That Someone

Jane Austen's Pride And Prejudice depicts marriage as a business transaction. A successful CEO understands the short life opportunities have, granting little to no room for consideration sometimes. He is able to isolate emotion and morality and concentrate on the tangible profit. He also understands that great profit requires sacrifice and toil, objecting not to some suffering for many bucks.

According to these criteria, Mrs. Bennet makes an excellent CEO in her family management. Her business concentrates on finding suitable partners for her daughters. She has her checklist. If he is rich, agreeable and of high class he needs no more in winning one of her daughters. This is not completely unreasonable, for who would denny money and power for the rest of her life if the choice exists. But that alone is not enough. Mr. Collins mistakes Elizabeth for an ordinary girl and thinks that his ability to meet her mother's checklist will suffice. He asks for her hand in marriage and she denies his offer. To him this is far beyond his comprehension. He believes that he is worthy of her acceptance for his "situation in life, my connections to the family of De Bourgh, and my relationship to your own, are circumstances highly in my favor" (82). Her denial shocks him for he, as does Mrs. Bennet, fails to see beyond the stated. Their belief that money equals happiness is too strong to let them admire other possibilities.

Elizabeth then proves to be one of smartest characters in the novel. She understands what others don't. Marriage is possibly the most important decision one takes in life. It defines how your life will be, who you'll get to call "family", which face will lie besides yours every morning and much more. One can cope with a mediocre decision regarding friends, work, country and such things which are easily reversed. Marriage deals with so many components it must be thought throughly. If one marries money alone, the risk of being lonely and unhappy exists. If one marries beauty, its bliss is only temporary. If one marries personality alone, as harsh as it may sound, there will come a point where we long luxuries we once had and may easily despair. Every component has its effect. Money does too, and a great one to some, but not enough to stand on its own.

In Pride And Prejudice we encounter several relationships. Beyond individual details they convey a message. We are free to travel a path of our choosing which ultimately takes us to someone with whom we shall spend the rest our life with (in theory). That whom we choose will define our happiness to an important extent. Cases are infinite. To some that person may never come. To others, that person shall come only after years of search and dozens of relationships. Yet others, such as Jane, might find it in their first love. Elizabeth argues that we shouldn't settle in our lives. But when we find those people so unique whose company will come only once, we should think twice before letting go.

The Right Lens

Pride, or the view one carries of oneself, and prejudice, that which others think of one, not only compose the title but reoccur throughout the novel. These themes appear in many conversations and explain behaviors in Jane Austen's Pride And Prejudice. Said themes are found in every character but Mr. Darcy provides a clear example.

Mr. Darcy embodies pride and prejudice as the novel defines them. Starting with his entrance at the dance in the fifth minute of the film, he creates a strong impression. He thinks a lot about himself and so much self-complacency advocates in him great pride. Mr. Wickham later refers to his pride as "often his best friend. It has connected him nearer with virtue than any other feeling" (61). According to this pride may be rewarding or punishing. Thinking highly of oneself is good in overcoming difficulties. It is the lack of this condition that defines depression. Conversely, thinking of oneself as highest blurs reality. Mr. Darcy fails to understand the balance and comes across as haughty. Family pride is then mentioned in that same conversation. This is also very true of the context for not only pride leads Darcy to act such but the belief of his family being superior others. All characters have some pride, but the amount of pride becomes then a way to compare oneself to others. Pride is an untangible and subjective currency. To the modern reader this condition is despicable and diminishes a character. In the historical context, those defined as proud take it as a virtue and toil not to hide it.

Prejudice makes up another part of Darcy's character. He doesn't care much about what others think of him unless they present a higher rank. As this is rare, he is by definition empty of prejudice. But caring not of alien opinions does not exclude him from prejudice. It is necessary for there to be a second individual in prejudice, the one that thinks of the person in effect. This second individual is often Mr. Darcy. He is quick to judge and gives much importance to what first impressions say. Elizabeth questions Darcy wether "you allow yourself to be blinded by prejudice" (71). He replies that he "hopes not." After demonstrating that he often speaks his mind, I conclude that he honestly hopes for this. There are two options. He might be lying to hide what he believes disgraceful or he might be giving prejudice a different meaning. His excessive pride might lead him to think it isn't prejudice, but his qualification to judge people. Darcy is a peculiar character whose mental state enables him to consider himself an exception.

Pride and Prejudice come with specifics to the situation. Feelings are all different and so are their definitions associated to individuals. Pride as felt by Darcy is different than Mr. Bingley's pride, but no more important. They are elements introduced for a reason and must be taken into consideration as we read. It is not through our modern eyes that the plot must run by but under the lens of Jane Austen's intentions.

