The Improvement of the Estate: A Study of Jane Austen's Novels

Table of contents :
Introduction: some critical and literary contexts
1 Mansfield Park: Jane Austen's grounds of being
2 Aspects of Northanger Abbey and Sense and Sensibility
3 Pride and Prejudice: the reconstitution of society
4 Emma and the dangers of individualism
5 Persuasion: the estate abandoned
Postscript: Sanditon

Citation preview


f?.) J, ,.,.



U R C.. , \ ~-> i!r(



- /\_

chap ter 1, some what altere d and expan ded, is repri nted from Ninet eenth Cenw .ry Fictio n, 26 Gune 1971), 25-48 , by perm ission of the Rege nts of the Universit y of Calif ornia . Quot ation s from D. H. Lawr ence, A Prop os of "Lad y OUltl erley' s Lover ," are repri nted by permi ssion of Laure nce Pollin ger Ltd. and the EMat e of the Late Mrs. Fried a Lawr ence; ·willi am Hein eman n Ltd.; and Rand om Hous e, Inc.

/ Copy right © 1971 by the .John s Hopk ins Press All rights reserv ed. ~o part of this book may be repro duced or trans mitte d in any form or by any mean s, ). But even if the lack of parental direction is considered partly responsible for Emma's individualism, it is by no means a wholly adequate explanation. As is true of ·Marianne Dashwood and Elizabeth Rennet before her, Emma's self-assertion is a characteristic inherent in her nature which has been given license rather than brought into being by her father's


The Improvement of the Estate

incompetence. Emma glories in her freedom to deftne her world outward from a center of self, yet we are to be aware of how closely she comes to fragmenting the little world of Highbury with her "schemes" and of how heinously she fails in her social respon· sibility when she insults Miss Bates on Box Hill. Against the regulated hatred, the detached irony, and the subversive morality that much recent criticism has stressed, it is neces· sary to take more seriously a Jane Austen "thoroughly religious and devout," who has the additional "merit . . . of being evidently a Christian writer." 8 In this connection it is appropriate to mention one important response to deprivation that is dramatized in Jane Austen's novels which seldom finds its way into critical commentary. At times of greatest distress the "reduced" self in Jane Austen's fiction is apt to fall back on its "resources," an idea which suggests a Christian stoicism, an inner resilience in the [ace of adversity. Elinor Dashwood, Fanny Price, and Anne Elliot all at times ap· proach a kind of Christian heroism which recognizes that, whatever the distresses of the moment, this world is not after all the place of ultimate reward. Such a tone, genuine enough when it is sounded, is never of course dominant in Jane Austen's fiction; her religion, as Arch· bishop Whately first noted, is not obtrusive. Moreover, the isolation and, often, real despair that her heroines experience is followed by a reinstatement into society. After dispossession comes possession, as each heroine in the novels (with the significant exception of Anne Elliot) is finally located in a properly organized space for her socially responsible activity, in a "suitable, becoming, characteristic situation" (E, 358) such as Donwell Abbey, Delaford, Pembcrlcy, or the Mansfield parsonage. The typical Austen plot may move in the direction of isolation and subjectivism, but in the end there is a rapprochemen t between self and society. This formal relocation of the individual protagonist in society is perhaps what the "subversive" critics find hardest to reconcile with s The first quotation is from Henry Austen's admittedly panegyrical "Biq· graphical Notice of the Author," included in the posthumous edition of Persuasion (1818); the second is from Archbishop Whately's unsigned review of Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, in Quarterly Review, 24 (Jan. 1821), 35246. Both pieces are collected in Critical Heritage. Among modern critics, C. S. Lewis, in "A Note on Jane Austen," F..uays in Criticism, 4 (Oct. 1954), 35g--']1, most clearly recognizes "the religious background of the author's ethical position."

Introduc Uon


their view of Jane Austen as an author who commit s a covert assault on society's values. Often, it appears , her plot resoluti ons are con· sidered as acts of "bad faith," as refusals to accept the respons ibility of her intuitio ns or the implica tions of her "origin al choice." She is a heretic to her own early 1nguin Books, 1g66). In additio n to these articles , Avrom l'leishm an's compre hensive monog raph, A Rendin g of " ield Park": An E.uay in Critical Synthes is (Minne apolis: Univers ity of Minnes ota Press, 1967), is both useful ami provoca tive.


Mansfield Parh: Jane Austen's Grounds of Being

obedience" may be imposed. 2 Any attempt to consider the novel as central to Jane Austen's thought-not the "counter-truth" that even such a sympathetic critic as \Valton Litz feels it to be-must take these two factors into account. It must understand, that is, why the rejected Mary Crawford is not "in every detail the exact counterpart of .Elizabeth Bennet" in Pride and Prejudice, and why the endogamous marriage of Fanny and Edmund is j ustified:q A critic need not seek to defend a certain lack of aesthetic tact that is to be marked in the concluding chapters: iVIary Crawford's underlying viciousness, foreshadowed in her earlier words and actions, is somewhat too crudely brought to the surface, her "evil" is given too infernal a guise. Rut to go beyond a recognition of a certain artistic failure, as Farrer and others have done, and discover moral dishonesty at the center of the book, is to rnisunderstand Jane Austen's fundamental intuitions about individual character and society and to fail to realize that her moral fervor in this novel is called forth (and largely justified) by the seriousness of her fictional issues. The issues at stake in Mansfield Park, though they are of more crucial moment, are not different in kind from those treated in the earlier novels. Here, as elsewhere, .Jane Austen is concerned with defining a proper relation between the individual and society, but whereas in a novel like Pride and Prejudice this relation could be expressed in terms of a positive marriage between characters whose initial attitudes were widely opposed, in Mansfield Park such a union would have negative force. In Pride and Prejudice the representatives of individuality (Elizabeth) and of society (Darcy) are both fundamentally right-minded, however much danger initially exists that their respective positions may become intractable. Mutual concessions and contributions permit a dynamic integration of self and society, of energy and culture. In Mansfield Park, by contrast, those who represent individuality (the Crawfords) are shown to be crucially suspect, while those who represent, or should z Marvin Mudrick, ]a,1e Austen: Irony as Defense and Disco-uery (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952), p. 165. :Following Farrer, Mudrick sees Ma,sfield Park as the "triumph of gentility." But even devoted Janeites share the wish that the novel had ended with a double wedding. Sec, for example, G. B. Sterne, "The Mansfield Park Quartette," in Speaking of .Jane Austen (New York: Harper, 1944). 3 Quoted phrase from Lionel Trilling, "A Portrait of Western :\Jan:· The Listener, 49 (11 June 1953), 970.

The Imp rove men t of the E.\·lu.te


repr esen t, society in the nov el (the Ber tram s) are with out exce ptio n defi cien t. Far £rom desc ribin g a mut ual grow th of edu cati on on the part of opp osed indi vidu als, the plot of Man sfiel d Park reve als an inue asin g mor al conf usio n in the min ds of ever yon e exce pt Fan ny Pric e, and ther e can be littl e sup port add uced from the text to argu e for a dial ecti cal end ing o£ the kind that is foun d in Prid e and Prejudice. Not only wou ld mar riag es betw een Edm und Ber tram and Mar y Cra wfo rd and betw een Fan ny Pric e and Hen ry Cra wfo rd mak e non sens e of all the sym boli c for"· '· ... -low ing o£ the actu al ending, but, them atic ally , they wou ld requ ·- a trad ition al mor ality to 4 capi tula te to rela tivis m, and "soc iety " tu surr end er to "self. " Wh at are the thre ats pose d by the Craw !ord s, and how are they reve aled ? In answ erin g these que stio ns one is able , I beli eve, not only to just ify the reso lutio n of Man sfiel d Par k but to iden tify the pers isten t conc erns of Jane Aus ten's ficti onal care er. One may begi n, not with the sym boli cally reso nan t epis ode of the thea trica ls hut with an exam inat ion of a mot if of near er app lica tion to the title of the novel, the mot if of esta te imp rove men ts. Onl y in the con text of "im prov eme nt" can the larg er sign ifica nce o£ the play be und erstoo d and the func tion o£ Fan ny Pric e, a curi ousl y atyp ical hero ine in man y resp ects , be appr ecia ted.


