Although many might consider Jane Austen to be outdated and clichéd, her work retains an undying appeal. During the last decade the English-speaking world has experienced an Austen renaissance as it has been treated to a number of film and television adaptations of her work, including Pride and Prejudice, Emma, Mansfield Park and Sense and Sensibility. Film critics such as Bill De Lapp (1996) and Sherry Dean (1996) have commented on the phenomenal response these productions received and have been amazed by Austen’s ability to compete with current movie scripts. The reasons for viewers and readers enjoying and identifying with Austen’s fiction are numerous. Readers of varying persuasions have different agendas and hence different views and interpretations of Austen. This thesis follows a gynocritical approach and applies a feminist point of view when reading and discussing Austen. Austen’s novels - Pride and Prejudice, Mansfield Park, Emma, Northanger Abbey, Sense and Sensibility, and Persuasion – are re-read and reevaluated from a feminist perspective in order to call attention to Austen’s awareness of women’s second-class position in her society. Women’s experiences in Austen’s time are compared to women’s experiences in society today in order to illustrate, in some way, the tremendous progress the feminist movement has made. In addition, by examining what Austen reveals about the material reality of women in her time, it is possible to explore the legacy that modern women have inherited. Literary critics such as André Brink (1998), Claudia Johnson (1988), and Gilbert and Gubar (1979) believe Austen to create feminist awareness in her novels. There are critics, however, who do not view Austen as necessarily feminist in her writing. Nancy Armstrong writes in Desire and Domestic Fiction (1987) that Austen’s objective is not a critique of the Abstract iv old order but rather a redefinition of wealth and status. In Culture and Imperialism (1993) Edward Said implicates Austen in the rationale for imperial expansion, while Barbara Seeber argues in “The Schooling of Marianne Dashwood” (1999) that Austen’s texts should be understood as dialogic. Others, such as Patricia Beer (1974), believe Austen’s fiction primarily to be about marriage since all her novels end with matrimony. My own reading of Austen takes into consideration her social milieu and patriarchal inheritance. It argues that Austen writes within the framework of patriarchy (for example by marrying off her heroines) possibly because she is aware that in order to survive as a woman (writer) in a male-favouring world and in a publishing world dominated by men, her critique needs to be covert. If read from a feminist perspective, Austen’s fiction draws our attention to issues such as women’s (lack of) education, the effects of not being given access to knowledge, marriage as a patriarchal institution of entrapment, and women’s identity. Her fiction reveals the effects of educating women for a life of domesticity, and illustrates that such an education is biased, leaving women powerless and without any means of self-protection in a male-dominated world. Although contemporary women in the Western world mostly enjoy equal education opportunities to men, they suffer the consequences of a legacy which denied them access to a proper education. Feminist writers such as Flis Henwood (2000) show that contemporary women believe certain areas of expertise belong to men exclusively. Others such as Linda Nochlin (1994) reveal that because women did not have access to higher education for so many years, they failed to produce great women artists like Chaucer or Cézanne. Austen’s fiction also exposes the economic and social system (of which education constitutes a major part) for enforcing marriage and for enfeebling women. In addition, it illustrates some of the realities and pitfalls of marriage. While Austen only subtly refers to Abstract v women’s disempowerment within marriage, contemporary feminist scholars such as Germaine Greer (1999) and Arnot, Araújo, Deliyanni, and Ivinson (2000) explicitly warn women that marriage is a patriarchal institution of entrapment and that it often leaves women feeling unfulfilled. The issue of marriage as a patriarchal institution has been thought important and has been addressed by feminists because it contributes to women’s powerlessness. Feminist scholars today find it imperative to expose all forms of power in order to eradicate women’s subordination. bell hooks comments in Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center (2000) on the importance of revealing unfair power relations in order to eliminate oppression of any kind. Austen does not necessarily express the wish to eradicate forms of power or oppression in her novels. Yet, if we read her work from a feminist point of view, we are made aware of the social construction of power. From her fiction we can infer that male power is enshrined in the very structure of society, and this makes us aware of women’s lack of power in her time. Austen’s novels, however, are not merely novels of powerlessness but of empowerment. By creating rounded women characters and by giving them the power to judge, to refuse and to write, Austen challenges the stereotyped view of woman as either overpowering monster or weak and fragile angel. In addition, her novels seem to question women’s inherited identity and to suggest that qualities such as emotionality and mothering are not natural aspects of being a woman. Because she suggests ways in which women might empower themselves, albeit within patriarchal parameters, one could argue that she contributes, in a small way, to the transformation of existing power relations and to the eradication of women’s servile position in society.

