| Author |
Comment
|
Terri
Registered User
(8/27/01 11:12:16 pm)
|
Fairy tale themes in Jane Austen
Laura, we were going to start this topic some time ago, weren't we? So I need your help in kicking it off please!
|
Heidi
Unregistered User
(8/28/01 10:57:28 am)
|
Pride and Prejudice/Beauty and the Beast
Would this be a good place to start? I haven't thought much about Austen and fairy tales, but I have certainly read enough of each to want to join the discussion. Even the plot has some similarities--a spurned proposal of marriage, a suitor who is not what he first appears, and a young woman who is well-loved by her father.
At the SCBWI conference a few weeks ago, one of the authors--I can't remember who at the moment--suggested that P&P was the first true young adult novel. I have been thinking about that ever since.
My husband also suggested we sit down and watch the A&E movie sometime soon, so perhaps this weekend I will be further immersed in the story again. Watching the movie always makes me reach for the book again.
Heidi
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(8/28/01 4:33:22 pm)
|
Re: Pride and Prejudice/Beauty and the Beast
Definately a good place to start. Coincidentally, I just watched the A&E version of PP. I enjoyed it a great deal, though I thought there were a few too many "stud" shots of Colin Firth - a bit corny, though I'm not complaining. I'm also reading PP currently.
I think Darcy does play that Beast role, and Lizzie is an interesting Beauty. Her beauty is emphasized, but always sister Jane is the true physical beauty, as well as having the amiable temperment and forgiving nature. It's Lizzie's spirit that captivates the Beast and makes him re-think how he behaves.
I actually have to run tonight, but I look forward to thinking on this more and reading what you all have to say! Laura Mc
|
Terri
Registered User
(8/28/01 11:27:39 pm)
|
Re: Pride and Prejudice/Beauty and the Beast
Yes, this is a great place to start. If Darcy is the Beast, then the enchantment he's under is a monstrous pride and arrogance, a spell laid upon him (according to Austen) by the adults in his early life: "As a child, I was taught what was right, but I was not taught to correct my temper. I was given good principals, but left to follow them in pride and conceit. ...I was spoiled by my parents, who...almost taught me to be to be selfish and overbearing, to care for none beyond my family circle, to think meanly of the rest of the world...."
Lizzie makes an interesting Beauty -- almost a Beauty in the Robin McKinley mode in that she's smart, practical, happily abdicates the role of the "beauty of the family" to her sister Jane, and doesn't much care if she appears in company with mud on her skirts. And like Beauty in the fairy tale versions, as opposed to the all-perfect Belle of the Disney cartoon, she makes mistakes, pays for them, and has to undergo her own transformation to mirror the Beast's.
Heidi, your mention of the father really set me thinking. One can definitely draw comparisons there too. Both stories hinge on loving but weak fathers (I *hate* the fact that the Disney cartoon removes this basic element of the plot), and the likely fate of the Bennet girls, like Beauty, is to be "sold" in marriage. Thus the mother's anger when Lizzie refuses to be "sold" to Mr. Collins.
I love the A&E version of Pride and Prejudice. (Actually, it's the BBC version of Pride and Prejudice, made here in England. When it first came out, the entire country was enthralled. Here in my village, the streets were literally quiet on the night of the final episode, the way America gets only for things like the Superbowl -- everyone was breathless with excitment and the newspapers were full of it. Ya gotta love a country that stops dead for Jane Austen.) It's a wonderfully faithful version, using much of Austen's own dialogue rather than re-writing it. (The sheer arrogance of re-writing Austen in other versions leaves me floored.) And I have to confess that I personally liked the stud shots of Colin Firth. (<g>) My only quibble with the BBC version -- but it's a big one -- is the ending. By ending with a wedding and a public kiss (Darcy? Kiss in public???), and thusignoring Austen's final chapter, the plot becomes reduced suddenly to mere romance, as opposed to what it is: a wickedly sly, sharply insightful comedy of manners. The true end of the story, which is about character above all, lies in, first, Elizabeth and Darcy's delicious disection of their previous encounters, and then in the short but crystal clear picture Austen gives us of what *becomes* of the characters in the final few pages. I want the BBC to go back and refilm the end...and then it would perfect. Unlike every other version of Austen on film I've yet seen, always disappointing....with the possible exception of Persuation.
