Pride and Prejudice: Blog Response #3

What should marriage be based on? Appearance? Social status? Stability? Love? Jane Austen explores this topic through her novel Pride and Prejudice by managing to include all types of marriages. Her criticism towards marriage based on superficiality leads her to conclude that marriage should be based on love. There are seven different marriages presented in the novel. Excluding the Gardiner and the Lucas, the remaining five marriages contrasts each other to reveal Austen’s opinions and thoughts on the subject of marriage.

The marriage between Darcy and Elizabeth reveals the characteristics, which constitutes a successful marriage. One of these characteristics is that the feeling cannot be brought on by appearances, and must gradually develop between the two people as they get to know one another. In the beginning, Elizabeth and Darcy were distant from each other because of their prejudice. The series of events, which they both experienced, gave them the opportunity to understand one another and the time to reconcile their feelings for each other. Thus, their mutual understanding is the foundation of their relationship and led them to a peaceful and lasting marriage. This relationship between Elizabeth and Darcy reveals the importance of getting to know one’s partner before marrying.

The marriage between Jane Bennet and Bingley is also an example of successful marriage. Jane Austen, through Elizabeth, expresses her opinion of this in the novel: "....really believed all his [Bingley] expectations of felicity, to be rationally founded, because they had for basis the excellent understanding, and super-excellent disposition of Jane, and a general similarity of feeling and taste between her and himself"(55). However, unlike Darcy and Elizabeth, there is a flaw in their relationship. The flaw is that both characters are too gullible and too good-hearted to ever act strongly against external forces that may attempt to separate them: "You [Jane and Bingley] are each of you so complying, that nothing will ever be resolved on; so easy, that every servant will cheat you; and so generous, that you will always exceed your income" (55).

Obviously, Lydia and Wickham’s marriage is an example of a bad marriage. Their marriage was based on appearances, good looks, and youthful vivacity. Once these qualities can no longer be seen by each other, the once strong relationship will slowly fade away. As in the novel, Lydia and Wickham’s marriage gradually disintegrates; Lydia becomes a regular visitor at her two elder sister’s homes when "her husband was gone to enjoy himself in London or Bath." Through their relationship, Jane Austen shows that hasty marriage based on superficial qualities quickly cools and leads to unhappiness.

Although little is told of how Mr. Bennet and Mrs. Bennet got together, it can be inferred by their conversions that their relationship was similar to that of Lydia and Wickham - Mr. Bennet had married a woman he found sexually attractive without realizing she was an unintelligent woman. Mrs. Bennet’s favoritism towards Lydia and her comments on how she was once as energetic as Lydia reveals this similarity. Mr. Bennet’s comment on Wickham being his favorite son-in-law reinforces this parallelism. The effect of the relationships was that Mr. Bennet would isolate himself from his family; he found refugee in his library or in mocking his wife. Mr. Bennet’s self-realization at the end of the novel, where he discovers that his lack of attention towards his family had led his family to develop the way they are, was too late to save his family. He is Jane Austen’s example of a weak father. In these two latter relationships, Austen shows that it is necessary to use good judgment to select a spouse; otherwise the two people will lose respect for each other.

The last example of a marriage is of a different nature than the ones mentioned above. The marriage between Mr. Collins and Charlotte is based on economics rather than on love or appearance. It was a common practice during Austen’s time for women to marry a husband to save herself from spinsterhood or to gain financial security. However, Jane Austen viewed this as a type of prostitution and disapproved of it. In Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen dramatizes this form of women inequality and show that women who submits themselves to this type of marriage will have to suffer in tormenting silence as Charlotte does, "When Mr. Collins said any thing of which his wife might reasonably be ashamed, which certainly was not unseldom, she [Elizabeth] would involuntarily turned her eye on Charlotte. Once or twice she could discern a faint blush; but in general Charlotte wisely did not hear” (28).

In Pride and Prejudice, Jane has denounced the elements of marriage and society that she found distasteful. The five marriages mentioned above contribute to the theme that a happy and strong marriage takes time to build and must be based on mutual feeling, understanding, and respect. Hasty marriages acting on impulse, and based on superficial qualities will not survive and will lead to inevitable unhappiness.

