@Austen

1:07 PM November 27, 2010
@JML: Ha! I know one thing that Elizabeth does not. Darcy loves her still, but she doubts it so bad. Tennis was great, hit 17 aces. Now, back to reading Austen. And finish it, hopefully.

9:51 AM November 27, 2010
@JML: They are clearly changing roles. I mean, Darcy and Elizabeth. Now, her feeling towards him are those that used to be his towards her. Chat later. I’m going to hit some balls. Tennis, I mean.

6:17 PM November 26, 2010
@JML: Short notice. Elizabeth looks like she gave lessons to girls of CNG to how to act with a man that is in love with you. They are identical! First, she scorned Darcy, then she rejected his marriage proposal, and now, SHE IS MARRYING HIM! Wow. Ms. Austen, what’s next?

8:47 AM November 25, 2010
@JML: I’m in a hurry. But just before I leave for the weekend I wanted to make a point. Elizabeth said that Mr.Darcy was “exactly the man, who, in disposition and talents, would most suit her” (Austen 237). Ironic huh? Chat later.

Portraying, Not Embracing, Seems not Seems

So, now that I’ve got time, let me tell you what I’m planning to write about.

• The book got my attention a couple of times, but nothing special compared to my favorites: Hamlet and Slaughterhouse-Five.
• Anyways, if I could choose one thing to write about, it would be, certainly, the dichotomy between the different personalities that people display to other people. Confusing?
• Wait. Let’s get it clear. One character, the main one, Elizabeth. Her personality displays different phases throughout the story. Her personality towards Mr. Darcy differs from her personality towards Jane, or any other character. Furthermore, she changes her attitude within minutes, to the extent that she ‘seems’ to portray a different image than the one she actually embraces.
• Another thing, her development throughout the novel highlights from the rest. Hence, making her personality the most acquiescent. The ‘seems not seems’ argument from Hamlet. The pursuit of happiness through actions that don’t characterize yourself as a being from Gatsby. Elizabeth evolves, and finally achieves her happiness. But in order to get there, she plays with her personality to the extent she becomes a different character for every character. Still confusing? Hope not.
• By the way, I haven’t finished the book. I’m still about one hundred pages to go, but be patient. Who knows, maybe next time we meet I’ll have another topic in mind. Till then. TTYL.

A Pair Of Star-Cross’d Lovers

Previously in my blog I commented about Darcy’s denial to dance with Elizabeth, by telling her: “she is tolerable; but not handsome enough to tempt me” (7). Now, I face a completely different situation, which in fact was a bit obvious since he said that phrase. Stop. What’s the phrase? Oh yes: What goes around, comes around. I guess. Or, the heart’s reasons are unknown to reason itself, or something like that. Fast forward. Darcy finally proposes to Elizabeth. Yeah, he was running late since in Austenworld, the best thing a man can do is propose. And the best thing a girl can do is, yes you got it: reject the proposal. Stop: “In vain I have struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you (Austen 142). Play. While I read Darcy’s proposal to Elizabeth a song was sounding in my head…

You know that I was hoping,
That I could leave this star-crossed world behind
But when they cut me open,
I guess I changed my mind.
…
That was the turning point…

(Spaceman, The Killers)

Nice song, by the way. Stop. Rewind… That I could leave this star-crossed world behind… Star crossed. Those words sound familiar. They are indeed familiar, I heard my head telling me. Really? From whe… Rewind. Rewind. Rewind. Gotcha: “From forth the fatal loins of these two foes, a pair of star-cross’d lovers, take their life.” Stop. Romeo and Juliet. My mind plays me games. Why would such line appear from oblivion into this Word document? Lets see. Star-cross’d lovers. Fast forward. Relationship thwarted by outside forces. Stop. The pairing of the couple is doomed from the start. Rewind. Romeo and Juliet’s love was indeed doomed since the very beginning. Then does this apply to Pride and Prejudice? Stop.

That was the turning point… To me, this is actually a turning point for many reasons. Play.

1. Darcy’s prejudice finally falls in love with Elizabeth. This instantly refers to the dichotomy dictated by the title between both terms: pride and prejudice. While Darcy’s prejudice towards Elizabeth fades, Elizabeth’s pride grows. This leads her to reject his proposal.

2. Since the beginning of the story, the reader makes note of Darcy’s relationship with Elizabeth. Their discussions sometimes foreshadow that something will happen between them in the future. This event of rejection fades the reader’s hope of seeing this “pair of star-cross’d lovers” together. Is Austen the outside force that prevents their love?

