Chance and the Hierarchy of Marriages in Pride and Prejudice Author(s): Joel Weinsheimer Source: ELH, Vol.

39, No. 3 (Sep., 1972), pp. 404-419 Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2872192 . Accessed: 17/10/2011 05:20
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ELH.

http://www.jstor.org

CHANCE AND THE HIERARCHY OF MARRIAGES IN PRIDE AND PREJUDICE

BY JOEL WEINSHEIMER

in novelsby herinChanceis givensignificance JaneAusten's sistenceon the value of its opposite-rationaland deliberate choice. And it is an important aspect of her realismthat she exclusive does not dividechoiceand chanceinto two mutually of and conforces. Ideal choicemade in fullawareness motives in sequences after a rareoccurrence hernovels.Few charis, all, reachit as a climax actersachieveit at all, and theymoreoften rather than as the normof theirmorallife. In general decision and actionare determined a variously of by composed mixture choiceand chance,and onlyas a givencharacter increases his and others of knowledge self does choicebeginto predominate. Littlecritical comment been devotedto the operation has of chance in Jane Austen'sworks, perhapsbecause it has been eclipsedby the tightness her plots and the preeminently of unchaotic sanityof her ideals. But Lionel Trilling has wisely observed that " JaneAusten's first basic irony the recognior is tionthat the spirit not free, is that it is conditioned, it is that " limitedby circumstance and that " only by reason of this ' anomaly doesspirit havevirtue meaning." Just thespirit and as is morally dependent and made meaningful uncontrolled on by so circumstance, also is plot enriched Jane Austen'sconby sciousness chance. W. J. Harvey,in discussing plot of of the the and openness the novel" to Emma, attributes " solidity of 2 the fact that "'it allows for the contingent." Again,Lionel findsMansfield Park moreunique than typicalin its Trilling "need to findsecurity, establish, fixity to in and enclosure, a refuge from dangers openness chance."' the of and Paul Zietlowpresents far the most extensive by analysisof
1Lionel Trilling, "Mansfield Park,' in The Opposing Self (New York, 1955), p. 207.
2

'Lionel Trilling, 210. p.

W. J. Harvey," The Plot of Emma," Essays in Criticism,17 (1967), 56-57.

404

Chance and the Hierarchyof Marriages

chancein JaneAusten's novelsin his examination Persuasqon, of whichis the novel of her canon that most overtly invitesthis treatment. of But the presence chancein Pride and Prejudice is neither striking obtrusive in Persuasion, so nor as where, as Zietlowhas pointedout, the reunion Anne and Wentworth of seems almost Providential.The "dark, menacingquality "4 which and others sensein Persuasion absentin the " light, he is " and bright, and sparkling Pride and Prejudice. Nor do the fortunes Elizabeth Bennet undergoso completea reversal of as those of Anne Elliot. This comparative of uniformity happinessin Pride and Prejudicetendsto concealthe operation of chance as a thematicmotifand plot device in bringing the novel to a felicitous conclusion. But, like Persuasion, forthe tuitousemerges Pride and Prejudiceas a forcewithwhich in bothitscharacters itsreaders and mustcontend. As a working we definition, may suggest that all effects not voluntarily produced considered, be morally speaking, the reas sults of chance. Supplementing definition, this thereare two distinct, connected, but phases of action in whichchancecan interpose.The firstoccurs in the processof decisionwhen, through self-ignorance self-deception, or a character remains unawareofthe actualmotivation brings that himto a specific conclusion planofaction.The secondoccurssimply or whena given intention fails- producethe desiredeffect, to when the consequencesofan actionare unforseen unexpected. and Chancethen fillsthe gap leftby the lapse of control eitherof one's selfor one's circumstances.8 Both instances caused by a moreor are lessavoidable(and thusmorally significant) ignorance, both and " blindness." are imagedin JaneAusten's novelsas a variety of With this definition chancein mind,we may investigate, of first, JaneAusten's method establishing of chanceas a credible and effective device, plot and,second, evaluation the balher of anceofchanceand choice thenovel'sseveral in marriages. Critics have already suggested severalperspectives the hierarchy on
'Paul N. Zietlow,"Luck and Fortuitous Circumstance Persuasion: Two Interin pretations," ELH, 32 (1965), 179. 'I have deliberately excluded fromthis discussionwhat may be called " circumstantialchance,"forexample, coincidence the that Darcy's aunt is Mr. Collins'patron. This formof chance has little moral significance-atany rate, far less than the chanceinvolvedin decisionand action. 'I am not suggesting this definition by that chance should be identified with but causelessness, ratherthat it is the ignorance causes or consequences. of

