Abstract:
While it is difficult to imagine how one might promote positive political
change in a democratic setup without even having the right to vote, women
activists of the nineteenth century did manage to get their way to a certain
extent by organising rallies and conferences, and also by writing for the
public. Jane Austen stands out as a novelist of her time in the way she
advocated for gender equality and endorsed a more progressive and
androgynous outlook, by the definition of Virginia Woolf, by painting male
characters who deftly challenged the prevalent norms of masculinity of her
time and went against the patriarchal hegemony by allowing a stable space
for women to step up and assume responsible roles in a meritocratic society.
This essay provides an analysis of Austen's view of merit and how a more
gender-inclusive society may be constructed with the help of male allies.
Keywords: Jane Austen,
Persuasion, meritocracy, gender equality, gender roles, women’s activism,
patriarchy, social reform, gender politics, women’s empowerment,
socio-economic class, social mobility, gender and merit.
It is a historical fact that the
engagement of women with politics as a phenomenon has been subdued and
indirect in nature, with the right to vote being accorded to women only in
the late nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries, an even that was
confined to a few industrialized countries. Traditionally, women preferred
to get involved in politics not by directly asserting their demands, but by
organizing rallies and conferences that highlighted their causes. Some women
managed to persuade their husbands to vote in favour of interests which
suited them, thus ensuring that even without the right to vote, the issues
which mattered exclusively to women remained relevant, if not on the ballot
box then at least in public discourse. Even issues which were not
exclusively about the interests of women did not receive open support from
prominent female figures due to social pressures. The female activist of the
time would much rather express her views on a topic by writing about it in
newspapers, journals, and books, than announcing her candidature for a seat
in parliament. Many prominent women writers of the time have been identified
as political activists as well due to the distinctively political nature if
their writing. One surprising exception to this group is Jane Austen, who,
according to some scholars, intentionally wrote novels of high quality that
were heavy in their cultural overtones, but was intentionally apolitical.
This reticence to engage in contemporary politics has often been interpreted
as a result of her physical absence from contemporary politics. (Butler,
190). However, a close analysis of the discourse and dynamics between the
aristocracy and the returned sailors in her last novel Persuasion,
reveals a willingness to wade into political dialogue. Austen attempts to
illustrates the phenomenal importance of the creation of a new, burgeoning
socio-economic class through the reintegration of the returned sailors as a
direct challenge to the prevailing aristocracy.
Persuasion
has a consistent underlying of a sense of social order and war, which Austen
probably saw as a progressive force capable of bringing in positive change,
an attitude reflected in her refreshing characters of the naval officers who
embody admirable values, including the modest man of integrity in Captain
Wentworth and the honest Admiral Croft. Austen probably uses her personal
experience of life during wartime to highlight how war permeates every
section of society and affects prevailing political and economic thought.
(Watson, 5).
Austen’s challenge to the prevailing
aristocratic tradition is symbolic of the revolutionary lines of thought
that were being propagated by the likes of Thomas Paine, William Cobbett,
and Thomas Spence (Colley, 152). Set during the Napoleonic wars,
Persuasion highlights the fact that most of Napoleon’s officers were
leaders of great capacity who had risen through the ranks by their own
merit. (Colley, 150) In the eyes of the British, the French officers were
representative of a fair and efficient system that was better than their
own, as was demonstrated by the recent loss in America and the French
Revolution. Criticism of the aristocracy began to get louder as leading
progressive political thinkers of the time sought to paint the aristocrats
as far removed from the people and interests of England, often sharing a
parasitic relationship with the people as the ruling elite only interested
in furthering their own selfish causes by inflating taxes or influencing
public policy at great cost to the common man. Ultimately, this ed to
greater reforms which curtailed the powers of the aristocracy and brought in
a new era of meritocratic tradition in England.
The debate between aristocracy and
meritocracy extends itself into the role of gender in determining one’s
position in society. Austen seems to argue that, while the old aristocracy
kept women out of influential and powerful positions, a meritocracy would
value women more for their contributions and the skills they possess, even
possibly allowing for their elevation to places earlier thought only fit for
men. The new system of meritocracy would embrace the steps taken by women
for the betterment of society, and would encourage them to work further
towards its betterment.
In traditional English society, it
was the men who were chiefly responsible for all matters related to finances
and women were not expected to contribute financially. This very trope is
challenged in the relationship between Admiral and Mrs. Croft. While looking
to rent Kellynch Hall, Mr. Shepherd says that “Mrs. Croft asked more
questions about the house, and terms, and taxes, than the Admiral himself”
(Austen, 17). This subverts the traditional gender roles idealized under the
aristocracy. Admiral Croft is also comfortable in letting his wife take over
the reigns at opportune moments, as is evident from the time when Mrs. Croft
takes over the driving from her husband while they are driving to Anne’s
cottage (Austen, 85). Anne’s reaction to the incident shows the unusual
nature of it, but Austen does not ridicule it in anyway and simply registers
some of Anne’s amusement at it. This gives the reader an insight into
Austen’s own view of a happy marriage, as one built upon mutual respect.
(Monaghan, 108).
Furthermore, Austen depicts Anne
Elliott as a strong woman, as is evident towards the conclusion of the
novel. When Wentworth and Musgrove fail to restore order after the fall of
Lousia, Anne takes over from them and supervises the resuscitation of Louisa
and the consoling of Wentworth. Anne’s behavior displays a maturity that is
absent among her male counterparts, and “she appears as an adult among
helpless children.” (Monaghan, 107) This is a resounding endorsement of
meritocracy that argues for the structuring on society based on individual
capacity. It is because Anne had taken over in a complex situation that
disaster was averted, and that any other line of action may not have been so
favourable.
Thus, Persuasion may be read
as a political novel that argues for meritocracy, especially in the
treatment of women and traditional gender roles.
1.
Austen, Jane.
Persuasion. Edited and notes by Gillian Beer, Penguin Books, 2003.
2.
Butler, Marilyn.
History, Politics and Religion. The Jane Austen Handbook, edited by J.
David Grey, Athlone Press, 1986, 181-206.
3.
Colley, Linda. Britons:
Forging the Nation 1707-1837. Yale University Press, 1992.
4.
Monaghan, David. Jane
Austen and the Position of Women. Jane Austen in a Social Context,
edited by David Monaghan, Barnes and Noble Books, 1981, pp. 105-121.
5.
Watson, J.R.
Romanticism and War: A Study of British Romantic Period Writers and the
Napoleonic Wars. Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.