"don't you know that a man being rich is like a girl being pretty? you might not marry a girl just because she's pretty, but my goodness, doesn't it help?"
I thought of this movie when Ellie was talking about lack of finances leading to unhappiness. Except I was thinking of the part where she tells Dorothy "If a girl is spending all her time worrying about the money she doesn't have, how is she going to have any time for being in love."
The 2005 version where Lizzy sees pemberly for first time and lets out that astonished giggle... Like the realization of.. just HOW wealthy Darcy is.. like girl, same
@@wastrel09 I don't need a man to support me, but I don't want a man to weigh me down either. I work hard, bring home money, cook, clean, do laundry, take care of my body and my hygiene, remember medical and other appointments, remember birthdays, get thoughtful gifts, offer a listening ear and a shoulder to lean on even at 3 am at night. And I expect my romantic partner to do the same or GTFO. It's really not even that hard! My guy has no problem putting in the same effort and care as I do. Yet, when I was dating before him, guys consistently told me that I was "too picky" and "asking for too much". Like, the idea of them having to do more than occasionally pay for things, of actually putting in equal TIME and EFFORT, was genuinely offensive to them! If, God forbid, my spouse dies before me, I'm just going to stay single for the rest of my life. I'm spoiled for other relationships after having experienced a true partnership with a genuinely good person.
Unfortunately there are far too many of those these days. Many of them were ill-advised in their youth and have not taken up even a decent trade occupation by which to provide for themselves much less the family. A man not properly endowed with a brain for University must find other legitimate means if he expects to make a good respectable man of himself.
Elizabeth's father made it clear that he did not expect her to marry a man that she could not respect or esteem as an equal partner just because the man had money. Mr. Bennet actively tried to discourage her from marrying if money was the sole attraction. She didn't have to be wildly in love with the guy, but she did need to like and admire him and her father hoped that the man liked and admired Lizzy. Mr. Bennet's sentiments indicate that he would have supported Lizzy for rejecting the Darcy that had proposed to her at Rosings. I love your example about eating leafy green vegetables as opposed to ONLY eating leafy green vegetables.
Easy for him to say but he didn't exactly financially prepare for them and did let his youngest go and ruin herself... hehe sorry, I love him on some levels but his neglect here is frustrating.
Heh. This video reminds me of a subtle joke about marriage we economists tell: "Move to Cambridge [i.e., Harvard] and marry for love." The point being that your probability of marrying a young bloke there who is wealthy and well-connected is probably much higher than where you probably live now.
@@raraavis7782 There's another joke we tell of ourselves: A 40 year-old suffers a massive heart attack and needs a new heart. He's rushed to the ER and the doctor tells him he's in luck: two donors of ideal an ideal match just passed away, so naturally he could have his pick of their two hearts. The first, says the surgeon with a wink, is from a 24 year old marathon runner, and the other an 88 year old economist. Which heart would he like? "I'll take the economist's heart!" This puzzles the surgeon: "But why?" The patient responded, "Because it's never been used!"
And then they meet an Irish gunrunner at the Plough and Stars, right there an easy stroll from the quad. The only solace is that the gun runner's parents back in Dublin will be equally appalled.
I would just need enough money to keep 1 servant- just 1 servant. 🙂 Or maybe a cook and 1 servant,. Yes, a cook and 1 servant. 🙂 Or a gardener- yes, 1 servant, a cook, and a gardener!! 🙂
Reminds me of that line from '95, "I should like to marry for love/And you shall. Only take care that you fall in love with a rich man." Also, as for the Collins thing, I think it WOULDN'T have been super profitable in the long run. There's no way Elizabeth could withstand Lady Catherine's overbearing tendencies with the same patience and subtle maneuvering that Charlotte did, and this would have likely ended with Lady Catherine retracting her patronage. Charlotte was a good choice for Collins, because she's able to play the long game in a way that Elizabeth's temper wouldn't have withstood.
I dont know about the book but the 95 movie Collins was a sniveling, groveling clown and so ugly it was unbearable ! If my father attached me to something like that Id ran away to find work or made myself un-alive. !!
