Jane Austen’s Pride and PrejudiceEssay Preview: Jane Austen’s Pride and PrejudiceReport this essayComposers explore the conflict between the power of the individual and the power of social norms and expectations. In your response, discuss Pride and Prejudice and ONE text of your own choosing.Jane Austen’s ‘Pride and Prejudice’ (1813) explores the tension between an individual and society’s expectations, similar to Arthur Miller’s ‘The Crucible’ (1953). Individuals in both the Regency period as well as the Puritan era display conflict against society. This is shown through both Austen’s and Miller’s characters in highly patriarchal and reputation conscious societies. Rising patriarchy during the Regency period displays a sense of tension, particularly between female individuals and society. As seen in Pride and Prejudice, it was expected of women to comply with the demands of men. Mr Bennet exploits his power over his family by refusing to visit Mr Bingley. Mrs Bennet’s resentful tone as she states, ‘We are not in a way to know what Mr Bingley likes…since we are not to visit’ emphasises her dislike towards the patriarchal system in society that forbids women to be independent. Dominant male power is exemplified through Mr Darcy, who alike the men in society, is enabled to exhibit authority over women. Mr Darcy’s high modality as he demands, ‘All this she must possess’ shows the lack of power women have over men as they are forbidden from controlling their own actions and decisions. Austen is then able to make women out as being the gender minority in society. The Regency period shows a rising sense of pressure amongst the individual and society. Miller explores the patriarchal tension between female individuals and society during the Puritan era, alike Austen. Parris exerts his male societal power over Tituba, seen through, ‘PARRIS: You will confess yourself or I will take you out and whip you to your death, Tituba!TITUBA, terrified, falls to her knees’. The use of exclamation signifies the authoritative power Parris has over Tituba, mainly as she is a female. Female oppression is also shown through Parris threatening to hurt Tituba, a right he has as a male in society. The stage direction acts as a symbol, that women will always be lower than males in society. Danforth is another individual Miller uses to highlight the patriarchal tension in society. As Mary attempts to redeem herself, ‘It were pretence sir’, Danforth blatantly dismisses her, stating, ‘I cannot hear you’. Danforth’s condescending tone emphasises the insignificance women were to men and demonstrates men’s power to ignore women in society. Mr Collins, portrayed by Austen, shows similarities between Danforth, as he uses his power in society to belittle women. This is seen through Austen’s use of colloquial language, ‘Mr Collins had only to change from Jane to Elizabeth – and it was soon done’ which emphasises the lack of power women had to voice their opinion and the power men had to do what they pleased. Lack of female power in society is demonstrated by both Miller and Austen.Austen presents the reader with conscious individuals, who strive to uphold their reputation amongst the expectations of society. Aware of a female’s reputation, Mrs Hurst displays a sense of shock, as Elizabeth arrives at Netherfield with a muddy skirt. By the repetition of ‘wild’ as she states, ‘I shall never forget her wild appearance this morning. She really looked almost wild’. The use of repetition along with her judgemental tone of voice is deliberately used by Austen to reveal the Mrs Hurst’s disdain and suggests the importance of reputation to women, especially those of a higher class. Despite Jane’s caring nature, she is also conscious of her reputation as well as her family’s. Through her letter to Elizabeth, she writes, ‘We are now anxious to be assured it has taken place’, regarding Lydia and Wickham’s marriage. The epistolary nature adds a sense of realism to the news, emphasising Jane’s concern for her reputation, rather than her sister’s happiness. Individuals during the Regency period display their need for a high reputation, an expectation in society.
Similar to Regency period, an individual’s concern for their reputation in society is evident in the Puritan era. Miller portrays Reverend Parris as a conscious man, always concerned for his reputation amongst society. When he recognises that his niece may be involved in the witch hunts, Parris begins to worry for his reputation in society, emphasised through his use of exclamation as he states, ‘Just now when some good respect is rising for me in the parish, you compromise my very character!’. Only concerned for his high reputation amongst the townspeople rather than his niece, Miller’s utilisation of exclamation assists the reader in understanding how conscious Parris is about his reputation. John Proctor is another individual represented by Miller, who protects his reputation in society. When asked to confess to witch craft, Proctor resists, ‘Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life’. Miller’s use of personal pronoun accentuates Proctor’s desperation to protect his reputation as he knows it will also stain his family’s reputation amongst those in society. Austen’s representation of Lady Catherine parallels Proctor as she is also concerned for her family’s reputation amongst society. Her dominative tone of voice as she questions ‘Are the shades of Pemberley to be thus polluted?’ demonstrates her hatred towards Elizabeth, as she would ruin Pemberley’s high-class reputation in society. Both Miller and Austen depict their characters as those who are conscious of society’s views of their reputation. Both Austen and Miller display the various conflicts individuals have in society, especially between the strong patriarchal system and the need for a high reputation. Quotes TablePatriarchyQuoteTechniqueAnalysis‘We are not in a way to know what Mr Bingley likes…since we are not to visit’ – Mrs BennetResentful tone As seen in Pride and Prejudice, it was expected of women to comply with the demands of men. Mr Bennet exploits his power over his family by refusing to visit Mr Bingley. emphasises her dislike towards the patriarchal system in society that forbids women to be independent.‘All this she must possess’ – Mr DarcyHigh modalityDominant male power is exemplified through Mr Darcy, who alike the men in society, is enabled to exhibit authority over women. shows the lack of power women have over men as they are forbidden from controlling their own actions and decisions.
