Is Jane Austen's "Truth" still universally acknowledged?

[Melbourne]

“Acre Chasers”. Young women in country towns looking to hook up with a farmer with good land. Still a thing.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@Aspidistra

[In] Pride and Prejudice…The men in the story don’t need to get married - it’s irrelevant to their wellbeing…

I disagree. Both Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley are portrayed as happier, more fulfilled men for having met and married their respective wives. And arguably Mr. Collins, too.

As to the Austens and the Royal Navy: "Jane Austen and the Navy" - Cafe Society - Straight Dope Message Board

[Quartz]

@Dangerosa

I’d say marrying for survival isn’t necessary like it used to be. In Austen’s time, an unmarried gentlewoman…

Since the thread has been resurrected, I’ll nitpick and point out that an unmarried gentlewoman would have been just fine as long as she had her own income. Such women were highly-sought after, of course, by fortune-seeking men. It was unmarried gentlewomen without funds that were in difficulty.

[Shoeless]

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains.

Seemed appropriate…

[Shodan]

@Dangerosa

I’d say marrying for survival isn’t necessary like it used to be. In Austen’s time, an unmarried gentlewoman MIGHT be able to get a job as a companion or governess - where she might be abused or raped - but there were fewer positions than unmarried women. If she wasn’t that lucky, she might find work at a school. There were some other minor professions, she might make a little money doing botanical illustrations or writing - but probably not enough to live on. Or she lived with her brothers - if she had any - or maybe one of her sisters’ husbands would take her in - if they managed to marry well, but that created a burden on her family.

And for Elizabeth Bennett, it was particularly desperate, because once her father died, she and her mother and sisters would be kicked out of their house.

And have basically nothing to fall back on - none of them were trained to do anything but be a gentleman’s wife. That’s part of the bitter irony of the exchange in Pride and Prejudice about what constitutes an “accomplished” woman - she can paint and sing and play the piano. Not that she can earn a living - that she is a decoration to a house, like good furniture.

That was something that always worried me about the conclusion of Pride and Prejudice - could Elizabeth Bennett run a large household for Mr. Darcy? Her mother does not appear to be much of a role model, nor her father. She can read and write, and she managed to marry a rich man before she was twenty. Maybe the learning curve of running a large estate is less steep than I think - but it won’t all be beer and skittles supervising the staff at Pemberley.

Okay, she isn’t a naïve simpleton like her older sister, or a brainless bimbo like Lydia. Those aren’t very high bars to surpass.

I get that it’s a satire of her society, where women have to marry well in order to survive. What happens after they marry well? How many marriages are actually happy in the novel? Her parents aren’t happy - her father spends all his time in the library because he can’t stand his wife. Lydian marries a jerk, her older sister marries the winner of the Upper Class Twit of the Year competition. Charlotte marries Elizabeth’s cousin the idiot clergyman, and encourages gardening to get him out of the house and away from her as much as possible. And loses Elizabeth as a friend because she married him. Which makes IMO Elizabeth look like a jerk - Charlotte takes the only realistic chance she has, and Elizabeth looks down her nose at her for it.

Maybe Elizabeth lives happily ever after. I only wish she doesn’t live snobbishly ever after, because most women don’t get to marry a rich, handsome aristocrat who isn’t a jerk.

Regards,
Shodan