Seriously, what's with the bias against Mrs. Bennet? If you’ve read the novel Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen, you’ve likely encountered Mrs. Bennet - the character universally tagged as one of the least likeable characters in the novel. One that everyone loves to hate. I mean, even Jane Austen herself characterised her as “a woman of mean understanding, little information, and uncertain temper.” (Austen,1813, p. 3)
For those who’ve skipped the book and gone for more of a cinematic experience, Mrs. Bennet isn’t getting much love there either. She is continuously portrayed as a frivolous woman, delicately waving her handkerchief, sipping champagne, and orchestrating marriages for her children like it’s her personal project.
In fact, a number of study sources name Mrs. Bennet as an “unattractive character with a lack of redeeming qualities” (SparkNotes, n.d.). Even the ‘Jane Austen Wiki’ labels her as an antagonist - yes, an antagonist! (Mrs. Bennet, n.d)
Mrs. Bennet, the main villain of the piece? Really? What about Mr. Wickham, the man attempting to seduce a 15-year-old for her fortune? Or Mr. Collins, a raging narcissist who constantly insults Elizabeth and her family? The bitchy Caroline Bingley? The interfering Lady Catherine de Burgh? Or even Lydia, eloping with a man because she fancies his uniform, for goodness sake!
I’ll be the first to admit it, my initial thoughts of Mrs. Bennet in both the novel and the Keira Knightly movie left me seeing her as a slightly annoying character. But I never saw her as an antagonist. As I have revisited the texts a few more times, I’ve had the chance to analyse, reflect, and question her character. In doing this I have been compelled to ask myself: Why are we so prejudiced against Mrs. Bennet? Why do we dismiss her as being silly and stupid? Is she the only ‘mother’ figure that we see this way?
One thing that I often think about in Pride and Prejudice is how often Mrs. Bennet proves to be right. The famous opening line - “It’s a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife” (Austen, 1813, p.1) is ironic. It mocks the notion that every wealthy young man enters the community only to marry daughters. Yet, in the novel, this is precisely what happens! The rich young men, Darcy and Bingley marry Jane and Elizabeth Bennet. Even Lydia marries Mr. Wickham and Charlotte Lucas and Mr. Collins tie the knot, despite Mr. Collins initially pursuing Jane and Elizabeth. Perhaps the novel's real triumph lies in Mrs. Bennet's foresight. In the first chapter we are told that the “business of her life was to get her daughters married” (p.4). The novel concludes with Mrs. Bennet witnessing her dreams come true and securing the uncertain futures of herself and her daughters. And all this after being dismissed as silly and pushy not only by the characters but also by the author herself (Austen, 1813).
This causes me to wonder; ‘why is wanting a secure future for your children, something Mrs. Bennet couldn’t provide herself because in a patriarchal world the family property can’t be inherited by a daughter, deemed a cruel action?’ Branding her wish for her daughters to have a secure future as cruel, is not just a misunderstanding, but also a neglect of the difficult challenges she experienced as a woman in the early 19th century. Is this more of a sign of our own ignorance and privilege rather than an indictment of a mum just looking out for her children?
In the 19th century, women were denied education and meaningful jobs, forcing them into a marriage for financial security. Mrs. Bennet is a product of a patriarchal Regency era. She had limited economic freedom and/or opportunities, leaving her little choice but to marry off her daughters to secure their well-being. Mrs. Bennet’s actions are a response to these constraints, and yet we continue to judge her without fully understanding the challenges she had to encounter.
Mrs. Bennet’s character faces not only scrutiny from readers and viewers but also constant mockery and judgement within the narrative itself. She is described by both Austen, and the characters within the novel, as possessing a “weak understanding and illiberal mind” (p.205) and being “beyond the road to reason” (p76). The plea: “Have you no compassion for my poor nerves?” (Austen, 1813, p.2) emphasises the relentless mockery she endured and her response to said mockery.
This highlights the need for a more compassionate examination of characters like Mrs. Bennet. We need to consider the complexities of their circumstances rather than dismissing them outright.
Another instance of Mrs. Bennet's character being subjected to ‘othering’ is when Elizabeth Bennet, one of the story’s protagonists, remarks, “I am excessively diverted” (Austen, 1813, p.225). This remark about her mother’s behaviour underlines the mocking attitude the novel’s ‘protagonists’, who we might expect to show kindness and compassion, have towards her. So, as we criticise Mrs. Bennet, let’s also scrutinise the structures that shaped her choices and, in turn, create a necessary conversation about the lasting effects of these historical gender inequalities.
