Austen writes Romance?

Austen writes Romance?

Welcome to February! I can’t believe how fast January flew by! My children are already bringing home heart-shaped crafts from school in celebration of the upcoming St. Valentine’s Day holiday. While I maintain that Jane Austen’s books are about so much more than romantic love you simply can’t get away from the marriage plots and anyone can see that she believed love as the basis of a happy marriage.

Using writelikejane.com, I have researched the occurrences of marriage and love related words in Austen’s works. Love appears the most at 568 times. However, the context is not always romantic love. Elizabeth Bennet loves a laugh and absurdities. Mrs. Bennet nearly always calls Lydia “my love.” Mr. Collins claims to love first Elizabeth and then Charlotte Lucas and yet we know neither is true. The word ‘lover’ appears 45 times. Each use maintains the context of romantic attachment but applies to the meaning “one who is enamored, a person in love” rather than an extramarital attachment. This means the word lover occurs less than 10% of the time when the word love appears in the text and curiously enough, does not appear in Persuasion at all. I have not taken the time to comb through each use of the word “love, ” but I think we can extrapolate at least 10% of the context does apply to romantic love.

Additionally, The Austen Thesaurus gives a list of related words Jane Austen used as well as a list of related words she did not use. Other romantic words used: beloved (49), admirer (15), beau (14), darling (11). Words she did not use: paramour, sweetheart, truelove, adorer, adore, amorist, infatuate, inamorato/a, doxy, and devotee.

Now, let us compare marriage related word. Marriage comes in at 246 times. Marriage related words are: matrimony (32), union (32), wedding (45), conjugal (10), nuptials (4), jointure (3), connubial (2), banns (1), license (1). Further, Austen uses a number of words to reference the traditional belief of marriage for fiscal and familial prudence. These words include: match (125), joining (20), agreement (14), and bond (10). In addition to several of the words above, Austen uses alliance 23 times to denote the legality of marriage.

Comparatively, of the 568 occurrences of ‘love,’ Austen uses other romantic words only 134 times, which is less than 25%. Marriage related words totaled are 299; over 100% of the number of times the word marriage appears. We now have quantitative proof that marriage plot does not necessarily mean romantic love.

What do all these numbers mean? I think they’re evidence that while Austen’s books are marriage plots, it is about more than romance. And of the 25% romance, only about 10% of each story ends up focusing on the real love match.

What is the point of having a misdirected love story? So the characters can struggle and grow. Unlike a modern day genre Romance book, however, Austen’s characters’ primary objective is not everlasting love and a happy marriage. Instead, in accordance to the era she wrote, they are rewards at the end of a story — nearly tacked on as an unfinished idea at the end in many cases — for a heroine of excellent character who overcame the conflict of the story. In this way, Austen’s heroines have more in common with Pamela, the virtuous servant girl who refused to go to bed with her master before marriage in Pamela or Virtue Rewarded (Samuel Richardson, 1740), than they do with the Romance Writers of America definition of a Romance novel: “The main plot centers around individuals falling in love and struggling to make the relationship work.”

I believe understanding this about Austen’s works can help readers understand the nature of her more controversial couples. Many love to sigh over the love of Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet or the steadfastness of Captain Wentworth and Anne Elliot’s second chance. However, many readers also believe Austen made errors matching Elinor Dashwood with Edward Ferrars, Emma Woodhouse with the stodgy Mr. Knightley, and Fanny Price with Edmund Bertram. Those relationships seem the least romantic to our modern sensibilities. As Knightley says of himself, “God knows, I have been a very indifferent lover.”

I don’t mean to say that Austen’s works do not contain Romance and cannot be counted as precursors to the modern day genre novel. I do, however, think Jane Austen is just as appropriate whether you celebrate Valentine’s Day or Single’s Awareness Day.

This piece is part of a month-long theme on my blog Stories from the Past. Be sure to subscribe and check it on each Thursday of the month as I will examine the lovers in Jane Austen for the month of February. Next week, I’ll cover the rumored matches and broken engagements of Jane Austen’s works.

Amazon  Kobo  Nook  iBooks  Mailing List

17 Responses to Austen writes Romance?

  1. Thanks for sharing your research…mind boggling. This is something I would not take the time to do so it is nice to find someone else has done it for me. I have read and read again all of Austen’s books so I can certainly say that for me they are all about the sweet romance in various ways and colors. Yes, there are other elements but in the end we have ODC.

