The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion
This topic is about
Mansfield Park
2022/23 Group Reads - Archive
>
Mansfield Park Week 1: May 21-27: Volume 1, Chapters 1-8
Mod
Mod
My understanding is that at this time, Maria was generally pronounced Ma-rye-a in the US and Britain, Ma-ree-a being considered more Italian or French.
To avoid some confusion (which has arisen in discussion of this and other Austen novels), an eldest son is normally referred to as Mr. (Family Name), and the younger ones by their personal names. The same applies to eldest daughters (although they may be grouped as Miss [Xs]. This was a highly structured and status-conscious society, which liked such matters laid out clearly.Marriage to a Marine lieutenant was apparently a considerable step down socially, but in addition to that the timing could hardly have been worse. "Thirty year ago" would put the marriage in the mid-1780s. In 1783, after the war of the American Revolution (which drew in France and Spain), the Royal Navy was cut from about an hundred-thousand to about sixteen-thousand, as an economy measure by William Pitt the Younger, the new Prime Minister. Seamen were generally pleased to be released, to look for better jobs in the Merchant Marine, but officers were not so easily re-employed.
This meant that a Marine junior officer without influence ("interest" in the language of the day) would almost certainly be put on half-pay, for an unforeseeable, but financially bleak, future. If he was lucky enough to be assigned to a ship, of course, he could be away for years at a time. Or sent to the West Indies, where he could die of Yellow Fever. (Which actually happened to the fiance of Jane Austen's sister, a regimental chaplain.)
An actual illustration of how this could work in practice: Horatio Nelson was among the Royal Navy captains initially retained on duty, and he married, on the assumption of continued employment at full pay. However, he then attracted the disfavor of the admiralty for enforcing trade restrictions which actually hindered, rather than helped, the British colonies in the West Indies,* and he was "beached" until the next war with France. He and his wife wound up as dependents on his father.
*Details on request.
I think the first two questions are best answered by those reading for the first time. I think though that Fanny's situation and prospects have undoubtedly improved. For her personal well being it is hard to say. There is something unique about the bond between a natural parent and child. In this novel Jane Austen portrays Fanny's mother as making little distinction between them and a willingness to part from her child as easily as a piece of furniture. I think as readers we are to accept this separation as minor and look at it through a more practical lens. Having 'lost' a brother in a similar fashion I do not believe she was insensitive to how difficult it can be for a family but she wishes to treat it that way for the sake of her story.
Mod
In terms of the story, I am reminded of college when a friend and I used to read for humorous value magazines like True Confessions. The young women were always motherless or somehow on their own. And there are all the fairy tales and Disney stories of motherless girls. I suppose the idea is that if the girl has a mother, she will be protected from bad influences and bad decisions, therefore no drama. Of course a mother could be terrible, but that is usually reserved for stepmothers, cruel headmistresses, etc.
In this case, the substitute mother is endlessly patronizing and constantly differentiating Fanny from the other children.
Aunt Norris is delightfully awful. she is as nasty as she can be. Lady Bertram is not so nasty as she is disinterested.As for Fanny, she is such an odd choice for a heroine and I am not sure why Jane Austen wants us to like her. I get why Fanny is the way she is and feels she has to be so deferential and why she feels so obligated. But Jane does not ask us to like any of her weak, hypochondriacs. Not Mrs Bennet, Mr Wodehouse, Mary Musgrove, Isabella Knightly, not Anne de Bourgh. The are there for comic relief, or derision, or both. Yet with Fanny we are supposed to accept it as okay to be forever weak, and crying, and sick. This is a time without any real medical knowledge. They bled people. You needed to be strong to survive yet Fanny is frail and sickly.
I never cared for that type. Not Beth March, not Melanie Wilkes. I have a hypochondriac mother and it is exhausting on all around them.
As for Edmund, he is my least favorite Austen hero. He is very judgemental which is not a good trait in a man of God. I do like that he looks out for Fanny and is kind to her. Tom has a lot of maturing to do and suffers from affluenza. I do not think it is a good thing to be so rich and idle.