Pride and Prejudice: Blog Response #2

Jane Austen, the author of Pride and Prejudice, definitely has a unique way of writing. She uses a light, satirical tone throughout the novel to express her opinion on the mercenary and the ignorance of people concerning social status. Although she does some obvious mockery through characters such as Mrs. Bennet, Mr. Collins, and Lydia, the one that caught my eye was the first sentence of the novel: "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife." Already by the first sentence, Austen accomplished introducing the subject of the novel. In this statement, she has cleverly done three things: she has declared that the main subject of the novel will be courtship and marriage, she has established the humorous tone of the novel by taking a simple subject to elaborate and to speak intelligently of, and she has prepared the reader for a chase in the novel of either a husband in search of a wife, or a woman in pursuit of a husband. The first line also defines Jane’s book as a piece of literature that connects itself to the 18^th century period. Pride and Prejudice is associated with the 18^th century because of the emphasis on man in his social environment rather than in his individual conditions. The use of satire and wit, a common form of 18^th century literature, also contributes to label the book as 18^th century. However, because Jane Austen had allowed personal feelings of the characters to be expressed in her work, she can also be classified as Romantic. In the figure of Elizabeth, Jane Austen shows passion attempting to find a valid mode of existence in society. Passion and reasons also comes together in the novel to show that they are complementary of marriage.

*The connection between the novel and the time when it was written was first brought up during the Literature Circle.

Pride and Prejudice: Blog Response #1

The Great Gatsby and Pride and Prejudice share some common themes – most prominent are the role of social class and materialism. Meanwhile, these two elements are also factors that affect the main characters’ consideration for their marriages. For example, Elizabeth in Pride and Prejudice is afraid of being gossiped by others of marrying a higher class and Mr. Darcy is afraid of degrading himself by marrying someone from a lower class. Likewise, Daisy in the Great Gatsby married Tom just because he is relatively affluent. These characters illustrate the importance of keeping sublime status of nobility by avoiding intermarriage with commoners and by having a comfortable life with abundant wealth in the past.

 In both novels, one can see how a society is ruled by wealth and power. People strived to attach to the dignitaries to gain more benefits and Mrs. Bennet is no exception. She is interested in letting one of her daughters marry Mr. Bingley just because she had heard he is wealthy despite the fact that she knows nothing about his character. 

                  “What is his name?”                “Bingley.”“Is he married or single?”              “Oh! single, my dear, to be sure! A single man of large fortune; four or five thousand a year. What a fine thing for our girls!”               “How so? How can it affect them?”“My dear Mr. Bennet,” replied his wife, “how can you be so tiresome! You must know that I am thinking of his marrying one of them.” (p.6, Pride and Prejudice)

 This not only reflects Mrs. Bennet’s desire to marry her girls for money, but the importance of wealth and stability in a society in general. Mrs. Bennet is just one of the many characters in the novel who wants her children to improve their social status or to simply give others the impression that they are from a high society.

 In order to meet Mr. Bingley, they went to the Netherfield Ball. It is a social event that both nobilities and middle class participated. Mrs. Bennet forced her daughters to participate to meet gentlemen. It is an only way for women to speak to men they want to know in the conservative society. 

“The evening altogether passed off pleasantly to the whole family. Mrs. Bennet had seen her eldest daughter much admired by the Netherfield party. Mr. Bingley had danced with her twice, and she had been distinguished by his sisters. Jane was as much gratified by this as her mother could be, though in a quieter way. Elizabeth felt Jane’s pleasure." (p.13, Pride and Prejudice) 

Mrs. Bennet is happy that Jane is admired by Mr. Bingley who is well off because she thinks Mr.Bingley is possibly going to marry Jane such that Mrs. Bennet relieves on Jane’s life. A good marriage can decide a woman‘s life. Whether it will be prosperous or suffering depends on their husbands as women rarely work at that time. 

 In the Great Gatsby, the vogue of marrying to the wealth exists too. Daisy’s marriage is a perfect example. She is reluctant to marry Tom. Tom acts as her safe path to keep her honor and quality of life because he is rich. 