[1][/1][/p]‘
I have been following this work for a while now, as I’ve researched and read about all of these women involved in a range of various issues relating to the Puritan period. Although I’ve never read any of the articles, I have found some interesting, informative and insightful reviews to my left of this article. I won’t go too far into specifics, instead focusing on a number of factors that I think will help to understand the general issues surrounding sexual assault, as well as the implications of these for men in society. If you’re in the UK enjoy reading, you can do so through the links here, as it is available in some countries.
What are a couple of women with high status and power in society that are being accused of doing a crime?
There are a couple of very interesting stories out there that are interesting to me. First, one of these is from the recent work of the London School of Economics’ Dr Louise Smith. As the title would suggest, the article provides a range of examples of this phenomenon where, if an offence took place in front of women and was not covered by the legislation, this would be a real issue. Dr Smith reports, It was widely used to get women arrested before trial and then jailed for just over two years in order to defend their innocence. The article that covers it provides a strong argument against the use of rape to prevent defendants from committing criminal offences: Although the evidence collected in that article was based out in this kind of court system, which does have many loopholes and may even encourage some courts to have laws that are unconstitutional as well, it is still a much better idea to use the law to prevent crime rather than having to rely on women to defend their rights. Secondly, one of the main arguments against the use of rape as a criminal offence is that, for the moment women in power are not going to be deterred from exercising this ability for the short term. While this is true, such a scenario cannot be taken as a justification for using rape as a criminal offence. As with the article on women, the article provides a clear example of how the very use of the word raped by the police actually results in a significant increase in cases where this type of
The Article
An article in the New Statesman magazine in September 2016 uses this kind of legal terminology to describe what the article is being said:
In his recent article on the issues and developments in the rape of boys in the military in Afghanistan, Mark L. Fenton cites in his context the same paragraph that the article refers to:
The use of sexual violence by the military means sexual abuse in war.
It does not however mention or even address any specific instances. Rather the article reads:
In August 2009, when General Stanley McChrystal, then commander of the 2nd Air Force, received word that an additional 20 men were serving in Afghanistan, he wrote on his blog: “[s]t. of other U.S. military personnel, including me, in my report submitted to Congress at the start of this year. The general acknowledged that the reported rapes that had occurred in the U.S. would have occurred far in advance of time to the point where no-one had an alternative source of defense other than the U.S. military. . . . There was also no indication that the perpetrators could have known of the time until they were caught.
The article continues (emphasis added):
He emphasized his responsibility to combat these alleged rapes, noting: “My general obligation is to help all who have been victimized to the point where their case is not limited to military service. The number of victims of rape worldwide is on the brink of doubling. I have identified two such cases, each involving more than 10,000 men and women, where a number of our units have lost at least one person in the process…. The total amount of victims of sexual violence has increased almost twofold since 2006.
As an additional added illustration, the article describes the following:
In September 2009, General Stanley McChrystal (then the commander of the 2nd Air Force) said, in comments sent to the Post to the Military Times: “[a]bout the last decade, if not in history, at least as many victims of rape have been assaulted by Americans because of military misconduct. . . . The numbers are very high, and are increasing by a lot. Some of them I believe have had serious sexual assault by the military for their country, some of them even with other officers in their rank. This raises the question as to whether or not it will ever be possible to prevent the number of assaults from increasing, or, better yet, to reduce it as far as possible, because when there is a substantial amount of victims, there is an incentive to use force. That is absolutely what I believe to be an extremely important difference.”
It’s important to note that the phrase “many victims” is also quoted in the article because it implies that rape does not involve killing and that’s not the end of this story. It’s also interesting that the phrase “many victims” appears in an article that refers to just about every kind of incident of sexual violence in the world (although there are multiple instances of this, such as having sex with children).
The Article has numerous other examples where feminists often use this to defend such attacks. It’s not hard to see how. The article cites:
The Washington Post article in an article published by the Los Angeles Times on Tuesday said, “…