As
those who follow this blog know, I just wrote a series of posts about
Shakespeare’s self-intertextual wordplay between Othello, on the one hand, and
Sonnet 116 and the Anglican marriage vows, on the other. I was prompted to do
so after noticing the word “impediment” used twice in a thematically
significant way in Othello. However,
it was only today that it occurred to me to check for usages of “impediment” in
Sense & Sensibility. And why should
that have occurred to me?
Because,
as I wrote up my Shakespearean observations this past week, only six weeks ago,
I wrote a post… http://tinyurl.com/jzehrh5 …about the veiled Austenian allusion
to Shakespeare’s Sonnet 116 (“Let me
not to the marriage of true minds Admit
Impediment. Love is not love Which
alters when it alteration finds”), which Emma Thompson plucked from the
subtext of S&S, and made explicit in her film adaptation of S&S.
To be
more specific, I suggested that Thompson recognized that JA deliberately echoed
the keyword “alters/alteration” from Sonnet 116. As you’ll see, below, it turns
out that Jane Austen left an additional textual hint in S&S pointing not
only to Sonnet 116 and the Anglican wedding vows, but also to Iago’s
match-breaking in Othello, all via
the word “impediment”, in a way that Thompson does not appear to have
recognized.
And
that in turn led me to find and decode JA’s usage of “impediment” in Emma which I’ve hinted at in my Subject
Line, which is so wickedly funny and subversive that I hope you’ll agree that JA’s
imagination sufficed to “remove” all the “impediments” her society placed in
her artistic path.
REMOVING
IMPEDIMENTS TO MARRIAGE IN S&S
First,
in Chapter 25, in Elinor’s throwing cold water on her mother’s enthusiasm for
the elder Dashwood girls accepting Mrs. Jennings’s invitation to stay with her
in London, we find the linked Shakespearean keywords “alteration”, “impediment”
and “removed”, all three in very close textual proximity:
“ "I am delighted with
the plan," [Mrs. Dashwood] cried, "it is exactly what I could wish.
Margaret and I shall be as much benefited by it as yourselves. When you and the
Middletons are gone, we shall go on so quietly and happily together with our
books and our music! You will find Margaret so improved when you come back
again! I have a little plan of ALTERATION for your bedrooms too, which may now
be performed without any inconvenience to any one. It is very right that you should go to town; I would have every
young woman of your condition in life acquainted with the manners and
amusements of London. You will be under the care of a motherly good sort of
woman, of whose kindness to you I can have no doubt. And in all probability you
will see your brother, and whatever may be his faults, or the faults of his
wife, when I consider whose son he is, I cannot bear to have you so wholly
estranged from each other."
"Though with your
usual anxiety for our happiness," said Elinor, "you have been
obviating every IMPEDIMENT to the present scheme which occurred to you, there
is still one objection which, in my opinion, cannot be so easily REMOVED."
Marianne's countenance
sunk.
"And
what," said Mrs. Dashwood, "is my dear prudent Elinor going to
suggest? What formidable obstacle is she now to bring forward? Do let me hear a
word about the expense of it."
"My
objection is this; though I think very well of Mrs. Jennings's heart, she is
not a woman whose society can afford us pleasure, or whose protection will give
us consequence."
"That
is very true," replied her mother, "but of her society, separately
from that of other people, you will scarcely have any thing at all, and you
will almost always appear in public with Lady Middleton."
"If
Elinor is frightened away by her dislike of Mrs. Jennings," said Marianne,
"at least it need not prevent my
accepting her invitation. I have no such scruples, and I am sure I could put up
with every unpleasantness of that kind with very little effort.”
I see
Elinor’s speech as an unwitting ironic allusion to Sonnet 116 and the Anglican
marriage vows – ironic, because Elinor is not playing Cupid here, but,
inadvertently, Iago! Sounds wild? Then consider. At this point in the story, Elinor
knows that the torch Marianne is carrying for Willoughby, and therefore her
wish to see him in London and rekindle their romance, remains brightly lit. Recall
that neither of them is aware in Chapter 25 that Willoughby has already moved
on to the heiress Miss Grey, whom they (and we) won’t hear about till Chapter
30.
And
yet, Elinor, not once, but twice in Chapter 25, does her very best to put the
kibosh on the proposed trip by her and Marianne to London---first by taking it solely
upon herself, without consulting Marianne or their mother, to respond to Mrs.
