Lauren Sandbach

K. McCauliff

 

WMST 2010

 

25 April 2008

 

Society Versus the Individual: Feminism at Work in Pride and Prejudice

            “In a world where social stability is increasingly rare, Jane Austen remains a refreshing voice against societal dissolution.”  (Fritzer 1) Being a woman ahead of her time, Austen acknowledges the need to expand outside of one’s social standards in order to achieve personal fulfillment. Conversely, Austen also upholds the “mores of her day” in that she recognizes restrictions for women as well as class distinctions. For this reason, there is much debate on whether Austen’s texts are feminist. On one hand, Austen’s characters are primarily concerned with the institution of marriage in order to achieve happiness; however, her characters engage in modern marriages where both partners are equal. In her novel, Pride and Prejudice, Austen attempts to strike a balance between the necessity of propriety, decorum, and social responsibility with that of individuality, spontaneity and self-expression.

Marriage plays a major role in the plot of Pride and Prejudice, and “is an ideal vehicle for Jane Austen’s thematic concerns.” (Paris 54)  Throughout the novel, an obvious rivalry exists between marriage as a social institution and marriage as a personal relationship. As we have learned in class, feminism tends to be anti-institutional and rather promotes individuality.  In one perspective, Austen conveys marriage as a traditional obligation to society. From the outset of the novel Austen describes marriage as a social institution that every young man or woman “must be in want of.” (Austen 1).  I was immediately skeptical when re-reading this book for my analysis. When I first read Pride and Prejudice, this statement corresponded with my own beliefs: that marriage is necessary for happiness. However, after taking Women’s Studies, this statement alerts me of anti-feminist ideals. Every character in Austen’s novel seems obsessed with the idea of marriage and its requirement for happiness. For example, Mrs. Bennett illustrates an excellent example of the necessity of marriage and its regard during the 1800s as well as today. Although she has what she considers her daughter’s best intentions at heart, Mrs. Bennett intends to force marriages of necessity on her daughters. Mrs. Bennett makes it clear that because her husband’s estate is entailed to a non-relative, the responsibility of the family’s well being lies with the daughters. This is typical of an oppressive, non-feminist society.  Perhaps Charlotte would have been a more preferable daughter to Mrs. Bennett in that she gladly abandons any option of love claiming she “is not romantic” and marries strictly for economical means. (Austen 126) In choosing to marry Mr. Collins, Charlotte believes she is fulfilling her obligation to her poor family as well as society. Another acceptance of society’s rules is observant in Elizabeth Bennett and George Wickham’s relationship. Elizabeth remains aware that while she may think fondly of Wickham, it would not be beneficial to her family for her to marry him. In her refusal she is upholding her responsibility to society.  In a similar way, while Colonel Fitzwilliam declares his fondness for Elizabeth, “he lets her know he must marry a woman with money.” (Paris 34) These traits in Austen’s characters irritate me. I feel like Austen, if truly feminist, would have her characters do exactly as they wish without any regard to society or its consequences. They would rebel against society’s standard of norm.

Mrs. Bennett is the most obvious example of a subservient wife who yields to society’s demands in her ridiculous manner towards her daughters as well as their visitors. From the very start of the novel, her obsessive concern with her family’s wealth and social status is evident. In an early conversation with Mr. Bennett, she claims “but consider your daughters!” in reference to their meeting Bingley at Netherfield. (Austen 4 ) In actuality, she is concerned only with her family’s status and prosperity. She obviously sees the woman in the traditional role with no equality to men. Mrs. Bennett is constantly urging her daughters to fit into society’s rigid norm. She complains to her daughter “You will not be fit to be seen when you get there!” proving once again that she regards her daughters as “merchandise on display.” (Nardin 150) She also displays her subservience to her husband when she tries to force him to talk to Mr. Bingley since she obviously cannot talk to him herself.  Mrs. Bennett’s impropriety and insensitivity towards her daughter’s feelings is actually a clue to her internal worth, or lack there of.

