Critics charge that in Jane Austen’s novels, “Happiness emerges only from the practice of virtue.” Many of her characters, after all, follow a strict set of standards. Even characters who do err from social norms (like Pride and Prejudice’s Lydia) achieve happiness only after well-meaning individuals (like Mr. Darcy) rectify their blunders. Yet for Austen, perfectly virtuous women – women who follow Victorian standards of morality without fail – are unrealistic illusions. Women need not panic, however. For Austen, women can achieve “perfect happiness” without becoming “perfectly virtuous.” In fact, breaking moral standards is actually a prerequisite to “perfect happiness,” defined as a state of contentment that even major setbacks cannot interrupt.
…show more content…
Examples regarding the significance of each percolate throughout her novels. For instance, both Emma’s “compassionate [concern for] the distresses of the poor” and her desire to lift Harriet into a higher social status exemplify a genuine (if somewhat paternalistic) sympathy. Similarly, the consequences of Lydia’s impetuous marriage warn readers against losing self-control, and the praise Jane Fairfax receives on the pianoforte exhibits education’s importance. Still, these characteristics do not work in seclusion. Rather, self-control and rationality can “synergize” to create a more sympathetic human. In fact, according to reason-oriented philosophers such as Hume, rational humans capable of self-control can overcome greed and other animalistic instincts to demonstrate …show more content…
She achieves “perfect happiness” only after she marries Mr. Knightley and discovers the one aspect of life previously unknown to her – a significant other. Indeed, Emma achieves “perfect happiness” despite of (and perhaps even because of) a thief’s decision to pilfer Highbury’s tasty chickens. Emma’s “perfect happiness,” defined here as a state of contentment that even major setbacks cannot interrupt, clearly arises from her decision to follow traditional ideas of Victorian morality and marry Mr. Knightley. Even if virtue leads to happiness in general, however, must perfect happiness arise from perfect virtue? Evidence suggests not. In fact, Austen probably argues that women with perfect virtue do not achieve perfect happiness, and that one must break some social standards to become
Examples regarding the significance of each percolate throughout her novels. For instance, both Emma’s “compassionate [concern for] the distresses of the poor” and her desire to lift Harriet into a higher social status exemplify a genuine (if somewhat paternalistic) sympathy. Similarly, the consequences of Lydia’s impetuous marriage warn readers against losing self-control, and the praise Jane Fairfax receives on the pianoforte exhibits education’s importance. Still, these characteristics do not work in seclusion. Rather, self-control and rationality can “synergize” to create a more sympathetic human. In fact, according to reason-oriented philosophers such as Hume, rational humans capable of self-control can overcome greed and other animalistic instincts to demonstrate …show more content…
She achieves “perfect happiness” only after she marries Mr. Knightley and discovers the one aspect of life previously unknown to her – a significant other. Indeed, Emma achieves “perfect happiness” despite of (and perhaps even because of) a thief’s decision to pilfer Highbury’s tasty chickens. Emma’s “perfect happiness,” defined here as a state of contentment that even major setbacks cannot interrupt, clearly arises from her decision to follow traditional ideas of Victorian morality and marry Mr. Knightley. Even if virtue leads to happiness in general, however, must perfect happiness arise from perfect virtue? Evidence suggests not. In fact, Austen probably argues that women with perfect virtue do not achieve perfect happiness, and that one must break some social standards to become