Jennings that they cannot leave Mrs. Dashwood,. Then, when Mrs. Jennings persists,
and repeats her invitation, and that first objection is quickly disposed of by
Mrs. Dashwood, Elinor does not give up her obstruction, but instead shifts to
another argument, which is that Mrs. Jennings, despite good intentions, would
be an unpleasant and unprotective host. This argument is, upon examination,
transparently lame, in that, as between the two sisters, it would be Marianne,
not Elinor, who would find Mrs. Jennings intolerable as a host, and Marianne
has made it crystal clear that the contrary is the case.
Although
a benign explanation of all this would be that Elinor wishes to spare Marianne
a reopening of raw emotional wounds vis a vis Willoughby, one begins to suspect
that what Elinor is really afraid of, in the aftermath of her learning about
Edward’s secret engagement to Lucy, is not that Marianne will get her heart
re-broken, but that Marianne will reconnect with Willoughby, and Elinor will then
be left to wither on the proverbial vine alone with her mother and Margaret. In
short, I believe JA means for us to suspect that Elinor is unaware of her own
subconscious, but powerful, jealousy of Marianne!
And so
in that regard, there is the unwitting irony of Elinor using verbiage, in that
short speech in Chapter 25, associated with the marriage of true minds theme in
Sonnet 116, and with the Anglican wedding vows echoed in Sonnet 116. There is
irony because, instead of taking on the happy role of maid of honor, Elinor instead
has assumed on the role of the curmudgeon in the pew who does the unthinkable-
i.e., taking the rhetorical prompt of the presiding clergyman seriously, and
voicing one objection after another to the marriage she is supposed to be
celebrating! In other words, it is Elinor who is the “impediment” to the
marriage of true minds that Marianne still believes, at that moment, she can
have with Willoughby.
And,
to reinforce this subversive reading, I believe JA also hinted to her readers
who were as deeply steeped in Shakespeare as JA was, that Elinor was even going
so far as unwittingly echoing the speech early in Othello which I wrote about in my post a few days ago, when Iago cynically
fans the flames of Roderigo’s gold-digging ambition to marry Desdemona:
“Sir, [Cassio] is rash and very sudden in choler,
and haply may strike at you: provoke him, that he may; for even out of that
will I cause these of Cyprus to mutiny; whose qualification shall come into no
true
taste again but by the displanting of Cassio. So shall you have a shorter journey to your desires by the means I shall then have to prefer them; and the IMPEDIMENT most profitably REMOVED, without the which there were no expectation of our prosperity.
taste again but by the displanting of Cassio. So shall you have a shorter journey to your desires by the means I shall then have to prefer them; and the IMPEDIMENT most profitably REMOVED, without the which there were no expectation of our prosperity.
There
you have that same “impediment/removed” verbiage as we find in Elinor’s short
speech, both referring to the removal of an impediment to a marital match. But Iago
is insincere and depraved in egging Roderigo on, in referring to Cassio and
Othello as the two-headed impediment to Roderigo’s hoped-for marriage to
Desdemona, because the “removal” Iago lobbies for is the death of Othello.
Whereas
Elinor is not Machiavellian, just utterly clueless about her own motivations. Which fits with JA writing comedy rather than
tragedy. In this reading, Elinor is a comic Iago, unwittingly scheming to
prevent her sister from marrying Willoughby, the man whom Marianne (and maybe
also Elinor?) loves.
Which
brings me to the second half of this post, in which I will discuss the other passage in JA’s novels where
“removal” of an “impediment” to marriage is before the reader.
REMOVING
AN IMPEDIMENT TO MARRIAGE IN EMMA:
The
following (edited) passage in Chapter 53 of Emma
is all about the formidable “impediment
to the marriage of true minds” that faces Knightley and Emma after they become
quasi-secretly engaged—of course I am referring to……poor Mr. Woodhouse!
“As
soon as Mrs. Weston was sufficiently recovered to admit Mr. Woodhouse's visits,
Emma having it in view that her gentle reasonings should be employed in the
cause, resolved first to announce it at home, and then at Randalls.—But how to
break it to her father at last!—She had bound herself to do it, in such an hour
of Mr. Knightley's absence, or when it came to the point her heart would have
failed her, and she must have put it off; but Mr. Knightley was to come at such
a time, and follow up the beginning she was to make.—She was forced to speak,
and to speak cheerfully too.,,,.