Joel Weinsheimer

405

can lie in artistic mastery over a restrictedrange."9 "The exclusionsand limitationsare deliberate," and as soon as we 10 acknowledgethem so, we also realize that the novel's restricted settingis definedby and thus implies the larger world which comprehends How this double awarenessof part and whole it. can account for the credibility chance events in PrIde and of Prejudiceis best illustrated examining threeincidents by the that appear most fortuitous. The rerouting and rescheduling the proposed trip to the of Lake country, earlyreturn Darcy to Pemberleyin time to the of meet Elizabeth there,and Elizabeth's failureto expose Wickham to Lydia or her parentsall seem to be the resultof chance. Yet the author assigns each a cause: Mr. Gardineris "prevented by business" (283) "1 fromhis originalplans; Darcy's " business withhis stewardhad occasionedhis comingforward fewhours a before the rest of the party" (256); and Wickham is spared
7'For a useful summarysee Mordecai Marcus, " A Major Thematic Pattern in Pride and Prejudice,"NCF, 16 (1961), 274-79. 8 For an analogousdiscussion of the novel'sscale of imperfection, W. A. Craik's see observation that " all of the characters deficient some way" in Jane Austen: are in The Six Novels (London,1965), p. 64. ' The EnglishNovel: Form and Function (1953; rpt.,New York, 1967), p. 124.

' of marriages Pride and Prejudice; each couple seemsto be in yokedbecausebothpartners achievethe same moralrank,and thusare fitmates. What has not yet beenfully is explored the factthat the characters' responses chanceare significant to criof relative teriafortheevaluation their merits. Rankedby their to the reactions the fortuitous, characters range frompartial to complete self-determination domination chance,and each by a married coupleillustrates doubleview of one position the in novel'sscale ofimperfect to responses chance.8 To assess the operation chancein Pride and Prejudice, of it to JaneAusten's be mayfirst helpful consider method making of incidentsseem probable and natural. the most fortuitous to who feelthatPride Dorothy Van Ghentreplies thosereaders is and Prejudice so limited thatitsvalueis minimal reminding by themthat " whenwe beginto look upon theselimitations as having positive function defining form meaning the of the and ofthebook,we beginalso to understand kindof value that that

"All references Pride and Prejudice are fromThe Novels of Jane Austen,ed. to R. W. Chapman,3rd ed. (London, 1932), Vol. II.

10

Van Ghent, p. 123.

406

Chance and the Hierarchyof Marriages

exposure becausewhenElizabeth" returned home[from Colthe -shire was to leave Meryton a weekor in the ilnsparsonage], a fortnight's time" (285) . Herethedutiesofan activebusinessand of of man,the concerns the landednobility, the directives of aliento theproeach signify sphere causation thewaroffice a of because of its provincialsetting the novel. Yet precisely and JaneAusten vinciality, achieve they significance probability. and of events balancesthe surprise thecredibility improbable by that and maintain awarelimitations bothsuspend our imposing chanceoccurrences world.Thus whether will ness of the larger becomesa matterof choicefor implydirection Providence by in JaneAusten, sinceshesuggests thenovelan alternative sphere ofterrestrial and causation intervening between Providential the the immediate. of chanceas a realistic By establishing technique plotdevelopment, JaneAusten enables reader acknowledge presence the to its formystery legerdemain. we without or apology Consequently, can understand the operation chanceminimizes danthat of the ger (which MaryLascelleswarns inherent its " exactness is in of symmetry of imposing benumbing 1112) a orderon the material of the novel. Chancehas its own symbology, is employed and thematic in a pervasive pattern paralleling of choice. that Two significant of symbols chanceunderlying affairs the of
Mr. Bennet's estate the Longbourncircleare the entail by xvhich
will devolve on Mr. Collins ("' such things . . . are all chance in

this world'" [65]) and the lotteryat the Phillips home, where in Lydia " soon grew too much interested the game, too eager in makingbets and exclaiming afterprizes,to have attentionfor " the anyone in particular (77). The entail typifies financialinsecurityof the middle-classwoman, which participationin the marriagelotteryis intendedto remedy. As Mr. Collins remarks using an associated metaphor," 'When persons sit down to a ' card table, they must take theirchance of these things " (83) . Here Jane Austendepictsthe hope of chance solutionsforchance ills. But the gamble of the marriage lottery also symbolizes design-even though we usually conceive of design as effort directedtoward a particularend, thus limitingthe operationof chance. In Pride and Prejudice (as in Emma) design and its corre' Jane Austen and Her Art (London, 1939), p. 165.

