VIRTUE, HAPPINESS, and CHRISTIAN LOVE in PRIDE and PREJUDICE Augusta Vae Hardy, Ph.D
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
“CHARITY ITSELF”: VIRTUE, HAPPINESS, AND CHRISTIAN LOVE IN PRIDE AND PREJUDICE Augusta Vae Hardy, Ph.D. University of Dallas, 2020 Dr. Theresa Kenney Dissertation Abstract Despite the historical evidence that Jane Austen was a devout Anglican, many readers have nonetheless contended that her Christian faith does not truly inform her fiction. Even those who do identify Christian themes in her works tend to argue that her early three novels, of which Pride and Prejudice is one, have a lightness of theme and tone that Austen abandoned in favor of more serious and explicitly religious subjects for her final three novels. While critics have described Christian elements in Pride and Prejudice—such as the importance of repentance, humility, and forgiveness—none have yet made a prolonged study of the way these Christian ideas pervade, not simply punctuate, the narrative. In my dissertation, I argue that Pride and Prejudice is a fully Christian work because Austen’s moral concerns in the novel are fundamentally, if not explicitly, Christian. The novel is governed from beginning to end by several essential Christian virtues, the chief of which is charity, the queen of the theological virtues. In their different ways, both Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy must improve in Christian charity as a preparation for romantic love: she must learn to judge with charity, and he must learn to consider others’ needs ahead of his own. Charity is also key to Austen’s understanding of the happy ending which rewards her characters; she suggests that her characters can hope to achieve real happiness in proportion to their ability to love others unselfishly. Indeed, her idea that happiness consists in generous love reflects her belief that the Christian’s ultimate happiness and reward is loving communion with God and the saints in heaven. Following charity, humility is also central to the novel’s Christian vision. Austen shows that this quintessentially Christian virtue must inform justice: only through the humble recognition of their own faults are the hero and heroine able to treat each other justly. Their humility also prepares them for gratitude and forgiveness, attitudes which are themselves the precursors to love. Augusta Vae Hardy, “Charity Itself”: Virtue, Happiness, and Christian Love in Pride and Prejudice © 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments vi Introduction: Making a Case for Pride and Prejudice as a Christian Novel viii Chapter I: Politeness and Charity: The Education of Mr. Darcy 1 Chapter II: Candor and Charity: The Education of Elizabeth Bennet 41 Chapter III: The Justice of Humility and Gratitude 96 Chapter IV: Marriage, the Good, and Human Happiness 148 Conclusion: “Circumstances of the Story”: Charity and Grace 211 Bibliography 216 Acknowledgments It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a scholar in possession of a completed dissertation must wish to express her gratitude to those who have made her endeavor a success. To that end, I extend the following thanks. To my parents, for beginning my education by surrounding me with good books and for supporting me in my graduate studies, as they do in everything. To my sister, the Jane to my Elizabeth, for friendship and shared adventures. To Dr. Theresa Kenney, my dissertation director, for her guidance and encouragement, and not least for reading chapter drafts even while on vacation. To the other members of my dissertation committee—Dr. Stephen Stryer, Dr. David Davies, Dr. Joshua Parens, and Dr. Richard Dougherty—for making my dissertation defense an enjoyable experience even under the unusual conditions of a pandemic. To my colleagues in the Braniff graduate programs for many enjoyable conversations about good books, both inside and outside the classes we shared. To Michael D. Terranova, Rachel Shunk, Kate Stearns, and Jonathan Carlin, for cocktail parties, brunches, movie showings, and bonfires. Your hospitality has been a blessing to the U.D. community. To the professors at my alma mater, Hillsdale College, for laying the foundations of my graduate work, especially to Dr. Stephen Smith, for teaching me that to read well is to ask questions of the text and for recommending the vi University of Dallas; and to Dr. Justin Jackson, for reminding me that plot summary is not analysis and for pushing me to be a better writer. vii Introduction: Making a Case for Pride and Prejudice as a Christian Novel According to the biographical notice published along with the first printing of Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, Jane Austen was a faithful and orthodox Anglican Christian. The notice, generally accepted to be the work of Jane’s brother Henry Austen,1 declares, “She was thoroughly religious and devout; fearful of giving offence to God, and incapable of feeling it towards any fellow creature. On serious subjects she was well- instructed, both by reading and meditation, and her opinions accorded