Oh, SHUT UP! Jane Austen didn’t mean THAT by her ”particulars of RIGHT HAND”……did she?

Near the end of my previous post (about Jane Austen’s “courtship” charade in Emma  as a complex veiled allusion to Charles Lamb’s “Triumph of the Whale”), my chain of textual inferences led me to assert that Jane Austen, in Emma, also specifically alluded to the stanza in Lamb’s poem about the Prince of Whales’s fawning courtiers, by broadly hinting at a coercive sexual relationship between the “King” of Highbury, Mr. Knightley, and his chief “courtier” or “pet”, the foppish “beau” Mr. Elton. I claimed that Jane Austen conveyed this via Mrs. Elton’s boasting about her caro sposo, which takes on shocking new meaning when read from a sexually suspicious perspective:   

"He promised TO COME to me as soon as he could DISENGAGE HIMSELF from Knightley; but he and Knightley are SHUT UP TOGETHER in DEEP CONSULTATION.—Mr. E. is Knightley's RIGHT HAND."

I count five sexual winks in that one sentence (which I’ve put in ALL CAPS), but my favorite is the part about Elton being Knightley’s “right hand”—it’s really the epitome of a sophisticated double entendre, because the sexual meaning is well hidden, and yet, once you become aware of it and you think about it, you realize that it’s very vulgar and even more clever, as you imagine the physicality of the scene. I.e., it’s a thinking person’s sexual pun! And I, for one, will never again be able to read about a “right hand man” to a man of power without thinking about Elton vis a vis Knightley.

I am sure everyone reading this, whether they buy this interpretation or not, can now understand the point of my Subject Line, which is the reaction I playfully predicted a fair percentage of readers would have. After all, the Jane Austen whom most Janeites know and love would never pack five winks at sexual intercourse between two men into a single short speech…..or would she?

I decided to investigate further, thinking that if I am correct, then this would not be the only passage in JA’s novels that fits this particular suggestive pattern. And so, after I wrote that post, I searched Jane Austen’s novels and immediately found the following telltale passage in Mansfield Park, Chapter 31, which I found strikingly and disturbingly resonant with my reading of Mr. Knightley as exploiting his position of great power as the grantor of livings to vicars in the parish, by extorting sexual favors from Mr. Elton in exchange for the appointment to such a valuable living.

The scene in MP occurs at the moment when Fanny is being coerced into sitting and listening to Henry Crawford court her, right after she has read a letter from Mary Crawford congratulating Fanny on Henry’s desire to marry her:

“[Fanny] was distressed whenever Mr. Crawford spoke to her, and he spoke to her much too often; and she was afraid there was a something in his voice and manner in addressing her very different from what they were when he talked to the others. Her comfort in that day’s dinner was quite destroyed: she could hardly eat anything; and when Sir Thomas good–humouredly observed that joy had taken away her appetite, she was ready to sink with shame, from the dread of Mr. Crawford’s interpretation; for though nothing could have tempted her to turn her eyes to the RIGHT HAND, where he sat, she felt that his were immediately directed towards her.

She was more silent than ever. She would hardly join even when William was the subject, for HIS COMMISSION CAME ALL FROM THE RIGHT HAND too, and THERE WAS PAIN IN THE CONNEXION.”

The parallel to Knightley and Elton may not be immediately apparent until you read the above passage through the lens of what I’ve previously claimed about the real message Mary Crawford is trying to communicate, in code, to Fanny, about Henry’s having shepherded William to a naval promotion, via Mary’s (in)famous pun about “rears and vices”. Here’s the relevant portion of my recent JASNA AGM presentation on this very point:

“Note what is going on immediately before Mary utters her infamous pun–Mary speaks specifically  about the possibility of William’s early naval promotion. Since Mansfield Park is a place where inconvenient truth (like Sir Thomas’s slave plantation in Antigua) is not spoken aloud, Mary the whistleblower is trying to warn Fanny--in code that Fanny, alas, does not understand---that Fanny’s beloved brother William will be forced to pay a VERY dear “price” for his promotion in the navy—Uncle Crawford and/or some other members of his Danteesque circle of admirals will wish to use William “very ill” indeed. “

