Jane Austen discussion

Welcoming your comments.....

Ain't this just the best of Lady Susan:

"I have been called an unkind mother, but it was the sacred impulse of maternal affection, it was the advantage of my daughter that led me on; and if that daughter were not the greatest simpleton on earth, I might have been rewarded for my exertions as I ought."

...and this is contained in Letter No. 2!

So it goes! Cheers! Chris

Well, we know she has been called worse than that too! Thanks for the perfect intro into L. Susan's correspondence, Chris.

This is strong on my mind at the beginning of the story: I can't help wondering what all really did happen before the time the letters began. What was Lord Vernon like? I would assume he wasn't elderly, due to the seeming age of his brother Charles. He may have been in poor health of some kind. And we know he lost a fortune some how. Was anyone in particular the cause of that?

The plot of "Lady Susan", as well as the epistolary style is very 18th century. You will see find some distinct parallels in "Les Liaisons Dangereuses", some so pronounced that it seems likely Austen read the book. Lady Susan Vernon does seem like an unkind mother - we found ourselves involved in a discussion of whether she was just desperate to get Frederica married or wanted her out of the way in order to pursue her own romantic escapades. But in terms of her connection to her daughter, her eagerness to see her make a good match, she is not radically different from Mrs. Bennet, Lady Bertram, Lady Catherine deBourgh or any of the other mothers who are perfectly content to shove their daughters into a good (by their standards) if loveless match.

janetility.com

I wonder if Lady Susan's reduced circumstances are not of her own making, in which case she may have caused her own desperation of getting her daughter married.

I think we do see by reading her letters a pretty total plan of manipulation in the subject of marrying off Frederica. We don't get to look inside the mind of those other Austen parents through the same method.

I see the general difference in the Lady Susan situation in the fact of her sweeping her young daughter out of the schoolroom and locking her in an upstairs room so that she can't complain to compassionate relatives.

J., who is the author of the novel you mentioned?

I think Lady Susan marks the beginnings of Jane mocking society's conventions. What a bunch of "snarky" women, all wearing one face in public and another in private.

Lady Susan wants to make a good match for her daughter, which all of the other Austen mothers are intent on doing, more or less. Some of them just go about it in a nicer way.

Pierre-Ambrois-Francois Choderlos de Laclos - it's "Dangerous Liaisons" in translation. It would have been available in English translation by the time Austen wrote "Lady Susan". You see a lot of parallels between the Marquise and Susan Vernon, and between Cecile and Frederica.
The book was first published in the 1780s and it's still a pretty racy read.

J. wrote: "Pierre-Ambrois-Francois Choderlos de Laclos - it's "Dangerous Liaisons" in translation. It would have been available in English translation by the time Austen wrote "Lady Susan". You see a lot of p..."

Was the film version good compared to the book, Jane? Have you seen it, the one with Glen Close?

The '88 version with Glenn Close is well worth its excellent reputation! (It also deserves its 'R' rating, so be ye forewarned.) I read the book last year, and IMO, the movie by its visual content alone supersedes the book. It also makes a powerhouse of certain ideas the book lightly touches on, e.g., the scene between Close and Malkovich which she ends by uttering only one word -- "War." *shiver* I can watch the movie over and over (to my husband's chagrin), but I doubt I'll reread the book.

So far with 'Lady Susan', I think it's better -- and racier! -- than Dangerous Liaisons.

(I hope that's not just the Janeite in me talking.)

"I think we do see by reading her letters a pretty total plan of manipulation in the subject of marrying off Frederica. We don't get to look inside the mind of those other Austen parents through the same method."

What struck me was the thorough dislike she had of Fred, reveling in her dislike of the man she'd force her to marry. I didn't get that sense from other Austen mothers.

"I see the general difference in the Lady Susan situation in the fact of her sweeping her young daughter out of the schoolroom and locking her in an upstairs room so that she can't complain to compassionate relatives."

According to Halperin's bio of Austen, Susan might have been modeled on the mother of a neighbor who beat,starved and locked up her daughters. Unpleasant to think there might be more truth in that than in the kindly, if desperate, more usual Austen moms.

Maybe "Lady Susan" is the based-on the type of sensational stories that were so successfully lampooned in "Northanger Abbey." Being young, Austen was having fun with writing a really wicked character, something she turned away from as she and her writing matured. Still, it is a very enjoyable work as it stands!

Very shortly into Lady Susan we see that the title character is the worst mother in all of Austen. Completely devoid of all maternal feeling. I love how Catherine Vernon is NOT decieved one bit by her and actively tries to thwart her.

Rachel wrote: "Very shortly into Lady Susan we see that the title character is the worst mother in all of Austen. Completely devoid of all maternal feeling. I love how Catherine Vernon is NOT decieved one bit by ..."

If England were Sparta [of 'This is SPARTA!!! fame:] Susan would have exposed poor Fred on a hillside to be eaten by wolves long before she got to be 16. IMHO.

Rachel wrote: "Very shortly into Lady Susan we see that the title character is the worst mother in all of Austen. Completely devoid of all maternal feeling. I love how Catherine Vernon is NOT decieved one bit by ..."

I am with you and the other views above that send Lady Susan into the extremist category. If she wasn't, what would the story be?

From the jumping off point of Susan's wickedness, Austen clearly tells the game women like this would have played. AND reveled in! Susan wasn't just cleverly trying to make it in a widow's world, she was glorying in it and enjoying crushing people.

Jeannette, I know Austen found her way into other types of characters in her later works, but HOW did she write this at 19? I knew a lot at that age, but not this much! ha ha

Yes, P, thank goodness for civilized England!

