This blog is a response to people in agreement with Charlotte’s decision to accept Mr. Collins.
I cannot agree with those women who, in almost in every interview and academic critique, (and without much serious thought, as I will discuss here) that Charlotte was doing the best she could for herself, in her social situation. Certainly it’s very easy to agree that she was. Yet, we might also say the same about gold-diggers, who also fall into the “doing the best they can for themselves” category! Of course, we don’t mean to be too judgemental. After all, so many people marry for money, that it’s almost too common to kvetch about. Still, there are some considerations (ethical) that affect the ultimate happiness of those who make ‘hasty’ decisions while choosing a partner.
Elizabeth Bennett’s “stamp of approval” for her friend’s marriage to Mr. Collins is not given readily. Why? Lizzy explains this later while discussing Charlotte’s odd choice with her sister, Jane). She states that anyone who could think of Mr. Collins as a proper marriage partner has a ‘wrong’ way of thinking, and remember that he had just asked Lizzie to marry him two days before. She refuses him.
Yet seriously, does it really matter, if a woman is simply trying for a comfy home? Actually, it does, and it matters even more when the guy Charlotte chooses is described as silly, conceited, awkward and arrogant. He’s also an odd sort of clergyman, who is narrowly focused on rank and material wealth rather than the refinement of consciousness. He is focused on his things, his house and his prestige and his patroness (Lady Catherine), and works in his garden without any sense of beauty—
“Here, leading the way through every walk and cross walk, and scarcely allowing them an interval to utter the praises he asked for, every view was pointed out with a minuteness which left beauty entirely behind. He could number the fields in every direction, and could tell how many trees there were in the most distant clump.”
Uh oh. Even on the surface, there’s so little about this man to attract us (ie, physically , emotionally or even in terms of “a beautiful mind”). Sadly for herself, Charlotte forgoes a normal courtship. Courtship is essential, vital and necessary for getting to know the person on whom your “marital happiness” will depend, yet (foolishly), she is disinterested in discovering the truth! She cares nothing about finding out if a marriage with Mr. Collins means she can forget about romance. Oof! As it turns out, happiness with this man is decidedly a lost cause, yet she chooses to go forward for the sake of material security.
“Her reflections were in general satisfactory. Mr. Collins, to be sure, was neither sensible nor agreeable; his society was irksome, and his attachment to her must be imaginary. But still he would be her husband. Without thinking highly either of men or matrimony, marriage had always been her object; it was the only provision for well-educated young women of small fortune, and however uncertain of giving happiness, must be their pleasantest preservative from want.”
Attempting to explain her acceptance of Mr Collins to the incredulous Lizzy, Charlotte claims that she has never been “romantic” and that basically all her hopes are centered in a comfy home. Personally, I’m not buying this sad excuse even if academia somehow finds it ‘reasonable.’ This is a perverse and merely ‘transactional’ kind of situation.
Just consider Jane Austen’s (hilarious) description of the courtship between them…
“”The stupidity with which he was favoured by nature must guard his courtship from any charm that could make a woman wish for its continuance”
Perhaps many women think very little of what is wrong with this (thinking very little is exactly the problem here!) and continue to side with Charlotte! Sure, they say, we have a right to marry whomever will have us, as long as we get what we want—a comfortable home!
Jane Austen disagrees. The heroine also disagrees and of course, explains why. It’s because marrying a Mr. Collins is throwing oneself away, like totally, and in a very profound sense. No romantic love, no attraction of any kind. Yet, if I play the devil’s advocate, besides that, what is Charlotte missing? Well, she’s actually missing a heck of a lot. First of all, just considering that divorce was not allowed at that time, unless under very specific circumstances, Charlotte has ties herself to someone who doesn’t appreciate that she (and, frankly all of us) desire and truly need, deeply reciprocal relationships based on love. Mr. Collins simply cannot provide this because he’s absorbed in the external world and simply follows rules without exploring a spiritual science of consciousness (ie, metaphysics or yoga philosophy). Not a friend and not an intelligent person. We shall get into this later. Jane Austen understood these principles very well, which is why she wrote the darn novel (Pride & Prejudice).
