January 2013 Discussion: Persuasion by Jane Austen (spoilers)
 

Let's discuss the January 2013 MobileRead Book Club selection, Persuasion by Jane Austen. What did you think?

This video, posted at the Grauniad a couple of days ago, seems timely. Marcel Theroux is in Bath, dresses as a Regency gentleman, and takes some dancing lessons. The squib gets it wrong, as none of the action in Pride and Prejudice takes place in Bath (although no doubt Mr. Darcy did visit), but perhaps it will make it easier to visualize Sir Walter or William Elliott.

Persuasion is easily the most accomplished of Jane Austen's novels and certainly the most subtle. Most matters admit shades of gray and spring can follow fall. One of my favorite aspects is how beautifully the seasons complement the story and reflect her themes.

Austen applies her usual penetration to her character studies and Persuasion lacks her usual buffoonery. Sir Walter Elliott, in his conceit and his absurdity, is all too believable. As a result, her depiction of class and a changing society is more penetrating and even damning than in her earlier works.

I admit it, though. I miss the high humor of P&P and Emma (probably my favorite of all the Austen novels). However, the subdued wit is necessary to a story that's both wistful and hopeful, about loss and regeneration.

I'm still reading this due to a few unforeseen set backs and my darn work getting in the way of my reading.

I am enjoying the story even though there seems to be quite a bit of fore shadowing as to the conclusion(s).

I have to admit that I still have not finished this yet. So far (ducking for cover :D) I have found it very slow going. When Louisa Musgrove was injured I perked up at bit, as finally something actually happened. The way the characters seem to parse in minute detail every turn of phrase or expression, I am glad I don't associate with such people. I would be afraid to ever open my mouth for fear of being taken more seriously than warranted. But I will keep an open mind as I have not reached the end yet.

:eek: :eek: :shocked:

But that's the point!

It might be the point, but it gets tedious anyway. I understand that the pages of planning that go into taking a walk are intended to convey how oppressive the social conventions were, but it's smothering to read. I'm not a detail person and struggle with other authors who saturate their books with descriptions of every little thing. At least in Austen's novels it serves a purpose.

I did like the subtlety of this novel compared to her others, star-crossed lovers are rarely dealt with this respectfully. I was afraid to root for them, since the happy ending wasn't a forgone conclusion.

Oh, I was kidding; I know you know that. I realize it's a matter of taste. I love to lose myself in those convoluted sentences and minutiae, but I acknowledge it's not everyone's cuppa.

I especially liked just the hint that Anne Elliott might have been happy with one of the other potential suitors. Not really William, since she was rightfully suspicious of his transformation and motives, but Captain Benwick seemed a distinct possibility. Had Frederick Wentworth ended up with Louisa, I could just see Anne's deciding that she had enough of commonality with Captain Benwick to make a marriage with him the best of her options.

I thought it was lacking in comparison to Pride and Prejudice, and in many ways seemed to be Pride and Prejudice Lite. The same theme of how pride can thwart happiness was explored, but not as compellingly nor as clearly as in P&P. And while I liked for the most part the way Anne was portrayed, I never felt the same level of sympathy for her that I did for P&P's Elizabeth; partly because I felt she shouldn't have let a friend's advice born of financial and social concerns hold such sway over her decisions.

Then there was the way the author expected us to feel sympathy over one of the characters because she was so impoverished she could only afford one servant. Was that meant as satire? I can't afford any servants. Now will someone please feel sorry for me?

From the first moment the book begins, persuasion is the name of the game. Not finished reading yet (sorry, sidetracked by Hominids by Robert Sawyer), but I think I'm going to go back and count all the various ways and means and incidences of persuasion that occurs throughout the story. I know that is quite a literal take on the title, but it did make me smile a bit while reading.