Joel Weinsheimer

407

and cunning-become associlates-art, scheming, contrivance, ated with chance by the partial disjunctionof intentionand for effect.In the cases of Mrs. Bennet's contrivances Jane,Lady Catherine'sfrankcondescension Elizabeth at Longbourn,and to Miss Bingley'sarts of captivatingDarcy, the existence the deof sign per se initiatesits own frustration. The " quality of powerlessness"13 which Marvin Mudrick finds characteristic the of " simple" charactersin the novel derivesfromtheirinabilityto conceive of an event as a somewhatunpredictableintersection of diverse causes. There are, for example, at least five forces fromBingley: her reserve,her operatingin Jane's estrangement parent's impropriety, Darcy's interference, Miss Bingley's cooperation with Darcy, and Bingley's malleability-any one of which would have been insufficient separate them. Without to an awareness of this multiplicity, design is ineffectual, and its bafflement seem attributable the perversity ill fortune. will to of If CharlotteLucas is typical of the designersengaged in the marriagelottery,it becomes clear that those who most credit chance, most employ art. Her marriage,of the three we will centeron, is the most pathetic. Charlottedemonstrates intelher ligence,as does Elizabeth, by acknowledging that marriagedoes not always bringhappiness. Marriage,Charlotteimplies,can be contrived successfully:" 'Bingley likes your sisterundoubtedly; but he may neverdo morethan like her,if she does not help him nothingis in question but the desire of being well married;and if I were determined get a rich husband, or any husband,I to dare say I should adopt it'" (22) . Conversely, fromCharlotte's perspective,"' Happiness in marriage is entirelya matter of defects the personwithwhomyou are to pass yourlife' " (23) . of Charlotte'splan is a good one if she is to catch " any husband."14 She succeeds in the same way as Lydia, who is also too involved in the lottery" to have attentionfor anyone in particular"(77). But the pathos of Charlotte'smarriage that, is because of her intelligence, her ignorancemust be a pretense. And thus she never arrives,as does Lydia, at the " sublime and
13 Jane Austen: Irony as Defense and Discovery (Princeton, N. J., 1952), p. 104. '4 From another perspective, Collins is not " any husband," since he is heir apparent to the Bennet estate. And it is significantthat Charlotte, the spokeswoman of chance, should marry the recipient of a fortuitoussufficiency.

on.

'.

. . Your plan is a good one,' replied Elizabeth, 'where

chance.

. .

. And it is better to know as little as possible of the

408

Chance and the Hierarchyof Marriages

refined point of felicity, called, the possessionof being well deceived." Charlotte 15 begins as we have seen, by espousing in the value of ignorance courtship, sincethe knowledge the of partner's defects no bearing one'schanceofhappiness, has on and shefollows prescription her After unswervingly. Elizabethrejects Collins, Charlotte satisfies curiosity " walking toward her by the windowand pretending to hear" (114) Mr. Collins ranot tionalize disappointment. his that Collins Whenthus informed
is, forthe moment, unattached,she sets the pretendedignorance

ofhermarriage scheme intomotion:" Miss Lucas perceived him from upperwindow he walkedtowardthe house,and inan as stantly outto meethimaccidentally thelane" (121). And set in as is usual in JaneAusten'snovels,the meansjustify end. the During Elizabeth's visitto theparsonage, notices she that" when Mr. Collinssaid anything whichhis wifemightreasonably of be ashamed, . . Charlotte . wiselydid not hear" (156). Whatever modicumof happinessCharlotte enjoys in her marriage resultsnot fromchance,as she had predicted, but fromher persistence the same pretended in self-deception characthat terizedher courtship. this way she unwittingly In becomesa fit mateforCollins, whois similarly defined the" perseverence by in willful self-deception" (109) in his deafness Elizabeth's to
rejection.