3. Upon his proposal, Elizabeth’s line of thought divides into two halves: one remembering Darcy’s arrogance, remembering her prejudice towards his snobbishness. And the other one portraying her new vision of Darcy as a man how shows some type of goodness.

Stop. Pride and prejudice. Darcy’s pride of his social class makes his love for Elizabeth impossible to express. Therefore, as long as there is pride and prejudice in the book’s society, there won’t be love. At least real love, since according to Elizabeth’s idealism, she will only marry for love. Fast forward. But even if Darcy loved Elizabeth, “he was not more eloquent on the subject of tenderness than of pride.” Making that love impossible to manifest. Rewind. Then, are they a pair of star-cross’d lovers? Stop.

Portraying A Happy Marriage

According to what I’ve just read, a man proposes to a girl like if he was picking up apples. He doesn’t think about it, or consider it. He just does it. Well, maybe I’m not qualified (yet) to comment about marriage since I’m not even close of taking that decision. But still, it’s far too comical for a man to propose to two women in less than five chapters. Yes, it’s like picking apples: ‘This apple is rotten so I’ll just go and pick up the next one until I find a good, juicy one.’ Apparently Mr. Collins proposes to Elizabeth, and just ten minutes later in my reading schedule he proposes to Charlotte. Compared to this, I see how people are couples for years, and maybe, just maybe, after three or four years they marry. In Austenworld, after ten minutes, Mr. Collins proposes twice.

This portrayal of marriage in Pride and Prejudice seems (yes seems) a bit unrealistic. Charlotte’s marriage to Mr. Collins evokes a dour component to Elizabeth’s love story. Anyways, the sequence of the story almost guarantees the reader that Elizabeth will eventually find romantic happiness. On the other hand, Charlotte’s sudden marriage shows how the book exemplifies a patriarchal, male-dominated society where unmarried women have hopeless futures. According to Austen, Charlotte “accepted solely from the pure and disinterested desire of an establishment” (97). This illustrates Charlotte as this hopeless woman, who marries for money, contrasted to Elizabeth’s idealism. She (Elizabeth) demonstrates her pride by not marrying a fool like Mr. Collins, or a snob like Mr. Darcy. Hence, establishing the dichotomy between idealistic and pragmatic women: those who marry for love, and those who marry for money.

Once Again, Satire

Two more characters Mr.Collins and Wickham. These two bring a different air in Austen’s novel. The former is completely different with the other characters, and the latter is wicked, just as the name implies. Let’s do them one by one. Mr. Collins juxtaposes every single aspect of Austen’s technique so far. By speaking in long and irrational speeches, the character makes him a target of parody, or satire, in other words. For example, upon the appearance of Mr. Collins, the narrator describes him closely, with the use of much descriptive language: “He was a tall, heavy looking young man of five and twenty. His air was grave and stately, and his manner were very formal” (Austen 48). This, hence, contrasts with Austen’s modus operandi of describing the characters through dialogue. Maybe by describing him this way might open the doors to heavier, and more comical, satire.

Besides parodying law (which forces Mr.Bennet to leave all his property to this man instead of his daughters), Austen illustrates Mr.Collins in such way in order to augment her satire upon snobbery. Even though he is not snobbish by nature, like Miss Bingley, he is snobbish due to his labor. He is a man who portrays classism, and in the long run, adopts an image of absurdity, as he strongly believes in his importance due to his patroness is from the nobility. As a result, the reader can only connect Mr.Collins with absurdity, and agree with Mr. Bennet that “his cousin was as absurd” as he had hoped.

On the other hand, the absurdity portrayed by Mr.Collins juxtaposes Wickham’s seemingly charming personality. Austen’s tone employed in his description completely contrasts with the one employed in Mr.Collins’ description: “His appearance was greatly in his favour; he had all the best part of beauty, a fine countenance, a good figure, and very pleasing address” (Austen 54). His superficial appeal might indicate that his inner personality is quite mysterious. And even if he is able to charm Elizabeth, he causes certain distrust in Darcy. With the appearance of Wickham, the novel enhances the main terms implied by the title: pride and prejudice. On one side, we have Darcy, whose pride is evident. And on the other side, we have Elizabeth, whose blind trust in Wickham’s stories shows her prejudice in the novel. This juxtaposition between the effects of the characters in the novels, will, little by little, illustrate the meaning of the superficially simple title: Pride and Prejudice.