Oh yum, two of my favorite things, Austen and fairy tales. I like this topic.
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(8/29/01 4:27:50 pm)
|
Re: Pride and Prejudice/Beauty and the Beast
I second that yum Terri, I'm in heaven with this discussion.
The interesting thing in P&P is that, while the loving father is unable to provide for the daughters, it is the mother who wants to "sell" them. (Persuasion too has the mother figure, Lady Russell, who wants Anne to make a fine match rather than marry for love.) I suppose we could discuss this a great deal, as well as Austen's deft depictions of the interplay and power struggle between women, but I can't make such a discussion fit to the fairy tale theme at this moment. There are all those wicked mothers/step mothers, but they want to eliminate the daughters not marry them off to respectable rich men.
It also occured to me that Lydia is the selfish sister, jealous - as the sisters are in the East of the Sun, West of the Moon and Cupid and Psyche tales which are so similar to Beauty and the Beast. Lydia almost ruins Lizzie's chances and in so doing makes Lizzie realize that she's come to love the Beast, as happens in Beauty and the Beast, East of the Sun, and Cupid and Psyche. Lydia also provides the catalyst for the Beast, rather than the Beauty, to prove his love - by being decent and worthy of loved.
My husband and I were talking about the Cinderella themes in Austen last night, and P&P especially. Lizzie is seeking love not money - though she adores Pemberly at first sight - but she does win the handsome rich 'prince' who will save her from being pushed from her home by Mr. Collins at her father's death, and who also saves her family's reputation and her other sisters' chances to marry well. Mansfield Park and Northanger Abbey and Sense and Sensibility also have heroines who marry out of poverty, or relative poverty, and instability.
Goodness, time has flown. L.
|
Terri
Registered User
(8/30/01 12:36:15 am)
|
Re: Pride and Prejudice/Beauty and the Beast
Laura, you wrote "I suppose we could discuss this a great deal, as well as Austen's deft depictions of the interplay and power struggle between women, but I can't make such a discussion fit to the fairy tale theme at this moment."
Well, none of Austen's books are going to fit cleanly into any specific fairy tale, nor is there any real evidence (as far as I know) of Austen drawing consciously on fairy-tale-inspired motifs. But I think it's interesting nonetheless to look at the fairy tale themes that crop up in her work, particularly if one is looking at fairy tales in the light of Marina Warner's scholarship (in From the Beast to the Blonde): as women's stories, and ones that often address issues of power and powerlessness. Warner writes eloquently about the way tales like Cinderella address power struggles within the family, and between women -- which is definitely Austen territory. Perhaps that's why I'm such a fan of fairy tales AND Austen's books, since both address issues central to women's lives. Particularly in a historical context.
Perhaps Mrs. Bennet *can* be compared to selfish (if not entirely evil) step-mothers found in a wide variety of tales...for Austen makes it clear that Lizzie and Jane are beloved by their father but not by their mother, who is only interested in the foolish two younger daughters. (Nobody is interested in poor Mary. I've often thought that a re-telling of the tale from her point of view would be interesting -- but it would have to be someone clever indeed to take on Austen!I'd never dare....) Yes, in pure self-interest she "reclaims" the older daughters when they marry well, but aside from their marriage potential, she treats them almost as if they were her husband's children by another woman. And Mr. Bennet is equally uninterested in the daughters who "belong" to his wife.
Bingley's sisters also have "wicked step-sister" aspects, particularly when they divide Bingley and Jane from each other. I'm reminded of the story of King Crispin here. The lovers are divided, Jane is locked away in her tower -- the imprisonment of social conformity, which makes it impossible for her as a respectable young woman to directly seek him out. She can only rely on the untrustworthy sisters for contact; and sit and wait. There are even hints (though false ones) that he is pledged to another (Darcy's sister), until the true bride is won back again at the end of the story. Yet Jane and Lizzie are not permitted to *act*, as a fairy tale heroine would in this situation. Gender and class, as both were reckoned in Austen's day, prevent them from taking the requisite action: crossing seven iron mountains, wearing out seven pairs of iron shoes, eating seven loaves of Iron bread. Society allows Jane only to sit, wait, perfect the patience of a saint. Lizzie, the more active of the pair, still can only act indirectly. And yet, in proper fairy tale fashion, action alone will not achieve a happy ending. Virtue, courage, and strong-mindedness on both Lizzie's part and Jane's are required, and (importantly) the ability to see through magic/disguise/illusion (ie: Wickham's wiles, the Bingley sisters' tricks) -- resulting in the personal transformation of everyone who can be reckoned as a hero or heroine: Darcy from prideful Beast to Prince, Lizzie from prejudiced maiden to wise woman, Bingley released from the "evil spell" of his sisters' interference in his life, and Jane transformed from a woman of repressed, steady emotions to one overwhelmed by her own happiness.
