Classics and the Western Canon discussion

Elizabeth and the Gardiner’s visit Pemberley, and while walking the grounds Mr. Darcy unexpectedly arrives a day early. Elizabeth is embarrassed, but he treats her and her aunt and uncle with the utmost civility.

Mr. Darcy, his sister Georgiana, and Mr. Bingley briefly visit with the traveling party at their inn. Darcy is eager for Elizabeth to meet his sister, and they are invited back to Pemberley. Elizabeth gets to see Darcy in a new light.

Shy Georgiana is the hostess for the gathering and a little out of her depth. It is all a little stilted, as the Darcy’s host the Bingley’s and Hurst’s at Pemberley, and the desired meeting between Georgiana and Elizabeth takes on a different tone with the others present. The jealousy of Caroline Bingley towards Elizabeth spills over much to her own detriment.

Elizabeth receives eagerly awaited letters from Jane. They contain the shocking news of Lydia having eloped with Wickham. Darcy finds her much distressed. Soon Elizabeth and the Gardiners are on their way back to Longbourn. When they arrive Mr. Bennet has already left in search of Lydia, and Mrs. Bennet has taken to her room. Soon Mr. Gardiner joins Mr. Bennet in his search in London, and those at Langbourn anxiously await news as the days pass by.

Mr. Gardiner persuades Mr. Bennet to return home and he will keep looking. Two days after his return he receives word they have been found, they are not married, but soon will be as soon as the proposed details can be agreed upon. Mr. Bennet is much perplexed as to the conditions, but readily agrees. Mrs. Bennet jumps out of bed for joy, all woes forgotten. Mr. Bennet, however, has some second thoughts on how he had managed his money and his legacy over the years.

The Wickhams marry in London and arrive at Longbourn directly after. At first Mr. Bennet didn’t want them in the house at all, but then relents as the couple will be moving up north where Wickham will report to a newly arranged assignment. Lydia let it slip that Mr. Darcy was present at their wedding, and Elizabeth bursting of curiosity sends a letter to her aunt. The prompt reply confirms the fact and fills her in on the various details how Darcy was instrumental in finding Lydia and Wickham and the subsequent arrangements.

Alas, the famous swimming scenes from the 1995 BBC adaptation starring Colin Firth are not in the book.

Kerstin wrote: "Mr. Bennet, however, has some second thoughts on how he had managed his money and his legacy over the years.

... At first Mr. Bennet didn’t want them in the house at all, but then relents as the couple will be moving up north where Wickham will report to a newly arranged assignment..."

I am afraid I find Mr. Bennet's reactions disappointing on re-reading this novel. Not only should he reconsider his economy, but his attitude toward his daughters' education. I would have had a serious long talk with Lydia herself but only leaves that to Mr and Mrs Gardiner and just wants to block her out of his view.

Whereas his lack of involvement in their education was detrimental to his 'silly' daughters, I think his belittling and condescending attitude towards his wife and daughters may have had some influence on his favorite Elizabeth as well. As Mrs Bennet's favorite Jane's optimistic or credulous character may have been influenced by her mother's upbringing, could his condescending and twisted sharp wit have formed his favorite daughter's view on other people and taught her to be on excessive guard for being duped or criticized? Although realistic in some cases, she seems to be projecting her own embarrassment or self-consciousness of her family's lack of status, grace or wealth in her defensive and critical attitude to the more advantaged people in the novel such as the Darcys, Bingleys, and Lady de Bourgh.

This sharp 'wit' might be considered smart and attractive in some rom-com situations, but I wonder how it would be accepted in, say, the workplace or social gathering? Her father openly displays her favoritism on Elizabeth who 'mimics' his wit and impertinence and encourages it. Although it might have been condoned by Elizabeth, even Darcy seemed to have thought her father's behavior somewhat offensive.

