Mais nous ne sommes toujours pas certains à 100 % que Shakespeare a écrit ses livres seul car il y a tant de choses dans ce qu'il écrit qu'il ne pouvait connaître, cela reste et restera un mystère et ce n'est pas le seul en littérature Molière a-t-il écrit lui-même toutes ses pièces, là aussi il y a un doute qu'un autre se cachait peut-être derrière lui pour ne pas être repris comme un écrivain léger)
Sorry but you just drop this immaculate piece of media completely for free online and its your only post? What a masterpiece of a video thank you so much!
Yes, Anna Chancellor is the granddaughter of Sylvia Paget, Lady Chancellor, herself daughter of Lady Muriel Paget nee Finch-Hatton, herself descended from Edward Knight nee Austen. Lady Muriel's paternal grandmother was Fanny Margaretta Rice, daughter of Edward Royds Rice and his wife, a daughter of Edward Knight nee Austen.
@@HJKelley47 Not _this_ one, but I can't speak to those who are still in England - & I don't know if her brothers/ their children kept Copyright over any or all of her works or not...
This is the best Austen discussion series. She has the best voice, is very thorough and has none of the egocentric ticks of so many UA-camrs. Very well done
@@beth-haymondplease remember, though, you are speaking to your audience, not speaking to yourself, so when speaking in front of the camera, look at the lens of the camera, not your image on your phone. This is a mistake way too many UA-camrs make.
I recall seeing someone once point out that the reason (or at least one of the reasons) Elizabeth feels she can afford to be picky and marry for love, is that she 1) trusts Jane to marry well, and 2) trusts Jane to provide for her, should she herself not marry anyone
True, she did believe that, but- I think it is unkind and unfair to put so much on Jane. If Lydia and Wickham had not been properly intervened by Darcy and the Gardiners- their reputations would have been ruined and all of the Bennett household would either had to marry sideways or lower. Elizabeth was hoping everything would turn out well, kind of like her father in that way, for Mr. Bennett kind let things fall as they may until it was too late.
All true, but her Dad being a free spirit of sorts created a daughter who took after him. That genuine spirit attracted Darcy who appreciated her lack of calculation. So it all did work out because Lizzy was forthright and honest.
@@aronhelios1734 Lizzie has faults enough! It’s on the cover. She was prejudiced against the man who slighted her, and had such pride in her intelligence and good judgement that she believed the unsubstantiated claims of a stranger because it affirmed her bias. Placing the burden on her sister to marry well so she and her future husband can shoulder the financial burden of all her sisters and house them until they die is another level of selfish
I have wondered whether the sisters could pool their tiny inheritance together and maintain a modest but secure lifestyle, should both their parents pass away before any of them got married. Their father’s income was 2000 per year but he had to maintain an entire household with land, farming equipment, supplies, animal feed, horses, carriage, servants, and what other luxuries a country gentleman may consider necessary, so perhaps the daughters wouldn’t be suffering too greatly if they were to take up lodge in some old widow’s house where there would be some service available but living expenses were kept low?
I know this video is 2 years old but I wish more people see it. It’s a good analysis of pride and Prejudice: a book that opens with the most famous line about money! Thank you for making this video and I hope you’ll return to UA-cam in the near future with more Austen discussions.
I completely agree that this video is a very good analysis of Pride and Prejudice. I don't know quite how to put it but I am completely gladdened by this video.
The opening line to Pride and Prejudice is pretty much tied for me for the best opening of an English language book, the others of course "it was the best of times it was the worst of times". And I'd far rather read Jane Austen then paid by the word Dickens
I found myself wondering if Elizabeth would have felt differently in 7 years time, the same age as Charlotte, if she hadn't married Darcy. Sometime our ideals seem so important and perfect when we are young but later with the benefit of more experience we realize we might be wrong. When I first read P&P in highschool I of course idolized Lizzie but as I approached 40 as a single woman it was like "oh Charlotte you are so right". Yes I have the ability to make money and do well but even today two incomes are better than one when trying to buy a house etc vs renting an old basement suite with little light. However, I don't think Lizzie would have felt the hardships as much as the rest of the family once her father passed because her character seems able to socialize and fit in with anyone - except for the fact that she would see her friend in their old house with Mr. Collins and that might be a big (unintentional) "I told you so" in her face. Also I never thought of the part about the Gardiners before. Everyone always places the "change" in Darcy solely at the feet of Elizabeth refusing him but then it seems the Gardners played a huge role in this beyond taking her to Pemberly in the first place but rather in just being a symbol of goodness. I have always loved them as a couple
I agree. It's all right when you're 22 and you think that your father's death is far off, but what happens when you reach 30, you have no chance of getting married, and your father, your only source of decent income, is not going to live much longer? At that point, she's facing poverty, has lost her youth, and is looking at living with her mother and sisters on very little income. Hand to mouth. Worse than in Sense and Sensibility. And if Darcy weren't there to rescue Lydia, Lydia would've been ruined and the whole family would have been pariahs in the village.
Very good, really enjoyed this. Reminder: Austen herself felt the sting of money prejudice when the family of her first love demanded that he not see Jane anymore.
One last compliment -- @ 47:58 Thank you for taking up for Mrs. Bennet. She was the only one concerned with how her daughters would survive after Mr. Bennet died. I've got little respect for Mr.B, always hiding in his library and neglecting the future of his family. He'd be more universally vilified if people weren't blinded by his obvious preference for Lizzie.
He's a literary character, not a historical one, so we don't get mad at him for being a negligent husband and father as long as we find him entertaining. I'd have more respect for Mrs. Bennet if it wasn't clear that she is just as much at fault for the financial situation of the Bennets as her husband, which undermines her concern for her daughters' futures. Someone who actually cared wouldn't be blowing the budget on clothes and food every single year for multiple decades. The difference between the two is that at least Mr. Bennet isn't a hypocrite.
Brilliant analysis. I'd never thought about why the Bingley sisters were snobbish, but now you've pointed it out it makes sense. They have a similar social anxiety as Mrs Bennett, all are worried about sinking in status and financial position. You could definitely do a video about the Bingley sisters and whether they're misunderstood or if they're genuinely horrid.
The Bingley sisters were not worried about sinking into a status or financial situation. They simply wanted to elevate the family into the upper-classes and not be regarded as trade, as the Lucas family managed to achieve. And Mrs. Bennet was worried about her daughters' financial situation only. As members of the landed gentry (through birth), Elizabeth and her sisters would not have lost their social position, following their father's death. Only their financial position. Lydia was the only one who had endangered the family's social position due to her behavior.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with you. I agree that the Bingley sisters wanted to elevate themselves, but I can't help thinking that as social climbers they would have probably had that fear factor of sinking again. To separate financial and class status doesn't seem realistic, the two things are intrinsically linked (unless you have a title), as well as being intrinsically linked to marriage for women of the time. Mr Bingley essentially bought his way into the landed gentry at the end of the book and Wentworth does something similar. Lizzy was raised in rank and wealth because of her marriage to Darcy, but Fanny Price's mother sank in status because of hers. I think both financial and class status would have been considerations for women marrying at the time. As to the balance you're probably right in that the Bingley sisters seem more concerned with class, whereas Mrs Bennett seems more concerned with money.
The Bingley sisters are a literary device, a foil. By these women being portrayed in a negative light, the main characters are shown in a positive way. Mr Darcy seems bad because Mr Wickham is portrayed positively, thenbtheir roles reverse. The author is attempting to manipulate your emotions - like all women do!
I've always been fascinated by the economic aspect that motivated Mrs Bennet but that, with your brilliant analysis, shines a light too on the atrocious snobberyand downright meanness of the Bingley sisters, Lady de Burgh, and even Darcy himself. Your incisive analysis of how money and how it drives our choices brings a freshness and modern outlook to P&P. I hugely enjoyed your video. Thank you and long live Jane Austen!
I have to wonder if Wickham knew Mr Darcy was in love with Lizzie, and thus assumed Mr Darcy would come to Lydia's rescue in order to save Lizzie from the shame that would come upon her had Lydia been debased to the level of a streetwalker. This could destroy Mr Darcy's chances of marrying Lizzie. In some way, Mr Darcy was also protecting his own interests. He told Lizzie he did it for her. (For her reputation and his?)