               “She began to cry – she cried and cried. I rushed out and found her mother’s maid, and we locked the door and got her into a cold bath. She wouldn’t let go of the letter. She took it into the tub with her and squeezed it up into a wet ball, and only let me leave it in the soap-dish when she saw that it was coming to pieces like snow." (p.76, Great Gatsby) 

She is drunk because she is unhappy and confused. She reveals herself on indecision on the wedding day when she sees the letter from poor Gatsby. She is still in love with Gatsby. Her heart is separated into two parts: a part tempting her to follow her strong feeling to Gatsby, another part urging her to be realistic by marrying Tom to keep superior social and financial status. At last she chose the later action. This reflects that Daisy is in love with money more than Gatsby.

While Daisy gives up Gatsby due to his poverty, even when Gatsby becomes very wealthy, he is still being disdained. 

                "I suppose the latest thing is to sit back and let Mr. Nobody from Nowhere make love to your wife. Well, if that’s the idea you can count me out […] Nowadays people begin by sneering at family life and family institutions, and next they’ll throw everything overboard and have intermarriage between black and white.”(p.130, Great Gastby) 

It is so sarcastic when Tom looks down upon Gatsby because of his impoverishment and class, not of having a relationship with his wife. This indicates that he cares more his high status than his wife. Daisy is just a complement and a performance tool in his rich life. Wealthy people get the most beautiful and ascendant women. He also describes discriminately the difference of classes as the difference between races, which demonstrates the solid concept of aristocracy dominance in the wealthy world. Gatsby’s new money earned from the New World is regarded as nothing. He gains no reputation or power, such that he is called Mr. Nobody.

 While Great Gatsby and Pride and Prejudice have common themes, their settings were completely different. Great Gatsby is based on the US during the Roaring Twenties. There was a crash between conventional middle class and the rising of newly rich people who are motivated by the American dream. People strived to improve their lives by creating possibilities through hardship and fortune. They had more financial freedom such as earning money from the stock market and buying on credit. Pre-war values like hypocrisy and utilitarianism were overlooked. On the other hand, Pride and Prejudice is based on the old feudal society. There was clear class gradation. People from the lower class could hardly climb the social ladder. This formed a vicious cycle of poverty for the large population of the poor. One’s social status depended on the number of lands one had.

Procrastination Article Response

Procrastination. A phase we all go through. I, for one, can relate to this article. In fact, I do it all the time. However, on the contrary to what the article said, I think procrastination should not necessarily be viewed as a negative thing. I believe that procrastination is sometimes inevitable. For example, there are things called priorities. If you have an uncountable things to do in one day, then it's necessary to choose what you're going to do and leave the rest later for when you have time. As a student, I know this is inevitable especially when a semester ends and teachers tend to cram all their assignments in the final week. I only have two regular classes and the rest are mostly AP classes. The amount of homework given in each class is ridiculous. During that final week, I have to choose which assignments I can do because I can't do all of them. In such cases, I have to make priorities. I have to leave my small assignments for later and concentrate on the important ones. One of the arguments the article made was that when you do everything in the last minute, the product of your work would nowhere be as good as if you did it with time. Although this is true, if you do it beforehand along with the other assignments you have to finish, the result would probably be the same. Thus, in response to this article, I would say that procrastination is inevitable. In a society where we live in, there is simply the excuse that there's just not enough time.

Podcast Response

Hamlet by William Shakespeare has been performed many times since the moment he wrote the play. Now, it has been performed on stage all over the world showing the different interpretations each actor and director took from the play. In fact, I remember a famous Japanese actor named Otojiro Kawakami perform Hamlet on stage a long time ago in the early 1900s. A prominent play that holds such literary significance has surely been staged in every way possible. Or has it? Have you ever come across a staged production done in a high-security prison? I’m sure it’s not an every-day thing that a group of hardened criminals act out such a sophisticated Shakespeare play. Yet, these murderers, who are currently living out the consequences that the play is all about, are able to understand the characters on a level that most of us might not.

