Sense and Sensibility as a novel is divided into three parts based on the predominant location (home) of the protagonists - Elinor and Marianne Dashwood. On the surface the text seems highly conventional, with a happy ending and women that reprise normative gender roles. However it is necessary to consider how conventional the novel truly is, and whether Austen actually tries to critique the social order and hierarchy through a seemingly politically-correct novel.
Through a complex exposition Austen introduces the readers to the characters, each described with the characteristic that supposedly governs them. This supposition and labelling of characteristic allows the reader to perceive the characters in certain lights and perhaps implores the reader to find the characteristic in each action of the player. For example, Austen describes Elinor as "possessing a strength of understanding, and coolness of judgement" which (even though continually reinforced) is almost searched for by the reader and found in even the most unrelatable moments and chapters of the novel - when Elinor sympathises with Willoughby at Cleveland for the course of his action. Despite having understood how mistreating Willoughby is the reader is almost ready to accept Elinor's forgiveness (which appears highly emotional, situational and a certain lapse of judgement on the part of Elinor). It is the reinforced description by Austen that permits the reader to overlook the confused and mixed distinction that she tries to separate.
However, just like it could be debated whether Austen intended to critique or pursue the societal norms, hierarchy and order, so could it be debated about whether Austen specifically merged contrasts to provide the idea "that nothing is unmixed" - as believed by critic Tony Tanner - or whether she simply tried to separate and contrast the followers of the Romantic (Marianne and her sensibilities) and the Enlightenment (Elinor and her sense).
Throughout the novel there is a larger looming 'resemblance and substitution' pattern, as seen in the resemblance of the three pairs of sisters (Marianne and Elinor Dashwood, Lucy and Nancy Steele, Lady Middleton and Mrs. Palmer - the Steele sisters seem almost like a reflection of the Dashwood pair), the two men (Edward and Willoughby) and their fashion of promising and jilting women and also being disinherited by women, etc. These resemblances give rise to the possibility of substitution, that the unavailability of a particular person/property can be replaced by another similar one.
Similarity and substitution is also noticed amongst Elinor and Marianne themselves, highlighted in the context of Marianne's probable dying and thus being replaced by Elinor as the hopeful wife of Colonel Brandon. The idea comes through the conversations between Mrs. Jennings and Sir John Middleton and from the statement of Mrs. Dashwood to Elinor, confiding "how desirable it would be if Colonel Brandon married either one of them"
It is perhaps these patterns of similarity and possible substitution (examples of which could include, Lucy and Nancy Steele seem as mirror to Elinor and Marianne Dashwood, and replace the Dashwood sisters not only as the lover of the "beau" Edward but also as guests invited to reside at the residence of John Dashwood in London) that give the idea that Jane Austen did not attempt to distinguish opposites, rather to showcase their combination in each person.
This idea is also expressed in the words of Austen herself, when Marianne is quoted to say, "our situations are alike, we have neither of us anything to tell...you because you communicate, and I because I conceal nothing." Thus being similar for different reasons.
However it is necessary to point out that while Austen may seem to point out similarity and substitution she only does so while "routinely countering it with difference" as is argued by critic Susan C. Greenfield. This regular interjection of contrasts and its highlighted repetition particularly in speech and behaviour or the physical acts of the heroines points out Austen's desire to distinguish them while pointing out they may exist together (as do Elinor and Marianne) in an individual.
The idea that these contrasts be separated then does not go with the idea of the novel. Austen's portrayal of the heroines and their dependence and understanding of each other leaves them inseparable. Seen in the actual happy ending of the novel "where the two sisters remain together despite being separated by marriage" giving the reader the only hope of solace and joy at the turn of events all of which may otherwise appear conventionally 'happy'.
What maybe noted is the characters' constant rejections of such mixtures - claiming that they are absolute and take pride in their 'individual' distinction. Seen particularly in Marianne's dismissive attitude towards Colonel Brandon and Edward for lacking the "taste" and romantic fervour she shares. Another clear example is the conversation between Elinor and Marianne at Norland during the visit of Edward Ferrars, when Marianne calls Elinor "cold-hearted" for describing her feelings towards Edward as limited to "like and esteem" or Marianne's dialogue that she could never be "happy with a man whose taste did not in every point coincide with my own".