What I hadn’t noticed before today, however, which greatly bolsters my claim about Mary’s coded warning, is that when Henry deliberately turns the conversation to William’s commission in Chapter 31 (25 chapters and 6 months after Mary’s “rears and vices” warning), Fanny seems to have gotten Mary’s coded message. This is why we get that same sexual double meaning of “right hand” in Fanny’s panicky thoughts. On the surface, Fanny is reminded that William’s commission came via the efforts of Henry Crawford, seated to her right, and that will only put her under more pressure to show him some gratitude by accepting his proposal; but under the surface, it’s all of that and even worse, because Henry has just reminded Fanny, in code, that William’s commission came from William’s having been coerced to be the sexual equivalent of Henry’s “right hand”. So it’s no surprise that we then read that Fanny thinks that  “there was pain in the connexion”—this can mean that Fanny feels emotional pain at being reminded of the debt owing to Henry for his intercession on William’s behalf, or it can also mean that William himself suffered physical pain from the physical “connexion” with Henry, which is a close analogue of Elton needing to “disengage himself from Knightley” after “deep consultation”, before he could “come to” his wife. Henry is the kind of degenerate sexual pervert, who would deliberately provoke Fanny to panic in this way, because it would turn him on. This is the darkest of black humor about painful coerced sex, as only Jane Austen could write it in her rapier sharp wit and authorial tact.

And Knightley having been “SHUT UP together in deep consultation” with Elton, reminded me of what I had noticed in 2011, a key phrase that was a gold mine of sexual innuendo throughout JA’s novels, a keyword I snuck into my Subject line---“shut up”! You may be shocked to see how well that sort of interpretation of “shut up” fits a variety of passages from all of JA’s novels. Here are the most obvious ones:

In NA, Chapter 23, we have Catherine’s Gothic imaginings of Mrs. Tilney being “shut up” as JA’s code for garden-variety marital heterosexual sex as a form of Gothic imprisonment of a wife, motivated by the husband’s jealousy or wanton cruelty, in no small part because of the risk that the outcome would be serial pregnancy leading to eventual death in childbirth:

“There must be some DEEPER CAUSE: something was to be done which could be done ONLY WHILE THE HOUSEHOLD SLEPT; and the probability that Mrs. Tilney yet lived, SHUT UP FOR CAUSES UNKNOWN, and RECEIVING FROM the pitiless hands of HER HUSBAND A NIGHTLY SUPPLY of COARSE FOOD, was the conclusion which necessarily followed. Shocking as was the idea, it was at least better than a death unfairly hastened, as, in the natural course of things, she must ere long be released. The suddenness of her reputed illness, the absence of her daughter, and probably of her other children, at the time—all favoured the supposition of her imprisonment. Its origin—jealousy perhaps, or wanton cruelty—was yet to be unravelled.”

In S&S Chapter 38, Anne Steele sounds a lot like Fanny Hill getting sexually stimulated watching live sex through a peep hole, when Anne describes sister Lucy’s tete-a-tete with Edward:

"No, indeed, not us. La! Miss Dashwood, do you think people MAKE LOVE WHEN ANY BODY ELSE IS BY? OH, FOR SHAME!—To be sure you must know better than that. (Laughing affectedly.)—No, no; they [Edward and Lucy] were SHUT UP in the drawing-room together, and all I heard was only by listening at the door."

In P&P Chapter 52, Mrs. Gardiner writes to Eliza, and the reader already aware of Knightley and Elton in Emma and Henry and William in MP will wonder what Darcy and Mr. Gardiner have been doing for several hours, before “IT was all over”:

"On the very day of my coming home from Longbourn, your uncle had a most unexpected visitor. Mr. Darcy called, and was SHUT UP WITH HIM SEVERAL HOURS. It was ALL OVER before I arrived; so my curiosity was not so dreadfully racked as yours seems to have been. HE CAME to tell Mr. Gardiner that he had found out where your sister and Mr. Wickham were…

In MP Chapter 47, we may well wonder what was really going on behind closed doors such that Susan was left on her own so much after her arrival at Mansfield Park, such that Edmund was burying and exerting for Tom’s relief, and Fanny was returning to every former office with Lady Bertram with more than former zeal:

“[Susan] was now left a good deal to herself, to get acquainted with the house and grounds as she could, and spent her days very happily in so doing, while those who might otherwise have attended to her were SHUT UP, or wholly occupied each with the person quite dependent on them, at this time, for everything like comfort; Edmund trying to BURY HIS own feelings in EXERTIONS for the relief of his brother's, and Fanny devoted to her aunt Bertram, returning to EVERY FORMER OFFICE with more than former ZEAL, and thinking she could never do enough for one who seemed so much to want her...”