Jane Aus ten's fiction, esta tes £un ctio n not only ~ :!;. as the setti ngs of adio n but as inde xes to the char acte r and social resp onsi bilit y of thei r own ers. Thu s in Pride and Prej udic e the aest heti c goo d sense that is evid ent in the land scap e of Pem berley ("ne ithe r form al, nor falsely ado rned " [245]) perm its the read er (and Eliz abet h) to infe r the fund ame ntal wor th of Dar cy's soci al and ethi cal char acte r, whi le in Emm a Don wel l Abb ey, with its THR OUG HOU T

g Fann y to The poin t is stren gthe ned when one recal ls that Edm und, in urgin r bein g so [ar acce pt Craw ford' s prop osal, argu es for a unio n of oppo sites : "You prob abili ty of unlik e, :Fanny, does not in the smal lest degr ee make again st the r a favo urab le your happ incs..d Elizabeth"s largely admirable inclividualism. 2 ·-~

__._, ··-~

That Pride and Prejudice achieves an ideal relation between the individual and society seems now to be generally agreed. Cf. Lionel Trilling's succinct summary of the novel's thesis: "a formal rhetoric, traditional and rigorous, must fmd a way to accommodate a female vivacity, which in turn must recognile the principled demands of the strict." male SY'ntax" (The oppositlg Self [New York: Viking Press, 1955], p. 222). Samuel Kliger's brilliant article, "Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice in the Eighteenth-Centu ry ~-lode," Univenity of Toronto Quarterly, 16 (July 1947). 357-70, sets the novel in the context of the history of ideas, by showing how the various relationships of the novel depend upon com· monplace antitheses of ethical and aesthetic debate-art and nature, the rules and originality-the impulse of the whole being toward a reconciliation of extremes and the establishment of a normative mean. Noting the "Whig" resonance of the hero's name, Donald J. Greene, in "Jane Austen and lhe Peerage," PMLA, 68 (Dec. 1953), 1017-31, argues for a historical rapprochement, suggesting as a ·:unifying thesis" of the novel (and of Jane Austm's fiction) "the rise of the middle class, a process of which the middle class itself became acutely conscious when Pitt, in effect, overthrew the entrenched political power of the Whig aristocracy in 1784." ~Not everyone would agree that Pride and Prejudice is a novel of the heroine's education. Marvin Mudrick, for example, finds Elizabeth's attitudes admirable and. .normative: "Like Mary Crawford later, Elizabeth is a recognizable and . -..,stnkmg aspect of her author" (lane Austen: hony as Defense and DIScovery [PriO.Ceton: hinceton University Press, 1952], p. 120). There is, Mudrick argues, "no compulsion-pers onal, thematic, or moral-toward denying the heroine her own powers of judgment" (p. 107). But such a reading ignores the heroine's own gradual awareness of the excesses of her individualism. 1



Pride and Prejudice: The Reconstitution of Society

time the inad~quacy of the her«?,.ine's outlook is concealed, as the narrative strategy emphasizes its undoubted virtues. Elizabeth's morality, when seen in action, is praiseworthy. On learning that her sister is iJI at Netherfield, and discovering that the carriage is not to be had, she walks the three miles to Bingley's house, ".iu~ing over stUes and spriu{Ing over puddles with impatient activity, and fin;h physically restricted by his wound, he is constantly employed: "He drew, he varnished, he carpentered , he glued; he made toys for the children, he fashioned new netting-nee dles and pins with improveme nts; and if every thing else was done, sat down lo his large fishing-net at one corner of the room" (gg). Harville exemplifies what Mrs. Smith only seems to exemplify, the ability to find employmen t that will carry the mind out of itself. And of all responses in the novel, his is closest ';> • to Anne's and, Anne's excluded, his is the response nearest to Jane · Austen's heart.


The Improvement of the Estate

o[ perfection," Jane Austen wrote not long hefore her death in a letter to her niece Caroline, "make me sick & wicked," and she went on to admit that the heroine of her last novel was "almost too good" for her (L, 486-87). Hut in insisting on the essentially Christian virtue of Anne Elliot, one is not so much opposing her author's retrospective opinion of her creation (Jane Austen is, after all, speaking for effect) as going against a rather common critical view of Persuasion's heroine. Most would agree that, of all the heroines, Anne is intended to come nearest to perfection and is treated with the l.~~~tjr9I1,.Y; hut for not a few readers her character is impaired hy her lack of a "light and bright and sparkling" quality and, especially, by what is considered her early failure of nerve in the breaking of her engagement to Wentworth. Though her refusal precedes the novel proper, its continuing conse'l_uences saturate the emotional atmosphere of the book and the • memory of the act lingers in the consciousness of the two central characters. Young, motherless, and without benefit of paternal approval, Anne had at the age of nineteen acceded to the "persuasion" of her only real friend, Lady Russell, not to continue what the latter considered to be an imprudent engagement. For some critics she erred badly. D. W. Harding may be taken to summarize a fairly general opinion, when he writes of Anne's "lapse from her own standard, in letting worldly prudence outweigh love and true • • esteem for personal qualities.':,a..Anne nearly throws away her chance of happiness, and the novel traces the bTfadual stages whereby she wins back Wentworth's love and becomes aware of her initial error. The trouble with such a reading is that it misreads Anne's spiritual progress in the novel (she undergoes no radical change of "PICTIJRES

Sec Ha · · introduction to his edition of Pcrstta~JC!_n (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1965), . g. 1Remaining faithful to his celebrated essay, "Regulated Hatred: An Aspect oft ~Work of Jane Austen," Scrutiny, 8 (\farch, 1940), Harding considers that Jane Austen in Persua~ion reveals a dislike for "the sodety in which she seemed comfortably embedded," and that the "conflict" in the novel is "between elderly prudence and the romantic love of two young people." Per contra, I shall argue that Anne's initial decision is not so unequivocally misguid-room to be kept from silence by the efforts of others, to Miss D. at Lady D.'s Elbow, listening & talking with smiling attentio n or solicitou s eagernes s, was very striking -and very amusin g-or very melanch oly, just as Satire or Morality

might prevaiL (396) In this descrip tion, perhaps , we come closest to the special quality of Jane Austen' s respons e in Sandito n. This is a world, it would seem, so far remove d from traditio nal ground s of moral action that its retrieva l through former fictiona l means is no longer possible , a world in which the heroine , though she remains a fundam entally moral figure, can no longer be an agent of so_ci.aJ.repewal. To adopt '7 ' n condem to be would stance moral ingly unswerv an society in this oneself to a continu ally melanc holic recogni tion of the disparit y between moral ideal and social fact. Rather than this, "satire, " or the ability to remain detache d, even amused , in the face of ubiquitous vanity, become s an accepta ble respons e. In the earlier novels, the role of p_~~q.toT ab ex_l!:_a had been criticiz ed-whe n it appeare d,


The lrnpm veme nt of the Estalr'

for exam ple, in the witty disen gage ment of Henr y Tiln ey, or the priva te uitic isms o[ Eliza beth Benn et In Sand iton, by contr ast, an attit~_~9:~---~.L~~~~~cl~~~.:~.~~t seems necessary; both hero ine and auth or have to add to their rnora l perc eptio ns a leave n of ironi cal disengage ment if they are to retai n their balan ce in a radic ally unsta ble society. As Char lotte is able to see in Esth er's char acter both what is mora lly repre hens ible and yet!Y.-~~l!s~ng, so Jane Aust en views 1\lr. Park er's proje cts both as a perv ersio n of his true social rule and yet as cause fC?r hum or. Such a posit ion of ironi c detac hmen t is not, howe ver, .'"pace Profe ssor Mud rick, the ultim ate liber ation of an irony always prese nt but prev iousl y unde r the cens orshi p of conv entio nal pressures. Rath er, it is a posit ion into whic h Jane Aust en h~.)Ken drive n by the unto ward cours e her social worl d has taken \ 6 }.