From my experience, a major reason for this problem is that differences of habit/upbringing in money matters often exist within a relationship but while your income is okay, they might only be a minor annoyance. However, once you're suddenly down at subsistence level, how your partner(s) handle the shared finances can become a real matter of survival. If the partners in a relationship aren't used to effectively communicating &/or agreeing about money decisions which affect their shared situation, that adds an extra layer of conflict? And of course, double all that if there any any dependents in the household... The standard advice is that partners should make sure they talk about money-handling habits & decision making when they first decide to cohabitate... I do wonder how many people actually do this, though? When it comes to communicating about really important stuff like finances, end-of-life decisions, childrearing etc, it seems like we are fighting against some pretty strong social conditioning which tells us that talking about them is NOT okay. That can make it hard even - or especially? - if you are talking to someone you really care for...?
Meh. I would rather my girl child make her own fortune and never feel like she has to accept behavior that is less than she deserves from someone she marries just because of her "expense of habit."
I think that someone with equally large income would be the best. If it is someone too rich, they might look down upon her and if it is someone too poor, she might be forced to support their family alone, which wouldn't be ideal either.
I think it contributes to happiness if the spouse has similar income level. So the other does not feel like s/he has to support whole family. Expect if the other is insanely rich, then it probably dont matter. :D
I have a lot of servants I would need to replace. There is Ms Washer Dryer, Mr Dishwasher, my stable guy Mr Prius, my cooks Ms Doordash, MickeyD and Marie Calendar. My cleaning lady Maid Brigade and my gardener Lawn Mower Service :)
This is hilarious because it just proves that upper-middle-class in the modern era have all the same benefits as Gentry once kept for themselves. But it also proved there's a lot of money to be made in providing those services without the expense of having to take care of the person as a live-in servant. They can simply go around to several jobs and get the same work done and take only a small fee from each one. Leaving plenty of profit for the business owner
Off subject but it was such a shock in P&P when Elizabeth Bennet ended up touring Mr. Darcy’s home with her uncle and aunt. What do you think about doing a video about this phenomenon of random people touring rich peoples homes like they’re at a museum? When did this practice stop? Also, poor girl, she was absolutely mortified!!
It never stopped! Ellie has a video of herself visiting Chatsworth! There are countless “great homes” and castles around the world, not just Britain, that are only too happy to show off their grandeur to tourists - especially in return for some pocket change for the trouble. Did the Gardiners exchange money with Darcy’s housekeeper, or with the groundskeeper at the gate is the question! I agree - I would love to see an Ellie Dashwood video on the subject!
@@BeckyMarshallDesign Also, looking further into that, it became really common later on for wealthy families to open up their family estates and gardens to the public for a fee to help cover the expenses of maintaining and restoring such properties. Many of the buildings that are in possetion of heritage organisations are there only because it bankrupt the family that originally owned it.
Reminds me of the quote in the 1995 BBC Pride and Prejudice mini-series, when Jane and Elizabeth are talking about marriage and love. Jane explains that she would like to marry for love, and Elizabeth says “...and so you shall, only make sure you fall in love with a man of good fortune.”
Elizabeth Bennet is such an awesomely written character, people of all times love her! Like Jane Austen herself, I do not think much of people that do not like Elizabeth Bennet. Jane Austen wrote to her sister, about Lizzie: "I must confess that I think her as delightful a creature as ever appeared in print, and how I shall be able to tolerate those who do not like her at least I do not know"
I think I can say that I half agree with you. Yes, there are some positive aspects about Elizabeth's character. And I saw her being described as one of the best examples of the "spirited young lady" character type. And she's also supposed to be only a tiny bit less admirable than Jane. But I just can't stand her treatment of Mary. And I don't like that she cut ties with Charlotte Lucas after her marriage to Mr Collins either. She is very arrogant and believes that she's better than every young woman around her except for Jane. And I know that this will sound weird to some people, but I feel that she's also too pretty and sociable to be likable to me. I will be more likely to relate to plain-looking and socially awkward characters. Mary Bennet is thus my favorite in "Pride & Prejudice".
@@Furienna why do you think she cut ties with Charlotte Lucas? The very clearly communicated and wrote letters. She visited her. Within the timeline of the book there was simply no time for Charlotte to return the visit. The novel states that Elizabeth was very happy to have her friend with her for the courtship season and the wedding when the Collins’ visited at Lucas Lodge. There is no indication that the friendship was dropped.
@@Furienna The novel mentions that Charlotte's decision to marry mr. Collins has cooled down the friendship, but Elizabeth is very much intent on maintaining it. She stays with the Collinses for several weeks although she very much dislikes mr. Collins.
@@Furienna I don't quite see why you prefer Mary, but I suppose that that very much depends on which Mary. As she is portrayed in the novel, or in a specific adaptation? My view of Mary is based on the novel and the 1990s tv adaptation. In these, she comes across to me as rather silly and a bit egocentric.