Collinshimself remarks perfection thisunionat Elizathe of beth'sdeparture: "'My dearCharlotte I havebut onemind and and one wayofthinking. Thereis in everythingmostremarka able resemblance character of and ideas between us. We seem to have been designed each other'" (216). Here is at least for a triple irony.Sincetheir compatibility small,onlya perverse is design couldhave joinedthem.Nevertheless, Collinsdoes design Charlotte a wife, at the sametime, designs for and she himfora husband-though bothare merely searching any mate availfor able. But, most important, they are attracted each other to by a force superior themboth-theirmutualidentity. to Here again JaneAustenpositsa new sphereof causation, non-Providential, extrinsic the forces whichthe characters yet to of are immediately aware. In The Family ReunionAgatha concisely describes sphere this and the folly ignoring of it:
"Jonathan Swift,A Tale of a Tub, eds. A. C. Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith, 2nd ed. (London,1958), p. 174.

Joel Weinsheimer

409

Thus withthemostcareful devotion Thus withprecise attention To detail,interfering preparation Of that whichis alreadyprepared the Men tighten knotofconfusion Into perfect misunderstanding. Reflecting pocket-torch observation a of
'Upon each other'sopacity. ...16

Althoughall the charactersin the novel get what they want, their designs do not effect their felicity. Contrivanceis either the ignorant"preparation of that which is already prepared," or else it is simplyirrelevant the outcome. The most explicit to instance of the folly of design occurs in Mrs. Bennet's selfapplause forkeepingJane and Bingley togetherat Netherfield: "'<This was a lucky idea of mine, indeed!' said Mrs. Bennet, more than once, as if the creditof makingit rain were all her own" (31). Design and chance are allied in Pride and Prejudice because Jane'smarriageand the rain are equally ofMrs. Bennet's While Jane Austen validates Darcy's claim that "whatever bears affinity cunningis despicable" (40), she does not conto clude that its opposite is more laudable. Mr. Bennet's indolent detachmentfrom his wife and daughters increases their vulnerability, and signalshis moral deficiency. And Bingley,though not at all cunning, fitforno betterthan Jane. The marriage is of Jane and Bingley, like that of Charlotte and Collins, also disclosesa dual perspectiveon a singlepositionin the hierarchy of marriages, and, as we noticedin the parson and his wife,their placementin this moral scale resultsin part fromtheir similar responses chance. to It is the chance involved in Bingley's spontaneouslypicking Netherfield a home that initiates the novel's action. "Mr. as Bingley had not been of age two years, when he was tempted by an accidental recommendation look at Netherfield to House. He did look at it and into it forhalf an hour,was pleased with " what the ownersaid in its praise,and took it immediately (16). But his capriceis moreestimablethan that of Mr. Collins,since by thismethodBingleychoosesa house,Collinsa wife. Bingley's " " needlessprecipitance is further developedin his replyto Mrs.
T. S. Eliot, The Complete Poems and Plays 1909-1950 (New York, 1952), pp. 230-31.

devising.

410

of Chance and the Hierarchy Marmage8

Bennet's inquirywhether will stay long at Netherfield: he "' Whatever do is donein a hurry . . and thereforeI should I . if resolveto quit Netherfield, shouldprobablybe offin five I minutes'" (42). However, unconvinced his of Darcy remains friend's resoluteness; such decisiveness merefantasy.On the is contrary, Darcy informs him,"'Your conductwouldbe quite as dependent chanceas that of any man I know;and if,as on you weremounting yourhorse, friend wereto say, " Bingley, a you had betterstay till nextweek,"you wouldprobably it, do you wouldprobably not go-and, at another word,might stay " a month' (49). What Darcy clarifies us is thatcapricious for choiceis not the affirmation individual of poweror of freedom from external restraint; rather is thereliance an immediate it on cause (the nearbyfriend, Darcy) whosepresence accidental. is Capriceis no morethan the unacknowledged determination of choiceby chance. Bingley's unconscious dependence chanceparallelsthat of on Jane,and thereby prepares fortheir us Like Bingley, marriage. Jane is without design. Quite the opposite, she nearlyfulfills Charlotte's prophecy that her reservewill not suffice hold to Bingley.The complement Jane'srestraint the displayof of in affection herrestraint censure, the basis of bothis her is in and responseto that ignorance whichproducesthe appearanceof chance. Jane'srecognition she does not knowthe degree that of Bingley's affection accounts herunwillingness entrap for to him. Because of the same self-acknowledged ignorance suspends she judgment whenElizabethrepeats Wickham's version Darcy's of duplicity. Nothing remained Janeto do " but to think for well ofthemboth,to defend conduct each,and throw the of intothe account accident mistake, of or whatevercouldnototherwise be explained" (85). Jane'ssancta simplicitasis thuspreserved bv herremaining a cocoonofignorance. one sense, in In Janeis the personificationthe comichopeof Pride and Prejudice. Of all of the characters, most consistently she expectsthat all will end well (287). But thisprognosis undermined thereader is as comes
to realize that the c"account of accident or mistake" will not sustain the new data continually being unfolded. And as chance yieldsto pattern, understand we moreclearlythat the " sanguine hope of good" whichmakes possibleJane's favorableinterpretations of the presence of evil does not result froman accurate observationof her world,but is merelythe projected " benevJoel Weinsheimer 411

