Allan Bloom on Jane Austen and Aristotelian Ethics Mary Beth Garbitelli & Douglas Kries

Virtue and Romance: Allan Bloom on Jane Austen and Aristotelian Ethics Mary Beth Garbitelli & Douglas Kries

ithin Allan Bloom’s last book, Love mized; the rural is superior to the urban; Wand Friendship, stands a chapter on sentiment tends to be predominant. What Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice.1 The chap- is perhaps unexpected, though, is Bloom’s ter is short—just over seventeen pages in insistence on “Austen’s classical prefer- length—but that it exists at all in a volume ences,” on her appearance “as a partisan of that features Plato and Rousseau may be Aristotelian rationalism against the domi- surprising to many. Nevertheless, Bloom nant principles of modernity,” and on her offers an incisive if unorthodox interpreta- desire “to celebrate classical friendship as tion of Austen’s novel, ultimately suggest- the core of romantic love.”2 ing that Austen advances a position that Without claiming that Austen actually features a unique combination of mod- read Aristotle, we may accept and even ern romantic love and ancient friendship. extend Bloom’s claim that there is a strong That the translator of Emile sees echoes of Aristotelian element in her work. Indeed, modern romanticism in Austen’s books is Bloom attributes to Austen a unique and hardly to be wondered at, for her works daring synthesis between modern mar- display many themes that are reminiscent riage and classical friendship, but does not of Rousseau: marriage is the foundation think that her attempt to reconcile these of society and, for most, the source of elements wholly succeeds. Nevertheless, meaning and purpose in life; social barri- his refutation does not take into account ers such as class often present themselves as that Austen has anticipated and answered unjust obstacles to romantic desire; chas- his objections in her ﬁ ction. We may, tity is the prerequisite of strong romantic therefore, accept Bloom’s interpretation of attachment; differences between males and Austen while rejecting his evaluation. females are augmented rather than mini- Smallness and Happiness MARY BETH GARBITELLI is an adjunct instruc- Aristotle is of course famous for his com- tor of English at the University of Southern ment in the ﬁ rst book of the Politics that Maine. Her father, DOUGLAS KRIES, is the Ber- man is a political animal. The polis, how- nard J. Coughlin, S.J., Professor of Christian Phi- ever, is a city of limited size—one in which losophy at Gonzaga University. His most recent there is a good chance that any given citi- book is The Problem of Natural Law. zen will know any other given citizen,

25 MODERN AGE or at least have some reasonably reliable Anna Austen, Jane Austen says, “You are knowledge about any other citizen. In his now collecting your People delightfully, discussion of the life of the polis, Aristo- getting them exactly into such a spot as is tle seems only indirectly interested in how the delight of my life;—3 or 4 Families in a such a city relates to other cities or nations, Country Village is the very thing to work especially if they are far away. It is not that on.”4 Indeed, Aunt Jane’s Pride and Preju- he completely ignores foreign affairs, but dice begins with the authoress collecting a what makes a polis an important and natu- small number of families in the vicinity of ral feature of human life is how it promotes a country village and bringing them into human happiness by advancing the virtues contact with each other at small gather- of the citizens; this means that Aristotle is ings, including parties and dances; her principally concerned with how the citi- Emma has two spatial foci, the two country zens themselves relate to each other. estates of her hero and heroine, which are This restricted horizon within which within walking distance of each other, as human beings work toward their hap- are the local village and all of the dwelling piness is further limited when one turns places of the other important characters in from Aristotle’s Politics to his Ethics. Cer- the novel. Like Aristotle, Austen seems to tainly, Aristotle advocates the study of the grasp the fact that the human horizon is city in the Ethics, but in Books VIII and limited by space and time in such a man- IX of the work he explains that a circle of ner that it is possible to know well—as friends within a city is actually the very friends—only a small number of people. best situation that human beings can hope If signifi cant human communication is for. These friends, sharing a noble con- to occur, it will have to occur within a ception of the good, will practice virtue limited circle of people who are involved toward each other, thereby improving each with each other in seeking to live well. As other and leading each other into the true Alasdair MacIntyre notes perceptively of happiness that comes with genuine virtue. Austen’s work, “The restricted households It seems that the justice provided by the of Highbury and Mansfi eld Park have to polis is indeed the natural social horizon for serve as surrogates for the Greek city-state human beings, but within the polis there is and the medieval kingdom.”5 an even smaller social circle that provides Another way to make this point is to the context for the best life for the best note that Austen harbors an Aristotelian human beings. “When men are friends,” distrust of large political arrangements Aristotle says, “they have no need of jus- in which anonymity is prevalent. It is an tice, while when they are just they need almost universal rule in Austen’s nov- friendship as well.”3 els that little good ever comes from the Jane Austen’s novels share the Aristo- great metropolis of London. In Pride and telian focus on small social arrangements. Prejudice, for example, London is the place If Aristotle prefers a small circle of friends where Lydia and Wickham fl ee to absent living within a city of restricted size, Aus- themselves from their families and indeed ten prefers a small circle of families living from all of their political obligations. They within a village of modest size; both, how- conceal themselves in the great anonymity ever, emphasize situations in which a hand- that is London’s political life. To be sure, ful of people share together a life in which Elizabeth Bennet’s decent aunt and uncle their happiness is intertwined. In a letter of live in London, as do Emma Woodhouse’s 1814 to her niece and aspiring story-teller decent sister and brother-in-law. Any ambi-