Jan wrote: "Aunt Norris is delightfully awful. she is as nasty as she can be. Lady Bertram is not so nasty as she is disinterested.As for Fanny, she is such an odd choice for a heroine and I am not sure why ..."
I do not think that because she is weak she is necessarily a hypochondriac. I think Austen made this heroine weak and meek because it was the best way for some of her actions later in the story to be accepted by the public of her time as honourable rather than pert or brash.
Mod
Current historical romances regularly have heroines who are scientists, businesswomen, artists, etc. and who find men who support those interests. Someone called those books "Recencies" instead of "Regencies" because they put modern thoughts and attitudes into 19th century characters. (The characters also take a lot more baths than most people would have!) I don't remember if I posted in this group that I enjoy a lot of Regency romances, but I sort of pretend they take place on some other planet where all the servants are happy, cleanliness is high, and men dote on their wives and children. I wasn't bothered by Black characters in the TV series Bridgerton because it's a fantasy world anyway. I read somewhere that in real life there were very few dukes in the Regency area and they were old men. In romances, they are on every street corner!
Austen's world doesn't turn in aristocratic circles, rather middle to upper middle class, and the upper class characters like Lady Catherine de Bourgh aren't sympathetic. None of Austen's women are "rescued" by a prince, even if Darcy does turn out to be rich.
I find Charlotte much more likeable. Yes. she settled because she had limited choices but she was not judgemental or weak.
Anne Elliot and Elinor Dashwood are introverts but they are not weak and sickly. They have a practicality and usefulness about them. They are made of sterner stuff than Fanny. The same with Charlotte Lucas. Fanny is just so different.
Fanny is, as another commenter mentioned, like the fairy tale princess. She epitomises the damsel in distress: meek, gentle, kind and good. Very early on we see that she is obedient and inoffensive. We see her put others needs and wants above her own. She presents a picture of Christian meekness. At the same time, she feels deeply and has no friend she can share all her thoughts with. You cannot see her seething with resentment. Aunt Norris I think does feel resentment and keeps it hidden and expresses it in passive-aggressive ways. Though Fanny has more reason to feel jealousy or dissatisfaction she does not. It is not because she is unable to see the injustice of her treatment in the family. She does. She also knows she is not entitled to the treatment of a daughter. By rights, she should be living in comparative poverty. She is also something of an ambassador for her brothers and sisters. If she hopes for any assistance for them she cannot make herself unpleasant. While I do not think that is all of her motivation it is likely part of it.
Perhaps people are deciding what Fanny is like too early. Remember that central characters have to have an arc. For me it’s not so much a question of “like” or “dislike” (though I deeply dislike Emma Woodhouse) as it is a question of how characters weave into the themes of the story.Speaking of themes, a recurrent preoccupation in Austen is the gap between form and substance—in social relations, most often; and in this book the gap is also explored in education and the role of faith. Sir Thomas in chapter 1 begins to reflect this issue even before Fanny appears on the scene, when he worries briefly about what her character will be but then falls back into his comfort zone, establishing her social position relative to his family: “We shall probably see much to wish altered in her, and must prepare ourselves for gross ignorance, some meanness of opinions, and very distressing vulgarity of manner. . . . There will be some difficulty in our way, Mrs. Norris, . . . as to the distinction proper to be made between the girls as they grow up; how to preserve in the minds of my daughters the consciousness of what they are, without making them think too lowly of their cousin; and how, without depressing her spirits too far, to make her remember that she is not a Miss Bertram. I should wish to see them very good friends, . . . but still they cannot be equals.” It sounds as if he pays lip service to the importance of character but is much more concerned with status. A key difference between her earlier work and Mansfield Park is that she’s not playing such hypocrisies for laughs—she is showing us the serious harm they can do.
