One of the things I really enjoy about P&P is how much it emphasizes the difficulty of really understanding other people, and how inadequate our schemas for doing so can be. This is true of lots of literature, of course, but I feel it the most with P&P.
There are a lot of ‘consistent inconsistencies’ in the novel. For instance, at Netherfield it’s asserted that Elizabeth dislikes Darcy too much to care about his opinion of her, but in Elizabeth’s outburst after accepting the truth of the letter, she realizes that she was offended by Darcy’s “neglect” of her the whole time. If you accept the outburst as accurate, it’s going to profoundly shape your view of Elizabeth’s full emotional response to Darcy through the first half of the novel (and sometimes even beyond). If you think she’s exaggerating out of shame and embarrassment, that leads to very different conclusions.
People throw each around as conclusive discussion-enders, but it’s often more the case that a single data point ends all discussion
for that person, but the text actually offers many overlapping but not perfectly congruent data points for interpretation. You, as a reader, have to decide the extent to which you accept them and how you’re going to weigh them.
( Read more... )