Love Anagnorisis

From: Fitzwilliam Darcy (fwdarcy@gmail.com)
Status: Opened
Subject: Help!

Hey man,
How are things going? Didn’t heard back from you after you told me you where starting Hamlet. How was it? Anyways, I’m writing you to tell you something quite odd. Remember Elizabeth? The girl I told you was attractive but so poor it was impossible to have a shot with her? Well, I think I may be falling for her, man. I don’t know, I think I love her. I just realized that she is the woman I want by my side. ‘[She has] been at Netherfield long enough. She attract[s] me more than [I] liked […] [I] wisely resolved to be particularly careful that no sign of admiration should now escape [me], nothing that could elevate her with the hope if influencing [my] felicity’ (44-45). In conclusion, I just realized I’m in love with her. Hope to hear from you soon!

Regards,
Darcy

El Lector Hembra

Dear blog,

This novel has too many characters thus far. About ten, more or less? Hopefully there won’t be too many more because then, I will start confounding them. Let’s see. Mr. Bingley likes Jane, Elizabeth hates Darcy, Charlotte is quite introspective with her observation about Jane, and I’m reading a chick flick. Tough bananas. Anyways, many of the aspects included within these chapters, give clues about the future of the novel. Well, I find it really hard to foreshadow what might happen if it wasn’t thanks to Austen’s deliberate clues. Thank you, Jane! Jane Austen, not Jane Bennet. As I was saying, foreshadowing happens when Charlotte tells Jane (Bennet not Austen) that “If a woman conceals her affection with the same skill from the object of it, she may lose the opportunity of fixing him; and it will then be but poor consolation to believe the world equally in the dark” (Austen 15). Will Mr. Bingley’s love for Jane fade?

Please help me. I don’t know what else to write about. I don’t like chick flicks. I want something else, something that involves deeper drama. I’ve had enough by watching chick flick movies with my girlfriends. Before, reading was my refuge from chick flicks, but now, I’m reading chick flicks! So, what can I write about? Something interesting, that reflects my understanding of the novel…

Something interesting: it’s language. Austen is able to portray an entire character without the use of many descriptive words. To my interest, the constant discussions between Darcy and Elizabeth portray this use of language. Even though the narrator never talks about their personalities, the reader knows them perfectly. For example:

“I am no longer surprised at your knowing only six accomplished women. I rather wonder now at your knowing any.”
“Are you so severe upon your own sex as to doubt the possibility of all this?”
“I never saw such a woman. I never saw such capacity, and taste, and application, and elegance, as you describe, united.” (Austen 29).

This excerpt from their dialogue reflects both characters’ personalities. It portrays Darcy as being far too demanding, while showing that he sees Elizabeth as being inferior to him. This traits that illustrate the novel’s characters, in the long run, reflect the novel’s thematic: love, social classism, and status.

Sincerely,

El Lector Hembra

Judge Them By Their Words

“I believe that the most important aspect of Pride and Prejudice is the dialogue. The first chapters are mostly dialogue, and there’s little description to each character. Therefore, we as readers perceive the character’s attitudes and personalities through their expressions rather than the narrator’s description,” said Jose Maria.

“I agree,” I said, “my first impressions of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet are caused by their dialogue. Towards the end of chapter 1, the narrator describes Mr. Bennet as being ‘so odd a mixture of quick parts, sarcastic, humour, reserve, and caprice’ (Austen 3) and Mrs. Bennet as “a woman of mean understanding, little information, and uncertain temper” (Austen 3). Those words, in fact, are just confirmations of my inferring.”

“Yes, for example, just as Darcy says ‘she is tolerable; but not handsome enough to tempt me’(Austen 7) I can picture an entire image of his personality,” Jose Maria said. “You can smell his superficial personality from those words. It’s not just a passing comment. It reflects his ‘prejudice’ towards women from lower social classes, and the rudeness present in his personality. Don’t you think so?”

“Indeed, thank you for that idea. I’m sure Mr. Tangen will like my blogs next week when he reads them,” and as I said that, we shook hands and I went back to writing my next blog entry.

Foils And Foils

With all due respect to the Spanish Department, I am about to mention a characteristic of Don Quixote in my AP English Literature blog entry. Ooh, devious. I hope they don’t read it, because then, I might be in big trouble…

Note from the Spanish Department:
Durante el transcurso del día de ayer, una fuente confiable nos informó que uno de los estudiantes del profesor Jesse Tangen-Mills violó el estatuto que separa al departamento de Literatura Hispanoamericana del departamento de Inglés. Éste utilizo referencias al texto Don Quijote de La Mancha en uno de sus trabajos para la clase de AP Literature & Composition. Esperamos que esta aberración no vuelva a repetirse.