olence of her heart" (287). Our reaction therefore twofold: is we reverenceher benevolence,and deprecate her fixationin it. Jane's " angelic" responseto chance is initiallyadequate. She humblypresumesthe possibility ignoranceand error.But her of benign skepticismproduces no knowledge,and thus becomes its own caricature stultified and incapable of adapting to the flux of the sublunary world. Her control is diminished,her choice incapacitated,and in their absence Jane is governedby chance. Both Bingley and Jane are characterizedby a perseverance in self-deception that of Charlotteand Collins,but like their unscheming good nature elevates them above the parson and his wife. Of Bingley's ductilityand Jane's petrification, we are forced to say (as does Elizabeth describingDarcy and Wickham), " ' There is but such a quantity of merit between them;just enoughto make one good sort of man'" (92925). Jane's fixationis not unique within the Bennet family. In the marriageof Mr. and Mrs. Bennet the reader discoversthat " both " neglect and mistaken indulgence (280), both detachment and design, are manifestations internal necessity or of fixation.Elizabeth upbraidsher father's indolenceby illustrating its effect his children: if he will not bestirhimself, says, on she "' Lydia's characterwill be fixed,and she will, at sixteen,be the most determined flirt that ever made herself and her family ' ridiculous " (231) . Nor is even Lydia's flirtation free; it is fixed on a scarlet coat (64). That the parents' fixationwill contribute the child'sfixation probableand natural. What is to is surprising that any of the Bennet daughtersescape " the disis " advantages of so unsuitablea marriage (236) as that of their parents. How Elizabeth does so is the centralconcernof Pride and Prejudice. And her liberationinvolvesa responseto chance that raises the moral value of her marriageabove that of the others. A significant form of verbal irony in the firsthalf of the novel17 is Elizabeth's perversion metaphors chance: "' Mr. of of Bingley's defenceof his friendwas a very able one I dare say, but since he is unacquainted with several parts of the story, and has learntthe rest fromthat friend himself, shall venture I still to think of both gentlemenas I did before'" (96; my
"7For a convincing argument that "irony is more totallyverbal in the first half of the novel than in the second,"see JosephWiesenfarth, Errand Form (New The of York, 1954), pp. 683ff.

412

Chance and the Hierarchy Marriages of

italics). Ironically, the limitations of Bingley's defence of Darcy are identical to the defects in Elizabeth's defence of Wickham. Yet Elizabeth is unaware that her evaluation of Wickham is a " venture," not a certainty. Similarly, while trying to penetrate Mr. Collins' deafness, Elizabeth assures him, "' I am not one of those young ladies (if such young ladies there are) who are so daring as to risk their happiness on the chance of being asked a second time'" (107; my italics). Elizabeth knows that to refuse Collins' offerdoes not " risk" her happiness since the chance of any is nil: "' You could not make me happy, and I am convinced that I am the last woman in the world who could make you so '" (107). The similarity of this rebuff of Collins to Elizabeth's rejection of Darcy is striking: "' I had not known you a month before I felt that you were the last man in the world whom I could ever be prevailed on to marry '" (193). This parallel phrasing in Elizabeth's two refusals of marriage suggests one facet of her fixation. To refuseDarcy does risk her happiness, but Elizabeth denies the gambling metaphor by presuming an omniscience of Darcy like that she possessed of Collins. In the first half of the novel Elizabeth's continual repetition of the metaphors associated with the marriage lottery indicates that while she seems unaffected by it, her attempt to deny chance proves it real and threatening. If Collins is often impenetrably deaf to Elizabeth, the reverse is also true. " 'My dear Miss Elizabeth,'" he remarks to her at the Netherfieldball, " 'I have the highest opinion in the world of your excellent judgment in all matters within the scope of your understanding,but permit me to say . . .' " (97). Disguised in Mr. Collins' flatulence is Elizabeth's unawareness that the scope of her understanding is too small, that it has gathered too little data, to evaluate circumstances accurately. These limitations of self-knowledgemust become conscious if she is to escape entrapment in her owvnillusory omniscience. What Elizabeth must learn, among other things, is that chance is predicated on ignorance, and insofar as ignorance can be under one's control, to that extent is chance capable of regulation. The paradigm of her awakening occurs in Rosings Park. " More than once did Elizabeth in her ramble within the Park, unexpectedly meet Mr. Darcy.-She felt all the perversenessof the mischance that should bring him where no one else was brought; and to prevent its ever happening again, took care to informhim at firstthat it was a

