Avatar

@bennetsbonnet

A little corner of the internet to show my passion for Pride and Prejudice & all things Austen My AO3 ͙͘͡★ My gifs

Just posted some short, tooth-rotting Elizabeth/Darcy fluff depicting the morning after their wedding night.

A Voyage of Discovery

Summary: Elizabeth Darcy spends the first morning of her married life quietly observing her handsome husband at repose.

You can read it here. I hope you enjoy it if you do decide to give it a read!

Imagine if you were reading Sense and Sensibility for the first time back in 1811, but you could only get hold of the first volume, so it ended on that cliffhanger... aka Elinor accepting the reality of Lucy Steele's engagement to Edward because of the ring he wore with her lock of hair in it???

I would've fainted, I think.

Avatar
Reblogged
Anonymous asked:

Hello! Sometimes I see people saying Darcy "raised a child (and on his own, is the unsaid implication)" via his care-taking of Georgiana, and I'm a little confused by that. Are we given a year when Darcy's father died? I thought it must have been just a few years ago, so Georgiana was already 12+ and might have been away at school or something - so it's not really Darcy changing his sister's diapers, is it? Plus I thought most of the actual day-to-day care-taking would've been done by Mrs. Reynolds and the other servants, while Darcy was mostly preoccupied with the estate and things, so does that really count as "raising" her? And he shares the guardianship with Col. Fitzwilliam anyway, who must've helped quite a bit, surely... by that definition, did Mr. Knightley "raise" his nephews/nieces every time he babysat for his brother? Did Captain Wentworth "raise" the likely prepubescent midshipmen aboard the Laconia or "raise" Dick Musgrove by making him write letters to his family?

Would appreciate your thoughts on this!

"My excellent father died about five years ago"

-Pride & Prejudice, Ch 35

Georgiana is sixteen during the action of the novel and fifteen at the failed elopement. Their father died when Darcy was around twenty-three and Georgiana was eleven. I personally, having experienced both parenthood and foster care (my parents fostered), would say that taking custody of a recently orphaned tween is harder than caring for a baby. I think that Darcy would be doing whatever a single father in the gentry class would generally do for their daughter or female ward.

As for raising/custody, I think that while Col. Fitzwilliam is a co-guardian, he's possibly just advising on legal matters and protecting the trust with Georgiana's dowry. Darcy probably has what we could call today primary physical custody. How much child raising he's actually doing is debatable, Georgiana is certainly in boarding school at some points and would have had a nursemaid/governess, but I would give him credit for being his sister's guardian and I would bet they had a hard year together after their father died (we don't know when the mom died, though it was likely prior to the father).

Regarding Georgiana not residing with Darcy at Pemberley, it's implied that it isn't his permanent residence either until his marriage. From Chapter 43:

'Is your master much at Pemberley in the course of the year?' 'Not so much as I could wish, sir; but I dare say he may spend half his time here; and Miss Darcy is always down for the summer months.'

So it's likely that most of the time he spent at Pemberley was in fact with Georgiana, perhaps in the summer and around Christmastime.

Darcy travels a lot because that was what was expected of a gentleman, particularly one who was unmarried. Georgiana would be in town with her governess/companions and there wouldn't be much for him to do in that respect, since I suppose she would be pursuing 'feminine' pastimes like music lessons or needlework. Even if he wanted to stay with her, Darcy would also be under pressure to satisfy obligations to attend various social engagements in town and further afield, in order to maintain Pemberley's reputation and ensure its continued prosperity. Georgiana would not have joined him because, as stated above, she was not 'out.'

Also, I wonder if her being taken out of school was due to her struggling with the other girls or the environment in some way, maybe not quite bullying but perhaps she wasn't happy. You can imagine how cutthroat an environment with lots of girls desperate to climb the social ladder would be for a shy teenager with a fortune of thirty thousand! I've always imagined that her being sent to the seaside at Ramsgate was no coincidence, perhaps it was for her health, to recover from a recent ordeal at school.

Elizabeth's visit to Pemberley also reveals how much he considers Georgiana; they enter a:

'very pretty sitting-room, lately fitted up with greater elegance and lightness than the apartments below; and were informed that it was but just done to give pleasure to Miss Darcy, who had taken a liking to the room when last at Pemberley.'

And Mrs Reynolds testifies:

'Whatever can give his sister any pleasure is sure to be done in a moment. There is nothing he would not do for her.'

By our modern standards, sure, arranging for a room to be decorated because she thought it would be nice does not seem like it would be a priority by a guardian. But I doubt most unmarried men would consider such a thing, yet it really seems like Darcy went out of his way for Georgiana.

Ultimately, I think Darcy writing such a long letter to her and Georgiana confessing the intended elopement with Wickham to him, unprompted, is further evidence of that and clearly shows that they had a very close bond. It might not seem like much to us now, but I think when considered in the context of the time, ensuring her comfort in a home that isn't even a permanent residence, writing her long letters and taking a keen interest in her living situation shows Darcy likely cared for his sister more than many men of his station.

Two statements about characters can and should co-exist: Pride and Prejudice edition

Mr Bennet has a close relationship with Elizabeth and provides amusing observations on the folly of human nature BUT he is a terrible husband and father who consistently neglects the women who rely on him for absolutely everything; Elizabeth and Jane turned out so well in spite of him, not because of him.

Mrs Bennet's behaviour is understandable given the era in which she lived and the subsequent pressure she was under to get her daughters married well, which wasn't entirely for vanity reasons given that Longbourn was entailed BUT she was still fundamentally vain, ridiculous and rude; such pressure, even combined with an absent husband, still does not make her behaviour justifiable, nor her a sympathetic character, as she enabled Lydia (whose subsequent elopement with Wickham almost ruined the family) for far too long.

