This post might be a HUGE mistake, I tell myself. Jane Austen fans have strong opinions about their favorite author, and they don’t hesitate to make their feelings known. You, my dear readers, have probably debated Jane Austen as a feminist before. But I have pondered the question for a long time, and I think Austen fans can explore the idea without getting a bee in their bonnets. So let’s take a look at why people might think that Austen was a feminist, and then why they might think quite the opposite. At the end I’ll ask you to give your opinion.
Burn the bonnets! Jane Austen was a feminist, and I can prove it:
First, Austen’s female characters accept marriage on their own terms. Elizabeth Bennet famously turns down security in the form of the ghastly Collins and the also appalling (at first!) Darcy, and remains true to her ideal of marriage for love. She’s not the only Austen character to hold out despite society’s pressure: Fanny Price defies her uncle and refuses to accept Henry Crawford’s proposal, no matter how eligible he looks on paper (or how he charms her family!). There are other examples, but you get the idea.
Secondly, her female characters are no shrinking regency wall flowers. They have wit, ambition, and agency. They are practical and thoughtful, capable of taking charge in difficult situations, like Anne Elliot at Lyme and Eleanor Dashwood at Barton Cottage. The women we’re meant to dislike, such as Caroline Bingley and Mary Crawford, still have strong personalities and an in-charge attitude. Even today, female characters are too often written as caricatures instead of real people.
Lastly, Austen’s novels are not so much romances as they are criticisms of society. Austen uses her pen to skewer the constrained circumstances of women in her day. The Bennet daughters face losing their home some day because of the failures of the patriarchal system that robs them of their inheritance. Charlotte Lucas accepts the off putting Collins as a husband because literally any husband is better than no husband at all. (Or is it? We never really get an answer.) Women are merely cogs in an ugly, woman-hating machine, Austen seems to say, and they do better when they fight the system instead of meekly surrendering to it.
Put down your pitchforks! Jane Austen was a traditionalist, and here’s why:
First, Austen’s heroines may be witty and self-aware, but their stories still end in weddings. Elizabeth Bennet, Emma Woodhouse, Anne Elliot—they all end up, well, married. For a supposed feminist, Austen’s ultimate reward for her heroines seems awfully traditional. Why can’t they be happy without a ring?
Secondly, Austen doesn’t exactly wave a banner for women who step outside of society’s norms. Lydia Bennet, who lived with Wickham before marriage, ends up in a loveless relationship, shiftless and penniless. Maria Rushworth is literally exiled after her adulterous affair. In Austen’s world, only “good” girls are rewarded with their heart’s desire. And their heart’s desire is always a man! Could there be a more traditional outlook?
Lastly, Austen may poke sly fun at the customs of her world, but she doesn’t propose anything different. None of her characters eschew marriage, burn their corsets in public, or found a secret sisterhood of suffragettes. When Mary Crawford suggests that society should forgive Maria Rushworth and Henry Crawford for their affair, Edmund’s eyes are finally opened to Mary’s flawed character and he rejects her. Nowhere does Austen suggest that Mary may be right. Likewise, Austen has no sympathy for Lydia’s youthful indiscretion, nor suggest that being married for life to a loser is a harsh punishment for such a young girl. Austen was not a revolutionary.
Both of you, settle down! Isn’t there a middle ground?
I think there is! Austen wasn’t a feminist by today’s standards. But she was a woman writing about women at a time when women’s voices were often silenced or ignored. Her works explore female experience with a depth and empathy that were unusual for her era. She operated within the world she knew and pointed out its flaws without demanding that her readers try to burn it to the ground. Her way was more gentle: a sly comment, a subtle joke, an appeal to reason and logic. And frankly, I prefer her way.
If you want to see Austen as a feminist, there is room in her writings for you to make that case. But if you want to see her as a traditionalist, there’s plenty of room for that as well. In the end, I think which view you take says more about you than about her.
So where do you fall on this question? Do you see Austen as a feminist, a traditionalist, or as something in between? Or is there another possibility altogether to consider? Let me know what you think!
Further reading:
https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/was-jane-austen-a-feminist
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/jane-austen-feminist-icon
Leave a Reply