As for Cinderella themes in Mansfield Park and others...lord, yes. But I have to stop here or I'll never get to work today. <g>
Edited by: Terri at: 8/30/01 12:54:00 am
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(8/30/01 3:42:03 pm)
|
Re: Pride and Prejudice/Beauty and the Beast
Good point Terri about Bingley's sisters, particularly Caroline who is so insufferable. You'd feel sorry for her, except that she just meddles in every way she can.
It strikes me that seeing through illusion and deception to find true virtue is a common theme in Austen's work. And many of the femal characters have guides (the fairy godmother), usually other women. In the case of PP, its Aunt Gardner, who convinces Lizzie to look at Pemberly which leads to a renewed acquiantance between the two lovers. Aunt Gardner also confesses about Darcy's aid in the Lydia/Wickham affair.
I'm way too tired to tackle Cinderella themes in Mansfield Park tonight. Just had my first teaching day as a school librarian and the kids were testing me. I'm lucky I'm *very* part time. I couldn't possibly do this five days a week. Full time teachers are saints. Laura Mc
|
Heidi
Unregistered User
(8/30/01 4:36:48 pm)
|
More on Austen
Oh, I like the idea of Aunt Gardner as a fairy godmother. She really does behave as one. Bingley's sisters are definitely wicked stepsisters and I can imagine them remaining so as wicked sisters-in-law.
Also, I do love the A&E/BBC production iof P&P. (When I call it the BBC among my friends, they always think of the earlier BBC version that played on Masterpiece and was torture to them in high school.) I completely agree with your opinion of it, Terri. I was only disappointed with the ending in which the conversations and resolutions between Elizabeth and Darcy fail to take place. Those pages are my favorite part of the book. All of the movies fail to incorporate those final moments. I also like Persuasion a great deal. It is pretty loyal to Austen and helped me enjoy the book by showing nuances I had missed before.
In many ways, Lizzie is also the rescuer of her sisters. She speaks up to Darcy and ends up "rescuing" Jane's relationship with Bingley. She also indirectly rescues Lydia from a completely wrecked reputation since Darcy buys Wickham off out of love for her. It is remote, but Lizzie is the only proactive one in the family. Jane, on the other hand, almost loses her love because she is not vocal or demonstrative enough. Lydia's actions are self-destructive and far, far from positive. So in some ways, Lizzie reminds me of the youngest sister (although she isn't) who always rescues her other sisters from perilous situations, such as Molly Whuppie.
I haven't read Mansfield Park in a while, just watched the movie which was no help. I realized I have been neglecting Emma though. What themes do you see there? Perhaps there is a slight touch of King Thrushbeard/Bristlelip in it with Emma getting humbled by Mr. Knightly?
|
Heidi
Anne Heiner
ezOP
(8/30/01 4:45:32 pm)
|
Re: Fairy tale themes in Jane Austen
Terri, I forgot to shout that I too thought of Robin McKinley's Beauty in comparison with Lizzie. I laughed when I read your comment because I had forgotten to write it, but you did it for me.
