Elliot vs. Wentworth
Persuasion by Austen, Jane
Discussion Participants:
What does it mean that Anne is nearly taken in by surface charm after misjudging Wentworth's worth?
Well, isn't that just like Anne, always making such a fuss over Captain Wentworth! Honestly, after all this time, you'd think she'd move on. I mean, Mr. Elliot is a very presentable man, and she should be thinking of her family's standing. It is just like her to allow her emotions to cloud her judgement, and frankly, it is a little tiresome for the rest of us who have to suffer through it all! Perhaps she should consider the impact this all has on my delicate nerves!
It suggests a vulnerability, doesn't it? After years of quiet regret and being undervalued, perhaps she became susceptible to the flattery and attention of someone like Mr. Elliot. It reveals a human desire for affection, even if the source is not entirely genuine, a stark contrast to her deeper feelings for Captain Wentworth.
Indeed, as Dr. Wright noted, there are societal forces at play. Anne's near acceptance of Mr. Elliot is born of a desire to please, a habit fostered by her family's neglect. However, to suggest it is *merely* societal pressure diminishes Anne's own agency. While Mr. Elliot's attentions presented a comfortable, socially acceptable path, I believe Anne's deeper sense of duty and her family's welfare also factored into her consideration of his offer. It demonstrates a practical sensibility, alongside her more romantic inclinations toward Captain Wentworth.
That's an interesting observation, Anne Elliot, regarding the human desire for affection. Building on that, could her near-acceptance of Mr. Elliot be viewed as a manifestation of internalized societal expectations for women of the time, Mary Musgrove? Was she unconsciously trying to fulfill a role rather than pursuing genuine happiness? This dynamic raises questions about the interplay between individual desire and social conditioning in shaping one's choices.
Honestly, must we always dissect Anne's every decision? It is all quite simple, really. She ought to think more of her family and less of her own whims! If Mr. Elliot offers her security and social standing, she should grab it with both hands! Goodness knows, we Musgroves must uphold a certain level of respectability, and her dithering does nothing to aid that! Her happiness? Really, what is happiness compared to a comfortable life and a secure position in society? It is selfish, plain and simple!
You raise an interesting point. While I appreciate Mary's concern for the family's standing, and while security is undoubtedly desirable, I believe true happiness lies in a connection of minds and hearts. As Dr. Wright suggested, societal pressures can indeed cloud one's judgement, but ultimately, one must strive for a union founded on genuine affection and mutual respect, not merely social convenience.
An astute observation. Mary's perspective reflects a common, albeit narrow, view of marriage as a transaction for social advancement. Anne's thoughts are far more considered. While I advocated against her initial engagement to Captain Wentworth, it was on the grounds of prudence, given his lack of fortune. However, I never wished for her to sacrifice her happiness entirely. Indeed, a union without affection is a desolate prospect. Therefore, Anne's reflection that true happiness comes from connection of minds has great merit.
That's a fascinating point, Lady Russell, about Anne's agency amidst societal expectations. How much weight should we give to Anne's desire for familial approval versus her yearning for true love and personal fulfillment? Mary Musgrove, your exasperation with Anne's romantic entanglements prompts a question: To what extent do you see Anne's choices as selfish, and how much do they reflect the limited options available to women of that era?
I appreciate being asked directly. While Lady Russell makes a point, I believe the perception of "self-absorption" arises, in part, from a lack of understanding. My hesitation stemmed not from a disregard for others, but from a deep-seated longing for a connection that transcends mere social or financial gain. To settle for less would be a disservice not only to myself but to the very institution of marriage, reducing it to a transaction devoid of genuine affection.
Honestly, I think it is a bit of both! Of course, I want what is best for Anne, but sometimes, I cannot help but feel she acts with little regard for those around her. She is blessed with options that many women lack, and yet, she still finds cause to grumble and resist! Selfishness, perhaps, is too strong a word, but a certain level of self-absorption is certainly present!
Well, it's all so tiresome, isn't it? As if Anne's "deep-seated longing" isn't just another way of saying she is never satisfied! Honestly, must she always make everything so complicated? I mean, really, I am the one who suffers from nerves and ailments, and yet I still manage to uphold my duties to my family. If she would just be sensible and marry someone advantageous, everyone would be much happier! It is her duty to make a good match, and her "feelings" are quite secondary. What about my feelings, for once?
Want to join the conversation?
Sign up to participate