Poor
man!—it was at first a considerable shock to him, and he tried earnestly to
dissuade her from it. She was reminded, more than once, of having always said
she would never marry, and assured that it would be a great deal better for her
to remain single; and told of poor Isabella, and poor Miss Taylor.—But it would
not do. Emma hung about him affectionately, and smiled, and said it must be so;
and that he must not class her with Isabella and Mrs. Weston, whose marriages
taking them from Hartfield, had, indeed, made a melancholy change: but she was
not going from Hartfield; she should be always there; she was introducing no
change in their numbers or their comforts but for the better; and she was very
sure that he would be a great deal the happier for having Mr. Knightley always
at hand, when he were once got used to the idea.—Did he not love Mr. Knightley
very much?—He would not deny that he did, she was sure.—Whom did he ever want
to consult on business but Mr. Knightley?—Who was so useful to him, who so
ready to write his letters, who so glad to assist him?—Who so cheerful, so
attentive, so attached to him?—Would not he like to have him always on the
spot?—Yes. That was all very true. Mr. Knightley could not be there too often;
he should be glad to see him every day;—but they did see him every day as it
was.—Why could not they go on as they had done?”
So
far, then, Mr. Woodhouse sounds alarmingly like Elinor: both give one reason
after another in objection to the marriage of a close relative. Let’s go on:
“Mr.
Woodhouse could not be soon reconciled; but the worst was overcome, the idea
was given; time and continual repetition must do the rest.—To Emma's entreaties
and assurances succeeded Mr. Knightley's, whose fond praise of her gave the
subject even a kind of welcome; and he was soon used to be talked to by each,
on every fair occasion.—They had all the assistance which Isabella could give,
by letters of the strongest approbation; and Mrs. Weston was ready, on the
first meeting, to consider the subject in the most serviceable light—first, as
a settled, and, secondly, as a good one—well aware of the nearly equal
importance of the two recommendations to Mr. Woodhouse's mind.—It was agreed
upon, as what was to be; and every body by whom he was used to be guided
assuring him that it would be for his happiness; and having some feelings
himself which almost admitted it, he began to think that some time or other—in
another year or two, perhaps—it might not be so very bad if the marriage did
take place.”
And
only after all stops are pulled out do Knightley and Emma even induce Mr.
Woodhouse to agree that it could happen in a year or two.
And
then, a paragraph later, we reach Jane Austen’s Shakespearean punch line:
“…And
who but Mr. Knightley could know and bear with Mr. Woodhouse, so as to make
such an arrangement desirable!—The difficulty of DISPOSING OF POOR MR.
WOODHOUSE had been always felt in her husband's plans and her own, for a
marriage between Frank and Emma. How to settle the claims of Enscombe and
Hartfield had been a continual IMPEDIMENT —less acknowledged by Mr. Weston than
by herself—but even he had never been able to finish the subject better than by
saying—"Those matters will take care of themselves; the young people will
find a way." But here there was nothing to be shifted off in a wild
speculation on the future. It was all right, all open, all equal. No sacrifice
on any side worth the name. It was a union of the highest promise of felicity
in itself, and without one real, rational difficulty to oppose or delay it.”
At
first, as I read this passage, I thought it was only another “impediment” winking
at Sonnet 116. But then, as I reread the words “The difficulty of disposing of
poor Mr. Woodhouse had been always felt in her husband’s plans and her own, for
a marriage between Frank and Emma,” I suddenly realized what Jane Austen, that
wicked satirist, was really winking at---“disposing of” being code for “killing”!
And
that made me LOL, as I realized that this passage is the bookend to the subtext
eight chapters earlier in Chapter 45, that Leland Monk first discovered WAY
back in 1990, and which I first learned of in early 2005 from a passing comment
in Janeites: the notion that when we read that “a sudden seizure of a different
nature from any thing foreboded by her general state, had carried her off after
a short struggle. The great Mrs. Churchill was no more”, this is Jane Austen’s
wickedly clever code for “Frank
Churchill murdered his aunt, Mrs. Churchill, in order to remove the single, major
impediment between him and the financial independence that would allow him to
marry the penniless Jane Fairfax.”
