As I read ‘Sense and Sensibility‘ earlier this month I was struck by the many similarities between the novel and ‘Pride and Prejudice‘. My initial theory was that ‘Sense‘ was an early draft of ‘Pride‘, but that didn’t withstand much research – as Claire @ nerdslikeme.co.uk pointed out in a comment on an earlier post, although ‘Pride‘ was published second it was written first. Nevertheless, ‘Sense‘ is, to me, the junior or lesser work. Components of ‘Sense‘ which work well are even more impressive when portrayed in ‘Pride‘.
Both novels focus on the romantic affairs of a family of women, in which a father figure is to all intents and purposes missing. Mr Bennet is of course alive, but disastrously abdicates any involvement in his daughters’ romances, until in Lydia’s case it is too late. In both novels the families’ inheritance situation is precarious – if Mr Bennet dies the family will have to leave Longbourn; Mr Dashwood’s death leaves his second family in a position where they have to leave their home and take a cottage donated by a charitable family member, taking at the same time a large step down the social ladder.
The events of the novels are each described through the narrative perspective of an older sister. Elinor and Elizabeth are both sensible, mature young women who are embarrassed and scandalised by the conduct of their younger sisters. They are not completely reliable narrators – they withhold information from the reader and perhaps themselves, but their judgment is the one we are invited to trust. In terms of the family dynamics they take the place of their mothers who are portrayed as less intelligent and lacking in mature judgment. Younger teenage sisters are a cause of drama in each household. Marianne nearly engages herself to an unsuitable young man; Lydia does so, and goes further. Willoughby is immature and flirts with Marianne while never seriously contemplating an engagement – his financial affairs and his profligacy means he has to marry well; Wickham is equally focused on marrying for money while having fun as a single man, with little concern for the feelings of the women he dallies with.
Each novel also has a spare sister. Margaret Dashwood plays little or no part in ‘Sense’, in terms of the plot nor as a commentator or observer; Mary Bennet plays arguably a slightly more important role in Pride, but is easily forgotten amongst the noise generated by her siblings.
Secrets and lies are at the heart of both novels. Much of what occurs in the texts is hidden from the reader. Marianne has no idea why Willoughby leaves Devon so suddenly, nor why he gives her the cold shoulder when they meet in London; all Mr Darcy’s efforts to salvage the situation with Lydia and Wickham is equally hidden from the Bennet family until near the end of the novel. Elinor has to bear the secret of Mr Ferrars’ engagement with Lucy Steele until it is finally broken; at least Elizabeth has someone to share her secrets with in her sister, Jane.
Finally, it all comes down to money. This is the central obsession of both novels. Many conversations revolve around character’s income, their savings, the inheritance they are likely to receive, etc. In ‘Pride’ there is an inflation of expectations – the sums Mrs Bennet talks about as being suitable for her daughters’ prospective and theoretical husbands gradually increase through the course of the novel. The despicable Mr Collins explains to Elizabeth that he is prepared to overlook her relative poverty, and later Mr Darcy makes a similar point, with broadly the same result. The same conversations dominate ‘Sense’; we are never far away from speculation about the worth of an individual in terms of income and savings, and Willoughby’s marriage to an heiress allows other characters scandalised by his behaviour towards Marianne to quickly overcome their scruples.
In comparing the novels I am not of course suggesting that Austen has recycled her material. She famously accepted that her work was narrow in scope, once writing:
“What should I do with your strong, manly, spirited sketches, full of variety and glow? How could I possibly join them on to the little bit (two inches wide) of ivory on which I work with so fine a brush, as produces little effect after much labour?”
It is her ultimate achievement that she produced such stunning novels with such fine material. Van Gogh painted sunflowers many times, but each painting is unique. In considering ‘Pride‘ the more successful novel, that’s a personal view mainly in relation to how the central romance is portrayed – I enjoy the love story of Elizabeth and Darcy, while Edward and Elinor never really go through the same journey or face the same challenges. What do you think?