In a way, I think it's nice that people back then were more frank about money. Nowadays people still care just as much but there's an expectation that you have to pretend you don't.
It was interesting that both Elizabeth and Emma stated that they saw themselves never getting married. Elizabeth because she found fault too easily, and Emma because she had enough of a fortune and social position as to not need marriage, with it's added status and income.
I've just read a sociological study of high modern french bourgeoisie and they do pretty much the same. Parents make groups of same age kids they name "rally". It's mostly just activities they do together, sports, dances parties, vacations, ect... So kids grew up together, meet up other peers and fall in love within the group.
Like charlotte, elizabeth wanted a life well provided for. except, that she was clear she would not put up with a person as absurd and unsensible as collins - not to mention unpleasant and lacking in self awareness. charlotte, apart from having the good sense of wanted to be provided for, was actually desperate. She was sure that if she did not take this offer that came her way, nothing else would come her way.since we are not given a picture of her home conditions, she could be right in her estimation. we are given to understand that the Lucas family has only just got a t oe hold in the genteel class, are not wealthy, and that there are many children in the household. she probably knew that she, as an old maid, could slip back into the working class she knew her prospects best.
I’m wondering if she somewhat liked him. He was sort of similar to her own father. I just reread the passage during the visit to Hunsford and Charlotte is described by narrator as being very content.
@@adorabell4253 I like Charlotte more and more as I age. “‘I am not romantic, you know. I never was. I ask only a comfortable home; and considering Mr. Collins’s character, connections, 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.'” She's entirely right. Mr Collins is a sanctimonious and snobbish fool, but he'd never be a wife beater. He would try to make his wife happy. Elizabeth would not have the temperament to put up with the societal evils of Mr Collins and Lady Catherine, but dining twice a week at Rosings would mean that that's two financially free meals a week. The house is described as small, but it would probably be big by modern standards. The garden is large with multiple walks and crosswalks and they have another two meadows in addition to that. Charlotte has her own drawing room at the back, and Mr Collins had his own bookroom at the front! That's in addition to the dining parlour. They clearly had at least two spare rooms, and possibly three if Elizabeth and Maria were not sharing rooms during their visit. "Poor Charlotte! it was melancholy to leave her to such society! But she had chosen it with her eyes open; and though evidently regretting that her visitors were to go, she did not seem to ask for compassion. Her home and her housekeeping, her parish and her poultry, and all their dependent concerns, had not yet lost their charms." I didn't get that at 20. At 31, I totally understand it.
@@diedertspijkerboer if her happiness should fade she is still comfortable and provided for. Eventually there will be children to fuss and fret over. Charlotte has chosen well for herself
This is entirely unrelated to the video but my younger sister just got a beautiful new hard cover copy of Pride and Prejudice! It has gold trim pages and illustrations for each new chapter and it's so stunning that neither of us have the courage to open it! 😂
That's why you keep this copy for display, and then go to the used bookstore and buy another copy to read 😉 You can never have too many copies of Pride and Prejudice!
In Elizabeth Bennet's case she was also 20, so she rightly thought she had plenty of time to attract a more suitable young man. The inference is that even if Mr. Bingley hadn't come around, Jane likely would have found a suitable husband.
@@ammaleslie509 Actually 22 was the median age for women to marry during the regency era. I've done my research. Again, it depends on what class someone was in but most of the research is on the gentry and the noble classes. A young lady would have her entry into her first season between the ages of 17-18. This was her entry into society. She would be feted through balls and parties. By the time the second season, it was expected she would have received several offers of marriages. However, there was a bit of a man shortage with all of the wars with Napoleon, as in most war periods this extended the age of many women. Not all women could afford to be part of the Season, like the Bennett sisters. If one looks at the other novels of Austen we see Emma being a comfortable 21-year old with no anxiety on getting married. Elizabeth Bennett at 20, is not anxious in getting a husband. However, we do see that Charlotte Lucas and Anne Elliot, both 27, and her sister Elizabeth at 30 are approaching the spinster realm. In the Georgian era, getting married younger was more common especially among the aristocracy. George lV when he was still the Prince of Wales married Princess Caroline of Brunswick when she was 27. 10 years earlier he has married Maria Fitzherbert in a secret wedding when she was 29 and a widow. She had married her previous husband when she was 22. The Prince of Wales's daughter Charlotte married Prince Leopold at the age of 20 in 1816. While Queen Victoria was born during the regency era, by the time she married Prince Albert at the age of 21, it was no longer the Regency era. However, this is context for the time.
