The real reason Jane Austen wrote about romance | Pride & Prejudice Ch 1 analysis, Brit Lit 101 

Mts Bennett loves her children, Mr Bennett not so much. He is careless about other peoples lives and every time I read or watch P&P I like him less.

@@dudleymaryannjones9509 He definitely loved Lizzie, but you're right, otherwise he didn't have much of a grasp of reality

I agree with this take, however, Mrs. Bennett is also highly manipulative and has a very shallow understanding of human behavior. I'm not sure that she understands her children at all, or even cares to know what makes them tick. It's no accident that Mr. Bennett sees Lizzie as his favorite, whereas Mrs. Bennett spends more time praising Lydia and Mary.

@@mcmurtryfan Yes, what you say I agree with. I think Austen even mentions how Mr. Bennett knows too well the folly of marrying a pretty face and cheerful personality without delving any deeper. She is nowhere near his intellectual equal, but on the other hand, she has a pretty fair assessment of the way things stand. I always thought that if I were to write a fanfiction take on P&P, I would write about what probably would have happened to those girls had the Bingleys not moved into Netherfield.

Mrs Bennet is practical, but to the extreme. Like an immigrant parent dismissing their child’s dream to be an artist or writer and pushing them to become a doctor or lawyer. She has a one track mind, and although it’s in good faith, it can steam roll over her children’s wants and desires. Like when she tried forcing Lizzy to marry Mr Collins. She’s practical to the point of not seeing the bigger picture that her daughters would think of when thinking of marriage. Mr Bennet on the other hand is obviously a lot more cynical of marriage to the point that he sometimes misses the practicality of it for women, especially his 5 daughters and wife who are vulnerable without it.

Agreed. After the first re-reading the political and cultural critique really stands out.

Reading P&P in high school is like being punk’d. Very few high schoolers have the life experience to appreciate it for what it is.

It is not exactly hidden, the opening of Pride and Prejudice is obviously biting satyre.

I actually once read a criticism of Jane Austen that it wasn't really true that all single men of "good fortune must be in want of a wife." This critic obviously had no ear at all for satire!@@kawaibakaneko

I suppose that the scullery maids and chambermaids and housekeepers don't really qualify as "women of all kinds." Austen wrote a romance that promoted "equality," but only as long as it was confined to certain levels of already-privileged women. Unlike Jonathon Swift, who used satire to enfranchise the most downtrodden of people LONG before Austen set pen to paper, she wasn't interested in championing ALL women. Just those who were apt to buy her books.

​@@pricklypear7516Jonathan Swift is great, and I'm sorry to see how he was downgraded to children's lit author. However, Jane Austen had a shorter life and a different education from Swift. Should she lived until 70, we would have gotten more novels from her. And who knows what issues they woud have discussed.

You’re right but I think it’s actually good that she stuck to what she knew because this is exactly what allowed her to expose the ridiculousness and hypocrisy of the class structure so well. She also doesn’t write the nobility. I think sticking closer to her own class experience helped her social commentary ring true, she critiqued from a perspective that was genuine to herself. One of Austen’s biggest strengths as a writer is her insight into the psychology of others but she wouldn’t have had as many opportunities to develop insight into the experiences of lower classes. Instead she acknowledges their plight through things like the anxiety of Mrs Bennet about what might happen to her and her daughters if they lost their rank, a mindset she’d have had more opportunity to witness and understand. These days we put a really high value on representation, and rightly so, but I think there’s also value to Jane Austen’s approach. So much of the poor representation we see in media comes from people who vastly overestimate their ability to understand others who have a very different social background to themselves. It would’ve been very difficult for Austen to hear the perspective of a servant. Even if she’d asked, they wouldn’t have been able to answer honestly without some level of fear for their livelihood

@@EmL-kg5gn True! She wrote what she knew, and what she was ALLOWED to know. She certainly did not ignore the existence of the lower classes, nor talk smack about them. She simply wrote about her heroines and heroes (and villains and side-characters) existing near those people, but not among those people, because that was the TRUTH OF HER SOCIETY. In order for her to write about the lower classes being equal to the upper classes, she would have had to 1) actually socialize with the lower classes enough to understand them, and that was STRICTLY VERBOTEN, even moreso for an UNMARRIED woman; 2) portray the lower classes in a way that was both accurate and acceptable to the only people in the country who were actually literate enough to read her works, which is the middle and upper classes. For the middle classes, mostly MEN. It was hard enough to get men to accept a woman as a protagonist! But note, as well, that she did not write about the nobility, except in rare cases, and never as the main protagonists. The highest she actually goes is the daughter or second son of an Earl. No Marquesses or Dukes to be found. Check out any Regency Romance paperback, published by Harlequin or Signet or any other major modern Romance publishing house. It's chock-a-block full of Dukes, Marquesses and Earls, but very few Misters. Everyone is a Lord or Lady. And the servants are rarely mentioned, at all. If the servants ARE mentioned in a MODERN book set in Regency England, then it is because the servant is somehow stepping out of their sphere (frequently to assist the put-upon heroine to make her brave escape, by dressing as a scullery maid). You want to chide a Regency romance author for not writing about the lower classes? Chide the MODERN authors who actually HAVE ACCESS TO and KNOW the lower classes, but write about the high nobility, instead. Jane Austen wrote what she knew, and wrote it very well. And, FOR HER TIME, she was very progressive. Sadly, you can put one of the most reactionary people of today's world into Regency England, and they would be frozen out of society, for being TOO EXTREME in their progressiveness. Women voting?! Absurd! Even the Bluestockings did not go so far! Also, Jane Austen and Jonathan Swift weren't even alive at the same time. He died about 30 years before she was born. Now you're going to say that means she should have picked up his banner and run with it. However, remember, his banner applied to the POOR, not the FEMALE. It's an "apples and oranges" argument, at best. They're both yummy fruit.

