-Spring argues that Austen breaks down the characters of Pride and Prejudice into three categories: psuedo-gentry (also known as bougeouis, but the scholar finds this word inappropriate due to its urban connotations), gentry, and aristocracy.
-The aristocracy represented the wealthiest of landowners; the gentry also own land, but not as wealthy; the pseudogentry do not possess the same monetary assests as the gentry, but desperately seek them or to appear to have them (manners, schooling, etc)
-Spring believes that although Austen belonged to the third and bottom group of the three, she had a distinct preference for the gentry; she portrays the gentry as modest and prudent, whereas the aristocrats come off as ostentatious and unnecessarily extravagant. On the other hand, the lowest class appears ridiculous with their attempts to emulate the rich. He describes them to have virtues of "aggressiveness, an eye for money and chance, and courtship for monetary aspects."
-I agree with this point: people like Lady Catherine represent the aristocracy, who are steadfast in their snobbishness and extravagance. On the other hand, people on the other end of the spectrum--namely Mrs. Bennet-- desperately seek to marry into a higher class.
-The final point he makes in his essay is that Austen's novel celebrates the rise of both the pseudo-gentry and the gentry. In a way, he is correct because the book demonstrates how marriages began to be more commonly accepted for love and happiness as opposed to solely based on material advantages, but this monetary perspective still persists in people like Mrs. Bennet and Lady Catherine. On this point, Spring would have been more convincing if he used textual support for his claims.
No comments:
Post a Comment