Of course, the Bertrams and especially Mrs. Norris don’t manage that balancing act at all, and Austen has shrewdly laid out the goal so we can see how, at the start at least, they fall woefully short. Watch for signs of the gap between form and substance throughout, and this reading experience will be much richer for you.
I’d put in a plea for sympathy for Fanny. There are deep psychological wounds associated with being an unwanted child, but also the potential to develop great strength. In these first chapters, we see her when she is very young, and the knowledge that the very roof over your head is contingent is deeply damaging to a child. People who have always had a place where they belonged, and people they belong with, can have no idea.
Quick word about the Royal Marines, the branch of service in which Fanny’s father serves as a lieutenant. It was one of the more despised branches of the military. The Marines were trained similarly to the army but then assigned to the navy; they served as landing parties and handled the hand-to-hand combat when a ship was attacked or attacked another. Officers did not have to buy a commission and did not have to have education, so they were not considered gentlemen, unlike the officers of the army and navy. They were the lowest-paid branch of the military, so an officer like Lieutenant Price on half pay really wouldn’t be in a position to support a family. Since he left active service so quickly, he would not have had much or any prize money, the chief way naval officers gained wealth. This was truly a bad match for Miss Frances Ward.
Abigail wrote: "Quick word about the Royal Marines, the branch of service in which Fanny’s father serves as a lieutenant. It was one of the more despised branches of the military. The Marines were trained similarl..."Would it have been likely/possible that Fanny's father served on a slave ship? Was he always a military sailor and thus not?
So much of that comment is made later on in the book.
Mod
Interesting, Emma is my all-time favorite Austen character and she is absolutely opposite to Fanny - rich and indulged and supremely confident. But it has to do with the arc of the story, as was said above, so we will see how Fanny develops. It is a good point that Austen was portraying realistically how this kind of treatment would affect a young person.
Jan wrote: "Would it have been likely/possible that Fanny’s father served on a slave ship?"I think it unlikely, since he was injured in the service (in chapter 1 it says he was “disabled for active service”) so he wouldn't have been able to get a job on a commercial vessel. Also, if the present day is assumed to be in the 1810s, the slave trade was already banned (1807 in Britain), though people could still own slaves (and the mention in chapter 1 of Sir Thomas’s West Indies estates implies that he did). It’s conceivable that Lieutenant Price served on a merchant ship before 1807, but I don’t see anything in the text to support that. Would he have lost his half-pay if he had subsequently taken a job on a commercial ship? I don’t know, but I suspect it.
Abigail wrote: "Jan wrote: "Would it have been likely/possible that Fanny’s father served on a slave ship?"I think it unlikely, since he was injured in the service (in chapter 1 it says he was “disabled for acti..."
Thanks
It appears that Naval and Marine officers on half-pay had to show up in person at a naval base to collect their meager income. This made accepting another position awkward. It also explains why the Price family remained in Portsmouth, which avoided spending money on travel.There is a Wikipedia article on the half-pay system over the centuries, and in several countries. There is also a long article on the Royal Marines, portions of which are relevant to the Napoleonic Wars. It briefly mentions one reason that marines were unpopular with seamen proper: they were supposed to provide security for officers in case of mutiny.
Yikes, I can imagine that standing up for the officers during a mutiny would indeed make them suspect figures to the average seaman! Thanks for the details, Ian.
This is my first read of Mansfield Park, although I know the story quite well from various adaptations. I'm really enjoying it, despite Fanny.On the subject of her, a few things struck me. First, that she is hardly a character at all (at least in these early sections). Not only does she not do or say anything, the somewhat omniscient narrator only occasionally drops into her thoughts. After briefly establishing her love for her brother and later Edmund, she fades into the background.
Secondly, I found myself despising her weakness... and then checked myself. From a poor family of many children, she was quite likely malnourished and got off to a bad physical start in life. I tried to think of her as someone with a chronic illness, or chronic asthma, and thought of her differently. I also considered that at the time, feminine weakness wouldn't have been considered so disgraceful. Fanny is perhaps to be seen as a normal female whereas Miss Crawford is more of an extreme sportswoman!
