr. Knightley (while I don't think ever thought of Jane romantically) sees Jane in the best light always. Jane and Frank might not be top ten couples material, but they love each other and will have plenty of money to live on. Frank accepts and cares for Jane's family and has a generous heart. Jane is highly intelligent and has excellent taste and judgement. She will run the household to perfection. Frank's wealth and position will give Jane the access to the finer things in life she's always been one step removed from her entire life. I think they will be at least reasonably happy together.
I throughly enjoyed this talk. the ideas were well thought out and gave me a lot to think about. thank you. such a pleasure.
I never enjoy Mansfield Park as much as Austen’s other novels, there does seem something hopeless about it.
So very proud of myself for also choosing General and Mrs Tilney! Clearly, I have to re-re-re-re-read Mansfield Park because I have not been able to catch to utter oppression of the Bertram girls, although Tom is an excellent representation of abusive parenting even today. Thank you, Dr Cox, for bringing sunlight into my gloomy hours of 4pm sunsets.
First time watching one of your videos, and absolutely love this!! Thank you !! And TH-cam who recommended this video!!
I'm very glad you enjoyed it so much! Octavia
Such insight!
I think there is something odd in the fact that the late Mr. Dashwood, though master of a great estate and probably with thousands in annual income, did not secure dowries for his daughters or a jointure for his second wife. The estate was entailed, but not the cash income from it. He should have been able to make some provision for them.
I agree. He was scandalously negligent of the future welfare of his wife and children, much like Mr. Bennett in Pride and Prejudice. I wonder if JA took this character type from a real life example, or if it was a common failing?
He had inherited the estate for one year only (chapter 1). He had no time to spare money for his family.
I think the Bennets were principal inhabitants of their area, but not that rich either. So the little inheritance money mentioned would already contain what Mr Bennett could put aside +maybe 2 cents from the mother's money after paying for a growing number of daughters.
Mr. Dashwood sen. though.......
Exactly instead he put his hopes in his estranged son
@@edennis3202 He did not inherit as much as he expected to ("he left it to him on such terms as
destroyed half the value of the bequest") and that most was left to John Dashwood for Harry. It seemed that he planned to live economically and "lay by a considerable sum" but that he died less than a year after inheriting the estate.
One of the best analysis I’ve heard of one of my favorite author’s works. Very few talk about northanger abbey or Mansfield park (which is actually my favorite of her works, partially because it is so unapologetically heartbreaking) well done Dr. keep it up...my second favorite is Persuasion so please do some more about Anne Elliott
Northanger Abbey & Mansfield Park are my top two favorite works of Jane Austen! I'll even go out on a limb and confess that Henry Tilney is my favorite "hero"...after all, is very amusing and knows muslin quite well..
100% agree with your list!
Amazing well thought through list. I love it.
Also you nailed villainy.
I thought the last chapter in pride and prejudice said that Lydia and Wickham didn't do well. He never was in love with her, he got bored and frustrated with her; She was in love or lust with him but ended up in the same place he was. Plus they were always asking Elizabeth and Jane for money. I agree that Charlotte would probably be okay since she got what she wanted: a house, a kid, and the ability to shove her husband out so she didn't have to deal with them. It would be interesting to see what happened when they took over longbourn.
Very, very interesting video....I plan on sharing your site with my friends who are Austen fans...very good...thank you...
John Dashwood, and he wife, are indeed horrors.
But are they happy with their horror in common? Hard to say.
@@lizziebkennedy7505 She is I’m pretty sure of that
I read Northanger Abbey so long ago that I remember nothing of it. However, Jane, being an astute observer, might have discovered but not named Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Austen very much conformed to her time period in that it was usually better to be married, even imperfectly, than to be alone. Also, we're talking about Jane Austen here, not the Brontes. She was part of a society that sought practical advantages, rather than romantic love, in marriage and does not condemn people for seeing the world that way. If anything, she is rather derisive of people like Marianne, who are looking for great passions.
Thanks!
