I like Anuja Chauhan a whole lot. I think she is really talented and have read all her books. She is funny which makes her books fun to read. She knows how to write romance without going all mushy on you. She creates characters you can love. She understands how to set up a plot and satisfyingly connect all the dots. But when I heard that she had commented on the lack of sisterly love in Pride and Prejudice, that made me sit up a bit.
I had never stopped to think about this.
I can see why she noticed it though. She writes with great knowledge about large families. Sisterhood flows strongly as a theme through her books. It is very obvious in "Those Pricey Thakur Girls" of course but there is a sisterhood between Zoya and her colleague whose name I have forgotten. Between Jini and her grandmother. But was it really absent in P&P? More specifically, were the older two girls mean or condescending in their attitudes towards the younger ones?
I thought about it a bit and have not finished thinking yet but here are a few of my unorganized thoughts.
For one, it is in a way an unfair point. The lack of sisterly love is not one way. Lydia is just as condescending in her attitude towards her sisters. She shows neither love nor affection.
In fact, the only affection one can sense is that between the older two. And a real, deep friendship between Lizzie and Charlotte Lucas. Why this difference, I wonder. But let me come back to this later.
Another thing I was wondering is, what about Austen's other books. What happens there? In a sense you can think of Mansfield park as "What happened to Lydia's children?". Was there any love between sisters or cousins there?
Let's start with the older bunch The youngest girl who ran away simply grew distant and had no more time for her sisters, thinking of them only when they might be useful to her. Their troubles, their concerns are nothing to her. The execrable Mrs. Norris of course loved no one at all. And Maria was the kind of character Austen routinely put in her books with a sort of gentle contempt.
Among the younger lot, the sisters quarrel and have a temporary fallout over a man. They continue their merrymaking - which is really a search for husbands/fulfilling relationships- even as their brother lies dying. Even Edmund who is shown as loving and caring towards Fanny, does not really love his siblings. At the bottom of which is his lack of understanding of what they are about. Their need for fun and frivolity. Fanny of course was moulded into his thoughts and philosophies. A very different thing from connecting with a real person. His relationship with Mary Crawford failed for just that reason. He never knew or loved her. He knew her only as an idealized imagination of her, re-interpreting all of her actions based on his own point of view. What he could not explain away distressed him. Interesting to note that her love for her brother was very genuine and deep. With all her knowledge of him and no glossing over the rough bits.
In Persuasion, once again the sisters are all separate beings. They each have their families, friends and own circles that they connect to far more than their siblings.
Does this have to do with the times they lived in? Women could not go to work. They had to find a suitable husband. Would that decision affect all other life choices? Whether to stay in touch with a sister or not?
The same would also be true of younger sons of gentlemen. Unable to inherit the family property while also being unable to go into trade, they are so busy getting by they do not have time for less materially rewarding filial ties.
Notably, all characters free of these restrictions have closer ties to their siblings. Fanny and William. But not, Fanny and Susan. Susan needs to prove her worth and unlikelihood of disturbing the flow of Fanny's life before she can truly be admitted into sisterhood. And is this (coming back to a former thought) the reason for the close friendship between Lizzie and Charlotte Lucas?
Or was it just an indicator of Austen's own experiences? This I doubt. From everything I have read of her, they were an affectionate family. Far more than the Brontes with their twisted glorification of their brother and jealousy of each other.
Or is it simply a true picture of the most of female bonds. A woman owns her family more than a man. This is true even today. Most men seem to find time for their friends more than women do. Women put home and children first. Even the ones who go out to work do not seem to find time to keep up their own friendships as much as they used to.
Is Austen then simply telling it like it is? And is Anuja the exception?
I'm not sure but I think it is time to read Sense and Sensibility again!
I had never stopped to think about this.
I can see why she noticed it though. She writes with great knowledge about large families. Sisterhood flows strongly as a theme through her books. It is very obvious in "Those Pricey Thakur Girls" of course but there is a sisterhood between Zoya and her colleague whose name I have forgotten. Between Jini and her grandmother. But was it really absent in P&P? More specifically, were the older two girls mean or condescending in their attitudes towards the younger ones?
I thought about it a bit and have not finished thinking yet but here are a few of my unorganized thoughts.
For one, it is in a way an unfair point. The lack of sisterly love is not one way. Lydia is just as condescending in her attitude towards her sisters. She shows neither love nor affection.
In fact, the only affection one can sense is that between the older two. And a real, deep friendship between Lizzie and Charlotte Lucas. Why this difference, I wonder. But let me come back to this later.
Another thing I was wondering is, what about Austen's other books. What happens there? In a sense you can think of Mansfield park as "What happened to Lydia's children?". Was there any love between sisters or cousins there?
Let's start with the older bunch The youngest girl who ran away simply grew distant and had no more time for her sisters, thinking of them only when they might be useful to her. Their troubles, their concerns are nothing to her. The execrable Mrs. Norris of course loved no one at all. And Maria was the kind of character Austen routinely put in her books with a sort of gentle contempt.
Among the younger lot, the sisters quarrel and have a temporary fallout over a man. They continue their merrymaking - which is really a search for husbands/fulfilling relationships- even as their brother lies dying. Even Edmund who is shown as loving and caring towards Fanny, does not really love his siblings. At the bottom of which is his lack of understanding of what they are about. Their need for fun and frivolity. Fanny of course was moulded into his thoughts and philosophies. A very different thing from connecting with a real person. His relationship with Mary Crawford failed for just that reason. He never knew or loved her. He knew her only as an idealized imagination of her, re-interpreting all of her actions based on his own point of view. What he could not explain away distressed him. Interesting to note that her love for her brother was very genuine and deep. With all her knowledge of him and no glossing over the rough bits.
In Persuasion, once again the sisters are all separate beings. They each have their families, friends and own circles that they connect to far more than their siblings.
Does this have to do with the times they lived in? Women could not go to work. They had to find a suitable husband. Would that decision affect all other life choices? Whether to stay in touch with a sister or not?
The same would also be true of younger sons of gentlemen. Unable to inherit the family property while also being unable to go into trade, they are so busy getting by they do not have time for less materially rewarding filial ties.
Notably, all characters free of these restrictions have closer ties to their siblings. Fanny and William. But not, Fanny and Susan. Susan needs to prove her worth and unlikelihood of disturbing the flow of Fanny's life before she can truly be admitted into sisterhood. And is this (coming back to a former thought) the reason for the close friendship between Lizzie and Charlotte Lucas?
Or was it just an indicator of Austen's own experiences? This I doubt. From everything I have read of her, they were an affectionate family. Far more than the Brontes with their twisted glorification of their brother and jealousy of each other.
Or is it simply a true picture of the most of female bonds. A woman owns her family more than a man. This is true even today. Most men seem to find time for their friends more than women do. Women put home and children first. Even the ones who go out to work do not seem to find time to keep up their own friendships as much as they used to.
Is Austen then simply telling it like it is? And is Anuja the exception?
I'm not sure but I think it is time to read Sense and Sensibility again!
No comments:
Post a Comment