To think that most Jane Austen's heroines didn't find happiness in marriage?

[bgmama]

I am a big fan and I must have read the books a hundred times, but I am starting to realize that most heroes in her books are either assholes or idiots and towards the end of the book they stop being assholes or idiots and become worthy of marrying the heroine. I am not talking only of Mr Darcy here, but most others too. AIBU to think that this transformation didn't last very long and they went back to their usual ways shortly after the marriage was consummated? And that the heroines were miserable and were told to LTB at some point during their lives?

Minges - "Loungbourn" is great! Nowhere near as light as P&P, more meaty, but well-written and very engrossing. The characters are not quite what you'd expect from JA. (I don't want to say more because spoilers).

Georgiana did confess all to D'Arcy before the elopement took place, because she felt guilty, which is why it didn't happen

I wonder if when push came to shove* Georgiana was frightened of the prospect? Wickham was an adult man, and very experienced - she had perhaps had a crush on him, and he had carefully groomed her in her infatuation, but then when the crunch came, she couldn't do it. Maybe he had "got physical" and it scared her.

*Possibly an unfortunate turn of phrase in the circumstances

I wonder if when push came to shove Georgiana was frightened of the prospect?*

Yes, I think this is likely. The impression is given that she'd led a very sheltered life. Wickham was probably one of very few men she'd come into contact with - again, very different from Lydia who was out and about from a young age, flirting with anyone in military dress.

I think Georgiana was possibly coerced by Wickham. He was an adult who had been kind to her when she was a child, and he was assisted by her companion Mrs. Younge, who she presumably also trusted. As screaming said, she had been very sheltered and she was probably lonely at Ramsgate, and therefore quite vulnerable when shown a little affection and attention.

I've just been to the library and taken out Sanditon and Longbourn. Fascinating thread!

We're missing an, imo, brilliantly written character here - Lucy Steele. Every time I read S&S I'm struck more forcibly by both her and her eventual husband's bitchiness. Part of me thinks that her and Robert would have rubbed along ok, probably both had affairs but as long as there was enough money, and they both remained totally self absorbed in their own life, they would have put up with each other for the sake of making a respectable appearance to the world.

Miss Steele certainly switches her allegiance fairly swiftly!

Wickham targets Georgiana because she is cash rich - 20 or 30k - and he knows the second he marries her he cops the lot.

A further indication that Wickham's a wrong'un is that he goes for a girl he's known all his life and been brought up with - suggesting he's been a bounder from a v young age.

There's also the very strong disapproval because W's bitter and twisted from not accepting his station in life and the status quo - JA doesn't rate him for that, at all. Class mobility is fine by her, particularly upwards in respectable ways; turning nasty to climb the greasy pole is not, especially for a man as they can always succeed at work to move up the ladder.

Wickham targets Georgiana because she is cash rich - 20 or 30k - and he knows the second he marries her he cops the lot.

A further indication that Wickham's a wrong'un is that he goes for a girl he's known all his life and been brought up with - suggesting he's been a bounder from a v young age.

There's also the very strong disapproval because W's bitter and twisted from not accepting his station in life and the status quo - JA doesn't rate him for that, at all. Class mobility is fine by her, particularly upwards in respectable ways; turning nasty to climb the greasy pole is not, especially for a man as they can always succeed at work to move up the ladder.

Lucy Steele is a marvelous character, and I think she and Robert Ferrars were made for each other. I think only Lucy could tolerate, and manage, such an ogre of a mil.

What interesting about the 'love' aspect, is that people were only just coming to the idea of 'love' being a requirement for marriage in upper society. Up until the Georgian period, almost all marriages in higher society were arranged at least to some degree. Your choice was pretty limited, so falling in love with your partner-to-be was a matter of luck, as Charlotte Lucas would say. I think Jane Austen must have been something of a romantic, and understood that her readers were too. It would probably be a bit of a novelty, and certainly an ideal. But Jane understood that love alone was not enough. She shows us Mrs Price after all!

I suspect that all her heroine's were only too well aware that success in marriage required a lot of work. Love just made it easier. Something, I think a lot of today's marrieds forget.

I agree about Lucy Steele being a superb character - there is a touch of the Becky Sharpe's about her (and both of them have names which tell us their characters).

I think Lucy Steele will wear the trousers in her marriage to Robert Ferrars. He must be an extraordinarily vain and self-important individual to imagine that Lucy's change of allegiance was totally due to his personal qualities, and had nothing to do with his unexpected wealth. She will rule him with a rod of iron - just as Becky ended up controlling Josiah Sedley. I would have LOVED to have been in the room when the Dowager Mrs Ferrars got the good news of her younger son's marriage!

I suppose our perception of 'love' is also different from what it was at the time. Now, a woman is no longer the property of her husband or father. We can work for our own money and buy our own homes. We can afford to marry for love. In those days, women couldn't afford to wait for love. They knew that love wouldn't pay their bills or put food on the table or keep a roof over their heads. The only thing that would ensure that in a lot of cases was a solvent husband. Maybe Austen was a romantic, but romantic love was different. It wasn't a love conquers all romance, it was a 'look at this guy, he's handsome and kind, and best of all, he has a big house! My parents had an arranged marriage. They were introduced in May and were married in June. I asked her once how she knew that she wanted to marry him. She said she was of marriageable age, that he was a teacher and lived in London ( She was in Mumbai) so she extrapolated that he was patient because he was a teacher, had a professional job she quite liked the idea of living in London. That was it. They have been married for 47 years. They are, incidentally, completely incompatible and dont spent much time together now at all, but that was how she decided. Id imagine its not dissimilar to the way marriage was seen in Austens time.

Anyone else started rereading the books with renewed interest and with different thoughts? I'm about to reach the Netherton ball!

@Notlostjustexploring I intend to after I hand in my thesis! But I did watch the 6-hour BBC P&P while doing corrections yesterday!

Cliveybaby

Sadly, thesis trumps austen. (if not too outing, what's your thesis on?)

For me doing something academic while watching p&p. =

"as can be seen in table 3 the molecular weight of carbon hexafluoride in a sprigged muslin balanced against the weight of ten thousand a year photosynthesis aerodynamic velocity of a fruit fly balanced on a dripping wet Colin firth..."*

*yes I know I bastardised a few different disciplines there.

All I can think of now is the brilliant advert (for malteasers, I think) where a lady librarian (tweed skirt, high-necked blouse, mousey hair etc) was giving in to her fantasies and cried "Oh Mr Darcy! Your Breeches!" and whizzed across the floor on her little wheeled office chair . . .

Lol!
It's a PhD thesis, so would be completely outing! Let's just say acoustics/audio :)

Are we finished with Austen?

Can we mention Poldark now?

The discussions about how marriage differs now from then are interesting read in the context of some of the threads about the legal implications of marriage v cohabitation. There are usually posters who don't think legal and financial considerations should figure at all, and others who take the opposite view. Next time I read one of those I'll assign the posters different Jane Austen characters!

Miss Marjoribanks by mrs O is available free on kindle at the moment ...

Thanks, Mumsnut - I've ordered it!

Thanks Mumsnut

It might have already been mentioned but Lucy Worsley did a fab program on Jane Austen, it's called the houses of Jane Austen and covers her life via the houses she grew up in. It's so interesting and highlights how precarious life was for women in those days! It covers her romantic life too and it's very sad really considering the romances she wrote.

Miss Marjoribanks by mrs O is available free on kindle at the moment

I still have my virago modern press copy. I recently gave it to my 16 year old (the one who thought Mr. Rochester was a creepy old man). It is one of my favourite books - "a white frock, cut high"