3:59 My mom has a saying that she tells me often. She says “When you can’t pay the bills, love is the first thing thrown out.” It’s not 100% correct as I translated it and she hasn’t said it in a while. She’s definitely where I got my practicality from. I would definitely choose wealth over love in this time period and any time period where women could not work for themselves, so love with a weather man would definitely be great.
I once had to work out what I would have been in the Regency for a re-enacting event. I settled on a clergyman, probably one like the infamous Thomas Racket who lived not too far from where I live today. He had an income of about £600 per annum, and only spent a week or two in his parish each year! He was outed in parliament as the worst example of non-resident clergyman in the country, but nothing could be done and he remained in his position for forty years! It is possible that he gave us the term 'racket' for a con or fraud.
One reason it was so important to make sure a married couple had enough money to live on (in the style they were accustomed to, preferably) was that there was NO CONTRACEPTION. It was very likely, and could be assumed, that once they got married they would start to have children and continue to have them pretty regularly. Many children died quite young, but there was nothing strange in having a half-dozen living children. So there was no option, as there is today, to get together but to wait to start a family (i.e., to have kids) until they had sufficient income to be able to support them. Thus, the most reasonable option would usually be to wait the necessary years before getting married.
so basically, jane austen was like an anthropologist of her own society? also, it’s interesting to consider that in a lot of countries, the upper classes still function like this. i mean, everyone doesn’t know everyone’s yearly income to the dollar. but in small societies of upper class families (and they are all small), people have a general idea of who are the most suitable bachelors or bachelorettes for their children, they send them to private schools and unis partly to have them only associate with the “right” crowd, etc.
I’ve literally been binging your channel over the last week and it makes me so happy to see that you’ve gained a couple thousand subs so quickly! You definitely deserve it!!
Aw! Thank you! And welcome to the channel! It’s so true, my subscribers have been going up so quickly. It amazes how many people are interested in these topics!
My wlw self "Oh noooo, can't believe a woman would marry without love lol. Guess everyone saved the detestable prostitution for me!" I suppose my best prospect would come from some birdie whispering into one of my female relations' ears that they had a wealthy male relative with certain "peculiarities" if I'd like a marriage of "understanding" or however they'd delightfully term it.
As a wlw myself i would find a match of “understanding” or go the Anna Nicole smith route. He’ll only be alive for a few more year with his gout. Then I’ll be a widow with a very “close friend”
@@kenyathompson3266 Oooo, I like the way you think! You'd just have to watch out for any grown children from his previous marriages who might be sniffing around to steal your new fortune!
Amusingly, when I was in high school back in the 1960s, I wrote a short story taking a fairy tale ("The Princess and the Glass Mountain") and warping the plot into a marriage of convenience between a lesbian and a gay man. I wrote it for an English class, and the teacher did not appreciate it. She also was not familiar with that fairy tale, which I had not expected.
@@miashinbrot8388 Boo, I despise English teachers like that! It's like, how of all things are you going to not promote creativity in WRITING, teach? Thankfully I had a lot of good English teachers because I wrote some quite flamboyant stories with LGBTQ+ themes in high school. Those were wild days lol
Before the industrial revolution, the middle-class group was substantially smaller. Also, the income of this class varied tremendously and an individual's station often could not be altered because his/her income was dependent on someone else or linked to a place. There simply was not the opportunity to change jobs, move to a different place or move up.
I would have thought that if she were to be called selfish for refusing a marriage proposal, it would have been the first one she got from Darcy. In fact, I believe she even asked Jane if Jane was upset with her for that very reason.
I have been researching the Early Republic period in the US for a while now. Pride and Prejudice was my Mom's favorite book and I've read it and enjoyably watched most of the film versions but I never really put 2 and 2 together to realize that the book takes place in the same time period. I enjoy your posts very much.
I found your channel a couple days ago and I just love it. I subscribed immediately. Thank you for talking about the things I love in a cool entertaining way
One of the warnings in Pride and Prejudice involves somewhat the other side of the equation. Mr. Bennet married Mrs. Bennet because she was pretty and flirty without ever really getting to know one another and if they would be a good match. And both seem to have largely regretted it ever since. Most of the dysfunction going on in the Bennet family is tied to how little Mr. Bennet loves his wife (or loves the two daughters that take after her) and how little Mrs. Bennet respects her husband (or the two daughters that take after her respect their father).