strictly with those of our Established Church” (8). In more recent years, there has been some questioning of the family motives for this “hagiographical” biography (Kirkham). The family’s affection for the departed Jane, plus Henry’s own Evangelical religious principles likely account for his glowingly hyperbolic account of his sister as perfectly mild-mannered and gentle in all her words and deeds (Tucker 3-5). The trouble, of course, is that Austen’s novels and letters reveal a critical mind and a sharp—sometimes biting—wit that belie Henry’s picture of a purely demure and sweetly inoffensive woman. Yet while we should reasonably doubt that Austen presented any such “picture of perfection” (to borrow her terms of complaint about unrealistic novel heroines), her real human imperfections are not in themselves sufficient cause to discount the claim that she was a sincere Christian who valued and strove to practice gentleness, humility, and charity (Letters 23-25 March 1817). Nonetheless, many readers have concluded that 1 Juliette Wells has demonstrated that while evidence certainly suggests that Henry wrote the “Biographical Notice,” no absolute proof for the authorship is extant; thus it is possible that Jane Austen’s sister Cassandra had a part in the composition. viii Austen was not the devout believer of Henry’s biography. Such judgments generally rest on the claim that, if Austen was sincere, surely her Christian beliefs would be clearly displayed in her novels. Laurence Lerner articulates this position: I say that Jane Austen the novelist did not believe in God because God is totally absent from her work. A person may remain silent about a deeply held and genuine belief, but not a writer: all that exists in a writer’s work is what he creates. I cannot of course prove that God is absent from Jane Austen’s work, because no one can prove an absence: but there is quite a lot of circumstantial evidence. (23-4) Lerner’s premise is reasonable and one with which I agree: what an author truly values will find its way into her work. It is difficult to imagine that a self-respecting author could remain utterly silent on those subjects which she believes matter the most. At any rate, biographical evidence about Austen’s religious views is not sufficient in itself to qualify Austen’s novels as Christian works. In other words, if God—or anything else intrinsic to religious faith—really is “totally absent” from the novels, historical facts such as Austen’s upbringing as a clergyman’s daughter or her reading of sermons do not make her works Christian in content or theme. Other critics have been ready to note the apparent “circumstantial evidence” against sincere Christian piety in the novels. Cited particularly often is the fact that Austen does not reserve the clergy from her satire. Indeed, Pride and Prejudice is especially singled out as an example of Austen’s lack of respect for men of the church. Kelly declares, “There’s rarely much Burkean ‘reverence’ in Jane’s attitude to the clergy; ix in Pride and Prejudice there’s none at all” (132). Mr. Collins is “a clergyman to be laughed at,” notes Warren Roberts (133).2 Surely, reason many readers, an author who truly respected the clergy would hardly have made one of her most notable fools a clergyman. Readers also attribute to Austen social views that are not particularly compatible with conservative, orthodox Christian faith. Pride and Prejudice is especially susceptible to radical readings, given both content (Elizabeth Bennet is a non-conventional heroine who overcomes class distinctions) and style (of the novels, Pride and Prejudice is probably the most witty and ironic or “light, bright, and sparkling,” as Austen herself claimed).3 D.W. Harding’s famous essay on “Regulated Hatred” (and the myriad of critics who have followed his lead) attributes to Austen a thinly-veiled disgust with her associates which hardly comports with the Christian ideals of love and kindness. Feminists such as Nina Auerbach or Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar suggest that Austen critiques female oppression under a patriarchal society, a reading that all but excludes the possibility of intelligent approval for traditional moral values. Claudia Johnson suggests that Austen’s apparently conservative novels contain disguised liberal themes: Austen, 2 Mr. Elton, Austen’s other laughable clergyman, is strangely absent from Roberts’ discussion of Emma, a novel which he considers evidence of an Evangelical conversion. 3 In a letter to her sister, Cassandra, Austen wrote, “Upon the whole however I am quite vain enough & well satisfied enough.—The work is rather too light & bright & sparkling;—it wants shade;—it wants to be stretched out here & there with a long Chapter—of sense if it could be had, if not of solemn specious nonsense—about something unconnected with the story; an Essay on Writing, a critique on Walter Scott, or the history of Buonaparté—or anything that would form a contrast & bring the reader with increased delight to the playfulness & Epigrammatism of the general stile” (Letters 4 February 1813).