26 WINTER 2010 guity, however, about the status of London Austen’s “Aristotelian” preference for in Austen’s view that would remain after small political arrangements is also shown considering Pride and Prejudice and Emma by the marked lack of interest in geopoliti- would seem to be dispelled in Mansfi eld cal affairs in her novels. Austen wrote just Park, in a brief but important rural conver- after the author of Refl ections on the Revolu- sation between the “villainess,” Miss Mary tion in France, just before the author of A Crawford, who has lived in London, and Tale of Two Cities, and contemporaneously the eventual hero of the book, Edmund with Sir Walter Scott. Yet her books are Bertram. Edmund is intending a career vastly different from those, for nowhere in as a clergyman; this, in Miss Crawford’s her novels do we read much about tremen- view, is a very bad idea—indeed she calls dous battles, revolutions, or politics on a the clergyman’s status “nothing,” an asser- grand scale. Although in Pride and Preju- tion that gives rise to a spirited response dice some soldiers are stationed near the from Edmund: “I cannot call that situa- home of the heroine and her sisters, they tion nothing, which has the charge of all are only interesting as possible domestic that is of the fi rst importance to mankind, partners; they are never called upon to do individually or collectively considered, any fi ghting or dying, and indeed it is not temporally and eternally—which has the all that clear just why they have congre- guardianship of religion and morals, and gated in the fi rst place.7 In Emma, we do consequently of the manners which result learn of a military hero of some years past, from their infl uence.” In the exchange that and we also learn of acquaintances who are follows, Edmund argues that the reason traveling in Ireland, but none of the main Miss Crawford thinks the clergy insignifi - characters seems to be much interested in cant is her experience in living in an urban the world beyond England. Indeed, only a center so large that the private moral lives few of them even have much knowledge of both clergy and parishioners are hidden. of a world beyond their village, and those In smaller political settings the true func- few who do are usually among the least tion of clergy can come to the fore: attractive characters in the book, such as Mrs. Elton and Mr. Frank Churchill. For- We do not look in great cities for eign lands do play a more prominent role our best morality. It is not there, that in Mansfi eld Park, for Sir Thomas Bertram respectable people of any denomina- absents himself from his family and village tion can do most good; and it cer- because of urgent economic endeavors tainly is not there, that the infl uence in distant Antigua. This turns out to be of the clergy can be most felt. A fi ne unwise, however, for Sir Thomas thereby preacher is followed and admired; fails to attend to the even more urgent but it is not in fi ne preaching only duty of overseeing the behavior of the that a good clergyman will be useful young people in his charge. And of course, in his parish and his neighbourhood, there are the noble sailors of Persuasion, where the parish and neighbourhood but even in this novel what is important are of a size capable of knowing his about the wanderers is that they have come private character, and observing his home to marry and found families in or general conduct, which in London near villages. The navy is important in the can rarely be the case. The clergy book primarily as a way for young men to are lost there in the crowds of their prove their worthiness for winning fi ne parishioners. . . . 6 English wives who live in small political

