A vindication on the worth of Fanny Price 😁 That people can't see her strength because she's so quiet and retiring (hardly uncommon in someone who suffered neglect and abuse most of her life) annoys me no end, especially when they *do* acknowledge her abuse, but still can't make allowances for her. Very ableist.
@@AJaneiteSews I'm naturally shy, and my dad was very Georgian in his parenting style back then (he's a lot softer now, but the damage is done), so I have *such* a hard time sticking up for myself, even in safe situations. Fanny is a badass in that scene, and nothing will change my mind.
I've never understood why so many people don't like Fanny. I was quiet and agreeable as a teenager too. Many times people assumed they could make decisions for me and got disappointed. Why do people assume if someone is agreeable that they never have any opinions at all? Kudos to Fanny for refusing to marry a jerk.
The first time I read Mansfield Park, I was so used to the romantic trope of "rake reformed by love and virtue" that I was filled with dread that Fanny would be so betrayed by the author. It was quite the thriller. In some respects, I think Mansfield Park is the perfect anti-Pamela.
Slight correction, Willoughby doesn’t marry Marianne not because his Aunt wanted him to marry a rich woman, but because she found out that Willoughby seduced Colonel Brandon’s ward, Eliza, and that Eliza was pregnant with Willoughby’s child. The Aunt insisted Willoughby make amends to Eliza, but when he refused, she cut him off. Willoughby could have married Marianne, but he was penniless and in debt with no future prospects due to his being disinherited, and so he instead decided to find a rich woman to wed.
that doesn't make sense. I thought her aunt already disinherited him the moment she found out about that, wdym "make amends" if she wanted to she could just give her money 💀 so what happen to the aunt? after Willoughby married rich heiress... just reading books in her library instead of maybe idk help Eliza
@@Satu-zs7gmAusten doesnt tell us what happened to the aunt. But I am at least impressed by her, that she was not ok with Willoughby behaving that way toward a young girl & punished him.
@@k.l.8804 punished him by? pushing him towards a rich heiress, you do know Austen portrayed this entire situation as morally grey area, technically none of them got happy Ending.
The punishment was not giving him any more money, not letting him inherit anything from her. She didn't push him into a rich woman's arms, he (an adult man) found his way into them. She was his aunt, not his puppeteer, she had little power over him. If she could force him into anything, he would have married Eliza.
@@Lu-li1ei again you don't get it, if she disinherited her nephew, his only option of getting money was to marry rich, his aunt (an old adult woman) might be stupid but she ain't that stupid, she knew perfectly well what he will do... what punishment considering he can still marry rich dumb girl... again none of you seemed to be able to answer my actual question oof what did the aunt do after Willoughby married rich and see that her plan of disinheriting him was pretty useless anyway...
In terms of cousin marriages, I have also heard it pointed out that, as interactions between cousins could be less formal, people might have felt more secure in their knowledge of their cousin’s character as compared to somebody they had met at a ball. Given how severe the implications of marrying were, and how badly it could go wrong, that’s not a small advantage.
Also, if it is a poorer, less connected family, who still has to uphold their social status - realistically, how many opportunities would the daughters have to go to balls or other social gatherings and meet unattached young men 'in want of a wife'? Esp since usually a certain degree of reciprocity was expected in arranging such gatherings. Imagine growing up in a small town, where you have grown up in regular contact with every other child of your age and you already know everyone available in a fifty mile radius and there just aren't enough men on the market. What is a girl to do? the best she can hope for is that a visit to another relation is arranged where she might be able to at least come into contact with other eligible bachelors, but if they are similarly financially challenged and live in another rural village, the people she will be getting most contact with are her cousins.
We must also remember to ask ourselves what a given society meant by "cousin." Certainly not only first cousin, as we use the term in the Anglosphere today.
Honestly I always put mr darcy's surprise proposal on his complete lack of taste or understanding for all this social nonsense. Dude realises he likes a girl and just goes to tell her because he's still in the "offended about the realisation" stage instead of trying to go through the process of courting. So like, falling into the opposite extreme? Either way, that scene is still legendary.
On recent re-readings of Pride and Prejudice, I've come to the conclusion that Mr. Darcy thought he was being painfully obvious in his affection for Lizzie, which, in a way, he was: visiting her almost daily, watching her whenever they were together, asking her to dance even when dancing wasn't happening, debating with her. I mean Charlotte Lucas and Caroline Bingley both pick up on it. But because he is uncomfortable with his feelings, socially awkward, and also accidentally insulted Lizzie the first time they met, Lizzie doesn't know how to properly interpret his behaviour, which is why she's surprised by the proposal.