In Sense and Sensibility Mrs. Jennings daughter Charlotte was married to a Mr. Palmer! . His Mother in law seemed quite enamored with him, bragging on him. But he was always correcting his wife Charlotte for something she said, and he acted annoyed with her, "rolling his eyes" at her or hiding behind his newspaper making snide remarks to her.
He seemed unhappy most of the time over something she said, and he responded sarcastically or contradicting her, implying she didn't know what she was talking about. .it didn't seem like a happy marriage at all.
Yes, I’ve thought of this myself. In the film version, as played by Hugh Laurie, he comes across as somewhat sympathetic, in part due to the respect & consideration he shows to Elinor and Marianne, but also because Charlotte is silly, annoying, and gossipy-not really interested in a husband as a person, but more as a necessary accessory. She doesn’t seem unhappy at all! But I’m sure her husband has “buyer’s remorse.”
@@shawnafleming5017 interesting point from another perspective, Charlotte being silly and gossipy.
I never enjoyed Mansfield Park. You are so right about the marriages in the novel. Enjoy your channel very much.
Am I the only one who didn’t read Sir Thomas Bertram as being a particularly bad character? A little distant and harsh, maybe, but certainly not abusive.
Berating Fanny and sending her to Portsmouth as a "remedy" I would say is abusive. He had good intentions, at least he believed he had, that doesn't excuse his method though.
I think he redeems himself in the end, but he really have a lot to make up for.
I agree. He's misguided but not bad. He tries to do what he thinks is the right thing. I remember one critic pointing out that Sir Thomas has financial anxieties which may suggest he is "new money." That would account for the fact that he didn't try harder to dissuade Maria from marrying Rushworth. He was sooooo anxious to shore up the family's legitimacy and fortune.
I always found it odd that he was so eager to fob off Fanny to Mrs. Norris as if he wished to reduce the expense of keeping her. He was also assured by Mrs. Norris that she was saving whatever she could from her income to leave to his children. If he had anything like a substantial fortune, why would her assurance of this mean anything to him?
So I excuse some of Sir Thomas's behaviour on the fact that he let money override common sense. He's redeemed at the end because he finally recognizes Fanny's worth and becomes "sick of ambitious and mercenary connexions, prizing more and more the sterling good of principle and temper." Any character that grows and becomes self-reflective is not bad. Note that Mrs. Norris never changes.
I also think Maria's and Rushworth's marriage to be the very worst in all of the novels.
This was quite fascinating and I apprecaite your diligence in being so thorough. I love Northanger Abbey and you've given me quite a lot to think about - so thank you so much!
I just finished Northanger Abbey for the third time. It's difficult to focus on the real life cruelties in marriages in this book because Catherine is very flighty and influenced by the books she has been reading. And Henry encourages her dramatic thinking when they are discussing Gothic novels and when he describes the contents of the room at Northanger which Catherine would be staying in.
But you're right, Dr Cox, that the hints are there in the text about general Tilney's cruelty. Even when Henry describes what happened to his mother and tries to defend his father, Catherine is still horrified that his father was not present when his mother was dying. As you said, Catherine felt that even if he didn't actually take a hand in murder his wife, he may have killed her with neglect or habitual harshness--perhaps both.
The relationship between General Tilney and his wife frames Catherine's stay at the Abbey, in a way similar to the mentally deranged wife in Jane Eyre. Mrs. Tilney's presence is very strong in the house, even though she is not seen in person, and Catherine cannot let go of it. Then General Tilney reveals his truly cruel nature to Catherine personally, confirming for everyone that he is so enflamed with his own expectations, demands, and prejudice, that anyone who might interfere with them is going to receive a disproportionate response from him.
Catherine is not very flighty.
Marvelous insight. Jane Austen is a realist on marriages in her novels and the differences are so subtle. Thank you making it a general topic.
Two possible candidates for 'best Austen marriage' could be the Musgroves (Persuasion) and Admiral and Mrs. Croft (same novel).