Heidi
|
Terri
Registered User
(8/30/01 11:24:46 pm)
|
Re: More on Austen
Heidi, I need to think about Emma a bit before responding to your question. But in the meantime, I want to respond to Laura's comments about the "fairy godmothers" in Austen's tales. Yes, indeed, that's exactly what they are -- and I hadn't realized that before! It's particularly interesting when you look at the role of fairy godmothers in the French salon fairy tales, which is where they became such a popular part of the fairy tale
tradition; you don't really find many fairy godmothers in older literary or oral tales. (Cinderella is aided by her dead mother's magic, for instance, in older versions of the story, not an FG.) Someone (Jack Zipes? Nancy Canepa?) has pointed out that the FGs, in tales by the women salon writers, can be read as representing the writers themselves. These were aristocratic women rebelling against the social roles of their day (ala Austen), particularly arranged marriages. A number of the salon writers had suffered from arranged marriages themselves (D'Aulnoy was basically sold off to the highest bidder -- a drunken brute who was 30 years older than her) or they'd struggled to resist marriage altogether. So you have a group of women fairy tale writers here who were independent, highly self-educated, unmarried or separated from their husbands, all hosting and gathering in fashionable Parisian salons through which they wielded enormous cultural influence during the later part of the 17th century. A smart, spirited young woman (like Austen's Lizzie) who feared the fate her parents planned for her (marriage to a Mr. Collins) could turn to the salonieres for guidance: fairy godmothers in the flesh. (For instance, Marie-Jeanne L'Heritier, a popular fairy tale writer of the period, was mentored by the writer Henriette Julie de Murat and then financially aided by a woman patron, the Duchess of Nemours -- which allowed her to remain unmarried, independent, and maintain a long, successful career.) Thus it's not surprising that in the French salon tales, fairy godmothers (independent, smart, and beautiful, with no male fairies around to cramp their style) are plentiful...swooping in to correct situations often brought about through foolish, wicked, or absent parents.
I love the idea of Lizzie's aunt, Mrs. Gardner, sporting a pair of invisible fairy wings.
Edited by: Terri at: 8/30/01 11:32:27 pm
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(9/1/01 8:44:02 am)
|
Re: More on Austen
Terri,
You have me totally fascinated about the salon writers. I've only seen versions of Perreault's tales, not the women. What books should I look for? I would be interested in reading both tales and history/biography about the tellers. Thanks, L. Mc.
PS - Heidi, I'm thinking on Emma too. I recently read that one and though its not my emotional favorite, I think it absolutely brilliant.
|
Terri
Registered User
(9/1/01 11:16:14 am)
|
Re: More on Austen
Laura, here's a short article on the Salon writers, which lists
book recommendations at the end: www.endicott-studio.com/forconte.html.
I wish more of their work was available in English translation,
as well as more biographical work about them. But thank goodness
for scholars like Warner and Zipes, or we wouldn't have as much
info as we've got. I want someone to do a study comparing the women
fairy tale writers of 17th century Paris and women fairy tale writers
(particularly in the fantasy field) today; I think some interesting
comparison (and contrasts) could be made, and it would be interesting
to place the modern writers in that historical tradition. I considered
doing it myself, but I think I'm too closely involved with the later
to be objective. Greg says he may tackle it if he ever has the time,
and I think he'd be the perfect person to do it!
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(9/2/01 3:56:27 pm)
|
FGs
Terri,
Thanks for the salon info. Now I'm even more fascinated than before. I see lots of research in my future.
I'm also interested in reading some Austen biographies. I find it so intriguing that she wrote these fabulously romantic stories but never married.
Back to the fairy godmother theme - I love FG as a nickname, it's like a great name for a band or something - Persuasion has a great FG or perhaps two - Mrs. Smith, Anne Elliot's school friend, and Mrs. Croft. They ease Anne's journey of discovery, as well as help her see through her cousin's lies. And Mrs. Smith's magic, really, is information and specifically information passed along by women. She hears and sees from personal experience, but also from "gossip," the "idle" tales told by her nurse.
Fanny Price of Mansfield Park, though most similar to Cinderella has no FG, if I remember. She doesn't even have a mother who can protect or help her, as in Mossycoat or other older Cinderella tales. She really has no one but Edward and one of her sisters. Of all Austen's heroines, she is in the most precarious position. Emma has no guide either, but at least she's not dependent on the financial charity of others. Fanny's difficulties are more dire because risking her uncle and aunt's displeasure could send her back into a life which doesn't fit well anymore.
Anyhow - more later I hope. Laura Mc.
|
Kate
Unregistered User
(9/2/01 4:16:13 pm)
|
Your essay idea
Terri,
That's a great idea for an essay, comparing the work of the 17 c. group to present artists' writings. In the intro to Mirror, Mirror I hint at some connections between contemporary fairy tale writings and art and film and the work of the 17 c. . . . but only hint at it, and in a perhaps dated fin-de-siecle sort of way (I wrote it four years ago). Wish I had the knowledge to write such a piece--hopefully Greg will do it!