27 MODERN AGE settings. In the end, one could say that are founded upon the needs and wants Austen implicitly criticizes the imperial, of each individual, and so change as fre- nationalistic politics of Napoleon, rather in quently as do personal needs and wants. the same manner that Aristotle implicitly Aristotle writes that “those who love for criticizes the imperial, nationalistic politics the sake of utility love for the sake of what of Alexander. is good for themselves, and those who love for the sake of pleasure do so for the sake of Friendship in Aristotle what is pleasant to themselves” (1156a14–16; While the overall goal of the Nicomachean emphasis added). Ethics is to explain happiness in terms of The highest form of friendship, and virtue, Aristotle explains in his two books ultimately the only true form of friend- on friendship how the practice of vir- ship, is friendship based on the truest tue that constitutes the highest happiness good, namely virtuous activity, which of is generally to be found only within the course is true happiness. Thus, Aristotle communication that grounds a particu- writes, “Perfect friendship is the friendship lar type of friendship. This capacity for of men who are good, and alike in vir- friendship is one of the most important tue” (1156b7–8). This type of friendship inherent characteristics of human beings. is most rare, since truly good people are “Without friends,” he says, “no one would rare, and their having the opportunity to choose to live, though he had all other live together and interact as friends is like- goods” (1155a5–6). In Aristotle’s analy- wise often rare. Nevertheless, friendships sis, friendship is based on a shared under- based on virtuous activity are the most standing of what is good, and the general permanent, for unlike friendships based opinions on the nature of the good can on pleasure and utility, this type of friend- be organized into three main categories, ship is based on something more perma- with each category representing some nent and unchanging. Such friends are fundamental option. Aristotle thus deter- truly “friends without qualiﬁ cation”; they mines that since human beings commonly want what is best for one another and try perceive the good to consist of pleasure, to beneﬁ t each other (1157b3). This results utility, or virtue, friendships may also be in a mutual education in virtue, a sort of divided into those same categories. pedagogical friendship: “The friendship All three types of friendship require of good men is good, being augmented by physical proximity, for although distance their companionship; and they are thought does not necessarily end friendship, Aris- to become better too by their activities and totle points out that it does prevent the by improving each other; for from each day-to-day activity of friendship and may other they take the mould of the character- cause the friendship to diminish or even istics they approve” (1172a13–15). Indeed, cease over time. For Aristotle, “there is friendship based on virtue represents not nothing so characteristic of friends as liv- only a shared understanding of the good, ing together,” for the opportunity of fre- but the most promising way to achieve that quent interaction is an essential condition good. Practically speaking, then, in Aris- of friendship (1157b19–20). Friendships totle’s view, the highest form of human based on pleasure or utility, or some com- association and attachment turns out to be bination involving pleasure and utility, are a small circle of friends who enable each merely incidental, susceptible to change, other to perfect themselves through their and easily destroyed. Such relationships communication as friends.

28 WINTER 2010

Friendship in Pride and Prejudice pleasure. Once again, Elizabeth is dismayed Pride and Prejudice is probably the most at this union, but to a much greater degree. popular of all of Austen’s novels; it is also Through her indulgence in a romantic the novel in which we can most easily see love rooted in sexual desire, Lydia endan- a similarly between her thinking about gers her family’s reputation and status, matrimony and Aristotle’s thinking about whereas Charlotte had at least helped her friendship. The match between Mr. Col- family grow in fortune. Thoughtless Lydia lins and Charlotte Lucas, for instance, is does not even seem to grasp how greatly clearly based on utility. Collins is useful to she has risked her family’s economic sta- Charlotte, for he provides her with a stable bility as well as its prestige and standing; source of support; Charlotte is useful to moreover, her fl ippant remarks reveal a Collins because his patroness, Lady Cathe- profound misunderstanding of the effect of rine de Bourgh, approves of her and of the her actions on the prospects of her sisters’ general idea that a clergyman like Collins marrying at all, let alone well. Whereas be married. The utility of the marriage is Austen does not indicate the ultimate fate further emphasized when it becomes clear of the attachment between Collins and that the two are not seriously interested Charlotte, at the end of the novel we learn in each other. Indeed, Charlotte care- that Lydia and Wickham are often in want fully arranges the house so that they can of both happiness and fi nancial stability. avoid each other as much as possible. Even The desire for pleasure is never satiated if though Elizabeth is initially shocked at the it is not moderated, and Lydia is constantly mutual self-interest that defi nes their rela- in need of funds. The omniscient narra- tionship, it does not necessarily follow that tor reports Elizabeth’s refl ections on the Austen herself unequivocally condemns it. match in this way: “How Wickham and To be sure, Charlotte’s situation is unro- Lydia were to be supported in tolerable mantic and emotionally empty, but it nev- independence, she could not imagine. But ertheless promises certain positive results how little of permanent happiness could for herself and her family. Of Charlotte’s belong to a couple who were only brought decision to accept Collins, the narrator together because their passions were stron- says, “Without thinking highly either of ger than their virtue, she could easily con- men or of matrimony, marriage had always jecture” (III.8). been her object; it was the only honorable If the Collins and Wickham matches provision for well-educated young women can be viewed as corresponding to the of small fortune, and however uncertain Aristotelian friendship models of utility of giving happiness, must be their pleasan- and pleasure, respectively, then that of Mr. test preservative from want” (I.22). Aus- Darcy and Elizabeth corresponds to the ten presents the advantages and disadvan- category of friendship based on virtue. tages of the marriage as they are, without This match, however, does not begin aus- excluding the possibilities that may ensue piciously. At fi rst, Darcy at least pretends from the establishment of a family—per- not even to notice Elizabeth at a Merry- haps one that will eventually include chil- ton assembly; it is hardly love at fi rst sight. dren—in a quiet, peaceful village. Elizabeth does not fi nd Darcy pleasant; While the marriage of Collins and Darcy certainly sees nothing useful in Charlotte is focused on utility, the match Elizabeth’s connections. Even after Dar- between Lydia and Mr. Wickham arises cy’s recognition of Elizabeth’s agreeable- principally from a mutual desire for sensual ness and her understanding of his utility,