·; '-,





of Sand iton differs from prev ious hero ines in the degre e of her detac hmen t, Sidn ey Park er, the prob able hero of the piece, is a stran gely incon siste nt figure whos e char acter as it is adum brate d in the fragm ent gives little clue to the futur e prog ress o[ the work . His entra nce, in the last chap ter, has been caref ully prep ared by vario us acco unts of him from 11r. and 1\frs. Park er and, as with Fran k Chur chill in Fmm a, we have a good deal of infor mati on abou t him befo re he arriv es on the scene. Muc h of this infor mati on suggests his speci al social and intel lectu al posit ion. lie is inde pend ently prov ided for "by colla teral Inhe ritan ce" (371), whic h expl ains his "nea t equi page & fashi onab le air" (382). Mr. Park er tells Char lotte that he is "a very clever Youn g Man ," who is "priv ilege d by supe rior abili ties or spiri ts to say anyt hing " (382). Tha t he shou ld laug h at his elder broth er's "Imp rove men ts" (382) and his youn ger broth er's hypo chon dria (385) suggest his discr imin a· tion. Tha t he wou ld fmd "som ethin g ente rtain ing" in Dian a Park er's lette r (388) is-g iven the mani fest self- revel ation o[ her rem arks no more than we coul d expe ct from a ratio nal perso n. Yet, even here, perh aps, his wit is not abov e suspi cion. Cert ainly , as we know IF THE

s Marv in Mudr ick, in Jane Auste n: Irony as Defense and Di.~covery (Princ eton: Princ eton llni-vc rsity Press, 1952), entitl es his chapt er on Sanditun "The Liber ation of Irony ."

Postscript: Sand iton


from Prid e and l'reju dice, laug hter need not be a norm ative attitude, and, if Sidney's wit bears any resem blanc e to the cynic al varie ty emb odie d in Mr. Benn et (who also took grea t pleas ure in reading stup id letter s), his char acter is in some doub t. Othe r pieces of inform ation , at any rate, revea l furth er grou nds for suspi cion. Like both his broth ers and othe r dubi ous chara cters in Jane Aust en's fiction, he )~as no profe ssion ; like Wick ham and Craw ford he is distu rbing ly III()bil,e. "here & there & every wher e" (38•). parti cipat ing in, rathe r than oppo sing "the spiri t of restless activ ity" that chara cteti zes the new society. Anot her mark again st him, at least if the them es of earli er novels still obta in, is that he is a poor lette rwrite r: "Not a line from Sidn ey," in respo nse to Mr. Park er's lette r anno unci ng the accid ent (385). Fina lly, when he arriv es at last in Sand iton, he comes, like Chur chill to High bury , unex pecte dly and with no assur ance of a long stay. Such indic ation s of his possi ble irres pons ibilit y notw ithst andi ng, it seems reaso nabl e to pred ict that Sidn ey Park er is the hero of the piece, desti ned for marr iage to Char lotte . 7 Perh aps, like Henr y Tiln ey, also lively, discr imin ating , "wit h a decid ed air of Ease & Fash ion," he woul d have had his attitu de of witty disen gage ment modi fied in due course. Even if this were to happ en, howe ver, it is difficult to see what effect his deve lopin g char acter and marr iage to Char lotte woul d have had on the total mean ing of the finished nove l. Cert ainly there seems little possi bility of a marr iage betw een this mob ile and witty hero and this mora l but detac hed hero ine prov iding a fixed mora l cente r arou nd whi ch-i n the man ner of earli er novels up to Pers uasi on-o ther less satis facto ry marr iages wou ld fall into place. A brief comp ariso n with Jane Aust en's othe r subs tanti al fragm ent, The T¥ats ons (18o5?) will estab lish the uniq uely unce rtain statu s of Sa.nditon's plot and them atic traje ctory . Not only docs The JValsons seem "alm ost to fores hado w its own fulfi lmen t," in a way that Sand iton fails to do, but it also fores hado ws a successful resol ution in whic h, throu gh the hero ine's deve lopin g caree r and final marriage , its fictionrll society wou ld have been prop erly reco nstit uted 1

It is, howev er, possib le that Sidne y is the secret lover of Clara Brcr~ton, ~is

relati on to her bearin g resem bhmc c to !'rank Churc hill's to Jane Fatrfa x. In Emma . For intere sting conje ctures about Sidne y's possible role, see Mudn ck, Irony as Defen u, pp. 251-5 2, and South am, Litera ry Manu script s, pp. llg---2 2.

The Imp rov eme nt of the Esta te


on firm mor al grounds.~ The JVatsons, I am con vin ced , was give n up for oth er tha n arti stic reas ons , and the frag men t we hav e, tho ugh adm itte dly som ewh at "bl eak " in its dep icti on of society, has wit hin it the nece55ary the mat ic imp ulse s to allo w for the cor rec tion of its wor ld. 9 Wi th a nar rati ve eco nom y tha t has bee n just ly cele bra ted, Jan e Aus ten in the earl y scenes of The TVa tson s des crib es a com ple x and tens e soc ial world. To the "wi nte r assembly in the Tow n of D. in Sur ry" (MW , 314) com e a num ber of fam ilie s and figures sub tly difi ere ntia tcd in social stat us: the rich and title d Osb orn es from the Cas tle; the Edw ards es, wel l esta blis hed in tow n, wit h a soli d hou se and a com fort abl e inco me, mad e in trad e; the ir riva ls, the Tom lins ons (the hus ban d bei ng the ban ker of the tow n); the han dsom e but irre spo nsib le Tom 1\fusgrave, wit h £8oo to £yoo a yea r; and Em ma "\Vatson her self , who se pos itio n and rela tion to her fam ily are bot h unc erta in. Bro ugh t up sep arat ely from her bro the rs and sisters \\'ith a rich unc le and aun t, Em ma has bee n forced to retu rn to her fam ily by her unc le's dea th and her aun t's subseque nt remarriag-e. The fam ily to whi ch she retu rns is itse lf a fragmen ted and neu roti c stru ctu re, refl ecti ng sev eral asp ects of the soc ial con diti on as a who le. Rur al, aml poo r for the ir stat ion in life (the Wa tson s, unl ike the Edw ard ses, hav e no carr iage ), they are rem inis cen t of sever(!_} oth er fam ilie s in Jan e Aus ten 's fiction. The fath er, like Mr. 'Vo odh ous e in Em ma, is a sen ile val etu din aria n, and Em ma' s thre e unm arri ed sisters hav e sim ilar pro ble ms to tho se of the Ben net sisters in Pri de and Pre jud ice. Em ma' s two bro the rs, how eve r, give gre ater bre adt h to the social pic ture . Rob ert, the elde r, has mar ried "th e onl y dau ght er of the Att orn ey to who m he had bee n Cle rk, wit h a fort une of six tho usa nd pou nds " (349), and in the com pan y of his wife from Cro ydo n forms a par tne rsh ip alm ost as des pica ble as tha t of the Joh n Das h woo ds in Sense and Sen sibi lity or the Elto ns in Em ma. Sam, the you nge r bro the r, is a surgeon~not : Quo ted phra se from Mar y Lasc elles , jane Aus ten and Iler Art (Ox ford Oxf ord Univ ersit y Pres s, 1939). p. 39· knes s of the soci:1l pict ure, 9 Sou tham spea ks of "the almo st unre liev ed blea sons ; and the aspe rity of the satire:" (Lit emr y l\Ian uscr ipts, p. 63) in The Wat a Miss Lasc elles writ es that Jane Aus ten seem s here "to he stru ggli ng with ten pecu liar oppr essi on, a stiff ness and heav ines s that thre aten her style " (jan e Aus frag and Her Art, pp. gg-· wo). Both criti cs seem to me to react a very prom isin g men t too hars hly. 8