Marianne's sense of self derives out of her passion and zest for "emotions" and her sensibilities, whereas Elinor's comes out of her reasoning mind and "sense". These ideas and morals along with a missing 'male-protector' leaves the young ladies with an idea of self-ownership and individualism - cited as ideologies of modernity.
"Self proprietorship however is limited to those with property in things" which most notably is the male inheritor of property due to male primogeniture. This causes critics such as Susan Greenfield to argue that "individualism is rarely available to those without property" since "individualism promises the right to self-possession" or "property in his own person" as believes John Locke.
However, the ideas of Marianne and Elinor's self-possession "prove little more than compensatory promises" (Greenfield 2009) since they are as "trespassed upon as the houses they never own". That male visitors enter their rented/visiting habitation as and when they please while also enforcing their idea of ownership over the women. Willoughby "quitted not his hold till he had seated her (Marianne) in a chair in the parlour" while entering "directly into the house". Similarly Colonel Brandon regularly enforced his ownership by inviting the Dashwoods to his gatherings and parties , leaving them little time for 'leisure' which appears as "rent on very hard terms".
Such obligations combined with women's lack of ability to visit without invitation while also being sympathetic to male feelings (Elinor's sympathy with the justifications of Colonel Brandon and Willoughby) realises the "gendered and economic exclusivity of self-possession" (Greenfield 2009). This works as another contrast in the novel - while Elinor and Marianne believe they possess themselves as individuals, the society permits it not.
This works on a parallel of the contrast between Marianne and Elinor - Marianne being a true and honest believer in her taste and "sensibilities" despite behavioural rejection and Elinor representing the consent of society.
In such the entire novel works along these contrasts represented by one of the sisters. Helping in building plot to the story - the contrasts and their combination at that permit Austen to comment and critique the society without choosing sides. Therefore Sense and Sensibility is a wonderful representation of Austen's society of social obligation, concealment and property over individualism and romance through the combination of the various opposites. It is through the 'othering' that Austen shows the characteristics of the people and society she writes about.
Through a complex exposition Austen introduces the readers to the characters, each described with the characteristic that supposedly governs them. This supposition and labelling of characteristic allows the reader to perceive the characters in certain lights and perhaps implores the reader to find the characteristic in each action of the player. For example, Austen describes Elinor as "possessing a strength of understanding, and coolness of judgement" which (even though continually reinforced) is almost searched for by the reader and found in even the most unrelatable moments and chapters of the novel - when Elinor sympathises with Willoughby at Cleveland for the course of his action. Despite having understood how mistreating Willoughby is the reader is almost ready to accept Elinor's forgiveness (which appears highly emotional, situational and a certain lapse of judgement on the part of Elinor). It is the reinforced description by Austen that permits the reader to overlook the confused and mixed distinction that she tries to separate.
However, just like it could be debated whether Austen intended to critique or pursue the societal norms, hierarchy and order, so could it be debated about whether Austen specifically merged contrasts to provide the idea "that nothing is unmixed" - as believed by critic Tony Tanner - or whether she simply tried to separate and contrast the followers of the Romantic (Marianne and her sensibilities) and the Enlightenment (Elinor and her sense).
Throughout the novel there is a larger looming 'resemblance and substitution' pattern, as seen in the resemblance of the three pairs of sisters (Marianne and Elinor Dashwood, Lucy and Nancy Steele, Lady Middleton and Mrs. Palmer - the Steele sisters seem almost like a reflection of the Dashwood pair), the two men (Edward and Willoughby) and their fashion of promising and jilting women and also being disinherited by women, etc. These resemblances give rise to the possibility of substitution, that the unavailability of a particular person/property can be replaced by another similar one.