But Mrs. Elton is the undisputed Queen of the sexual “shut up” in JA’s fiction, as JA gives her three such passages (two in Chapter 32 & one in Chapter 42) in addition to the one in Chapter 52 (describing Elton with Knightley), in all of which Mrs. Elton has also used the phrase “shut up” in sexually suggestive ways. The first uses is a veiled critique of masturbation, the second uses the metaphor of ‘music” as sex to suggest a wives’ lesbian club: and the third almost goes overboard with the double entendre of coming on a donkey in the repartee between Knightley and Mrs. E:

“…Many a time has Selina said, when she has been going to Bristol, 'I really cannot get this girl to move from the house. I absolutely must go in by myself, though I hate being STUCK UP in the barouche-landau without a companion; but Augusta, I believe, with her own good will, would never stir beyond the park paling.' Many a time she has said so; and yet I am no advocate for entire seclusion. I think, on the contrary, when people SHUT THEMSELVES UP entirely from society, it is a very bad thing; and that it is much more advisable to mix in the world in a proper degree, without living in it either too much or too little.”

"No, indeed, I have no doubts at all on that head. I am delighted to find myself in such a circle. I hope we shall have MANY SWEET LITTLE CONCERTS TOGETHER. I think, Miss Woodhouse, you and I must establish A MUSICAL CLUB, and have regular weekly meetings at your house, or ours. Will not it be a good plan? If we exert ourselves, I think we shall not be long in want of allies. Something of that nature would be particularly desirable for me, as an inducement to keep me in practice; for married women, you know—there is a sad story against them, in general. They are but too apt to give up music."

"But you, who are so extremely fond of it—there can be no danger, surely?"

"I should hope not; but really when I look around among my acquaintance, I tremble. Selina has entirely given up music—never touches the instrument—though she played sweetly. And the same may be said of Mrs. Jeffereys—Clara Partridge, that was—and of the two Milmans, now Mrs. Bird and Mrs. James Cooper; and of more than I can enumerate. Upon my word it is enough to put one in a fright. I used to be quite angry with Selina; but really I begin now to comprehend that a married woman has many things to call her attention. I believe I was half an hour this morning SHUT UP WITH MY HOUSEKEEPER."

"But every thing of that kind," said Emma, "will soon be in so regular a train—"

"Well," said Mrs. Elton, laughing, "we shall see."

Emma, finding her so determined upon neglecting her music, had nothing more to say.”

"I wish we had a donkey. The thing would be for us all to COME ON DONKEYS, Jane, Miss Bates, and me—and my caro sposo walking by. I really must talk to him about purchasing a donkey. In a COUNTRY life I conceive it to be a sort of necessary; for, let a woman have ever so many resources, it is not possible for her to be always SHUT UP at home;—and very long walks, you know—IN SUMMER THERE IS DUST, AND IN WINTER THERE IS DIRT."

"You will not find either, between Donwell and Highbury. Donwell Lane is never dusty, and now it is perfectly dry. COME ON A DONKEY, however, if you prefer it. YOU CAN BORROW MRS. COLE's. I would wish every thing to be as much TO YOUR TASTE as possible."

"That I am sure you would. Indeed I do you justice, my good friend. Under that peculiar sort of dry, blunt manner, I know you have the warmest heart. As I tell Mr. E., you are a thorough humourist.—Yes, believe me, Knightley, I am fully sensible of your attention to me in THE WHOLE of this scheme. You have hit upon the very thing TO PLEASE ME."

In one of the cancelled chapters of Persuasion, we find a passage describing Mrs. Croft shut up with her Mantuamaker, which reminds us of both of Lady Bertram and her sexual “carpet-making” that I posted about last week, but also of Darcy being “shut up” with Mr. Gardiner (quoted above), with “IT” being over soon after quite a long private session alone:

“Oh! yes, quite alone ‐ Nobody by but her Mantuamaker with her, & they have been SHUT UP TOGETHER this half hour, so IT MUST BE OVER SOON."