The Gardiner's are such overlooked characters! They aren't just the un-cringe characters that Lizzy can point Darcy towards. In many ways they are Lizzy's mentors and act in a parental role quite often. Without ever saying it even through Lizzy, Austen is very clearly holding them up as the ideal marriage. Loving but also a very practical partnership, both materially and personality wise. Rather than overt passion, their marital success is conveyed through respect and companionship. Austen's thesis is that this is the basis for a sound marriage rather than the tropes of the time, either purely mercenary or purely passionate motivations.

And this in only one book!

I find the contrast between the Bennets and the Collins very interesting because they’re both incompatible marriages. Neither partnership is built on shared values. The difference is that Charlotte wasn’t ignorant of Mr Collins’ faults and made a conscious decision that she could handle it, and she actually could. Mr Bennet had no idea what he was getting himself into because he overvalued outward appearance and was blindsided

@@EmL-kg5gn It happens easily in a society that thinks women and girls to be silly little creatures. One does not necessarily distinguish between those who indeed are and those who only seem to be - and what a difference it makes.

The Gardiners and Admiral and Mrs. Croft in Persuasion are my favorite Austen couples.

Wow, kudos to your grandfather for being a book club member! Usually men do not come to it. They probably consider it as part of women's culture. Like novels.

His charms have no ends 👌🏻🎩📖💕

@@EllieDashwood and i think i recall that John Thorpe badmouths novels.

@@kirstena4001 He does indeed.

Mr Darcy also praises Lizzie for reading- though she doesn't pick up on it.

Certainly Mr Collins wouldn't dane to read a novel aloud.

I’ve made my way through 5/6 of her novels and she is fucking spicy. With a very clear disregard for certain kinds of people. She shows what real kinds of consequences came with actions of the time and so much is still relevant. How many times have the young and silly been duped by the older and good looking? Some things never change.

Absolutely agree. So many times as I've read her work I've had to put the book down and ask myself "When was this written again?" Because it is so relatable, the characters' perspectives, reasoning, and even the humor is timeless.

I agree. It’s why I hesitate to call them romance novels. They seem closer to coming of age stories mostly. The exception being Persuasion, which is something different altogether.

So true. Jane finishes her life with a compliment to attachment, stolidity. Loving best loves longest. The ephemeral Musgrave conception. The shocking admittance that some find romance without love, having a mistress and a thing that suits both parties. Jane knew the full span of human interaction, she had read Fielding. But I have a feeling that much of what she feels is to do with companionship. Because of her own disability, perhaps, she veers away from the physical.

Oh, I've GOT to read that!

It had a basis in fact - soldiers in World War I read her novels in the trenches. It was partly escapism but I think they probably enjoyed upper class people being satirised and relationships between people is universal.

What?!?! That is so cool!!!!

@@EllieDashwood ru-vid.com/group/PLL84Aw12nRu1NHMOltb9n7ca8XaYlnU77

I gotta check that out! She has such a pleasant voice.

Yes! She did it during the early days of the pandemic.

@@EllieDashwood it is amazing, you need to find it! It’s very casually read, she obviously has a blast!

Except Lizzy isn't average looking. The book never stops telling us she has fine eyes and is vivacious.

Lizzy is the second pretties of a family of beautiful girls(except for Mary who is the only plain one). Lizzy is prettier than Lydia

I feel Mr Palmer and Charlotte are another Mr and Mrs Bennett in the making and married for the same reason. Except with more money and they have a son to leave things to.

@@Irina-Daniela If Lizzy is prettier than Lydia then why does Mrs. Bennett think they can marry off Lydia so much easier?

Having fine eyes and being vivacious are certainly attractive features in both human genders. But that doesn’t necessarily translate to Lizzie being beautiful, with flawless skin, hair and teeth - especially given how widespread diseases like smallpox were back then. So I agree with an earlier comment- it would be really interesting to see a TV or movie remake of P&P without someone who looks like a model playing Lizzie.