Similarity and substitution is also noticed amongst Elinor and Marianne themselves, highlighted in the context of Marianne's probable dying and thus being replaced by Elinor as the hopeful wife of Colonel Brandon. The idea comes through the conversations between Mrs. Jennings and Sir John Middleton and from the statement of Mrs. Dashwood to Elinor, confiding "how desirable it would be if Colonel Brandon married either one of them"
It is perhaps these patterns of similarity and possible substitution (examples of which could include, Lucy and Nancy Steele seem as mirror to Elinor and Marianne Dashwood, and replace the Dashwood sisters not only as the lover of the "beau" Edward but also as guests invited to reside at the residence of John Dashwood in London) that give the idea that Jane Austen did not attempt to distinguish opposites, rather to showcase their combination in each person.
This idea is also expressed in the words of Austen herself, when Marianne is quoted to say, "our situations are alike, we have neither of us anything to tell...you because you communicate, and I because I conceal nothing." Thus being similar for different reasons.
However it is necessary to point out that while Austen may seem to point out similarity and substitution she only does so while "routinely countering it with difference" as is argued by critic Susan C. Greenfield. This regular interjection of contrasts and its highlighted repetition particularly in speech and behaviour or the physical acts of the heroines points out Austen's desire to distinguish them while pointing out they may exist together (as do Elinor and Marianne) in an individual.
The idea that these contrasts be separated then does not go with the idea of the novel. Austen's portrayal of the heroines and their dependence and understanding of each other leaves them inseparable. Seen in the actual happy ending of the novel "where the two sisters remain together despite being separated by marriage" giving the reader the only hope of solace and joy at the turn of events all of which may otherwise appear conventionally 'happy'.
What maybe noted is the characters' constant rejections of such mixtures - claiming that they are absolute and take pride in their 'individual' distinction. Seen particularly in Marianne's dismissive attitude towards Colonel Brandon and Edward for lacking the "taste" and romantic fervour she shares. Another clear example is the conversation between Elinor and Marianne at Norland during the visit of Edward Ferrars, when Marianne calls Elinor "cold-hearted" for describing her feelings towards Edward as limited to "like and esteem" or Marianne's dialogue that she could never be "happy with a man whose taste did not in every point coincide with my own".
Marianne's sense of self derives out of her passion and zest for "emotions" and her sensibilities, whereas Elinor's comes out of her reasoning mind and "sense". These ideas and morals along with a missing 'male-protector' leaves the young ladies with an idea of self-ownership and individualism - cited as ideologies of modernity.
"Self proprietorship however is limited to those with property in things" which most notably is the male inheritor of property due to male primogeniture. This causes critics such as Susan Greenfield to argue that "individualism is rarely available to those without property" since "individualism promises the right to self-possession" or "property in his own person" as believes John Locke.
However, the ideas of Marianne and Elinor's self-possession "prove little more than compensatory promises" (Greenfield 2009) since they are as "trespassed upon as the houses they never own". That male visitors enter their rented/visiting habitation as and when they please while also enforcing their idea of ownership over the women. Willoughby "quitted not his hold till he had seated her (Marianne) in a chair in the parlour" while entering "directly into the house". Similarly Colonel Brandon regularly enforced his ownership by inviting the Dashwoods to his gatherings and parties , leaving them little time for 'leisure' which appears as "rent on very hard terms".
Such obligations combined with women's lack of ability to visit without invitation while also being sympathetic to male feelings (Elinor's sympathy with the justifications of Colonel Brandon and Willoughby) realises the "gendered and economic exclusivity of self-possession" (Greenfield 2009). This works as another contrast in the novel - while Elinor and Marianne believe they possess themselves as individuals, the society permits it not.
This works on a parallel of the contrast between Marianne and Elinor - Marianne being a true and honest believer in her taste and "sensibilities" despite behavioural rejection and Elinor representing the consent of society.
In such the entire novel works along these contrasts represented by one of the sisters. Helping in building plot to the story - the contrasts and their combination at that permit Austen to comment and critique the society without choosing sides. Therefore Sense and Sensibility is a wonderful representation of Austen's society of social obligation, concealment and property over individualism and romance through the combination of the various opposites. It is through the 'othering' that Austen shows the characteristics of the people and society she writes about.