29 MODERN AGE marriage does not immediately appear to neither improbable nor faulty. But be a prudent choice. Since neither party is if otherwise, if the regard spring- aware of the other’s virtue, Darcy’s prema- ing from such sources is unreason- ture proposal is spurned, and even in mak- able or unnatural, in comparison of ing it, Darcy admits that it goes against his what is so often described as arising better judgment. Both parties want more on a fi rst interview with its object, from marriage than utility or pleasure. As and even before two words have virtuous people—or as people who are been exchanged, nothing can be said on the way to becoming virtuous—both in her defence, except that she had Darcy and Elizabeth know, or at least given somewhat of a trial to the latter sense, that they will be most happy with a method, in her partiality for Wick- virtuous spouse. Thus, each believes enter- ham, and that its ill-success might ing marriage without such a manifestation perhaps authorise her to seek the of virtue would be foolish. This does not other less interesting mode of attach- mean that the other reasons for marriage ment. (III.4) are necessarily excluded, but such ends are to be subordinated to a higher one. The focus of Austen’s refl ection here is the By the time Elizabeth and Darcy hap- fundamental question that the novel seeks pen to meet at Pemberly, in Volume III of to answer: what is the most admirable the novel, each has begun to recognize the form of friendship between a man and a virtue of the other. Through Darcy’s let- woman? In referring to the reasonable ter to her, Elizabeth has become painfully or natural approach as the “less interest- aware that she had earlier misjudged him; ing mode of attachment,” the authoress is more importantly, she now learns through clearly being ironic, and indeed the choice the testimony of Darcy’s servant at Pem- of judgments that the narrator offers to the berly that he is virtuous—even magnani- reader is meant to be rhetorical only. Hav- mous in every respect. Precisely when the ing developed esteem for Darcy’s charac- two have come to understand themselves ter and gratitude for his esteem for hers, and each other much better, and seem about Elizabeth’s sentiments have improved and to become engaged, Lydia and Wickham are now, in Austen’s view, far more reason- suddenly threaten everything by creating a able and natural than any sort of roman- family scandal that makes the possibility of tic infatuation arising prior to rational a marriage between Elizabeth and a man discourse. Elizabeth’s marriage to Darcy, of considerable social stature like Darcy based on qualities of mind and virtues of very nearly impossible. Confronted with character, would have been an opportu- the reality that her incipient relationship nity for the deepest kind of friendship, with Darcy must end, Elizabeth now fi nds namely one that is founded upon nascent herself mourning the missed opportunity. virtue and fosters its improvement. As At this point, Austen withdraws from her Elizabeth herself notes a few chapters later, heroine’s perspective and, in a notable such a marriage would have taught “the shift, addresses the reader directly, asking admiring multitude what connubial felic- for a judgment on Elizabeth: ity really was” (III.8).

If gratitude and esteem are good Pedagogy and Friendship in Emma foundations of affection, Eliza- Of all of Austen’s novels, it is easiest to see beth’s change of sentiment will be in Pride and Prejudice a parallel to Aristotle’s

