I think I hate Mrs. Norris more than I hate any other Austen character. Probably even more than idiot Lydia from
P&P, because she's young and, while stupid, is indiscriminate with her stupidity and doesn't single anyone out like Mrs. Norris does. Good grief does she ever have it in for her niece. What did the poor girl ever do to her? I hate her so much. She just smashes her down at every opportunity. Why is she so eager to make her low? What good does it do anyone? At least Austen shows an improvement in her writing by giving Mrs. Norris some comeuppance. Sir Bertram overrides her and won't let Maria move back home after the latter runs away and lives in sin with Henry Crawford, ruining her reputation etc., so she and Mrs. Norris are forced to live in another country together. Austen is clear that while Maria is her aunt's darling, Maria doesn't love her back. So there's something, at least. That's not enough of a comeuppance, in my opinion, but at least it's a bit better than what passes for Lydia's (she has to live out the rest of her days with Wickham, who doesn't love her. But her family mainly still keeps in touch with her. Ugh.).
It's also easy to get frustrated with the characters in
Mansfield Park, but not as much as I did with S&S. The intro was all like "oh readers hate Fanny because she is so virtuous" but I like her, probably because I am rather like her. However, she is so very retiring and, well, wimpy, and modern culture has taught us to despise people who don't stand up for themselves, plus she's so weak and gets headaches from cutting roses in the garden wtf. Look at her life, though. She's the second oldest of TEN children (those who are anti-birth control haven't read this book, I'll wager. I do want kids but I'd rather die than have more than four) and is sent away to live with relatives who are strangers to her when she is ten years old, and the only one who is nice to her is her cousin Edmund and everyone is super eager to show her how inferior she is and is always ignoring, scolding, or putting her down. So of course she's the way she is. She could easily be worse. She actually shows strength of character in being against the play even though she'd been taught to obey her relatives all her life and her opinion was never taken into account. She also refused Henry Crawford even though her entire family, even Edmund, lectured that she should accept him because she'd never get a better offer. They even brought out the big guns that had kept her in control all her life, gratitude and obedience, but Fanny stuck to what she knew was right. I like her for that. The English professor or whatever who wrote the intro in my B&N copy points out that Mary Crawford is more of an Austen heroine than Fanny is, because Mary is sparkling and witty and flirtily argues with her love interest etc. But she hates religion and doesn't care about propriety and is all about the exciting rather than what is right. So for that she is not a good match for Edmund, even though they love each other.
Edmund is the second nicest character in the book, but I still get frustrated with him. Mary is beautiful and charming, yes, but really his love so blinds him that he cannot see she's totally wrong for him. He's going to be a clergyman, for pete's sake. And then instead of sticking up for Fanny when she turns down Henry Crawford, even though she explains that he's never acted properly and was leading both the Bertram girls on like the dickhead player he is, he lectures her too about how wrong it is of her to reject him. WTF, Edmund. Just because he's your gf's brother doesn't make him perfect. I mean, Edmund knows Fanny best of anyone and he really thinks Henry's a good match for her, with his player ways that don't take propriety into account? Come on. Just seeing her distress should be enough to not pressure her to do something she doesn't want to do. What I really dislike him for is when both Betram girls run away with their paramours (Maria with Henry and Julia with Mr. Yates) and he brings Fanny home from visiting her immediate family, and he's all like "yeah, Fanny, it sucks that your only suitor who was in love with you totally dropped you and ran off scandalously with your married cousin to live in sin and so now you'll never marry him, but think of ME! My gf didn't really do anything wrong except for not being shocked enough at the immorality of her brother and my sister, therefore showing that she's totally wrong for me and for a clergyman's wife!" Yeah, ok. Selfish much? I guess what he's saying that is that it probably hurts Fanny less because she didn't love Henry, but he really loved Mary so it really hurts to see, without any of the prior love-blindness, that she doesn't care about morality and is totally wrong for him. Like, she's only mad that they got caught, not that they did it. Still, though. And I was less disgusted with it this time, but I still hate that Fanny is a second choice. She's loved Edmund half her life, basically, and it's not until after he sees finally that Mary is wrong for him and finishes nursing his broken heart that he sees, "exactly when it's proper and not a week before", that Fanny's great. How convenient, he sees her good qualities in a new light and falls in love with her, mainly because his prior love, whom he really loved, turned out to be a twerp and wrong for him.
Where have I heard that before? Poor Fanny. She's just a second choice, like Colonel Brandon. She deserves to be loved first.
This book is really heavy on morality and propriety, which makes it less popular today. It's hard to see what's so immoral about young people putting on a play to amuse themselves. I can see the objections to the play itself, which is about a mistress and illegitimate child, etc., but as to the putting on of the play I don't really get the objections. Oh well. The morality and Fanny's meekness are probably why this book isn't as well loved as
P&P or
Emma, as well as its slowness and length. The whole "be virtuous/a good girl and you will be rewarded (often with a love of your own)" thing is very common in literature of this period and before, but
MP is more modern in its portrayal of this old trope. The book is clear that you will be unpopular if you do the right thing, that you'll be outcast and that those who do or think wrong are much more attractive than you. Society doesn't censure it anymore. It's harder to be good now that the reward is less sure. I like it also for that reason.