Now I
see that plotting to “dispose of” uncooperative elderly “impediments” to
marriage is a Weston family predilection----the only difference being,
apparently, that Mr. Weston merely planned a “disposition” of Mr. Woodhouse,
which turned out to be unnecessary when Frank and Emma ceased to be “an item”,
whereas Frank, under the exigencies of the moment, actually “removed” the “impediment”
that was Mrs. Churchill, forever.
Think
I’ve really gone too far this time, imagining a dark meaning of “dispose of”
that Jane Austen could never have intended? Well, what if I tell you that I
have found the literary source where Jane Austen got the idea to use “dispose
of” to refer to “murder”?
Here’s
a giant hint, see if you can guess which speech it is:
I’m
thinking of a speech in the first scene of a Shakespeare play, spoken by a rich,
cruel, selfish widower father who unashamedly asserts his right to stymie his
daughter’s desire to marry the young man she loves, and who loves her; and then,
immediately afterward, there is a speech spoken by that very same young man to
the rich man’s daughter, in which that young man bemoans their dim marital prospects
with this famous line: “The course of true love never did run
smooth” ----which just happens to be a line which every Janeite knows which is
quoted by Emma to Harriet!
So,
what play, who is the father, and who are the lovers?
Of
course, every Bardolater, and many Janeites, know that I am talking about A Midsummer Night’s Dream, in which Egeus
is the father, Hermia is the daughter, and Lysander is the lover. And here’s
the speech—please pay particular attention to Egeus’s final four lines:
Full
of vexation come I, with complaint
Against my child, my daughter Hermia.
Stand forth, Demetrius. My noble lord,
This man hath my consent to marry her.
Stand forth, Lysander: and my gracious duke,
This man hath bewitch'd the bosom of my child;
Thou, thou, Lysander, thou hast given her rhymes,
And interchanged love-tokens with my child:
Thou hast by moonlight at her window sung,
With feigning voice verses of feigning love,
And stolen the impression of her fantasy
With bracelets of thy hair, rings, gawds, conceits,
Knacks, trifles, nosegays, sweetmeats, messengers
Of strong prevailment in unharden'd youth:
With cunning hast thou filch'd my daughter's heart,
Turn'd her obedience, which is due to me,
To stubborn harshness: and, my gracious duke,
Be it so she; will not here before your grace
Consent to marry with Demetrius,
I beg the ancient privilege of Athens,
As she is mine, I may dispose of her:
Which shall be either to this gentleman
Or to her death, according to our law
Immediately provided in that case.
Against my child, my daughter Hermia.
Stand forth, Demetrius. My noble lord,
This man hath my consent to marry her.
Stand forth, Lysander: and my gracious duke,
This man hath bewitch'd the bosom of my child;
Thou, thou, Lysander, thou hast given her rhymes,
And interchanged love-tokens with my child:
Thou hast by moonlight at her window sung,
With feigning voice verses of feigning love,
And stolen the impression of her fantasy
With bracelets of thy hair, rings, gawds, conceits,
Knacks, trifles, nosegays, sweetmeats, messengers
Of strong prevailment in unharden'd youth:
With cunning hast thou filch'd my daughter's heart,
Turn'd her obedience, which is due to me,
To stubborn harshness: and, my gracious duke,
Be it so she; will not here before your grace
Consent to marry with Demetrius,
I beg the ancient privilege of Athens,
As she is mine, I may dispose of her:
Which shall be either to this gentleman
Or to her death, according to our law
Immediately provided in that case.
“As
she is mine, I may DISPOSE OF HER…either to this gentleman or TO HER DEATH….”
Which
casts a pretty dark light on “disposing of poor Mr. Woodhouse”, doesn’t it? And it also makes us wonder what Mr. Weston
meant by:
“Those
matters will take care of themselves; the young people will find a way." ---Frank
certainly “finds a way” to do away with Mrs. Churchill.
“But
here there was nothing to be shifted off in a wild speculation on the future.”
--- In other words, don’t leave the future to a game of chance depending on an
older relative to die a natural death.
“It
was all right, all open, all equal. No sacrifice on any side worth the name.”
--- as in a sacrifice of Mr. Woodhouse!
Q.E.D.
Cheers,
ARNIE
@JaneAustenCode
on Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment