What’s Love Got to Do with It?
“In vain I have struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you.”
These words first published 200 years ago this week – and just before St. Valentine’s Day – perfectly express a theme found not only in literature but in our lives as well. The heart wants what the heart wants, despite any reasoning against it.
Two central motifs dominate Pride and Prejudice: love and money. For some characters, the two go hand in hand, as with Mrs. Bennet’s hope that a young man of large fortune “will fall in love with one of” her daughters. Even she is not so callous as to hope for marriage without love; and once Mr. Darcy has insulted the least favourite of her children, his ten thousand a year loses its luster.
The association of the human heart to love and, indeed, all passions goes back to ancient times. Jane Austen could not have known that the embryonic heart begins beating before the brain has formed, or that a person may be declared “brain dead” whilst the heart beats still. Yet, she weaves the idea of heart over head throughout the narrative in such a way that one is left to wonder if she herself has taken a position in favour or against. Although clearly dismissive of love at first site and that “hackneyed” expression “violently in love,” Miss Austen comes across as ambiguous at best, even qualifying the basis of her heroine’s change of heart – “If gratitude and esteem are good foundations of affection, Elizabeth’s change of sentiment will be neither improbable nor faulty.” – with IF.
Miss Austen provides a plethora of examples of the folly in allowing the heart to lead the mind, even whilst acknowledging its inevitability. She tells us Mr. Bennet, “captivated by youth and beauty, and that appearance of good humour which youth and beauty generally give, had married a woman whose weak understanding and illiberal mind had very early in their marriage put an end to all real affection for her.” Yet even he, when warning Elizabeth against what he perceives as a loveless union, holds esteem above material gain: “(Mr. Darcy) is rich, to be sure, and you may have more fine clothes and fine carriages than Jane. But will they make you happy?”
Does Miss Austen agree with Mr. Bennet, or did she possess the opinion of the self-described “not romantic” Charlotte, that “happiness in marriage is entirely a matter of chance”? Still, even the cynical Charlotte, who gladly sacrifices any chance of love in exchange for security and opines “very few of us who have heart enough to be really in love without encouragement,” can see what her romantic friend cannot: “My dear, Eliza, he must be in love with you.”
Alas, Mr. Darcy could not deny the desire of his heart, falling “so much in love as to wish to marry her in spite of all the objections which had made him prevent his friend’s marrying her sister, and which must appear at least with equal force in his own case.” How ironic that Elizabeth had once accused him of allowing nothing for the influence of affection!
The voice we hear predominately throughout Pride and Prejudice, of course, is that of Elizabeth Bennet; and perhaps she speaks for Miss Austen as well. When her aunt Mrs. Gardiner warns her against an imprudent match with Mr. Wickham, Elizabeth assures her, “He shall not be in love with me, if I can prevent it,” even while allowing, “we see every day that where there is affection, young people are seldom withheld by immediate want of fortune from entering into engagements with each other.” How lucky her heart was “but slightly touched” by Mr. Wickham.
We see Elizabeth repeatedly allowing her heart to rule her head. Beyond her flirtation with Mr. Wickham – in his state of “comparative poverty” – her refusal of Mr. Darcy’s first proposal placed her love for Jane (and misplaced esteem for Mr. Wickham) before the financial security of herself, as well as her mother and sisters. Then she admits, “Pleased with the preference of one, and offended by the neglect of the other, on the very beginning of our acquaintance, I have courted prepossession and ignorance, and driven reason away.” In fact, only when her head tells her Mr. Darcy is lost to her forever does she have a change of heart: “It was…exactly calculated to make her understand her own wishes; and never had she so honestly felt that she could have loved him, as now, when all love must be vain.”
Fortunate are we that Miss Austen draws Mr. Darcy with the same inclination to hold love above reason (as well as “honour, decorum, prudence”) – “I cannot fix on the hour, or the spot, or the look, or the words, which laid the foundation. It is too long ago. I was in the middle before I knew that I had begun.” – thus providing the standard against which all other romance novels are measured. No wonder Pride and Prejudice retains its relevance even after two hundred years.
What do you think of Miss Austen, who remained “on the shelf” until her death at the age of 41: Cynic or true romantic? What about you? Valentine’s Day: Love it or leave it?
Colette Saucier
Colette is the best-selling author of 'Pulse and Prejudice,' the paranormal adaptation of the Jane Austen classic, which tells the story of Mr. Darcy - vampire; as well as the contemporary novel 'All My Tomorrows,' voted Top 10 Romance Novel of 2012, for which she was honoured to be named Austenprose's "Debut Author of the Year."
- Web |
- More Posts
28 Responses to What’s Love Got to Do with It?
P&P: RC
Be sure to vote!
*Giveaways
Enter our monthly contest using the Rafflecopter form on the
Giveaway Page.
All rules and prizes are listed there! Click the image or link provided.
April 14
Comment to be entered into the Giveaway!













































































































Facebook
RSS
Twitter
The Writers Block
A brilliant post, Colette! I suspect Miss Austen’s heart ruled her head – the best example, I think, is that of her initially accepting and then rejecting Bigg-Wither’s proposal. She knew she would have a comfortable life with him and yet, in the space of one night had realised she couldn’t do it, she didn’t love him. She was not Charlotte Collins-she was definitely Elizabeth Bennet.