@@lauradavison8068 Also I think he felt he didn’t need to woo her, because she’d be so wowed by him proposing that she’d gratefully accept. No wonder he was surprised when she refused!
@@Satu-zs7gm Yes, it is indeed a novel, but that sort of thing actually did (and does) happen in real life. And we have LOTS of evidence via primary sources such as letters, diaries, newspaper articles, and even laws of the time period. Laws? Why, yes! Male aristocrats "stooping" to wed impoverished women was an issue. It happened often enough among the royals of this time period that specific rules were developed to stop socially inappropriate marriages from happening. The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 was created by King George III to require all royals to receive permission from the monarch before they marry, due to several princes (including the next king) running off and marrying women below their class. In all times and places, attraction happens across class lines. Love and lust do not know the bounds of social class, and some of our most treasured love stories reflect that love can transcend these barriers. No matter how the older generation strive to keep the power and prestige of the family intact, their attempts to control the youth do not always succeed. But if your point was different, or you are speaking from personal experience as someone with wealth enough that others are beneath your notice, then carry on. :) - Your friendly feminist historian
I had a baby out of wedlock, kept her, still not married and live with the baby and her father…. Regency ladies would have a heart attack upon hearing that
I had a baby as a sole parent, with a sperm donor, who has since gotten married, to a man. I don't think Regency folk would be able to process that :-)
If I were a time traveler, I'd love to visit during the London just to eat popcorn and watch all the intrigues and scheming that go into landing a good match.
The Mayor of Casterbridge was adapted! It stars Ciaran Hinds who played Wentworth in the 95 Persuasion adaptation. I think I watched it on Amazon Prime.
It is of course true that it was not the norm for a man of Mr Darcy’s social standing to marry someone from a less exalted background but such marriages occurred more frequently than is sometimes realised. For example, in the second half of the 18th century Elizabeth Gunning, who came from an impoverished gentry family, married the Duke of Hamilton and subsequently married the Duke of Argyll. Moreover, in 1835 Pauline Jermyn, the penniless daughter of a clergyman, married the eldest son of a rich baronet and thus ended her days as Lady Trevelyan, the wife of a man who owned two large estates.
well yes and no. Elizabeth gunning was absolutely stunning the plain truth was the whole pride and prejudice situation was just a fantasy quite unrealistic. Most who married up were highly ambitious and vain, like Elizabeth Gunning.
I’m guessing that’s the reason Austen had Mr. Darcy lose both his parents before his marriage, because if they were alive, they likely would not have approved, so I think that might be how Austen made it more realistic.
In terms of how proposals pop up in Austen novels, I wonder if some of it is more context of the time that we just don’t see. It’s like when I try to explain a twitter joke: if you’re not there, there’s so much context missing! And the women of her circles would know the whole rigmarole so well, you wouldn’t have to write about it for it to be read into…
I have searched for extant Regency court gowns and haven't found any. I would love to see one. I don't think they were considered beautiful even at time. Possibly they were remade in more attractive styles when court was over. One other possibility is that museums have some but don't think they're worth putting on display. Most people don't visit museums looking for gowns that resemble giant cupcakes. I just hope there aren't any of these gowns slowly decaying from lack of love.
That's interesting that there aren't any to be seen. I suppose that with the price of fabric, that they were taken apart and used to make something more fashionable, or possibly several somethings! It is a bit surprising that there aren't any on display, you would think that some women would have kept one as a show of how rich they were that they didn't need to re-use the material!
I love that your uncle read Jane Austen. May your memories of him bring you comfort. In thinking about all these Regency rules it made me think about my own courtship. There was a hugely popular book at the time (1997) titled "The Rules". It included such rules as Don't Talk to a Man First, Don't Ask Him to Dance, as well as Don’t Call Him. I can see a correlation between the two eras. Truth time. Tired of dating toads I gave The Rules a whirl. There must be some merit to it. My Mr. Darcy and I have now been together 24 years. :)
Hahahaha. The Rules sound like “the usual” when I was around 18 in the late 1970s. A girl NEVER phoned a boy unless they were engaged (to each other). There are a lot of toads 🐸 out there! I am a 64-year-old divorcee, and I have met many a toad through online dating! I wonder if The Rules are different for seniors.
