Friday, January 22, 2010
Austen the Feminst (?)
Can you classify this novel as a feminist novel--one that is concerned with women's issues and the limitations society sets for women? What evidence is there in the novel to suggest that Jane Austen or her narrator or Elizabeth Bennett is a feminist? Remember that the story is about marriage. While it may not be the stated object or goal of ALL the women in the story to get married, what other options in life do they have, according to the novel? What else can these upper class women DO?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Pride and Prejudice is not a feminist novel per se, although its author and protagonist certainly do make certain proclamations to that end. These are found namely in the themes of being true to oneself, which could be construed as "feminist" in nature, given that the protagonist and the author are both women, as well as an inclination to think outside of the bounds of conventional thought/wisdom. As far as conveying women's "issues" of the time the novel certainly illustrates them, but doesn't really take a stand in regard to changing them. It is the way things are; Elizabeth knows she must marry even though she's unwilling to compromise herself for just anyone, much less money alone. Women, in the setting of Pride and Prejudice, do not really have any other options but to marry, unless they are born into temendous wealth and/or royalty.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn’t consider the novel a feminine piece but there is evidence of the author’s/narrator’s grievances about the expectations of upper class women. Elizabeth, for example, turns down not one, but TWO, marriage proposals. Her suitors each remind her that she may not get another offer of marriage, and although this worries her a bit, she still seems to want to hold onto what little power she has over her choice of husband.
ReplyDeleteWomen were expected to marry for financial stability and social status. Marriage was a business arrangement rather than a connection between two people that love each other. There was a part in the novel where it said something along the lines of “chances of happiness in marriage were very little.” I know that’s not the exact phrase, but it sums up the marriage prospect very well. Happiness I guess could be equated with love, or at least a certain amount of compatibility between husband and wife. Lizzy finds Mr. Collins and Charlotte to be ill suited for one another, but unlike Lizzy, Charlotte accepts Mr. Collins’ proposal because she knows that she is getting too old to expect any more requests for her hand in marriage. Women who did not get married became spinsters and obviously, their lot in life wasn’t envied by young women.
Lizzy is different from the other women in this novel because she doesn’t exactly look at her suitors and see them as Mr. Moneybags. She pays more attention to their character and both Collins and Darcy turn her off because they are very proud (although I believe every single character is proud…). Lizzy sees Collins as this bumbling stupid character and Darcy is just a jerk. Both men think they are too good for Lizzy, and they tell her so when they ask her to marry them. Lizzy does not appreciate her character and situation being attacked, so in a way she stands up for herself by declining both offers, no matter how detrimental her actions may prove to be.
Based on the reading so far I would say "yes" this is a feminist novel that does not focus on women's issues but more on what limitations are laid out for them. I would say that the narrator herself is not a feminist because she is reading only what is read or how the story is to be told. On the other hand I would classify Jane Austen and her character, Elizabeth Bennet as feminists. Jane Austen can be labeled a feminist because she portrays her characters as being strong women who don't need a man and because she wants them to break that cliché of a "glass ceiling" that women are their own bosses. Elizabeth the character comes across as a feminist because she takes the words that the author has written and projects in a manner that says I am "woman hear me roar."
ReplyDeleteAccording to the novel there are no other options for the single woman except for marriage. Many of the middle to upper class women did not work and mostly indulged in creative tasks such as painting and music to make them well rounded.
Trisch,
ReplyDeleteI really like where you said that the novel talks about women’s issues but the characters don’t do anything to change the way things are. I believe that although Lizzy turns down two marriage proposals, she doesn’t do it as a direct argument against the idea of marriage as a business arrangement. Lizzy seems more concerned with whether or not she will end up with someone she will actually like rather than trying to boycott marriage as a whole.
I also agree with your statement about wealthy women being the only ones who could afford to not marry. If they were extremely wealthy by inheritance, they didn’t necessarily need a man to keep them wealthy, but at the same time, women were more sought after if they had an impressive amount of wealth to back them up.
I do believe that this novel is very feminist in its nature. Jane Austen covers the marriage issue in this novel like she does because during this time women were expected to marry in order to have their security. However, she does use characters in this book differently because it is so uncommon for a woman to deny an engagement, but she uses that to show there can be some freedom for women during this time if they chose it, but they have to chose. For Austen to give a character the option of chosing also shows how much Austen was thinking forward for women and women's rights. In all honesty women during this time and of their class did not have a different choice other than marriage, but women should have a choice and Austen was the beginning of showing this in a huge voiceby using a novel to tell this.
ReplyDeletePride and Prejudice could easily be classified as a feminist novel. It focuses on the struggles that face women due to their social limitations and sense of inequality to their apparently superior male beings. In Austen's Pride and Prejudice, women were conceived to be of little merit besides in their placement as a wife to a man of fortune. Marriage was the ultimate goal for many women. They had no other place in society or options in life. If they were not married they were a burden to their mother and father, an old maid, and a social outcast. To be unmarried was a frightening thought; thus, marriage was the goal for a sound life. Women were socially claimed to the role as a wife who was to be socially acceptable, civil, and pleasing.