My heart rules my head too-and I am definitely a romantic and lucky that my husband is too!
I concur with Jane, on both accounts. My heart has always ruled my head. Colette, I truly enjoyed this post – lovely and so well put together. Thank you.
Thank you both for your kind compliments! I am definitely a romantic, and I like to think Miss Austen was as well. <3
Can I ride the fence and get splinters? I think she is filled with a little love and larceny both. I think she is probably like every other person who dreams and hopes even though her intelligence and sense tells her that most everyone won’t get their happy ever after, but must settle for somewhere short of that.
I loved reading the points you bring up and you argue your point well.
Thanks, Sophia! You might be right, but I do hate the idea of having to settle.
Isn’t ‘on the shelf’ a horrible expression? I prefer to think of our Jane as a free thinking, independent woman who refused to settle!
I agree – I think it’s a ridiculous expression, and I’m glad it was finally shelved!
Lovely post!
I agree with Clair, I guess I always think that Jane had either felt or seen what love could be and refused to settle for less than true love in her own life. That’s my thoughts anyway.
It does, though, make me sad that she never found her true love.
I believe or want to believe that Jane was a true romantic. She rejected a marriage proposal herself after thinking it through, first accepting with her head rather than her heart, since she called it off the next day. Her characters always have happy endings because they fall in love, so I believe she wanted it for herself as well.
I have a similarly conflicted answer. I think that she was romantic, the ultimate romantic. I believe only the deepest love could temp her and her independent Charlotte-esque spirit kept her single…that and her illness. I’ve read of her suspected Addison’s disease. Perhaps her romantic side played a role in that as well. Only the deepest, livliest, mutually healthy love could temp her. Her holding out for that ultimate love only enhanced her imagination and though the thought of her single all her life when so romantic makes me sad, I am forever grateful because Jane Austen has quite literally changed my life for the better.
You bring up several great points. I wonder what she would have written had she found her true love and had health and happiness….
Wonderful post. Every word rings so true. And lovely responses as well.
I agree that the fact she withdrew her acceptance of a comfortable, secure future for herself, her sister and mother with Mr. Bigg-Withers showed her heart was the ultimate decision maker in her own life. As someone who married for love and then later discovered my dream man had some major weaknesses which led to many years of unhappiness I find the Charlotte Lucas also present in my older self.
As a mother of a daughter who in Regency times would be considered that horrible “on the shelf spinster” at age 32, I go back and forth from becoming Mrs. Bennet, wanting her to find a husband, but also wanting her to hold out for her dream man. It’s a tightrope we all walk, isn’t it?
I was 27, my mother was convinced that I was going to be the eternal “maiden aunt”.
Thanks so much!
Marriage is definitely a marathon – and not for the timid!
I have a single daughter not much younger than yours, and I would rather she never marry than marry and be unhappy.
Colette,
You ask a thought-provoking question… I think JA was wise enough to have been able to fully and clearly see both sides — the rational and the romantic. But, as several others have mentioned already, the Bigg-Wither proposal was “proof” that, while she may have been tempted by cool rationality, she couldn’t bring herself to morgage her heart. Ultimately, only the deepest love (to echo some words Lizzy said in P&P) would induce her to marry…
I really do wish we had the full story behind that proposal, but it does appear she took the anti-Charlotte position.
With her refusal of Bigg-Wither, Austen wrote her story as a spinster sister. In “You’ve Got Mail,” there is a line where Meg Ryan’s character responds to the question of whether there is someone special in her life with the line of “No, but there is the dream of someone.” I think Austen kept her “dream” alive in her stories.
What a lovely sentiment, Regina! Thanks for sharing!
Beautiful post and very thought provoking. I believe Jane was a romantic and chose her heart instead of just settling. She may not have believed in love at first sight, but I certainly do as it was butterflies and electricity when I met/saw my husband for the first time and vice versa for him. I didn’t really think it existed as there were a few frogs along the way before we did meet…33 years later and counting!
Thanks so much, Carole!
I had a similar experience… I was married to someone else when I met my current husband, so he and I were completely platonic friends for 6 years. Then we went on our first legitimate date the first week of September. By the second date, we both “knew,” and we were engaged on Halloween. Going on 20 years now…
A wonderful, thought provoking post, Colette!
I think that Jane was such a perfect romantic at heart that in real life she had to put on a hard veneer of cynicism to cover the fact that she felt so strongly… hence her humorous satire of love.
Thanks so much, Vera!
Love your post!! It puts Pride and Prejudice in a new light for me, As for Jane I believe she believed in love at heart but maybe a little bit cynical and that is why you have Charlotte as Elizbeth best friend . Thank you writing
Thank you, Suze!
I’m with Regina. Jane had the “dream”. Lovely post Colette.
Thank you, Lisa!
A very good analysis of heart and head over the topic love, Colette. I think Jane Austen is a romantic at heart and a realist at the same time. She understands that not every woman in her time can marry for love hence she did not put up with anything less than it.