The
role of a hero plays a focal point in the setting of a novel. The main story
line cannot move on itself without the presence of a hero. A male protagonist
brings security and action into a traditional narrative. Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey explains why Catharine
Morland is in a static situation in the beginning of the novel, “But when a
young lady is to be a heroine the perverseness of forty surrounding families
cannot prevent her. Something must and will happen to throw a hero in her way”
(Austen 8). Notice the instance, “a hero” is mentioned to the reader, the
presence of action words and events dramatically change the direction of where
the novel will go. A transitional phase has already occurred early on in the
novel. Therefore, Heroes in Austen’s novels affect each novel’s starting point
and conclusion. Heroes can significantly influence a novel’s narrative without
truly being “a hero”. For example, Austen
produces only one true hero in the three novels she works on simultaneously: Northanger Abbey, Sense and Sensibility, and Pride
and Prejudice. Mr. Darcy is the only real character, who epitomizes the
role of a patrician hero; Henry Tilney and Edward Ferrars lack character development.
It doesn’t necessarily mean the reader loses interests in Mr. Tilney or Edward,
because they seem to generate a sense of rawness which strips away their
traditional narrative titles unlike Darcy. Why does Austen choose to pair
Elinor with an awkward and self-conscious Edward, who does very little to be
called a hero? Elinor’s so-called hero
lacks the courage and financially stability to grow and remains a weak hero
throughout the novel. Henry Tilney represents the early development of Austen’s
traditional heroes. Mr. Tilney has several glitches, which need to be fixed both
in terms of gallantry and honesty. Mr. Darcy’s image as a hero will be analyzed
and criticized by comparing and contrasting to the heroes in Austen's first two
written novels. Therefore, the
discourse on Austen’s heroes is to understand why Austen is able to create
one true hero with a traditional paradigm, instead of three functional heroes to complement their heroines?
Going back to our theme of the waiting women, I feel like your argument actually spins it on its head with Tilney and Edward. The fact that men come and go, allows us to focus on the women and their "three dimensional heroine" identities. Men are not heroes here; they are just venues from which our women will take initiative. Men sort of become the backdrop while the marriage plot is made inevitable by the women's choices. Men, of course have to give the final word to tie the knot however.
ReplyDeleteCatherine and Elinor, although very differently, direct their men back to them. Tilney is led on by Catherine's flattery and Edward is also given special treatment by Elinor, who finds in him what no else does. Although Tilney is more vibrant that Edward, they are both bland figures who do not develop much other than by being finally "reined in" by the women... The women chose their men out in the public wild, lasso them and wait for the long rope to come to its end. So yes, the women wait, but only for their prey to be dragged in with kicking feet. Ultimately, they are tamed men though. Tilney appears more sheepish than usual when he comes to propose at the Morland house. Edward is even more flustered than usual, but is finally able to give Elinor the words she wants to hear. Haha, maybe I am going too far with this...
I think it'd be fair to include Captain Frederick Wentworth from _Persuasion_ in this list of heroes. Though I think your post is more about the inverted heroes--those who don't fit our prototypical mold--I think Wentworth would just as well fit in. I think the Austenian male hero is always flawed; none from any of her novels that we've read are the perfect protagonist. That would make for a rather complicated story, or if you'd rather turn it the other way, possibly even quite boring since we know there's nothing about him that we can find extra-ordinary or imperfect. _Sir Charles Grandison_ was Austen's favorite novel, and I think what she's tried to do with her heroes is do the opposite of what Samuel Richardson did for his: while Richardson tried to write a perfect hero, Austen created some flawed ones, yet still allowed them to achieve "perfection" by way of marriage with their perfect partner.
ReplyDelete