Anyways, ouch, in Cervantes’ Don Quixote, the absentminded and unrealistic Don Quixote is contrasted with realistic Sancho Panza, without noting that the latter is fat in contrast to the prior’s thin contexture. This drastic difference between the two makes Sancho one of the most prominent foils in literature. As I write this, my memory dates me back to one of the first lessons in Pre AP ELA 9th Grade:

September 2, 2008
Topic: The Story of Him Who Knew
Aim: Who is Enkidu?
Does Gilgamesh have a foil?
WRITE NOW
Copy the following definitions
Hamartia: A tragic flaw i.e, Achilles’ heel
A negative character trait that leads to a character’s demise
Foil: Contrasts with the protagonists attributes i.e, Don Quijote’s foil is Sancho Panza.

A foil. And now I’m back from my walk down the memory lane, back to reading Hamlet, back to thinking how to make this blog entry more interesting to read. Is there anything about Hamlet that there hasn’t been said? Let’s give it a try.

I think of Fortinbras as being Hamlet’s foil. His minor role is the first difference with Hamlet, who enhances the audience into deep and long soliloquies. Fortinbras’ appearance at the end of the play is deliberate, not accidental, due to the fact he is determined to avenge his father’s slain (by King Hamlet prior to the play). Hence, Hamlet’s uncertainty and indecisiveness is clearly contrasted with Fortinbras’ impetuous action. Consequently, the appearance of Fortinbras acts as a deus ex machina due to three reasons:

1. Marcellus’ statement in Act I, scene iv: “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark” (100), and the image of the Gertrude, Claudius, Laertes, and Hamlet laid dead upon the appearance of Fortinbras lead the audience to believe that Fortinbras will eventually cure Denmark’s disease.

2. Hamlet’s lines, “There’s a divinity that shapes our ends” (V,ii,11) and “the rest is silence” (V,ii,395) might refer to the ending of the play itself. The first one implying that the end of the play will be wrought by the appearance of a God-like figure (by definition, dues ex machina is “god out of a machine”), which in this case is Fortinbras. Meanwhile, the second line might refer to silence as a metaphor of peace or death, which hence alludes to the fact that Denmark will, as the epitaph says, Rest In Peace.

3. Fortinbras’ final lines, also being the play’s final lines, “Such a sight as this / Becomes the field but here shows much amiss / Go, bid the soldiers shoot” (V,ii,447-49) resemble hope in the future, contrasted by the present scene of death, which he compares to a battlefield.

Besides Fortinbras, various other characters also serve as Hamlet’s foils. And a curious coincidence is that all of them appear in the final scene: Horatio, Laertes, and Claudius. I’m not going to talk about the three, you should understand why each one serves as Hamlet’s foil. But fine, choose one, I’ll explain one for you, but later, let me finish my point. As I was saying, these foils appear altogether in the last scene. In addition to that, the main event of this last scene is what? Yes, fencing, and what do we use in fencing? Yes, foils! Wow, now I’m going to be optimistic and assume that Shakespeare did that on purpose. A paronomasia, as we might infer.

And as I promised you a foil, choose one. Horatio? Fine. Let’s see… Horatio, for example, is like Hamlet’s Sancho Panza, where his serenity and sanity is contrasted to Hamlet’s bustle and madness. Also, Horatio’s loyalty to Hamlet is clearly contrasted with Hamlet’s variable state of mind. Besides being the foil, Horatio is an interesting character if we consider one of Hamlet’s last words: “If thou didst ever hold me in thy heart, / Absent thee from felicity awhile / And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain / To tell my story” (V,ii,381-84). Here, its quite amusing how Hamlet refers to death as “felicity”, and hence pleads Horatio to avoid suicide, or death, but instead wait to tell his story. Hamlet’s final wish makes me wonder, can Horatio be interpreted as Shakespeare? Is Shakespeare self-inserting himself in Horatio to tell the story of Hamlet?

***

Oh, one last comment. The death of all the characters, who in some way or another, played with treachery or villainy, and the survival of innocent Horatio and Fortinbras at the end of the play serves as a clear example of poetic justice: a twist of fate in the characters’ ends.