1. Affability: pleasantly easy to approach and to talk to (50).

2.Vouchsafe: to grant or give, as by favor, graciousness, or condescension (50).

3. Phaeton:avarious light, four-wheeled carriages, with or without a top, having one or two seats facing forward,

used in the19th century (51).

4. Triffling:of very little importance; trivial (52).

A Slight Change

It is only for so long that character manage to hold their initial impression. It tends to happen in novels and that which they mirror: life. It is about ten chapters into Jane Austen's Pride And Prejudice that our initial understanding of the characters begins to change along with the relationships between one another. People are one when they are first introduced, another when they spend some time with you and a third, real person when they get accustomed to you. This is only in short term, for over the years people may change a dozen times. And when they do we tend to feel cheated, as if they had hidden their real intentions in need of acceptance. This isn't true for every living being grows, hopefully, into something better. It is so that every character in the novel changes and there are none who manage to hold their introduction intact.

Mr. Darcy is introduced as a haughty character who's presence is rather unimportant. He begins by disregarding everyone without argument. Later in the book he becomes quite an intellectual whose insight lead the way to many conversations which become then fundamentals for the plot. It is he that defines humility as "carelessness of opinion, and sometimes an indirect boast" (35). This then becomes the basis for a conversation with Mr. Bingley which leads us to much better understanding of them both. In turn, Elizabeth lets her essence show as she too shares thought upon Darcy's definition. The lonely character who at first thought himself too much for the others might just be an over thinker, one that would rather participate in intellectual exchange than on the dance floor.

Miss Bingley comes to show much of herself when Elizabeth pays Netherfield a visit. She who was one the living example of diplomacy and good manners becomes a resentful wasp submerged in insecurity. As she tries to impress Mr. Darcy, she begins to feel that the man shows interest upon Miss Bennet. As her dislike for the girl grows so does his admiration for her. We then find her manipulating her relatives in opposition to Elizabeth. Miss Bennet knew about the crush for " frequently Mr. Darcy's eyes where fixed in her" (38). Not only does it empower her to wield said advantage but the moment the interest becomes more than just suspicion the relationship changes. Darcy proceeds to ignore her, posing a distant figure as to take back his obvious admiration which so much troubles MIss Bingley.

These few chapter shed new light on the plot. Characters have changed or rather become unchanged to their true essence. A novel that deals primarily with relationships is affected the most by shifts in personality. For this reason we must be critical about every word muttered by the characters, because behind strong walls of hypocrisy lie weak people exposed to reality.

Frame It In Time

As I read further into Jane Austen's Pride And Prejudice I begin to encounter differences between my reality and that of the characters. It is important to note that the novel was written roughly 200 years ago. The society depicted by Austen is intensely different from ours in custom, language and mentality. Geographically, the plot takes place across oceans making the cultural gap even greater. This is important when reading the novel, for not what seems is, and not what is today would be then. This aside, the basic human emotions remain the same through centuries. Even if channeled differently, it is the same situations that trigger events at Netherfield and Hollywood.

It is evident, when one stares upon the first page of the novel, that the matter in subject is not a valid application of contemporary society. But how great could the gap be? I understand the way they speak, carry themselves, and interpret events under the lens of society is different. I can appreciate how the materialistic movement runs parallel to the novel. The problem comes when asked to draw the line upon hypocrisy. The subject in essence is complicated as are all subjects with basis on subjectivity, but its complications turn up a notch with reference to time. It puzzled me when they criticized what to me, and many modern citizens, was an act love, admirable under any light. Elizabeth, worried for her sister's condition, walks miles in the mud and arrives tired and dirty only to care for Jane's recuperation. At the first opportunity to discuss, the congregation at Netherfield thought it "very nonsensical to come at all! Why must she be scampering about the country because her sister has a cold? Her hair so untidy, so blowzy" (25). So much criticism triggered after so much affection. How could it be considered "nonsensical" to care for one's sister, setting her health as a priority above her grooming? Here not only did I disagree with Miss Bingley's attitude, but began to dislike her personally.

After some thought, I concluded that the comment lay as a consequence of the distant between decorum in the city and in towns. Much like today, people living in big cities tend to look down upon people from towns. As if living in the city made you any better. Even if the subject in the town was to have more resources, the economically inferior city boy would have an air of superiority for he ignorantly believes he represents the city. I wont strive to convince that we are all equal, for I don't believe such myth myself. Yes, there are superior individuals. I disagree the criteria by which this superiority is adjudicated. Say a scholar, one who has written books and conferenced about agricultural development, was to converse with a farmer. As humble as the former might be, he shall deem himself more important, an authority in the matter in which the farmer is but a peasant. I disagree with allowing this attitude to come through, but there is no denying the scholar of his reason.