While slyly being offensive, he never fully confronts or tries to influence those he disdains. I might understand how he tries to ignore his wife 'for the sake of a peaceful marriage' but he might have done better with his daughters. How he just chooses to ignore Collins or Wickham and merely thrusts passive-aggressive jabs at them behind their backs make Mrs. Bennet's worry over her husband being killed in a duel even more silly. As soon as his search is over, "he naturally returned to all his former indolence".

Do we know if Wickham also got the 10,000 pounds that Mr. Bennet alluded?

“Wickham's a fool if he takes her for less than ten thousand pounds”

Mike wrote: "Do we know if Wickham also got the 10,000 pounds that Mr. Bennet alluded?

“Wickham's a fool if he takes her for less than ten thousand pounds”"

I think the total sum wasn't specifically mentioned, as everything was settled between Darcy and Wickham and we can only rely on Mrs. Gardiner's surmise:
His debts are to be paid, amounting, I believe, to considerably more than a thousand pounds, another thousand in addition to her own settled upon HER, and his commission purchased."

I noted this comment on neighborly affection:
The good news quickly spread through the house; and with proportionate speed through the neighborhood. It was borne in the latter with decent philosophy. To be sure it would have been more for the advantage of the conversation, had Miss Lydia come upon the town; or as the happiest alternative, been secluded from the world, in some distant farm house. .... the good-natured wishes for her well-doing, which ahd proceeded before, from all the spiteful old ladies in Meryton, lost but little of their spirit in this change of circumstances, because with such an husband, her misery was considered certain.

From my Norton Critical edition I found out that to 'come upon the town' meant to be involved in prostitution or thievery, and that to be 'secluded' meant to 'be secluded during a term of pregnancy'. I also found out 'philosophy' meant 'resignation' and I was amused with this definition because I was reminded of what David had said about Socrates and Xanthippe.

The death of your daughter would have been a blessing in comparison of this.

I found this the most reprehensible expression in the letter from Mr. Collins. But what of it? Jane and Elizabeth read the letter, but it just ends without comment or reaction from anyone. Why is this letter included in the story?

David wrote: "The death of your daughter would have been a blessing in comparison of this.

I found this the most reprehensible expression in the letter from Mr. Collins. But what of it? Jane and Elizabeth read ..."

Yes! and this coming from a CLERGYMAN. How different is this from stoning the adulterous woman in the bible? Not only that, he adds insult to injury by making a remark on their parental indulgence AND her naturally bad disposition. On top of that, he makes a not so subtle and self-congratulatory allusion to 'the event of last November'... What a troll.

David wrote: "The death of your daughter would have been a blessing in comparison of this.

I found this the most reprehensible expression in the letter from Mr. Collins. But what of it? Jane and Elizabeth read ..."

Like the neighbor's interest in Lydia's future, it points out the hypocrisy in those 'good-natured wishes' and 'condolences' in which other people's misery can become the source of one's joy. It also shows how people are judged not only on their 'natural' tendencies but also their upbringing. I found it interesting how Jane was to open all the letters that came in Mr Bennet's absence and Elizabeth had to read over her shoulders. Jane would have been too 'nice' to make any outright negative remarks and Elizabeth may not have been authorized to openly read it. Anyway, apart from their outer reaction, I think their inner reaction would have been pretty much similar and Austen thought it redundant to add the obvious comment.

Speaking of upbringing, I wonder how much Elizabeth's opinion of Darcy would have changed if she only saw people like lady Catherine near him instead of Mrs Reynolds and Georgiana?

Borum wrote: As Mrs Bennet's favorite Jane's optimistic or credulous character may have been influenced by her mother's upbringing

We're told that Lydia is Mrs Bennet's favourite, hence why she was allowed to be out in society and why it's so hard to restrain her.

It feels like Jane reacted to her parents' tempestuousness by becoming as good-natured as possible. She's also meant to be Elizabeth's opposite: where Lizzie is quick to judge, Jane withholds forming an opinion, where Lizzie wears her heart on her sleeve, Jane keeps hers hidden away.

David wrote: "I found this the most reprehensible expression in the letter from Mr Collins. But what of it? Jane and Elizabeth read the letter, but it just ends without comment or reaction from anyone. Why is this letter included in the story?..."

