WordPress.com



-----------------------

First… The file under study raises a question that can be considered as a prominent theme in literature: can differences be reconciled? Can we overcome original prejudices? To put it differently, taking up the old saying, but with a difference: “Can birds of a “different” feather flock together?”

To try and answer this question, and before considering the texts studied on the subject, we could first wonder how people choose their friends or partners?

As it seems 2 sayings exemplify the way this “choice” is made: “Birds of a feather flock together” and “Opposites attract”. The first saying means that people who share the same interests/ who are on the same wavelength/ who see eye to eye on nearly all topics are bound to be friends while the second saying means that differences can unite/ that you may be attracted by sb you have nothing in common with. On the contrary, it is these very differences that render the other special/ unique/ attractive. Friends/ partners are also meant to be complementary.

But if friends and/ or partners are naturally attracted by their opposites, there has been a long tradition in literature that consists in exploring this tension/ to-and-fro movement/ dialectical movement between attraction and repulsion.

Indeed, when confronted to one’s opposite, two sorts of obstacles can come up: there can be inner obstacles coming from people’s inner personalities, deemed incompatible. And there could also be outer obstacles; obstacles coming from the society and its social conventions.

C.f. As this text points it out, in 19th century England, social classes defined your place in society and the way you behaved. Relationships between people of different classes were governed by unwritten rules; Lower classes’ people had to respect people belonging to the upper-classes. It was nearly impossible to move from one class to another. One also had to be very careful about your reputation.

-> This is precisely what is at stake in Jane Austen’s novel Pride and Prejudice.

For example, in the excerpt taken from chapter 3, the way upper-class Mr Darcy is introduced to the reader leaves little chance for Elizabeth Bennet and him to hit it off together. Indeed, if he is first seen as the embodiment of the ideal wealthy husband, his outward/ apparent pride and contemptuous behaviour when he slights/ offend/ humiliate Elizabeth seem to definitely eliminate any possibility of any relationship. She is judged because of the way her family behaves, because of her social background, her social class. They seem to lack manners. As for Darcy, his pride makes him the butt of the whole assembly’s judgment and of Elizabeth’s mockery.

But, as always, it requires getting to know the other, overcoming initial prejudices. As the old saying goes, “Don’t judge a book by its cover” Indeed, first impressions can be deceitful. Indeed, the first bad impression more than often comes from an original misunderstanding/ quiproquo in literature: you have a false opinion about somebody, and the person turns out to be nicer than you thought…

( Meeting the other requires overcoming prejudices, getting rid of the blinding burden of social conventions. Getting to know the other, means accepting their differences to make a relationship work.

-> This is precisely what Jane Austen’s novel is about, along with her young heroine’s implied scathing comment on its patriarchal society.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download