Pos tscr ipt: San di ton

yet a resp ecta ble pro fes sio n-a nd he is in lo\'C wit h Ma ry Edw ard s. His suit is not pro spe ring , how eve r, since her par ents , if they can cur e her of her attr acti on to arm y officers, wis h her to mar ry one of the Tom lins on sons. Em ma' s role in this wor ld bea rs som e rese mbl anc e to Cha rlot te's in San dito n; like Cha rlot te, Em ma ofte n app ear s as a neu tral observ er of the selfishness and hyp ocr isy of her society. Unl ike Cha rlot te, how eve r, Em ma is a sign ific antl y mo ral age nt bot h wit hin her fam ily and in the larg er con tex t of her society. He r gen ero us sug ges tion to Eliz abe th tha t she tak e her plac e at the asse mbl y convinces Eliz abe th of her goo d nat ure (320), and the "tra nqu il & affe ctio nate inte rco urs e of the two Sisters" (348) tha t ens ues pro mis es som e imp rov eme nt in a fam ily hith erto div ide d by sisterly ran cor and envy. Em ma' s mos t imp orta nt fun ctio n as a mo ral age nt, how eve r, occ urs at the ball , in a sett ing whi ch mo st vivi dly suggests a society div ide d, like the fam ily gro ups and the dan cers ther e, into "set s" and "cir cles ." Bet wee n the Edw ard ses and the Tom lins ons , who , no dou bt by virt ue of the ir imp orta nce in the tow n, occ upy the fireplace, a "ve ry stiff mee ting " ensues. Sep ara te from these riva ls are "th ree or fou r Officers ... pas sing in & out from the adj oin ing card -roo m." Aff able in the cor rido r of the Inn , "in a mo rnin g dress & Boo ts" (327) is Tom Mu sgra ve, ann oun cin g in his lack of ent husiasm for the occ asio n a pre sum ptiv e clai m to a hig her social stat us, to an acq uai nta nce wit h the hab its and out loo k of the "Gr eat Peo ple " (323) at the Cas tle. Las t on the scene com e the aris tocr atic Osb orn es, stiffly awa re of the ir sup erio rity , enc lose d like the oth er fam ilie s wit hin the bou nda ry of the ir "se t." In this tense atm osp her e Em ma' s acti on in dan cin g wit h you ng Cha rles Bla ke, whe n he is aba ndo ned by 1\fiss Osb orn e for a mo re attr acti ve par tne r, has an imm ens e effect. Jt is, of cou rse, an act of cha rity , stem min g from an inn ate goo d nat ure : "Em ma did not thin k, or reflect; she felt &: acte d" (330). Bu t it is also an exe mp lary act (like Kni ght ley' s sim ilar ges ture whe n he dan ces wit h Har riet in Em ma ) which, in cros sing the bou nda ries bet wee n gro ups . brin gs social fact and mo ral idea l tog ethe r. Th e act is wit nes sed by the thre e imp otta nt mal e cha racters of the nov el, To m J\;fusgrave, Lor d Osb orn e, and Mr. How ard , all of who m wil l the rea fter mak e ove rtur es to Em ma. Tom 1\I usgrav e wil l disc ove r tha t she is not , like her sisters, imm edi atel y sus cep tibl e to his cha rms (she refuses his offer to dan ce at the ball ;


The lmprovn nent of the Estate

later, to his even greater discomf iture, she refuses his offer of conveyance home). Lord Osborn e, after the failure of his interme diary, will himself approac h her and, like Darcy at Hunsfo rd, discove r that his arrogan t manner s are not of much avail in face of the heroine 's natural good breedin g and firm indepen dence. l\Joreover, though he is not, like Darcy, finally to win her hand, he is to be educate d in his outlook , a develop ment already evident in the exchange he has with Emma at Stanton . The subject in questio n is whethe r Emma has the inclinat ion and the means to ride. Emma's blunt respons e-"Fem ale Econom y will do a great deal my Lord, but it cannot turn a small income into a large one" (346)-s ilences Lord Osborn e: Her manner had been neither sententi ous nor sarcastic, but there was a somethi ng in it's [sicJ mild seriousness, as well as in the words themselv es which made his Lordship think;- and when he addresse d her again, it was with a degree of conside nte propriet y, totally unlike the half-awk ward, half-fear less stile of his former remarks .-Tt was a new thing with him to wish to please a woman; it was the first time that he had ner felt what was due to a woman, in Emma's situatio n.-But as he wanted neither Sense nor a good dispositi on, he did not feel it without effect. (346)

That Mr. Howard 's future courtsh ip will be more successful than the overtur es of Musgra ve and Lord Osborn e, we do not really need family traditio n to tell us. Unlike Sidney Parker, he has no suspicious characte ristics. All that can possibly be held against him is his failure to modify the pride ol Lord Osborn e and his lamily, and by refusing 1\fiss Osborn e, as we may assume he will, even this failure will be remove d. What we learn about him is uniform ly favorab le. His modesty and good sense are revealed , for exampl e, when he dances with Emma at the Ball (335), and his reporte d excellen ce as a preache r, a quality already discussed in chapter one of this study, is another mark in his favor. Admitte dly, much remaine d for Jane Austen to do, before her fictiona l society could be brough t through the marriag e of Emma and Mr. Howard to a stable and morally reconst ituted shape. Emma is left in the fragmen t shattere d by the unkind reflectio ns of her brother and discomp osed by the sudden arrival and double entendres of Tom Musgra ve. She is relieved , in going to her father's chambe r, to be "as little among them as possible ," to be "at peace


Postscript: Saruliton.

from the dreadful rnonificatio ns of unequal Society, & family Discord" (361). Furthermor e, if family tradition is right, she has still to suffer the on.leal of her falher's death and a subsequent stay with her brother and sister-in-law. That such a depressing prospect lies before her does not in itself, however, make the book "bleak" or explain its unfini:o.hed state. A period of social isolation is not uncommon for Austen heroines, and it is unlikely that Emma's stay at Croydon would have been any worse than Fanny's at Portsmouth . 'Vith the preparation s already made, it would not have been difficult to have Emma return to Dorking, meet Mr. Howard again, and be asked for her hand in marriage. \Vith this marriage we would have a union of worthy outlooks, akin perhaps to the union of Elinor Dashwood and Echvard Ferrars, or of Fanny Price and Edmund Bertram, a union, at any rate, which would have a morally centripetal eflect on the fictional world of the completed work. It is possible that other marriages would have followed, between Sam VVatson and I\Iiss Edwards, between .\Iusgrave and ·Margaret \\'atson (\Vickham' s marriage to Lydia docs just allow for this unlikely event). Certainly there would have been a funher chastening of l.ord Osborne's pride following Emma's refusal; and, through Emma's ability to act as a continuing moral example, the world of The TVaisons would, l think, have been reconstitut ed on hrmcr moral grounds, as new relations were opened between castle, town, and country, the Osbornes, Fdwanlses, and Watsons. When we return to Sa.nditnn, it is to rccogniLe that no such sanguine predictions are possible for this fragment. Although the arrivals of Sidney, his friends, the \Vest Indian heiress, Niiss Lambe, and the two husband-h unting 1\Tisses Beaufort promise to complicate the inheritance plot, and perhaps add to the mystery of C.lara Brereton, we cannot. predict with any certainty the future development of the work. That l\f r. Parker's speculation will result in financial disappoint ment, if not disaster, seems clear enough, but whether Lady Denham's fortune will suffer loss, too, we cannot say. That Arthur Parker will he roused from his lethargy to lay siege to one of the "1\.Iiss Beauforts seems reasonablv' certain. That Clara will successfully resist Sir Edward is surely probable, but 1\'hether she will engage in further liaisons, and with whom, is not at all clear. The greatest enigma, however, in a story that has "a deliberate and

meaningfu l enigma in almost every a~pect," surrounds the fate of the heroinc. 10 The uncertainty which invests the future of Sanditon and its heroine is to be explained, 1 suggest, by its lack of an ultimate locality, or estate, for Charlotte to inhabit. After Emma Watson leaves her aunt's home and loses her expectation s of being an heiress, .Jane Austen is still able to reserve for her-as she is for all her heroines until Anne Elliot-the possibility of an ultimate and secure place in society. As the wife of -:'Vfr. Howard, clergyman to the Osborne estate, Emma, we may conjecture, would have taken her place, in the finished work, in a stable society properly improved by her own moral character and actions. But for Charlotte Heywood no such stable society beckons. After she leaves her endosed, idyllic, but already slightly unreal home in Willingden , she enters an unstable world of shifting values, a world in which "every body must now 'move in a Cirde',-to the prevalence of which rotatory Motion, is perhaps to be attributed the Giddiness & false steps of many" (422). Old certainties arc left behind as surely as Mr. Parker's old residence has been replaced by Trahlgar House. Sanditon is a society so totally transforme d that inherited "grounds" can no longer support the individual, nor, conversely, can the individual any longer retrieve society from its errors, renew and invigorate time-tested and ultimately religious principles of being and action. The fragment's last scene takes on interesting symbolic significance in this connecrion . It describes a visit to Sanditon House paid by Mrs. Parker and Charlotte. Sanditon House has previously been described as the "last Building of form~r Days in that line of the Parish"(384 ). Now its appearance , as the two women approach, seems to suggest it as a possible source of value and order-ano ther Pcmberley or Donwell Abbey: "The road to Sanditon H. was a broad, handsome, planted approach, between fields, & conducting at the end of a qr of a mile through second Gates into the Grounds, which though not extensive had all the Beauty & Respectability which an abundance of very fine Timber could give" (426). But immediatel y following this description , replete with details which in former novels would have testified to the essential 10