I also found she made an interesting contrast to Miss Bates in Emma.
Miss Bates is funny and certainly does not disappear.
Jan wrote: "Miss Bates is funny and certainly does not disappear."True, I just meant that they are contrasting perspectives on a poor relation, allowed into wealthier circles but not quite of them.
It is possible some of her physical weakness is due to malnourishment as a young child. It is never explained. That would not be the case for Anne de Bourgh. But a lot of Fanny's health issues are emotional. When she gets upset she cries and gets a headache and it spirals. Were weak women looked down on in that time period? I do not know. I think it would weaken their marriage prospects. The ability to produce heirs was important and to get married and not be a burden to the family. I have not seen this addressed in a Jane Austen book but I would expect people thought about it. Ashley Wilkes still married the weak Melanie in Gone With the Wind.
Emily wrote: "Jan wrote: "Miss Bates is funny and certainly does not disappear."True, I just meant that they are contrasting perspectives on a poor relation, allowed into wealthier circles but not quite of them."
Miss Bates was treated with a lot more kidness for the most part if you leave out the Box Hill Incident. But yes, with them, but not quite of them.
Interesting contrast, Emily. I agree, Miss Bates’s situation seems very different to me. She was an adult, while throughout the section we’ve read Fanny was a child. Miss Bates had a home, albeit a modest one, and a role to play, taking care of her mother. Only Emma is slow to learn respect for her; the other gentry all treat her with courtesy and kindness. But she seems to share a high level of nervousness with Fanny, perhaps a reflection of the tenuousness of their respective situations.
Mod
Fanny's position as a "poor relation" in a large household could have been particularly difficult: she may have been viewed as of a lower, and vulnerable, status, (view spoiler).For an example of servants observing, and exploiting, the familial pecking-order in a baronet's household in more recent times, the 1920s, see Christian Miller's A Childhood in Scotland, an account of being a youngest child, and a daughter to boot. (This is short -- under a hundred pages -- and the Kindle edition is currently $2.99). See also this obituary: https://www.scotsman.com/news/obituar.... It describes her childhood as privileged "yet oddly deprived."
Mod
Studies in nursing homes showed that when older people had no "agency", that is no part in deciding their own life, they declined more quickly. Fanny does have tasks to do, but they are rarely of her own choosing.
Sophia Peabody, who married Nathaniel Hawthorne, suffered intermittently from severe illness, which magically cleared up when she married and left home.
Toward the end of this section, we see Fanny beginning to struggle with inner demons. Edmund, her only friend, is starting to shift his focus and she feels bereft. From chapter 7: “She wondered that Edmund should forget her, and felt a pang. She could not turn her eyes from the meadow [where Edmund and Mary Crawford were riding], she could not help watching all that passed. . . . For she had been feeling neglected, and been struggling against discontent and envy for some days past. . . . The pain of her mind had been much beyond that in her head.” By contrast, the Miss Bertrams act out and pout over trivialities—e.g., Maria when she isn’t invited to dine at the parsonage, when she doesn’t get to ride on the barouche-box with Henry Crawford. I saw some classic Austen snark when she describes the sisters as having “a manner naturally easy, and carefully formed to general civility and obligingness. . . . Their vanity was in such good order, that they seemed to be quite free from it.”
Regarding Mary Crawford, the annotated edition I’m reading (Shapard’s) has an interesting note about Mary Crawford in chapter 7, as she starts to have feelings for Edmund but doesn’t want to confront them, even internally. Shapard says: “The suggestion, confirmed at other points, is that neither Mary’s education nor her background, centering on the admiral’s home and fashionable London society, has given her much knowledge or experience of [Edmund’s] virtues. Thus, while she has sufficient intelligence and natural decency to perceive and appreciate them, she cannot really understand them. This sort of analysis is found elsewhere in Jane Austen, who consistently treats virtue, especially in its highest forms, as the product of education and rational understanding as well as benevolent inclinations. . . . Mary’s incapacity or disinclination even to ‘discuss with herself’ these new sensations might not bode well for this process of improvement.”