Mr Collins is unfairly portrayed as a middle-aged sycophant in most adaptations, rather than the young clergyman who sucks up to his patroness in pursuit of a more lucrative living that he was BUT he is still a ridiculous character who you are not meant to feel sympathy for when Elizabeth rejects him; he is rude, hypocritical and thinks of himself far too highly considering how vapid he actually is.

Caroline Bingley is often too harshly judged as a 'pick-me,' even though her relentless pursuit of Darcy is understandable given his wealth & status and how important it was for women to make a good marriage BUT she was still rude, vain and treated Jane terribly; plus she was a hypocritical snob, given the manner in which she looked down upon the Bennet family's relations despite the Bingleys' own background in trade.

Elizabeth is incredibly witty, courageous and endearing and instantly likeable which makes Darcy's slight of her at the Meryton assembly all the more of an affront to us as readers BUT, while it explains her dislike of him, she is no means perfect herself; she had far too much misplaced pride in her ability to successfully read others' characters and consequently ignored positive accounts of Darcy in favour of believing the deceitful Wickham, given her prejudice against the former.

Mr Darcy was harshly judged by Elizabeth, even though there are many more sympathetic elements to his character than immediately meet the eye BUT he was not shy or innocent; he was always a haughty rich man who had never been told no, thought far too highly of himself and, ultimately, thoroughly deserved to be rebuked and subsequently made to reform his character.

Avatar
Reblogged

I love that Austen directly tells us first that it wouldn’t matter if Anne had never reunited with Wentworth, because that’s not the reality, and therefore the alternative isn’t even a possibility worth considering:

How she might have felt, had there been no Captain Wentworth in the case, was not worth enquiry; for there was a Captain Wentworth;

…and then that it wouldn’t matter whether he even returned her love or not, because she’d be in love with him forever:

and be the conclusion of the present suspense [of his feelings] good or bad, her affection would be his forever.

…and then that just as whether they had met again or not didn’t matter, neither would the possibility of their never being together (i.e. if Wentworth died or if Anne thought he married somebody else): she would still love him and only him, and no other man:

Their union, she believed, could not divide her more from other men, than their final separation.

And Wentworth, even back when he was trying to distance himself from Anne, believing them both to be indifferent to each other and believing himself to want nothing to do with her anymore, feels the same way about her though he doesn’t realize it:

He had been most warmly attached to her, and had never seen a woman since whom he thought her equal.

Anne and Wentworth had nearly an entire decade to move on, and were basically encouraged to by every circumstance possible… but they didn’t! In fact, Wentworth (who had already been in love with Anne the entire time - “never inconstant”) says that meeting her again, seeing her again, after all this time, has actually made him fall in love with her even more:

I offer myself to you again with a heart even more your own, than when you almost broke it eight years and a half ago. Dare not say that man forgets sooner than woman, that his love has an earlier death. I have loved none but you.

I'm currently reading The Real Jane Austen: A Life In Small Things by Paula Byrne and it provides a fascinating insight into how a young Jane Austen had a front row seat to many of the most consequential events of her era.

Which contradicts what many scholars (predominantly men, let's not kid ourselves) have frequently asserted, when they have taken the simplistic view that Jane Austen somehow merely existed in a vacuum and was not impacted by the world around her... because (in their eyes) her novels do not contain enough detailed references to contemporary events. Which is not only wrong (read Mansfield Park!) but, I think, rather lazy, too.

Especially when there is evidence that she was very aware of the world around her, perhaps to a painful extent, due to her family. She was very close to many of her relations and one in particular, Eliza Hancock (later Eliza de Feuilliede), provided ample inspiration for the young Jane given the colourful events of her life. Eliza was born in India and was potentially the illegitimate daughter of an influential politician there. She married a Captain in the French army who had ties to Marie Antoinette and visited the Austens frequently, probably enthralling Jane with stories of her life which must have seemed so exciting.

But Eliza also provided Jane with the grim opportunity to see firsthand the impact of the Reign of Terror which followed the French Revolution. In 1794, Eliza's husband, Jean-François Capot de Feuillide, was guillotined. Jane likely corresponded with the widowed Eliza and the little boy he left behind in the immediate aftermath. It must have been difficult for her to imagine their grief, she had grown close to them both when Eliza stayed at Steventon in 1792.

It must have been so painful to bear witness to such a horrific loss suffered by her own family member whose life she likely had already used as inspiration for her novels. It's speculated that Eliza provided inspiration for characters in some of her cousin's earlier works, such as Love and Freindship [sic] and Lady Susan, and potentially even inspired Mary Crawford from Mansfield Park. It's a very interesting link, a far cry from the provincial spinster many think Jane Austen was.

Perhaps, rather than being ignorant of the world around her, Jane Austen—much like General Tilney in Northanger Abbey—felt the grief all too acutely to contemplate ever including such events in graphic detail within her novels. Perhaps, like so many of us that read her novels over and over, she just wanted an escape from the horrors of the real world...

Avatar
Reblogged

Time for a Northanger Abbey re-read, and what a beautiful edition I have to enjoy!

Just finished reading and I enjoyed it so much more than the first time!!! I was slightly confused when I last read it why Catherine was so upset about constantly missing the Tilneys in Bath (just go to their house?!) but knowing the etiquette of the period far better now, I was stressed. And the Thorpes were even more unbearable... which I didn't think was possible.

I also adored everything that occurred when she finally got to Northanger Abbey. I was quite disappointed by that section the first time and found it to be anti-climatic (just like Catherine I suppose) and was deeply confused why everything was suddenly resolved re: the General after one conversation with Henry... but I get how satirical it is now.

I had a great time; Catherine is so endearing and Henry Tilney is such a sweetheart. NA will definitely be added to my list of comfort reads going forward!

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.