The Reading Bug 
There are many similarities between Austen’s works (such as believing one character has gotten married when in truth it was someone else entirely), but I think each of her works has their unique merits.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed – and that’s a good spot about getting marriage confusion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d never spotted all these similarities but you’re right. And you’ve reminded me that I’ve been meaning to blog about S&S for a while now, I should get on with that!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for dropping by, and looking forward to your thoughts on S & S
LikeLike
I’ve just reread Pride and Prejudice, but your posts on Sense and Sensibility have really given me an itch to go back and revisit the latter. It’s definitely not as well put together in some respects, but there’s such a variety of characters and settings in S&S, and even though the romances aren’t done as well in that one, I remember really enjoying the relationship between Elinor and Marianne.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pride is one of those novels that I can reread and reread over again. I think in many ways it is the near perfect novel, so inevitably Sense will suffer by comparison. I don’t think Elinor is as likeable or as believable as Elizabeth, and for me that is a big weakness in the overall novel.
LikeLike
Wow, you found so many parallels! A few similarities between the two novels struck me (for instance, Willoughby and Wickham are almost exactly the same character, with almost exactly the same narrative purpose), but not nearly this many. Totally agree that P&P is the better novel on every front — pace, characterization, style, themes. And S&S isn’t nearly as funny (the main thing I look forward to in Austen!).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Jamie, it’s so nice to have a thoughtful reader come along. Not that other commenters weren’t thoughtful of course!
LikeLike
You taught me something – though published second P and P was written first. I find that illuminating as I always considered S and S to be a far more mature work than P and P.
I also found many similarities in the books and in almost every case found S and S to have the superior side. The characters in S and S are richer and more complex than anything in P and P. Willoughby is a cad but he is a complex cad and almost everyone sees a good in him that explains his treatment of Marianne and his marrying for money. In the end he is a question dangling over the book. Wickham is never anything more than a user and is never portrayed with any redeeming qualities.
Without going into all of the similarities and taking too much of your time … I will say these 2 characters summarize so much of what I like about S and S over P and P. In S and S There is tension and ambiguity which is entirely lacking in P and P.
The plot, the characters, the intentions, in P and P are all telegraphed from the beginning and the reader knows they will not deviate in any way from the direction they are moving. There is more literature in the second chapter conversation of S and S where Fanny talks John out of helping his sisters than there is in any part of P and P. The chapter where Edward, Lucy, and Elinor end up in the same room together and the readers knows more about the 3 of them than the 3 characters do is both incredibly well written and the culmination of several narrative lines. That chapter alone could occupy a book length study. I have found nothing in P and P to equal that scene.
I find P and P dull, predictable, and full of 2 dimensional stick figure characters taking cues from an external world. S and S is vibrant challenging populated with rich and complex characters struggling to exist in their own internal space and it is narrated with great deftness.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suppose we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one – I remain convinced Pride and Prejudice is one of the best novels ever written in the English language, and without doubt one the best romantic novel. Yes we know how the novel is going to end from early on – but then we know how Romeo and Juliet is going to end from the opening monologue. It’s how they get there that keeps us reading. But Elizabeth and Darcy’s romance is far from smooth – his rejected first proposal is extraordinary and very funny at the same time. None of that takes anything away from Sense and Sensibility of course.
LikeLike
Interesting that you mention humor. Part of what confused me from my first reading of P an P is that the first 5 or 6 chapters of the book came across as a very well written, suitably hyperbolic, satire on English mores and behaviors. I thought I was reading something like The Importance of Being Earnest – Characters who were caricatures – stylized, self important, acting roles they thought made them exemplars of social values and who did not understand that they were actually very shallow and just quite funny. But then there was this Darcy Elizabeth thing that seemed to be non satirical and an attempt at developing a grand human love story. And the book then seemed schizophrenic – a confusing mash up of Wuthering Heights and The Importance of Being Earnest. If P an P is just supposed to be a humorous social satire then it works and works well and should just be left as that… which doesn’t explain to me why so many people seem to consider it to be a complexly developed classic love story between Darcy and Elizabeth.
LikeLike
Which begs the question – if you can’t see P&P as a great love story, which novel do you think does fall into that category?
LikeLike
I attempted to reply twice but nothing seemed to appear… perhaps my reply was too long… perhaps its for the best.
I feel I have intruded too much on your time. I found Austen confusing because I could not see what others saw so plainly. I wanted to see and appreciate that perspective. When I stumbled on your blog I was quite happy because I felt that you expressed the perspective I sought. And you have helped me understand Austen in new ways. For that I am thankful. Read always. Never stop reading.
LikeLiked by 1 person