To me, that was one of the most realistic parts of the book and I think Auden was on the side of Anne's being right to listen to Lady Russell. At 19, with no knowledge of the world and a lover who was all talk and bluster as yet with no real expectations, prudence dictated caution and advice from someone in loco parentis was not to be ignored. Lady Russell was wrong in her dislike of Wentworth and therein lay the problem. Someone more understanding and sympathetic might have advocated patience and a long engagement, except that Lady Russell thought Anne could do better. And in Mrs. Smith we have the example of just how wrongly "the world well lost for love" could go.

As in all the Austen novels, precedence and position are seen as all-important, but at the same time we see a society more in flux than depicted on the surface. Sir Walter makes me chortle, with his overweaning vanity and his jealousy of his position, the lowest possible inherited one. He's being outstripped by a gaggle of self-made men, one of whom can afford to live in Sir Walter's house, as he no longer can.

I loved rereading "Persuasion" after a great many years. I find Anne a very sympathetic heroine who definitely needs to be rescued from her stupid, self-important family.

And even though I knew exactly what was going to happen, I could savour the language and commentary about the various characters along the way. For example, I think at the end of Chapter 11 when Anne had been talking with Captain Benwick, a lovely comment about her realising that like most people who give advice, she was in need of heeding it herself. (Sorry, I'm writing this away from home and don't have the book with me to quote it exactly.)

One of the reasons I so love this novel lies in Austen's characterization. Personally I think that her main characters are far more subtly drawn than their equivalents in Pride and Prejudice. Ane and Wentworth are older than Elizabeth and Darcy and have each gone through a traumatic emotional experience in their romance. They have experienced the darker side of life and felt anguish and disappointment.

I would agree with Issybird that Austen certainly does feel that Anne was correct to take Lady Russell's advice--though in the event it proved to be incorrect and certainly caused deep, lasting unhappiness in Anne. How could a 19 year old reject the genuine loving concern of someone who was to all intents and purposes a mother-figure? After all, Anne had no one else to turn to and no other from whom she could obtain rational and loving advice.

Wentworth, too, was scarred by the breach. When he had proven himself and returned he harboured an intense indignation which he felt was justified. Darcy deserved to be rejected when he first proposed; Wentworth genuinely believed that Lady Russell had shafted him unfairly--and he is correct in so thinking. But he allowed his resentment to smother his love--and nearly made a disastrous mistake of judgement himself.

Thus, to summarise, Jane Austen creates a wonderful ironic pattern of behaviour. One cannot say that Lady Russell gave bad advice within her own context. Anne would have been wrong to rebel--considering her age. It is completely understandable that Wentworth feels humiliated and hurt and is angry that Anne wouldn't trust him and put her faith in their mutual love. This is a far more complex pattern of relationships than in any previous novel she wrote.

Add to this a magnificent villain in William Elliot. Austen was concerned with the relationship of manners--civilised behaviour--and morals--the underlying ethical beliefs that supported civilised behviour. Here is a character with all the correct externals of manners--beneath them he is utterly wicked--far more so than Wickham. Yet, his affection for Anne is genuine and he has the backing of Lady Russell. Even Wentworth realises that the marriage of Anne and Elliott would be the social optimum for both.

In the end, Elliott is exposed by the ambiguous Mrs Smith. I say "ambiguous" because she actually supports the idea until she realises that Anne has already decided against the union. In Mrs Smith we get another snapshot of the underbelly of Jane Austen's world--not as dramatic or extended as that in Mansfield Park--but perhaps more moving.

There's so much in this novel! I haven't even touched on the ridiculous Sir Walter Elliott who is merely an empty shell of manners and his arrogant daughter Elizabeth. In fact the theme of self-awareness and/or its lack of it is a significant area of concern in this wonderful book.

I never tire of it.

I found on this re-read that there's a bit too much exposition at the start and a very sudden resolution at the end.

I would have preferred to have had the characters show themselves by their actions in the time seven to eight years earlier, rather than having the detailed descriptions at the start.

Granted, that would leave the problem of how to cover the intervening period, but I would rather have a [seven years later] marker that what looks like it could have been a summary of half a book in the first chapter.