Virginia Woolf (1882-1941), expressed her belief that Austen had a much deeper understanding of love than most people. Almost a century later, and like poor Charlotte, many people seem confused. The only cure is to allow Jane Austen to carry us back from the brink of social media’s dreadful influence on intimate relationships.
We suffer from meaningless content on many of the most popular social media sites (ie, a site where we are trying to “get social”) and where many of us spend a good deal of our time. Yet, according to studies, the more we time we spend on social media, the more depressed we become! In fact, many youth are unable to stop. It’s a real crisis especially for young women.
Let’s do an experiment in order to get a better sense of why Jane wrote these novels. I suggest reading Austen on her own terms and she’s all about having and describing the best kinds of friends. So rather than trying to turn all Jane Austen’s characters into something they’re not… That is, her heroines are not sexually loose. They are not ‘gadding about’ in search of their next hookup. The heroes are sincerely interested in marriage, not just trying to get the heroine in bed (of course, there are bad guys in her novels who play with the emotions of women, and some go further than that and ruin women’s lives). Jane Austen considered men who “created an attachment” in a woman without any serious intention to actually marry, was a dispicable person. Dogs, hogs, camels and…assholes!
Note to young people: Love yourself enough not to do hookups just “because your friends expect you to.” No one needs friends that expect you to do something that puts your life in DANGER. Anyone whom you intend to be intimate with, should be someone that you know very very well. This is why decent people generally marry. Intimacy should always be restricted to a person who is committed to you, your happiness, and staying with you throughout life. That is a normal basis for a loving relationship, not these damn hookups. They’re just for using you, and you deserve better. Seriously.
Before we begin trying to appreciate the romance aspect of Jane’s novels, let’s briefly consider her purpose. She wrote six novels (as a witty study of people). The story takes place in a moral universe, making the story more realistic, so sometimes hilarious and sometimes tragic. It’s like a Shakespearean play and Jane has more often been compared to Shakespeare than any other writer! She wrote “metaphysical” literature, which means that she introduces us to a moral universe (which includes karma). Just remember that old saying, “What goes around comes around.”
These novels were meant to teach the path to rational happiness in this life by acting properly. All the great philosophers taught the same thing. During the Enlightenment, and for many centuries, happy endings were once the ‘norm’ in plays with a moral message. Why? Deep down, we all know that living a good life will result in happiness, and living a selfish life means we can expect “bad karma.”
For example, in the novel, Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth Bennett is unmarried yet, like most other women, hopes to find a good marriage partner. However she refused to ‘settle’ for a loveless marriage, for the sake of material comfort . Meanwhile her friend Charlotte Lucas thinks that bagging a good marriage partner is all a matter of chance! What went wrong in Charlotte’s choice? She put material Security before love. She actually values money more than a sincere relationship, and Mr. Collins can only be described (even today) as…insufferable. Elizabeth (speaking to her elder sister) states:
“My dear Jane, Mr. Collins is a conceited, pompous, narrow-minded, silly man: you know he is, as well as I do; and you must feel, as well as I do, that the woman who marries him cannot have a proper way of thinking. You shall not defend her, though it is Charlotte Lucas. You shall not, for the sake of one individual, change the meaning of principle and integrity, nor endeavour to persuade yourself or me that selfishness is prudence, and insensibility of danger security for happiness.’
Charlotte Lucas chose to ignore the faults of her marriage partner-to-be and this was before ‘liberal’ divorce laws were enacted. Once married, she’d be stuck for life. Charlotte claimed only to have an interest in “marrying well” and yet ignored a consideration as basic as compatibility. She also rationalized her actions by claiming that she has never been ‘romantic.’ In her mind, “[Marriage] was the only honorable provision for well-educated young women of small fortune, and however uncertain of giving happiness, must be their pleasantest preservative from want.”
Right. No doubt there are many women today who might find this a convincing reason to marry a ‘Mr. Collins.’ Yet, if we are not interested in rational choice, we accept ‘anything’. This cannot be love. Now, as to Elizabeth’s choice, she wants a marriage based on the deepest love. This take on marriage appears quite idealistic and more than what cynical people consider to be rational, yet, at least it rules out marrying someone who is just a “taker.”
