Austin always reminds me of Blake's funeral hearse.

Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Dear Pete,
But Charlotte did marry, even if she married a fool. The "universal" fact is really conditioned by the female need--in that society
--to find a husband or be doomed to various forms of misery: maiden aunt, governess, fallen woman. I think it is really an ironic remark about the assumptions of all marriageable young women that any available bachelor with enough to provide has to be made to do his duty and support a wife. So the sad lot is what is available, and Elizabeth is one of those women who either get lucky or are the right sort. Charlotte is quite happy to evade as much of her husband as she can because she has a proper place and role in society, and she makes the very best of it, given that she is neither beautiful nor rich nor socially clever in Elizabeth's way, and so cannot expect a romantic choice. It is a strangely sad and yet understandable and even rational choice. And "rational" is what Austen goes for even when her lucky heroines can have both.

>>> Peter Dillane <[log in to unmask]> 08/13/13 8:39 PM >>>
Thanks for the interesting reflection Carrol which I enjoyed. They are a sad
lot the men in this book. I wonder why more of the women don't take up
Charlotte Lucas' observation that she bears the solitude quite well

Cheers Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: T. S. Eliot Discussion forum. [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

On Behalf Of Carrol Cox

Sent: Wednesday, 14 August 2013 9:11 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: prose poetry--new topic

Darcy admits that he can only, really, _be_ Darcy as the husband of
Elizabeth. To
be himself, he had to be completed: he was indeed in want of a wife, a
particular one