            With the same ideals in mind, Austen also hints that a marriage between Darcy and Miss Bingley or Bingley and Miss Darcy would be ideal. Once again, Austen seems solely concerned with money and the benefits of society.  Being that the attachments would increase each family’s wealth as well as social status, the marriages would certainly be acceptable to society. However, these relationships would be endangering to those of Elizabeth with Darcy and Jane with Bingley. Austen also more firmly conveys that while socioeconomic situations should be considered in choosing a spouse, they should not be the governing factor. Finally, she portrays feminist ideals that individuals should not yield to society and sacrifice their true happiness in return for the privileges of a socially stable marriage.  Bingley emerges as the first non-traditionalist in the novel when he attempts to gain the affections of Jane Bennett despite her economic and social situation. Though this may not seem feminist, Bingley rebukes society’s standard and gives up privilege that would come with marrying someone of higher status. Directly following that attraction, Elizabeth’s wishes diverge from that of society’s in her refusal to Mr. Collins. Although she is aware the arrangement would be valuable economically to her family, she is unwilling to sacrifice her own happiness. While she may not appear to have feminism on the brain, she clearly rejects standards of society and embraces her own true identity rather than what society expects.

            In considering the denial of social standards in marriages and proposals, the relationship between Darcy and Elizabeth must be accounted for.  Their relationship is completely controversial and can be seen from two prospectives through the feminist lense On one hand, desire for improved social status interferes with the workings of love and individuality in Pride and Prejudice. Darcy views himself with “reserve and privilege.” (Mooneyham132)  He socially slights Elizabeth on one occasion and claims “she is tolerable, but not handsome enough to tempt me.”  (Austen 11 ) His behavior exhibits male dominance, and the idea that women are subservient to men. He seems to convey that he does not view Elizabeth as his equal in social status, or in general for that matter.  Pride is imbedded deep within him, through his parents, who “allowed, encouraged, almost taught him to be selfish and overbearing, to care for none beyond his own family circle, to think meanly of all the rest of the world.” (Austen 202) I can see how Austen can be criticized on two levels for this character situation. On one hand, Darcy behaves like an anti-feminist who is perfectly content in this role. However, she seems to criticize his behavior, and encourages an equal relationship between the two. It is almost as if she creates a feminist relationship within a non-feminist environment. Darcy ultimately discards society’s opinion and recognizes “others besides him have the right to be proud,” and recognizes Elizabeth as his intellectual equal. (Mooneyham 132) In this case, the text’s feminist values shine through.

             It is imperative to acknowledge that it is not Elizabeth’s physical attractiveness that links Darcy so firmly to her side, but rather her quick wit and denial of his affections. Their relationship is a breath of feminist fresh air in the novel that revolves around the restrictions of society. Elizabeth claims,  “you were sick of civility, of deference, of officious attention. “You were disgusted with the women who were always speaking and looking, for your approbation alone. I roused, and interested you, because I was unlike them.” (Mooneyham 135 ) In my opinion, Elizabeth is a perfect example of a feminist character. Not only is she unlike them, but also she does not allow her originality to interfere with her happiness. It would be very easy for her, as a dramatically rebellious character against superficiality, to reject Darcy under the claim that he is extremely rich.  In fact, in the beginning that is exactly what she does. ) Elizabeth is “far more perceptive than most of the society around her,” which causes her to be prejudiced towards Darcy.  (Brooke 3) Darcy’s attitude of superiority disgusts Elizabeth, and she believes him capable of gross misconduct. (Paris 40) Elizabeth continuously fascinates Darcy with her quick wit and intelligence. In this aspect, Austen celebrates the woman who can easily be seen as man’s equal.  Elizabeth is completely third wave feminist and head of her time because she does exactly what she wants in the end.  

All of Jane Austen’s characters continuously rival with the issue of individualism throughout Pride and Prejudice. While feminism clearly is rejected in the society of the novel, Austen uses this situation to allow her characters to find their own form of feminist lifestyle. Most importantly, Darcy and Elizabeth’s relationship reflects equality and rejection of what society would consider the norm.  Although the road is rocky, the characters ultimately prevent their debt to society from interfering with any attempt at personal happiness, which in my opinion is the backbone of feminism.