Wow, had a social media cleanse for a week; I come back and now you have over 20k subs! I’m soooo happy that your channel is growing you deserve all the love 💕
That is so sweet! Thank you!!! I’m so surprised by them all too! It’s amazing that there are that many people interested in these topics. I hope your cleanse went well. 😃
Interesting and good video ❤️. In my culture when its comes to marriage we have to find someone that have the same "bibit, bebet, bobot" to us. The phrase "bibit bebet bobot" means marry someone who has good family, society, and behavior. I think that phrase is relate with Jane Austen's book since Austen tell us about the idea of ideal marriage on her books. Marriage isn't only about "I love you and I want to live with you" it's more than that and Jane Austen is successful in bring this topic more relatable and more easy to understand. This is my I love Jane Austen's books and films. If I get married now I don't know how money I need in pounds since it's not my currency, but I am sure to maintain my current social life which is had enough food and money to buy the stuff that I need.
Am Indian. I'd like to recommend Indian Matchmaking on Netflix. It felt, well, actually Indian. People's expectations are pretty high & no one wants to tell them to compromise (unless they're women.THEN everyone wants them to compromise.)
I never understood why Lizzie's dad never just told Collins: "Look, Willy, sign this paper saying you'll give my kids XXX pounds per year after I'm dead, or I'll evict every tenant on this estate and leave it worthless for you"..
@@EllieDashwood That sounds like an interesting video. I understand that he couldn't sell the estate or leave it to his daughters in his will, but he could have done a lot to make it less valuable if he wanted to, couldn't he? Mind you, in addition to that requiring trouble that Mr. Bennet was unlikely to put himself to, it would also have lowered his own (and his daughters') income during his lifetime, and it would have made the sisters less marriageable as well.
He couldn't do that according to the common law or (in some cases) the contract of the entail. (Common law would kick in if the entail didn't specify). If he did that, he was committing "waste" of the estate and could be sued. The doctrine of "waste" was that a current estate holder could not diminish the value of an estate as capital. There is the capital of the estate, and the income. Mr. Bennet is entitled to the *income* during his lifetime but mayn't take the *capital*, the condition of the estate that generates the income. (Destroying or taking the capital would be doing something like cutting down the woods at an unsustainable rate and selling off the timber for cash and spending it or giving it to his daughters; or letting the tenant farms go to ruin by not having them productively rented to tenants; or taking all the fertile topsoil and selling it by the wagonload to other farmers; or failing to maintain the roof on his on manor house or the barns and tenant houses, etc.) If Bennet committed "waste" a person injured could sue him for damages or a court order to stop, which would be enforceable by contempt of court, i.e., being thrown in jail (gaol) at the judge's discretion.
@@miashinbrot8388 He could not. If he either negligently or deliberately made the estate less valuable, he could be sued by Mr. Collins (as the heir whose future interest in the estate was being damaged) for "waste", which was diminishing the value of an estate as capital. The "doctrine of waste" in English common law holds that there is the capital of the estate, and the income; the current estate holder (Mr. Bennet) is entitled to the *income* during his lifetime but mayn't take or destroy the *capital* which would injure the interests of a future holder (Mr. Collins). (Destroying or taking the capital would be doing something like cutting down the woods at an unsustainable rate and selling off the timber for cash and spending it or putting the proceeds in trust for his daughters' inheritances; or letting the tenant farms go to ruin by not having them productively rented to tenants; or raking all the fertile topsoil off the land and selling it by the wagonload to other farmers; or failing to maintain the roof on his on manor house or the barns and tenant houses until they were damaged by moisture, etc.) If Bennet committed "waste" a person injured could sue him for monetary damages or a court order to stop (an injunction), which would be enforceable by contempt of court, i.e., being thrown in jail (gaol) at the judge's discretion. Come to think of it, I have always wondered what "the disagreement subsisting between my late father and yourself" is, which Mr. Collins mentions in the "olive branch" letter when he announces his intention to visit Longbourn. It occurs to me that perhaps Mr. Bennett saw Collins' rather senseless father wasting the estate in some way and threatened to sue or had some other conflict related to it. That would probably fit with the description of Collins' father in the novel, who reared his son in a very limited and negligent way.
Could you do a video on courting, engagement and marriage in regency times? Like what rules did you have to follow, what liberties did an engaged couple have, what was the whole process like?