30 WINTER 2010 treatment of friendship. If space permitted, lent to others, but unquestionably it it would be profi table to show how the plays a decisive part in the power and basic teaching of that novel is developed charm of Jane Austen’s art. And if in the less typical attachments that Austen we attempt to explain the power and explores in Mansfi eld Park and Persuasion. charm that the genre of the novel At present, however, we must confi ne our- exercised in the nineteenth century, selves to a brief analysis of Emma, for, as we must take full account of its peda- noted above, a crucial element in Aristo- gogic intention and of such love as a tle’s treatment of friendship is the manner reader might feel was being directed in which friends are pedagogues in virtue towards him in the solicitude of the to each other. novel for his moral well-being, in its Like Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth, Mr. concern for the right course of his Knightly and Emma are shown to achieve development.9 what will certainly be a happy attachment based on their mutual concern for one Despite their shared attraction to the another’s virtue. In Emma, however, this virtuous life, Knightly and Emma do not concern with virtue arises within the rela- bring the same benefi ts to the relationship. tionship between master and student, for They are not both teachers—at least not in Knightly assumes the role of teacher, edu- the same way—and Austen emphasizes that cating Emma in the virtues she lacks, while they play very different roles within the Emma displays her charm and vitality as friendship. They both care about each oth- she learns thoughtful concern for the well- er’s virtue and happiness, but the strengths being of others. As Anne Crippen Ruder- that they bring to the attachment are com- man points out in speaking of the novel, plementary rather than identical. Although “Mr. Knightly’s project of education—his Elizabeth and Darcy are not equals with concern with Emma’s virtue, and her con- respect to property, one becomes aware cern with his—is the truest foundation for in reading Pride and Prejudice that they are their friendship and love.”8 Lionel Trilling, more or less equal in character; indeed, it who approaches Austen quite differently is Darcy’s failure to recognize this equality than Ruderman or Bloom, agrees that that causes Elizabeth to scorn his fi rst pro- Austen understands moral education to be posal. The relationship between Knightly grounded in friendship and love: and Emma, however, is far less equal. They are on a more equal economic foot- [Austen] was committed to the ing, but Knightly is thirty-seven or thirty- ideal of “intelligent love,” accord- eight years old and Emma twenty (nearly ing to which the deepest and truest twenty-one); more importantly, Knightly relationship that can exist between clearly possesses a certain authority over human beings is pedagogic. This Emma as her informal moral pedagogue. relationship consists in the giving Closely connected to her family because and receiving of knowledge about of location and because of the marriage right conduct, in the formation of between his younger brother and Emma’s one person’s character by another, older sister, Mr. Knightly is a frequent the acceptance of another’s guidance visitor to Hartfi eld and a good friend of in one’s growth. The idea of a love Emma despite their difference in age. based in pedagogy may seem quaint Austen shows that Mr. Knightly makes to some modern readers and repel- every effort to promote Emma’s virtue, an

31 MODERN AGE endeavor that her other friends and family only one who ever told her of them: have neglected. Emma’s great fl aw is the and though this was not particularly result of inadequate companionship both agreeable to Emma herself, she knew at Hartfi eld and in the neighboring village it would be so much less so to her of Highbury, for a lack of discipline and an father, that she would not have him excess of fl attery have made Emma some- really suspect such a circumstance what spoiled and conceited: “The real as her not being thought perfect by evils indeed of Emma’s situation were the everybody. power of having rather too much her own “Emma knows I never fl atter way, and a disposition to think a little too her,” said Mr. Knightly. (I.1) well of herself; these were the disadvan- tages which threatened alloy to her many The friendship between Knightly and enjoyments” (I.1). In her childhood Emma Emma thus originates in a common con- was never disciplined; her mother died cern for Emma’s own well-being and a when she was very young and her govern- commitment to the improvement of her ess, Miss Taylor, although an upstanding character. In fact, Mr. Knightly considers example to Emma, was more a comrade friendships inferior if they do not augment than a governess. She “had such an affec- the virtue of the individuals involved. He tion for [Emma] as could never fi nd fault” tells Mrs. Weston that he considers the (I.1). Emma’s father, a benevolent hypo- friendship between Harriet, who is pretty chondriac, “could not meet her in conver- but poorly educated, and Emma to be a sation, rational or playful,” and spoiled and bad thing because he thinks that “they will praised her to no end (I.1). Truly, Emma neither of them do the other any good” has no equals at Hartfi eld; as Knightly (I.5). points out, “Emma is spoiled by being the The most important moment in cleverest of her family” (I.5). Knightly’s educational project comes in Only Mr. Knightly censures Emma in the climactic scene at Box Hill in which any way, and thus he is the main and prac- Emma quite improperly insults the very tically only contributor to her education decent if rather pitiful Miss Bates. Taking in virtue. It seems that he has recognized Emma aside, Knightly severely castigates Emma’s lack of discipline in her home Emma for her actions: and continually attempts to remedy this by repeatedly bringing her errors to her Emma, I must once more speak to attention. The nature of their relationship you as I have been used to do: a priv- is addressed in the very fi rst chapter, where ilege rather endured than allowed, Emma tries to pass off Knightly’s criticism perhaps, but I must still use it. I can- of her as a joke so as to avoid offending her not see you acting wrong, without a fl a t t e r i n g f a t h e r : remonstrance. How could you be so unfeeling to Miss Bates? How could “Mr. Knightly loves to fi nd fault you be so insolent in your wit to a with me, you know—in a joke—it woman of her character, age, and sit- is all a joke. We always say what we uation?—Emma, I had not thought like to one another.” it possible. (III.7) Mr. Knightly, in fact, was one of the few people who could see Upon receiving Knightly’s reprimand, faults in Emma Woodhouse, and the Emma is immediately ashamed of herself,