They'd grown up together Sure he noticed Mr Darcy looking at Lizzy ( Like charlotte did ) Even if Lizzy herself didn't notice He would have seen Darcy as his rival
@@beckihayes220 Possibly, but he only had a moment to do so, since he and Darcy only met that one time in Meryton during the time they were both in Hertfordshire, and considering that Wickham turned white as soon as he spotted Darcy, he might have had other things on his mind than why Darcy had looked in his direction in the first place.
I absolutely think this is the entire reason Wickham pays attention to Lizzy at all, she doesn’t have any money, so he wouldn’t have wanted her for that, and he would have quickly realized he couldn’t seduce her, so Lizzy would have been useless to Wickham, but when he met with Darcy and Elizebeth he caught that Darcy liked her, I think Wickham knew before Darcy did, Wickham grew up with Darcy, and had developed excellent observation skills because all manipulators have those skills. At least that’s how I read it, I’m not sure if that was Austen’s intention, but that’s what I got from that interaction.
@@ladidaohoh3168 I don't think it's the entire reason. While Jane is the prettiest woman in the neighborhood, Lizzy's witty, lively and flirty(in a respectable way, unlike Lydia). Wickham seems smart enough to avoid trying to seduce gentlewomen in an area he's gonna be stuck in for several months, so any flirting in polite society is merely innocent entertainment. With that in mind Lizzy is the most attractive recipient, while he saves the actual seductions for servants and shopkeepers' daughters. Once there's an actual heiress avaliable he abandons Lizzy, but before that he was enjoying her company, with the mutual Darcy-hating society they'd formed being a bonus.
@@korganrocks3995 Possibly, as I said I’m not sure what Jane Austen intended for the reader to get from the early exchange’s of Wickham and Lizzy, but as it seems Wickham was alway’s working his own angle and he didn’t seem to take an interest in women for any purpose other than sex or money anywhere else in the novel, that was the reason I took his interaction as working some angle for his own benefit, as I couldn’t find any other instance in the novel where he participated in a flirtation just for the sake of the flirtation itself.
Thank you. You're a kindred spirit, and I enjoyed your discussion very much and recommending you're video to others attracted to Austen and life during Regency times!
I’ve read the book and seen the 1995 miniseries many times, as well as seeing quite a few other commentaries here on UA-cam, but you make quite a few points here that I had never considered. Well done!
Beth, great video. It’s obvious how much work, research and thought you put into the project. On a different topic, your soft delicate voice put me right to sleep last night and the two times I woke up overnight. Thank you for that. Sad to see that this is your only video. Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.
i was so sad to see you dont have more videos up! Loves all the detail and context in this video that many videos on the subject cant fit. Keep it up!!
Darcy was not only rich he was actually a member of the so-called "old money". While he and his family did not have an actual noble title (were not part of the nobility, they were an actual old landed gentry. Meaning his family most likely owned land since probably the middle ages and/or for at least for a couple of centuries. This meant that he had far "superior breeding" to use Jane Austen's words, his connections would thus surely go far beyond any of the other character...besides ofc Catherine de Bourgh and their cousin Col. FitzWilliam who in fact came from even more "distinguished families" at least in the most immediate family. In fact the use of the surnames by Jane Austen, while her characters are purely fictitious, refer to actual noble families of that time. For example Darcy of rather D'Arcy as it would be spelled originally were an old family from north England which had numerous branches, of which at least four managed to gain nobility being created Barons and Earls. So in my understanding Darcy would probably be an offshoot of a much richer and powerful family, most likely a descendant himself from one of the younger sons of a noble...not much unlike as Col. FitzWilliam as he is portrayed in the book. The actual FitzWilliam family itself was also an old family of which at least two branches were raised to nobility, not to mention De Burgh of which the actual family featured heavily in English history and even more in Ireland (where they are known as Burke/Bourke) since they held some of the highest offices and noble titles since the times of William the Conqueror. Bingley's and in smaller part Bennet's represent the so-called middle class of that time. A class which started emerging from the upcoming industrialization and trade. This puts things even more in the perspective...it wasn't only just about the money but rather it was in essence a clash and joining of two different social classes. In essence it was a love story and in smaller part a social commentary of the British (or rather English) society of the time...with the new upcoming families climbing up the social ladder and mixing up with the old landed gentry.
@joekerr9197 Just to clarify, very few people owned land in the middle ages; they were "seised" of land. The monarch was the owner. He infeudated it to the nobility, who subinfeudated it to the gentry. The one who held the land directly of the king was the "tenant in chief". Only when feudalism was abolished did anyone own anything, that is, the tenant in chief was now a true owner because he no longer owed the monarch feudal service for each fief.
As you pointed out it is difficult to translate these incomes to modern readers. There are a couple of factors to consider that One British pound during this era was equivalent to 5 US dollars, so Darcy's yearly income was equivalent to $50,000 which was a huge fortune. Second, the other thing to consider that all of these estates were self sufficient in the sense that they produce nearly all of their own food. So, they had no rent or mortgage, most of their food was provided, so the monies that their state created was for labor/salaries, clothing, education of their family, maintaining the property etc. Darcy's 10,000 pounds per annum was equivalent to the income of many noble families, so his estate was grand. There were other Austen characters who were wealthier- Mr. Knightly of Emma had an income of around 12,000 pounds per years as did Mr. Rushworth in Mansfield Park. Most families that lived in London during this period who were in the merchant or skilled class salary to support a family was around 250 pounds per year. The noted architect George Nash, George lV's court appointed architect, was paid 600 pounds per year. This puts salaries in context.
Wow! I really enjoyed your analysis of the novel and would love to see another video on the themes you weren't able to explore. Thank you so much for sharing!
It has been too long since I read the book, but the one thing that worries me about the ending is that Darcy has obviously defied his aunt by marrying Lizzie and we don't see her reaction or contemplate how this might affect their happiness. The1940 version happily resolves this question--with the delightful Edna Mae Oliver in the stylized role.
It's all resolved in the final chapter. "Lady Catherine was extremely indignant on the marriage of her nephew; and as she gave way to all the genuine frankness of her character in her reply to the letter which announced its arrangement, she sent him language so very abusive, especially of Elizabeth, that for some time all intercourse was at an end. But at length, by Elizabeth’s persuasion, he was prevailed on to overlook the offence, and seek a reconciliation; and, after a little further resistance on the part of his aunt, her resentment gave way, either to her affection for him, or her curiosity to see how his wife conducted herself; and she condescended to wait on them at Pemberley, in spite of that pollution which its woods had received, not merely from the presence of such a mistress, but the visits of her uncle and aunt from the city."