Such a great video. I really enjoyed how you used examples from Austen's text, Austen's own life, her contemporaries, and historical context. But most of all, I enjoyed your liberal use of clips from all the various Austen film adaptations and even some Bridgerton. And don't think I didn't catch your photo of Sylvestra Le Touzel as Fanny Price in Mansfield Park-1983, followed immediately by a photo of the same actress playing Mrs. Allen in Northanger Abbey-2007.
I'm thinking of trying to read Austen for the first time (never even seen a film adaptation somehow even though I'm 25) and I found this video very informative!! Thank you!!
Great video. Although I would take book of conducts with a pinch of salt. In two centuries, people trying to understand our ways of life through self-development books might get a very distorted view
Great video as always! I’m curious to know, how does the same process work for men? Did men have a “coming out” process? When is a guy considered an eligible man and no longer a boy?
I couldn’t find anything on boys to men, and I don’t think they had a come out. Boys in the upper classes often went off to school, and when they came back, I think they were just assumed to be ready to find a wife. Their only requirement was being able to provide for a family, and if they were not going to inherit enough, they had to find an appropriate occupation in the church, law, or military. And even then, many like Colonel Fitzwilliam still had to find a match with a hefty dowry to maintain their lifestyle.
Men were ready to marry when they could afford a home, a wife, and children. This is the main reason why, if you look at census statistics back through time, you find men about three years older than their wives, with the ages of 23 for women and 26 for men the average age at marriage.
Great video! I really appreciate the way you highlight examples from Jane Austen's works, Bridgerton, etc. to make the social realities and customs of the period more accessible. I'm eagerly awaiting part 2! :)
I have read a description of Bridgerton somewhere that this is basically Austen fanfic with a more modernized array of social mores and it really seems to fit. Maybe I will give it a watch sometime anyway, just for the costumeporn and the intrigue :-) , though i usually can't suspend my disbelief long enough to read regency fanfic, all those faux-pas throw me right out.
Mr Collins wasn't a first cousin to the Bennet girls, but a much further one. In my country it is still legal to marry a first cousin, but it is frowned upon. I only know of one couple being 2nd cousins.
It gives a 5% chance for first cousins of a serious issue with their child. The UK average is only half this at 2.5%. Though, I expect the risk is far far lower when neither has a family history.
@@MartinChadwick-xe7gh I suspect the statistics of first cousins is also largely populated with families where it's not a single occurrence but more widely done. Which increases the risk a lot.
Male characters in Austen's novels whose family members try to exercise influence over their choice of marriage partner: Mr. Darcy (Lady Catherine wants him to marry Anne); Colonel Brandon (his family wouldn't allow him and Eliza to marry); Mr. Collins (this one may be a stretch because they're only related by marriage, but Mrs. Bennet practically pushes Lizzy into his arms); Mr. Bingley (his sisters try to convince him of Jane's unsuitability); Mr. Tilney (his father refuses to consent to his marrying Catherine); Mr. Crawford (his sister, Mrs. Grant, tries to set him up with Julia Bertram); Mr. Rushworth (his mother and Mrs. Norris orchestrate his courtship and proposal to Maria). That's all I can think of! I'm sure there are others!
S&S - The Ferrars family try to keep Edward from Elinor, and set him up with Miss Morton, Willoughby is ordered by his Aunt to marry Eliza, on threat of disinheriting. P&P - The Bingley sisters and Darcy separate Bingley from Jane, and want to set him up with Georgiana Darcy. Emma - the Churchills want Frank to marry well
During her time people marry for money and status within their class, they experienced unhappy marriages and usually cheated on each other. Jane tell us that people should be honest with themselves and marry for love to be able to live a happy life.
Jane is ill a lot, culminating in her grim death (my partner had Hodgkin's while pregnant. Will she die? Will he die? She lived another twenty years and died of lung cancer. What is left of Jane's personal history speaks of low disease resistance and a miserable time under the cosh. With that in mind how she wished all the best for her imaginary friends only serves to describe her torrid circumstances that much more emotionally.
Enjoyed your video. But the title "Sir" -----indicating a knight or a baronet----followed by said knight or baronet's surname is absolutely not a thing. There is never a Sir Bertram, Sir Eliot, or Sir Lucas. The title belongs with the first name: Sir Thomas, Sir Walter (baronets). and Sir. William (knight). Their wives, however, are addressed as "Lady" plus husband"s surname: Lady Bertram, Lady Lucas. I am surprised if you read a lot of Austen, that you didn't realize there things, because she uses these titles correctly throughout her novels. You want to talk about etiquette in Recency society, proper forms of address (especially where titles are concerned!) are absolutely essential, and videos about the period should show awareness of this crucial necessity.. As a matter of fact, the rules regarding titles in Britain remain the same today; they have been in place, virtually unchanged, for centuries!