Yes, Robin, the story is racy. What does everyone think of that aspect of it?

Did I miss the racy bits? Or have I got a different definition of racy?

As for Jane's writing this at 19: I understood from an earlier post that there was a news story about a horrible mother who beat her daughters, etc. I was theorizing that she based Lady Susan on these accounts and on the Gothic novels of the time. Lady Susan might have been a story that Isabella Thorpe could have told.

I consider it racy just from the innuendoes: she's got a marriageable-age daughter and has only been a widow for 4 months, yet she's been practically shoved out the door by her hostess; apparently she's flirted entirely too much, Lydia-style; she'd love to visit a friend in London, but the friend's husband shuns her (for what good reason?) -- and that's just the first few pages!

Whew!!

I know, Mr. Johnson won't have her in his house -- so what has she really done under his roof in the past?

And Manwaring paying his nightly visits to her boarding house. It seems Austen really brought it out on the table with this character. I guess not racy in details, but in every insinuation, as Robin says.

Jeannette, I am just amazed not that she created this plot actually, but more that she so carefully detailed the workings of this woman's mind. This seems much more interesting than the real stories probably would have been! That Jane!

Apparently, Jane Austen read this aloud to her family and they were absolutely horrified! I think she learned to be not quite so obvious and explicit as a result of Lady Susan. Clearly, her later novels do not reflect this overt 'raciness,' do they? As a plot, and the overall presentation, via the letters, is nothing short of ingeniously clever! Cheers! Chris

Ah, simple difference in word choice. Lady Susan was very wicked and had rather loose morals coupled with a very inflated image of herself and her power over people. Jane must have had a lot of fun writing this character.

First, I love this novella. It is so great to see Austen indulge us readers with the wicked Lady Susan - delicious!

When I recently re-read Lady Susan, I was struck by the similarity to an 18th century epistolary novel I read a few years ago. The novel The Coquette was originally published in 1797 in America by "a lady from Massachusetts" Hannah Foster, so likely before Austen penned her epistolary novel. However, The Coquette was based on an a real person's life and the main character Eliza meets with a much more tragic end than Lady Susan. Perhaps more of a precautionary tale. Here's a synopsis from Amazon:

"The Coquette tells the much-publicized story of the seduction and death of Elizabeth Whitman, a poet from Hartford, Connecticut. Written as a series of letters - between the heroine and her friends and lovers - it describes her long, tortuous courtship by two men, neither of whom perfectly suits her. Eliza Wharton (as Whitman is called in the novel) wavers between Major Sanford, a charming but insincere man, and the Reverend Boyer, a bore who wants to marry her. When, in her mid-30s, Wharton finds herself suddenly abandoned when both men marry other women, she willfully enters into an adulterous relationship with Sanford and becomes pregnant. Alone and dejected, she dies in childbirth at a roadside inn. Eliza Wharton, whose real-life counterpart was distantly related to Hannah Foster's husband, was one of the first women in American fiction to emerge as a real person facing a dilemma in her life. In her Introduction, Davidson discusses the parallels between Elizabeth Whitman and the fictional Eliza Wharton. She shows the limitations placed on women in the 18th century and the attempts of one woman to rebel against those limitations."

Jeannette wrote: "Did I miss the racy bits? Or have I got a different definition of racy?

As for Jane's writing this at 19: I understood from an earlier post that there was a news story about a horrible mother wh..."

I was JUST thinking that if you fast-forward Isabella Thorpe to 35 years old, you get Lady Susan!!! Jeanette, you are so right!

The raciness of the novel I think is entirely a product of Lady Susan's immorality, carrying on an affair with a married man.

Joy, that novel sounds SO interesting! Tragic and feminist at the same time. I will definitely try to find and read it sometime.

It is good and a quick read :) I'm not sure how available it is in print, but I saw several digital versions on google books.

I really enjoy the epistolary style of Lady Susan and The Coquette. It is so satisfying to me to have so many characters reveal their interiority through their letters.

Sounds like a very intersting story, Joy! I hope it's still possible to get a copy, I would love to read it some day.
Apropos Dangerous Liaisons (another book I would love to read): there's also a more modern adaption of the book: Cruel Intention. I don't know how true to the novel this movie is?

The Coquette is available online:

The Coquette

Sarah wrote: "This is strong on my mind at the beginning of the story: I can't help wondering what all really did happen before the time the letters began. What was Lord Vernon like? I would assume he wasn't elderly, due to the seeming age of his brother Charles. He may have been in poor health of some kind. And we know he lost a fortune some how. Was anyone in particular the cause of that?"

I'd say he was kind (certainly to Frederica, and probably to Susan before she started making his life a misery), and somewhat weak-willed. I'd strongly suspect that the loss of the fortune was a result of giving in to Susan's demands.

I suspect there's a clue to his character in this description of his younger brother, Mr Vernon (this from near the end of the book, but not really a spoiler):
Mr. Vernon, who, as it must already have appeared, lived only to do whatever he was desired. I.e. he was good-natured and easygoing, and easily persuaded by someone with a stronger will. He's also a convenient character for the author to use :-)

But the younger Mr Vernon married a woman of sense and a warm heart, and has done extremely well.

The Vernon men may have been as you described. I also remembered another phrase used implying that the younger Mr. Vernon still wasn't completely onto Susan's games, even though she had helped to sell family estate away from him, as described near the beginning.

Despite Catherine's liking and compassion for Frederica, I can't see how Mr Reginald De Courcy's sister and mother think Frederica an eligible match for him!