开云体育

At the very end of Ch. 46 of P&P, we read the following narrative passage
right after Elizabeth reads Jane’s two letters describing the Lydia-Wickham
fracas:



“She was wild to be at home—to hear, to see, to be upon the spot to share
with Jane in the cares that must now fall wholly upon her, in a family so
deranged; a father absent, a mother incapable of exertion, and requiring
constant attendance; and though almost persuaded that nothing could be done
for Lydia, her uncle’s interference seemed of the utmost importance, and
till he entered the room the misery of her impatience was severe.

Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner had hurried back in alarm, supposing, by the
servant’s account, that their niece was taken suddenly ill; but satisfying
them instantly on that head, she eagerly communicated the cause of their
summons, reading the two letters aloud, and dwelling on the postscript of
the last with trembling energy. Though Lydia had never been a favourite
with them, Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner could not but be deeply affected.

Not Lydia only, but all were concerned in it; and after the first
exclamations of surprise and horror, Mr. Gardiner readily promised every
assistance in his power. Elizabeth, though expecting no less, thanked him
with tears of gratitude; and all three being actuated by one spirit,
everything relating to their journey was speedily settled. They were to be
off as soon as possible.”



And now comes a part I had never noticed before, which is that,
temporarily, we find ourselves in Mrs. Gardiner’s head.


With that background, does any of you notice anything strange in Mrs.
Gardiner’s reaction in the following excerpt, which immediately follows the
above:



“But what is to be done about Pemberley?” cried Mrs. Gardiner. “John told
us Mr. Darcy was here when you sent for us;—was it so?”

“Yes; and I told him we should not be able to keep our engagement. *That* is
all settled.”

“What is all settled?” repeated the other, as she ran into her room to
prepare. “And are they upon such terms as for her to disclose the real
truth? Oh, that I knew how it was!”

But wishes were vain; or, at best, could serve only to amuse her in the
hurry and confusion of the following hour. Had Elizabeth been at leisure to
be idle, she would have remained certain that all employment was impossible
to one so wretched as herself…”



ARNIE

Hello Arnie, I’m not sure what you mean by ‘strange’. Here is how I
understand the passage:

Smart Mrs. Gardiner has noticed the special “chemistry” between Lizzy
and Darcy previously (apart from the honour of being invited to Darcy's
home) and is, of course, curious to see what their relationship will
come to. She immediately realizes what this sudden departure, and the
“real truth”, will mean for their possible love/courtship connection.
That is why she is wondering if Lizzy told Mr. Darcy why they are not
able to follow Giorgiana’s invitation (which would mean some greater
intimacy), or if she used some polite excuse (meaning their relationship
has not – yet?- proceeded towards courtship).

I think what we are looking at is a discrepancy between what Lizzy
thinks of and means, and what Mrs. Gardiner thinks what is behind the
word “that”. Lizzy does not explain it further as for her it is clear
that she means the dinner invitation. By her emphasis on “that” it is
clear that there must be something else that is *not* settled, in
contrast to the cancellation of their visit to the Darcys.

Interestingly, I noticed that my German edition makes it clearer that
Mrs. Gardiner says those sentences to herself, while in the original she
could have said it aloud, for Lizzy to hear (at least the first sentence).

Happy New Year to everyone!

Caroline

Am 03.01.2025 um 22:40 schrieb Arnie Perlstein via groups.io:

Arnie,

To add to Caroline’s excellent analysis, I’ll say that both Mr and Mrs Gardiner have been gradually becoming aware that something more than they realized is going on between Darcy and their niece. Mrs Gardiner in particular is burning with curiosity, but as ever is careful not to press Elizabeth for particulars. In their final visit to Pemberley closes with this passage:


"Mrs. Gardiner and Elizabeth talked of all that had occurred during their
visit, as they returned, except what had particularly interested them
both. The look and behaviour of everybody they had seen were discussed,
except of the person who had mostly engaged their attention. They talked
of his sister, his friends, his house, his fruit--of everything but
himself; yet Elizabeth was longing to know what Mrs. Gardiner thought of
him, and Mrs. Gardiner would have been highly gratified by her niece's
beginning the subject."