Alternatively, I would have like it to start with action, and let the past become apparent through the interactions of the characters, rather than from an omniscient narrator.

And after a very long build-up, the resolution at the end comes very, very quickly.

Still, an enjoyable re-read, even if not my favourite Austen.

So I have now finished this. I am at a disadvantage relative to many here in that this the the first work by Jane Austen that I have read, and honestly probably the last. So that I can not compare this to any of her other novels. I was surprised by how it all ended, in particular about who became paired up with who.

I get that Austen was mocking or criticizing how the class she was writing about put so much importance on titles and social pecking order. Though to me she was only really lambasting that taken to the extreme, as in the case of Sir Walter and his daughter Elizabeth. Austen does not seem to really question the basic premise of that class system. In fact there was not a single character in the novel to represent what would have been the overwhelming majority of the population of England at that time. That is people who would be too preoccupied with simply getting by to worry over such nonsense. I can't help but compare Austen and this book to the books by Charles Dickens that I really like. Dickens' works are filled with characters drawn from the top to bottom of society, not limited to the small upper class.

This is not really an important topic relative to the novel, but I was struck by how becoming a British naval officer was a good route to wealth and movement into the upper class for men of modest beginnings. I was remained of the great Horatio Hornblower novels. Since the British navy for so long ruled the seas in that era I guess one can't question success. Still it seems surprising that the navy would win battles when the minds of the commanders of ships would have been on their personal financial gain by acquiring prizes, instead of winning the battle.

I thought that the ending gives us another example of superb irony. Mrs Clay and William Elliot have been at war for the entire novel. Mrs Clay knows that Sir Walter is clearly dumb enough to marry her for all she has to do is to flatter him outrageously and that Elizabeth is dumb enough to ignore that possibility until it is too late. Mr Elliot knows that by marrying Anne, he will always be around to circumvent Mrs Clay's designs. But Anne doesn't co-operate.

Thus, William Elliot buys off Mrs Clay by making her his mistress: ;)

The news of his cousin Anne's engagement burst on Mr Elliot most unexpectedly. It deranged his best plan of domestic happiness, his best hope of keeping Sir Walter single by the watchfulness which a son-in-law's rights would have given. But, though discomfited and disappointed, he could still do something for his own interest and his own enjoyment. He soon quitted Bath; and on Mrs Clay's quitting it soon afterwards, and being next heard of as established under his protection in London, it was evident how double a game he had been playing, and how determined he was to save himself from being cut out by one artful woman, at least.

But Mrs Clay may triumph in the end:

Mrs Clay's affections had overpowered her interest, and she had sacrificed, for the young man's sake, the possibility of scheming longer for Sir Walter. She has abilities, however, as well as affections; and it is now a doubtful point whether his cunning, or hers, may finally carry the day; whether, after preventing her from being the wife of Sir Walter, he may not be wheedled and caressed at last into making her the wife of Sir William.

That paragraph is vintage Austen irony! :) :)

It is satisfying to see the two schemers ending up with each other.

Sorry - still reading this. :o

I'm finding it tough going at the moment. I've heard from a couple of friends that Persuasion is not the best start to Jane Austen, but I'm slowly but surely beginning to warm to Anne and even Captain Wentworth (through a layer of indirection).

I'm only 40% through so at this stage I don't think I'll finish until the weekend. :(

I think that's true. Pride and Prejudice is flat-out funny with a host of comic characters, and while Persuasion has its moments (all of Sir Walter's mirrors!), it's not a comic novel, which P&P is.

For those who've found themselves left flat by Persuasion, I'd strongly suggest trying P&P or Emma before giving up on Austen.

Almost exactly the recommendation given to me. :)

:o Still reading this too...about 40%. I'm quite enjoying it but keep getting sidetracked by other books. :o

PS: As an avid knitter, I'm also enjoying the Jane Austen Knits magazines. It's nice to read more of Austen's works so I have a better frame of reference for the knits featured.