I do want to point one thing out about Mr Collins: he is not a direct cousin but slightly removed. So more than okay in Regency terms but still why they call him cousin. Even in these days that distance might be seen as ok, I dont know how distanced it was. But of course in Regency times even a first cousin was fine, and as someone here pointed out, you were likely to know your cousins from a young age. You would know if you liked them or not and possibly fall in love. Interactions with non family was so restricted that getting to know some one organically was hard. Balls and other courtship occasions was basically like todays Tinder and you never knew if that swipe would lead to something good or disasterous!
Ridiculous rules but at least they had mannuals like the washing machines today , they might consider publishing mannuals for todays dating though I bet even if they will be impractical they will sell just fine (laughs)🤣🤣
Sir Thomas was hardly abusive. His wife was clearly not entirely all there so you can give her a bit of a break. Was really looking forward to this video. But there are lots of errors in it, particularly as regards titles. Also, I think you're allowing 21st century woke ideology to impair your thinking where some of the characters in Miss Austin's books are concerned. Although I hoped Sir Thomas would not be successful in his council to Fanny, in the times they were living he was actually giving her quite sage advice that any father would have given as well. We must remember that Fanny knew things about her suitor that Sir Thomas did not. Had he known, his advice might have been quite different. Especially since that information pertained to his own daughter. Very disappointing video. I gave up halfway.
Less than 8 minutes here, and for the same reason: Interpreting past social norms, which reflect most of human society up until quite recently, through the lens of angry feminazism shows me someone who doesn't know their history or understand human behavior.
Completely wrong attitude. Since this was released five upper class males decided women should not control their own bodies. Should we get titles correctly? What a trivial notion when women TODAY are facing exactly the same issues they did 200 years ago. Read Jane Austen to know what life was, not to prove pedantic credentials. To be a woman is to bear the burdens a patriarchal society places on us, then and now.
@@debrabarnhardt1103 up to a third of women died in childhood back then. Throwing it back to the states to legislate was the appropriate choice since Roe was based on bunk since and the Warren Court was notorious for legislating from the bench. I was raised to be an angry, man hating, anti patriarchy leftist. Hope you find peace. Abortion is not empowering, it's cruel and damaging.
Let me get this straight. You couldn't get into Simon Hastings's arc in "Bridgerton" because of his determination not to have kids and continue the family line? Even though the series had made clear why he had made such a declaration in the first place?
I love your videos, so interesting and insightful! I wonder though, as there were so many way of coming out, from pinning up their hair to being introduced to the queen, how would the Bennet sisters or other Jane Austen protagonists have come out? Would neither have been introduced at court?
A vindication on the worth of Fanny Price 😁 That people can't see her strength because she's so quiet and retiring (hardly uncommon in someone who suffered neglect and abuse most of her life) annoys me no end, especially when they *do* acknowledge her abuse, but still can't make allowances for her. Very ableist.
Yes!!! I think she's amazing for sticking up for her beliefs. I was super shy as a teenager, too, and I had a great childhood.
@@AJaneiteSews I'm naturally shy, and my dad was very Georgian in his parenting style back then (he's a lot softer now, but the damage is done), so I have *such* a hard time sticking up for myself, even in safe situations. Fanny is a badass in that scene, and nothing will change my mind.
I've never understood why so many people don't like Fanny. I was quiet and agreeable as a teenager too. Many times people assumed they could make decisions for me and got disappointed. Why do people assume if someone is agreeable that they never have any opinions at all? Kudos to Fanny for refusing to marry a jerk.
The first time I read Mansfield Park, I was so used to the romantic trope of "rake reformed by love and virtue" that I was filled with dread that Fanny would be so betrayed by the author. It was quite the thriller.
In some respects, I think Mansfield Park is the perfect anti-Pamela.
I thought Fanny Price was also a hypocrite who was quite good at judging others, while ignoring her own flaws and those of her "beloved" Edmund.