Then again, this must be interpreted under the respective context. My example makes only sense for those who lived after humanity began to prize education and may make no sense in a hundred years, when the generosity of heart comes to be prized above knowledge. In doing this I vastly generalize, for there are obviously some who, even today, consider material possession way above education but they are a minority. They used to be a majority, at least in the social circle depicted in the novel. This is why books must be read in context, and why interpretation of the pages changes as time goes by. I will accept it and agree upon the mentality as I open the book once again.

Prelude To Drama

As I begin reading my way through Jane Austen's Pride And Prejudice, a critique about society begins to take form in my mind: a critique applicable today.Even in the first few pages the novel demonstrates a superficial take on the purpose of life. The novel depicts high class as an empty group of individuals as they prize "fortune." As the characters participate in a battle for the best match they demonstrate some animal behavior, that primitive human instinct which pushes us to selfish acting. Even amongst sisters, the Bennets are host to much rivalry between themselves.It is not enough to have as a family, but individual preferences creates opinions on who should hold said assets.

As the parents begin to assign Mr. Bingley to one of their daughters without as much as being introduced, preferences emerge. They describe the girls in their discussion, but beyond that they describe their character and define that which they prize the most. Mr. Bennet gives some priority to beauty and appearance, while Mr. Bennet holds quickness of mind in higher esteem. Each of them has a preference, but it is his "always giving her the preference" which is questioned (2). Mr. Bennet emerges as a representation of freedom of thought aloof such tense society. He accepts its course and toils not in changing it, but through his mild sarcasm he demonstrates a different train of thought.

I am uncertain about my expectations. I foresee an interpretation of social customs which transcend time along a story of romance and envy. It seems to be a soap opera for the enlightened, if I dare say. The elements of society are merely represented for us to interpret. An interpretation so obvious as it is fed to us line by line, and yet so complex that the novel goes beyond what it seems. It is not much different, then, that which the Bennets thought of Mr. Bengley from what I begin to associate with the novel.

What Lies In Revenge

As I turn the last page, read the last lines and learn the last words everything begins to spin and shift inside my mind as the so much expected unraveling of the story comes much too abruptly. We did expect revenge to take place in spite of Hamlet's denial, but so much? If one has but a mediocre understanding of Shakespeare and his work, a tragedy is definitely expected incorporating death and murder, but even for this genius it is too much. The whole play revolved around this final moment which "tied" it al together, and so its implications may not be assumed hastily. In the end, rare it is for those who live and not those who perish under sword, lunacy and treachery.

Hamlet by his wound, Laertes succumbing to his own weapon, the King a victim to his own hypocrisy, Ophelia a casualty in the limbo of love and so many others come to the end by their own means. In answer to previous intrigue about revenge, it is made clear that the driving force behind the whole play is revenge itself and not the natural consequence of one's acts. This revenge is clearly expressed by Hamlet when he uncovers the truth about the sword "envenomed too! Then, venom, to thy/ work."(Act5, Scene2, 351-353). It is, after all, a story about revenge, its consequences and its forms of application up to its ultimate degree. And it is no smart revenge as may be argued possible by some, but an animalistic and savage revenge which, it ints course to hurt an individual, requires such sacrifice as mathematicians would deem unprofitable.

Such a disturbing plot provides little comfort at its closure, taking us to question the intentions behind it. When so much is said and so many thought come to an end before a sword, leaving no one alive to give meaning to the history, what is the message? There are some obvious possibilities. First, some may argue that mere entertainment must not include a teaching but merely distract its audience which the play accomplished, but that somehow falls short of my standards. On the other hand, it is evident that even when everyone dies the play becomes one of the most praised works of all times, demonstrating how art can outlive its creator, but I suspect thats not it. If considering how revenge is an evil force, the conclusion could be evidence of how living by such parameters leads to no satisfaction, and how such feeling is valid but failure to overcome it is pointless. Finally, another interpretation may be driven by history and how so much power and greed came to destroy families and whole reigns as a warning to future leaders.

In literature there a variety of interpretations and, in a way, each of the previous may be valid an so are many others. It is curious however, how we spend our days reading between lines and analyzing every word and every situation in our endeavor to grasp the every detail to end in so much nothingness. And I am not mentioning nothingness as mere a description of ideas for in nothingness much lies inscribed. It is just curious how a pattern emerges where, when stories end in general death and hope is vanished from the script, the audience only looks upon the logical reasons for it to happen and leaves it at that. When, to the contrary, characters remain and stories end, we are given the invitation to imagine, so suppose, to go beyond what is fed to us.