Magister Artium - MA / In this thesis I focus on the ways I believe Jane Austen re-imagines the idea of the hero. In popular fiction of her time, such as Samuel Richardson’s Sir Charles Grandison (1753), what we had as a hero figure served as a male monitor, to guide and instruct the female heroine. The hero begins the novel fully formed, and therefore does not go through significant development through the course of the novel. In addition to Sir Charles Grandison, I read two popular novels of Austen’s time, Fanny Burney’s Cecilia and Maria Edgeworth’s Belinda. An examination of Burney’s construction of Delvile and Edgeworth’s construction of Clarence Hervey allows me to engage with popular conceptions of the ideal hero of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Burney and Edgeworth deviate from these ideals in order to accommodate conventions of the new Realist novel. I argue that Austen reimagines her male protagonist so that hero and heroine are well-matched and discuss, similarly, how Burney and Edgeworth create heroes as a complement to their heroines. Austen’s re-imagining of her male protagonist forms part of her contribution to the genre of the Realist novel. Austen suggests the complexity of her hero through metaphors of setting. I discuss the ways in which the descriptions of Pemberley act as a metaphor for Darcy’s character, and explore Austen’s adaptations of the picturesque as metaphors to further plot and character development. I offer a comparative reading of Darcy and Pemberley with Mr Bennet and Longbourn as suggestive in understanding the significance of setting for the heroine’s changing perceptions of the character of the hero. I explore Austen’s use of free indirect discourse and the epistolary mode in conveying “psychological or moral conflict” in relation to Captain Wentworth in Persuasion and Mr Knightley in Emma, offering some comparison to Darcy. This lends itself to a discussion on the ways in which Austen’s heroes may be read as a critique of the teachings of Lord Chesterfield’s Letters to His Son (1774). I conclude the thesis with a discussion of the ways in which Darcy has influenced the stereotype of the modern romance hero. Using two South African romance novels I suggest the ways in which the writers adapt conventions of writing heroes to cater for the new black South African middle class at which the novels are aimed. My reading of Jane Austen’s novels will highlight the significance of Austen’s work in contemporary writing, and will question present-day views that the writing of the eighteenth- and nineteenth-centuries is not relevant to African literature.

No description available.

Permission from the author to digitize this work is pending. Please contact the ICS library if you would like to view this work.

Chan Ka-ling. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 160-167). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Acknowledgements --- p.iv / Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter Chapter One --- Bridget Jones's Diary： A Novelistic Adaptation of Pride and Prejudice --- p.18 / Chapter Chapter Two --- The Image of Elizabeth Bennet in Pride and Prejudice and Its Adaptations --- p.4 7 / Chapter Chapter Three --- The Image of Bridget Jones in Bridget Jones' s Diary and Its Film Adaptation --- p.85 / Chapter Chapter Four --- Evolution of a Heroine: From Pride and Prejudice to Bridget Jones's Diary --- p.110 / Conclusion --- p.142 / Notes --- p.157 / Works Cited --- p.160

No description available.

No description available.

The theme of this thesis is the relationship of the Jane Austen heroine to her social environment--codes of proper behavior as exemplified by the heroines of Emma, Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, and Persuasion. The study follows the development of the characters from the ignorance of the social code demonstrated by Emma Woodhouse, through views of the expectations of women of marriageable age as seen by Elizabeth and Jane Rennet, to a comparison of sensible and sensitive behavior in Marianne and Elinor Dashwood, and concluding with the perfect propriety of Anne Elliot. The thesis explores the connection between propriety and the heroine, demonstrating why a heroine succeeds or fails on the basis of her individual view of the social code and her behavior in obeying or denying its dictates.

'Women and independence in the nineteenth century novel : a study of Austen, Trollope and James', begins with the concept of independence and works through the three most common usages of the word. The first, financial independence (not needing to earn one's livelihood) appears to be a necessary prerequisite for the second and third forms of independence, although it is by no means an unequivocal good in any of the novels. The second, intellectual independence (not depending on others for one's opinion or conduct; unwilling to be under obligation to others), is a matter of asserting independence while employing terms which society recognizes. The third, of being independent, is exemplified by an inward struggle for a knowledge of self. In order to trace the development of the idea of self during the nineteenth century, I have chosen a group of novels which seem to be representative of the beginning, the middle, and the end of the period. Particular attention is given to the characterizations of Emma Woodhouse, Glencora Palliser, Isabel Archer, Milly Theale and Maggie Verver. Whereas in Jane Austen's novels the self has a definite shape which the heroine must discover, and in Anthony Trollope's novels the self (reflecting the idea of socially-determined man) must learn to accommodate social and political changes, in Henry James's novels the self determined by external manifestations (hollow man) is posed against the exercise of the free spirit or soul. Jane Austen's novels look backward, as she reacts against late eighteenth century romanticism, and forward, with the development of the heroine who exemplifies intellectual independence. Anthony Trollope's women characters are creatures of social and political adaptation; although they do not derive their reason for being from men, they must accommodate themselves to men's wishes. And Henry James looks backward, wistfully, at Austen's solid, comforting, innocent self and forward, despairingly, to the dark, unknowable self of the twentieth century.

The last works of Jane Austen and Barbara Pym, written while each was knowingly dying, both continue and transform a discourse of illness and cure traceable through their canon. Illness figures both literally and metaphorically in their narratives; in Austen as failures in wholeness and in Pym as failures in love. After undergoing the metaphorically medical treatments of purging and vivifying in Austen and inoculating in Pym, their female protagonists achieve conditions of health and wholeness by closure of the narrative. In the dying works, individual metaphorical illnesses become a general societal condition of fragmentation, and cure becomes more elusive. The shared use of a village undergoing profound change reflects each writer's own bodily transformation as certain death approaches, and the restoration of health to the village-as-body becomes one of achieving balance or homeostasis. This is effected in the narrative by the hinted-at curative powers of nature in Sanditon and of restored faith in A Few Green Leaves. On a theoretical level, both texts reflect their narratives of dis-ease and cure. Pym's last text remained unpublished before her death and therefore "ill" because not functioning, but second opinions and faith in her reputation confirmed its public health. Austen's Sanditon as a fragment embodies its own discourse of dis-ease, or failure of wholeness, and requires a curative act on the part of the reader to restore it to some sense of ideal wholeness or health.