Chelsea Usher, "Pride and Prejudice: A Search for Duality"
The themes of pride and prejudice prevail all throughout Jane Austen’s famous novel, Pride and Prejudice. However, the past determination of scholars to label one of these terms as distinctly describing Elizabeth Bennet and the other Mr. Darcy would be incorrect. Not only do Elizabeth and Darcy represent both of these traits during the course of the story, but they are joined in it by nearly every other character in the book. Labels, however, do not end with the traits of pride and prejudice as many scholars have also attempted to designate these characters as representing individualism or society. Despite the multiple scholarly attempts to label these two characters as one theme or another, it becomes clear that to place one word labels on characters of so much depth is shaky at best.
The readers are first introduced to pride in the third chapter when Darcy’s unwillingness to dance leads the rest of those in attendance to find him, “to be proud, to be above his company, and above being pleased” (Austen 11). This introduces the main definition of pride found within the novel, “a high or inordinate opinion of one’s own dignity, importance, merit, or superiority” (Dictionary). Another, less commonly seen definition can often be found whenever Elizabeth and Lady Catherine are placed near one another. Lady Catherine’s pride may best be described as a, “dignified sense of what is due to oneself or one’s position” (Dictionary). Elizabeth’s refusal to answer her questions outright and the confidence she has in her presence not only surprises Lady Catherine, but clearly leaves her irritated.
Yet, beyond the straightforward definitions of the word, the most appropriate comment on pride comes from Mary, who states, “Pride… is a very common failing I believe. By all that I have ever read, I am convinced that it is very common indeed, that human nature is particularly prone to it, and that there are very few of us who do not cherish a feeling of self-complacency on the score of some quality or another, real or imaginary” (Austen 19). With the amount of pride surging through the Bennet household, it is highly ironic that Mary would choose to attribute her knowledge of it to reading instead of first hand observation.
“Prejudice” is a much more straightforward term and is defined as “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason” (Dictionary). Within the novel, it normally takes one of two forms. Either the rich are looking down upon the poor, who they do not personally know, or one individual is judging another based off of partial information. It is debatable who shows prejudice first, for while Darcy is seen as prejudiced against the lower, country society for his lack of dancing at the ball, those who observe this action also begin to form prejudices against the man based on this one interaction and without taking other aspects of his character into account.
Critics have examined the relationship of these two title words to the two main characters for years. In his essay, “Pride and Prejudice in Pride and Prejudice”, Everett Zimmerman claims, “The usual interpretation is that the title is a reference to Darcy’s pride, which causes him to reject Elizabeth and her family, and Elizabeth’s resulting prejudice, which is reinforced by Wickham’s false story about Darcy” (64). The claim that Darcy is proud and Elizabeth prejudiced is not without its evidence. In fact, the ending of one of their own conversations lends itself to this purpose as Elizabeth, speaking of human defects, says to Darcy, “your defect is a propensity to hate everybody,” to which he replies, “and yours…is willfully to misunderstand them” (Austen 51). Yet, in this search for duality, the very complex characters of Darcy and Elizabeth are over simplified.
However, there is no question that Darcy possesses an immense amount of pride and the Meryton ball is indeed where this first comes to light. He is placed in stark contrast to his friend, Mr. Bingley, whose friendliness quickly wins the good opinion of everyone in the room. Though this may at first appear to be a fairly quick, possibly even harsh judgment, Darcy does little to repair this image. Though, why would he? His comments about the lack of society in the country and the fact that “he really believed that were it not for the inferiority of [Elizabeth’s] connections he should be in some danger” (Austen 46), clearly show that his pride does in fact stem from his social class. Moreover, Darcy believes that, “nothing is more deceitful…than the appearance of humility” (Austen 42). Not only would he find hiding one’s pride a dishonest act, but as he truly believes in the class system, he would have no reason to refute it.
These displays of pride are exactly what first bring Elizabeth’s prejudice to life. After overhearing Darcy tell Bingley that, “she is tolerable; but not handsome enough to tempt [him]” (Austen 12), her opinion of Darcy is nearly sealed. Between his lack of manners and his comment, she could come to no other conclusion than that he was proud and arrogant. These opinions are reinforced when Wickham relays the story of why he and Darcy are no longer close. Society has prejudiced Elizabeth to believe that with good manners and looks comes honesty and gentility. Therefore, she falls for every lie Wickham feeds her and further resolves to dislike Darcy.