I see it as Austen's criticism of the clergy. Mr Collins letter may be irrelevant in terms of plot, but the fact that nobody was outraged by it proves that Mr Collins views were not unusual for a clergyman.

I was just "complaining" that P&P has no despicable characters. Looks like we have one after all.

Borum wrote: "From my Norton Critical edition I found out that to 'come upon the town' meant to be involved in prostitution or thievery, and that to be 'secluded' meant to 'be secluded during a term of pregnancy'. I also found out 'philosophy' meant 'resignation' and I was amused with this definition because I was reminded of what David had said about Socrates and Xanthippe."

Thanks, Borum, for the explanations!

The drama with Lydia is the stuff that can turn any parent's hair prematurely grey.

I see Lydia as the quintessential willful child. You have a passel of kids like the Bennets, there is bound to be one. In Chapter 41 Mr. Bennet's comment to Elizabeth about Lydia is spot on,

"Lydia will never be easy until she has exposed herself in some public place or other, and we can never expect her to do it with so little expense or inconvenience to her family as under the present circumstances."

Lydia grows up in the same family as the others, the same DNA, the same upbringing, is part of the same discussions around the dinner table, yet she will always follow her own (selfish) tune. It takes five times the energy to raise a Lydia than it does a Jane. That Mrs. Bennet favors her is very counterproductive in reigning her in. And as Mr. Bennet predicts, she will have to really fall on her nose before she wakes up. Though I don't think Mr. Bennet had foreseen the elopement.

Lydia complains of having her wings clipped while staying at the Gardiners, and what is really telling, doesn't listen to Mrs. Gardiner when she tries to talk sense to her. Usually, when someone outside the immediate family says something it carries more weight. Not with Lydia, she hasn't learned a darned thing yet, she has no clue what fate she is being rescued from. The real wake-up call is about to happen, her future with Wickham doesn't look promising.

Addendum: I just came across another quote about Lydia in chapter 38:

But of this answer Lydia heard not a word. She seldom listened to anybody for more than half a minute, and never attended to Mary at all.

Borum wrote: "I found it interesting how Jane was to open all the letters that came in Mr Bennet's absence and Elizabeth had to read over her shoulders."

That's timing. If you recall, Mr. Bennet had left the house in search of Lydia before Elizabeth and the Gardiners returned from their vacation. He most likely left Jane in charge because Mrs. Bennet took to her room.

Emil wrote: "David wrote: "I found this the most reprehensible expression in the letter from Mr Collins. But what of it? Jane and Elizabeth read the letter, but it just ends without comment or reaction from any from anyone. Why is this letter included in the story?..."

I see it as Austen's criticism of the clergy. Mr Collins letter may be irrelevant in terms of plot, but the fact that nobody was outraged by it proves that Mr Collins views were not unusual for a clergyman."

Good point! So many of the clergy were simply installed through connections. I imagine there were many who didn't have a religious vocation at all. Mr. Collins fits that profile.
From the beginning Mr. Collins was a very unsympathetic character. His utterly selfish proposal to Elizabeth objectifies her. He has not the slightest regard for others unless they can further his standing and purposes. He revels in lecturing others and his position gives him free license to do it. Yet I don't recall one act of compassion or forgiveness or mercy from him. Strange indeed for a man of the cloth. It is no surprise then that he sends off this acrid missive.

The letter also shows how far and wide the gossip spread about Lydia. It makes one sympathetic to Mrs. Bennet. It is a particular heartbreaking pain to be this deeply embarrassed by one's child.

Emil wrote: I was just "complaining" that P&P has no despicable characters. Looks like we have one after all.

Caroline Bingley? Lady Catherine? Wickham?

Lydia was born into the same family as Elizabeth and Jane, but I don’t think she had the same upbringing. Her mother indulged her to such a degree that Lydia is totally self-absorbed and feels entitled. She is oblivious of the fact her actions have consequences because she has never had to face the consequences of her actions. She has no clue of the potential scandal she has brought on her family. And she really doesn't care because her mother has instilled in her the belief that her priority in life should be to get married. How she achieves that goal is irrelevant.

