November 2023 meeting: The Up and Comers

The topic for our final meeting of the year was described as “The Up and Comers, or, looking at the changing social order in Jane Austen’s times”. In the end, for various reasons, it was a small meeting but those of us there enjoyed the discussion. We were amused that in terms of looking at the topic, we broke down the middle with half of us focusing on the “up and comers” and half on the changing social order. However, in a count back the “up and comers” won, as that’s the angle our remote member also took!

The Up and Comers

Those who chose this approach explored up-and-comers in general, as well as some specific up-and-comers, like the Coles and the Eltons (in Emma) and the Steele sisters (in S&S). Our remote member sent some thoughts on the topic.

She wrote that she was less interested in the general line of the rapid development of social change during Jane Austen’s lifetime, than in in “the far more interesting glimpses of it in her writing”. She was particularly interested she said in how Austen’s characters rose and fell socially, and how they handled themselves. She came up with some useful (and entertaining) categories:

• Those upping unpleasantly, such as the Eltons (Emma), the Thorpes (NA), and the Bingley sisters (P&P). 
• The comical uppers, such as Sir William Lucas, Mr Collins and Mrs Bennet (all P&P). 
• The well behaved and courteous uppers, like the Gardiners (P&P), Fanny and William Price (MP), the Crofts (Persuasion), and the Martins (Emma). 

As our remote member concluded, every nuance of social mobility is included in Austen’s works as almost every character is experiencing some form of change, either consciously or unconsciously. The one curious person who remains solidly static, she thought, is Mr. Bennet. Also, Colonel Brandon, Mr. Knightley and Mr. Morland seem comfortably uninterested in rising the social ladder. They have, she proposed, upped and come!

Another member who looked at the up-and-comers angle suggested that Persuasion could be seen as the novel of up-and-comers, given its exploration of the rise of the naval class in peace-time, and perhaps Sanditon was to continue this idea of the rising class. Emma is also rich in up-and-comers, including the Coles, the Eltons, and the Martins. Emma’s discomfort with this group – including her determination that Harriet is a cut above – is partly behind her education.

Another up-and-comer featured by a member is Pride and prejudice’s Mr Collins, who epitomises, our member suggested, the Peter Principle, in that he’d risen to his level of incompetence. He is an excellent example of someone trying to move up the social ladder. He has some “nice characteristics”. At 25 years old, he is described, when he appears at Longbourn, as “grave and stately … manners … Very formal”. Mrs Bennet would have loved that. Elizabeth, on the other hand, sees something different. She says to her father:

“He must be an oddity, I think,” said she, “I cannot make him out. There is something very pompous in his style. — And what can he mean by apologizing for being next in the entail? — We cannot suppose he would help it if he could. — Can he be a sensible man, sir?”

He praises Lady Catherine, and admires her condescension, which he sees as a privilege. He is an example of those up-and-comers who try too hard. Is Miss Bingley another one? She comes from new money, while Mr Darcy and Emma’s Mr Knightley come from old money.

Those of us who looked at the up-and-comers came to the realisation that the world Austen depicted in her novels was essentially what we’d now call the middle class – that is, not the aristocracy, but what Copeland describes as the “genteel professionals” or “pseudo-gentry” who are “sandwiched between commerce and the land Gentry,”. Consequently, more characters than not, could, in fact, be described as up-and-comers.

Given this large population of up-and-comers in Austen’s novel, we realised that there was no simple way to characterise them or their role in the novels. Take the Coles in Emma, for example. They are successful and well on their way to achieving some social status in the community. The Steeles, in Sense and sensibility, on the other hand, grasp any way they can to claw their way in and up, with Lucy, in particular, not caring whom she hurts along the way. What the Coles and Steeles do have in common, however, is that they all experience snobbery – the Coles at the hands of Emma (who condescends to go to their party and “meant to be very happy” despite their lowly status, to her mind), and the Steeles at the hands of many. But the Coles appear to behave with grace and, dare we say, knowing their place (as they’d be expected to in that era), while the Steeles push themselves forward and turn off anyone with integrity but not those who are easily flattered.

