We’ve all asked ourselves this. Did love ever catch Jane by surprise, like it did Elizabeth? Did she secretly pine, like Fanny, or did she experience Anne’s years of regret over a rejected proposal? As her readers, don’t we all hope Austen felt this emotion that she wrote about so movingly?
And I know. This has been written about before, but still I’m fascinated by this topic, and I just had to dig into the research and see what I could uncover.
Austen’s Philosophy on Love
Austen’s heroines married for love, but marriage at the time was an economic decision, and Austen’s family lacked money. Did Jane agree with her heroines that marriage was for love, or was she more practical?
An 1814 letter to her niece Fanny gives us a clue. Fanny asked her aunt’s opinion of a suitor, and Austen, after listing the suitor’s favorable qualities, advised, “If his deficiencies of manner strike you more than all his good qualities, give him up at once.” This is still good advice, isn’t it? We all need an aunt like this. Austen then concluded, “Nothing can be compared to the misery of being bound without Love.” Yes! There is the Austen we expected—with a philosophy much closer to Elizabeth’s than Charlotte’s. (Even though this is what we expected, it’s still a relief. Austen was a practical women with no dowry, and none of us want to think life would have pushed her into becoming a Mrs. Collins.)
This site is ending, so I’ve moved this post. Read the rest here...Jane’s dalliance with Tom Lefroy is up next!
5 responses to “Was Jane Ever in Love? (Part 1: Tom Lefroy)”
When I was still teaching, every year after AP Language scores came out (meaning late July), I would send out an invite to my students to meet me at a local pizza shop for lunch and some other event – ice skating, high air park, etc. My treat for all their hard work they did and keeping me above the 90% for those scoring above a three and earning college credit, and before they went off to AP Lit the following year. In 2007, we had our pizza and then went to see “Becoming Jane” on the first day of its release, Aug. 3, at a local movie theatre. My treat!
Students in the Advanced Placement Language and Composition course read fiction and nonfiction texts through the eyes of a writer, exploring the choices writers and speakers make to persuade and entertain their audience. It is about structure, not the story line.
Yes, I was an Austen freak in those days also. Most of those in the class had also had me for World Lit as tenth graders. Counting my class there were perhaps 45 people at the afternoon showing. The others in the audience could not quite figure out what was all the whispering about. For example, when Cassandra Austen’s betrothed died and she receives the letter, it is raining. As soon as the letter was handed to her, one student said, “Who died?” You see, one of the books we used in the class was called “How to Read Literature Like a Professor- A Lively and Entertaining Guide to Reading Between The Lines.” In that book, the reader is told that rain often indicates death, a character with the initials J.C. is a Christ figure, etc.
Anyway, after the film, the others in the audience began asking the students questions, especially why they all groaned when Tom LeFroy’s daughter is named “Jane.” I had to explain to the others in attendance that LeFroy’s wife’s mother was also named “Jane,” and it was not an Jane Austen reference. I also had to explain the obvious references to P&P and S&S, Austen’s first two novels to be published and the dramatic license taken by the film, along with the letter you referenced above. We were inside for a good half hour fielding questions from others. Quite fun and definitely memorable. A proud teacher moment as you can tell.
Sorry for rambling on . . .
What a great thing you did for those students every year! How fun, Regina. I used to teach AP Lang.
I realized as I read your comment that I haven’t watched Becoming Jane, I think because I read once it wasn’t very factual, but I’m realizing now I should give it a chance.
I’m sure your students still think of that memory too.
Great post! Hopefully Tom was not a cad Jane Austen deserved love too!💗 Sounds like you were a great teacher Regina! I saw Becoming Jane and loved it! I’m sure she experienced love but her family had to come first.
Very thoughtful, Kirstin. One of the things that I wondered was if Tom was considerate of Jane by not proposing. If I remember correctly, he came from a family with a wealthy uncle who was very strict in who he was willing to help financially. Because Tom’s older brother married someone that was unapproved, he was basically disinherited and did not have his uncle’s blessing or financial help.
If Tom really loved Jane, he may have taken that into consideration if he was thinking of her welfare first rather than his own.
Back then marriages were considered according to financial gain more so than love, and when we consider the circumstances that people lived with, we can understand why love was second, third or fourth down the line.
I personally feel that Lefroy loved Jane. Whether it was a yearning to marry her or loving her enough to not put her in stressful conditions because of finances, we may never know. But I feel that there was something there, else he would not have traveled to England to honor her after her death.
As to Jane’s feelings, she may have just viewed Tom as a good friend. However, I feel that there was more on her part as history does not mention her in connection with any other man during her life. Since she enjoyed parties and dancing, yet wound up a spinster, I like to think of her and her lost love, Tom LeFroy.
That’s pretty Gianna. I do think they felt something for each other, and if he had proposed, I’ve thought she might have accepted, especially considering her young age. She might not yet have been fully cognizant of what she’d had to give up (her writing) if she married. They definitely felt a pull towards each other.
Their families remained close, and there were other marriages between their families, so I think they continued to think well of each other.