A minor theory and a plot bunny

[anghraine]

[reposted from wordpress]

Usually, Austen takes painstaking care to fit the pieces of her puzzles together seamlessly. Pride and Prejudice, in particular, is a miracle of internal consistency. To all appearances, the cast of over twenty differing personalities achieve a suspiciously neat conclusion by acting, and being, perfectly “in-character” as they pursue their own ends. On the surface, it looks merely fortuitous; any attempt to deconstruct the shiny, sparkly, straightforward plot quickly demonstrates otherwise. It is put together very, very well.

Of course, that means that certain people take great pleasure in poking at the tapestry of plot and seeing what happens. I’m not actually referring to AUs (or, to use Austen fandom parlance, what-ifs) here, though I could be. I’m thinking of a more purely intellectual exercise that you can catch even critics at. Particularly critics, even, since they do it nearly as often as fans do. It goes something like this.

“Nobody except for the Gardiners have the slightest reason to suspect a relationship between Darcy and Elizabeth, right? Right. I mean, everybody’s shocked when they get engaged. So how on earth did a rumour of their impending marriage reach Lady Catherine, of all people?”

“Well, it’s got to be the Collinses. They’re the only link. But why would Mr Collins think there was anything between them? – I mean, this is the man who didn’t think anybody else would propose to Elizabeth, ever. So . . . Charlotte?”

“It’s got to be, really. But why would she think . . .?”

“IT’S A CUNNING PLOT. Don’t question it.”

(I have now saved you the trouble of reading “Who Betrayed Elizabeth Bennet?” You can thank me later.)

(PS. Austen actually explains all of this within the body of P&P. Twice. Fan Dumb applies to critics too.)

So, anyway. We poke at the things that don’t fit quite so perfectly as the rest, and come up with theories. And I have a theory.

It hinges on two fairly insignificant details. (What is a fan theory without insignificant details?) First, a few people – including the intermittently not-dumb Dr Shapard, author of “The Annotated P&P” – have wondered why Darcy went to Netherfield so (comparatively) soon after Ramsgate, since he obviously doesn’t like it and doesn’t want to like it and certainly doesn’t want to be there. Now, we can all come up with about a dozen good reasons for it (the good Dr Shepard provides two), but Austen never provides any. She never even addresses it.

OR DOES SHE?

Let’s leap a volume and a half forward. See, Caroline is trying to discomfit Elizabeth by alluding to her suppopsed preference for Wickham. But, in the book, she’s smart prudent enough to refrain from mentioning him by name. She just suggests that Certain People were enraptured of the men in the militia. And Georgiana totally freaks out. Darcy Darcyishly watches to see what’s going to happen. (I will never understand where the concept of Darcy as an impulsive, dynamic Man of Action came from. </tangent>) Elizabeth elegantly defeats Caroline, which undoubtedly brightens everybody’s day, even the perpetually-neurotic Georgiana.

The point? The “militia” is a reference to Wickham – not just for Elizabeth, Darcy, and Caroline, but for Georgiana too. Georgiana knows that Wickham was in the militia. But why? The Bingleys know that Darcy can’t stand to hear Wickham’s name so much as mentioned. They wouldn’t have dared mention him to Darcy’s sister, would they? Then who was it? Colonel Fitzwilliam? That’d be rather stupid. Then . . .

Darcy himself?

He’s the only one who coud conceivablgy away with it – but, again, why? If there’s no chance of Georgiana meeing him, what point would there be to upsetting her . . . oh, of course!

Suppose that Darcy meant Georgiana to join him after a few weeks? I mean, he wouldn’t throw her willy-nilly into a new place – even normally, but certainly not then. He’s vetting the neighourhood for Georgiana as well as Bingley (since he would like to see them married at some point, this goes double). And while he was deciding in his usual leisurely fashion (see above), he runs into Wickham on the street. Perhaps he had already sent for Georgiana and sent a panicked WICKHAM IS HERE!!! express to London.

That would explain why he would have told Georgiana about Wickham’s presence in Hertfordshire. It would have mattered that she know.

Hm. Doesn’t that mean that, if Wickham had not shown up, Georgiana would have come to Netherfield, met Elizabeth & Co, etc etc? No Wickham, + Georgiana = . . . well, a faster conclusion, I’ve got to think. Wouldn’t that be fun? A little shallow and frothy, perhaps, but cute. I think the Darcy/Georgiana relationship is inexpressibly cute. (”There is nothing he would not do for her,” quoth Mrs Reynolds. Aw.)

Anyway, I’d like to read something like that. Or write it.

Comments

I've always wondered how Mrs Renyolds knew

[ben.com]

Her aunt now called her to look at a picture. She approached, and saw the likeness of Mr. Wickham suspended, amongst several other miniatures, over the mantlepiece. Her aunt asked her, smilingly, how she liked it. The housekeeper came forward, and told them it was the picture of a young gentleman, the son of her late master's steward, who had been brought up by him at his own expence.—"He is now gone into the army," she added, "but I am afraid he has turned out very wild."

I've always wondered why -- even if Darcy was at much at Pemberly after the fall -- he would have informed Mrs Renyolds that Wickham had gone into the militia. Perhaps she had it from Georgiana, who looked up to her as a mother figure?

Re: I've always wondered how Mrs Renyolds knew

[anghraine]

I... rather doubt that Georgiana would look up the housekeeper at all, tbh, though I'm sure she was fond of her. And that does raise the question of how Georgiana found it. I tend to think it was mutual acquaintances in Lambton or something, the same way Mr Collins had heard that Mr Bennet's daughters were pretty before he met anyone in the Meryton area.