Southam, Literary MamHcripts, p.


worth of the estate, Jane Austen provides a curiously insidious description of the gates and fence: These Entrance Gates were so much in a corner of the Grounds or Paddock, so near one of its Boundaries, that an outside fence was at first almost pressing on the road-till an angle here, & a curve there threw them to a better distance. The Fence was a proper Park paling in excellent condition; with dusters of fine Elms, or rows of old Thorns following its line almost every whcre.-Almost must be stipulated-for there were vacant spaces .... (4~6)

Is it too much to see in this asymmetrical and disjointed scene a symbolic representation of a once worthy society twisted into a troubling new shape? Perhaps not, for it is through one of the "vacant spaces" in the estate's "enclosure" that Charlotte "caught a glimpse over the pales of something \Vhite & 'Vomanish in the fteld on the other side;-it was something which immediately brought Miss B. into her head-& stepping to the pales, she saw indeed-& very decidedly, in spite of the Mist; Miss B seated . . . apparently very composedly-& Sir E. D. by her side" (4 26). As R. \V. Chapman perceived, "all the items of chiaroscuro-the mist, the treacherous fence, the ill-defined flutter of ribbons-add up to an effect which is as dearly deliberate as it is certainly novel." 11 1£ the estate in Jane Austen's last fragment has not yet Uisintegrated into a handful of dust, its grounds have been partly obscured by mist. The new world is "\'ery striking~and very amusing--or v~t :' melancholy, just as Satire or Morality might prevail." But in any case it is a world incapable of being redeemed through individual moral agency, or of being improved through fictional means. 11


jane Austen: Facts and Problerm (Oxford: At the Claretu.lon Press, 1948),



Abrams, M. H.,


Addison, Joseph, 1350 Adler, Alfred, 75 Aldridge, A. 0., 133n Allen, Mr.s. (NA), 84, 94 Amis, Kingsley, 6n, 61 Aquinas, Thomas, 240 Arnold, Matthew, "Dover Beach," 20 Austen, Anna, 33 Austen, Cassandra, 5411 Austen, Edward, 88


Austen, Frank, 88 Austt:n, Mrs. George, 88 Austen, Henry, 8n, 450, 88 Austen, James, 88 Austen, Jane: comparison with liclding, q, 27-28 (see also Fielding, Henry); comparison with Richardson, 14-20, qn, 26, 76, 76n, 84; in the context of eighteenth century fiction, to----:w, 14n, 23, 25; in the context of nineteenth century fiction, 2o-25; degradation, theme of, in fit:tion, 2-5; estate improvements as theme, 38-59 (see also Burke, Edmund; Cowper, William; Mansfield Park, estate improvements, theme of; Repton, Humphry) ; idea of profession in fiction, importance of, 61--7u, ttt-12, 13 1-32, •ss-so. 2o23, 202n; intermediate nature of her novels, 24-26; lc.ttcrs, 33· 34· 5411, 93n, 194; limitation of individual choice, 31-32; money, attitude to-

ward, 28-30, 83, 85--gt; and moral individualism, 31-32, 11g-21; moral standards, alleged class basis of, 30, q6, 146n, 153-55, 153I1I1; new directions in thought, 25-26, 18o-83, 18g, 210, 227--29; problem of perspectivism, awareness of, 121-25; relation of life to fiction, 411, s----6, 6n, 7711, 88; religion, allegiance to, 8, 26; and sentimental movement, g8-too, 1o6--g; society and traditional structures, allegiance to, 26-32, 73; spatial and temporal accuracy, 32-34; subject matter, 3o-3t; subjectivity, awareness of, 7-8, 2o-23, 149-50, 156-62; "subversive" criticism of, 5-10, 6n, gnn, 2g-3o; and sympathetic imagination, g8-too Austen-Leigh, James Edward, Memoir of Jane A us ten, 6n Austen-Leigh, Mary Augusta, Per$onaf Aspects of Jane Austen, 4511 Austen-Leigh, William and R. A., jane Austen: Her Life and Letters, 4511, 88n Babh, Howard S., 9n, 32, 62n, 130, 18211 Barish, .Jonas, 5911 Barrett, Eaton Stannard, q8n Bate, Walter Ja~:ksun, 2411, g8n, tofin Bates, Miss (E), 8, 77n, 147, •55-56, 164 , 168-7•, •73. qo-n Rates, Mrs. (F.), 170 Battcstin, Martin, 1411


Bennet, Elizabeth (PP), 3, 4n, 5, 7• 37-38, 42. 72, So, 113, 116--43, ugn, Ij8n, 147. ISS. IJ7, Iih, 204, 217, 222 Bennet, .Jane (PP), 5, ll6-q, 125, 137, 140, 142 B~nnt:t, Kitty (PP), •q. •son, 136 Benn~t. Lydia (PI'), 4n, 117, 126, 13o31, 130ll, 134· 136-39. 14~. 227 Bennet, Mary (PP), IIG-17, 126, 13011, 131• 13511, 137, 141-42 Bennet, Mr. (PP) 3n, 4n, 5, 87, uG-17, 128-3 1, 13on, 134-37, 148, 223 Bennet, ~lrs. (PP), 3n, 87, 116-q Ben wick, Captain (P), I flo, '9D--9', IY3· 197-9H. 200 Bngsou, Il~uri, 133. 136 Bettram, Edmund (AfP), ::n-sH, 41-42, 48-so. 52, 54-55, 58-76, 79· 95· 124, 148, 203-4> 227 Bertram, Julia (MP), 40, 55, 6o, 79 Bertram, Lady (MP), 58, 6o, 65, 72, 75-79 Bertram, ;\1aria (MP), 25, 30, 39, 49, so. 54-55· 6o, 7', 79· 86 Bertram, Sir Thomas (AIP), 5, 40, 5558, 6w, 71, 75-79, 86, 149· 185 B~rtram, Tom (MP), 25, 55-56, 58-59, 63. 66, 76. 79 Hingky, Charles (PP), 8, 86-87, ug, u::8-3o, 130n, 139, 142 Bingley, Miss (PP), 129-30, 13.1. 141 Blair, Hugh, "Eloquence of the Pulpit," 68, 70; l,er:tures on Rhetot·ic and Belles Lettres, 68n, 7011 Blake, Charles (The Watsons), 225 Booth, Wayne, 83, 16o, 161 Boulton, James T., 45n Bradbrook, Frank, gn, 1511, 39n, t.;Hn, q6n, t68n Bradbury, Malcolm, g1, 146, •son, 202n, 20j, 20311 Bradley, :F. H., 162n Brandon, Colonel (SS), go, 104, 111,

"3 Branton, Clarence L., 61n Brereton, Clara (Sanditon), !H7-IS, 227' 229

Bronte, Charlotte, Jane Eyre, 21 Bronte, Emily, Wuthering Height~-. ::I22

Brophy, Rrigid, 4n, 77n, 88n Brower, R~uben, 121, 127n Brown, Capability, 39, 4In, 43-41 Buckley, Jerome Hamilton, tg6n Burckhardt, Jacob, 15 Burke, Edmund, 24n, 35, 39n, 45-49, 4511, 53, 5H, 79, III, 115, 128-29, 128n, 12911, 132, 142, 18o, 18ti, 21fi, 21fin; biographical connection to Jane Austen, 4sn; definition of vanity, 186; personal qualities, importance of, 79; philosophy of improvement, 35, 4648, 115; relation of individual to authority, 142; respect for tradition, 53· 58, lit, 128, 12811, 129, 18o; speculation, reference to, 216; use of house and estate metaphors, 4.1-46; use of pride and prejudice, 12gn; works: Letter to a Member of the National Assembly, 186; "A Letter to \Villiam Elliot, Esq.," 79, 142; "A Plan for the Better Security of Civil and Other Establishments," 12gn; Reflections vn the Revolution in Fmt~ce, 35, 45-48, 53· III, II[i, 12R, 128n, 129, 142, t8o, 216 Burney, Fanny, 14n, 126n; Camilla, 103 Burns, Robert, 220 Burrows, J. F., 16o, 16on, 162n, 167n Butler, Bishop Joseph, 106 Butler, Samuel, The Way of All Flesh, 20