Going deeper, if we analyze the ethics taught by Aristotle, friendships may be based in one of three catagories–pleasure, utility or virtue. For example, a friendship based in pleasure would be based simply on using another person’s body for temporary gratification, and motivated by selfish desires. Think of how Lydia Bennett (a foolish and thoughtless character) “left all her friends” and almost wrecked all of her sisters’ chances to marry, in order to run off with the useless and penniless Mr. Wickham. Charlotte’s marriage is based in a ‘friendship’ of utility. She wants a home and her awkward husband wants a wife. That’s all they get. Very little love involved in this kind of arrangement. Still, we get why Charlotte thinks she’s being rational. It’s just that there’s no chance of that relationship ever developing into anything more meaningful.
Indeed, we must point out that seeking a friendship based upon love doesn’t discredit the importance of basic material comfort and solid finances when choosing a marriage partner. However, Lizzy demands more than a mere ‘comfortable home’ because she values, more than anything else, a virtuous partner. Omg. How romantic is that? Very!
For those of us who rarely think about ‘virtue’ we might not understand how very romantic this is. I know that there may be a bit of knee-jerk scepticism and that inward eye-rolling. It just seems too romantic and perhaps irrational. Yet real love exists and we may feel a twinge of dissatisfaction if we deny the natural desire for love. Skeptics are not cornering the market on romance, so relax! This need for love is not true only of women but also of men. It’s so innate and so powerful because it’s part of who we are.
We have that natural, deep connection to each other as eternal spiritual beings. In many relationships today, everything rests on utility and pleasure, not shared values. As we see in every movie based on stories of ‘love at first sight’. In P&P even our heroine Elizabeth is (temporarily) blinded at first by the charms of Mr. Wickham. Luckily she escapes his charms. Lizzie is not about marrying for money. As proof, she rebukes the rich Mr. Darcy for destroying the marriage prospects of her beloved sister Jane. Darcy, who is sincerely in love with Lizzy, eventually sets everything aright and corrects his mistakes. As he said, he would have still remained “a selfish being” without her. A perfect romantic ending is the result.
It is very clear that Charlotte’s choices leave her with only a shadow of the perfect happiness that we see in Elizabeth’s marriage. From the beginning, Charlotte is compelled to go out of her way to arrange her life in order to avoid her husband’s company as much as she can. There are no romantic feelings between them. Another sad truth is brilliantly shown when Mr. Collins, who is proud of his material comforts and position in life, and still apparently holding a grudge against Lizzy for her rejection of his marriage proposal, imagines that she must be feeling remorse. Attempting to rub his matrimonial triumph in her face, he states that he and his wife, Charlotte seem ‘designed’ for each other.” Interestingly, this is the fact.
The malicious Mr. Collins and his indifferent wife are indeed perfectly designed for each other–not as a blessing. On the other hand, Elizabeth and Darcy treasure and respect each other. He is her perfect partner, a classy man who is intelligent, generous and concerned about her. Austen makes the vast difference between Elizabeth and Charlotte’s situation very clear. Darcy is also very wealthy, so Elizabeth has not thrown herself away for love.
I am truly sorry that Charlotte chose to blindly accept such an awkward and foolish man, just as I am always amazed at those who find themselves with the wrong, sometimes very wrong, partner. It is best to be honest about this type of self-delusion. I’ve been there.
It seems that those few articles and videos that defend Charlotte’s choice might be misleading their readers by ignoring what Austen has set up her novels to do—which is to make us think more deeply about what our best happiness looks like. Lizzy herself laments-
“Poor Charlotte! It was melancholy to leave her to such society! But she had chosen it with her eyes open;… she did not seem to ask for compassion. Her home and her housekeeping, her parish and her poultry, and all their dependent concerns, had not yet lost their charms.“
Austen here expresses her own feelings through the heroine Elizabeth, who feels as a friend must feel especially because she predicts that her friend will not be contented after the ‘charms’ of the honeymoon phase are ended. I hope that this will help clarify Jane’s message of self-knowledge.
Here is a link to a wonderful talk by Professor John Mullan, who goes into the comic and tragic awkwardness of Charlotte’s marriage situation. If you enjoyed this blog please do subscribe.
- Buy Bhagavad-Gita here!From Barnes & Noble
- Get Jane Austen’s Complete Novels here! From Amazon.com
Jane Austen Yoga 