Mod
Robin P wrote: "Mary regularly acts on a whim. Fanny has never had the luxury to do so."Mary is definitely spontaneous and Fanny is not. Fanny is very rigid.
I had the sense in the early chapters with Mary Crawford of Austen being seduced by her anti-heroine, much like Satan steals his scenes in Paradise Lost. It is true that Mary is alive as Fanny hardly seems to be, and she was clearly a lot more fun to write.
Good point, Emily! I agree we are supposed to find her seductive, to be tempted to root for her even though Fanny is clearly positioned as the heroine.It’s notable to me that Mary uses French expressions and mentions the word “maneuvering” at one point. In reading a slightly earlier book last year, Belinda, there was a similarly worldly and sophisticated character who did the same. The British stereotype of French high-society people was that they were witty and charming and polished in their manners but manipulative (the meaning of “maneuvering” in those days) and not to be trusted. It seems likely that Austen’s contemporary readers would see Mary through that lens.
There are probably good, if unspoken, reasons why Edmund should be so attracted to Mary Crawford. This may be the first time that a really “eligible” young lady has paid serious attention to him, a point which inheritance-conscious early readers might not have needed to have spelled out.Gentry mothers in the area with marriageable daughters would probably regard him as at best a last resort, what with him being a younger son, and planning on a less than lucrative career in the clergy. And steer their daughters away.
All of which objections would have vanished if his older brother died before he could inherit, of course, but a responsible match-making mother would hardly gamble on that!
Ian wrote: "There are probably good, if unspoken, reasons why Edmund should be so attracted to Mary Crawford. This may be the first time that a really “eligible” young lady has paid serious attention to him, a..."But clergymen were considered respectable. So not top tier, but certainly better than spinsterhood, shudder.
Mod
Following the death of Martin Amis, Lithub republished his essay on Jane Austen and her TV adaptations. It's mostly about Pride and Prejudice, but I enjoyed this snarky dig at our book:Elizabeth Bennet is the most frictionlessly adorable Heroine in the corpus—by some distance. And, as for the Hero, well, Miss Austen, for once in her short life, held nothing back: tall, dark, handsome, brooding, clever, noble, and profoundly rich. He has a vast estate, a house in town, a “clear” ten thousand per annum. His sister, Georgiana, has thirty thousand pounds (the same as Emma)—whereas Elizabeth’s dowry amounts to about a quid a week. No reader can resist the brazen wishfulness of Pride and Prejudice, but it is clear from internal evidence alone that Austen never fully forgave herself for it. Mansfield Park was her—and our—penance. As her own prospects weakened, dreams of romance paled into a modest hope for respectability (or a financial “competence”). Persuasion was her poem to the second chance. And then came death.
It's a good read:
https://lithub.com/martin-amis-on-the...
Ian wrote: "To avoid some confusion (which has arisen in discussion of this and other Austen novels), an eldest son is normally referred to as Mr. (Family Name), and the younger ones by their personal names. T..."Thank you for this detailed background.
Frances wrote: "Hello and welcome to our read of Mansfield Park.The novel opens with a page of background information on the three Ward sisters-Miss Ward (who I presume was the eldest as no first name is given),..."
I think Fanny is a wonderful heroine. I am not that familiar with Austen's works and those periods of history the she portrays.
Fanny reminds me of going to stay with relatives. That feeling of being a duck out of water.
I am reading online (Gutenberg at work) and annotated edition (Shapard) at home.
I'm struck by Edmund's words to Fanny in our first encounter with her of any length, when he finds her crying on the stairs. He tells her she is "a good little girl" and that to me is her motivation throughout the book. She knows that to be a good little girl is what justifies her existence, or at least her existence in the Bertram household, and strives continually to live up to Edmund's judgment by obedience to her aunts in particular, and by always in general putting the Bertrams' interests above her own.