After failing to get Darcy to relay his side of this story at the next ball, Elizabeth brings up a past conversation. She says, “I remember hearing you once say, Mr. Darcy, that you hardly ever forgave, that your resentment once created was unappeasable. You are very cautious, I suppose, as to its being created” (Austen 81). After confirming her statement, Elizabeth asks one of the most ironic questions of the novel when she responds, “And never allow yourself to be blinded by prejudice?” (Austen 81). Elizabeth, who to some personifies prejudice and who holds a grudge for most of the novel, has just attempted to imply that Darcy is the one who forms his opinions based on prejudices. She is not completely incorrect. Darcy does display prejudices through the novel, but then again, she displays pride as well.
Perhaps the best example of why each of these characters must take responsibility for both traits is a quote from A. Walton Litz which reads, “Darcy’s pride of place is founded on social prejudice, while Elizabeth’s initial prejudice against him is rooted in pride of her own quick perceptions”(63). The novel provides ample evidence to support this theory.
Elizabeth is in fact the first to mention her pride after having been insulted by Darcy during the first ball. She tells Charlotte Lucas, who had defended Darcy’s right to be proud, that she “could easily forgive his pride, if he had not mortified [hers]” (Austen 19). Upon arriving at Pemberley to care for Jane, Miss Bingley is the next to accuse Elizabeth of being proud, although she words it instead as “conceited independence, a most country town indifference to decorum.” (Austen 32) It is Elizabeth’s interpretations of instances such as Darcy’s rudeness and Miss Bingley’s, “higher than thou” attitude that leave her with a prejudice against several members of the upper class, most specifically, Darcy. In addition, when Elizabeth explains her reasons for rejecting Darcy’s proposal, he claims that “these offenses might have been overlooked, had not your pride been hurt by my honest confession of the scruples that had long prevented my forming any serious design” (Austen 163).
This quote not only gives the reader an insight into Elizabeth’s pride, but also further outlines Darcy’s prejudice against lower society and impropriety. His prejudice against the lower classes can be seen in one of his responses following Elizabeth’s rejection of his proposal as he says, “Could you expect me to rejoice in the inferiority of your connections? To congratulate myself on the hope of relations whose condition in life is so decidedly beneath my own?” Though it may at first appear that he is referring to her immediate family, the reader knows from an earlier conversation that Darcy’s prejudice expands to her extended family as well. While Elizabeth and Jane are at Netherfield, Bingley’s sisters comment that one of their uncles lives in Cheapside. Though Bingley quickly states his indifference to this fact, Darcy responds, “but it must very materially lessen their chance of marrying men of any consideration in the world” (Austen 33).
Outside of this textual evidence, there is further historical support that Austen did most likely not intend “Pride and Prejudice” to be interchangeable with “Darcy and Elizabeth.” Though no one can know for sure what revisions were made, most Austen scholars are comfortable saying that “Pride and Prejudice” is actually the revised version of the earlier novel “First Impressions” (Rubinstein 1). If this is in fact true, there would have been no reason to craft one character to represent pride and one prejudice. That is not to say, however, that pride and prejudice were not important in the earlier novel.
“Sir Charles Grandison” by Samuel Richardson was held in high esteem by Austen and several parallels have been identified between the stories; namely a connection concerning what Richardson called “first prejudices” (Fergus 74). “In both novels,” he says, “First impressions are formed, compared, evaluated, and revised, so that the characters’ responses to each other are a major part of the action and a clear, well-established thematic concern” (Fergus 74). Indeed, Austen may have been in the habit of borrowing ideas from her favorite authors. One theory suggests that she got the title “Pride and Prejudice” from the moral lesson in another of her favorite works, “Cecilia” by Fanny Burney (Fergus 62). Burney’s use of prejudice, however, is narrower than Austen’s as she focuses on “misjudgment…as only one of the unfortunate effects of pride” (Fergus 64). Yet, regardless of whether or not she had any “help” inventing her title, there is textual evidence to support the title change, and possibly, a slightly different opening theme. While themes are normally identified quickly upon the start of a novel, Austen’s first four chapters center almost solely on first impressions. Only once is the word “proud” used and even then, it is in reference to the first impressions of Darcy at the ball (Fergus 87-88).