The thing that struck me the most about this podcast was how these prisoners can relate to Hamlet and the other characters more than anyone else on this planet. Why? Because these criminals have experienced the actions that Hamlet wants to take, all the events that occurred in the play, and the feelings of intensity. They are the living consequences of all what happened in the play. As Agnes Wilcox, the director of this production, had said, “Each person used its psychological ways to understand the characters.” This was evident when one inmate named Daniel Waller had played the role of the Ghost. When trying to connect with the said role, the man related it to the friend he himself have killed a while before. Understanding the hatred and betrayal the Ghost felt toward his murderer, his thirst for revenge, as well as his helplessness (now that he’s dead) was crucial in order to play the character out properly. Another inmate named Edgar Evans played the role of Claudius. During the scene when Claudius was confessing his crimes, Evans himself felt like he was asking for forgiveness to God. Only during these moments, do these prisoners finally realize the crimes that they have committed.

I remember a quote that I once read by C.S Lewis. It goes along the lines of “Literature adds to reality, it does not simply describe it. It enriches the necessary competencies that daily life requires and provides; and in this respect, it irrigates the deserts that our lives have already become.” From what I know, CS Lewis is trying to convey that literature adds to reality by changing our perspectives. A good book (on in this case play) will challenge the way that you think, which in turn will alter your perception of reality. As you can see, the prisoners who had to act out in this play not only connected to the characters but also allowed them to finally react to the crimes they have committed and changed their reality completely. In other words, Hamlet did not just tell a story. It enriched our lives, and especially the lives of these inmates. 

The conclusion I can make through this podcast: literature is more alive than ever.

Comparison between Hamlet and J. Alfred Prufrock

It is interesting to see Prufrock from The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock by T.S. Eliot compare himself to Hamlet. Of course, Prufrock immediately rejects the idea, claims he is nowhere as important as Hamlet, and returns to his usual self-criticism. He suggests that he would be a minor character in a play, not the protagonist. However, Prufrock's denial in being similar to Hamlet is somewhat more ironic than true because he does, in fact, resemble him. Similar to Hamlet, Prufrock's greatest flaw is his indecisiveness as well as his self-deprecation.

Although Hamlet and Prufrock have completely different situations – one hesitating to murder his uncle and the other hesitating to ask a girl out – these two characters prove to the readers that the way they act (or don’t act) upon these dilemmas are exactly the same. These characteristics are illustrated in each of their monologues. Hamlet saying “I do not know why yet I live to say this thing’s to do” seems to be almost identical to Prufrock’s obvious lines such as “That is not it at all; that is not what I meant at all.” Both these characters are revealed to be overly analytical and indecisive through their attempts in taking action. In the case of Hamlet, he is overwhelmed by his feeling of revenge but hesitates in the murder of Claudius due to his fear of making the wrong decision. Hamlet is held back by his excessive consideration of religious morals and beliefs and his fear of the consequences it would bring him. The entire play drags on with him deciding that he will do something and fails to make it a reality. Similarly, Alfred Prufrock talks to the audience, exposing his indecision that characterizes his thoughts (and most of the poem). His inability to ask a girl out may seem far less important than Hamlet deciding whether to take a human’s life or not. However, the characteristics that define them do not change. It does not matter the content; the fact that they share a common trait of not being able to act upon the things they claim they will do is what is important and makes them similar.

Another common trait these two complicated characters share is how they end up hating themselves for their indecisiveness. Throughout the play, the Danish prince encounters inspiring people such as the performer who can easily cry and Fortinbras who can easily kill. These people leave an impact on him in that he starts hating himself for not being able to take actions as quickly as them. He thinks so lowly himself that he, at one point, claims himself to be “pigeon-livered and lack gall.” Prufrock’s disregard for his own importance is also demonstrated by his comparison to small creatures such as crabs. “I should have been a pair of ragged claws scuttling across the floors of silent seas.” As shown through these quotes, they both regret the fact that they don't act on the things they promised they would. They look down on themselves and compare themselves to small, inferior creatures. The fact that they both feel bad about their inability to act, and yet STILL do not act makes them all the more similar.  

Both made their lives worthless and meaningless. Hamlet spent much of his time debating on killing a man or not. Prufrock wasted his entire life making ridiculous decisions such as whether to eat a peach or not. This characteristic of indecisiveness and self-loathing that defines both of these men can only be considered tragic flaws. A man seen as a hero and the other seen as pathetic – are they all that different?