Her mother doesn’t reprimand her. Quite the opposite. She is delighted to see her and parades her around the neighborhood with pride. Her father does what he has always done—he ignores her.

Lydia is the way she is because her mother is foolish, and her father abandoned her to be raised by a foolish woman. Add to the mix her lack of education, and you have a catastrophe waiting to happen.

Jen wrote: "Emil wrote: I was just "complaining" that P&P has no despicable characters. Looks like we have one after all.

Caroline Bingley? Lady Catherine? Wickham?"

Yes, this novel seems to have lots of people of 'authority' challenged and criticized, both of the clergy and the rich and powerful. Even the authority of one's parents are questioned. I would say that it must have been a subversive jab at the hierarchical society.

Tamara wrote: "Lydia was born into the same family as Elizabeth and Jane, but I don’t think she had the same upbringing. Her mother indulged her to such a degree that Lydia is totally self-absorbed and feels enti..."

All these things are true.
I am going to introduce another nuance, I’ll go from the term “upbringing” to “influence”. Since the Bennet girls all grew up in the same home, in that sense they had the same upbringing, but they differ in the influences they had in their formative years. Both Jane and Elizabeth benefited from frequent visits to the Gardiners – they are the key, I believe.

Chapter 25,

Mr. Gardiner was a sensible, gentlemanlike man, greatly superior to his sister, as well by nature as education. The Netherfield ladies would have had difficulty in believing that a man who lived by trade, and within view of his own warehouses, could have been so well-bred and agreeable. Mrs. Gardiner, who was several years younger than Mrs. Bennet and Mrs. Phillips, was an amiable, intelligent, elegant woman, and a great favourite with all her Longbourn nieces. Between the two eldest and herself especially, there subsisted a particular regard. They had frequently been staying with her in town.

Then there is this quote by Mr. Darcy in chapter 32,

Mr. Darcy drew his chair a little towards her [Elizabeth], and said, "You cannot have a right to such very strong local attachment. You cannot have been always at Longbourn."

Observant as he is, Mr. Darcy notices there is something different about Elizabeth that distinguishes her from her family - which parallels the Bingleys favoring Jane. This is no accident, it is the influence of refinement the Gardiners had on them. This refinement is beyond their mother’s ability to impart on her daughters, and the three youngest not having the reciprocal attachment to their aunt as Jane and Elizabeth have, miss out.

I find it interesting how Austen describes and compares Elizabeth's first and second reaction to Darcy's letter, as well as her reaction to Jane's first and second letter.

Her different reactions to reading Darcy's letter ("Widely different was the effect of a second perusal) at first reminds me of the double system of thinking that was explored by psychology.

The first reading began with 'a strong prejudice against every thing he might say' and she 'read, with an eagerness which hardly left her power of comprehension". This sounds a lot like the fast, automatic, instinctive and emotional system 1 of thinking.

Although she 'wished to discredit it entirely' and 'put it hastily away' at first, she came back after a to 'command herself so far as to examine the meaning of every sentence' and 'weighed every circumstance with what she meant to be impartiality - deliberated on the probability of each statement' and though she fails at first saying 'on both sides it was only assertion', she finds that not only Darcy but Wickham's words are suspect and faces her limitation of information. Then she digs deeper into her former experiences from memory and then 'how different did every thing now appear in which he was concerned!' From this, she goes back to the first assertion of Darcy and realizes, with the memory of Charlotte's opinion and the behavior of her family, that even his first point might have some validity. She now goes wandering for two hours(!) "giving way to every variety of thought; re-considering events, determining probabilities, and reconciling herself as well as she could". This sounds very much like the slower, conscious, effortful and calculating System 2 of thinking.

The two different thinking is like the two different sisters's reception of Wickham motives as well. Even after being informed by Elizabeth of Wickham's past, Jane is 'willing to hope the best' and instead is thankful that they 'never let them know what has been said against him, and forget it themselves! This is just flat out denial and even worse than Elizabeth's unconscious hasty conclusion from lack of information.