I love your analysis. Cost of living is the best way to compare how people lived back then as inflation is not really accurate indicator alone. For instance, Bennets are wealthy family with income generating estate that allows servants, balls and in general pretty comfortable life (as for a wealthy person), however, Bennet ladies would lose all wealth but the income of their mother's dowry that would allow them around 40 to 50 pounds a year - not enough to live a comfortable life alone but together they would manage a gentile 'poverty' (as we see in Sense and Sensibility). Now servants would earn anything between 5 pounds a year (yep, 5 pounds. Per year) while others would even manage to earn 400 pounds a year (estate managers or stewards of the wealthy family, like Darcy. And I will digress here but I disagree that Wickham's father could not afford to send his son to a good school - I will go as much as to say it is highly hinted Wickham fancied himself to be in the same class as Darcy so even if his father was well respected and liked, Wickham Junior was seen as mean to other servants but managed to ingratiate himself to Darcy's father so he too would be sent to study with the gentry. Only to fumble the opportunity as he had desire for more but not desire to earn it). Wickham as an officer would earn up to 1000 pounds a year which is actually very good money but we know that Wickham is indebted and squanders his money fast, even when he marries Lydia, she always writes to her sisters for financial help. Still, Wickham would be able to have some servants and even a nanny for his children. As it comes to the wealth of Mr Bingley, he's practically a multimillionaire hitting hundreds of millions in today's money. Mr Bingley can purchase a title if he purchased an estate (and his sisters are nudging that he should). The only thing that wealthy upper class gentry may hold against Mr Bingley is that his father was in trade (oh horror!) and Bingley sisters are highly insecure of the fact. Financially Bingleys can do no wrong. Socially - someone like Lady Catherine would probably slight them and the funniest thing is that Caroline Bingley tries so hard to call out Bennets on their 'low connections' just to feel better about herself or maybe to divert anyone from digging on her own background. However, she invites Jane Bennet to dinner because Jane is of high social status in the neighborhood and Bingley sisters are all about status chasing and Jane as a friend would look good, so to speak. Of course, as soon as Caroline suspects her bother is in love with her, she shows her true colors to Jane. If we talk about the wealth of Mr Darcy... he's indeed on the level of billionaires by today's standards. He's richer than some of dukes of his time. His own sister has immense dowry which attracts fortune hunters like Wickham and his aunt is a formidable wealthy Lady Catherine de Bourgh. It is indeed interesting that you touched upon Col Fitzwilliam as he exposes that a man in his position is expected to have a high life standards but not the means of an heir as Col Fitzwilliam is only a younger son of an Earl (and though a candidate to inherit, it is not likely he will if his bother marries and has at least one son). If we talk Col Fitzwilliam income, it would probably be on the same level as Mr Bennet at the time, please correct me if I am wrong. And there is no wonder that Lizzy at least considers what marriage to Col Fitzwilliam would be like as it is not only socially acceptable but amiable prospect (Col Fitzwilliam is wealthy enough, high ranking officer enough and has superior connections) and whether his lamentations on looking to find a wealthy heiress comes from his own desire or rather social pressure to do so is not clear. Mr Darcy's character, the more I read Pride and Prejudice, the more I come to like him, personally. The first time I hated him and saw no reason why Lizzy should fall in love with him as it was all his fault ! (oh he young indignant me) but the more I read the more I realized how wonderfully Jane Austen painted a picture of Darcy not herself but using us, the readers and the supporting characters. Mr Darcy is very careful of his social circle as his sister was almost kidnapped for her fortune by a person his own father treated like a son (ew ew ew) at the age of 15 (!!!! pedo alert!), his own best friend's sisters fancy themselves to be of higher social status and are snobbish to other people beneath them and though Darcy sometimes agrees with them, he does so only among strangers. Mr Darcy shows all respects to Elizabeth even if her family's behavior makes his hair stand up, he does not judge her the same way Bingley sisters do and even though his proposal was clumsy and indeed insulting, no lies were told. And Lizzy realizes that. Mr Darcy took care to introduce his own sister to Elizabeth, visited her in Rosings often enough to cause notice and, of course, rescued Lydia from ruining entire Bennet family even after Lizzy refused to marry him. In short, his fortune was always part of his character and whether we like it or not, realizing how people took advantage of his family and him in the past and what great temptation his money is for any woman at that time, one could see why he's cold and disliked when he's first introduced.
Great video! Id have a more thoughtful comment but my cold is making me stupid today 😅 I like your style of commentary and agree with a lot of your thoughts here. Though I will defend Bingley on the count that Darcy was only able to get him to leave Jane bc he convinced him that Jane was indifferent. I dont think he realized he was going to hurt her at all. He clearly wants to marry for mutual love, not just beauty. Like a lot of personality traits, his humbleness is a double edged sword, both allowing him to meet others as equals and sometimes making him easy to influence by someone he trusts
This is a wonderful breakdown. Thank you for sharing your scholarship. Financial security is every bit as important today. When Jane Eyre inherits 20,000 pounds from her uncle in Mediera, it wasn’t an income, just a lump sum, correct? Whereas Darcy earns 10,000 per year. Jane would be secure but not wealthy. And not “in society.”
It's not just that Jane was reserved; it wasn't proper for any well-bred young lady to wear her heart on her sleeve, as the saying goes. Lydia is a perfect example of a young lady who does (and look what happened to her).
The Bank of England inflation calculator goes back to 1209. Pride and Prejudice was written starting in 1797 (£1.3M; $1.77M) and published in 1813 (£709.5K; $964K).
This is true and thanks for sharing. I pulled from Katherine Toran's article on JASNA and she referenced the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator only going back so far. There are different ways to calculate inflation and how much Mr. Darcy would be worth today, but it's hard to measure. The value of things changes over time and what we value as a society changes over time. That's why I focused on his wealth relative to other people at the time. :)
Great discussion and recap. Nice take on Austen characters. They had a class system which worked fairly well for everyone but about half the women and children (kind of like now).
Iloved the explanation of why Bingley was so attached to Mr Darcy, i wondered that after reafing the book & seeing the 1995 series, i lovd this version solely
I never understood why my English Great grandmother was disowned by her family for marrying beneath her station until reading Jane Austen. As in Emma, they wouldn’t associate with people below their income level, and were always looking to level up their social standing. My Grandmother used to say “Position is all in life”, and that’s where it came from.
I think you've done a really good job here of analysing all the characters in a really intelligent way - many of the more 'minor' characters generally get a really superficial analysis, but your was great on the old versus new money etc. Thank you. This was really interesting and well considered.
From what I understand about the income ticket and why Elizabeth ended up marrying a man that had a lot of money was because of the type of love Darcy and Elizabeth have. Austen wrote Darcy as having more because Darcy and Elizabeth would develop consummate love for each other which is rare. It's also, because of the high income ticket displays another form of anxiety within the Darcy household that is opposite of the Bennet household. One strives to marry well so that they will not be deprived/homeless in the future, the other strives to have an alliance that would not squander the opportunity of staying well financially as well as societal.
Thinking of the importance of a good marriage, Mrs. Bennett’s fanatic efforts, Lydia‘s fate, and even Anne Elliot in Persuasion, I always picture Fanny Price’s mother. That will likely be Lydia‘s future, and the reason young ladies’ parents were so concerned about how much money they married.
La meilleure analyse de ce livre, une analyse simple mais rigoureuse qui donne envie de relire le livre en s'appuyant sur cette analyse. J'ai remarqué l'emploi du film de 1985 au lieu de celui de 2005 et c'est avec raison car le film de 1985 suit parfaitement le livre et l'esprit de Jane Austen tandis que le film de 2005 est seulement un film pour rapporter de l'argent et plaire aux publics américains qui ne sont pas tous au courant de la situation des femmes et de la société britannique au moment de l'écriture du livre. Bravo pour cette analyse complète non seulement des caractères mais également des situations face à l'argent à cette époque.
I loved this video! I just read the book and this information about the context in which the story takes place uncovers so much that i did not know or notice while reading!!! I was perplexed by many details of the book related to the social interactions and now everything makes sense! Thank you!
Darcy was what is called a ""slow-to-warm-up" person. He knows only Bingely and his sisters and no one else in the room. He knows nothing of the economic status of the marriageable girls' anxious mamas and worried papas and he knows that his behavior with the girls or their parents will excite speculation, gossip, and rivalries. Darcy is a prudent man.
@@mikakestudios5891 With all due respect, I beg to differ. My paternal grandmother was Victorian. My maternal grandmother, Edwardian. I was raised in a post-WWII environment that hadn't changed much since the Civil War. I was taught the meaning of flowers, the language of the fan, how to write meaningful bread and butter notes, thank yous, apology notes, and invitations. I was taught to curtsey, modulate my voice, be dignified and chaste. I wasn't alone. Then the 1960s happened. It was a shock.
@@mikakestudios5891 With all due respect, Darcy would have to commit a pretty reprehensible crime to become a social outcast. He has more than enough money to buffer him (should he bugger a farm boy or compromise a villager girl's honor) and rather high connections to fix things for him if necessary.
Thank you for your terrific summary and analysis of P and P. It was through coming across excerpts on UA-cam of the BBC series and the 2005 film that I have been drawn to revisit both with great pleasure. My late wife particularly loved the series. I confess that I have only delved intermittently into the book but have come to admire the skills of the scriptwriters who have brought to life the imagery of the text so vividly. I searched the book for the famous wet shirt encounter at Pemberly in vain! The class system so well described in the novel insulated the characters from the realities of life for those on whom their comfort depended. Servants are rarely even named for instance. And the political turmoil that had undermined the nobility of France (20 odd miles away across the Channel) and scared the wits out of the English upper classes of the period seems of no concern to Jane Austen. What degrees of freedom leisure and literature can bring! But maybe I should knuckle down and read the book through. Thanks again for your work. Peter McC
To find out what happens when a wealthy woman marries a fortune chaser, read Wilki Collins' novel The Woman in White written in 1860 but set ten years prior to it. Only in 1882 the British government passed the act about financial freedom for married women.