Kate
|
Terri
Registered User
(9/3/01 1:36:56 am)
|
Re: FGs
Laura, you're right that Persuasion contains some of Austen's strongest FG characters. Mrs. Smith is a good example of an FG; despite her poverty, she still has power. Her "magic" is her wisdom (a combination of sound principles and hard experience), allowing her to penetrate Mr. Elliot's disguise. Sequestered away from society, she resembles the type of FGs that a fairytale heroine must go "into the woods" or some other lonely place to seek...removed from the heroine's daily life, yet completely aware of everything that goes on in it. (Not through magic or a crystal ball, but through working women's gossip.) Again, I'm reminded of the salon fairytale writers themselves -- in this case, Henriette Julie de Murat, a writer almost as popular as D'Aulnoy herself. She was beautiful, talented, flamboyant, independent...and soon managed to get herself banished from court, sent to live under a form of "house arrest" in a chateau in the provincial city of Loches for almost the rest of her life. Nonetheless, she continued to write and publish popular fairy tales -- and, importantly, she kept in close contact with the other fairytale writers of Paris. de Murat hosted her own salon in Loches (to the scandal of the town), and mentored a number of younger writers over the years. She wasn't poor, like Mrs. Smith, but her banishment from Paris and court society has a similar quality. And yet, she did not allow that banishment to prevent her (as it does not prevent Mrs. Smith) from an eager interest in society, or a certain influence.
There are also many fairy tale examples of less benevolent FGs, who are either wicked, crabby, or simply meddlesome in annoying ways, and thus must be out-witted...sometimes by the heroine alone, or sometimes with the aid of other fairies. Magotine, in D'Aulnoy's "Green Snake," is one of these (described by D'Aulnoy as "the sister of Carabossa and no less malicious"), and the easily offended fairy Marmotte in Mlle. de Lubert's Princess Campion. I see Lady Russell, in Persuasion, as one of these meddlesome fairies--not wicked, but prickly, influential, and certainly not to be trifled with. Just as the fairy Marmotte says: "Queen, I'm astonished that you thought of marrying your son without consulting me!", Lady Russell has appointed herself to rule over Anne's life and marriage, a role that must eventually be thwarted and out-witted. She's a wonderfully nuanced character -- not at all evil, yet all the more dangerous in her influence because of it.
I don't see obvious FG characters in Emma--but rather, a story that hinges on the *lack* of FG guidance for the heroine. She has no mother; Miss Taylor, her former governess, has now left the house -- and was never a corrective influence previously anyway. (Austen writes archly: "the mildness of [Miss Taylor's] temper hardly allowed her to impose any restraint...they had been living together as friend and friend very mutually attached, and Emma doing just what she liked; highly esteeming Miss Taylor's judgement, but directed chiefly by her own.") Emma herself assumes the role of FG in the various lives around her, and becomes a kind of Marmotte-in-training. (She more or less says to her friend Harriet: "I'm astonished that you thought of marrying without consulting me!", and immediately meddles to prevent the marriage of Harriet and her young farmer.) Oddly, it is a man -- Knightley -- who comes closest to the role of benevolent FG, before he switches to the role of romantic hero at the end of the book.
(I thought the Gwyneth Paltrow movie version of Emma was rather pathetic, by the way. All the subtle shadings that Austen puts into these characters is required in order to keep Emma likeable, and Knightley from being a scold and a prig. The L.A. teen version of the story, Clueless, does a far better job!)
As for Mansfield Park...I'd better stop here, or I'll never get to work today. But I'm really glad we're on the subject of fairy godmothers in particular. This summer I've been poddling along on work for a two-women painting show (with a wonderful English painter named Susan Spencer) on the theme of "Godmothers," so I'm interested in any comments on this subject in general. Susan is neither a folklorist or fantasist (her big, gorgeous canvases remind me of an English version of Georgia O'Keefe), so she's playing with the words God and Mother as the jumping off point for her paintings, rather than taking the fairy tale route. But for me, the term godmother is very much bound up with fairy tale associations, so my half of the show has been going in that direction.