32 WINTER 2010 but she attempts to defend her behavior ies the correct standard of behavior, and nonetheless. This only invites Knightly his virtue and rationality fail only in the to increase his censure, and he appeals to exceptional case of his brief jealousy of their friendship as giving him license to do Frank Churchill. Therefore, Emma can- so: “This is not pleasant to you, Emma— not possibly assist Knightly’s virtue in the and it is very far from pleasant to me; but same way as he can hers. Yet Mr. Knightly I must, I will—I will tell you truths while still admits in the end that his pedagogi- I can, satisﬁ ed with proving myself your cal concerns improved himself. After he friend by very faithful counsel, and trust- and Emma have revealed their true feeling that you will some time or other do ings to each other and their attachment me greater justice than you can do now” is formed, he says, “The good was all to (III.7). Emma no longer attempts to myself, by making you an object of the respond verbally to Knightly, who does tenderest affection to me. I could not not recognize that she is ashamed. With- think about you so much without doating out a word she steps into her carriage and on you, faults and all; and by dint of fan- departs, reproaching herself not only for cying so many errors, have been in love her conduct toward Miss Bates but also for with you ever since you were thirteen at her failure to acknowledge what Knightly least” (III.17). has done for her in correcting her for her misdeed. Indeed, she seems to be at least The Marriage of as concerned with the ill opinion that her Virtue and Romance? teacher now has of her as she does with her As noted in the introduction, Bloom’s inconsiderate remark to Miss Bates: “How overall interpretation of Austen is not that could she have exposed herself to such ill she is simply a representative of the Aris- opinion in any one she valued! And how totelian viewpoint, but rather that she in suffer him to leave her without saying one some sense combined modern romanti- word of gratitude, of concurrence, of com- cism and classicism, Rousseau and Aristo- mon kindness!” (III.7). Her attachment to tle, Emile and the Nicomachean Ethics, into a her teacher causes her to be desirous of his unique position of her own. Assuming that good opinion and to despair when she feels there is something to be said for accepting that she has lost it. Indeed, it would seem our claim that Austen reaches certain con- that only now that she has lost her teach- clusions that are similar to Aristotle’s, it is er’s good opinion is Emma cognizant that now possible to consider Bloom’s complete Knightly is her teacher and important to or full interpretation of Austen as arguing her for that very reason. for a synthesis of classical friendship and The friendship between Knightly and romantic matrimony. Emma, then, can be seen as similar to a In Bloom’s analysis, it is through Aus- pedagogical relationship in its primary ten’s integration of eros into her illustra- inequality. Knightly censures Emma tions of friendship that the transition to because Emma is spoiled and needs to be proper matrimony occurs. In his view, corrected, but Knightly himself is never unlike Aristotle, Austen incorporates both shown to be in need of correction by romantic passion and friendship based on Emma. On the contrary, Mr. Knightly is the good in her conception of marriage, always shown to act as a gentleman, one uniting these two traditionally warring who follows the sound principles of his portions of humanity, reason and passion, mind with appropriate action. He embod- under the marriage contract:

