(above: a still of Catherine from the new version of Northanger Abbey, to be aired on PBS this Sunday, February 14 (Valentine's Day)! On Monday I will post my own response to the adaptation, and hope you will respond to my response with comments.
Answer two of the following...
1. Re-read Henry’s speech which follows his discovery of Catherine’s snooping (on page 186): “If I understand you rightly, you had formed a surmise of such horror as I have hardly words to—Dear Miss Morland, consider the dreadful nature of the suspicions you have entertained. What have you been judging us from?” How do you read this passage? Is this sense shocking her into an awareness of her overworked sensibility? Or does this speech have ironic implications that only the narrator (and perhaps the reader) can appreciate? Does English society “prepare us for such atrocities” (186)?
2. Somewhat related to the above, is General Tilney the true “monster” of the novel? Is he similar to Manfred—a real man working real “evil” amidst the Gothic terror and imagined prodigies? How does Catherine understand/account for his actions in the novel? Does she find them “Gothic”—or of a much more mundane nature?
3. In the last chapters, we get an interesting view of life in the Morland home—particularly in the interaction between Catherine and her mother. How does Austen depict this domestic world? How is Catherine understood here, and do you feel Austen’s portrait is sentimental or critical?
4. In her Introduction to Northanger Abbey, Marilyn Butler writes, “Austen’s compact with her readers is never puritanical. Traditional stories end with satisfied desire; surprisingly often this encompasses the desire for goods. Happiness comes in Northanger Abbey as a sitting-room with a window down to the floor, and a view of apple trees” (xlvii). Is she suggesting here that marital bliss is still tied to class and possessions? Despite Catherine’s sensibility, does Austen ultimately reward her heroine with a sensible match—a man of property and comfort? Do we think her sensibility will continue to thrive in this setting—or is Austen no longer interested in that?
Alex Taussig
ReplyDelete2. General Tilney is -very- similar to Manfred, as he is "the real bad guy". I wouldn't call him evil, after all, lots of people are extremely greedy (he would have earned "evil" if he really had locked his wife up somewhere in Northanger Abbey), just as Manfred is not truly evil, even though he ends up killing someone. I think that men such as these are essential components of the eighteenth century Gothic novel: not evil, but they are what we should really be afraid of. Blurry reality can be much more dangerous than bumps in the night. I remember that Catherine was confused about General Tilney for a very long time: how can someone so nice do these terrible things? But she eventually comes to a conclusion similar to the one that she made about John Thorpe: I just don't care for him, and he definitely has faults. Sense strikes again! I think that once she convinces herself that he does not have his wife locked up somewhere in the abbey, Catherine does not see the General's actions as Gothic at all. He is rude, greedy, and not to her liking, but she has read the Gothic, and well, he's not it.
3. I believe that while she was at Bath and Northanger Abbey, Catherine was a stone placed into a rushing river, whereas at home, she finds herself dropped into stagnant water. Catherine has experienced monumental personal growth, and it is clear that her family and home life is too unchanged and dull to compare to her travels and lessons learned. Austen depicts this best by Catherine's mind spinning in all directions while in body she sits and tries to concentrate on sewing. Her mother can see that something is agitating her daughter and is concerned, but she tries to push Catherine forward into the realm of ladies and pincushions. I think that Austen's tone is critical but not biting: almost every eighteen year old sees their parents as stupid and dull at some point, unwise in the ways of the world, and this is what she portrays at the end of the novel. The proof of it, I believe, is how much things lighten up when Henry comes over. Henry, in addition to being her love interest, is someone Catherine associates with the "rushing river", and very importantly, not her parents' age.
2. Somewhat related to the above, is General Tilney the true “monster” of the novel? Is he similar to Manfred—a real man working real “evil” amidst the Gothic terror and imagined prodigies? How does Catherine understand/account for his actions in the novel? Does she find them “Gothic”—or of a much more mundane nature?
ReplyDeleteThe General is no monster. Unlike Manfred, who lets throws away all good sense General Tilney is acting as was considered proper, for the most part. True, he was a bit ruse in dismissing Catherine in such a hasty manner, but he felt as if he had been set up and lied too. Once he had the complete truth, he relented.