Kate: I just went back and re-read the Intro to Mirror, Mirror and see that you did indeed briefly touch on the historical tradition of women fairy tale writers. Oh, I really want Greg to write this essay! (Yes, I know, Greg, the novel must come first. <g> ) [The rest of this paragraph has been moved over to its own
thread, "Current FT writers" -- Terri]
Edited by: Terri at: 9/10/01 12:34:41 am
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(9/3/01 3:51:04 pm)
|
re: FGs
Oooh Terri. I love Lady Russell as a meddlesome fairy. And Mrs. Smith's information about Mr. Elliot thwarts Lady Russell's plans for Anne to become the next Mrs. Elliot. One FG's power thwarts the power of the other.
I like the reminder about fairies in general, and FGs in particular, as powerful, but not always beneficial. It seems that salon writers and their tales, like Austen's fiction, provide a darker image of the female protector. She can be the guide or she can use her power and influence to hinder the heroine. Either way, her power is not to be ignored. Indeed, in Persuasion, Lady Russell's power, the power of persuasion, is the central theme of the book. When must one be persuaded to follow the path others deem right, and when must one choose one's own happiness? This is the trial Anne Elliot must face.
I guess I never really considered Mr. Knightly as a FG character because the love between Emma and him always seems to be an undercurrent. He is jealous that Emma is interested in Frank Churchill, and she doesn't even want to consider that he is interested in Jane Fairfax. Emma claims this is for her sister's children's sake, and she's of course jealous of Jane in general, but she also doesn't want to lose him. He is already hers in many ways, as she is already his, and spouses would jeopardize their relationship.
I agree that Emma tries to set herself up as a FG, but she doesn't have the magical strength - knowledge - to play the role effectively. She would like to be benevolent, but she works from prejudice and loneliness rather than a true assessment of situations.
And now you've got to go on about Mansfield Park!! I'm dying to know what you're thinking.
Laura Mc
PS - sorry this post, like many of my others, is so disjointed. I'm so interested in the subject but of course there are other things I should be getting to - dishes, work, reading my kids stories, etc. Also thank you Terri for all the salon info - I'm learning a great deal!
|
Terri
Registered User
(9/3/01 11:03:03 pm)
|
Re: re: FGs
Laura, I'm off on a day trip to London in about twenty minutes so I have to keep this short (for once!) But you've convinced me -- Knightley doesn't qualify as an FG character. So I suppose one could say that Emma is a demonstration in the perils of *not* having a proper FG in one's life...since Emma's attempt to be one, without the experience and wisdom to back up that role, is a pure disaster.
I promise to have a good think about Mansfield Park on the train today. What are your thoughts on the subject, Laura? Heidi? And what's happen to Helen -- this is exactly the sort of literary fairy tale puzzle she's good at!
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(9/8/01 4:00:49 pm)
|
mansfield park/Cinderella
Ok, Mansfield Park -
I haven't read this one in a while, but since no one's jumped on it I'll try to get the ball rolling. Fanny in many ways is the perfect Cinderella character. She is financially poor, poorer than most of Austen's heriones, and has no protection, no benevolent FG, no mother - mother is trapped with a drunk husband and a passle of children. Her benefactors respect her in some ways but always hold her lower than their own children. Like Cinderella, she desires that which she can't have - her cousin Edmund. Edmund must learn to appreciate her - find her inner beauty - much like Cinderella's prince must find the servant girl who's foot fits the slipper, or in Princess Furball or Mossycoat, the suitor must discover the servant girl who belongs to the stunning dresses or who owns the golden thimbles etc. that are slipped into his soup. I suppose if Fanny was the true Cinderella however, she would have married rich suave Henry Crawford, rather than Edmund who only aspires to be a clergyman. But in Mansfield Park, the riches aren't money but learning and knowledge and spirituality.
On the FG topic, I suppose the aunts could be FG's of the more meddling kind. They want to help her, but not too much. They certainly don't want her to presume to be her cousin's equals. And her female cousins could also fit the bill as the nasty step-sisters.