I suggest that it is beyond the realm of reasonable possibility that all these passages should by random chance contain very similar verbiage that lends itself so readily to sexual interpretations.

And perhaps the most remarkable (and poignant) usages of “shut up” are from JA’s own real-life letters:

First this 12/9/1808 from JA in Southampton to CEA at Godmersham, not long before their big move to Chawton Cottage:

"I have but one thing more to tell you. Mrs. Hill called on my mother yesterday while we were gone to Chiswell, and in the course of the visit asked her whether she knew anything of a clergyman's family of the name of Alford, who had resided in our part of Hampshire. Mrs. Hill had been applied to as likely to give some information of them on account of their probable vicinity to Dr. Hill's living, by a lady, or for a lady, who had known Mrs. and the two Miss Alfords in Bath, whither they had removed, it seems, from Hampshire, and who now wishes to convey to the Miss Alfords SOME WORK OR TRIMMING which she has been doing for them; but the mother and daughters have left Bath, and the lady cannot learn where they are gone to. While my mother gave us the account, the probability of its being ourselves occurred to us, and it had previously struck herself . . . what makes it more likely, and even indispensably to be us, is that she mentioned Mr. Hammond as now having the living or curacy which the father had had. I cannot think who our kind lady can be, but I dare say WE SHALL NOT LIKE THE WORK.

Distribute the AFFECTIONATE LOVE of a heart not so tired as the RIGHT HAND belonging to it."

Given my recent interpretation of Lady Bertram’s sexual “carpet work”… http://tinyurl.com/kmhng84  ....it makes me think that Jane Austen has written the above passage in deep code, to convey to Cassandra that the unnamed “kind lady” who was looking for Jane had been a “particular friend” of Jane’s in Bath several years earlier, but that JA no longer had any “affectionate love” for her “right hand” to “distribute” to that lady---perhaps because Jane was already looking forward to residing at Chawton Cottage with Martha Lloyd.

And finally, I see the same double entendre in play in the following famous writing advice in JA’s 1814 letter to her writing niece Anna:. “You give too many particulars of right hand & left.”

The two above quoted “right hand” passages in Emma and MP make me think that JA is suggesting to Anna, in code, that when it comes to sexual innuendoes, it is better to not give too many particulars, i.e., not to be too obvious, as JA had been in the “carpet” Sharade she wrote at age 16. We’ll never know if Anna took that advice in Which is the Heroine, because Anna burnt the manuscript which never was published.

Cheers, ARNIE

@JaneAustenCode on Twitter

Revealing the Danteesque, Miltonian & Austenian Triumph of Charles Lamb’s “Prince of Whales”

In my last post, yesterday….http://tinyurl.com/kcqezrp…I reviewed and expanded upon Daniel Pollack-Pelzner’s excellent 2013 article “Jane Austen the Prose Shakespeare” about the significant influence of Charles & Mary Lamb’s 1807 Tales from Shakespeare on Jane Austen’s narrative style (so-called “free indirect discourse”) in her novels.

In particular, I pointed out that Dan’s claim of Lamb’s influence on Austen was strongly bolstered by Colleen Sheehan’s 2007 article  http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol27no1/sheehan.htm

It set forth Colleen’s discovery of the astonishing covert allusion that Jane Austen made (via the “courtship” charade she wrote in Chapter 9 of her 1816 masterpiece Emma) to Charles Lamb’s 1812 “Triumph of the Whale”, a parodic poem Lamb published anonymously, which savagely satirized the corpulent Prince Regent as “the Prince of Whales”. In a nutshell, Sheehan discovered that Austen’s charade hid in plain sight 2 anagram acrostics on Lamb’s own name, and also hid “Prince of Whales” as an additional secret answer. In my opinion, that was already more than enough to validate, beyond a reasonable doubt, the claim that Austen intentionally, covertly alluded to Lamb’s savage satire.

And yet, I’m not surprised that Sheehan’s extraordinary discovery remains, 8 years after its publication in the most widely read Austen scholarly journal, almost entirely unknown to Austen scholars and ordinary Janeites alike, even though it ought to be common knowledge. I’m not surprised, because of what I have repeatedly referred to as The Myth of Jane Austen, still alive and kicking nearly 2 centuries after its earliest version was foisted on the public by Jane’s brother Henry in his Biographical Notice, barely a year after her death, when she was no longer around to be able to debunk it herself!