This is why later (view spoiler).
I agree, she’s desperate to have value in someone’s eyes and to justify her space in the world. She adores Edmund and makes him her North Star because he’s the only one (aside from her absent brother William) who does that. One thing I noticed on this reading was that in her original home, as the eldest daughter she had a lot of responsibility (and authority) for taking care of her younger siblings and they all looked up to her—but of course at Mansfield she’s youngest, last and least.I’m currently reading a 1947 book called The Psychology of the Unwanted Child and seeing a lot of Fanny in its descriptions of a child’s reaction to not having a secure family unit.
I don’t think it is at all appropriate to think of Fanny as weak. She is as weak as a cork being tossed around in an ocean. The cork that never sinks and eventually reaches dry land, even if the direction is uncertain. Her circumstances require her to assume a subservient position, at least during her present situation, but all the time her mind is alive to her surroundings and those attempting to influence her.
In fact it is the depth and constancy of Fanny’s thoughts which help to expose the shallowness of both her aunt and many of her cousins and their acquaintances. Donning a superhero costume to push against her aunt’s bullying and her cousins’ condescension would soon expose her as a liability and someone to get rid of. At this time her quietness is her strength.
wonderful insight Trev I agree . she is a real heroine. I never could understand why many readers prefer Mary who has ready wit but is shallow and thinks only of gossip and fashion (though she does have a kind heart )and would bore me after 15 min (unless she wwere playing music which Fanny doesnt)
Trev wrote: "I don’t think it is at all appropriate to think of Fanny as weak. She is as weak as a cork being tossed around in an ocean. The cork that never sinks and eventually reaches dry land, even if the di..."Agree
Trev wrote: "I don’t think it is at all appropriate to think of Fanny as weak. She is as weak as a cork being tossed around in an ocean. The cork that never sinks and eventually reaches dry land, even if the di..."3 cheers!!
The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910
Books mentioned in this topic
The Psychology of the Unwanted Child (other topics)A Childhood in Scotland (other topics)
The novel opens with a page of background information on the three Ward sisters-Miss Ward (who I presume was the eldest as no first name is given), Miss Maria and Miss Frances Ward. 30 years before the beginning of our story, Miss Maria made a very advantageous marriage to Sir Thomas Bertram of Mansfield Park, and became our Lady Bertram. It was expected that her elevation would bring her sisters into contact with equally eligible men, however this was not to be. While Miss Ward married respectably the Reverend Mr Norris, a friend of Sir Thomas, and came to live close to the Bertrams, Miss Frances married “to disoblige her family” and fell considerably in social station. The Bertrams had four children, the Norrises none, and the Prices had too many to give an exact number. To relieve the burden on their sister-in-law, Lady Bertram and Mrs Norris decide to take in one of her daughters, young Fanny, who makes the journey to join them at Mansfield Park.
Fanny arrives at Mansfield Park aged 10, and by the end of the first 8 chapters she is 18 years of age. She is one of the family, and yet a distinction is clearly made by which she is treated more like a paid companion to her Aunts than as a niece. She is rarely taken out other than to the Parsonage, it is assumed by all but Edmund that she will stay home to keep Lady Bertram company when the rest of the family and the Crawfords are invited to Sotherton Hall, and she is often excluded when the young Bertrams and Crawfords socialize together. Materially her life is much improved, but it is not clear whether she is happier at Mansfield Park than she would have been had she remained at home.
What is your impression of Fanny Price at this point in the story? Is she the heroine? Or are her cousins Maria and Julia or Miss Crawford better suited to that role?
What of the young men? Do you like and/or admire Edmund, Tom, or Mr Crawford?
Has Fanny’s lot improved in being moved to Mansfield Park in her formative years? What do you make of Lady Bertram and Mrs Norris?
Please share your thoughts on this first section of the novel, and feel free to answer or ignore the questions!