I am still chuckling as I reread the following passage in Letter 81
about the Catholic Church's Oath of excommunication:
" I have been applied to for information as to the oath taken in former
times of Bell, Book, & Candle but have none to give. Perhaps you may be
able to learn something of its origin & meaning at Manydown. Ladies who
read those enormous great stupid thick quarto volumes which one always
sees in the Breakfast parlour there, must be acquainted with everything
in the world."
Upon further research and reflection, I am not sure which is funniest
among the following three aspects of the above:
1. the pitch-perfect mock seriousness of JA's request for information
from CEA, including in particular the absurd equation of the sheer bulk
and size of volumes in the Manydown parlor with the notion of those
volumes containing information about "everything in the world". I would
imagine that JA had enormous difficulty "keeping her countenance" as she
wrote the above-quoted passage. And I just realized, it is in _exactly_
the same vein as the passage in P&P I pointed out recently, where Mr.
Bingley exhibits his own unexpected adept facility with absurdist humor,
delivered with a totally straight face in the parlour at Netherfield, by
explaining his own extreme deference to Darcy's edicts as a logical
consequence of Mr. Darcy's _tallness_!:
"By all means," cried Bingley; "let us hear all the particulars, not
forgetting their comparative height and size; for that will have more
weight in the argument, Miss Bennet, than you may be aware of. I assure
you, that if Darcy were not such a great tall fellow, in comparison with
myself, I should not pay him half so much deference. I declare I do not
know a more awful object than Darcy, on particular occasions, and in
particular places; at his own house especially, and of a Sunday evening,
when he has nothing to do."
OR....
2. the way that the two reputable Austen scholars who have taken notice
in print of the above passage have written about it---absolutely
oblivious to the joking tone of the passage, but instead taking it
completely seriously:
_
_Laura Mooneyham White: JA’s Anglicanism:
p. 119: “Writing in 1813 to Cassandra, who was visiting the Bigg-Withers
at Manydown, she gives the news that she has been "applied to for
information as to the Oath taken in former times of /Bell Book/&
/Candle/— but have none to give. “ Her reluctance seems mostly to follow
from a dislike of long scholarly reading (note the four adjectives in a
row she deploys against quartos—“enormous great stupid thick”) and less
from lack of interest in the Church…The phrase "bb&c" refers to the most
extreme act of excommunication performed in the Catholic Church, the
rite of anathema, a rite not much practiced since the Middle Ages.”
Ian Littlewood, Critical Assessments:
p.180: “Austen knew nothing, when applied to, of a medieval curse and
had little interest in pursuing the matter herself….She would rather
encounter play of mind than store information for its own sake.
Undeniably, too, her interest in the past was severely limited…”
OR...
3. the fact that Le Faye has _no_ footnote whatsoever for the above
quoted passage in Letter 81! Is there any clearer indication of her
editorial bias? Isn't it clear that "Bell, Book & Candle" was crying out
for an annotation? But Le Faye is no fool---she realized that JA was
horsing around bigtime in a way that, if described for what it was,
would strike some modern readers as sacrilegious---Jane Austen joking
about excommunication? Horrors! ---so she took the path of least
resistance, and just ignored it entirely (and I just double checked---it
was ignored in the new 4th edition, too!).
In the light of the above, is it any wonder that profound misconceptions
about Jane Austen's religiosity continue to widely prevail? It required
the stubborn persistence of a outlier/skeptic such as myself to notice,
and then bring to the attention of other Janeites, the significance of a
passage which is utterly irreconcilable with the notion of JA as a
pious, modest, serious High Anglican.
And finally, it occurred to me as I was writing this message that I have
one additional bit of evidence to support my claim that JA was joking
around about excommunication, and it is in the following passage earlier
in Letter 81:
"While I think of it, give my love to Alethea (Alethea first mind, she
is Mistress) & Mrs Heathcote & kind remembrances to Miss Charlotte
Williams. Only think of your having at last the honour of seeing that
wonder of wonders, her elder sister! We are very sorry for what you tell
us of Deane. If Mrs Heathcote does not marry & comfort him now I shall
think she is a Maria & has no heart. Really, either she or Alethea must
marry him, or where he is to look for happiness?"
JA is of course referring to two of the Bigg sisters, the unmarried
Alethea and the widowed Elizabeth, and to John Harwood VII, the poor guy
whose life was ruined in 1813 by the death of his father leaving
crushing debts to be paid off by his eldest son, that we heard about in
earlier letters! John Harwood VII had been a suitor for the hand of the
widowed Elizabeth Bigg, until his financial debacle in 1813 rendered (so
we are all told) that marriage impossible.
But....does any one of you _really_ believe that JA was being serious
when she writes that if Elizabeth does not marry John Harwood VII, then
_Alethea_ should marry him instead? Are we supposed to think that JA
seriously thought about marriage in this way? Of course not! This is
more horsing around on JA's part, and, again, are we not reminded of an
absurdist passage in Pride & Prejudice, this time out of the mouth of
that master of the put-on, Mr. Bennet:
"You are over-scrupulous, surely. I dare say Mr. Bingley will be very
glad to see you; and I will send a few lines by you to assure him of my
hearty consent to his marrying whichever he chooses of the girls; though
I must throw in a good word for my little Lizzy."
Remember---JA is writing Letter 81 still flushed with the euphoria of
the publication of P&P---so it is no surprise at all that she would
giddily and covertly allude to not one but _two_ absurdist passages in
P&P in Letter 81--and the crowning glory of the in-joke with CEA is the
linkage between the real life _Elizabeth_ Bigg and the fictional
_Elizabeth_ Bennet---aka "my little Lizzy"----and I long ago wondered
whether the fictional name "Bingley" was connected to the real name
"Bigg"! Which also makes me wonder whether there is not some sharp
satire of the ill-fated proposal to JA by the unattractive Harris
Bigg-Wither in the ill-fated proposal to Elizabeth Bennet by the
unattractive Mr. Collins! So it is no surprise at all that the Bigg
family are the "stars" of Letter 81!
And that's what takes us _right_ back to "bell, book, and
candle"---Alethea and Elizabeth Bigg are those very same Manydown ladies
with their "enormous great stupid thick quarto volumes" who supposedly
would have been experts on the Catholic excommunication curse!
In closing, then, one point that has come through clearly to me during
the course of our long group read of JA's letters, is that certain
letters seem to have caught JA in a particularly joking mood, and
therefore are packed with one joking, mock serious passage after
another. And it is clear that Letter 81 is one of those letters!
Cheers, ARNIE
@JaneAustenCode on Twitter
“Jane Austen, Book Owner”
2 weeks ago
No comments:
Post a Comment