Think about what it would mean for the common understanding of Jane Austen the person, if she were widely recognized to have really been an author who would consciously embed in her greatest novel that sort of biting parody of a major authority figure in her society. It would explode the Myth, which portrays a modest, obedient, pious Anglican spinster, who lived a life of Christian forbearance and was most definitely not a radical feminist.

So it’s sad-almost tragic, actually, given the universal acknowledgment of Austen as one of the great fiction writers of all time---that, even when strong, startling new evidence of JA’s subversiveness is brought to light in a highly probative manner, as in Sheehan’s article, it still remains invisible! It’s an irony which JA herself would have noted, because I’ve long claimed that Austen’s novels are not merely among the most sophisticated romances ever written, they are also sophisticated veiled treatises on epistemology – the ancient wisdom about human subjectivity, which she demonstrated via her novels, i.e., that people only see what they expect to see, not what is actually there.

Our all-too-human pride, prejudice, sensibility, and persuadability all work to blind us to anything close to objective reality. And Emma in particular is right up there in the pantheon of fiction, alongside Hamlet, as works of art that best dramatize that eternal principle. It’s no accident that Miss Bates saying “What is before me, I see”, is JA’s subtle echo of the following famous exchange:

HAMLET: Do you see nothing there? GERTRUDE: Nothing at all; yet all that is I see.

So, today, I’ll take another poke at the brick wall of the Myth of Jane Austen, knock out another brick, & maybe enable a few more Janeites to see through the holes to what’s really there in her fiction. I’ll present more textual evidence of the subtle presence of Lamb’s satirical poem in the Emma charade, and show how both Lamb and Austen had Milton and Dante in the back of their minds. It turns out that the “Prince of Whales” solution and the two Lambs in JA’s charade, are only the first layer of allusion, there is more. Then, in a followup post tomorrow, I’ll place Lamb’s poem and Austen’s charade in a larger 19^th century context of authorial subversion of governmental/ patriarchal oppression, involving Byron, Shelley, Poe, & Melville.

To begin today, for your ease of reference, here is the full text of the charade which Mr. Elton gives to Emma and Harriet in Chapter 9 of Emma, which Colleen Sheehan demonstrated was based in part on Lamb’s “Triumph of the Whale”, and which I have previously claimed….http://tinyurl.com/nenmw7l

…was actually recycled by Mr. Elton, having previously been given to him by his “friend” (wing man) in courtship, Frank Churchill, after Frank gave it to Miss Hawkins…before eventually jilting her, leaving her to be scooped up by Mr. Elton after Emma rejected him:

M    My first displays the wealth and pomp of kings,

L      Lords of the earth! their luxury and ease.

A     Another view of man, my second brings,

B      Behold him there, the monarch of the seas!

B     But ah! united, what reverse we have!

M     Man's boasted power and freedom, all are flown;

L      Lord of the earth and sea, he bends a slave,

A      And woman, lovely woman, reigns alone.

 Thy ready wit the word will soon supply,

 May its approval beam in that soft eye!

As should be obvious, I’ve altered Jane Austen’s visual presentation so as to foreground the “BALM” acrostic (going up) and “BMLA” (going down) acrostic/anagrams of the name “Lamb”, which are otherwise only subliminally perceptible. And now I present to you the full text of Lamb’s poem (in the same foregrounding format as above) and intersperse my own commentary in brackets to explain Lamb’s own wordplay and allusive meanings that I claim Jane Austen also emulated and understood:

Triumph of the Whale

Io! Paean! Io! Sing

To the FINNY people’s King.

Not a mightier WHALE than this

I     In the vast Atlantic is                     s;

N   Not a fatter fish than he                  e

F    Flounders round the polar SEA     A.

[The idea of the British people as sea creatures is the central image of Lamb’s poem, and it is apt, given that the British Navy did indeed rule the waves of the Regency Era world. Lamb puns on that symbolism, by referring to the Brits as “the FINNY people”, which rhymes with “PRINNY”, the popular nickname of the Prince Regent, who was in a practical sense already “King”. Plus, we already have him being referred to as a “whale”, foreshadowing the punch line “Prince of Whales” at the end of the poem. And, as I also show, above, the last 3 lines of the stanza begin with an anagram acrostic on the word “fin” and end with an acrostic on the word “sea”, which refers to “the vast Atlantic” within the stanza. So, from the get-go, Charles Lamb (who was already famous to his fellow Brits as a creator of acrostics) is doing some clever, multifaceted vertical acrosticking to amplify his horizontal meanings.]