Fascinating. Do you do crochet as well? If so: http://www.amazon.com/Austentatious-.../dp/0762441461

I've become a bit of a crochet nut in the last 6 months.

I don't crochet....but will definitely share this with my friends that do. Thanks!

On a different tack, rereading "Persuasion" reminded me of a poem by Rudyard Kipling to be found in "Debits and Credits". It's called "Jane's Marriage" and is as follows:

Jane went to Paradise:
That was only fair.
Good Sir Walter met her first,
And led her up the stair.
Henry and Tobias,
And Miguel of Spain,
Stood with Shakespeare at the top
To welcome Jane.

Then the Three Archangels
Offered out of hand,
Anything in Heaven's gift
That she might command.
Azrael's eyes upon her,
Raphael's wings above,
Michael's sword against her heart,
Jane said: 'Love.'

Instantly the under-
standing Seraphim
Laid their fingers on their lips
And went to look for him.
Stole across the Zodiac,
Harnessed Charles's Wain,
And whispered round the Nebulae
'Who loved Jane?'

In a private limbo
Where none had thought to look,
Sat a Hampshire gentleman
Reading of a book.
It was called Persuasion,
And it told the plain
Story of the love between
Him and Jane.

He heard the question
Circle Heaven through -
Closed the book and answered:
'I did - and do!'
Quietly but speedily
(As Captain Wentworth moved)
Entered into Paradise
The man Jane loved!

I don't think Kipling was a good poet (though a great writer of short stories), but I find his affection for Jane Austen very charming.

I'm tickled that Kipling sees Sir Walter Scott as coequal to Shakespeare, Fielding and Cervantes; Smollett isn't quite the reach. Great fun.

I'm only a little more than halfway through this right now :(

I'm getting through it okay, but it just hasn't enthralled me like Pride and Prejudice did.

That does have more charm than I usually associate with Kipling. :) Thanks for sharing it! :thanks:

For those, who read this or any other Jane Austen book for the first time: Persuasion initially had another ending how Anne and Capt. Wentworth finally found together.

You can read it here: http://www.pemberley.com/janeinfo/pcanchap.html
but her manuscript was not easy to read!

I find it highly interesting to compare these different versions and I love the actual ending much more. You pierce my soul! :)

I read it as being Sir Walter Raleigh, not Sir Walter Scott - who I think would have outlived Jane by quite a bit, wouldn't he?

Many thanks for this link, Billi - really interesting to see the draft version and compare it with the final one.

How delightful! Where I struggled greatly through the first half, the second half seemed to flow more for me. I think it was possibly the combination of two things: I had become more accustomed to the prose and the story became much more interesting.

Towards the end, I noticed no difficulty in reading Austen's prose. I was swept into the agonising misunderstandings and misfires of Anne's and Captain Wentworth's romance. I was intrigued by the eventual revelation of Mr Elliot's true character. I was amused by by Sir Walter's vanity even as it appalled me. But Mary, I wanted to hit with a brick. Apologies to all for my vulgarity, but to me she was painful to observe at every encounter.

If this was a slightly less approachable example of Austen, I have to say I'm somewhat heartened by the thought. I will be putting Pride & Prejudice and Emma on my list of must reads.

One of the saving graces of my earlier trouble with this novel was Anne herself. When I read of most romances (because I rarely actually read them), I find the female protagonist painful. Not so for Anne. I really enjoyed this character and I liked Captain Wentworth as well. Finally a relationship where some self-loathing woman is not completely smitten by a cruel and undeserving cad. Anyway - enough to say that I really enjoyed them both and was hopeful of a good outcome.

I'm glad I did not skip this read.

:smack: I'm an idiot. Of course.

I remembered your comment when I came to that part and have to confess that I giggled.

Thanks for that link! :thanks: :)

I like and agree with this view.

ary
 

Lady Russell seemed to value Anne as her sisters valued themselves; they thought that as baronet's daughters, they were the bee's knees. Yet despite trips to London, Elizabeth couldn't catch anyone and the best that Mary could do was a gentleman farmer. Mary's insistence on her precedence over her MIL tells us all we need to know about her. As the widow of a mere knight, Lady Russell was presumably dazzled by a hereditary title. This is part of what makes Persuasion Austen's masterpiece; manifest absurdities in earlier books is much more subtle.