Money was a fixation of everyone in that era., not just women. Without a stable income, you would be left to starve to death on the streets. A working man earned so little and worked so hard that many died on the job. . There was no social welfare, so without many children, there would be no one left to look after the parents when they aged. So women were typically pregnant from late adolescence to menopause, assuming they lived that long. Men were expected to work 14 hour days to pay the bills (they also typically died young). Mens' pay was typically so low that many young women worked as well, for even less. The system was utterly brutal, but it was brutal for anyone who wasn't rich, regardless of gender.
Ha, when Bingley and Darcy visit Netherfield once again after the elopement and shotgun wedding, Jane is NOT apparently indifferent. It's brilliant facial acting, where she conveys her emotional turmoil so, so subtly.
It does make financial and dynastical sense; he needs money, and being a younger son he'd be more likely to allow his own heir to take the de Bourgh name(if that was a requirement), alternatively not have children at all if she's too frail for pregnancy/childbirth. Not to mention that if she died young the estate would stay in the family.
Hi. Thanks for all the work you put into this analysis. I like the fact that you use footage from the classic 1995 adaptation, all in all, the best version of Pride and Prejudice. Furthermore, you correctly highlight that Mr Bennet was a very wealthy man. Indeed, in the following clip Professor Mullan describes £2,000 per annum as "huge, huge wealth." ua-cam.com/video/MuFoo3PZGQw/v-deo.html
I think it was a fairly smooth way to clarify that he wasn't looking for more than friendship, which is an issue that kinda did need adressing when two young people got along as well as he and Elizabeth did. Elizabeth had assumed that might be the case, and him confirming it after so short an acquaintance made it easier for her to guard her heart before she fell for him. Unless you meant what he said about Bingley, which was the opposite of smooth! 😄
What I do not understand is how would everyone know how much money others make a year? It is as though the income of everyone is published in the newspaper every year! Does everyone in England have to notify the world of their yearly income?
I don't remember the particulars, but you're actually not far off! I think there was a fair amount of information avaliable, which allowed people to get within 25% of the correct answer, like Bingley having "four or five thousand a year".
Great video, one small note Mr Gardiner isn’t a lawyer (his father and brother in law were attorneys which was not a profession for the gentry unlike a barrister which was) Mr Gardiner lives in cheapside which means he’s a merchant. Depending on what he traded he might have been the most acceptable part of the non-gentry, yet he seems to have no desire to social climb but is happy with his situation as a sensible and independent man. An interesting contrast to Sir William. Also Charlotte Lucas almost certainly did have a dowery, though not enough to be independent
3 місяці тому
About what you raised at the end, on how future adaptations would present Lydia’s situation: in both recent modern adaptations (Lizzie Bennet’s Diaries and Fire Island), they use the means od sex tape instead of elopement.
2 questions please? How gross would it have been to readers at the time that Darcy refused to be introduced to any ladies at the first party? (I heard on another video, how Gentlmen were expected to accept any introduction from a lady if she wished to meet them) And why was Mr Bennet embarrassing at the ball? Should he have let Mary continue playing? 😅 I just never understood that bit of "impropriaty" haha.
If Elizabeth Bennet had failed to marry someone of wealth, she WOULD NOT have fallen out of the gentry class. Class wasn't always about mere money. It was about how a person (or a person's family) earned income and blood connection.
I can agree with my wording there. I think it would've been a Miss Bates type situation where the lack of money and estate world make it very difficult for them to access the same level of connections they had previously enjoyed. Without considerable charity on someone else's part or, as is the plot of the book, a very good marriage from I've of the sisters.
@@beth-haymond Yet, Miss Bates and her mother had no difficulty participating in the social scene of Highbury's upper class, due to their social connections. Despite their lack of money, the Dashwoods were still able to socialize with the local gentry and upper classes in "Sense and Sensibility". And the only reason the Bates and the Dashwoods were able to do this and receive this kind of charity from their neighbors was blood connections and class.
@@beth-haymond Don't forget that despite her lack of wealth, Miss Bates and her mother were still invited to dinners and other social events attended by those from the gentry class with more money. Despite their lack of wealth, they still have the social connections due to bloodlines and family connections. The same can be said for the Dashwood sisters in "Sense and Sensibility".
@@beth-haymond Elisabeth would not lose her social status , she would still be gentry even if a poor one . Her status came from being the daughter of a gentleman not from her own money. Like she would get invited to dinner but lets say a very rich merchant would not be . Lady Catherine is still a member of nobility even if she married a man without a title . She is a lady even if her husband was not a noble because she is the daughter of an Earl.
I wonder whereabouts they shot the ramsgate scenes. There's no rock out to sea. It looks like Ailsa Craig, but surely not. I've booked it up, it was Weston-super-Mare
Sometimes I think about the fact that if Mrs. Bennet hadn’t been so sure of Mr. Bingley’s interest, Jane would probably have married Mr. Collins. It would have been interesting to see how she would have reacted to that pressure.
I always wondered was why income was so universally known and the gossip so specific. “He has 10,000 a year” Were these educated guesses based on acreage and the current rent charged for land?
Clearly you haven't read enough Shakespeare.
That was definitely a bad comparison.
Mais nous ne sommes toujours pas certains à 100 % que Shakespeare a écrit ses livres seul car il y a tant de choses dans ce qu'il écrit qu'il ne pouvait connaître, cela reste et restera un mystère et ce n'est pas le seul en littérature Molière a-t-il écrit lui-même toutes ses pièces, là aussi il y a un doute qu'un autre se cachait peut-être derrière lui pour ne pas être repris comme un écrivain léger)
Yes! Maybe it is Edward de Vere we’re still reading after all this time and not the son of a glove maker.
?
@@moniquesilverans3842 Did Dashiell Hammet write 'The Little Foxes'??
Sorry but you just drop this immaculate piece of media completely for free online and its your only post? What a masterpiece of a video thank you so much!
Some trivia: Anna Chancellor who played Caroline Bingley in the adaptation is related to Jane Austen.
Thank you for blessing me with that information and I love her and wish she was in everything!!
Yes, Anna Chancellor is the granddaughter of Sylvia Paget, Lady Chancellor, herself daughter of Lady Muriel Paget nee Finch-Hatton, herself descended from Edward Knight nee Austen.
Lady Muriel's paternal grandmother was Fanny Margaretta Rice, daughter of Edward Royds Rice and his wife, a daughter of Edward Knight nee Austen.
Jane & Cassandra had six brothers- there are a few of us Austen descendants kicking around...
@@OcarinaSapphr- Does the Austen descendants make any money from the multitude
of money made for others from Austen's works?
@@HJKelley47
Not _this_ one, but I can't speak to those who are still in England - & I don't know if her brothers/ their children kept Copyright over any or all of her works or not...
This is the best Austen discussion series. She has the best voice, is very thorough and has none of the egocentric ticks of so many UA-camrs. Very well done
You're so sweet!!
@@beth-haymondplease remember, though, you are speaking to your audience, not speaking to yourself, so when speaking in front of the camera, look at the lens of the camera, not your image on your phone. This is a mistake way too many UA-camrs make.
nope. better voice - actual variation.
I recall seeing someone once point out that the reason (or at least one of the reasons) Elizabeth feels she can afford to be picky and marry for love, is that she 1) trusts Jane to marry well, and 2) trusts Jane to provide for her, should she herself not marry anyone
True, she did believe that, but- I think it is unkind and unfair to put so much on Jane. If Lydia and Wickham had not been properly intervened by Darcy and the Gardiners- their reputations would have been ruined and all of the Bennett household would either had to marry sideways or lower. Elizabeth was hoping everything would turn out well, kind of like her father in that way, for Mr. Bennett kind let things fall as they may until it was too late.
All true, but her Dad being a free spirit of sorts created a daughter who took after him. That genuine spirit attracted Darcy who appreciated her lack of calculation. So it all did work out because Lizzy was forthright and honest.
@@JamieRobles1 having Lizzie have faults in her is what makes her likable.
@@aronhelios1734
Lizzie has faults enough! It’s on the cover. She was prejudiced against the man who slighted her, and had such pride in her intelligence and good judgement that she believed the unsubstantiated claims of a stranger because it affirmed her bias. Placing the burden on her sister to marry well so she and her future husband can shoulder the financial burden of all her sisters and house them until they die is another level of selfish
I have wondered whether the sisters could pool their tiny inheritance together and maintain a modest but secure lifestyle, should both their parents pass away before any of them got married. Their father’s income was 2000 per year but he had to maintain an entire household with land, farming equipment, supplies, animal feed, horses, carriage, servants, and what other luxuries a country gentleman may consider necessary, so perhaps the daughters wouldn’t be suffering too greatly if they were to take up lodge in some old widow’s house where there would be some service available but living expenses were kept low?
I know this video is 2 years old but I wish more people see it. It’s a good analysis of pride and Prejudice: a book that opens with the most famous line about money! Thank you for making this video and I hope you’ll return to UA-cam in the near future with more Austen discussions.
I completely agree that this video is a very good analysis of Pride and Prejudice. I don't know quite how to put it but I am completely gladdened by this video.
The opening line to Pride and Prejudice is pretty much tied for me for the best opening of an English language book, the others of course "it was the best of times it was the worst of times". And I'd far rather read Jane Austen then paid by the word Dickens
@@daniellekazemzadeh7886 lol! Love Dickens’ description!
I found myself wondering if Elizabeth would have felt differently in 7 years time, the same age as Charlotte, if she hadn't married Darcy. Sometime our ideals seem so important and perfect when we are young but later with the benefit of more experience we realize we might be wrong. When I first read P&P in highschool I of course idolized Lizzie but as I approached 40 as a single woman it was like "oh Charlotte you are so right". Yes I have the ability to make money and do well but even today two incomes are better than one when trying to buy a house etc vs renting an old basement suite with little light.
However, I don't think Lizzie would have felt the hardships as much as the rest of the family once her father passed because her character seems able to socialize and fit in with anyone - except for the fact that she would see her friend in their old house with Mr. Collins and that might be a big (unintentional) "I told you so" in her face.
Also I never thought of the part about the Gardiners before. Everyone always places the "change" in Darcy solely at the feet of Elizabeth refusing him but then it seems the Gardners played a huge role in this beyond taking her to Pemberly in the first place but rather in just being a symbol of goodness. I have always loved them as a couple
I agree. It's all right when you're 22 and you think that your father's death is far off, but what happens when you reach 30, you have no chance of getting married, and your father, your only source of decent income, is not going to live much longer? At that point, she's facing poverty, has lost her youth, and is looking at living with her mother and sisters on very little income. Hand to mouth. Worse than in Sense and Sensibility. And if Darcy weren't there to rescue Lydia, Lydia would've been ruined and the whole family would have been pariahs in the village.
Very good, really enjoyed this. Reminder: Austen herself felt the sting of money prejudice when the family of her first love demanded that he not see Jane anymore.
One last compliment -- @ 47:58 Thank you for taking up for Mrs. Bennet. She was the only one concerned with how her daughters would survive after Mr. Bennet died. I've got little respect for Mr.B, always hiding in his library and neglecting the future of his family. He'd be more universally vilified if people weren't blinded by his obvious preference for Lizzie.
He's a literary character, not a historical one, so we don't get mad at him for being a negligent husband and father as long as we find him entertaining. I'd have more respect for Mrs. Bennet if it wasn't clear that she is just as much at fault for the financial situation of the Bennets as her husband, which undermines her concern for her daughters' futures. Someone who actually cared wouldn't be blowing the budget on clothes and food every single year for multiple decades. The difference between the two is that at least Mr. Bennet isn't a hypocrite.
Brilliant analysis. I'd never thought about why the Bingley sisters were snobbish, but now you've pointed it out it makes sense. They have a similar social anxiety as Mrs Bennett, all are worried about sinking in status and financial position. You could definitely do a video about the Bingley sisters and whether they're misunderstood or if they're genuinely horrid.
The Bingley sisters were not worried about sinking into a status or financial situation. They simply wanted to elevate the family into the upper-classes and not be regarded as trade, as the Lucas family managed to achieve. And Mrs. Bennet was worried about her daughters' financial situation only. As members of the landed gentry (through birth), Elizabeth and her sisters would not have lost their social position, following their father's death. Only their financial position. Lydia was the only one who had endangered the family's social position due to her behavior.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with you. I agree that the Bingley sisters wanted to elevate themselves, but I can't help thinking that as social climbers they would have probably had that fear factor of sinking again.
To separate financial and class status doesn't seem realistic, the two things are intrinsically linked (unless you have a title), as well as being intrinsically linked to marriage for women of the time. Mr Bingley essentially bought his way into the landed gentry at the end of the book and Wentworth does something similar. Lizzy was raised in rank and wealth because of her marriage to Darcy, but Fanny Price's mother sank in status because of hers.
I think both financial and class status would have been considerations for women marrying at the time. As to the balance you're probably right in that the Bingley sisters seem more concerned with class, whereas Mrs Bennett seems more concerned with money.
The Bingley sisters are a literary device, a foil. By these women being portrayed in a negative light, the main characters are shown in a positive way.
Mr Darcy seems bad because Mr Wickham is portrayed positively, thenbtheir roles reverse.
The author is attempting to manipulate your emotions - like all women do!
I've always been fascinated by the economic aspect that motivated Mrs Bennet but that, with your brilliant analysis, shines a light too on the atrocious snobberyand downright meanness of the Bingley sisters, Lady de Burgh, and even Darcy himself. Your incisive analysis of how money and how it drives our choices brings a freshness and modern outlook to P&P. I hugely enjoyed your video. Thank you and long live Jane Austen!
Seriously, long live Jane Austen and thank you!
This was extraordinarily well done, and I thank you. I am disappointed to see that this is your only YT video on any subject.
I have to wonder if Wickham knew Mr Darcy was in love with Lizzie, and thus assumed Mr Darcy would come to Lydia's rescue in order to save Lizzie from the shame that would come upon her had Lydia been debased to the level of a streetwalker. This could destroy Mr Darcy's chances of marrying Lizzie. In some way, Mr Darcy was also protecting his own interests. He told Lizzie he did it for her. (For her reputation and his?)
They'd grown up together
Sure he noticed Mr Darcy looking at Lizzy
( Like charlotte did )
Even if Lizzy herself didn't notice
He would have seen Darcy as his rival
@@beckihayes220 Possibly, but he only had a moment to do so, since he and Darcy only met that one time in Meryton during the time they were both in Hertfordshire, and considering that Wickham turned white as soon as he spotted Darcy, he might have had other things on his mind than why Darcy had looked in his direction in the first place.
I absolutely think this is the entire reason Wickham pays attention to Lizzy at all, she doesn’t have any money, so he wouldn’t have wanted her for that, and he would have quickly realized he couldn’t seduce her, so Lizzy would have been useless to Wickham, but when he met with Darcy and Elizebeth he caught that Darcy liked her, I think Wickham knew before Darcy did, Wickham grew up with Darcy, and had developed excellent observation skills because all manipulators have those skills. At least that’s how I read it, I’m not sure if that was Austen’s intention, but that’s what I got from that interaction.
@@ladidaohoh3168 I don't think it's the entire reason. While Jane is the prettiest woman in the neighborhood, Lizzy's witty, lively and flirty(in a respectable way, unlike Lydia). Wickham seems smart enough to avoid trying to seduce gentlewomen in an area he's gonna be stuck in for several months, so any flirting in polite society is merely innocent entertainment. With that in mind Lizzy is the most attractive recipient, while he saves the actual seductions for servants and shopkeepers' daughters.
Once there's an actual heiress avaliable he abandons Lizzy, but before that he was enjoying her company, with the mutual Darcy-hating society they'd formed being a bonus.