See his blubbers—at his gills

What a world of drink he swills,

From his trunk, as from a spout,

Which next moment he pours out.

Such his person—next declare,

Muse, who his companions are.—

Every fish of generous kind

Scuds aside, or slinks behind;

B        But about his presence keep

AL     All the Monsters of the Deep;

M       Mermaids, with their tails and singing

[And above, we see an acrostic (with the second letter on the second line included) on the word “BALM”, which I believe Jane Austen consciously copied in her  BALM acrostic in the charade (see above). So Lamb here is in effect including an anagram-acrostic signature on a poem he published anonymously for obvious reasons, and Jane Austen in effect is “signing” Lamb’s name to the charade!]

His delighted fancy stinging;

Crooked Dolphins, they surround him,

Dog-like Seals, they fawn around him.

Following hard, the progress mark

Of the intolerant salt sea shark.

For his solace and relief,

F   Flat fish are his courtiers chief.

L   Last and lowest in his train,

I    Ink-fish (libellers of the main)

T   Their black liquor shed in spite:

[The acrostic “flit” superficially coincides with the “Ink-fish” (i.e., octopi/squid) who “flit” and “slink” around—but it seems clear to me that Lamb is indulging in a slur on the sexual orientation of the lowly courtiers who “flit” and “fawn around” the Prince---and if “flit” in that derogatory sense sounds vaguely familiar to you, it may be because you read it in Holden Caulfield’s casual teenage homophobia in Catcher in the Rye (“The other end of the bar was full of flits. They weren’t too flitty-looking…but you could tell they were flits anyway” ”And flits and Lesbians. Old Luce who knew every flit and Lesbian in the United States was. All you had to do was mention somebody-anybody-and old Luce’d tell you if he was a flit or not…”).

Which brings me right back to the (in)famous sexual innuendo of the 16 year old Jane Austen:

“SHARADE:  My first is what my second was to King James the 1st, and you tread on my whole.
The principal favourites of his Majesty were Car, who was afterwards created Earl of Somerset and whose name perhaps may have some share in the above mentioned Sharade, and George Villiers afterwards Duke of Buckingham...."

The answer being “Car-pet”, referring to the sexual relationship between the king and his “pet” Carr.

And THAT makes me realize that Jane Austen was still thinking along these lines, when she broadly hinted at a similar relationship between the “King” of Highbury, Mr. Knightley, and his chief fawning “courtier”, the foppish “beau” Mr. Elton, in writing Mrs. Elton’s boasting about her husband, which takes on shocking new meaning when read from a sexually suspicious perspective:

"He promised to come to me as soon as he could disengage himself from Knightley; but he and Knightley are shut up together in deep consultation.—Mr. E. is Knightley's right hand."

I count five sexual winks in that one sentence, but my favorite is the part about Elton being Knightley’s “right hand”!

Now, I can’t prove that this latter sexual joking was in any way inspired by Lamb’s “flit” acrostic, but they sure fit together perfectly! Now back to Lamb’s poem…]

(S     Such on EARTH the things that write.)

I        In his stomach, some do say,

N      No good thing can ever stay.

[This acrostic “sin” is very interesting, given the following footnote in Sheehan’s 2007 article:

“Both Lamb’s poem and Cruikshank’s print were inspired by Milton’s description in Book I of Paradise Lost of the mariners casting anchor on the scaly rind of the enormous Leviathan.  I am indebted to Susan Allen Ford for directing me to this passage about the “Arch-Fiend,” which Lamb was clearly referencing in his poem (Milton 1.194-209).  The original printing of the Cruikshank caricature of “The Prince of Whales or the Fisherman at Anchor” in the Scourge included a reference to Milton’s description in Paradise Lost. “  

And here is a synopsis of the relevant section of Paradise Lost, where Sin comes in:

“Sin is met by Satan at the gates of Hell in Book II of Paradise Lost. She holds the key to Hell's gate and opens the gate so that Satan (her father) can pass through on his way up to heaven. Sin has no mother but was born out of Satan himself at his rebellious assembly in heaven, both an allegorical representation of his sin against God and a parody of God's creation of the Son. Sin is 'woman to the waist' (II.650) and has a fish's tail, but she shifts shape and is constantly re-forming and breeding, giving birth to dog-like young. She has no control over these changes but is held captive by cruel pregnancies in a body in perpetual labour, cursed by her own fertility. Satan raped his daughter in heaven, and she gave birth to Death.”