In all Austen's books that society is somewhat more fluid than appearances indicate initially, with denizens of the middle class achieving gentry status and some in the upper reaches greatly reduced in circumstances. Still no hope for the submerged tenths, admittedly.

Glad you got your giggle in the middle of all that wistfulness. :snicker:

The characters in Persuasion have a depth that I feel is directly owing to their problems in evaluating the moral roots underlying their decisions--giving their characters a consequent moral ambiguity. Thus, as issybird mentions, Lady Russell has a problem with class distinctions and the respect due to titles. It is no wonder that she sees Mr Elliott as the solution to Anne's problems. And it would seem that Mr Elliott actually does value Anne and would treat her well.

Mrs Smith--the most complex morally ambiguous character in the novel says:

"Well, my dear Miss Elliot, I hope and trust you will be very happy. Mr Elliot has sense to understand the value of such a woman. Your peace will not be
shipwrecked as mine has been. You are safe in all worldly matters,
and safe in his character. He will not be led astray; he will not be
misled by others to his ruin."

And even after her revelation of Elliott's true character she states:

"He is no hypocrite now. He truly wants to marry you. His present attentions to your family are very sincere: quite from the heart."

I find Mrs Smith to be one of the most interesting characters in the novel--certainly the most interesting of the secondary figures. She has fallen on hard times and very much appreciates the visits and help of Anne. But she is willing to let the marriage with Elliot take its course because it is the surest way she can receive the value of property to which she is entitled but unable to gain without assistance. It is only when Mrs Smith realises that Anne will certainly not marry Elliott that she reveals his true character. Indeed, Anne is herself astonished that Mrs Smith not only did not reveal Mr Elliott's character earlier but even seemed to promote the marriage.

The reply given to Anne is a revelation of a character whose cynicism is such that she is willing to let Anne take her chances and she makes no apology for doing so:

"My dear," was Mrs Smith's reply, "there was nothing else to be done.
I considered your marrying him as certain, though he might not yet
have made the offer, and I could no more speak the truth of him,
than if he had been your husband. My heart bled for you,
as I talked of happiness; and yet he is sensible, he is agreeable,
and with such a woman as you, it was not absolutely hopeless.
He was very unkind to his first wife. They were wretched together.
But she was too ignorant and giddy for respect, and he had never loved her.
I was willing to hope that you must fare better."

And Anne realises that Mrs Smith's assessment is by no means impossible--particularly with Lady Russell maneuvering in the background.

Off-hand, I can think of no other minor character in Austen that has as complex a psychology as Mrs Smith. And her presence is another reason why this novel has significantly more psychological depth and realism than any of the others.

Thanks for that. I also found Mrs Smith to be quite interesting. It looked to me like she fully intended to subtly blackmail Mr Elliot by showing her connection to Anne and when it looked like that would not be effective, she played the protective friend.

I was always a bit unsure about her in the end and it coloured all my first impressions of her in the story.

But it's nice to have one of those characters that you can't paint black or white by the end of the book.

I have been rereading Pride and Prejudice and Persuasion for about 25 years now, and only yesterday connected the similarities between the two Elizabeths. Both are fascinated with rank, both have considered an entail held by a cousin as a lure to matrimony, and both are their father's favourites.

Neither have interest in or accomplishment in household management, but have sufficient social skills to be confident in public. Why then do I laugh with Elizabeth Bennet and wince at Elizabeth Elliot?

Perhaps if Mary Bennet was the protagonist, Mr Collins would have looked less ridiculous and Mr Darcy more so.

That's a great insight! :thanks: I've never noticed the parallel links between the two Elizabeths. It's as if the Elizabeth of Persuasion is a kind of dark mirror of the character in P&P.