JANE AUSTEN’S STYLE

JANE AUSTEN

Jane Austen’s style is both graceful and sardonic. Her style marks the transition from neo-classicism to romanticism. The neo-classical style is clear and precise, ideally suited to the subject matter. Imagination had yet to displace reason and the mimetic was still there in the midst of the expressive. Jane Austen’s novel Emma (1815) is an excellent example of the use of different styles to suit the personality and the emotional condition of her characters. Dialogues from chapters 4 and 13 dealing with Emma’s dislike for yeomanry and Mr. Knightley’s confession of love to Emma are good examples of the different styles Jane Austen uses to communicate her vision of the novel.

In the first section Austen makes Emma Woodhouse dislike young Robert Martin just because he is a yeoman possess the Abbey Mill Farm. He is quite well-educated and writes good English. He is a perfect match for Harriet but Emma does not think so. The social classes in England during the early nineteenth century were quite integrated and it was not uncommon for a farmer to marry into aristocracy. But marrying above one’s social class always led to strife and problems. By showing Emma’s snobbishness, Austen is highlighting Emma’s shortcoming. Her snobbery is based on false principles.

‘That may be, and I may have seen him fifty times, but without having any idea of his name. A young farmer, whether on horseback or on foot, is the very last sort of person to raise my curiosity. The yeomanry are precisely the order of people with whom I feel I can have nothing to do. A degree or two lower, and a creditable appearance might interest me; I might hope to be useful to their families in some way or other. But a farmer can need none of my help, and is, therefore, in one sense, as much above my notice as in every other he is below it’ (Austen, 1996 30).

Undoubtedly it is the prose of a woman using hurried and argumentative sentences trying to convince Harriet not to marry Mr. Martin as he is a yeoman. Jane Austen shows that her heroine is immature, conceited and snobbish and is out of touch with the social and political reality of the times.

Some critics have complained that Austen did not take account of the political events of her time that were introducing great social changes in England. Arnold Hauser in Social History of Art tells us that though Austen’s characters were “rooted in social reality” the writer did not place them in situations where they could “solve or interpret” social problems (Hauser, 1951 825-26). But the situation of Emma and Mr. Martin shows that Austen was concerned about new aspirations of the yeoman class. The farmer occupied an important position is English class feeling and only the stupid would have looked down on him. Mr. Knightley sees Mr. Martin as a friend and calls him “a gentleman farmer.” His rise in social hierarchy was certain during a time when the French Revolution was in the making. England escaped social unrest as not only it enjoyed freedom and parliamentary government but had abolished the caste differences between nobility and commoners. Both joined hands together to conduct business and intermarry.

Emma’s statement is both contrived and dreadful. She is snobbish which arises from her self-love. She is also unkind, impulsive and brutal. She assumes that since Mr. Martin is a farmer he is illiterate. But his reading choice seems to be superior to Harriet’s. Emma admits that she would not have noticed a man like Mr. Martin. He was not low class enough for her to help but low class enough not to associate with. This shows her snobbishness. She can be charitable to the lower classes if they fit her estimation of poverty.

Mr. Knightley in Chapter 13 expresses his utter confusion through dashes and half formed sentences:

‘As a friend!’—repeated Mr. Knightley.—‘Emma, that I fear is a word—No, I have no wish—Stay, yes, why should I hesitate?—I have gone too far already for concealment.—Emma, I accept your offer—Extraordinary as it may seem, I accept it, and refer myself to you as a friend.—Tell me, then, have I no chance of ever succeeding?’

He stopped in his earnestness to look the question, and the expression of his eyes overpowered her.

"My dearest Emma,’ said he, ‘for dearest you will always be, whatever the event of this hour's conversation, my dearest, most beloved Emma—tell me at once. Say ‘No,’ if it is to be said.’—She could really say nothing.—‘You are silent,’ he cried, with great animation; ‘absolutely silent! at present I ask no more.’

Obviously an analysis of style finally attempts to evaluate the control a writer exercises over his theme, structure and character. We are assessing the writer’s dexterity, his erudition, his use of allusions, his understatements, his inter-textuality, symbolism and wordplay to create his vision and surprise us. If for example a writer follows a specific style but lacks the ability to suit the needs of the situation, it is possible to conclude that his control over his material and style is rather inadequate. However lack of change in style may be a deliberate attempt to reveal his central vision.