As I wrote last month, my Jane Austen group is doing a slow read of Mansfield Park this year, meaning we are reading and discussing the novel, one volume at a time, over three months. This month was Volume 2 (that is, chapters 19 to 31). It starts with the return of the patriarch, Sir Thomas Bertram, from his plantation in Antigua, and ends with Fanny rejecting Henry Crawford’s proposal.
Last month, I said that the thing that struck me most in volume 1 was the selfishness, or self-centredness, of most of the characters. I wondered whether Austen was writing a commentary on the selfishness/self-centredness of the well-to-do, and how this results in poor behaviour, carelessness of the needs of others, and for some, in immorality (however we define that). Having now read volume 2, I’m still on this path – together with a couple of other, somewhat related ideas, education, which I also mentioned last month, and parenting.
But first, the selfishness and self-centredness continues. In this volume, Maria marries and she and Julia leave Mansfield Park, leaving Fanny the only young woman at the Park. Mary Crawford, over in the parsonage, no longer has a young female friend to entertain her, so her sister Mrs Grant thinks Fanny would suffice:
Mrs. Grant, really eager to get any change for her sister, could, by the easiest self-deceit, persuade herself that she was doing the kindest thing by Fanny, and giving her the most important opportunities of improvement in pressing her frequent calls.
Here is one of the reasons I love Austen. She knows exactly how we justify our actions to ourselves.
Anyhow, as a result, Fanny spends more time with Mary, as a favour to others, resulting in, Austen writes,
an intimacy resulting principally from Miss Crawford’s desire of something new, and which had little reality in Fanny’s feelings.
Examples like this pepper the volume. Lady Bertram doesn’t want Fanny to accept a dinner invitation because it would affect her “evening’s comfort”. After all, as Austen writes, “Lady Bertram never thought of being useful to anybody”. Late in the volume, Lady Bertram rises to the occasion, or thinks she does. She sends her maid to help Fanny dress for her first ball, and says so during the ball when Fanny’s appearance is complimented. “Chapman helped her to dress. I sent Chapman to her.” Yes, she did, but only after she was dressed and too late to help Fanny who was already dressed! Austen adds:
Not but that she was really pleased to have Fanny admired; but she was so much more struck with her own kindness in sending Chapman to her, that she could not get it out of her head.
Mrs Grant, Mary and Lady Bertram aren’t the only selfish, self-centred people in this volume. There’s the egregious Henry Crawford who had played, in volume 1, with the feelings of Maria and Julia, and then leaves Mansfield, in volume 2, with nary a word to either of them:
Henry Crawford was gone, gone from the house, and within two hours afterwards from the parish; and so ended all the hopes his selfish vanity had raised in Maria and Julia Bertram.
That’s not the end of Henry, though, because he’s soon back, telling his sister Mary, “my plan is to make Fanny Price in love with me”. In my Jane Austen group, we discussed that as his frivolous flirtation moved to something more serious – as he started to truly see, we believe, Fanny’s value – he gives no thought to whether Fanny will love him. That’s a given! He’s a catch!
There’s more I could say on this theme – I haven’t even mentioned Mrs Norris – but there are other ideas to talk about. I started to see in volume 2 that Mansfield Park is also about parenting, and, relating to this, I’d argue that in this volume we see the beginning of the education of Sir Thomas.
However, Sir Thomas is a controversial character in my group. Some detest him, rather like Mr Yates who had never seen a father so “unintelligibly moral, so infamously tyrannical” as Sir Thomas. But, along with some others, I see Sir Thomas differently. Sure, he’s formal, but he loves his children – and he has no support in that wife of his. When he realises how silly Maria’s fiancé is, he wants to give her an out. Unfortunately, Maria wants to escape home and its restraints, so doesn’t take it. Sir Thomas is – admittedly – relieved because it suits his wish “to secure a marriage which would bring him such an addition of respectability and influence”. An example of new money, he’s a product of his times, and a “good” marriage can only help! However, as the volume progresses, Sir Thomas looks out for Fanny, wanting to give her opportunities, despite Mrs Norris’ attempts to keep puttng Fanny down.
For me, a recurring theme in Austen’s novels, in fact, is parenting. Lady Bertram is completely hands-off, letting Mrs Norris (as I mentioned in volume 1) have too big a hand in her daughters’ upbringing, to their detriment. Sir Thomas, on the other hand, is strict and – well, let’s talk about how it all plays out in volume 3. Here, though, he is kind to Fanny and wants well for her.