A conversation about social climbing and choosing one's partner based on practical reasons (vs ONLY love) in Jane Austen's world is very interesting. I've always been fascinated with the characters who make it their business to secure a comfortable future in the society where women had so few options of making a living. They had to be realistic, like Charlotte Lucas, or crafty, like Lucy Steele... Would love it if you made a video and shared thoughts on this!
I do think she can still somewhat be considered selfish, even if it is at a healthy level. While she would be encouraged not to have a ‘mercenary’ approach to marriage, there is somewhat of a difference between ‘marriage so you can be more rich’ and ‘marriage so you, your sisters and mom don’t end up on the street’. Thankfully she had an older sister, who was beautiful and well tempered and who would probably make some sort of good enough match to help our her family, but had Elizabeth been written as the eldest daughter, I think that idea of selfishness would have been more expressed. She could hope for Jane to marry someone she liked who was well off, and never have to make the ‘sacrifice’ of marrying Mr Collins, but there is no way we can deny that she chose her own happiness over her families survivability. As with all decisions, hindsight is important in this. We know all ends well, therefore we thing she was very prudent and brave in her choice. Had none of them married well, had their father died to soon, etc her choice would have meant poverty if not almost all of them went and got a job, or again, married well.
It's a caring, responsible parent who screens a child's acquaintances, but never forget the Romeo and Juliet effect. It all but ensures that your teenager will find the forbidden teenager irresistable. And vice versa.
The trick is genuine advice, not strict rules. "I don't approve because [insert reasons here], but I trust your judgement. Just tell me where you are, who you're with, and what you're doing, and know that you can call me at any time and I'll come pick you up, no questions asked. Be safe." will always be more effective in the long term than, "No, absolutely not. Give me your phone."
I would NEVER screen my daughter’s acquaintances when she’s old enough to marry. We could bring up any glaring issues with anyone who interested her, and would be here for her if she wanted input, but to be the gatekeepers? FUCK NO. That’s not caring and responsible. That’s controlling and frightening and disrespectful. Caring and responsible is raising your children to identify signs and to know they’re always safe coming to you if they find themselves in a bad spot.
This was enlightening! I had no idea that marrying for money was disgusting to their class. What will happen to the Charlotte and Collins? Will they live by Lady Catherine a few years, then inherit Longbourn and retire? Maybe hire an assistant to do the preaching? I'm so curious!
i'd like have a maid. i like cooking, so i think that i could survive. in regency era didn't exist home appliances. cleaning and cooking required much more time
To answer your final question: I would go for being Anne De Bourgh. Owning a grand and lovely estate (which means being able to provide for yourself) and being able to marry out of love sounds good to me. Also I would like to tease mr. Collins now and then LOL🤪
I love your videos, the amount of research you put into them and their informative presentation! Some could even be shown at school, in history or English class!
I'm not sure if you take video requests, but is it possible you could do a video on officers in the Army/Navy? Their pay seems to fluctuate wherever I look, and I can never tell if a high ranking officer Admiral is actually rich or just middle class, and seeing as officers seem to be a reoccurring occupation in Austens works, it might be worth a video look at officers, what they earned and how they lived?
We men do the same thing. As a divorced guy back in the dating scene after 20 years, I am only spending time with gals with a good income, anymore ;). Prudence, and then romance.
Excellent research into the context of Elizabeth's response to Collins' proposal! I learned something new and plan to share this video with my JAFF group. 👍
I speak english? No, I read one of Jane Austen books? No, and saw the movies? No. I see all the videos of this Channel and repeat? Yes of corse! I Love this lovely eyes lady? OF CORSE I DO !!!!
@@EllieDashwood OO YOU RESPONSE ME!!!❤❤❤❤ Thank you!! You eyes are just so big and beautiful I hope go back in the video dont take away my viws that i hope help u, cuz i do that a lot 😅
Your channel really is fabulous. So much of what you talk about even applies to todays world. Your video's really make me think :) Thank You. Also, the way the channel, in terms of depth of the analysis, has grown over time is so great ! Some graduate level analysis for sure.
The beautiful estate at pemberley for me. On another note this brings up ideas about the marriage market and the relationship between the married couples portrayed in not only Austen's works, but her own life as shown in "Becoming Jane " but also in "Bridgerton".
Although the focus on money in the marriages of the era may strike us as mercenary rather than happiness-focused, it's interesting to look at present day statistics about what causes relationship strife and breakup? Money matters are still riiight up there in terms of causes of unhappiness! Makes sense sadly given the socioeconomic context we still live in, where even a minimum basic income is not a guaranteed security...