As a woman I 100% agree with your assessment! That’s why I thought I hated romance focused media. My sister loves shows like marriage at first sight, the bachelor, love island etc. because she loves the social aspect and the psychology but I can’t tolerate the sexualisation. Human sexuality isn’t inherently negative at all but it’s so often written as being shallow at best and degrading at worst! I’m inclined to avoid the topic because seeing that part of someone’s relationship feels invasive to me even if it’s fictional, and in some ways I think part of our problem is that people are used to looking at it as a performance. But I do wonder if more writing about the erotic side of relationships as respectful and loving could be healthy for people? We have so many depictions of shallow, degrading, and violent sexuality in our modern media that maybe having a better example/influence would be good. I’m not sure what the answer is but either way I’m actually very thankful for well written romances!

"men have to pretend not to enjoy it even though in real life romance would never occur without both sexes." Romance/dating is sex work/prostitution done by men in order to experience sex. It is prostitution because most men aren't into it. Just like female prostitutes participate in sex with the end goal of a cash payment in mind - most men are going through the motions of dating and romance with the end goal of sex in mind.

Awww! Thank you! It was fun switching things up! 😃😂

lol yeah she even talks about this in persuasion

Hmm...yet Mary Shelley was able to do it.

1800s included some adventurous English women who wrote. For example, 1) 1 Austen---era English woman traveled around both sides of Mediterranean in various local clothes as travel correspondent til felled by disease in Egypt? 2) Also early 1800s, an English woman travelled around earl independent Argentina. 3) By mid & late 1800s, the no. of English + other European women who wrote from personal experiences about "non typical" places continued to increase.

@@darkwitnesslxxShe's not like other girls

@@darkwitnesslxx Mary Shelly came from a background that was different from the start and paid a very high price for many of her choices. \her example is not a normal example

I watch another lovely channel, Jill Bearup, who refers to this phenomenon as 'it's what the people want.' And that is nothing for us to be ashamed of. I believe another excellent term for it is 'democracy' 😆.

"The journey of self understanding and improvement" as you say is a part of a romance novel too I think. Even if it's not only a romance book thing. Because characters have to understand something about themselves and/or the other one in order to be together. If not why are they not together at the beginning of the book?

Rom coms help make up for the terrible time I had in high school, romance wise. I was so clueless about girls. Now all of my best friends are women. Since I am 81, not kidding about “friends”.

😊🌷

Women owned the psychological language and approach to life until Freud stole it for his own profit.

Indeed, and Ellie did not miss a beat of her explanation❣️👌🏽

But Jane Austen, was very aware of the philosophy of leading contemporary English feminist thinker + writer Mary Wollstonecraft.

Or in any time.

I think it's important to remember that teenage girls liked both the Beatles and Star Trek first. (I know what you mean, though.)

First, but not happiest. Mrs. Bennett got herself Mr. Bennett. But Lydia got herself a peice of scoundrel. It is obvious infidelity and quarrels will entertain their life together.

Aw, thank you so much! I’m so glad it was helpful! 😃 And I hope your classic novel reading has been going well! 😃

Aw!!! Thank you!!! 😃

Perhaps “it’s a romance that’s also a work of social commentary” would be good…?

This. Is SOOO true and beautifully expressed! You almost made me tear up and I don't do that easily! Your comment inspires me as a woman to freely express my femininity (and great point that we ALL have both 'feminine' and 'masculine' traits). Thank you 🥰

@@cmm5542 Oh wow, thank you, I'm really glad to hear that what I said resonated with you! As a woman myself, it's been a long road for me as well to become comfortable with fully embracing and accepting my own femininity. But it's been so liberating and fulfilling to finally have gained the courage to do so. I've come to accept that I am someone who is naturally a lot more emotional, sensitive, and "soft", and I've learned to use those qualities order to bring more positivity, warmth, understanding, and encouragement to all the people around me. But I do *have* to be very emotionally vulnerable at times in order to do this effectively. And while occasionally I have gotten hurt who were not in the right place to be receptive to me, overall, my relationships with others and with myself has overwhelmingly improved. I sincerely hope that your journey to embracing and expressing your own unique gifts will bring you much peace and happiness as well! :D

@@JadestonePony Thank you 🙂. Wishing you all the best as well.

Lydia, of course, is the exception to the above.

I agree. I also hate that unhappiness is marketed as more 'real' than happiness. Real life is a mixture of the two. Good things as well as bad happen to everyone. A book that ends with doom and gloom and misery for everyone is no more realistic than one where everyone has their wishes come true! The difference is that happy endings inspire us to make real life better, which I frankly think is more realistically practical!

Yes, well behaved women rarely make history

So true. Ellie’s voice is very melodious, isn’t it. Hope you’re having a better day today, and the tomorrows too, of course btw

😃😊☺️