Campbell, Colonel (E), 160, 169-170 Campbell, Mrs. (E), 160 Canavan, t"rancis P., 46, 4711 Carew, Thomas, "To My :Friend G. N. from \Vrest," 50 Carroll, David R., fi3 Cary, Joyce, Tv Be a Pilgrim, 35 Chapman, R. W., 32, 3311, 3911, 41, 51, 5II1, 52n, 202n, 229 Chaucer, Geoffrey, 154

Chesterfield, Lord Philip, 133-34, 134n, 136. 16Rn Churchill, Frank (F.), 148, 150, 157. 161, 162-78, qm, 206, 222-23 Churchill, Mrs. (F.), 160 Cicero, 240 Clay, Mrs. (P), 202 Cobbett, William, 91, 216, 216n Cole, Mrs. (E), 164, t6g Collins, Mr. (PP), 3· 32. 61, 87, u6-17, ug, 121, 127-28, 131, 134-36, t35n, 139ll, J4l Congrevt", William, 136 Conrad, Joseph, The Heart of Darkness, 22 Cowper, William, 41, 70, t6o, 173; The Task,·44, 6g, 214; Truth, 215 Craik, W. A., g2. 18311 Crane, Ronald, 1o6n Crawford, Henry (MP) , 25, 30, 38, 40, 48, 5(}-54· 5tn, 57-60, 64-70, 71, 7476, 79· q8, 157· 15!). t63, 211, 216,

223 Crawford, Mary (MP), 37-38, 40, 4311, 48-49. 54-55· 59"· 6o, 62-65, 76, 79· 86, 88, 118n, q2, 147-4R Croft, Admiral (P), 1R5, 203, 205 Croft, Mrs. (P), 1Rt, 203, 20!) Daiches, David, 6n, 28, 29, 2gn d'Arhlay, Madame. See Burney, Fanny Darcy, Fitzwilliam (PP), 411, 37, 58, 86, 87, 110, 116-13, 156, 177, t81, 203, 226 Dashwood, Elinor (SS), 7-8, 42, So,

go, 104-5· 107-14· 139· 183, 217, 227 Dash wood, Henry (SS), 5, 85-87 Dashwood, Mrs. Henry (SS), 86-87, 8g,


Dashwood, John (SS), 85-go, tto-11 Dash wood, Mrs . .John (SS), 88-Rg, 91, no Dash wood, Marianne (SS), 3, 7, 20, 21, 42, 82, go, g6, 104-14• t;!g, tgo, 217 Defoe, Daniel, 12, 1411, 92; Robinson Crusoe, 11, 1311, 18, 21, 22

Denham, Sir Edward (Sanditon), 211, 217-20 Denham, Esther (Sanditon), 218, Ut22

Denham, Lady (Sandi ton), 211, 21719, 227 Dickens, Charles, 78n, 201; Great Ex· pectations. 21-22, 27; Little Dorrit, 27-28 Dixon, Mr. (E), 161, 16g-7o Dixon, Mrs. (E), 161, 169 Donahue, Joseph W., .Jr., 3611 Donne, John, Satire II, 53 Duffy, Joseph M., Jr., 36n, 3Bn, 15011, 183U, 202, 2021l Edgeworth, Maria, l.etters of .Tulia and Caroline, 103 Edwards, Mary (The Watsons), 225, 22)

Edwards, Thomas R., Jr., 36n Elinor and Marianne, 103 Eliot, George, Middlemarch, 21, 23, 1.1)7ll Eliot, T. S., 162, t62n Elliot, Anne (P), 3, 4, 8, 25-26, 72, 78, So, qg-2o8, 217, 22H Elliott, Elizabeth (P), 187, 193 Elliott, Sir Walter (P), 5, 39, 181, 18587, 193· 202, 212 Elliot, William (P), 88, 181-82, 182n, 200--201, 2o3 --5 . 208

Elliott, Robert C., 102 Elton, ~-lr. (E), 61, 150, 158-59, 165, q6-77 Elton, Mrs. (F.), qg, 151-53, 157-58, t6t-62, 171-72, 175-77 Emma, 145-78; anagram game, 172--74; character of Churchill, 162-71; Churchill compared wilh Henry Crawford, 162; Churchill contrasted with Knightley, 167-DB, 168n, q8; compared wilh Mansfield Park, 14748; compared with Northanger Abbey, 101; compared with novels of manners, 166-67; compared with Persuasion, 180, 2o6; compared with

Sewe and Sensibility, 113-q; compared with The J.Vatsnns, 224, 225; Emma's snobbery, t.l)o--56; Emma's snobbery contrasted with Knightley's outlook, 155-56; episode of the charade, 164-65; episode of the piano, tG8-6g; games, theme of, 163-78, 16511; moral and social significance of, q6-47, q6n, 151-55 (see also Kettle, Arnold, and Lawrence, D. H.); resolution, nature of, 178; scene at Miss Bates's, qo-71; setting, importance of, qH-,g}; subjecti·vism of heroine, 7-H, 20, 149-50, 14911, t!jG-6o; \"isit to Box Hill, q6-77; \'isit to Donwell .\bbey, 174-76; wider nanativc couo.Tll with ~ubjec­ tivity, t6o--62; other references to the novel, 27, 30, 38, 54, 7711, 184, 222 Emmet, Dorothy, 127 Estate improwmcnts. See Mansfteld Park, e-state improvement, theme of Fairfax, Jane (!:'.), 3, 7711, 117· 119-50, 154, 158, 161-63, t66, tOH-78, q8n, t83, 206, 217 }'ancr, Reginald, 6, 36, 37, 37n 'Fcrrars, Edward (SS), 42, go, 104-5, lll-12, 227 Fcn:ns, Mrs. (S.S), 105, 110, 151 lcucrhach, I .udwig, 23 l'cuillidc, Comtc de, 45n l'cuillidc, Eli1.a de-, 1511, 59n Fielding, Henry, 12, 12n, 1411, 28, 13311, 139. I67, 219; The Covent-Garden journal, 136-37, 145; ]oJeph And1·eu•s, 14, 12111; Torn ]one~. II, 12, 1;), q, qn, 21, 27, 92, 119 Fitzwilliam, Colonel (PP), 141 Flaubcrt, Gustave, 20111 Fkishman, Avrom, 3611, 3911, 570, 59· 59n, fi1 n, 6211, 74, 75n, SOn, I5311 Ford, :Ford l\-·tadox, tfifi; Parade's F:nd, 53. t66n, 20H Forster, E. :\1., 91, 21011; Howards End, 53> 208 Forster, Harriet (PP) , 138

Fox, Charles James, 46, 4711, .Janet (MP), 76 :Fussell, Paul, 24n (~ames,

theme of. See Emma, games. theme of; Huizinga, J. Gardiner, Mr. (PP), 13o-32, 151 Garrick, David, Lethe or E.wjJ in the Shades, 43 Gilpin, William, 42, 95, g6, 105 Girard, RcnC, 20111 Gisborne, Thomas, An Enquiry into the Dillie.< of the Female Sex, I34n; A11 F:nquiry into the Duties of Men in the Higher and Middle Classes of Society, 186-87 (~odmcrsham Park, 88 Godwin, William, 10, 154, tg8; Enquiry Cmu:aning Political ]wtice,

47 Goldsmith, Olive-r, 4511; The Vicar of VVahefield, II, I2, 13, qn Comlnich, E. H., 83 Gordon Riots, g6 G-orer, Geoffrey, 6n, 88n Cornall, :F. C., 86n Gosse, Edmund, Father and Son, 20 Grant, Dr. (MP), 40 (;rant, Mrs. (I\.1P), 40, 50 (;rccnc, Donald J ., 118n Hamilton, .Elilabcth, 199 Hancock, Eliw. See l'cuillidc-, Eliza de Harding, D. W., sn, 6, 6n, 7, 31, 97, 194· 194Il Hanly, Thomas, jude the ObKure, 21 Harmsel, Henrietta Ten, 1511, 103n Harvey, W. J., 161, 162, 171 Harville, Captain (P), 73, 78n, 179, tgo, 1!)2-!)3, 198, 200. 204-5 Harville-, Fanny (P), I!)O Hastings, 'Varrcn, 4511 Hawthorne, Nathaniel, The Scarlet Leller, 108 Hays, i\fary, 198 Hayter, Charles (P), 195