@@korganrocks3995 Possibly, as I said I’m not sure what Jane Austen intended for the reader to get from the early exchange’s of Wickham and Lizzy, but as it seems Wickham was alway’s working his own angle and he didn’t seem to take an interest in women for any purpose other than sex or money anywhere else in the novel, that was the reason I took his interaction as working some angle for his own benefit, as I couldn’t find any other instance in the novel where he participated in a flirtation just for the sake of the flirtation itself.
Thank you. You're a kindred spirit, and I enjoyed your discussion very much and recommending you're video to others attracted to Austen and life during Regency times!
correction : "your video."
I’ve read the book and seen the 1995 miniseries many times, as well as seeing quite a few other commentaries here on UA-cam, but you make quite a few points here that I had never considered. Well done!
Ellie Dashwood has also done several videos on Mr. Darcy’s wealth and its sources.
Beth, great video. It’s obvious how much work, research and thought you put into the project. On a different topic, your soft delicate voice put me right to sleep last night and the two times I woke up overnight. Thank you for that. Sad to see that this is your only video. Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.
i was so sad to see you dont have more videos up! Loves all the detail and context in this video that many videos on the subject cant fit. Keep it up!!
Darcy was not only rich he was actually a member of the so-called "old money". While he and his family did not have an actual noble title (were not part of the nobility, they were an actual old landed gentry. Meaning his family most likely owned land since probably the middle ages and/or for at least for a couple of centuries. This meant that he had far "superior breeding" to use Jane Austen's words, his connections would thus surely go far beyond any of the other character...besides ofc Catherine de Bourgh and their cousin Col. FitzWilliam who in fact came from even more "distinguished families" at least in the most immediate family.
In fact the use of the surnames by Jane Austen, while her characters are purely fictitious, refer to actual noble families of that time. For example Darcy of rather D'Arcy as it would be spelled originally were an old family from north England which had numerous branches, of which at least four managed to gain nobility being created Barons and Earls. So in my understanding Darcy would probably be an offshoot of a much richer and powerful family, most likely a descendant himself from one of the younger sons of a noble...not much unlike as Col. FitzWilliam as he is portrayed in the book. The actual FitzWilliam family itself was also an old family of which at least two branches were raised to nobility, not to mention De Burgh of which the actual family featured heavily in English history and even more in Ireland (where they are known as Burke/Bourke) since they held some of the highest offices and noble titles since the times of William the Conqueror.
Bingley's and in smaller part Bennet's represent the so-called middle class of that time. A class which started emerging from the upcoming industrialization and trade. This puts things even more in the perspective...it wasn't only just about the money but rather it was in essence a clash and joining of two different social classes. In essence it was a love story and in smaller part a social commentary of the British (or rather English) society of the time...with the new upcoming families climbing up the social ladder and mixing up with the old landed gentry.
@joekerr9197 Just to clarify, very few people owned land in the middle ages; they were "seised" of land. The monarch was the owner. He infeudated it to the nobility, who subinfeudated it to the gentry. The one who held the land directly of the king was the "tenant in chief". Only when feudalism was abolished did anyone own anything, that is, the tenant in chief was now a true owner because he no longer owed the monarch feudal service for each fief.
"And she doesn't die in childbirth"
That is alternatively the funniest thing you said in your essay and the most horrible, so very well done indeed
How is this the only video on your channel? It's immaculate!
fantastic video! I would love to watch many more of your in-depth videos about Austen's work!
I immensely enjoyed your lovely guidance on "Pride&Prejudice" ! Thank you!
As you pointed out it is difficult to translate these incomes to modern readers. There are a couple of factors to consider that One British pound during this era was equivalent to 5 US dollars, so Darcy's yearly income was equivalent to $50,000 which was a huge fortune. Second, the other thing to consider that all of these estates were self sufficient in the sense that they produce nearly all of their own food. So, they had no rent or mortgage, most of their food was provided, so the monies that their state created was for labor/salaries, clothing, education of their family, maintaining the property etc.
Darcy's 10,000 pounds per annum was equivalent to the income of many noble families, so his estate was grand. There were other Austen characters who were wealthier- Mr. Knightly of Emma had an income of around 12,000 pounds per years as did Mr. Rushworth in Mansfield Park.
Most families that lived in London during this period who were in the merchant or skilled class salary to support a family was around 250 pounds per year. The noted architect George Nash, George lV's court appointed architect, was paid 600 pounds per year. This puts salaries in context.
The food issue has greater import when you consider how much more expensive food was pre industrial agriculture.
Wow! I really enjoyed your analysis of the novel and would love to see another video on the themes you weren't able to explore. Thank you so much for sharing!
This is such a great analysis, it made me consider aspects of the characters that I hadn't considered before. Thank you
It has been too long since I read the book, but the one thing that worries me about the ending is that Darcy has obviously defied his aunt by marrying Lizzie and we don't see her reaction or contemplate how this might affect their happiness. The1940 version happily resolves this question--with the delightful Edna Mae Oliver in the stylized role.
It's all resolved in the final chapter. "Lady Catherine was extremely indignant on the marriage of her nephew; and as she gave way to all the genuine frankness of her character in her reply to the letter which announced its arrangement, she sent him language so very abusive, especially of Elizabeth, that for some time all intercourse was at an end. But at length, by Elizabeth’s persuasion, he was prevailed on to overlook the offence, and seek a reconciliation; and, after a little further resistance on the part of his aunt, her resentment gave way, either to her affection for him, or her curiosity to see how his wife conducted herself; and she condescended to wait on them at Pemberley, in spite of that pollution which its woods had received, not merely from the presence of such a mistress, but the visits of her uncle and aunt from the city."
I love your analysis. Cost of living is the best way to compare how people lived back then as inflation is not really accurate indicator alone. For instance, Bennets are wealthy family with income generating estate that allows servants, balls and in general pretty comfortable life (as for a wealthy person), however, Bennet ladies would lose all wealth but the income of their mother's dowry that would allow them around 40 to 50 pounds a year - not enough to live a comfortable life alone but together they would manage a gentile 'poverty' (as we see in Sense and Sensibility). Now servants would earn anything between 5 pounds a year (yep, 5 pounds. Per year) while others would even manage to earn 400 pounds a year (estate managers or stewards of the wealthy family, like Darcy. And I will digress here but I disagree that Wickham's father could not afford to send his son to a good school - I will go as much as to say it is highly hinted Wickham fancied himself to be in the same class as Darcy so even if his father was well respected and liked, Wickham Junior was seen as mean to other servants but managed to ingratiate himself to Darcy's father so he too would be sent to study with the gentry. Only to fumble the opportunity as he had desire for more but not desire to earn it). Wickham as an officer would earn up to 1000 pounds a year which is actually very good money but we know that Wickham is indebted and squanders his money fast, even when he marries Lydia, she always writes to her sisters for financial help. Still, Wickham would be able to have some servants and even a nanny for his children. As it comes to the wealth of Mr Bingley, he's practically a multimillionaire hitting hundreds of millions in today's money. Mr Bingley can purchase a title if he purchased an estate (and his sisters are nudging that he should). The only thing that wealthy upper class gentry may hold against Mr Bingley is that his father was in trade (oh horror!) and Bingley sisters are highly insecure of the fact. Financially Bingleys can do no wrong. Socially - someone like Lady Catherine would probably slight them and the funniest thing is that Caroline Bingley tries so hard to call out Bennets on their 'low connections' just to feel better about herself or maybe to divert anyone from digging on her own background. However, she invites Jane Bennet to dinner because Jane is of high social status in the neighborhood and Bingley sisters are all about status chasing and Jane as a friend would look good, so to speak. Of course, as soon as Caroline suspects her bother is in love with her, she shows her true colors to Jane. If we talk about the wealth of Mr Darcy... he's indeed on the level of billionaires by today's standards. He's richer than some of dukes of his time. His own sister has immense dowry which attracts fortune hunters like Wickham and his aunt is a formidable wealthy Lady Catherine de Bourgh. It is indeed interesting that you touched upon Col Fitzwilliam as he exposes that a man in his position is expected to have a high life standards but not the means of an heir as Col Fitzwilliam is only a younger son of an Earl (and though a candidate to inherit, it is not likely he will if his bother marries and has at least one son). If we talk Col Fitzwilliam income, it would probably be on the same level as Mr Bennet at the time, please correct me if I am wrong. And there is no wonder that Lizzy at least considers what marriage to Col Fitzwilliam would be like as it is not only socially acceptable but amiable prospect (Col Fitzwilliam is wealthy enough, high ranking officer enough and has superior connections) and whether his lamentations on looking to find a wealthy heiress comes from his own desire or rather social pressure to do so is not clear. Mr Darcy's character, the more I read Pride and Prejudice, the more I come to like him, personally. The first time I hated him and saw no reason why Lizzy should fall in love with him as it was all his fault ! (oh he young indignant me) but the more I read the more I realized how wonderfully Jane Austen painted a picture of Darcy not herself but using us, the readers and the supporting characters. Mr Darcy is very careful of his social circle as his sister was almost kidnapped for her fortune by a person his own father treated like a son (ew ew ew) at the age of 15 (!!!! pedo alert!), his own best friend's sisters fancy themselves to be of higher social status and are snobbish to other people beneath them and though Darcy sometimes agrees with them, he does so only among strangers. Mr Darcy shows all respects to Elizabeth even if her family's behavior makes his hair stand up, he does not judge her the same way Bingley sisters do and even though his proposal was clumsy and indeed insulting, no lies were told. And Lizzy realizes that. Mr Darcy took care to introduce his own sister to Elizabeth, visited her in Rosings often enough to cause notice and, of course, rescued Lydia from ruining entire Bennet family even after Lizzy refused to marry him. In short, his fortune was always part of his character and whether we like it or not, realizing how people took advantage of his family and him in the past and what great temptation his money is for any woman at that time, one could see why he's cold and disliked when he's first introduced.