Dorothy

To me, it seems clear that Mrs Gardiner is
accustomed to talking to herself aloud.
The sentence is "she cried", not "she thought".
It is followed, as Lizzy moves out of earshot,
by a followup question, "What is all settled?"
(which might or might not be intended for Lizzy)
and then as she realizes Lizzy really isn't listening,
by a spoken thought about the relationship with Darcy,
"and are they on such terms (etc)" which is definitely
not intended for Lizzy, as it is not "are you" but "are they".

The "What is all settled" could be either to Lizzy or to herself,
as Austen slides smoothly from writing Mrs G's conversation
to writing Mrs G's thoughts.

Thank you, Carolyn, Dorothy, and Tamar for your replies, which are fine as
far as they go. However, none of you addressed what I find to be the
curious part of the passage I quoted, which was the following sentence
describing Mrs. Gardiner’s thoughts as she got ready to leave the inn:

“But wishes were vain; or, at best, could serve only to amuse her in the
hurry and confusion of the following hour.”



When you stop and think about it, what in the world would Mrs Gardiner find
amusing in the Bennet family crisis she has just learned from Elizabeth,
that had caused the cancellation of their planned re-visit to Pemberley?

To answer that question, here are some relevant data regarding word usage
in P&P, which I believe shed some light on the seeming ambiguity of the
above sentence.



First, the archaic meaning of the verb “amuse” prior to Jane Austen’s
lifetime was very much like our modern verb “bemuse”, which means “puzzle”
or “mystify”; whereas, by JA’s lifetime, and still today in 2025, “amuse”
only means “entertain”.

Some of you then might object, that the context seems to clearly rule out
Mrs. Gardiner being entertained by the family crisis, so it must be that
Austen for some reason chose to use “amuse” in this case, despite the fact
that the “mystify” meaning was already archaic in her lifetime.



But here’s the thing. There are 28 other usages of “amuse” in P&P besides
the one in question, and I can tell you (but you’re welcome to check it out
if you are skeptical of me) that it is crystal clear in every one of those
28 other usages of “amuse” that the primary meaning is “entertain”.



And, in particular among those other 28 usages there is the following one
in Chapter 42, i.e., only 4 chapters earlier, which also pertains, notably,
to the Gardiners’s trip north that ends up at Pemberley:



“The Gardiners stayed only one night at Longbourn, and *set off the next
morning with Elizabeth in pursuit of novelty and amusement.* One enjoyment
was certain—that of suitableness as companions; a suitableness which
comprehended health and temper to bear inconveniences—cheerfulness to
enhance every pleasure—and affection and intelligence, which might supply
it among themselves *if there were disappointments abroad.”*



OK, so why in the world would Austen use that identical word in Chapters 42
and 46, both referring to Mrs. Gardiner, but with two opposite meanings?
Seems very careless and confusing for no reason.



And there would especially be no reason for creating this confusion, given
that Jane Austen used another word (which is sorta homophonic with “amuse”)
to describe a state of being mystified: “amaze”.



It turns out that the word “amaze” and its variants occur 19 times in P&P,
which is a much greater frequency in P&P than in any other Austen novel. So
if Austen had meant to clearly convey to her readers that Mrs. Gardiner was
experiencing amazement as she hurried to pack her things to head back to
Longbourn, why didn’t she write that sentence this way?:



“But wishes were vain; or, at best, could serve only to AMAZE her in the
hurry and confusion of the following hour.”



And that is the question I leave you with – why would Austen do this? And,
in that regard, is it noteworthy that the passage from Chapter 42 ends with
“if there were disappointments abroad”, which curiously describes exactly
what came to pass only 4 chapters later –– i.e., the Wickham-Lydia fracas
arising at the same time as the seeming beginning of a new, positive
relationship between Elizabeth and Darcy, while at Pemberley.



Speaking of “disappointment”, it is Darcy who, while debriefing the rocky
course of their courtship with Elizabeth, recalls the abrupt end of
Elizabeth’s visit at Pemberley:



“He then told her of Georgiana’s delight in her acquaintance, and of her
DISAPPOINTMENT at its sudden interruption….”



Isn’t it doubly curious, then, that we have this second subliminal echoing
of the Ch. 42 passage – as if Mrs. Gardiner somehow foresaw all that would
occur in Ch. 46; and, moreover, that she would be “amused” by that?



贬尘尘尘….



ARNIE