Kerstin wrote: "Tamara wrote: "Lydia was born into the same family as Elizabeth and Jane, but I don’t think she had the same upbringing. Her mother indulged her to such a degree that Lydia is totally self-absorbed..."

Observant as he is, Mr. Darcy notices there is something different about Elizabeth that distinguishes her from her family - which parallels the Bingleys favoring Jane. This is no accident, it is the influence of refinement the Gardiners had on them. This refinement is beyond their mother’s ability to impart on her daughters, and the three youngest not having the reciprocal attachment to their aunt as Jane and Elizabeth have, miss out.

This is interesting as Elizabeth first misconstrued his hauteur as being against her uncle's working in the trade whereas Darcy was very civil to the Gardiners and actually had something against her closer family including her gentleman father.

Kerstin wrote: "Observant as he is, Mr. Darcy notices there is something different about Elizabeth that distinguishes her from her family - which parallels the Bingleys favoring Jane. This is no accident, it is the influence of refinement the Gardiners had on them.."

You make a really good point, one I had overlooked. The upbringing may be the same but the influences are different.

The same thing can be said about Mrs. Bennet and her brother. Even though they are siblings, they are extreme opposites.

And you also have to keep in mind that Lydia was the fifth and last in line whereas Jane and Elizabeth were the first daughters. So I can imagine that Lydia would have a way less strict upbringing than her older sisters (so the upbringing might not be the same at all)

In a way this point is also adressed in the conversation with lady Catherine: if the Bennet-girls don't have tutors either their mother would be their slave (i.e. only being very busy with properly educating and upbringing the girls) or (what she doesn't say out loud) the girls' upbringing can't be that great.

Another note on Mary:

When the family is in the throes of a scandal due to Lydia’s behavior, Mary reaches out to Elizabeth:

”This is a most unfortunate affair, and will probably be much talked of. But we must stem the tide of malice, and pour into the wounded bosoms of each other the balm of sisterly consolation.

She goes on to pontificate that the lesson to be learned from Lydia’s behavior is the importance of a woman to protect her virtue.

Despite her pompous language, Mary’s sentiments are commendable. She is trying to connect with her sisters. She is saying that as sisters, we should rally together and console one another. We are told Elizabeth doesn’t reply but “lifted up her eye in amazement.”

Once again, Mary is ignored.

I was trying to imagine what the Bennets' education must have looked like. They can all read, even Lydia and Kitty borrow books from a lending library, likely trashy novels their dad wouldn't have had. And they can presumably all do basic arithmetic, since they go shopping a lot. I don't know what late 18th century literacy classes for young kids looked like: would someone have read to them? Did they sit there and sound out 'cat, bat, mat?' Once they could read, they had access to their dad's library, though we don't hear very much about its contents besides Fordyce's Sermons. It seems reasonable to assume he had some philosophy, poetry, literature, and classical plays. Jane and Elizabeth spent an appropriate amount of time in there, Mary far too much, and Kitty and Lydia very little. But then how did they learn to think about what they read? Certainly their mother wouldn't have read the books to discuss them, so did their dad have nightly round-table debates with them at dinner? Since he thinks they're all silly, it couldn't have been a very in-depth discussion. Perhaps the Gardiners?

Kerstin wrote: "...From the beginning Mr. Collins was a very unsympathetic character. His utterly selfish proposal to Elizabeth objectifies her...."

I don't disagree with your statement, but I will repeat something I said earlier, that I suspect from Mr. Collins viewpoint he considered it very upright and generous of himself to go calling upon and to propose to one of the Bennet girls (women?). For me, one of the many examples of getting trapped into self-justifying mind-sets that Austen captures.

I will probably always wish that those who so carefully looked at the characters in Demons would be providing their compare and contrast here -- rightly or wrongly the two stories we have pursued contiguously here seem to me can be viewed as not unlike contrasts so manifest in this country (USA) today -- with all the attendant human failings, strengths, dreams, ....