Clearly, it is nearly impossible to label Darcy as “pride” and Elizabeth as “prejudice”. One critic, however, takes this a step farther and claims that Elizabeth does not even truly represent prejudice. In his essay, “Elizabeth Bennet: Prejudice or Vanity?”, Robert C. Fox claims that, “the respective traits of Darcy and Elizabeth are just close enough to pride and prejudice for us to be misled” (185). He uses as his evidence Mary’s quote about pride and vanity: “pride relates to our opinion of ourselves, vanity to what we would have others think of us” (185). To be sure, Fox is correct in his assessment of Darcy. As seen in his behavior at the ball and in the public eye, he is content to act and do as he pleases, unconcerned with what the people around him may think. This is further evidenced by his refusal to defend himself (at first) to Elizabeth concerning Wickham’s lies. Apparently, it would be “beneath Darcy’s pride to explain that Wickham had signed away for cash his right to the Darcy patronage” (Kliger 54).
Where Elizabeth is concerned, however, Fox claims she is not in fact prejudiced and that her dislike of Darcy, because of his opinion of her family, is more aptly described as “vanity.” He also contends that where Wickham is concerned, she does show temporary prejudice, but that it is “superficial” because she relinquishes it upon hearing Darcy’s explanation (Fox 187). This statement ignores the fact Elizabeth, “wished to discredit it entirely, repeatedly exclaiming, ‘This must be false!’” (Austen 173), as she reads the letter. In addition, she almost takes Darcy up on his offer to question Colonel Fitzwilliam if she has any doubts. Had Elizabeth’s prejudices towards Darcy not been present, and had she been so willing to accept the explanation as Fox implies, she would have never considered checking the validity of the letter. Furthermore, when Darcy asks her opinion of the letter later, “she explained what its effects on her had been, and how gradually all her former prejudices had been removed” (Austen 307). Not only does Elizabeth acknowledge the fact that she was prejudiced, but that she had multiple prejudices. This would contradict Fox’s claim that her only prejudice was related to the Wickham incident.
The final claim of Fox’s essay is that, “In [Elizabeth and Darcy], what is the predominant quality at the beginning lessens, and something of the opposite quality is acquired” (187). In this case, Elizabeth would embody pride and Darcy vanity. To Fox, Elizabeth’s pride is essentially borrowed from Darcy upon visiting Pemberley. He writes that, “she becomes less conscious of the spectacle presented by her family and vicariously experiences the pride of Darcy” (187). This claim is weak at best, for although Elizabeth does think to herself, “to be mistress of Pemberley might be something!” (Austen 203), to say that she is now prideful of something she does not have is erroneous. She has also not become less aware of her family’s issues, as she, “did all she could to shield him from the frequent notice of [Mrs. Phillips and Mrs. Bennet], and was ever anxious to keep him to herself and to those of her family with whom he might converse without mortification” (Austen 320), even after their engagement.
Similarly, Fox’s claims of Darcy are also lacking. He states that Darcy “becomes less concerned with himself and more concerned about the opinions of others” and sites his evidence as Darcy’s aid to the Bennet family in an effort to, “create a favorable impression” on Elizabeth (187). Again, the text has been misinterpreted. Had Darcy intended his actions concerning Wickham and Lydia to truly enhance Elizabeth’s impression of him, he wouldn’t have attempted to keep his involvement a secret. Though Lydia slips and tells Elizabeth, Darcy was in no way guaranteed that she would ever discover his kind deed.
However, pride, prejudice, and vanity are not the only terms that scholars have attempted to apply to Darcy and Elizabeth. They have also been assigned the terms “society” and “individual.” The tendency of most is to label Darcy as society and Elizabeth as the individual (Sherry 611). Litz makes a persuasive argument for this theory in the following quote from his essay, “Into the Nineteenth Century: Pride and Prejudice”.