NOOO I JUST REALIZED YOU ONLY HAD ONE VIDEO I WAS READY TO BINGE YOUR VIDEOS ALL NIGHT
I've watched this video at least 5 times since ive discovered it. Thanks for the quality content and hope youll be putting some more up soon!
This comment cured my depression and my acne. I really do plan to make more videos!!
This is such a good analysis, very well done! 🙌🏻 thank you for your insights!
Your soft-spokenness made your little quips and jabs that much funnier. I really enjoyed this video, thank you for making it!
My favourite book, 1995 my favourite adaptation. This is a wonderfully done, plus you added a snippet of George Michael's Careless Whisper.....perfect
Thank you! One of my favourite books. This was a great analysis!
Excellent. I really enjoyed your explanations. Thank you for posting.
I didn't expect to see this through to the end, but I did. Thank you for an interesting analysis.
Great video! Id have a more thoughtful comment but my cold is making me stupid today 😅 I like your style of commentary and agree with a lot of your thoughts here. Though I will defend Bingley on the count that Darcy was only able to get him to leave Jane bc he convinced him that Jane was indifferent. I dont think he realized he was going to hurt her at all. He clearly wants to marry for mutual love, not just beauty.
Like a lot of personality traits, his humbleness is a double edged sword, both allowing him to meet others as equals and sometimes making him easy to influence by someone he trusts
This is a wonderful breakdown. Thank you for sharing your scholarship.
Financial security is every bit as important today.
When Jane Eyre inherits 20,000 pounds from her uncle in Mediera, it wasn’t an income, just a lump sum, correct? Whereas Darcy earns 10,000 per year.
Jane would be secure but not wealthy. And not “in society.”
I think you're right and then she shares her money with her cousins as well!!
That analysis was spot on and so good
You have a wonderfully calm voice. Thank you.
ASMR
It's not just that Jane was reserved; it wasn't proper for any well-bred young lady to wear her heart on her sleeve, as the saying goes.
Lydia is a perfect example of a young lady who does (and look what happened to her).
The Bank of England inflation calculator goes back to 1209.
Pride and Prejudice was written starting in 1797 (£1.3M; $1.77M) and published in 1813 (£709.5K; $964K).
This is true and thanks for sharing. I pulled from Katherine Toran's article on JASNA and she referenced the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator only going back so far. There are different ways to calculate inflation and how much Mr. Darcy would be worth today, but it's hard to measure. The value of things changes over time and what we value as a society changes over time. That's why I focused on his wealth relative to other people at the time. :)
Great discussion and recap. Nice take on Austen characters. They had a class system which worked fairly well for everyone but about half the women and children (kind of like now).
I'd say they had a system that worked fairly well for the 1%, and even some of them got screwed over...
Iloved the explanation of why Bingley was so attached to Mr Darcy, i wondered that after reafing the book & seeing the 1995 series, i lovd this version solely
I never understood why my English Great grandmother was disowned by her family for marrying beneath her station until reading Jane Austen. As in Emma, they wouldn’t associate with people below their income level, and were always looking to level up their social standing. My Grandmother used to say “Position is all in life”, and that’s where it came from.
Great presentation. Thank you :)
I think you've done a really good job here of analysing all the characters in a really intelligent way - many of the more 'minor' characters generally get a really superficial analysis, but your was great on the old versus new money etc. Thank you. This was really interesting and well considered.
Great video; it’s both educational and entertaining. Hopefully you will upload another one to your channel eventually! Cheers.
You have a great voice and delivery. (Plus, your essay is well written too.) A great voice, a gift few of us have. Go get 'em!
From what I understand about the income ticket and why Elizabeth ended up marrying a man that had a lot of money was because of the type of love Darcy and Elizabeth have. Austen wrote Darcy as having more because Darcy and Elizabeth would develop consummate love for each other which is rare. It's also, because of the high income ticket displays another form of anxiety within the Darcy household that is opposite of the Bennet household. One strives to marry well so that they will not be deprived/homeless in the future, the other strives to have an alliance that would not squander the opportunity of staying well financially as well as societal.
Thinking of the importance of a good marriage, Mrs. Bennett’s fanatic efforts, Lydia‘s fate, and even Anne Elliot in Persuasion, I always picture Fanny Price’s mother. That will likely be Lydia‘s future, and the reason young ladies’ parents were so concerned about how much money they married.
This is an excellent analysis. ❤
La meilleure analyse de ce livre, une analyse simple mais rigoureuse qui donne envie de relire le livre en s'appuyant sur cette analyse. J'ai remarqué l'emploi du film de 1985 au lieu de celui de 2005 et c'est avec raison car le film de 1985 suit parfaitement le livre et l'esprit de Jane Austen tandis que le film de 2005 est seulement un film pour rapporter de l'argent et plaire aux publics américains qui ne sont pas tous au courant de la situation des femmes et de la société britannique au moment de l'écriture du livre. Bravo pour cette analyse complète non seulement des caractères mais également des situations face à l'argent à cette époque.
I loved this video! I just read the book and this information about the context in which the story takes place uncovers so much that i did not know or notice while reading!!! I was perplexed by many details of the book related to the social interactions and now everything makes sense! Thank you!
Thank you for all these wonderful knowledge of English Society!! I just love watching that period & P&P is my very favorite!!
This is a really marvelous work of a scholar. Congratulations!
Darcy was what is called a ""slow-to-warm-up" person. He knows only Bingely and his sisters and no one else in the room. He knows nothing of the economic status of the marriageable girls' anxious mamas and worried papas and he knows that his behavior with the girls or their parents will excite speculation, gossip, and rivalries. Darcy is a prudent man.
Darcy straddling the line between Prudence and Social Outcast is the most relatable part of the book.
@@mikakestudios5891 With all due respect, I beg to differ. My paternal grandmother was Victorian. My maternal grandmother, Edwardian. I was raised in a post-WWII environment that hadn't changed much since the Civil War. I was taught the meaning of flowers, the language of the fan, how to write meaningful bread and butter notes, thank yous, apology notes, and invitations. I was taught to curtsey, modulate my voice, be dignified and chaste. I wasn't alone. Then the 1960s happened. It was a shock.
@@mikakestudios5891 With all due respect, Darcy would have to commit a pretty reprehensible crime to become a social outcast. He has more than enough money to buffer him (should he bugger a farm boy or compromise a villager girl's honor) and rather high connections to fix things for him if necessary.