Joel Weinsheimer

413

favorite hauntof hers.-How it could occura secondtimewas veryodd!-Yet it did, even a third" (182). At least one critic has notedthatit is a "series of incidents overwhichElizabeth " ' herwithDarcy. And in Rosings has no control thatreunites Park onlyby an involuntary does empiricism Elizabethdiscover a patternemerging fromwhat seemedto be fortuitous his in actions. On the possibility Darcy's knavery of Janeis in a quandary: "'It is difficult indeed-it is distressing.-One does not know whatto think.'" But Elizabeth "'I retorts, beg yourpardon;one knowsexactly whatto think'" (86). Throughout novel the Elizabethrecognizes, Janedoesnot,thenecessity judgment as of in the presence evil. But Elizabethheremanifests same of the needless precipitancy decision in thatcharacterizes and Bingley, is thus to a similarextentdirected chance. Her prejudice by originates the coincidence her beingnear enoughto overin of hear Darcy's snub. And onlywhenElizabethcomesto understand that she has perservered willfulself-deception, in has " ' courted prepossession and ignorance,and driven reason away'" (208), is she releasedfromthe dominion chance. of Her perspective thenbroadened, she becomescapable of is and

events," and, mostsignificantly, " determining of probabilities" (209). Although Reuben Browerfindsit " an odd, rather legalistic 19" determining process," probabilities" nevertheless, most is, the appropriate the responses chancedramatized Pride and of to in and Prejudice, Elizabeth's to capacity determine probabilities the ofpossible events validates novel's the placement hermarriage of above thatof Janein the moralhierarchy. one musthave a If fixation, Jane's fixation the suspension censureis more in of than Elizabeth'sin prejudice.But because Elizpraiseworthy abeth escapesherself, achievesthe higher she moralstatus. If Jane superficially affirms chance but ultimately deniesit, the reverseis true of Elizabeth. She finallycreditschance and to attempts cope withit. For a gambler, is determining probabilities relatively easy. He
Wiesenfarth,p. 83. A. Brower, " Light and Bright and Sparkling: Irony and Fiction in Pride and Prejudice," in The Fields of Light: An Experiment in Critical Reading (New York, 1951), pp. 176-77.
'1

" giving way to every variety of thought,"of " reconsidering

19 Reuber

414

Chanceand the Hierarchy Maniages of

knows the dice and how they are marked. But Elizabeth and Darcy must discover while blindfolded how the dice are constructed. They are forced -todefinetheir world inductively before deciding the probability of a given outcome. The possibility of error in this process destroys the self-assurance with which Elizabeth had judged Darcy and Wichkham. And had Darcy known the difficulty determining probabilities when he first of proposed, his countenance would not have "expressed real security" while " he spoke of apprehension and anxiety " (189). Such security only causes vexation. As Jane comments "'His being so sure of succeeding, was wrong . . . and certainly ought not to have appeared; but consider how much it must increase his disappointment' (224). That by the time of his second proposal Darcy has been educated in the vagaries of mischance is shown by the " more than common awkwardness and anxiety of his situation" (366). And here his humility is rewarded with success because it presumes that Elizabeth is free either to accept or reject him. Likewise, when Darcy returnsat last to the Bennet home, Elizabeth acknowledges the possibility of a variety of motives and distrusts what appears to be simple cause and effect relationship. She hopes that his returnmeans " that his affection and wishes must still be unshaken. But she would not be secure" (334). The anxiety of Elizabeth and Darcy demonstrates that their reappraisal of the operation of chance does not make them capable of molding the world to their satisfaction. Whatever additional control the recognitionof chance gives them is dwarfed by their glimpse of the far greater chaos beyond their direction. Nor does Jane Austen lead us toward the pride of Stoicism. The inner world, like the outer, is susceptible of only small (though significant) control. " Health and temper to bear inconveniencies -cheerfulness to enhance every pleasure-and affectionand intelligence, which might supply it among themselves if there were disappointments abroad " (240) characterize the Gardiners as a couple high in the moral scale; but these qualities are rare and can be generated only in a naturally fertilesoil of which there is very little on this earth. It is true that for Jane Austen self-knowledgeand self-control crown the moral hierarchy,and where her characters fail in these respects they fall under the lash of her wit. The art of selfmanipulation to prevent the deception of others is laudable and