Needless to say, then, Lamb is calling the Prince a Satan (especially with the reference to the “dog-like” seals), and we may wonder about Mr. Woodhouse’s sensitive stomach, in which we might well say that “no good thing can ever stay”---and Emma’s concern that her wishing to marry Knightley might constitute a “sin of thought”.]

Had it been the fortune of it

To have swallowed that old Prophet,

Three days there he’d not have dwell’d,

But in one have been EXPELL’D.

Hapless mariners are they,

Who beguil’d (as seamen say),

Deeming him some rock or island,

Footing sure, safe spot, and dry land,

A       Anchor in his scaly rind;

S       Soon the difference they find;

S       Sudden plumb, he sinks beneath them;

Does to ruthless seas bequeath them.

[It only occurred to me while reading that “ass” acrostic that it wasn’t just Milton whom Lamb had in mind in his Satanic imagery, it was also one of Milton’s primary sources for Paradise Lost, Dante’s Inferno! I believe Lamb’s acrostic “ass” is a scatological allusion to Dante’s Inferno, Canto XXI. The following summary of Canto XXI makes my case for me, that it was a primary source both for Milton and for Lamb:

“The next valley held a pool of boiling tar, which reminded Dante of the pitch the Venetians used to patch up their ships. While Dante was watching the tar, Virgil warned him to look out. Turning around, he saw a black demon racing up, carrying a SINNER which he cast into the pool, calling out to the other demons, the Malebranche, that it was an elder of Saint Zita. He said he was going back for more, and that there were plenty of grafters in that city. The sinner tried to get out of the pitch, but other demons thrust him down with long hooks, taunting him all the while. Virgil told Dante not to be afraid of the demons, and went over to speak with them. At first they looked menacing, but when Virgil told them that they were there by divine will, the head demon, Malacoda, gave them an escort made up of eight demons. Dante was not pleased to have an escort, but Virgil again told him not to be frightened: the demons' growling faces were meant to scare the sinners. As a signal to begin, the leader, Barbariccia, "made a trumpet of his ass."

Plus….this acrostic “ass” comes right after the passage in which Lamb has rather sacrilegiously suggested that Jonah would have been “expelled” from the Prince of Whales in one day, not three, because of the hellish physiology of the Prince’s gluttony-saturated stomach. And the same then applies to the “hapless mariners” who think he is an island, but then “sudden plumb” occurs when the whale dives, which makes it sound as if they are all whale excrement, which is very much a Danteesque grotesque image.]

 N       ame or title what has he?

I         s he Regent of the Sea?

F        rom this difficulty free us,

[And here we have the punch line, which is clearly the prompt to think of the Prince of Whales---and so how apt that at this moment Lamb gives the acrostic “fin”, which echoes back to the “finny people” at the beginning of the poem, which of course refers to the British Navy (or, as Austen charade puts it, “the monarch of the seas”)]

Buffon, Banks or sage Linnaeus.

With his wondrous attributes

Say what appellation suits.

By his bulk, and by his size,

By his oily qualities,

This (or else my eyesight fails),

This should be the PRINCE OF WHALES. 

So when Jane Austen chose to mold her courtship charade around this Dante, Milton & Lamb imagery of Satan in hell, and to wink at the multiple acrostics in Lamb's poem with her two anagram acrostics on "Lamb", it tells us all she really meant it when she confided to close friend (and more) Martha Lloyd in 1812 that she really hated the Prince Regent. And it also tells us that she enjoyed the sacrilegious content of Lamb’s poem, and saw in it a kindred spirit to her own teenage Sharade on James I. And finally, it confirms to me what I have long believed, which is that Mr. Knightley is the Prince of Whales of Emma, and that Jane Austen is hinting to us that he swallows Emma whole at the end of the novel, to Emma's grave detriment.

Cheers, ARNIE

@JaneAustenCode on Twitter