Very good video! I just don't remember well right now, but Jane Austen made this example of marrying and living in poverty woth Fanny's parents, right? Like they could not to apreciate each other anymore because of the poverty and with Fanny going to live with her realtives far away. Well, those ideals make all sense, because is the life they know and they want to keep it, of course. Nowadays I think is pretty much similar, but we have the liberty to be better in life working by yourself and through more opportunities, but people still wants to assure they minimum to maintain their lifestyle.
When people think about Austen and money they tend to gravitate towards Darcy and his 10k a year but I think S&S is more explicit and real-life with its lower numbers. And we get a wider range of incomes to compare. The whole 2nd chapter is Dashwoods talking about inheritance money. You have Miss Morton with her 50k, Willoughby's debts and Edward's 250 a year which Colonel Brandon deemed not enough to marry but Mrs Jennings was sure they're not gonna wait for more. Snd at the very end when Elinor and Edward work Mrs Ferras for extra money so they can comfortably marry.
Absolutely. It is also noteworthy that if you deflate the numbers given by Victorian writers such as Dickens and Doyle to Regency levels, you tend to get Sense and Sensibility style numbers. The Dashwoods seemed to have been written a clearer eye towards the realities of Regency economic life.
Austen has an example of so many of the aspects that you‘re teasing out: Aspect 1: Anne Elliot didn’t marry Wentworth at first (negative example), Fanny Price‘s mom married down and suffered for it… and that’s what Wickham was betting on…
Thank you so much for clarifying! I obviously always thought that Lizzie made the right choice in regards to Mr Collins, but it was still nice to have it be confirmed that Mrs Bennets attitude was .. improper lol
The odds were most would be born into a class they could not step away from.. The upper class essentially has nothing to do ( except to maintain their wealth ) and had to fill their time with match making. It would be great to have been an observer- a fly on the wall - during these times
Thinking of my current life I’d probably be in a family with an income of 6-700lbs a year. I would not be a housewife who does manual labour of any kind. Though looking at my family’s history i’d likely be married to a middling to wealthy tradesman or a professional like a barrister or doctor.
I find the literature of that era, and other eras, to be rather obsessed with the lives of the rich. The lives of poor people, who were the majority of the population, is rarely the focus of fiction. I wonder why that is. Is it because authors were usually rich, educated people, so they were writing about their own lives?
I think it’s the escapism. Who wants to read stories of poverty and misery and children starving to death when that’s your everyday life? Just look at what tends to be popular in bad economies - fantasies and futuristic sci-fi’s.
Escapism is a good point! I think too for Jane Austen she wrote about what she experienced. She followed that old maxim, “Write about what you know.” As the daughter of a clergyman she lived a certain lifestyle and wrote characters she would have known and interacted with in that lifestyle. Also, she wrote for her audience. Back then many of the poor could not read. And they certainly could not afford novels even if they did. Reading in the Regency was a rich people sport where they wanted books relevant to their own lives. As the 1800s progressed authors did start writing about the poorer classes more like Charles Dickens and Elizabeth Gaskell ( ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-WNf4Sfs7vr4.html ). But a lot of that was their attempting to create social change and reform by informing their wealthier audience about the plight of the poor.
So you're saying... That people were *always* people with their own thoughts and feelings??? HAVE MY LITERATURE TEACHERS BEEN LYING TO ME??????? Jokes aside, it's nice to have someone who studies past eras literally saying "Yes, they were people. They did people things like reject rude people despite how rich they were because they have ~*standards*~" rather than romanticizing their ways of life.
So did Darcy and Caroline intervene in Bingley and Jane’s relationship because they believed she was seeking a mercenary relationship? I recall there was a lot of commentary in the book and movies about her mother and sisters being social climbers and the comment that her affections were more indifferent than Bingley’s.
in the text she explains herself in that her marriage to collins was for survival, and that she didn't think highly of collins at all but she had to do it. i doubt she had any romantic feelings for him.
@@miashinbrot8388 It makes me wonder, with the new knowledge of this video, if both Collins and Charlotte would be considered mercenary, because it seems both were influenced by unspoken need for practicality and not quite romance
@@reesey7988 Mr. Collins was pretty good at self-deception. I'm sure he thought himself as quite a catch, and that Charlotte actually fell for him, if he considered her feelings at all.