Borum wrote: "Jen wrote: "Emil wrote: I was just "complaining" that P&P has no despicable characters. Looks like we have one after all.
Caroline Bingley? Lady Catherine? Wickham?"
Yes, this novel seems to hav..."

The most despicable characters are the most judgemental ones. I wonder if Sartre was thinking of P&P when he came up with, Hell is other people?

Since I mentioned Lawrence Stern before I can't help but think of Tristram's contrasting live and let live attitude,

. . .and so long as a man rides his HOBBY-HORSE* peaceably and quietly along the King’s high-way, and neither compels you or me to get up behind him,——pray, Sir, what have either you or I to do with it?

The extent to which immediate family may be compelled to get up behind Lydia on her horse can be debated, because I cannot predict much peace or quiet from the enabling behavior of Lydia's parents and others, but outside of the family its nobody else's business, right?

*Hobby horse in this instance refers to an individual's foible, amusement, obsession, or ruling passion.

Susanna wrote: "It's true that the most despicable characters in P&P are the judgmental ones, but Austen is quite judgmental of her characters as well."

Interesting--this makes me wonder whether being judgmental is the "worst" quality. Certainly many of us seem to agree that Mr. Collins is toward the bottom of the list. I read his letter as the final nail in his coffin. After that, we couldn't possibly cut him any slack or imagine that there is any circumstance under which Elizabeth should have accepted him. I don't expect we'll hear from him again. Case closed.

But we (and Lizzy, and Austen) have also judged Mr. Bennet for what is, in a sense, the opposite problem: not being judgmental enough! I, too, noted the line that said as soon as he was back at home, he slipped into his "indolent" old ways.

And, of course, we are "judging" as well. All this makes me wonder, where is the line? When does judgment cease being a necessary and productive act to keep us safe and become instead "prejudice"?

And, of course, we are "judging" as well. All this makes me wonder, where is the line? When does judgment cease being a necessary and productive act to keep us safe and become instead "prejudice"?

In this case, where Jane Austen drew it! If I overheard Darcy slag me off, then he was a jerk for weeks, then he insulted my family in the course of telling me he was in love with me and proposing, I would run for the hills! A billion pounds, or whatever he would be worth today, would not make it enjoyable enough to spend a lifetime with him. But this is a comedy, not a tragedy, so Lizzy must end up with the guy who is rude at the beginning.

Kathy wrote: "When does judgment cease being a necessary and productive act to keep us safe and become instead "prejudice"?.."

I think it depends entirely on whether or not we are willing to keep an open mind and modify our views depending on the evidence. People who hold on to their negative and/or stereotypical views about others despite evidence to the contrary are prejudice. They may even actively seek information to feed their prejudice and ignore or dismiss anything that challenges their views.

For example, Lizzie formed a negative opinion about Darcy, and she actively sought Wickham to fuel her prejudice. But she was able to overcome her prejudice when evidence proved her original assessment of him was erroneous.

Darcy harbored a prejudicial opinion on Lizzie based on her family and her social class. Even his marriage proposal reeked of prejudice. We shall see whether or not he is able to overcome his prejudice based on later evidence.

Susanna wrote: "David wrote: "However, in this time and place, Austen's harsh judgment of both of them is appropriate. Lydia is going to have a hard time, probably."

The parents surely must have heard of:

Proverbs 13:24
Whoever spares the rod hates their children,
but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.

We do not need to go so far as to endorse corporal punishment, but there are ways to discipline children or at least not enable undesirable behavior in the name of unconditional love, either through encouragement, support, or simple negligence.

I think it's funny that Mr. Bennet behaves like many parents. After Lydia's disaster, he says to Kitty "... I have at last learnt to be cautious, and you will feel the effect of it. No officer is ever to enter my house again, nor even to pass through the village. Balls will be absolutely prohibited, unless you stand up with one of your sisters. ... If you are a good girl for the next ten years, I will take you to a review at the end of them." I can certainly listen the voice of my parents saying the same thing to me or to my siblings after one of us had misbehaved somehow.

