Luceat!

- Letters from the Front-lines of the New Evangelization

Luceat! header image 2

The articles and opinions posted on this website do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Fellowship of Catholic Univesity Students and merely serve
to promote discussion and thought on topics and themes most pressing to modern man in light of the teachings of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.

 

Why I love Jane Austen…

February 12th, 2007 · 6 Comments

Disclaimer:
It is hard for me to imagine that anyone could be even slightly less interested in Jane Austen than I am, but my editor has convinced me that I must at least try. I’ve tried to be brief, but failed miserably. Nonetheless, I hope you enjoy my rantings all the same…

Just as “it is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of good fortune, must be in want of a wife,” it is also indisputably acknowledged that whenever I am asked to comment on literature, I cannot help but to expound upon the treasures offered to men and women alike by the woman who is arguably the British Isle’s most famous authoress, Jane Austen. Just ask any poor fool who has made the mistake of tiptoeing anywhere near the subject in my presence. Next to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, it is the Good News of Jane Austen that is closest to my heart, and I don’t mind saying so… and in fact have on several occasions! My zeal tends to be overwhelming for some, especially those unsuspecting gentleman for whom the name “Jane Austen” only conjures images of rooms full of women in various emotional states, weeping and sighing over the infamous six episode BBC mini-series Pride and Prejudice.

Feelings of sheer terror tend to well up at of the mere thought of being anywhere near the aforementioned event for many young men of my acquaintance. Indeed, most seem to either have no knowledge of Jane Austen’s existence, or live in fear of being forced to spend tedious hours watching Austen’s film adaptations with their significant other. I usually try to shame the latter group of young men into changing their attitude about Austen through the words of Lord David Cecil who states: “The kind of people who do not like Jane Austen are the kind of people who do not like sunshine and unselfishness.” Most groan and roll their eyes at this comment. They continue on in their misguided belief that Austen can have nothing important to say to them.

But these young men are gravely mistaken. Though Austen’s work, at least in my experience, is often perceived to be the domain of women alone, I believe that her writing has much to say to both modern man and modern woman. Though I do not predict the same kind of cult following to develop around Austen for men that seems to exist in Catholic women’s circles, I do believe modern men would discover that Austen’s message resonates just as strongly for them as it does for women. Why?

We live in an age that is in great need of Austen and her world, and I argue that what Austen presents is precisely that for which our modern hearts’ long. We are increasingly mobile, but we long for the stability and sense of community that the Woodhouse family in Emma enjoys. We scoff at the confinements of the Victorian etiquette displayed at the Netherfield Ball in Pride and Prejudice, but our lack of clear rules of social behavior, especially in romantic relationships, ultimately leaves us insecure and with a general lack of peace in our relationships with the opposite sex.

But perhaps most significantly, we live in an age that is greatly confused about issues of gender. We face bewildering questions about what it means to be a man, and what it means to be a woman. It is here that Austen’s work speaks most profoundly to us today, for in the development of the characters in her stories, she offers us clear conceptions of authentic masculinity and femininity. She shows us, through the lives of Fitzwilliam Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet, Elinor Daschwood and Edward Farrars, how the complimentarity of the sexes can be lived out practically, a lesson our culture is desperate to learn.

What do I mean by “the complimentarity of the sexes?” I’m afraid I will have to save that for next time as this post is already too long and I have likely already lost the attention of my modern readers who are accustomed to the thirty second news clip. In the mean time, I welcome any comments and critiques, responses and/or rebuttals, and look forward to picking this discussion up again within a fortnight!

Tags:

6 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Nathan // Feb 12, 2007 at 4:49 pm

    Great blog, Katie! The little I know of Austen, I would agree with you. A good friend of mine was the first man to change my thoughts on Austen about. This happened a year ago. Which do you recommend more, the books or the movie (and my hypothesis is that you suggest the older version of the movie over the newer one)

  • 2 Trisha // Feb 12, 2007 at 9:42 pm

    Katie,
    You are a hoot! As much as your zeal for Jane Austen might scare some people away, I think it’s refreshing to know that there can be a great deal of passion for good quality literature. If one glances at the New York Times best sellers list, one sees a real need for meaningful and imaginative work like Austen’s or Tolkien’s or .
    Peace!

  • 3 Kelly // Feb 13, 2007 at 3:58 am

    I’m a huge fan as well, not because her stories involve romance, but because they mirror reality and the daily struggle for virtue in the little things and small interactions of life. I spent a year studying feminist interpretations of Austen (so that I could better refute them) and am constantly saddened that people try to manipulate her words and characters to support their own misguided propaganda. I’d also be more than happy to defend the longer movie as the only accurate and authentic version of Pride & Prejudice to anyone who disagrees. And to culminate all my bold statements, I’ll close with a quotation from a male, English professor of mine: “Real men love Jane Austen.” :wink:

  • 4 John // Feb 22, 2007 at 4:17 am

    Watching “Pride and Prejudice” (long version) and reading Aristotle is illuminating. Elizabeth’s three suitors correspond very interestingly to Aristotle’s three types of friendships–utility, pleasure, and true friendship (character). It becomes very clear how dull or silly the first two are as a basis for union without the third.

  • 5 Kelly // Feb 25, 2007 at 3:30 am

    Awesome point John! I’ve never come across that insight in my Austen studies, but I think it’s startlingly true.

  • 6 Pia // Mar 27, 2007 at 1:24 am

    “I … am constantly saddened that people try to manipulate her words and characters to support their own misguided propaganda.”

    I fully agree with that sentiment. However, oddly enough, such sadness caught up with me while reading this page.

    I’m too weary to argue with you about what I perceive to be the misconceptions your view of Austen is based on; let me only say this.

    Jane Austen died in 1817. Queen Victoria was born in 1819.
    Jane Austen is not a Victorian writer. She’s regency.

    And may I recommend George Eliot, Elizabeth Gaskell etc as the most rewarding Victorian moralists displaying exemplary gender role models…

Leave a Comment