33 MODERN AGE

Austen brings passionate love to Austen’s goal is surely not to advocate the marriage where the classical moral- sentimental approach of “love conquering ists never encouraged it. It was not all,” neither is it to advocate a rationalistic that they simply rejected or despised approach whereby love is simply enslaved love in marriage, but that it got in by reason. the way of being reasonable . . . . MacIntyre characterizes Austen’s views The adjustment of the sexual pas- well and aligns himself more closely with sion to the love of virtue is for Jane Bloom’s interpretation, in suggesting that Austen the central question, as it is in Austen’s depiction of romantic friend- for Rousseau, and the wholly unclas- ship, virtue provides a practical basis for sical expectation of these novels is the passions. “Morality in Jane Austen is that one’s beloved will be one’s best never the mere inhibition and regulation friend or that marriage itself is the of the passions,” he states, but “is rather essential friendship.10 meant to educate the passions.”11 There- fore MacIntyre argues that, for Austen, For Bloom’s Austen, romantic eroticism the moral intellect actually teaches the need not necessarily be a distraction from passions what is proper and improper to the quest to live virtuously, let alone an want, thus redirecting rather than sti- excessive and detrimental passion that ﬂ ing the passions by providing them with excludes reason. Her position is that, prop- a stable foundation. Ruderman goes fur- erly cultivated and pruned, sexual desire ther, claiming that in Austen’s presentation might be made to assist in the search for of passion, the integration of the highest virtue. By painting marriage as the high- form of friendship with the marriage con- est form of friendship, Austen is translating tract actually deepens and increases the the philosopher’s quest for virtue and truth emotional passion of the relationship. She into the loving relationship between hus- argues that without virtue “it is not pos- band and wife. This necessarily recasts the sible to have the depth of feeling that leads sexual tensions as somehow natural to the to real attachment.”12 Thus, the virtuous pursuit of virtue. Elizabeth and Darcy, and lovers, in her view, are also the most pas- Emma and Knightly, are indeed desired sionate ones. by each other, but this natural desire sup- Austen, then, seeks not simply a sort of ports and improves their quest to live the negotiated compromise between reason best life possible—a quest not completely and romance within the bond of matri- unlike that of Aristotle’s philosophical mony, but she wants reason and romance friends. to mutually reinforce and increase each This is not to say that romantic love is other. Stated differently, she seeks to avoid totally rehabilitated by Austen. Certainly a human soul that is divided between logos she warns her readers about the dangers and eros and pursues instead a higher unity of romantic attraction and certainly her of soul in which both aspects are aug- novels contain many illustrations of the mented. Bloom views this holistic solution destructiveness of romantic love. The of Austen in this way: escapade of Lydia and Wickham comes immediately to mind, as does the wayward This romantic friendship could be romance of Marianne Dashwood in Sense understood as a kind of idealism and Sensibility. One must be careful not in which the whole self is engaged to overstate this point, however. While without the separating out of the ele-

34 WINTER 2010

ments that friendship used to require; wants are likely to occur? Does not Aus- or, it could be understood as a hard- ten tacitly admit that the sort of marriages headedness that, not trusting in the she advocates will be exceedingly rare, self-sufﬁ ciency of the spiritual, gives if for no other reason than that virtuous an anchor in the body and its pas- people who are able to make each other sions.”13 the objects of romantic love are themselves exceedingly rare? Most of the matches Presumably Austen’s blending of emo- within Austen’s novels are not good ones; tional and intellectual elements is intended it is only the match between the hero and to unite and improve the entire person, so the heroine that belongs to the highest as to result in a better integration of Aris- type. Austen understands that the good, totelian friendship with the varied facets of the pleasant, and the useful almost never human existence. coincide in the way we might hope; stated Even though Allan Bloom was clearly differently, Austen understands at least as fascinated by Austen’s attempt to unify a well as Aristotle that the philosophical life concept of friendship similar to Aristotle’s and the domestic life will remain distinct with an understanding of Rousseauesque for most people, and that the latter needs to romanticism, he remained unconvinced be subordinated to the former in the souls that such a blending was possible: of most serious human beings. One piece of evidence suggesting that For Aristotle, the friendship of Austen does recognize this problem is pro- shared discourse is the highest thing vided especially in her narrator’s descrip- to which everything else must be tion of the life of Mr. Bennet, Elizabeth’s subordinated while receiving its father. He had foolishly fallen for a woman due. In Romantic love, friend, beautiful in body but weak in mind, and lover, father or mother of one’s chil- soon “respect, esteem, and conﬁ dence” dren, and fellow citizen are all the were gone from his marriage. He did not same, and no act of subordination seek solace for his lack of “domestic hap- is required. This is a charming and piness” in the vices to which most men in tempting solution, but does it work, such situations turn, but had sought his and does it give each of the elements consolation in a life that is described in its proper due?14 philosophical terms:

Bloom ultimately rejects Austen’s solu- He was fond of the country and of tion on the grounds that there is no reason books; and from these tastes had to think that romantic love and classical arisen his principal enjoyments. To friendship have any intrinsic connection his wife he was very little otherwise to each other. He seems to think that Aus- indebted, than as her ignorance and ten is naïve in failing to notice that friend- folly had contributed to his amuse- ship and eroticism do not share a necessary ment. This is not the sort of happi- relationship, and thus that any coincidence ness which a man would in general between the two will be, at most, only wish to owe to his wife; but where accidental. other powers of entertainment are One wonders, though, whether Austen wanting, the true philosopher will is really so naïve as Bloom suggests. Does derive beneﬁ t from such as are given. she really think that the marriages she (II.19)

