Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal: A Weblog

What if "all" in this case equals "the"? Or what if a series of steadily young CLs marries one aging Mr. C.? Given the danger of childbirth in that day, it wouldn't be that unusual...

Also, I don't see why you should trust the author to accurately portray a happy CL-Mr C. marriage when you don't trust her to accurately portray the other marriages. E.g., can you imagine the book with a miserable CL?

Sneers? Man, the sneering threshold must be lower than I remembered.

Second, let me point out that all the internal evidence in Pride and Prejudice is that Charlotte Lucas marries happily.

I disagree. Certainly, she marries about as happily as she can expect given the social realities you mention. She fulfils her goal to make a marriage that provides for her properly. But it's the accoutrements of the marriage, rather than the marriage itself, that her happiness consists in. We see that she arranges her house so that she has to see her husband as little as possible. She gives him the best room in the house for his study so he won't spend much time in the drawing room with her. She encourages to be out in the garden as much as possible. And she "wisely does not hear" the many idiotic and patronising things he says. So, if a happy marriage is one where one of the parties contrives to bear the other with as much equanimity as possible then Charlotte Lucas is happy.

If, as you say, we cannot judge Charlotte unhappy because it is unfair to apply the standards of our age to hers -- or because those standards prevent me from saying that this could be a happy marriage -- then this just reinforces my point that standards for happiness, along with room for choice, are given in large part by the social structure, and so casual talk about revealed preferences isn't generally useful.

What Kieran Healy said.

Also I think the correct locution would be the Messrs. Collins. Even in Utah, of course, as we glibly reproduce the casual slur.

This Miss Manners moment was

I think it's clear from Pride and Prejudice that Charlotte Lucas has made the best she can of a bad marriage - I certainly don't think Jane Austen portrays her as "happily married".

Incidentally, I've always thought one reason Pride and Prejudice has remained so popular is that it doesn't step on many of the "taboos of our own age" - not compared to (say) Mansfield Park, anyway.

One piece of internal evidence worth noting: Charlotte Lucas contrives to spend as little time with her husband as possible. Another piece of evidence: the Jane-Bingley and Elizabeth-Darcy matches are depicted as ideals, against which all other marriages in the book fall short.

If you look at the marriages of the older couples in Pride and Prejudice, you see that they adjust to each other, accept each other, and make the best of it. So does Charlotte Lucas. Collins may be an ass, but no bigger an ass than Mrs. Bennett, Mrs. Phillips, or Lady Catherine (whose husband makes no appearance). Mr. Bennett is himself not that attractive in his attitude towards his wife, and Mr. Phillips is just a country gentleman, with little to recommend him. The couples are bound together because once married they are stuck together.

Charlotte has made the accomodations that Mr. Bennett makes to Mrs. Bennett. Pride and Prejudice is a romance novel. We are meant to understand that the happy couples are blessed and lucky to have found someone reasonably compatible, which is not often the case. We should also assume that they will make the best of the differences, as Mr. Bennett says of the weaknesses of Bingley and Jane, and of the hoped-for increase in playfulness in Darcy.

So, yes, Charlotte is happy, and she gets a child to raise to do better, just as Mr. Bennett got two to raise better than Mrs. Bennett.

Why do you forget the Gardiners? That strikes me as the happiest marriage in the book.

I think that it is quite fair to read Austen as a proto-feminist, in that what she does over and over again is show the way women's lives are circumscribed, and ground down, by the limitations on the choices they can make. One of the reasons these depictions have power is because making the best of a bad situation is not the same as happiness. If Mrs. Collins were genuinely happy in her new life, would she be quite so urgent in her solicitations of a visit from Elizabeth, or so much brought down by her departure? We are shown very clearly that Elizabeth Bennett constitutes the only rational society she can reasonably expect within her new social circle.

(And anyone who imagines that bearing and raising children constitutes some sort of pinacle of happiness in Austen's universe doesn't know his Austen. She was terrified of dying in childbirth.)

No, I'm with Kieran on this one.

Though, I do find it intriguing that the folks most likely to insist that Charlotte Lucas was positively happy in her life appear to all be men.