Heywood , Charlotte (Sanditon ), 2Io29 Heywood , Mr. (Sandi ton), 212-14 Hibbard, G. R., 44n Hobbes, Thomas, 77 Hooker, Richard, 24n Hough, Graham, 30, 146, 146n Howard, Mr. (The Watsons) , 6g, 22528 Huizinga , J., 165, 165n Hume, David, to6 Hunter, J. Paul, 130 Hussey, Christop her, 4tn Inchbald , Mrs. Nature, 103

Elizabeth ,

Art and

James, Henry, t6o, t66; The Portrait of a Lady, 148 Jennings , Mrs. (SS), go, uo-12, 220 Job, Book of, 13 Johnson, Samuel, 140, 24n, 126, 168n; Rasselas, 11, 12 , ug Joyce, James, A Portrait of the Artist, 20, 22 Kernan, Alvin, 930 Kettle, Arnold, 30, 146, 146n, 153-55, 153""· 1740, 184 Kliger, Samuel, tt8n Knight, Richard Payne, 41, 410, 42; The Landscap e, 44 Knightle y, George (E), 27, 39, 110, 131, 148, 153n, 155. 159-61, t66--68, t68n, 172-78, 175"· 203, 225 Knightle y, Isabella (E), t6t Knightle y, John (E), 156, 159 Kotzebue , A. F. F. von, 55 Lady Catherin e (PP), 7, 117, 127, 132, 135· 141, 151 Lady Susan (l,ady Susan), 31 Lambe, Miss (Sandilon ) , 227 Larkins, William (E) , 161 Lascelles, Mary, 35, 224nn Lawrence , D. H., A Propos of "Lady Chatterle y's Lauer," 34, 145. 151-53,

155, 176; The Rainbow , t6; Women in Love, 22-23, 151n l,azarillo de Tormes, 16 Lea vis, F. R., gn, 101 Leavis, Q. D., S:m Lee, Miss (MP), 79 Lennox, Charlotte , 148n Levi-Stra uss, Claude, 57" Lewis, C. S., Sn Lindsay, Lord, 50 Litz, A. Walton, gn, 32, 320, 37, 59, 590, 82n, 83n, 84n, g6n, 103, tojn, 104n, 1240, 182n, 189n Lodge, David A., 36n, 71 Lovejoy, A. 0., 24n Lucas, Charlotte (PP) , ugn, 128 Lucas, Sir William (PP), 117, 141 Mackenzie, Henry, The Man of Feelmg. ug, 1210 McKillop , Alan, 17, g2, 103n MacKinn on, Sir Frank, 510 Malins, Edward, 39n, 4on, 410, 44n, 48n, 510 Mandevil le, Bernard, 192 Mansfield Park, 35-80; casting of Lover's Vows, 5g--6o; compared with Emma, 147-48: compared with Pride and Prejudice, 36-38, 142; Crawford 's Protean nature, 64--70; debate over sermon delivery, 67-70 (see also Blair, Hugh; Cowper, Wil· liam; Sheridan , Thomas) ; the East Room, 73-74; Edmund' s ordinatio n, 61-63, 6tn; estate improvem ents, theme of, 31, 38-59, 90-91, 174-76, 184-85, 185n, 21o-16 (see also Burke, Edmund; Cowper, William; Repton, Humphry ) ; Fanny Price, role of, 71-Bo; Fanny's education al hypothesis, 72-73; Fanny's function as judge, 74--75; Fanny's isolation and the Portsmou th episode, 75-79; Fanny's moral character , 72-73; Fanny's return from exile, significance of, 79--Bo; oppositio n between Edmund and Mary, 62-64; opposi-

Norri s, Mrs. (MP) , 39· 40, 48, 54, 6o, tion betwe en Fann y and Henr y, 64; 73> 75· 79 the play, ss--6o, 59ll; profe ssion , North , Doug las, 1 g6n them e of, 61-70 ; Thor nton Lacey , North anger Abbe y, 81-85 , 91-10 2; 5o-54 ; visit to Sothe rton, 48-50 ; comp ared with Emm a, 101; Henr y other refere nces to the novel , 7, 25, Tilne y, ambi valen t funct ion of, gs27, 30, 33-34 , 82, 95, Ill, 131, 132, g8; heroi ne's mora l progr ess in Bath, tG5n, 172n, 18g, 2o2n, 217 92-g5 ; irony , natur e of. 82:-83; mora l Manw aring , Eliza beth W., 39n, 4m, 44n frame work of novel , 10o--101; role Marti n, Robe rt (E), •so--51, 155. 161, of narra tor, 102; struc ture of, 84, g2; 165, 175. 178 symp athet ic imag inatio n discu ssed, Marx , Karl, 28n 98-w o; other refere nces to novel , Mere dith, Georg e, 133; The Orde al of 4• 31, f\8, Ill, ll3, 140, 184 Richa rd Fever el, 20 Midd leton , Sir John (SS), 105, 188 Orteg a y Casse t, Jose, 2n Midd leton , Lady (SS), 110 Osbo rne, Lord (The Wats ons), 14tn, Mill, John Stuar t, 1g6 >=25-26 Mille r, J. Hillis , 220, 24n Osbo rne, Miss (The Wats ons), 225-2 6 Ming ay, G. E., 87, 87n, goo, 176n Minte r, David Lee, 149n Palm er, Mr. (SS), 11: Mole r, Kenn eth L., go, 15n, 32, 36n, Parke r, Arthu r (Sand itrm) , 219-2 0, 71n, 730, 75, 83n, 103n, u6n, 148n, 227 198, tggn Parke r, Diana (Sand iton), 218, 220, Mole swort h, Charl es, 44n 222 Moor e, Georg e, 110 Parke r, Mr. (Sand i ton), 21o-16, 215n, More , Hann ah, 75, tgg 222-2 3, 227-2 8 Morl and, Cathe rine (NA) , 4· 41, 72, Parke r, Mrs. (Sand iton) , 214-1 5, 228 82:, 84-85 , 85n, 88, gt-1o 2, 104, 111, Parke r, Sidne y (Sand iton) , 210, 222-2 3, 113, 149· 159· 212-1 3, 217 226-2 7 Morl and, Jame s (NA) , 93, 95 Pauls on, Rona ld, 133n, 135n Mort on, Hon. Miss (SS) , 105 Peaco ck, Thom as Love, Head long flail, Mudr ick, Marv in, 6, 6n, 90, 31, 37n, 43 710, g6n, 104-5 , 10411, 118n, 147n, Peckh am, Mors e, 2411 157n, •s8n, 182n, 222, 22:2n, 223n Perry , Mr. (E), t6t, 171 Murr ah, Charl es, 36n, 38n Persu asion , 17g-2 o8; accom moda tions, Musg rave, Tom (The Wats ons), 224them e of, 77, 77n, 78, 7Sn, tgo-g 3; 27 Anne 's respo nsibil ity and resilie nce, Musg rove, Charl es (P), 188, :m6 155, 187-go; Anne 's usefu lness, 197. Musg rove, Henr ietta (P), t8g, 195, 197 comp ared with other s' respo nses: Musg rove, Louis a (P), t88-9 o, 195, Bcnw ick, tgo-g t; Harvi lle, 192-93; 197-201 Mrs. Smith , 191-9 2; comp ared with Musg rove, Mary (P), t88, 193, 203 Emm a, 180, 206; Louis a's accid ent Musg rove, Mrs. (P), t8o, tgo, 205 on the Cobb , 197-9 9; marri age o£ Anne and Went worth , natur e and Newm an, John Henr y, Apolo gia pm circu mstan ces of, 199-208: comp ared Vita Sua, tg6, tg6n with union of Darcy and Eliza beth, Nietz sche, Fried rich, 22 201; naval and lande d chara cters Nolen , John, 43n

con tra ste d, 202-3; new dir ect ion s ot, 5, 10, 25-26, 27, 178, 18o-83, 182n, 189; non -lin gui stic com mu nic ati on , e 204--6; the nu t ana log y, 195-97 (se also Ne wm an, Joh n He nry ); ren ting of the estate, significance of, 184 87 (.~n also Gis bor ne, Th om as, An