ReplyDeleteAusten presented a social atmosphere and built characters that enthralled this gender limitation. Charlotte Lucas looked upon marriage as a chance for happiness and worldly advantage. She was limited by the role of her gender to only find happiness in being a wife to a man who had few promising features. Mrs. Bennet, the mother of five daughters, considered that "the business of her life was to get her daughters married" (7). Marriage was the end all, be all for these two women. Others, such as Elizabeth, opposed this view and limitation placed upon women.
Elizabeth could not fathom a matrimonial arrangement that would emotionally deprive her of happiness. She believed that to be married out of obligation, without admiration and respect, would lead to an unhappy life and an intolerable marriage. Charlotte Lucas married Mr. Collins in order to alleviate her fear of being alone. Lydia and Mr. Wickham married out of personal claims instead of matters of social class and financial well-being. On the other hand, Jane and Elizabeth married outside their social class regardless of defiance and were able to assert their personal happiness. Thy found equality with superior males despite their social limitations. These two women had to overcome their social boundaries and assert their desires for more. They had to set aside their pride and prejudice in order to alleviate their social boundaries and oppression.
Honestly, based on what I've read so far I'd have to question the definition of feminism that we're using. There have been multiple attempts to clearly define it, the simplest of which deals with supporting women's rights, but what rights are we supporting? Certainly the right to property is brought up constantly in the reminder of the entailed Bennet's estate to Mr. Collins, while at the same time Lady De Burough's estate is perfectly fine in the hands of a powerful female figure.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm curious about looking at perhaps the other rights involved in the story, for example the right to have and share an opinion - certainly Elizabeth's demeanor and candor is often the subject of conversation when it comes to outspoken women and society might have frowned upon an uncouth individual, but there are no examples of strong female characters who follow the norms of Austen's society other than perhaps Jane but she's compared to Elizabeth the entire way. In fact I'd contend that the novel is a commentary on how actual marriage is compared to the idealized or romanticized version found in common novels of the era - Jane and Mr. Bingley, a romantic couple as the ages could bring together versus the other examples of marriage such as Charlotte and Mr. Collins, Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, Sir William and Lady Lucas, and finally Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth.
In this sense I might answer that it's not a feminist novel so much as it's questioning the fairness of certain societal roles and customs while still pointing out the current state of matrimony and the humor therein. Perhaps by today's standards of equality it's not Feminist because there's still clearly a segregation of male and female roles but certainly for the time it does tackle feminist issues.
Michael,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading what you had to say. I struggled with the definition of feminism for hours as well. I went back and forth debating on its meaning and its implications towards Jane Austen's novel. However, isn't the right to assert and share your opinion a struggle that women fought for? Apparently Elizabeth fought this notion and bluntly spoke on matters and affairs others would not consider appropriate. But she aimed to brake the line between aceptable and unacceptable women manneriams. Her idea of civility introduced a new social role for women. Elizabeth sought to give women a stronger say in their personal matters, such as in marriage. She asserted her opinions even to Lady Catherine, a lady who you would have generly stayed quite instead of protested against. She insisted on her right to freedom of speech; a limitation put upon women by society. I failed to realize this notion beforehand and only focused on women's matrimonial roles in their society instead. But thank you for thinking outside the box and looking at another angle of feminism in Pride and Prejudice.
Claudia
ReplyDeleteI disagree the novel is based on feminist views! Elizabeth not only turns down two proposals but feels her views as a woman are equally as important as a man's. Elizabeth is under the impression that she can do without a man and considering the fact that she is not as rich as Miss Darcy, eventually she will have to accept the next proposal or live her live as a spinster. Besides we all know that back in the Victorian era women where not allowed to think for themselves let alone speak out about conditions that did not appeal them. I believe Elizabeth was ahead of her time when standing up for "equal rights" of women.
Michael:
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you what you say; however, could we not say that because she is tackling some social issues that are dealing with women in particular that it is a more feminist novel? For Jane Austen to write this novel and have a woman decline an engagement was a huge "no-no" and that is a huge statement to say that women deserve rights; rights that are equal to men.
As a feminist myself, I am one who believes in equality. I want there to be equality for men and women, gays and straights, professionals and non-professionals, etc., so in that perspective and that realm of feminism this could be considered a feminist novel. I find it admirable that Jane Austen would write a novel like this during the 19th century because of the bold stances that she takes on.
Rene, The reader is an active part in the development of the story unlike classical literary thinking is inclined to believe, so what the reader projects and takes away from the work greatly shapes how the story is read. I feel that from a modern context the novel isn't necessarily feminist so much as it takes on feminist issues. But then that's also my interpretation as I see Austen's heroines as ultimately becoming conformists in their contemporary societies rather than, as Trisch seemed to be heading, rebels or even innovators (using Robert Merton's Strain Theory to classify participants in a society). True they attempt to seek out non-traditional solutions, ultimately however it's still within the confines of societal standards and propriety.
ReplyDeleteI also have noticed that I failed to touch upon the last couple of questions within the prompt. Following along in my thought process There's only trade or marriage for an upper middle or upper class female and sadly several laws and traditions at the time inhibited successful business women and female property owners. Within a patriarchal society a woman is only in power when beside or behind a man sadly, unless that woman likes to stir things up...