Changing social order

Most of those who focused on the changing social order used, quite serendipitously, Janet Todd’s excellent book, Jane Austen in context, which contains essays on specific aspects of Austen’s career and her times. Interestingly, different members chose different articles, some reading a couple, during their research.

Edward Copeland’s essay “Money” divides Austen’s novels into early and late, with the first three written – Sense and sensibility, Pride and prejudice, and Northanger Abbey – having, he argues, a common economic vision, encompassing the danger of losing all, the chance of hitting it rich, huge losses and huge gains, all riding on luck and the main chance. The later novels – Mansfield Park, Emma, Persuasion – involve more complex economics, which are sometimes deeply troubling morally. Here, social changes are handled more reflectively, and are affected by the economic upheavals of war years, the decline in agricultural profits, and the idea that “movement of money was the key to the disturbing new shifts in the arrangements of power” 

Another member talked about the role of women, changing and otherwise. She spoke of how daughters were seen in terms of their ability to increase their family’s means by marrying up.

Another change came from Raven’s essay, “Book production”, in which he discusses the role of circulating libraries, and the increasing penetration of printed material in society between 1800 and 1830, though authors didn’t necessarily benefit significantly from “the marketing boom”.

Changes in transport was another area we looked at, mainly via Pat Rogers’ essay. Walking was still a common means of transport, for men and women, though as we know from Elizabeth Bennet’s experience, it was frowned upon for, as Rogers describes them, “fine ladies and smart gentlemen”. Horses, and horses and carriages, were the major form of transport at the time, and Austen uses them regularly in her novels to make various points – Edmund’s using Fanny’s horse for Mary, Willoughby’s inappropriate horse gift, to name a couple.

The improvement in roads were, argues Rogers, an “index of social progress” and made the Industrial Revolution possible.

Another essay our members looked at was Robert Clark and Gerry Dutton on agriculture, in which they discuss the importance of farming to the Austen family income, arguing it was more financially signifiant to them than Mr Austen’s role and vicar and teacher. Clark and Dutton argue that:

Austen’s mentality was formed in a household very much more engaged with the shaping forces of the British economy than in the insulated genteel home that is usually presumed. This realisation enables us to re-evaluate the acuity with which her novels represent the socio-economic transformation of Britain in her lifetime.

Closely related to the agriculture issue is that of Landownership. Austen, writes Jones, is concerned throughout her novels with the conduct of landowners and their influence on community. Jones also discusses Mr Knightley as, in effect, combining new Whiggish modernising behaviour with more Tory ideas of benevolence and paternalism. Mr Knightley, he says, was Austen’s favourite “portrait of a country gentleman”. Through him, she “attempts to unify, old and new, Whig, Tory, and even radical ideas of responsible stewardship of land.”

Finally, a member briefly looked at Wheeler’s “Religion” essay. Austen’s family practised a moderate anglicanism, one based on commonsense in morality, on pragmatism, on a middle road between and new. It’s a value espoused by Fanny Price. This thinking shaped Austen’s response to the Gothic sublime, which we see in Henry Tilney critique. Austen, argues Wheeler, avoided extremes.

So, all in all, a wide-ranging discussion that covered ground beyond that originally envisaged. However, it resulted in more ideas for us to consider in our next Austen re-reads.

Sources

• Robert Clark and Gerry Dutton, “Agriculture”, in Jane Austen in context, ed. Janet Todd, Cambridge University Press, 2005
• Edward Copeland, “Money”, in Jane Austen in context, ed. Janet Todd, Cambridge University Press, 2005
• Jane Austen World blog. Regency – Middle Class tag
• Chris Jones, “Landownership”, in Jane Austen in context, ed. Janet Todd, Cambridge University Press, 2005
• James Raven, “Book production”, in Jane Austen in context, ed. Janet Todd, Cambridge University Press, 2005
• Pat Rogers, “Transport”, in Jane Austen in context, ed. Janet Todd, Cambridge University Press, 2005
• Michael Wheeler, “Religion”, in Jane Austen in context, ed. Janet Todd, Cambridge University Press, 2005