Joel Weinsheimer

415

difficult mastery.But the qualms one has about the value of of complete self-consciousness from persistent its result tendency towardknavery;or froma more Romanticperspective, selfconsciousness of mightbe imagedas the wearing a truemask, a persona identical theperson to behind But whattheviewer it. of such a mask alwaysrealizesis that thisduality perilously is close to the duplicity suchas Wickham. of JaneAusten circumvents problems involved over-rationin the alizingbehavior reminding of the operation the unconby of us sciousevenin themostconsequential choices.Reasonis parodied in Mary's windymoralizing in Mr. Collins'formulaic and proposal to Elizabeth.But,moreimportant, central the of marriage Prideand Prejudice basednotaloneon reason is and thegrowing mutualunderstanding betweenDarcy and Elizabeth,but also on a thoroughly spontaneous affection-one which flowers entirely contrary theefforts expectations thecharacters. to and of Bingley and Jane"considered we talkedof it as impossible"(373). it, One reason why the marriage Darcy and Elizabeth seems of " it has beenmostunconsciously " (190). is impossible that done can Elizabeth takeno credit having for knowingly elicited Darcy's addresses, " it was gratifying have inspired yet to unconsciously so strong affection"(193). Elizabethcannotsay how long an she has loved Darcy: "'It has been coming so gradually, on that I hardlyknow when it began'" (373). And similarly Darcy, whenElizabethasks him to describe the originof his " love,replies, ' I cannot on thehour, thespot,or thelook, fix or orthewords, which thefoundation. is too longago. I was laid It in the middlebefore knewthatI had begun" (380). Finally, I thereis no immediate cause-not even conscious will-for the affection Darcy and Elizabeth,and this freedom of constitutes their peculiar felicity. Elizabeth wondersat one point "how far it would be for the happiness boththat she shouldemploy power, of the which herfancy toldhershe stillpossessed, bringing the renewal of on of [Darcy's]addresses" (266). Luckilyshe neverhas the opto portunity do so, for this would bringher to the level of Miss Bingley. As we have seen,it is superfluous worseto or arrange whatis alreadyarranged.This inefficacy the willin of is not " of matters affection found onlyin the" simple characters, as Mudrickcontends, but in " complex" characters well.20 as
20Mudrick, p. 104. We may note that Elizabeth equates the inefficacyof Darcy

416

Chance and the Hierarchyof Marriages

Ratherthan attempting snareDarcy,Elizabethacts toward to himas sheresolves act toward to Bingley.It is hard, thought, she "'that this poor man cannotcome to a house,whichhe has legally hired, without raising thisspeculation! will leavehim all I "' to himself (332). Such is.Elizabeth'sresponse the " truth to " universally acknowledged that governs the novel. What she hereclarifies us is thatwhenleftalone by the Mrs. Bennets for ofthisworld, individual's emerges self the without being lucidly, falsified the pattern by imposed other's wishes. by The unpredictability eventsin Pride and Prejudiceresults of from factthat,from characters' the the pointofview,all manner of improbability discovered. Wickham'sknaveryteaches is Elizabethto " drawno limits the future the impudence in to of an impudent man" (317). Andat theother she in extreme, finds " an exertion goodness great Darcy's assistance Lydia of of too to be probable" (326). Even determining probabilities inis adequateif we are not prepared the unlikely. for On theother hand,when of probability actionor motivation is too easilycalculated, JaneAusten puts us on ourguard. Justas sheportrays improbable, also do we find over-probable, the so the and sometimes bothsimultaneously: Never, since reading Jane's second letter, IElizabeth] had entertained a hopeofWickham's to meaning marry No she [Lydia]. onebutJane, thought, could flatter herself suchan expectation. with Surprise was theleastofherfeelings thisdevelopement.... nowit wasall on But toonatural. suchan attachment this, might For as she havesufficient and charms; though did not suppose she Lydia to be deliberately in without intention marriage, had engaging an elopement, the of she nodifficulty in believing neither virtue herunderstanding that her nor would her preserve from an falling easyprey. (279-80; italics) my Here the over-probable becomesa sourceof pity or aversion becauseit implies involuntary an entrapment an exterior by and " mechanical cause. Lydia falls an " easy prey to Wickham becausehe is thoroughly self-conscious, she is not. And she and is a prey to herself her self-will by and carelessness(213). Here, as elsewhere, Wickhamfalls victimto his own contrivance. Nevertheless, they do surprisingly marry, contrary to Elizabeth's expectations, at thesametimefulfill suspicion and her
with that of Miss Bingley in attempting to separate Jane and Bingley: "'And
*

