“The Reception of Jane Austen: 1815-1950”
(363-382)
Read through
these excerpts from Austen’s friends, Charlotte Bronte, Henry James, Virginia
Woolf, and others, and respond in detail to ONE of the readings of Austen/Emma.
Why do you agree or disagree with this reading? Where in Emma
do you see the writer (of the article’s) ideas—or where in the book can you
refute them?
Be sure to focus on a specific article and use a specific passage or two from Emma to connect to this. This will help you write Paper #3 and, quite possibly, your large paper for the class, since these are some of the most foundational readings of Austen that have continued to shape critical perceptions (and neglect)!
Sir Walter Scott's review of Emma aptly ends with him telling how both Woodhouse and Miss Bates are at first presented as ridiculous, then eventually evolve into something tiresome. That's part of what makes Emma and Pride and Prejudice so perfect: both of the books don't represent alien ideas and characters, they represent relatable ideas and characters. All of the characters, no matter how exaggerated they are, represent actual people. Everyone knows a Miss Bates, or a Mr. Collins. Jane Austen took the people she knew and created characters based off of them, which is perfect, because for a book, novel, or story to work, something about it has to be relatable. Even fantastical works have to have elements that are found in the world we live in today. Emma especially is a character that people know in real life, and so is Frank Churchill. When Emma insults Miss Bates, the situation is very childlike in nature. Frank eggs her on, and even encourages her to pull a Wickham and be a complete and total ass. Frank is like the older kid telling the younger kid to do something he knows he shouldn't do, but feels the need to do, partially to impress, and partially just to be a dick (because lets face it, being a dick sometimes is fun).
ReplyDeleteLater on, after Emma learns about Frank and Jane's engagement, she has a gem of a conversation with Mrs. Weston on page 274, where she states that Frank behaved "So unlike what a man should be!- None of that upright integrity, that strict adherence to truth and principle, that disdain of trick and littleness, which a man should display in every transaction of his life." My response to this is: seriously? You just acted like a complete bitch throughout the whole novel, manipulating Harriet (and ruining her life), being an ass to Jane, and all because you think you have all the money, prestige, and class to do it without even remotely getting in trouble or admonished in any way. It's interesting that Emma is essentially a "man" throughout the whole novel. She has the money, so she doesn't have to marry. She doesn't have to marry, so that allows her to take the men in her life and shuffle them around so she can play matchmaker with Harriet. In summation: Emma shakes her finger at Frank because of his actions, while being a complete hypocrite in the process, because she acted just like him.
Sir Walter Scott is right about the characters in Emma being highly realistic, but that's not a fault, that's a plus. If Jane Austen had not have wanted the characters to be annoying, she wouldn't have written them that way. She's one of the rare authors that can right stunningly realistic characters.
Great response here: Scott's criticism is one of its strengths! Yes, she does push it quite far at times, but that's the fun of the work: that they seem SO realistic, even to the point of people "seeing" their own friends and family in the work (as happened in Austen's day). And I agree with your reading of the Emma/Frank scene; here she is conveniently forgetting her past behavior and adopting Knightley's view...though, to her credit, I think she's crediting him with seeing what she, herself, could not. I think it's to Austen's credit that the great love match in the book, Frank and Jane, is such a bitter and tortured one. They come together in the end, but after a lot of self-inflicted pain and torment; will this be a happy match? Austen doesn't give us a lot of room to hope...whereas Knightley and Emma, who weren't so hot and heavy for one another, seems much more likely to prosper. For all of Austen's "brand" image, she's really not much of a Romantic in the modern sense. She's actually quite dubious about the showy, over-passionate love, which I think is also a sign of her realism.
ReplyDelete