Tamara wrote: "it depends entirely on whether or not we are willing to keep an open mind and modify our views depending on the evidence. People who hold on to their negative and/or stereotypical views about others despite evidence to the contrary are prejudice. They may even actively seek information to feed their prejudice and ignore or dismiss anything that challenges their views. ..."

Very nicely put Tamara, I couldn't agree more.
I think that keeping an open mind and being able to modify our views is not only a matter of will but also a matter of education. In this respect I don't see that we've made a lot of progress since the 19th century.

One may argue that even if we are not properly trained in critical thinking, we now have the internet, our modern Agora and library, a place where we can exchange information. The volume of information is so large that we need a tool for finding the needle in the haystack: the search engine. The problem is that most search engines are not merely giving you a result for your search, they are giving you a result correlated with all your previous searches, your profile, your location etc. Being an IT engineer, I know how valuable algorithms for the end user are, but there is an important side effect: the user may be stuck in a "knowledge bubble". He will search for information regarding one of his prejudices, and he will only find results favorable to that prejudice.

A trained mind can easily detect those knowledge bubbles, but our current educational systems are not doing enough to teach us "how to think", they are too busy teaching "what to think".


“We should free ourselves from the narrowness of being related only to those familiar to us, either by the fact that they are blood relations or, in a larger sense, that we eat the same food, speak the same language, and have the same “ common sense.” Knowing men in the sense of compassionate and empathetic knowledge requires that we get rid of the narrowing ties of a given society, race or culture and penetrate to the depth of that human reality in which we are all nothing but human.”
Erich Fromm

Tamara wrote: "Kathy wrote: "When does judgment cease being a necessary and productive act to keep us safe and become instead "prejudice"?.."

I think it depends entirely on whether or not we are willing to keep an open mind and modify our views depending on the evidence."

I think when it comes to prejudice, there is an important element of "pre-conception" that comes in to play. This manifests itself in several ways, from pretending, or imagining, to know things, personal bias piled on eagerly by confirmation bias in the face of dubious information, such as Wickham provided to Elizabeth, to judging too hastily, to just plain ignorance of a thing. Adding elements of morality and identity, in this case, class, result in stubborn beliefs that are resistant to change.

I think Elizabeth did the best she could in her dislike of Mr. Darcy at first with the information she had from his referring to her as "tolerable", to his involvement in dissuading Mr. Bingley's affections away from Jane. I am inclined to feel he deserved a big fat middle finger for those behaviors.

To Tamara's point, I am finding the breakdown of Elizabeth's negative opinion of Mr. Darcy a fascinating study of someone who is epistemically or doxastically open, i.e., willing to change their mind, and the process from starting to doubt their own beliefs to accepting new ones. In this case it is partially in light of new facts, as revealed in Mr. Darcy's letter, which are often less effective, and partially in light of shared or admired values and feelings which are generally more effective which are brought to bear when Elizabeth visits Mr. Darcy's home.

David wrote: "I think when it comes to prejudice, there is an important element of "pre-conception" that comes in to play."

I worked for a principal who used to tell us to "beat the student home." Meaning, when there's a problem, get in touch with the parents before they do. Whoever gets there first will have the benefit of the doubt, and woe to the teacher who tries to discuss an issue that's occurred at school after the student has already told their side of the story. Wickham "beat" Darcy to Elizabeth, and it took a mighty effort and a terrible consequence for Lydia to change Lizzy's mind about him.

Tamara's, Emil's and David's comments are all making me think about what it really means to be "open-minded."

Kathy wrote: "Wickham "beat" Darcy to Elizabeth, and it took a mighty effort and a terrible consequence for Lydia to change Lizzy's mind about him...."

Sometimes a particularly tough challenge comes in the form of avoiding being prejudiced about what we perceive as prejudiced -- too often it takes a lot of time to hear/listen to the conditions and experiences that may underlie the positions taken -- especially if the reasons are muddled and the positions taken seem "wrong-headed."