Elizabeth possesses the illusion of total freedom; she looks to nature, rather than society or traditional authority, for the basis of her judgments. She is self-reliant and proud of her discernment, contemptuous of all conventions that constrict the individual’s freedom. Darcy, on the other hand, is mindful of his relationship to society, proud of his social place, and aware of the restrictions that inevitably limit the free spirit. Together they dramatize the persistent conflict between social restraint and the individual will, between tradition and self-expression. (65)
Yet this application does not take into account that Austen’s definition of those two terms would have been much different than today’s. To Austen, society was about fellowship, not traditions or rules. Under this definition, Elizabeth becomes the better candidate for society as she displays the most “social” behavior and Darcy a far cry from it as he hinders society in his unwillingness to dance at the first ball (Sherry 611-612, 616). He would actually be a better representation of the individual as his, “reserve, privacy, and discretion are, in fact, protective of the individual” (Sherry 612), as is his love of propriety. Again, an issue of definition arises. In modern society, propriety is seen as conforming to strict social customs and it is almost often used with a negative connotation. In Darcy’s world, propriety, “suggests a kind of behavior which is particularly careful not to violate the privacy, the integrity, and the right to respectability of every individual” (Sherry 618). This is the definition Darcy has in mind as he comments on the impropriety of the Bennet family. It would seem that this pairing of Darcy with individualism and Elizabeth with society is much better supported than the attempt to label Darcy as pride and Elizabeth as prejudice.
Both main characters represent the two main themes present in the title. In fact, it may be more likely that the novel was so named in an effort to present the two main moral conflicts of the story rather than any particular characters. This is highly likely as, “the eighteenth-century ideology [framed] the genre as a vehicle of moral improvement” (Matthews 245). Perhaps the simplest explanation of the moral movement in this novel is expressed in the following quote by Samuel Kliger:
Darcy’s pride of class is persistently misunderstood by Elizabeth and what she must learn is that his pride – under proper limitations – is an appropriate and a proper human trait. Contrariwise, Darcy must learn that Elizabeth’s prejudice for dealing with humans qua humans, irrespective of class, is – again under proper limitations – appropriate and an admirable human trait. (52)
By pointing out the undesirable effects of these two traits in Elizabeth and Darcy, Austen also criticizes those aspects within society. She was keenly aware that complex personalities could not be easily understood and that this often led to misinterpretations. By having Elizabeth fall prey to many such misinterpretations throughout the novel, she shows the danger of quick judgments. Though most of the moral lessons of the novel do center on prejudices, she also critiques inappropriate pride. By the end of the novel, the reader has become well aware of “good” pride (respect for oneself) and bad pride (that which places oneself above everyone else and leads to prejudice). Austen attacks one form of inappropriate pride in the principle of “noblesse oblige” which means, “no gentleman will either complain or explain when his actions are falsely reported” (Kliger 54). Darcy’s prideful refusal to explain himself to Elizabeth only furthers her prejudice.
Pride and Prejudice, therefore, is a book about the moral implications of the traits of pride and prejudice. Neither historical nor textual evidence support the theory that Austen intended the words of the title to be interchangeable or representative of her two main characters. To be fair, Darcy does seem to start the novel with more pride than prejudice, and Elizabeth more prejudice than pride. It is indeed Darcy’s pride that causes Elizabeth to become prejudiced, but in the same sense, it is Darcy’s prejudice against the lower class that ignites Elizabeth’s pride in herself and her family. Clearly, one would be doing both the author and the characters an injustice by attempting to assign labels to Elizabeth and Darcy.
Works Cited
Austen, Jane, and Margaret Drabble. Pride and Prejudice. New York: New Amer Library, 1996. Print.
Fergus, Jan. Jane Austen and the Didactic Novel: Northanger Abbey, Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice. Totowa, NJ: Barnes & Noble Books, 1983. 61-98. Print.
Fox, Robert C. “Elizabeth Bennet: Prejudice or Vanity?” Nineteenth-Century Fiction 17.2 (1962): 185-187. JSTOR. Web. 11 Apr 2010.
Kliger, Samuel. "Pride and Prejudice in the Eighteenth-Century Mode." Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pride and Prejudice. 1969. E. Rubinstein. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Print.
Litz, A. Walton. "Into the Nineteenth Century: Pride and Prejudice." Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pride and Prejudice. 1969. E. Rubinstein. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Print.
Matthews, Peter. “How to Read the Ethics of Austen’s Pride and Prejudice.” Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal No.29 (2007): 245-254. Web. 5 Mar 2010.
"prejudice." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. Web. 8 Apr. 2010.
"pride." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. Web. 8 Apr. 2010.
Rubinstien, E. "Introduction." Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pride and Prejudice. 1969. E. Rubinstein Ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Print.
Sherry, James. "Pride and Prejudice: The Limits of Society." Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 19.4 (1979): 609-622. JSTOR. Web. 5 Mar 2010
Zimmerman, Everett. “Pride and Prejudice in Pride and Prejudice.” Nineteenth-Century Fiction 23.1 (1968): 64-73. JSTOR. Web. 5 Mar 2010.