I have more to say on this, but I’ll leave it here as there are two ideas I’d like to share from my group’s discussion.
One of our members talked about the Australian critic John Wiltshire’s discussion of the disempowerment of women in his book Jane Austen and the body. He argues that caring for servants and the working class is a traditional role for genteel but otherwise disempowered woman, but that “this benevolence has a Janus face” because it replicates the inferior-superior social relationships that characterise the wider society. Mrs Norris, Wiltshire argues, “punishes others for her own dependency and frustration, whilst being able to hide this from herself in the guise of generosity to the recipients and loyal service to the system”.
Similarly, all at Mansfield Park have, through their adoption of poor Fanny Price “basked in the pleasure of benevolence”. But this has let Fanny become Mrs Norris’ victim. Both Fanny and Mrs Norris, says Wiltshire, are outsiders, “fringe-dwellers”; both are single, defenceless females who are “not part of the family except by courtesy. The one lives in the small White House, on the edge of the estate, the other in the little white attic at the top of the house”. Wiltshire argues that Fanny becomes the scapegoat upon whom Mrs Norris can “exercise her frustrations and baffled energies”. By scolding and punishing Fanny, she can “appease her own sense of functionless dependency and reaffirm the strictness of the social hierarchy which gives meaning to her life”. An interesting idea which I plan to think more about. It doesn’t excuse Mrs Norris, but it might explain her!
The other idea I want to share came from a young American visitor to our meeting. While she had read Austen and other classic authors, she said that her main reading, currently, is romance and general fiction. So, as she was reading Mansfield Park, she looked for tropes common to the romance genre. And, she found two significant ones, which could cement Austen’s reputation as the mother of the romance genre! The first trope is the idea of friends (or, here, cousins) becoming lovers, and the other is the romantic heroine’s belief that she’s “not like other girls”. She’s not as pretty, not as outgoing, and so on, as her rivals. Fanny makes this sort of observation in a discussion with Edmund about how she likes hearing Sir Thomas talk about the West Indies. She says she is “graver than other people” and concludes:
… but then I am unlike other people, I dare say.
I loved this insight from a first-time reader of the novel.
So much more to say … but there will be more opportunities to talk Austen, I dare say! Meanwhile, thoughts?
Whispering Gums 
I have a small Spaniard to throw into the works, ST – and it springs, of course, from that which is going on in my own life …
Lady Bertram, imo, shows signs of dementia.
OTY.
Yes, perhaps, MR. I’ll research that theory. There are many, including laudanum but there’s also this one from Pauline Beard (JASNA’s Persuasions), “Over-stimulated by sexual activity in the past, Lady Bertram’s system has been undermined and debilitated; as a result, in her older, possibly menopausal years, she is capable only of lying on the sofa and caring for her lapdog, rather than fulfilling her central duty as responsible mother.” Based on some 19th century ideas!
We read that there was dementia in the 18th and 19th centuries, and I think that many of the silly, selfish old lady tales – I don’t mean just Austen’s – possibly and in fact probably reflect it.
And in Lady Betram’s case, I’d explain her “sexual activity in the past” as having led to it now, as having been “over-stimulated” by it would certainly be outside the norm in those times.
All fair points MR. Of course I appreciate there was dementia then. There’s always been dementia one has to assume.
I think all this conjecture is a bit of fun. But, generally, I don’t pathologise characters outside of what the author tells us, because if a character’s condition is important to our understanding of that character, the author will tell us? This is a fine line, though, I realise, as we always try to understand characters and to do that we read into the text don’t we.
This is one of Austen’s books I have not read. I like the idea of doing a slow read of it with others.
Oh, I missed this yesterday Pam. It’s well-worth reading. Some don’t like it, but there are those who see it as her “most profound” book. It’s more earnest than her first two, and she knew it, but good for her, I say, for not sticking with sparkle! (As much as we love Elizabeth and Darcy!)
Typically, the “not like other girls” trope is used to show how a woman is not a lemming, but a unique thinker. Oftentimes, the joke is that this “unique” young woman is like every outsider ever. I’ve never seen a “not like other girls” girl view herself in a negative fashion. It’s an interesting argument, but I have not read Mansfield Park, so I don’t know. I do like that your group has different generations of readers to bring their perspectives to the table. From the covers, it looks like there are 9 of you!