BTW - saw Clueless the other night and thought it was hysterical. Laura Mc
|
Terri
Registered User
(9/9/01 12:24:04 am)
|
Re: mansfield park/Cinderella
Laura, yes, I agree. There are definitely Cinderella motifs in Mansfield Park, even if the plot isn't a perfect fit. The cousins fit the wicked step-sisters role -- self-centered, and perfectly willing to treat Fanny as second class. Since her Aunt Bertram is so distant, the other aunt, Mrs. Norris, usurps the role of matriarch of the household (or at least continually attempts to) and behaves as the wicked, jealous stepmother in regards to Fanny. I like what you say about Edmund being the Prince because Austen valued his intelligence and moral qualities over riches. Mind you, he's not exactly *poor*, and marrying him still elevates Fanny socially, which is why Edmund's father goes out of his way to try to nip such aspirations in the bud when Fanny first joins the household by making her lower rank absolutely clear. Edmund's father, Mr. Betram, is -- in some ways -- comparable to Cinderella's father. Like Cinderella's father, he gives tacit approval to Fanny's mistreatment by the women of the household by allowing it to go on for so long unchecked. Angela Carter called Cinderella's father the "unseen organizing principal" of the story, standing firmly at the center of the action, even if he doesn't act himself. His LACK of action has deep consequences.
One of the things that's satisfying about this tale as a Cinderella story is that in Cinderella, one keeps thinking: why the heck doesn't the father DO something? In this case, the father figure, Mr. Betram, finally, finally DOES recognize Fanny's value, and even though he fails her once again, by pressuring her to marry Henry Crawford, he eventually recognizes that she was right all along. We never know what Cinderella's father thinks...but in Austen's version, he has his due comeuppance. (That's one of the things I hate about the recent Mansfield Park movie, the way the character of the father is changed, turned into a slave runner, and made so completely creepy. It's an...interesting...approach, I guess; but it's not Austen. What on earth makes people attempt to re-write Austen? Do they think the books aren't good enough the way they're written? And that they know better how to tell Austen's own stories, or are better writers than a woman whose works have been beloved for centuries? Creating a movie *inspired* by Austen, like Clueless, the delightful L.A. teen version of Emma, is one thing; but calling a movie Mansfield Park and then CHANGING Austen's plot and characters simply beggars belief. I know that the script writer claims to have done so after careful study of Austen's life and letters. Poppycock. We already know how Austen wanted the story to go. The way she wrote and published it.)
I've also been thinking about the Donkeyskin/Mossycoat elements in the story, so I'm glad you brought those up, Laura. Fanny is a true princess in the Austen sense: smart, literate, kind, deeply moral. But her "royalty" is hidden under the "donkeyskin cloak" of poverty. Edmund is the prince who sees through the keyhole, recognizes the princess under the dirt. It's also her task, like Donkeyskin's, to stay on a straight moral course even when she's being pressured to stray from it. In Donkeyskin's case, of course, the pressure is to marry her father, which she knows is wrong, wrong, wrong -- but to refuse is to lose her father's love and her home in her father's household. In Fanny's case, the pressure is to marry Henry Crawford, whom she knows to be a morally flawed young man, but to refuse is to lose the newly-won love and approval of her father-figure, Mr. Betram, as well as her home in his household. Fanny choses exile instead, to the dirty, slovenly, poverty-stricken household of her birth, just as Donkeyskin choses exile to the dirty hut where she works as a pig keeper. It is not until the Prince recognizes the princess under the filth that Donkeyskin is reunited with her father, eventually going on to a new home with her new husband, the Prince. It's not until a letter from Fanny's prince, Edmund, conveys the news that Fanny's "royalty" is now recognized (her "royalty" being her wise, stoic morality, revealled when she proves to be right about Henry Crawford) that Fanny is reunited with Mr. Betram, and eventuaslly goes on to a new home with her new husband, Edmund.
One of the nice things about Mansfield Park (as opposed to the shorter Cinderella tale) is that Austen gives us positive family relationships to set against all the negative ones: Fanny's relationship with her brother William, and (after her visit home) her sister Susan. I like the fact that after being rescued from poverty, after winning her prince in the fairy tale sense, Fanny then turns around and rescues Susan. I bet if Cinderella or Donkeyskin had had little sisters, they'd have done the same....
Edited by: Terri at: 9/9/01 12:31:23 am
Edited by: Heidi Anne Heiner 3/14/04 replacing all references to
"Austin" with "Austen" |
|