Thank you for your terrific summary and analysis of P and P. It was through coming across excerpts on UA-cam of the BBC series and the 2005 film that I have been drawn to revisit both with great pleasure. My late wife particularly loved the series. I confess that I have only delved intermittently into the book but have come to admire the skills of the scriptwriters who have brought to life the imagery of the text so vividly. I searched the book for the famous wet shirt encounter at Pemberly in vain! The class system so well described in the novel insulated the characters from the realities of life for those on whom their comfort depended. Servants are rarely even named for instance. And the political turmoil that had undermined the nobility of France (20 odd miles away across the Channel) and scared the wits out of the English upper classes of the period seems of no concern to Jane Austen. What degrees of freedom leisure and literature can bring! But maybe I should knuckle down and read the book through. Thanks again for your work.
Peter McC
Excellent! Looking forward to seeing more of your work.
This was very well done, I thoroughly enjoyed this, thank you.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on her other novels as well. Great video!
So awesome! Thank you for making this video. I totally enjoyed it. Thinking more about the characters motivations and now I want to read it again. 😂😊
What a truly great video. Thankfully this appeared in my recommended. I’ll subscribe! 🎉 I love it haha I will probably watch it again 😅😅
To find out what happens when a wealthy woman marries a fortune chaser, read Wilki Collins' novel The Woman in White written in 1860 but set ten years prior to it. Only in 1882 the British government passed the act about financial freedom for married women.
Money was a fixation of everyone in that era., not just women. Without a stable income, you would be left to starve to death on the streets. A working man earned so little and worked so hard that many died on the job. . There was no social welfare, so without many children, there would be no one left to look after the parents when they aged. So women were typically pregnant from late adolescence to menopause, assuming they lived that long. Men were expected to work 14 hour days to pay the bills (they also typically died young). Mens' pay was typically so low that many young women worked as well, for even less. The system was utterly brutal, but it was brutal for anyone who wasn't rich, regardless of gender.
great video love your mind thank you for sharing these thoughts!
I found a book called Mr. Darcy takes a Wife! Hubba hubba, it takes place right after their wedding!
Ha, when Bingley and Darcy visit Netherfield once again after the elopement and shotgun wedding, Jane is NOT apparently indifferent.
It's brilliant facial acting, where she conveys her emotional turmoil so, so subtly.
A few English gentry women did inherit,
as Lady Catherine De Bourghs. daughter,
or Emma Woodhouse.
Wow, that was very insightful. I am looking forward to new videos, however long you want to make them. 🙂
I’ve wondered if Col. Fitzwilliam is the one who ultimately weds Anne de Bourgh?
It does make financial and dynastical sense; he needs money, and being a younger son he'd be more likely to allow his own heir to take the de Bourgh name(if that was a requirement), alternatively not have children at all if she's too frail for pregnancy/childbirth. Not to mention that if she died young the estate would stay in the family.
An excellent vid. Loved it!! ❤️👍🏻
Well done analysis.
Ty for this, I really throughly enjoyed it ❤
Jane Austen did not suffer fools - of any class. Lovely video. ❤
Perfection. More videos please!
Thank you for this analysis!
Hi. Thanks for all the work you put into this analysis. I like the fact that you use footage from the classic 1995 adaptation, all in all, the best version of Pride and Prejudice. Furthermore, you correctly highlight that Mr Bennet was a very wealthy man. Indeed, in the following clip Professor Mullan describes £2,000 per annum as "huge, huge wealth." ua-cam.com/video/MuFoo3PZGQw/v-deo.html
Thanks for the clip and I'm definitely a big fan John Mullan!!
This is an incredibly well done video. Does anyone know why it's the only one? This Creator could do really well...
I always wince at that discussion between Col. Fitzwilliam and Elizabeth... like, dude, could you BE more obvious and heavy-handed?
I think it was a fairly smooth way to clarify that he wasn't looking for more than friendship, which is an issue that kinda did need adressing when two young people got along as well as he and Elizabeth did. Elizabeth had assumed that might be the case, and him confirming it after so short an acquaintance made it easier for her to guard her heart before she fell for him.
Unless you meant what he said about Bingley, which was the opposite of smooth! 😄
What I do not understand is how would everyone know how much money others make a year? It is as though the income of everyone is published in the newspaper every year! Does everyone in England have to notify the world of their yearly income?
I don't remember the particulars, but you're actually not far off! I think there was a fair amount of information avaliable, which allowed people to get within 25% of the correct answer, like Bingley having "four or five thousand a year".
Very nicely done.
Enjoyed this so much, thank you! I would gladly listen to those other 40 pages :)
PS: 1995 adaptation is the one and only for me
There are some calculators out there that go back further, though one I used was a different currency, so perhaps not as useful for Great Britain.
Great video, one small note Mr Gardiner isn’t a lawyer (his father and brother in law were attorneys which was not a profession for the gentry unlike a barrister which was)
Mr Gardiner lives in cheapside which means he’s a merchant. Depending on what he traded he might have been the most acceptable part of the non-gentry, yet he seems to have no desire to social climb but is happy with his situation as a sensible and independent man. An interesting contrast to Sir William.
Also Charlotte Lucas almost certainly did have a dowery, though not enough to be independent
About what you raised at the end, on how future adaptations would present Lydia’s situation: in both recent modern adaptations (Lizzie Bennet’s Diaries and Fire Island), they use the means od sex tape instead of elopement.
2 questions please?
How gross would it have been to readers at the time that Darcy refused to be introduced to any ladies at the first party?
(I heard on another video, how Gentlmen were expected to accept any introduction from a lady if she wished to meet them)
And why was Mr Bennet embarrassing at the ball? Should he have let Mary continue playing? 😅
I just never understood that bit of "impropriaty" haha.
Well done, more please
Thank you for giving Georgette Heyer a shout-out!
This video is great 👏
If Elizabeth Bennet had failed to marry someone of wealth, she WOULD NOT have fallen out of the gentry class. Class wasn't always about mere money. It was about how a person (or a person's family) earned income and blood connection.
I can agree with my wording there. I think it would've been a Miss Bates type situation where the lack of money and estate world make it very difficult for them to access the same level of connections they had previously enjoyed. Without considerable charity on someone else's part or, as is the plot of the book, a very good marriage from I've of the sisters.
@@beth-haymond Yet, Miss Bates and her mother had no difficulty participating in the social scene of Highbury's upper class, due to their social connections. Despite their lack of money, the Dashwoods were still able to socialize with the local gentry and upper classes in "Sense and Sensibility". And the only reason the Bates and the Dashwoods were able to do this and receive this kind of charity from their neighbors was blood connections and class.
@@beth-haymond Don't forget that despite her lack of wealth, Miss Bates and her mother were still invited to dinners and other social events attended by those from the gentry class with more money. Despite their lack of wealth, they still have the social connections due to bloodlines and family connections. The same can be said for the Dashwood sisters in "Sense and Sensibility".
@@beth-haymond Elisabeth would not lose her social status , she would still be gentry even if a poor one . Her status came from being the daughter of a gentleman not from her own money. Like she would get invited to dinner but lets say a very rich merchant would not be . Lady Catherine is still a member of nobility even if she married a man without a title . She is a lady even if her husband was not a noble because she is the daughter of an Earl.
Well, would Fanny Price’s mother still be considered gentry?
I wonder whereabouts they shot the ramsgate scenes. There's no rock out to sea. It looks like Ailsa Craig, but surely not.
I've booked it up, it was Weston-super-Mare
Beth I had so much fun watching this! You have made me want to reread very much and reminded me that I shouldn’t watch 1995!
Caroline is basically a Kardashian. Plenty of people would read/watch her retelling of P&P.
I would love to hear that 40 pages of deleted notes!!!
What a great video!
You speak (mostly) in Dollars instead of in Pounds, it matters a lot!
I went from knowing nothing about Jane Austen's writing to knowing too much... would watch another 🤷♂️
Emma is up next, so buckle up
Sometimes I think about the fact that if Mrs. Bennet hadn’t been so sure of Mr. Bingley’s interest, Jane would probably have married Mr. Collins. It would have been interesting to see how she would have reacted to that pressure.
I always wondered was why income was so universally known and the gossip so specific. “He has 10,000 a year” Were these educated guesses based on acreage and the current rent charged for land?