Thanks Melanie… I’m not sure whether our visitor saw it as entirely negative though those two off-the-cuff examples could doubd that way. I’m afraid that our group is mostly quite old, as in rarely do we have anyone under 65! But it happens sometimes and we like it. That pic of covers was taken last time we discussed the book, about ten years ago. There’s about 12 in our group with an average of 8 at any one meeting. I love that you counted the covers.
9 to 12 is still a lot! I attended a book club this weekend that had 7 total, and I was surprised. It’s hard to keep consistent participants who say something more than “I liked it.”
It can be but that’s not usually an issue with Jane Austen lovers. We usually have too much to say!! In my general reading group there’s more variety and it can vary with the book a bit, but it’s very rare to not get something more than “I did (or didn’t) like it” from each of us over the course of the evening. That group is currently 12, but mostly 8-10 turn up (except maybe in winter when people start scattering to warmer climes for holidays. Then we sometimes only get 6 or 7).
I have the complete Jane Austen in Audible. I think I am going to have to listen to MP to be able to comment sensibly. (I don’t agree with M-R. Sorry! There are pretty, silly women all through JA. They can’t all have dementia. I think it is more a comment on what many men look for in their wives.)
I’m more inclined to agree with you Bill re Lady B. We know for a fact the Mr Bennet was swayed by a pretty face, and in the first para we are told that “Miss Maria Ward, with only £7000, had the good luck to captivate Sir Thomas Bertram”. Also, we are told that from the start, really, that she had “a temper remarkably easy and indolent”. It seems that Sir Thomas just accepts it, unlike Mr B who is frustrated by his pretty wife!
The trope “not like other girls” from modern day romance novels is an fascinating way to look at Fanny in Mansfield Park. I agree that many characters in romance novels are not as unique as they think they are, but Fanny truly is not like other girls in that she is not taken in by Henry’s “love bombing” tactics. Fanny must know that she is on the fringes of society and is therefore an easy target for a predator like Henry. She sees through his gaslighting even when the people around her, such Sir Thomas, are blind to it. Jane Austen’s insight into gaslighting and predatory behavior is spot on even now.
Thanks Carolyn… I like this. It’s fascinating how writers in the past might not use the terms we use now – how could they – but the behaviours haven’t changed have they?
The other romantic trope is having another man (less suitable of course) fall in love with the heroine for a while so the best friend/cousin/boy next door sees her finally as a love interest and not just a best friend.
I saved thinking about a response to your post until 3am, when I knew I would be waking up to think about all the things still left to be done for our imminent move! When I finally caught myself in the act, I had Mansfield Park up my sleeve to switch gears 🙂
Haha, Brona … I’m with you in spirit. Yes, true. A significant romantic trope.
This morning at 3am I had a really insightful thought abiut JA’s use of nature and gardens in her stories…but it’s gone now 😀
I hate those midnight lightbulbs that disappear! I will probably return… Sometime…
I always feel so sorry for Fanny when it comes to part where Henry decides to make her love him and then he ends up falling in love with Fanny, the whole while completely baffled over why she doesn’t reciprocate.
Really interesting group member contributions regarding Mrs. Norris and Fanny and also the romance tropes.
Thanks Stefanie. Yes. I agree. He’s so oblivious to her values and needs but he does genuinely love her – in his own way.
The discussion was great.
This really isn’t related, only on the thinnest of threads with classic women writers’ stories, but I just watched “To Walk Invisible” (as a rental, it was originally a BBC production, I believe?) which is a two-hour film about the period in the Bronte sisters’ lives just when they came upon the idea to submit their writing under male pseduonyms and all the other stuff that was actually going on in their lives around that, details which impacted their decision-making (finances, instability with their father and brother, etc.). It was such an interesting reminder of why classic themes endure.
I haven’t heard of that Marcie, but it sounds something worth looking out for. Who of us who loves literature wouldn’t be interested in that story?
I rented via hoopla, which is an online streaming service available via public libraries (both it and Kanopy are available to some Australian library patrons too, but maybe not all), but there are also previews and scenes available online: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/shows/to-walk-invisible-the-bronte-sisters/ Although PBS can be tricky with broadcast rights, so I’m not sure if these videos would play over there. And, anyway, if you couldn’t see the film, it might be like teasing to watch just two minutes. hee hee #sorrynotsorry
thanks, Marcie. I do have access to Kanopy so will check it out.
Not on Kanopy… And I can’t seem to find it access to Hoopla for me. As you say geo-restriction could very well make unavailable anyhow. I will check your link later – am waiting for a train to Melbourne right now!