@@reesey7988 Consider also that Charlotte may have felt she had somewhat of an obligation to her future supporters (her brothers) to form "an establishment" for herself. Otherwise, she would end up as a poor old maid and one or another of her brothers would have to take her in and feed, clothe, and generally support her. Misery for Charlotte, a burden on her brother(s), and potential conflict or resentment from a future sister-in-law. There was still a sense in 1790 that women "OUGHT" to marry to avoid becoming burdensome old maids that had to be taken care of financially by a relative. That's wrong and stupid, but they couldn't work for a living (not a very nice living, anyway) so that's how it worked.
Pip was given £500 a year by Magwich, but then he split it with his friend, Herbert Pocket. The ladies in Cranford had about £150 a year, which was just enough to remain genteel. George Gissing, in the late Victorian period, said in one of his books that a man needed £400 a year or a well brought up lady would not look at him. Most people earned well under £100. I think I read Charles Dickens' father earned £70 a year and was always in debt. I'll settle for £400; that should be enough.
~£20/pa was pretty much the Regency poverty line, ~£50/pa was the respectability threshold, ~£200 was the 'gentry' threshold. And I once read this piece (can't find it again) that asserted that the standard of living espoused and touted in Regency era England required a household income equivalent to £300 per person/per year. Now take that notion, and consider the Bennets (7 people/£2000pa...ouch!)
I would like to know more about the consequences of eloping , for example in the cases of Lydia Bennet or Maria Bertram. Now days people live together before getting married or don't get married , they choose to marry in Las Vegas for fun etc. but I want to now when Mrs Bennet says "we are all ruined" what exactly does that mean ?? What would have happend with the bennet family if Lydia didn't get married, I hope you could make a video about that thank you so much !!!!
Lydia's ruination would have reflected very badly on the whole family. The entire Bennett family would have been rendered untouchable by her behavior with Wickham, and the marriage prospects of the other Bennett daughters would have been in tatters. That's how it was then.
On a side note, how were recency sons brought up, taught and introduced to society (I believe you mentioned a levee?) I'd loooove to see a video on that!! I would need enough to provide for a servant and cook, plus some cushion if I won a daughter or two in the generic lottery. I'd place it at around £4000-£5000 a year? I think? I'm an introvert, very much a "customer-service-masking" at work and social battery charging at home sort of person. Therefore, comforts of the home would be important, as well as the potential for hiring a governess or tutors for my daughter(s) education.
What do you think about Mary Bannett? I think that Mary and Mr Collins would make very good couples, if Mr. Collins chose to ask for Mary's hand from the beginning 🙄 because they are very close to each others when it comes to their personalities.
You've touched on the topic of the social and financial disparity or lack of it thereof between Darcy and Elizabeth in your other video. The financial disparity was great, but if the social disparity wasn't that much, why did Darcy said that Elizabeth was so beneath him or something to that effect when he proposed? Did he meant oy the financial aspect as you've mentioned in terms of social standing they were in the same sphere. BTW, as. Jane Austen's fan and all regency romance fiction, love your channel 👍 keep it up
I think Darcy was referring to Elizabeth's "connections", her relatives, as Lady Catherine does when she says to Elizabeth, "Your father is a gentleman, yes, but what of your mother?" Mrs. Bennett did not come from landed gentry; her brother was in trade, and her sister was only the wife of an attorney. In addition, the behavior of Mrs. Bennett and the younger Bennett girls would have dismayed Mr. Darcy, especially when he considered the possibility of having to take them in.
If I lived in the Regency Era, a snug cottage in the countryside and 500 or so a year would be enough for my Mom, sister, and I. We'd likely live how the Dashwood ladies did, or how Jane and her mother and sister lived.
This makes me wonder if Charlotte Lucas accepting Mr Collins would have been seen as "mercenary" at the time. Her parents obviously didn't care, as they were delighted at the prospect of her becoming the mistress of Longbourne at some point in the future, but they were also worried that she would never marry because she was **gasp** 27 years old - so they were pretty much just relieved that she'd found *someone!* However Elizabeth's reaction now seems more understandable in that she was shocked that Charlotte would do such a thing (especially Mr Collins of all people!)
Americans, perhaps Hollywood being the epitome, have throw away all the old common sense practicality. In Singapore, young women were taught the five C’s in assessing a suitor, btw, looks or age are not one of the five key criteria
First, I love your channel so much! I never hesitate to click on a new video! Second, why do you pronounce it EEN-come? I have always said INN-come and that throws me every time I hear it. I'm willing to learn something new if I've been saying it wrong.