As for a claim that he acted greedily, let us remember the time period and the mores of the country. When a gentelman got married, it was not uncommon for the bride to bring something to the marriage. A marriage was supposed to be financially supportable. The general was simply looking to his son’s welfare by insuring he married a woman of at least modest financial means.
If this story has any monsters it would be the Thorpes. It was Jon Thorpe’s lies about Catherine’s wealth that created the issue with the General. Even that was not entirely evil, he simply wanted to make himself look better. Then there is Isabella. She is greedy and uses her looks to try to attract men of wealth and infuence in order to improve her status. Like her brother, this isn’t truly eil either. Though greed is one of the deadly sins, it does not alone constitute evil.
3. In the last chapters, we get an interesting view of life in the Morland home—particularly in the interaction between Catherine and her mother. How does Austen depict this domestic world? How is Catherine understood here, and do you feel Austen’s portrait is sentimental or critical?
For the most part I would say that the depiction of Catherine’s home life is a discription of a typical home of the realtively well off. Women were expected to be able to manage a home, including mundane jobs such as needle work. The change that Catherine has undergone while away, is something that her parents are seeing with fresh eyes, so at first it makes sense that she isn’t understood. However, her mother shows that she has a good head on her shoulders when Henry show up. Quickly she see’s her daughter in a new light and realizes what had been bothering her daughter, who is no longer an innocent, little girl.
Side note: not part of any of the questions.
It is this change, the innocence lost, that makes this book a Gothic novel. True, it had me almost in tears because a soap opera is a soap opera, whether it is on the boob-tube or in 200 year old books.
But, it is this element of experiencing the world and growing up that is essential. Austin plays with the idea of the gothic in Catherine’s imagination, but shows there are no real monsters. Instead, she shows us that emotional side of the Gothic.
~Question 1~
ReplyDeleteI believe that Henry’s words to Catherine were a stern rebuke of her behavior and questionings, but by the same token, I believe that he was calling her to action to begin(in earnest) demarcating her lines of the Sense and the Sensibility. Catherine had been involved and engaged in so much characterizations and story lines that she sought those aspects in her real world. Chances are, her opinions of men and relationships have been completely skewed, which of course, would directly affect Henry. These are important things not only for one’s well being and edification but to clarify the realities of relationships from the fantasy worlds that are sometimes indulged in.
~Question 4~
I don’t think that the presence of apple trees (looking through the window) is a sign of affluent lifestyle or the caste system really, because the apple is a traditional symbol in British lore not only of Avalon’s orchards but also a symbol of balance from the star shape that the seeds take within the core. I think that if we were to follow the myth of Avalon, we may find our real answer. Avalon in the lore was “The Isle of Avellania”, sometimes also known as the “Isle of Apples” and “Isle of Women”. For Catherine to be able to look out and see apple trees may be a symbolic device for showing that Catherine has taken responsibility for her own actions, made her choices as a sovereign female and was willing to live with them. The apple could signify growth and balance in her character and interior self (particularly if cross-referenced with the English/Welsh/Scottish/Irish Goddesses (such as Branwen and Blodduewedd)
Austen rewards the heroine with a mate of good sense. As always, a balance of opposite is necessary to life. In fact, that could be a very sublime point as well—that through the image of the apples, a reader might look to the meaning of an apple in various folklores and spiritual traditions and they would most certainly turn up a history of the apple as a fruit of spiritual nature in more than one religion! By rewarding Catherine with a happy ending with a man of good sense, the equilibrium is found at last. I do think that Catherine will continue to have her moments of sensibility, for much of that is “hardwired” into the feminine psyche. It’s even been called “Cinderella Syndrome” because women have the tendency to look for a fairytale like life, complete with Prince Charming. Having indulged in flights of fancy for so long, I think that the ability to look for, wish for the unusual and fantastical, will continue with Catherine because she is driven towards it as an entertainment.
Great and that i have a super provide: How Much Remodel House house renovation pictures
ReplyDelete