On quantificational structure:

"all the Charlotte Lucases who choose to marry their Mr Collins"

strikes me as having the same structure as

"all the householders who wash their car"

which strikes me as OK--it doesn't imply that they all have the same car.

Also, on this implicature: "it is illegal even in Utah, let alone Arizona";

the Salt Lake Tribune likes to remind us that one of the major polygamous communities is in Colorado city, Arizona (the base of the Fundamentalist Church of the Latter Day Saints).

Oddly enough, our age taboos unhappiness unless it can be described in social-problem, oppression, or victimization terms. The blameless victim of an evil fate who is doomed to sorrow is nowadays thought of as mentally ill, whereas for most pre-modern non-optimistic societies, it was assumed that there were many such people.

Compared to the Bennetts (much less the Wickhams), Lizzie Borden had a happy marriage. Sure, Charlotte is *happier* than they are...but that isn't saying much.

Now I think of it, the Collinses are sort of a gender-reversed version of the Bennetts. Perhaps they'll have a whole passel of boys who grow up unable to respect their father.

I think we have to look at Elizabeth's take. At first she is, like, all "For shame, Charlotte, this is not sound," i.e. she seems repulsed that C could choose such a husband even if it brings her a comfortable household. But when she actually goes to visit and sees how Charlotte has arranged her life to make the best of it, while she still cannot condone it (for herself), she understands and accepts it.
"Happiness" is not quite the issue. Charlotte's mother is an idiot and the role of eldest old maid daughter particularly dreadful, esp if it means passing the rest of your life with such parents and watching your little sisters get married off. I take the vicarage and the kids behind Box 1. (And yes, I'm a female, and as I age the prospect of a large garden and snug cottage almost more important than the man who comes with.)
(PS--Bingley, though good-natured, is a bit of an idiot. Dull nights there, too...)

Have to agree with Kieran and the commenters above, that it's hard to read Charlotte's marriage as a happy one. On the other hand, nanook is right that happiness may not be the right measure--the real question may be is she better off having married Mr. Collins than she would have been if she hadn't done so?

She's going to be living with a twit either way, but in her own marital household, she'll have some power to arrange things to suit herself that she probably wouldn't have as an "old maid" in her parents' household--and, in fact, with some maneuvering, she does manage to arrange things in her marriage so that her life is reasonably bearable. Elizabeth looks at this and sees a compromise she wouldn't be willing to make, but Elizabeth is younger (and more attractive) than Charlotte, and she has one parent, at least, who's interesting and intelligent (if an asshole to his wife and irresponsible in his parenting in many ways) and values her highly.

I also agree with nanook about Bingley, but Jane's not the brightest bulb, either, and my guess would be that they probably spent a lot of their time with company (either paying or receiving visits), and relatively little time thrown back on their own internal resources. But you get the sense with them, and I think Austen is right about this, that being good-natured, kind, and friendly can go a long way in making for a happy marriage...

Of course, you have to switch authors to get to my personal favorite 19th century novel marriage... As revealed by my "name"...

"On the other hand, nanook is right that happiness may not be the right measure--the real question may be is she better off having married Mr. Collins than she would have been if she hadn't done so?"

No, with all due respect, that is not the real question. Kieran was specifically talking about the fact that marital choice was, until very recently, very circumscribed indeed. Everyone agrees that Charlotte made the best choice available to her, but the point of the allusion was that while it was her best option, that doesn't necessarily make it good option, just the least bad one. I think the larger point Kieran is aiming for is that preferences under conditions of circumscribed choice do not necessarily tell us very much about what preferences would be if the circumscription were lifted.

Mr. Collins isn't old (worse luck maybe). He's just pompous and stupid.

As to Charlotte - I see her as being like many people who have a career they don't love, but the hours are good and it pays the bills. We don't see marriage that way now - but they did (and most other times and places). A person can be happy with a job she doesn't love. It isn't the job that makes her happy, but as long as the job isn't miserable, she can be happy in her life.

Yes, the Gardiners have a lovely marriage. That's pretty much it for happy marriages until the end, though.

I would just like to say that I am deeply grateful to all of you and to indicate the sheer delight I take in reading this blog.