Slight correction, Willoughby doesn’t marry Marianne not because his Aunt wanted him to marry a rich woman, but because she found out that Willoughby seduced Colonel Brandon’s ward, Eliza, and that Eliza was pregnant with Willoughby’s child. The Aunt insisted Willoughby make amends to Eliza, but when he refused, she cut him off. Willoughby could have married Marianne, but he was penniless and in debt with no future prospects due to his being disinherited, and so he instead decided to find a rich woman to wed.
that doesn't make sense. I thought her aunt already disinherited him the moment she found out about that, wdym "make amends" if she wanted to she could just give her money 💀 so what happen to the aunt? after Willoughby married rich heiress... just reading books in her library instead of maybe idk help Eliza
@@Satu-zs7gmAusten doesnt tell us what happened to the aunt. But I am at least impressed by her, that she was not ok with Willoughby behaving that way toward a young girl & punished him.
@@k.l.8804 punished him by? pushing him towards a rich heiress, you do know Austen portrayed this entire situation as morally grey area, technically none of them got happy Ending.
The punishment was not giving him any more money, not letting him inherit anything from her. She didn't push him into a rich woman's arms, he (an adult man) found his way into them. She was his aunt, not his puppeteer, she had little power over him. If she could force him into anything, he would have married Eliza.
@@Lu-li1ei again you don't get it, if she disinherited her nephew, his only option of getting money was to marry rich, his aunt (an old adult woman) might be stupid but she ain't that stupid, she knew perfectly well what he will do... what punishment considering he can still marry rich dumb girl... again none of you seemed to be able to answer my actual question oof what did the aunt do after Willoughby married rich and see that her plan of disinheriting him was pretty useless anyway...
In terms of cousin marriages, I have also heard it pointed out that, as interactions between cousins could be less formal, people might have felt more secure in their knowledge of their cousin’s character as compared to somebody they had met at a ball. Given how severe the implications of marrying were, and how badly it could go wrong, that’s not a small advantage.
Also, if it is a poorer, less connected family, who still has to uphold their social status - realistically, how many opportunities would the daughters have to go to balls or other social gatherings and meet unattached young men 'in want of a wife'? Esp since usually a certain degree of reciprocity was expected in arranging such gatherings. Imagine growing up in a small town, where you have grown up in regular contact with every other child of your age and you already know everyone available in a fifty mile radius and there just aren't enough men on the market. What is a girl to do? the best she can hope for is that a visit to another relation is arranged where she might be able to at least come into contact with other eligible bachelors, but if they are similarly financially challenged and live in another rural village, the people she will be getting most contact with are her cousins.
In fact this exact reason is the first one communities and societies who still practice cousin wedding today they give to journalists and researchers.
We must also remember to ask ourselves what a given society meant by "cousin." Certainly not only first cousin, as we use the term in the Anglosphere today.
First cousins, YIKES!! Are there no birth defects? And whynot?
Honestly I always put mr darcy's surprise proposal on his complete lack of taste or understanding for all this social nonsense. Dude realises he likes a girl and just goes to tell her because he's still in the "offended about the realisation" stage instead of trying to go through the process of courting. So like, falling into the opposite extreme?
Either way, that scene is still legendary.
On recent re-readings of Pride and Prejudice, I've come to the conclusion that Mr. Darcy thought he was being painfully obvious in his affection for Lizzie, which, in a way, he was: visiting her almost daily, watching her whenever they were together, asking her to dance even when dancing wasn't happening, debating with her. I mean Charlotte Lucas and Caroline Bingley both pick up on it. But because he is uncomfortable with his feelings, socially awkward, and also accidentally insulted Lizzie the first time they met, Lizzie doesn't know how to properly interpret his behaviour, which is why she's surprised by the proposal.
@@lauradavison8068 Also I think he felt he didn’t need to woo her, because she’d be so wowed by him proposing that she’d gratefully accept. No wonder he was surprised when she refused!
@@riverAmazonNZ YES
it's a novel💀 get a grip... irl people like Mr Darcy would not degrade himself with someone so low like the bennets
@@Satu-zs7gm Yes, it is indeed a novel, but that sort of thing actually did (and does) happen in real life. And we have LOTS of evidence via primary sources such as letters, diaries, newspaper articles, and even laws of the time period.
Laws? Why, yes! Male aristocrats "stooping" to wed impoverished women was an issue.
It happened often enough among the royals of this time period that specific rules were developed to stop socially inappropriate marriages from happening.
The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 was created by King George III to require all royals to receive permission from the monarch before they marry, due to several princes (including the next king) running off and marrying women below their class.
