Families Made and Families Found -- Then and Now
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8846b/8846b9c9edae9ced567336b4c5466b2f71f6e0ec" alt=""
Brandon writes eloquently about the embarrassments and discomforts of the governess life -- the loneliness of this particular state of upper servanthood, of being in the family but not of it, denied even the dow
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2986c/2986cc711d2603a8141597ec36ff2aed8258d1b6" alt=""
All of which, of course, takes place in the context of family life among the upper classes of a society where status and much of wealth was based upon the transfer of land, title and inheritance to an eldest son. Where in 99% of the cases, women of the landed (and even the middle, classes could only achieve real status by marrying into the system) and who needed some training in the ladylike graceful arts and accomplishments to pull it off. Which is, of course, why they had governesses.
For men, meanwhile, inheritance mattered -- most particularly for older sons. At the upper reaches of society, legitimate claims to a title mattered. As in the earliest extant romances (from second-century Greece) paternity mattered.
But what if a landowning family had no legitimate heir? If the estate wasn't entailed (most horrifically to a Mr. Collins) such a family without an heir might take in an affable, attractive boy. And if he remained affable, attractive, might settle the estate upon him.
Jane Austen's brother, Edward Austen Knight (as he became), was evidently such a boy. This is silhouette of Jane Austen's father presenting his son to the Knight family. And we should thank heaven that he
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98eb8/98eb8ed1105f96adebf8fc6be1a8b8429cb76755" alt=""
Perhaps remaining affable and attractive was a simple matter for Edward Austen Knight. Certainly we have no knowledge to the contrary. Still, I can't help wondering what the pressures might have been upon a boy who'd been sent away at age twelve from a crowded if loving home (eight children to support on the Reverend Mr. Austen's small living!) to charm his way into an estate. There isn't any evidence to suggest any difficulties -- except, perhaps, the portrait his brilliantly perceptive (and far less affable) sister Jane drew of another such boy -- Frank Churchill in Emma.
Not only is Frank constrained to dance attendance upon the difficult, querulous aunt who holds his fate in her hands, but he's managed to further complicate his life by falling in love with a young woman of no property of her own -- one of the angriest governesses (or would-be governesses) in all of fiction, Jane Fairfax.
Bringing us back to the humiliations of living one's life preparing other ladies (perhaps far less smart or talented or even handsome than oneself) to enter the marriage mart. To be a governess was to be an unsuccessful (because unmarried) lady never quite at home in the house of a successful lady and her potentially successful daughters.
The darkness of a love between a too charming adopted boy and a furious and furiously accomplished orphaned girl, neither of them with secure assurances of an eventual home is, to my mind, one of Austen's great understated moments of social criticism, and one that leads me to muse upon the misshapings of family life under the dominance of property and inheritance. Not strictly or simply a romantic couple in Austen (their problems are solved too abruptly by a providential offstage death) Jane and Frank continue to haunt my imagination, to make me hope that they do find their way, somewhere beyond the covers of Emma.
While as for the complexities of family life that more often than not overflows strict biological boundaries, of governesses in homes not of their making, and all the secrets and
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/72f04/72f0466c7360403bc202cbbc68a9f0b7ceabafbb" alt=""
The idealized postwar mid-century "nuclear family" was doubtless the exception instead of the rule. And so, I'm thinking, perhaps the impetus for this post didn't entirely originate with Jane Eyre, but with the actress who will play her, and who also played another touching young woman, Mia Wasikowska as Joni in the Oscar-nominated The Kids are All Right.
Which movie h
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c6399/c63991a355978722c06b8113b3ae0f599dd07b3e" alt=""
And because I'm rather awed to realize (if only a
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0be12/0be12af662ea8196519d46f18acf62110fa88b2f" alt=""
There's my new cover.
And HER
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/27c96/27c967a0ad8991dede530f0111a95578366289d7" alt=""
And let me know what some of your favorite new-style, old-style, blended or created families are in romance (or in the movies, too)
(and thanks again to romance blogger Tumperkin, for her lovely, insightful comments on EDGE)
Comments
Post a Comment