Comments on: Jane Austen’s Guide to Being a Gentleman

By: pentamom

pentamom — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 16:52:25 +0000

Jack Swan — the younger sons (and sometimes the scions) of families just like Darcy’s were in the army and navy. That’s where the entire officer corps came from. Should Darcy, as the current lord of the manor have abandoned his tenantry to a possibly corrupt paid agent to go fighting somewhere? Overseeing an estate like Pemberley was as much a responsibility, if taken seriously, as a privilege. Who do you think Nelson and Wellington *were*? Do you realize that Persuasion took place during Napoleon’s exile, and its male lead was a in fact a fighting naval captain?

In a still largely land-based society like England of Austen’s day, responsible land-owners were as essential to the welfare of large segments of society as fighting men. Jane Austen depicts fools and wastrels as well as men of honor in both the upper and middle classes. It’s precisely how they conducted themselves in the sphere they were called to that forms the basis for how she judges them.

By: pentamom

pentamom — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 16:29:14 +0000

Because it assumes responsibility and is personally costly. Mr. Darcy is in some ways one of the weaker examples — he didn’t have much to lose except a broken heart which there were plenty of ladies clamoring to try to heal, and the esteem of an aunt who wasn’t much of a joy to be around anyway, but some of Austen’s men risked a great deal to maintain their honor. Edward Ferrars, of all Austen’s leading men the least “sexy” and the least highly-rated even according to the standards of Austen’s own time, assumed a level of responsibility for his actions that most men today would consider downright foolish, and very few would come close to imitating.

By: Jack Swan

Jack Swan — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 16:28:26 +0000

If the men “understand the call to duty”, why are so few of them in the military? England, during that time, was fighting for her life against Napoleon. Why wasn’t Darcy in Spain with Wellington, or in the Navy with Nelson?

Perhaps because they were actually selfish and spoiled, and preferred to let men of lower social class defend their wealth and property?

By: Blake

Blake — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 15:48:40 +0000

Yes, Austen’s heroes are “gentlemen” in the truest sense, and it has little to do with money and nothing to do with clothing, horses, or their ability to dance. And all the “villain” or “foil” characters get passed over precisely because of their failure to be gentlemanly in that sense.

Yes, but following the links in that article – to the books “Guyland” and “The Peter Pan Syndrome” – makes me wonder why men are so uninterested in being “gentlemanly”.

By: pentamom

pentamom — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:01:14 +0000

By: Jane Austen’s Guide to Being a Gentleman « JASNA-NY Juvenilia

Jane Austen’s Guide to Being a Gentleman « JASNA-NY Juvenilia — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 13:50:23 +0000

[...] Apr via First Things By Joe [...]