In all times and places, attraction happens across class lines. Love and lust do not know the bounds of social class, and some of our most treasured love stories reflect that love can transcend these barriers.
No matter how the older generation strive to keep the power and prestige of the family intact, their attempts to control the youth do not always succeed.
But if your point was different, or you are speaking from personal experience as someone with wealth enough that others are beneath your notice, then carry on. :)
- Your friendly feminist historian
I had a baby out of wedlock, kept her, still not married and live with the baby and her father….
Regency ladies would have a heart attack upon hearing that
I had a baby as a sole parent, with a sperm donor, who has since gotten married, to a man. I don't think Regency folk would be able to process that :-)
No, the ladies wouldn't. The men and society at large would
If I were a time traveler, I'd love to visit during the London just to eat popcorn and watch all the intrigues and scheming that go into landing a good match.
Did popcorn exist then or later ?
@@tymanung6382 It's been around for almost seven thousand years. I think European settlers at least knew of it by the mid 1800's, but probably longer
Fanny's mother a sailor married for love and regretted it later.
Emma was not the only Austen heroine who said she would marry only for love. Both Jane and Elizabeth Bennet also said so.
The Mayor of Casterbridge was adapted! It stars Ciaran Hinds who played Wentworth in the 95 Persuasion adaptation. I think I watched it on Amazon Prime.
It is of course true that it was not the norm for a man of Mr Darcy’s social standing to marry someone from a less exalted background but such marriages occurred more frequently than is sometimes realised. For example, in the second half of the 18th century Elizabeth Gunning, who came from an impoverished gentry family, married the Duke of Hamilton and subsequently married the Duke of Argyll. Moreover, in 1835 Pauline Jermyn, the penniless daughter of a clergyman, married the eldest son of a rich baronet and thus ended her days as Lady Trevelyan, the wife of a man who owned two large estates.
well yes and no. Elizabeth gunning was absolutely stunning
the plain truth was the whole pride and prejudice situation was just a fantasy quite unrealistic.
Most who married up were highly ambitious and vain, like Elizabeth Gunning.
I’m guessing that’s the reason Austen had Mr. Darcy lose both his parents before his marriage, because if they were alive, they likely would not have approved, so I think that might be how Austen made it more realistic.
In terms of how proposals pop up in Austen novels, I wonder if some of it is more context of the time that we just don’t see. It’s like when I try to explain a twitter joke: if you’re not there, there’s so much context missing! And the women of her circles would know the whole rigmarole so well, you wouldn’t have to write about it for it to be read into…
I am surprised that you quote Bridgerton, all the show without the substance, grand eloquence without a scintilla of wit.
I have searched for extant Regency court gowns and haven't found any. I would love to see one. I don't think they were considered beautiful even at time. Possibly they were remade in more attractive styles when court was over. One other possibility is that museums have some but don't think they're worth putting on display. Most people don't visit museums looking for gowns that resemble giant cupcakes. I just hope there aren't any of these gowns slowly decaying from lack of love.
That's interesting that there aren't any to be seen. I suppose that with the price of fabric, that they were taken apart and used to make something more fashionable, or possibly several somethings! It is a bit surprising that there aren't any on display, you would think that some women would have kept one as a show of how rich they were that they didn't need to re-use the material!
I love that your uncle read Jane Austen. May your memories of him bring you comfort.
In thinking about all these Regency rules it made me think about my own courtship. There was a hugely popular book at the time (1997) titled "The Rules". It included such rules as Don't Talk to a Man First, Don't Ask Him to Dance, as well as Don’t Call Him. I can see a correlation between the two eras. Truth time. Tired of dating toads I gave The Rules a whirl. There must be some merit to it. My Mr. Darcy and I have now been together 24 years. :)
Awww! I met my Mr. Darcy in 1996!
Hahahaha. The Rules sound like “the usual” when I was around 18 in the late 1970s. A girl NEVER phoned a boy unless they were engaged (to each other).
There are a lot of toads 🐸 out there! I am a 64-year-old divorcee, and I have met many a toad through online dating!
I wonder if The Rules are different for seniors.
So interesting! Please do part 2!🙏
Such a great video. I really enjoyed how you used examples from Austen's text, Austen's own life, her contemporaries, and historical context. But most of all, I enjoyed your liberal use of clips from all the various Austen film adaptations and even some Bridgerton. And don't think I didn't catch your photo of Sylvestra Le Touzel as Fanny Price in Mansfield Park-1983, followed immediately by a photo of the same actress playing Mrs. Allen in Northanger Abbey-2007.
