A Contrast of Classics: Characters

Over the past few posts we’ve looked at the leading ladies of Pride and Prejudice and Emma. I confessed to being Emma but preferring Elizabeth. But today we’ll glance at several of the characters and see how they stack up against each other. 

Pride and Prejudice has its fair share of irritating characters, to be sure. They’re all flawed, but not to the extent of giving the reader a facial twitch. But I can’t say the same for most of Emma’s characters. In my opinion, many of Highbury’s constituents are thoroughbred nincompoops. I do have a theory about why I can tolerate one set of flawed characters and not the other, so sit tight!

Pride and Prejudice: The Aggravating

In all honesty, some of P&P’s characters are truly terrible. Take, for example, Mrs. Bennet. She is so neurotic, frivolous, and inane that it gives me hives to imagine being her progeny. She’s so obsessed with marrying her daughters well that she perpetually jeopardizes their prospects with her lack of discretion. She’s hard to tolerate even from the comfortable distance of a couple hundred years and the buffer zone of fiction. 

And when it comes to Mr. Wickham and Lydia, don’t even get me started. Wickham is a scoundrel through and through, and he never gets his comeuppance. Except, perhaps, that he has to live with ridiculous Lydia for the rest of his life. I really want to slap her. Why does no one slap her? And I dearly wish Mr. Bennet would have sucker punched Wickham when he came to visit. It would have been supremely satisfying. 

Pride and Prejudice: The Endearing

So I do admit that some of P&P’s characters can try one’s patience, but most are so ludicrous and relatable that they’re just plain funny. Mr. Bennet’s quick wit and even temper make him lovable despite his proclivity toward passive self-preservation. Mr. Collins is ridiculous in the extreme. He’s so grave and absurd that you have to laugh at him. His simultaneous self-abasement and self-satisfaction are gold. 

And even dear Jane is too good to be true—literally. Do you know anyone that generous, forgiving, and naïve? If she were the heroine, my enjoyment of the book would be greatly diminished, although that’s just proof of my fallen nature. Also, the book would have to be called Pride and Pollyanna, and that’s not quite as catchy.

I also admit that Darcy is an acquired taste. I think Colin Firth has a lot to do with our ability to enjoy such a priggish rich boy, because his character in the book is intolerable for the first half of the story. But his humbling and penance is thorough, so we forgive him. Plus, I mean, Colin Firth. 

Continuity

So all things considered, the characters in Pride and Prejudice are entertaining and enjoyable. You get to follow their growth and changes (or lack thereof) throughout the story, and nearly everyone ends up better than they deserve. Darcy and Elizabeth live happily ever after, and our hearts are satisfied. 

But the literary flow of Emma is different. Rather than tracking the same set of characters throughout the book, Austen seems to pull an abrupt shift halfway through. Initially we’re inundated with Harriet and Mr. Elton. We hear of them on every page. But halfway through, they’re tossed out to the curb in favor of Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax. We catch glimpses of the others now and then, but not much. As a reader, this shift feels a bit jarring, but I’ll admit that I’d already had as much Harriet and Elton as I could handle, so I was ready for a change. But the change seemed to go from bad to worse. I’ll explain.

Emma: Early Characters

Personally, I find Harriet very difficult to read because of her utter spinelessness. She is completely willing to evacuate what little brain she has for the approval of Ms. Woodhouse. Her utter lack of sense draws Emma to her like a puppeteer to a discarded dummy. Maybe we’re meant to like Harriet for her simplicity and trust, but she’s too vacuous for me. And then there’s  Mr. Woodhouse. This man needs a good, stern dose of reality. I don’t despise him, but I certainly couldn’t tolerate him. Hypochondriacs are nails on a chalkboard to me.

But there are a few characters who are worth reading: the Westons and Miss Bates. The good-natured Westons can be relied upon to think (too) charitably and sensibly most of the time. And it may be hard to believe, but I actually like Miss Bates. I find her to be the most believable and sympathetic character. We all know the Chatty Cathy type that she’s based on, and in real life I would rather gnaw my left arm to the elbow than have to sit with her multiple times a week. But do you know what else? She’s gracious and unpretentious. She’s humble and grateful. She’s simple and friendly. I like her. I really do. I mean, from a distance. Her response to Emma’s sting on Box Hill shows almost superhuman graciousness, but it still seems in character. Hurray for Miss Bates!

Emma: Latter Characters

But as I mentioned earlier, the cast changes abruptly mid-story. Enter Frank and Jane. I don’t have much to say about Jane except that she should have had more to say for herself. She’s as bland as a saltine cracker. But Frank Churchill is simply inexcusable. What possible redeeming characteristic does he have? Everything that seemed amiable was just a charade. His insinuating himself into Emma’s confidence against his own fiancé, his pretending to make fun of Jane to Emma, his excessive teasing and cruelty to Jane…he deserves a sound whoopin’ and no mistake. I don’t care what his motivations were; he was too far out of line to make a comeback in my good graces. 

And while we hear almost nothing from Mr. Elton again, we hear quite a bit from his preening, pretentious wife. Honestly, if I read the phrase “my brother, Mr. Suckling,” one more time, I’d probably have ripped the page out. But I’m sure that was the intention.

And Yet, Mr. Knightley

I do like Mr. Knightley, I suppose. But his change from coolness and criticism to devotion and lenience seems improbable and out of character. Would he really entangle himself with someone so young, silly, and ridiculous? I feel like it’s almost as likely for him to marry Harriet as Emma! But at least we have the comfort of knowing he can tell her when she’s out of line. When he finally reaches his grand finale of scoldings on Box Hill, his words finally have their desired effect: Emma changes. The only thing that would have made it more satisfying is if Miss Bates had dumped a bucket of pig slop on Emma’s head. I would have liked Miss Bates even more, I think. But as it is, the scolding was enough, and all’s well that ends well.  

A Sensible Heroine

So both novels have their fair share of aggravating characters. Then what makes P&P’s ridiculous characters more tolerable than Emma’s? Really, I think it’s the comfort of having a sensible heroine. In Emma, we feel helpless because we can’t identify with almost anyone in the book. Our heroine is so untrustworthy that we’re left adrift in a sea of frustration. It’s like watching The Office without Jim and Pam—just a madhouse. 

But in Pride and Prejudice, we have peace of mind knowing that Elizabeth can see these folks for who they are and can laugh accordingly. We see them through her eyes, we trust her perspective, and we grow with her. While both books are comedies, only Pride and Prejudice truly makes me laugh. A great many readers will disagree, and I heartily welcome that. After all, someone’s still reading Emma after all these years! But I’d rather chuckle with Elizabeth than groan at Emma.