En qu iry int o the Duties of Me :n) ;

___ ....... _. .••• I4D-43i pre car iou s sit uat ion of the Be nn et family, 3, Bn, 87; pro ble m of per spe cti vis m and the vis it to Pem ber ley , 121-25; res olu tio n of Persuasion, com par ed, 201; oth er ref ere nce s to the novel, 27, 32, 35, 42, 45n, 54• 58, 66, 82n, 84, 87. lli , 113, 114, 151, 176, 181, 184, 197, 224 Pro fes sio n, im po rta nce of. See Au ste n, Jan e, im po rta nce of ide a of professio n in fiction Pro ust , Marcel, 121, 201n re~u1uuuu,


tra dit ion al aspects of, 183; We ntwo rth , cha rac ter an d rol e of, 194 208; oth er references to the nov el, 3· 4· '9· 33· 39· 6j, 83 Pev snc r, Nik ola us, ggn, tot n Pic are squ e her o, mo ral res pon se of, Ra dcl iffe , An n, 98; Th e My$teries of 16--17 Udolpho, 85 Pil che r, Do nal d, 43, 43n Re itze l, Wi llia m, 59n Pit t, Wi llia m, 118n , 3g--52, 41n, 43n, hry mp Hu n, pto Re -77 176 Po irie r, Ric har d, 51n, 52n; cause of div isio n am on g to tle pis "E ; 24n , der xan Ale pe, Po ter s in Mansfield Park, 3g--41; rac cha grlin Bu to tle pis "E ; 154 ," rst Ba thu vem ent of Ha rle sto ne Ha ll, 51, pro im ton ," 50 Jan e Au ste n's att itu de to; 52n 52, 3631, , 7-8 5, 3· , Pri ce, Fa nn y (M P) wa rd, 43-45; an d pap er wa r, 41, 41n ; 95• 80, 646o, , 59n 49· 42, 38, 41Re d Books, 41, 52; the ory an d pra c227 , -17 216 , 189 , 183 , 148, 154 discussed, 42-43; works: Frag· tice n 124 , 39n , rtin Pri ce, Ma the Th eor y an d Practice of on nts me 78 7773, , P) Pri ce, Su san (M Gardening, 43n , 51, 52, e cap nds La tur Pic the on ay Ess Pri ce, Uy eda le, s on the Th eor y an d ion vat ser Ob ; 52n g6n , -g6 esque, 41, 410 , 42, 95ctice of Landscape Gardening, Pra 66 , P) (M m Pri ce, Wi llia e 42; Sketches an d Hi nts on Landscap ks, boo ; -43 115 , Pride an d Prejud£ce Gardening, 41n, 42 nsMa th wi ed par com ; 129 the me of, Re yno lds , Mrs. (PP ), 122-23 ed par com ; 142 field Park, 36-38, dso n, Sam uel , 14n, 26, 29; Cla har Ric wi th No rth an ger Ab bey an d Sense rissa's res pon se com par ed wi th tha t an d Sen$ibility, qo ; Da rcy 's pTOper of Jan e Au ste n's her oin es, 17, 76, pri de, 126-30 (see also Bu rke , Ed 76n; conftict bet we en ind ivi du al an d mu nd ); Elizabeth'.~ edu cat ion , ttg -aut ho rity rel ate d to Jan e Au ste n, 14; 26; Eli zab eth 's per son ali st mo ral ity , her oin e's str ict all egi anc e to rel igi ous ug -20 ; Eli zab eth 's rel ati on wi th con duc t, 17-2o: works: Clarissa, 14mela, Wi ckh am , 12o-21; fra gm ent ary na20, 14n , 22, 23, 26, 76, 76n ; Pa tur e of, 116-17; lau gh ter , the me of, 75. 84 erest Ro oke , Nu rse (P) , 192-93 132-40, 22st-23; (see also Ch Ro sen fel d, Sybil, 59n field, Lo rd Ph ilip ; Fie ldi ng, He nry , Ro uss eau , Jea n Jac que s, 107, 198 Th e Covent-Garden journal; ShaftesRo uss ct, Jea n, 56, 64n bu ry, thi rd Ea rl of, "Essay on the Ru shw ort h, Jam es (M P) , 30, 39, 41, Fre edo m of Wi t an d Hu mo ur" ); 53, 6o, 6g, ']1, 86, 185n, 211 50, 48, el's nov ; -31 13D of, me the s, ter let

Rushwor th, l\frs. (MP), 49 Russell, Lady (P), 182n, 194---l)6, 199200, 207 Ryle, Gilbert, 30

Sanditon , 209-29; compared with Mansfield Park, 21o-14; compared with The Watsons, 223-2H'; estate improvem ents, theme of, 2ro-16; heroiue compared with previous heroines, 216-1H; heroinC', role of, 21622; relation of Charlotte to Jane Amtcn, 221-22; role of probable hero, 222-23; significan ce of last scene, 228-29; speculati on, strC'ss on, 215-16; uncertain ty as to future course of Sandilun , 227-28; other reference s, 10, 208 Sartre, Jean Paul, 9n, 127 Schneide r, Sister M. Lucy, C.S ..J., 74n Scharer, .'\lark, Gn, 29 Scott, Sir Walter, 16, 30, 49 Seuse. and Seusibilit y, 81-91, 102-14; compared with Pride and Prejudice and E111111a, 113-14; Elinor, character and function of, 109-13; the estate, significan ce in, 2, 54, 1 84; C'Xposun: of economic ally motivate d behavior in, 2H-2g, 88-~)l; financial details, specificity of, 85-88; fictional predecess ors of, 103-.1; irony, nature of, in, 82-83; Marianne , character and function of, Hl4-g; Marianne 's relation to the sentimen tal movement, 1ofi-g (see also Shaftcsbu ry, third Earl of); and resolutio n, limited success of, 113-14; and theme of professio n, 111-12; other references to the novel, 20, 42, 72, 100, 131, 140, 154, 172, 172nn. 188, rgo, 2U), 220, 224 ShaftC'sb ury, third Earl of, 108; Chm·acteristic s of 1\Jel!, Manners, Opinions, Times, w6; "Essay on the Freedom of \Vit and Humour, " 13336, 133n. 13111 Shakespe are, William, 65, 67

Shannon, Edgar l., 15011, 15tn Shepherd , ~tr. (P), 186 Sheridan , Thomas, A Course of Lee· lures un Lloclllion , 68, 68n Simpson, Richard. 6n Smith, Adam, 106; Theory of Moral Senti111ent~. g8; H-'ealth of Natiom,

"6 Smith, Harriet (E), 147, rso--!)1, 155, 157--61, 164, 172, 174, qG, t78 Smith, \Jrs. (!'), 2-4, 5n, 7• 25, 77• r8o, 191-93, I~Jln, 208 Snwllett, Tobias, Hu/1/phr y Clinkn, 219; Roderick Random, 16-17 Southam , B. C., 32, 8211, 20411, 21011, 212n, 215n, 22on, 22311, 224n, 228n Spring, David, 59n, 66, 2o2n Starr, G. A., 13n Steele, .-\nne (SS), 89 Steele, Lucy (SS), go, 110, 112 Stendhal , 201, 201n Sterne, G. B., 37n Sterne, Laurence , 27, TTislram Shandy, 13, 161 Stondeig h Abbey, 88 Strachey, Lytton, Hl Stroud, Dorothy, 43n "Subvers ive" criticism. See Austen, .Jane, "subversi ve" criticism of Swift, Jonathan , 24n Tanncr, Tony, 3fm, 39n Thomson , David, gtn, 21611 Thorpe. Isabella (NA), 88, 92-95 Thorpe, .John (NA), 84, 88, g2-95 Tiluey, Eleanor (l\lA), 94-~17. gg, 102 Tilney, General (]VA), 84, 88, 97-101, 151 Tilney, Henry (NA), 61, 92, 94-102, g6n, tl:J, 222-23 Tolstoy, Count Leo, Anna KaTenina ,

107 Tompkin s, J. :\f. S., qn, 103n Trees. Sa .\mten, Jane, trees, low· of Trilling, Lionel, gn, 28, 32, 36n, 37n, 59, !)gn, 6tn, 85n, 11811, 146, q6n, 149t1ll, 151. 168n, 175