Jane Austen’s novel, Pride and Prejudice and Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest explore the archetypal values of aristocracy, including marriage, women and identity.
Austen and Wilde converge in presenting opinions on marriage through humour and contrasting characters. Wilde explores the role of women through reversal and dialogue, while Austen explores the same idea with irony and symbolism. The incorporation of irony and anagnorisis allow both authors to criticise the role of perception in forming opinions on identity, thus challenging the conventional views of Victorian and Regency society.
Austen and Wilde converge in criticising social status as the prime determinant when selecting a suitable partner for marriage through …show more content…
The ironic opening to Pride and Prejudice, that “a single man…must be in want of a wife,” amuses Austen’s reader as she juxtaposes this statement with the reality that the security of marriage is, in fact, a woman’s primary goal. Wilde’s role reversal is to a similar effect, humouring his audience by the seemingly ridiculous statement that “the home …[is]the proper sphere for the man,” encouraging the audience to laugh at an inverted society where a man is confined to the home, thus questioning the principle that anyone should be likewise confined. Further, Austen’s presentation of societal expectations of an “accomplished woman” conveys a hypocritical society where “a woman must have a thorough knowledge” yet Mary, described as the “most accomplished girl in the neighbourhood” will likely never marry, thus will be the least successful. Similarly, Wilde’s male protagonists, although would lay “particular stress on [their] German” lessons, did not care whether their lovers were educated. Moreover, Miss Prism mixes up a baby and her “three-volume novel,” symbolising the jumbling of a woman’s role as a caregiver. The subsequent destruction of Jack’s future suggests that women should not enter the traditionally male sphere of knowledge, while Austen, rather than criticising progressive society, encourages wit as a suitable quality for a woman through the characterisation of …show more content…
This earnestly said sarcastic statement and the amused tone creates comedic effect, encouraging the audience to mock the idea that neither first impressions nor society’s interpretations have any substance. Austen criticises first impressions through Elizabeth’s idea of Mr Darcy and Mr Wickham, as her understanding of these characters are overturned in the climax of the novel where both Elizabeth and the audience realise that they, subject to society’s recommendations of first impressions, have been “blind, partial, prejudiced [and] absurd”. Epistolary mode allows a revelation of the deceptive nature of first impressions, and this new understanding allows dramatic irony to guide criticisms of the treatment of “that disagreeable Mr Darcy,” to whom Mrs Bennet unknowingly owes and assumes so much. Similarly, the ironic double-entendre of the name Ernest openly mocks societal ideals that the shallow perception of identity, as symbolised by the Christian name, has more weight than character. Jack and Algernon are far from ever being earnest, but their name, not their character, is relevant to their social identity as their lovers deny they are “engaged to be married to anyone,” when
Austen and Wilde converge in presenting opinions on marriage through humour and contrasting characters. Wilde explores the role of women through reversal and dialogue, while Austen explores the same idea with irony and symbolism. The incorporation of irony and anagnorisis allow both authors to criticise the role of perception in forming opinions on identity, thus challenging the conventional views of Victorian and Regency society.
Austen and Wilde converge in criticising social status as the prime determinant when selecting a suitable partner for marriage through …show more content…
The ironic opening to Pride and Prejudice, that “a single man…must be in want of a wife,” amuses Austen’s reader as she juxtaposes this statement with the reality that the security of marriage is, in fact, a woman’s primary goal. Wilde’s role reversal is to a similar effect, humouring his audience by the seemingly ridiculous statement that “the home …[is]the proper sphere for the man,” encouraging the audience to laugh at an inverted society where a man is confined to the home, thus questioning the principle that anyone should be likewise confined. Further, Austen’s presentation of societal expectations of an “accomplished woman” conveys a hypocritical society where “a woman must have a thorough knowledge” yet Mary, described as the “most accomplished girl in the neighbourhood” will likely never marry, thus will be the least successful. Similarly, Wilde’s male protagonists, although would lay “particular stress on [their] German” lessons, did not care whether their lovers were educated. Moreover, Miss Prism mixes up a baby and her “three-volume novel,” symbolising the jumbling of a woman’s role as a caregiver. The subsequent destruction of Jack’s future suggests that women should not enter the traditionally male sphere of knowledge, while Austen, rather than criticising progressive society, encourages wit as a suitable quality for a woman through the characterisation of …show more content…
This earnestly said sarcastic statement and the amused tone creates comedic effect, encouraging the audience to mock the idea that neither first impressions nor society’s interpretations have any substance. Austen criticises first impressions through Elizabeth’s idea of Mr Darcy and Mr Wickham, as her understanding of these characters are overturned in the climax of the novel where both Elizabeth and the audience realise that they, subject to society’s recommendations of first impressions, have been “blind, partial, prejudiced [and] absurd”. Epistolary mode allows a revelation of the deceptive nature of first impressions, and this new understanding allows dramatic irony to guide criticisms of the treatment of “that disagreeable Mr Darcy,” to whom Mrs Bennet unknowingly owes and assumes so much. Similarly, the ironic double-entendre of the name Ernest openly mocks societal ideals that the shallow perception of identity, as symbolised by the Christian name, has more weight than character. Jack and Algernon are far from ever being earnest, but their name, not their character, is relevant to their social identity as their lovers deny they are “engaged to be married to anyone,” when