It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife.
January 28, 1813: Pride and Prejudice is published.
Jane Austen’s most famous work, a satire of society and manners, was published 200 years ago today. Like all of her works, Pride and Prejudice was published anonymously - Austen was identified on the title page only as “the author of Sense and Sensibility”. Austen completed the original version in 1797. at which point it was entitled First Impressions, but this version was rejected for publication. By 1812 she had apparently revised the manuscript significantly, and it was this version that was eventually published, though under the (equally appropriate) title Pride and Prejudice, so named as to avoid confusion with other novels.
For historical context - Pride and Prejudice was written during the late Georgian era and is typically associated (along with Austen herself) with the Regency era, during which the future king George IV ruled as Prince Regent in his father’s stead. Although this was a time of great political and social change, both at home and abroad, Pride and Prejudice touches sparingly on these issues and instead focuses on the lives of the landed gentry and the not-quite-aristocrats. In addition, the novel cannot be neatly classified into one or the other of the major literary movements of the time; although Austen wrote during the Romantic period, her writing had little in common with the movement. In fact, Charlotte Brontë was a notable critic of the book, citing a lack of passion and emotion as her main complaint:
I had not seen “Pride and Prejudice,” till I read that sentence of yours, and then I got the book. And what did I find? An accurate daguerreotyped portrait of a common-place face; a carefully fenced, highly cultivated garden, with neat borders and delicate flowers; but no glance of a bright, vivid physiognomy, no open country, no fresh air, no blue hill, no bonny beck. I should hardly like to live with her ladies and gentlemen, in their elegant but confined houses.
Perhaps the main difference between the two was that Austen saw the world as a comedy rather than a tragedy (“For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbors, and laugh at them in our turn?”).
So, in every P&P adaptation or sequel or whatever an important decision is made at some point in the process, wittingly or otherwise, and that decision is about the two sides of Mr. Darcy.
Darcy is part snobby, arrogant douchebag and part socially awkward penguin and different P&P material balances that in different ways. Because Darcy is one of the most iconic romantic heroes in western fiction a lot of stuff tends to smooth over his faults and lean waaaay more towards socially awkward penguin (or in particularly egregious instances somehow make him not douchey AND suave?!?!).
For example, Matthew McFadyen’s Darcy is SO socially awkward that the moments he’s an arrogant douchebag because the story demands it seem completely discordant with the rest of his characterization and performance. Which is why the 2005 P&P is less about Darcy and Lizzie overcoming their pride and prejudices and growing as people than it is about them accepting their apparently intense sexual attraction to each other.
The thing is Darcy HAS to be a douchebag just like Lizzie HAS to be kind of a snarky asshole or else there is no character arc!
Now, that said, LBD had a built-in problem, a problem that it solved with brilliant casting and good writing, but one that I found fascinating, nonetheless.
That problem was multifaceted and arose for two primary reasons: audience foreknowledge and Darcy’s physical absence.
Because we don’t see Darcy for 60 episodes of LBD (though his presence is endlessly felt so he still manages to be a major character despite not physically being there) the audience must rely solely on other characters’ representations of him and primarily on Lizzie’s. Now, given that Lizzie dislikes Darcy and focuses intently on everything that she dislikes about him, it would seem that that would be enough to communicate his dickishness.
BUT the thing of it is, not only is the audience aware on a meta level of the fact that Darcy is in love with Lizzie and as such things like her assertions of dislike and disdain towards her on his part are inaccurate, but the other characters and the overall narrative itself go out of their way to present Lizzie as an unreliable narrator.
Even from almost the very first time Lizzie discusses Darcy, Charlotte counters the rude statement he made about Lizzie by pointing out that she heard Bing say that Darcy is “painfully shy.” This pattern continues throughout the episodes prior to Darcy actually appearing. Lizzie rants and rages about him and how terrible he is and it’s either so hyperbolic that you assume she must be exaggerating (“I dislike smiling, it contorts the face.”) or the other characters explicitly contradict her by pointing out further context or their own observations of Darcy.
Jane and Charlotte take over an entire episode of the vlog to present to the audience the fact that Darcy is clearly crushing on Lizzie (or, at least, that Caroline believes it to be the case). When Lizzie is at Netherfield and most often in Darcy’s company, Jane argues extensively that Darcy is, in fact, attempting to be nice to Lizzie while Lizzie insists that he dislikes her. Even Lydia’s representations of Lizzie’s interactions with Darcy present Lizzie as being excessively aggressive towards a hapless Darcy. And of course by the time Fitz shows up, his reiteration of Darcy’s unfortunate lack of social skills is hardly even necessary.
So, when you have Lizzie who the audience knows on a meta level is prejudiced against Darcy and who on a textual level is shown to be so consistently mistaken in her interpretation of his actions by almost every other character, you end up with a Darcy that the audience has never actually seen DO anything to Lizzie herself but be awkwardly in love with her. Which threatens to make Lizzie’s dislike him seem wildly unreasonable.
AND THEN!!! He appears.
And Daniel Vincent Gordh saves this Darcy from being over-idealized because he manages to portray the fact that he is an agoraphobic lobster, he is deeply in love with Lizzie, AND he’s kind of a dick. While his awkwardness and depth of genuine emotion are clear, he encases that in a haughtiness and stiff formality in his manner that allows you to so easily imagine why he would bug the shit out of Lizzie, why she would take everything he said the wrong way, and that sometimes she wouldn’t even need to take it the wrong way because he was probably saying something douchey.
So basically DVG appreciation post????
A++++ Darcying.
I feel like next I need to do a post about how FANTASTIC Ashley Clements is at Lizzie-ing. Warm, funny, clever, compassionate, snarky asshole of my heart. <33
Sterling Publishing is releasing some of our favorite classics with some seriously pretty new covers in March 2012. Click here for more information.