  2. Wait….there’s a thing called “singles’ awareness day”??? Where have I been all this time and no one told me?? I’d have been celebrating that with the hard stuff! 😉

    Great post, Rose! Thanks for sharing! 🙂

  3. Love the post, Rose — you and your love of data! 🙂 You know, I tend to think that there are as many forms of romance as there are heroines and heroes. 🙂 (to paraphrase an Austen quote) so I think that there was romance for Elinor and Edward, Emma and Knightley, and Fanny and Edmund — it just looks different — it is more practical perhaps for Edward and Elinor but steady and true; it is the wish to bring out the best in another and sacrifice for their happiness with Knightley and Emma; and for Fanny and Edmund, it is a friendship that deepens, a realization that one perfects the other and is peaceful and happy and seeks to do good. At least that is how I see those relationships. 🙂 I love thinking about (and discussing, as you know) these things. Good work!

    • In one of my other posts this month I will be expressing exactly your sentiment, that romance and the ways to love come in many different paths. I think nowadays our opinion of love is very influenced by the commercialization of love (ie Valentine’s Day). Chocolates and a dozen roses are the stereotype along with a fancy dinner and champagne but they certainly don’t epitomize everyone’s opinion of romance and in the end have become so passe they almost lose their meaning by how little thought effort is involve.

  4. Thank you, Rose, for pointing out the romantic words that Jane used, and did not use. Can I just point out, (and I checked it on Write Like Jane) that, as much as I love the 2005 P&P, Jane never, ever used the word “incandescent” or “incandescently?” I HATE that they made that the ending moment in the film – my only true beef with it. End a Jane Austen movie with a word she never used? Uh-uh. I don’t think so. Great post by the way!

    • I think the word “incandescently” is a bit in the spirit of Jane Austen. It was in use and if anything, we probably think of it more related to light bulbs than “glowing within.” I think that scene expresses more romance than Austen ever does and in a very private way. However, instead of just saying “you can only call me Mrs. Darcy when you’re completely happy” or being more wordy with “only call me Mrs. Darcy when your heart is aflame for me like the sun rising over the horizon” they used a very descriptive word that gives a lot of meaning and imagery without being ostentatious or flat. In that way I think it’s very Austen-like. As for ending a film with a word she never used, I’m really not sure but I think most of them do. I’ve never thought to pay attention to them. I might need to hand in my Janeite card, but I have never thought Austen’s closing lines very memorable or profound. Of course, perhaps I feel that way so I can feel better about my own paltry efforts, lol!

    • Thanks for your reply. I tend to not see them as direct commentary in the way that she meant to condemn society and ask it to change. I think her books certainly show the reality, sometimes the bad and sometimes the good. Either way, definitely lots of representing of society.

  5. Hi Rose,

    Personally, I think of Austen’s work as social satire, maybe even comedy at times. This is where we (Renata and I) get into a bit of trouble on occasion. We tend to write things that amuse us.

    I agree, though, there’s a prevalence of love, matchmaking and happily ever after, which makes her stories romantic. It’s her perfect combination of reality and romance, I think, that makes her work so enduring.

    • I entirely agree about Austen’s blend which makes so long lasting. I also agree that she wrote satire. Some people believe it more as social commentary or critique, as though she desired to usher in change the way Dickens, Gaskell, and the Brontes did. I don’t think she was condemning society so much as laughing at its foibles and having fun with sometimes what are rather extreme satire. Miss Bates is the pitiable, poor spinster who means well but annoys and chatters endlessly with no additional depth. It’s a character that others (especially of the time) could recognize but without the added backstory and depth that most people would know of a person they had known their entire life. I think I got off on a bit of a tangent- but what I mean is that there are times when her characters are appropriately complex and times when they’re appropriately not.

      As for writing things that amuse you, please never stop. Sometimes I think people take Austen far more seriously than she ever took herself.

  6. Fascinating post Rose. As you say, Austen’s works are about so much more than the romances contained within each book. There’s also betrayal, avarice and misunderstandings to name just three other themes.

    Thanks for sharing it with us. I’ll have to keep an eye open for your other posts on your blog.

    • Thanks Anji! I really love how Austen blends so many things into her stories. It feels difficult to do today with market demands. But that’s why she’s still studied 200 years later and is a well-loved Classic and I will be forgotten. 🙂

Your thoughts are precious!