35 MODERN AGE

Mr. Bennet, as the narrator explains, is mental to his family, although not really to painfully aware that his domestic life does himself. Nevertheless, her narrator’s por- not coincide with the higher life of his trayal of Mr. Bennet suggests that Austen mind. We should be careful in taking the understood very well that the contempla- phrase “the true philosopher” at face value, tive life and the domestic life rarely line up, but Mr. Bennet does spend most of his days and that therefore often the best marriage in his library, and when he emerges it is must remain one that can be founded only to view the people around him with an in speech. Bloom’s contention that Aus- amusement that comes from his knowing ten misunderstood something crucial in that he is superior to them. To be sure, Aus- offering her synthesis of the friendship of ten depicts Mr. Bennet as being, in the end, ancient philosophy with the matrimony of imprudent, for his neglect of the education the modern age may itself turn out to be of his daughters proves to be most detri- only a misunderstanding of Austen.

1 Allan Bloom, Love and Friendship (New York: Simon Political Thought in the Novels of Jane Austen (Lanham, & Schuster, 1993). One notes that Austen’s fi rst attempt MD: Rowman & Littlefi eld, 1995), 8. David Gallop at novel writing, undertaken at the age of fi fteen, says of Austen’s moral thought that “Aristotle’s ethics was titled “Love and Friendship.” 2 Bloom, 201, 191, can be read as an uncanny anticipation of hers”; see his and 208, respectively. Bloom even reminds his read- “Jane Austen and the Aristotelian Ethic,” Philosophy and ers that Leo Strauss himself had compared Austen to Literature 23.1 (1999): 98. Also Gilbert Ryle, “Jane Aus- Xenophon in On Tyranny (Ithaca, NY: Cornell Uni- ten and the Moralists,” in Critical Essays on Jane Austen, versity Press, 1963), 198. In the passage, Strauss says ed. B. C. Southam (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, that “we are in need of a second education in order to 1968), 114–22; David Fott, “Prudence and Persua- accustom our eyes to the noble reserve and the quiet sion: Jane Austen on Virtue in Democratizing Eras,” grandeur of the classics,” including especially Xeno- Lamar Journal of the Humanities 24 (1999): 17–37. 3 Eth- phon, and he notes that “those modern readers who ics 1155a25–27, trans. W. D. Ross, in The Basic Works are so fortunate as to have a natural preference for Jane of Aristotle, ed. Richard McKeon (New York: Modern Austen rather than for Dostoievski, in particular, have Library, 2001). All quotations of the Ethics in this essay an easier access to Xenophon than others might have; will be taken from Ross’s translation; references will to understand Xenophon, they have only to combine be to Bekker numbers and will be given in parenthe- the love of philosophy with their natural preference.” ses in the text. 4 #107 in Jane Austen’s Letters, 3rd ed., Irving Kristol recalls Strauss making a similar point in ed. Deirdre La Faye (Oxford: Oxford University Press, this way: “Strauss, in conversation, once remarked that 1995), 275. 5 Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study it was entirely proper for a young man to think Dos- in Moral Theory (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre toevski was the greatest novelist, but it would be a sign Dame Press, 1981), 224. 6 Mansfi eld Park, I.9. All quo- of maturity when he later concluded it was Jane Aus- tations of Austen’s works in this essay will be taken ten who had the most legitimate claim to that place.” from the various volumes of The Cambridge Edition of See Irving Kristol, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography the Works of Jane Austen; references will be to novel vol- of an Idea (New York: Free Press, 1995), 9. Although ume and chapter and will be given in parentheses in Bloom’s understanding of Austen as in some sense an the text. 7 See Bloom, 192. 8 Ruderman, 49. 9 Lionel Aristotelian is uncommon, it is not unique. Anne Crip- Trilling, Sincerity and Authenticity (Cambridge, MA: pen Ruderman, Bloom’s former student, goes so far as Harvard University Press, 1971), 82. With the phrase to say of Austen that “it would be possible to use her “intelligent love,” Trilling is relying, he says, on an novels to illustrate the view of human nature put forth anonymous critic who wrote of Austen in 1870 in the in Aristotle’s Ethics, which is not at all to say that she North British Review. 10 Bloom, 195–96. 11 MacIntyre, meant them to do this”; see her The Pleasures of Virtue: 224. 12 Ruderman, 63. 13 Bloom, 207. 14 Bloom, 207.