Importantly, Mrs. Bennet is not the only ‘mother’ character that has experienced this kind of judgement by both the audience and other characters from within a text. If we shift our focus to the iconic fairytale of ‘Rapunzel’ we can see a deeply ingrained tale about a wicked woman stealing a child and keeping her in a tower for years. This story has been retold and passed down through generations and will probably continue for generations to come. I mean, we have all heard of this tale, whether encountering it as a bedtime story, watching the animated film Tangled, or seeing stage productions like Into the Woods.
Yet, the original Grimm Brothers story (published in 1812 and revised in 1857) offers a nuanced narrative. In this telling, Rapunzel’s biological parents trade her away for the healing powers of the Rapunzel flower without hesitation. Thus, Frau Gothal, the seemingly wicked character, is positioned as an improvement over the biological parents. She pledges to care for Rapunzel as a mother, locking her away in a tower as a protective measure against the dangers of men and the oppressive patriarchy, declaring of the child she adopts that “It will do well, and I will take care of it as a mother” (Grimm & Grimm, 1857, p.65).
Additionally, the Prince’s behaviour proves Gothel right about the horrors of the outside world. He climbs the tower and gets Rapunzel pregnant, leading to her “miserable existence with the twins she had given birth to.” (Grimm & Grimm, 1857, p.65). Yes, you heard that right the first time - the so-called “hero” knocked her up and left her in a tower with twins to face the consequences alone.
Sylvia Henneberg (2010) notes the consistency of the fairy tales portraying mothers negatively, reflecting a broader societal anxiety surrounding real and realistic women from maturity to old age. Her analysis explains how fictional tales like this have the recurring theme of eliminating and devaluing these maternal figures in these narratives. She states that fairy tales “continue to lean on the tradition of eliminating mom and devaluing granny, indicative of the widespread anxiety we have when it comes to dealing with real and realistic women ranging from maturity to old age” (Henneberg, 2010, p.130).
Similarly, Linnea Hendrickson’s (2000) exploration of ‘Rapunzel’ emphasises the story’s relevance in addressing themes of family, motherhood, love and the balance between encouraging independence and ensuring safety, particularly in the context of contemporary challenges faced by young women. ‘Rapunzel,’ it appears, continues to serve as a framework for storytelling that resonates with the complexities of relationships and the evolving roles of mothers, fathers, and daughters in a changing world. For both Henrickson (2000) and Mary Pipher (1994) ‘Rapunzel’ is about how we “encourage our daughters to be independent and autonomous and still keep them safe” (Hendrickson, 2000, p.212).
So, why on earth do we persist in recycling the same diluted version of Rapunzel’s story while conveniently sidestepping the gritty Grimm Brothers’ original? Like Mrs. Bennet, Frau Gothel isn’t just a wicked witch; she is a complex character grappling with a society that thought it acceptable to trade away their own flesh and blood for a flower. Yet, in our modern renditions, she’s painted as the epitome of evil, while we conveniently forget the Prince’s role in getting Rapunzel pregnant. And what do we do? We keep spreading these fairy tales that portray mothers negatively, embracing long-standing lies about real women from maturity to old age, all while overlooking the actual society problems involved.
Just think about Mrs. Joe in Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations. This time it’s even worse, as the ‘mother’ figure is framed as violent and controlling. While historically this kind of woman would be called a ‘termagant’, today we would throw around the term ‘bitch’ to describe the women we meet in the novel. Dickens paints her as “tall and boney” (Dickins 1992, 0.19) and describes her persistently “going on a rampage” (Dickens, 1992, p.37).
The most famous and often repeated phrase associated with Mrs. Joe is that she is bringing up her younger brother, Pip, “by hand”. To be fair this does involve smacking. Mrs. Joe hits both her husband Joe Gargery and Pip with her hand and her cane, which she has nicknamed ‘tickler’ (Dickens, 1992). Yet, by framing her this way, we as an audience tend to ignore all the pain that she has experienced in her life.
When Mrs. Joe was twenty she was left alone with a helpless infant brother who was not even able to take solids yet. By the time that readers are introduced to her character she has already buried her two parents and five brothers. Orphaned and husbandless, she marries Joe Gargery for both her and her brother’s survival. Because she’s lost loved ones early on, she’s afraid of being left alone and seeks security, making survival her main concern (Dickens, 1992). A quote which expresses this sentiment is when she tells Pip that “it’s bad enough being a blacksmith’s wife without being your mother” (Dickens, 1992, p.42).
In saying this, she expresses that she does not consider herself as a person, and instead she is only the “blacksmith's wife” (Dickens, 1992, p.42). The values during this time period means that being a wife and a mother are merely roles and chores for her which she fulfils without meaning.