. . is the end of all his friend's anxiouscircumspection! all his sister'sfalsehood of and contrivance!the happiest,wisest,and most reasonableend!"' (347).

this

Joel Weinsheimer

417

that little" permanent could belongto a couplewho happiness wereonlybrought together becausetheir passionswerestronger than theirvirtue" (312). Likewise, over-probable imand the probableare combined whenMiss Bingleyteases Darcy about hispleasure from fine Elizabeth's eyes: " ' I am all astonishment. How longhas she been such a favorite?-and praywhenam I to wishyou joy?' " To which " Darcy replies, ' That is exactly the questionI expectedyou to ask'" (27). Miss Bingley's comment completely is predictable therefore and inane;yet ultimately is justified. it Samuel Kligerhas observed that in Pride and Prejudicethe eighteenth century's "rationalistic quest of the mean between two extremes requiresthat the probabilities the heroine's for behavior set up between be two alternatives, neither which of is acceptablealone. . . .' 21 Justsuch a quest forthe mean is in completed Jane Austen'sreconciliation the over-probable of and the improbable, the inevitableand the impossible.Indeed thisunioninforms wholeof Pride and Prejudicesince the it is the basis of the "truth universally acknowledged, that a singleman in possession a good fortune, of mustbe in wantof a wife." We wouldassumeany truth universally acknowledged in a Jane Austennovel to be eitherfalseor trite;yet,as one criticconcedes,"by the end of the novel we are willingto acknowledge that both Bingleyand Darcy were 'in want of The ignorance this truthoccasionsthe most significant of illusionof chancein Pride and Prejudiceand, perhaps, all in Jane Austen'snovels. It is an illusionthat appears in the frequent, repressed, but response thattheimpossibly happyconclusion thenovelis, after fortuitous. of all, This response springs from onlypartialawareness a cause neither the of Providential norphysical, rather but moral.Prideand Prejudice, takenas a whole, enforces recognition an unmarried or woman our that man is incomplete. onlyis theurgeto matea physical Not drive, but it is a moralnecessity one is to becomemorethan the sum if ofthemultiple idiosyncrasies compose individual that the personality. JaneAustensees the individual "not as a solitary being
21

a wife.'"a 22

22A. Walton Litz, Jane Austen: A Study of Her ArtisticDevelopment (London, 1965), p. 107.

(1947), 360.

" Jane Austen'sPride and Prejudicein the Eighteenth Century Mode," UTQ, 16

418

Chance and the Hierarchy Marriages of

completed himself, onlyas completed society." The in but in 23

contends,24 quite the opposite. If anyone,only the " simple," myopic, fixated and individuals isolated, are sinceforthem other people never become real. Darcyincreases scopeofhisfreedom the by enlarging societyto includenot onlyElizabeth,but her his family well. And in Wickham createsa brother. his as he By freedom Darcy establishes vindicates position society. and his in The truthuniversally acknowledged that humarnitas cannot be achievedalone is sometimes amongthe welter socioof lost force Prideand Prejudice of cannotbe explained reference by to the pocketbook. Rather, JaneAusteninvites to examine us the possibility that an individual can meritand achievehappiness in a community becomes that valuableby hisjoining "' Withit. out scheming do wrong, to make othersunhappy, to or there may be error, and theremay be misery.Thoughtlessness, and wantof attention other to people'sfeelings, wantof resoluand tion,will do the business (136). The sourcesof misery are various;but wheninformed thoughtfulness, by sympathy, and fulfillment marriage not a matter chance. in is of commitment,
Ohio University

" complex" individualis not isolatedby his freedom, Mudrick as

economicinterpretations the novel's marriages, the driving of but

23Richard Simpson, rev. of the Memoir, North British Review (April, 1870), rpt. in B. C. Southam, Jane Austen: The Critical Heritage (New York, 1968), p. 249.
24

Mudrick,pp. 124-25.

Joel Weinsheimer

419