I'm thinking of trying to read Austen for the first time (never even seen a film adaptation somehow even though I'm 25) and I found this video very informative!! Thank you!!
I am in desperate need of part two
Working on it!
So am I. This vid came out 2 years ago, apparently.
@@Tioko
Yeah, I want a part two, as well!
Great video. Although I would take book of conducts with a pinch of salt. In two centuries, people trying to understand our ways of life through self-development books might get a very distorted view
Great video as always! I’m curious to know, how does the same process work for men? Did men have a “coming out” process? When is a guy considered an eligible man and no longer a boy?
I couldn’t find anything on boys to men, and I don’t think they had a come out. Boys in the upper classes often went off to school, and when they came back, I think they were just assumed to be ready to find a wife. Their only requirement was being able to provide for a family, and if they were not going to inherit enough, they had to find an appropriate occupation in the church, law, or military. And even then, many like Colonel Fitzwilliam still had to find a match with a hefty dowry to maintain their lifestyle.
Men were ready to marry when they could afford a home, a wife, and children. This is the main reason why, if you look at census statistics back through time, you find men about three years older than their wives, with the ages of 23 for women and 26 for men the average age at marriage.
Young men often went on "Grand Tours" of Europe and Asia to further their education before returning and taking up their roles in life
Great video! I really appreciate the way you highlight examples from Jane Austen's works, Bridgerton, etc. to make the social realities and customs of the period more accessible. I'm eagerly awaiting part 2! :)
I have read a description of Bridgerton somewhere that this is basically Austen fanfic with a more modernized array of social mores and it really seems to fit. Maybe I will give it a watch sometime anyway, just for the costumeporn and the intrigue :-) , though i usually can't suspend my disbelief long enough to read regency fanfic, all those faux-pas throw me right out.
This was soo informing and enjoyed it but Where is part 2 ? 😭😭
Working on it!
@@AJaneiteSews looking forward to it❤️❤️
Mr Collins wasn't a first cousin to the Bennet girls, but a much further one.
In my country it is still legal to marry a first cousin, but it is frowned upon. I only know of one couple being 2nd cousins.
It gives a 5% chance for first cousins of a serious issue with their child. The UK average is only half this at 2.5%. Though, I expect the risk is far far lower when neither has a family history.
@@MartinChadwick-xe7gh I suspect the statistics of first cousins is also largely populated with families where it's not a single occurrence but more widely done. Which increases the risk a lot.
I can't find part 2...
This was so fascinating! Was part 2 ever posted?
No, I hope to have time this summer! Working over time, grad school, etc, have gotten in the way of making longer research videos, lol.
Came for the Austen and costuming, and stayed for the memes.
Male characters in Austen's novels whose family members try to exercise influence over their choice of marriage partner: Mr. Darcy (Lady Catherine wants him to marry Anne); Colonel Brandon (his family wouldn't allow him and Eliza to marry); Mr. Collins (this one may be a stretch because they're only related by marriage, but Mrs. Bennet practically pushes Lizzy into his arms); Mr. Bingley (his sisters try to convince him of Jane's unsuitability); Mr. Tilney (his father refuses to consent to his marrying Catherine); Mr. Crawford (his sister, Mrs. Grant, tries to set him up with Julia Bertram); Mr. Rushworth (his mother and Mrs. Norris orchestrate his courtship and proposal to Maria). That's all I can think of! I'm sure there are others!
S&S - The Ferrars family try to keep Edward from Elinor, and set him up with Miss Morton, Willoughby is ordered by his Aunt to marry Eliza, on threat of disinheriting. P&P - The Bingley sisters and Darcy separate Bingley from Jane, and want to set him up with Georgiana Darcy. Emma - the Churchills want Frank to marry well
Id love it if you did a part two! Im glad to watcv a video explaining this stuff from someone who can explain it well
Working on it!
I believe it was called the Regency era, as poor King George had bipolar disorder and his son was the replacement regent.
During her time people marry for money and status within their class, they experienced unhappy marriages and usually cheated on each other. Jane tell us that people should be honest with themselves and marry for love to be able to live a happy life.
An interesting look at courtship in the time is Austin.
Jane is ill a lot, culminating in her grim death (my partner had Hodgkin's while pregnant. Will she die? Will he die? She lived another twenty years and died of lung cancer. What is left of Jane's personal history speaks of low disease resistance and a miserable time under the cosh. With that in mind how she wished all the best for her imaginary friends only serves to describe her torrid circumstances that much more emotionally.