What is intriguing to me is the other ways in which “by hand” could be interpreted. Sure, there is the physical punishment aspect. But Mrs. Joe is brilliant in nurturing - a skilled cook, known for her beautiful pork pies, housekeeper, and caretaker. Her daily uniform is an apron stuck with pins so she can quickly fix any household or clothing emergency (Dickens, 1992). Indeed, she tells Pip that “I may truly say I’ve never had this apron of mine off, since born you were” (Dickens, 1992, p.43). What a symbol of her life dedicated to others! When Pip is late coming home at the start of the novel, Mrs. Joe is described as going out several times in search of him (Dickens, 1992). Is this the action of an uncaring woman?
Yet Dickens, typical of a man, inflicts a severe and unjust punishment upon Mrs Joe. Beaten and attacked, she succumbs to her injuries, a cruel fate for a character who was trying to do the best for family. Mrs Joe isn’t the only negatively depicted woman who is killed off. Miss Havisham is also wiped out by dying in a fire (Dickens, 1992). Dickens seriously seems to have had it in for ‘mother’ figures!
This narrative choice forces us to question Dickens’ representation of women. J Johnson (2008) puts it brilliantly; “The independent, uncontrolled women threaten the domestic ideal/idyll and it is for this reason that they have to be modified, altered, 'bent and broken' into a better shape, to either restore them to a proper dependency and passivity, or eradicate them entirely” (Johnston, 2008, p.96). These autonomous women threaten societal norms, and have to be either reformed or killed off (usually the latter).
The 21st century has witnessed a wave of retellings in classic tales, exemplified by Maleficent and Wicked which aims to humanise and bring depth to these traditionally one-dimensional ‘mother’ figures. It is high time to challenge our ingrained prejudices, advocating for a nuanced understanding of these characters. By treating them as multi-dimensional beings, we can engage in both critique and compassion, fostering a more inclusive and empathetic perspective on maternal roles in storytelling.
In judging these characters we are only continuing to show our distorted point of view.
As Audre Lorde wisely said; “It is not our differences that divide us. It is our inability to recognize, accept, and celebrate those differences.” Choosing understanding over criticism is crucial for breaking down barriers and promoting empathy (Lorde, 1984, revised in 2020).
So now I ask you, why are you so prejudiced against Mrs. Bennet?
References:
Ashliman, D. L. (2019, November 12). Grimm 012: Rapunzel. Sites.pitt.edu.
Allingham, Philip V. "The Illustrations for Great Expectations in Harper's Weekly (1860-61) and in the Illustrated Library Edition (1862) — 'Reading by the Light of Illustration'." Dickens Studies Annual, Vol. 40 (2009): 113-169.
Austen, J. (1813) Pride and Prejudice. Pasadena, Calif.: Salem Press.
Austen, J. (2023) Pride and Prejudice (with the original watercolor illustrations by C.E. Brock). Good Press.
Dickens, C. (1992). Great Expectations. Wordsworth Editions.
Dunphy, R. (2017, July 18). Jane Austen’s Most Widely Mocked Character is Also Her Most Subversive. Literary Hub.
Forster, G. (2015) Fairytale Theory and Explorations of Gender Stereotypes in Post-1970s
Rapunzel Adaptations Fairytale Theory and Explorations of Gender Stereotypes in Post-1970s Rapunzel Adaptations. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228200472.pdf.
Grimm, J. & Grimm, W., Fassett, J. H., ed. (1904) Grimm's Fairy Tales. New York, The
Macmillan company; London, Macmillan & co., ltd. [Pdf] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/04028962/.
Hendrickson, L. (2000). Children’s Literature in Education, 31(4), 209–223.
Henneberg, S. (2010). Moms do badly, but grandmas do worse: The nexus of
sexism and ageism in children’s classics. Journal of Aging Studies, 24(2), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2008.10.003
Johnston, J. (2008) ‘Women and Violence in Dickens’ Great Expectations’.
Lorde, A. (2020) Sister outsider. New York: Penguin Books.
Mrs. Bennet. (n.d.). The Jane Austen Wiki. Retrieved March 10, 2024, from
Mrs. Bennet Character Analysis in Pride and Prejudice | SparkNotes. (n.d.).
Neti. (2022, May 29). The blacksmith’s wife. netinetineti.
Zelinsky, P.O. and Scholastic Inc (2002) Rapunzel. New York: Scholastic Inc.
OMG THIS GIRL TOTALLY SLAYYYYEDDD