Enjoyed your video. But the title "Sir" -----indicating a knight or a baronet----followed by said knight or baronet's surname is absolutely not a thing. There is never a Sir Bertram, Sir Eliot, or Sir Lucas. The title belongs with the first name: Sir Thomas, Sir Walter (baronets). and Sir. William (knight). Their wives, however, are addressed as "Lady" plus husband"s surname: Lady Bertram, Lady Lucas. I am surprised if you read a lot of Austen, that you didn't realize there things, because she uses these titles correctly throughout her novels. You want to talk about etiquette in Recency society, proper forms of address (especially where titles are concerned!) are absolutely essential, and videos about the period should show awareness of this crucial necessity.. As a matter of fact, the rules regarding titles in Britain remain the same today; they have been in place, virtually unchanged, for centuries!
Regency period, not Georgian!
This was excellent! I love your sense of humour ✨💛✨
Where is part two?
This was such an interesting video
Love the Austen and Regency videos. Is part two coming out soon?
Yes, at some point this spring!
I do want to point one thing out about Mr Collins: he is not a direct cousin but slightly removed. So more than okay in Regency terms but still why they call him cousin. Even in these days that distance might be seen as ok, I dont know how distanced it was. But of course in Regency times even a first cousin was fine, and as someone here pointed out, you were likely to know your cousins from a young age. You would know if you liked them or not and possibly fall in love. Interactions with non family was so restricted that getting to know some one organically was hard. Balls and other courtship occasions was basically like todays Tinder and you never knew if that swipe would lead to something good or disasterous!
Ridiculous rules but at least they had mannuals like the washing machines today , they might consider publishing mannuals for todays dating though I bet even if they will be impractical they will sell just fine (laughs)🤣🤣
Fanny is not weak... she's jus boring
Fanny Price has a personality of passive
strength.
Can't wait for the next video 💜
Another great video thank you!
Sir Thomas was hardly abusive. His wife was clearly not entirely all there so you can give her a bit of a break. Was really looking forward to this video. But there are lots of errors in it, particularly as regards titles.
Also, I think you're allowing 21st century woke ideology to impair your thinking where some of the characters in Miss Austin's books are concerned. Although I hoped Sir Thomas would not be successful in his council to Fanny, in the times they were living he was actually giving her quite sage advice that any father would have given as well. We must remember that Fanny knew things about her suitor that Sir Thomas did not. Had he known, his advice might have been quite different. Especially since that information pertained to his own daughter.
Very disappointing video. I gave up halfway.
Less than 8 minutes here, and for the same reason: Interpreting past social norms, which reflect most of human society up until quite recently, through the lens of angry feminazism shows me someone who doesn't know their history or understand human behavior.
Completely wrong attitude. Since this was released five upper class males decided women should not control their own bodies. Should we get titles correctly? What a trivial notion when women TODAY are facing exactly the same issues they did 200 years ago. Read Jane Austen to know what life was, not to prove pedantic credentials. To be a woman is to bear the burdens a patriarchal society places on us, then and now.
@@debrabarnhardt1103 your opinion. I disagree.
@@debrabarnhardt1103 up to a third of women died in childhood back then. Throwing it back to the states to legislate was the appropriate choice since Roe was based on bunk since and the Warren Court was notorious for legislating from the bench. I was raised to be an angry, man hating, anti patriarchy leftist. Hope you find peace. Abortion is not empowering, it's cruel and damaging.
Where is PART TWO??!!
Let me get this straight. You couldn't get into Simon Hastings's arc in "Bridgerton" because of his determination not to have kids and continue the family line? Even though the series had made clear why he had made such a declaration in the first place?
I really recommend Dr Octavia Cox's close reading analysis video on John Thorpes proposal to Catherine Morland x
The pronunciation of the names, LOL. Edward Fair-Arse!
Where do the profits of all Jane Austin novels, movies and memorabilia?
Coming out comes first before courting
I love your videos, so interesting and insightful! I wonder though, as there were so many way of coming out, from pinning up their hair to being introduced to the queen, how would the Bennet sisters or other Jane Austen protagonists have come out? Would neither have been introduced at court?
They didn't rank high enough to be presented at court.
@@AJaneiteSews Ah, interesting, thank you! That's a pity though, but it's the court's loss. :)
Enjoyed this video 😊 thank you!