Last night Jane Austen made an appearance in the first of Ian Hislop’s three-part essay on that interesting phenomenon: The Stiff Upper Lip. This is a series of three programmes chronicling an Emotional History of England, and which was broadcast by BBC 2.
The theme of the programmes is of a chronological history of the British and their emotions. In last night’s episode – Emergence- we were taken on a journey from medieval times(when we were known, both men and women, as ready to kiss each other and strangers at the drop of a hat) to the situation just after Waterloo, when all such soppy displays had ended. Ian Hislop’s argument was that the stereotypically British virtues of reticence and stoicism only began to assert themselves during this period: the stiff upper lip ( an American expression, apparently) had its beginnings as a reaction against the excesses of the French revolution and in our subsequent wars with Napoleon. After Waterloo, the emotional excesses of the 18th century men of sentiment, as personified by the hero of Henry Mackenzie’s novel, The Man of Feeling (1771) were then not quite the thing. Nelson, the Nation’s hero after his death at the battle of Trafalgar in 1805, was a far more openly emotional man than the Duke of Wellington. Between Trafalgar and Waterloo, ten years later, the nation’s emotions had become far more reserved. And of course Jane Austen’s novels, with their emotionally restrained heroes and heroines demonstrates this sea-change in our emotional life rather well…
On a visit to the Jane Austen’s House Museum at Chawton, Ian Hislop gave us some Austenian examples of British Reserve and that all important attribute, Politeness, at its best:
The meeting of George and John Knightley in Chapter 12 of Emma, was given as one of the prime examples of the new, restrained attitude that was then acceptable in the early years of the 19th century. Here, while the reception the brothers gave to each other may appear outwardly polite and indifferent, inwardly their mutual love and affection is acknowledged . We know that, despite this emotionally cool meeting, they would move heaven and each to help each other.
The discussion continued with Louise West ,who is the Curator of the Jane Austen’s House Museum. They argued that Austen produced a new type of romantic hero: the reserved, upright man, who only confesses his feelings of deepest love after a novel full of incident. This is very true of Darcy, Wentworth George Knightley and Edward Ferrers. It was posited that the most guarded of Jane Austen’s characters often display the deepest, most genuine feelings. Of the heroines, only Marianne Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility gives way to excesses of sentiment, but even she is more sedate, reserved and sensible by the end of the novel. She has reformed to the state of emotional restraint thought desirable by late Georgian society.
I think we can all agree that Jane Austen respected rational beings of both sexes, to borrow as she did Mary Wollstonecraft’s phrase, and the argument that her novels are testament to her society’s admiration for certain aspects of The Stiff Upper Lip, and are, moreover, good examples of the era when an excess of sentiment was seen as something to be avoided, is an interesting one.
Two points did annoy me. That old chestnut, that Jane Austen never wrote about politics or incidents in the wider world- the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, the Abolition etc etc- reared its ugly head yet again, in a reference to a letter written by Winston Churchill upon having had Pride and Prejudice read to him while he was convalescing from illness in 1943:
Does this view really still prevail? Really? Not in my opinion or on my website. And to be frank, I really did not see the point of its inclusion here. Perhaps I missed something crucial. And I did not appreciate the scenes in the Museum’s gift shop, where Ian Hislop wonders, rather disapprovingly in my view, what Jane Austen’s reaction to the stock, in particular the “I Heart Darcy bookmarks” might be. I think she might be glad that the shop is contributing funds to the privately run Museum so that it can continue to celebrate her life and works….but then that’s just me being pragmatic, and not a little annoyed.
However, on the whole this was an interesting programme to watch, with plenty for those of us interested in the late 18th/early 19th century to ponder. You can go here to its website to see some clips and here to the BBC iPlayer to view the whole of Episode Number 1
(….and yes,we will get back to the Lefroys in my next posting!)




































































10 comments
October 3, 2012 at 2:56 pm
David Bennett
We haven’t seen the Stiff Upper Lip yet (it’s on the TIVO box – waiting patiently) so I can’t get the full flavour of your attack – but for what I do know, I enjoyed your article immensely.
October 3, 2012 at 10:09 pm
jfwakefield
Goodness, I didn’t think I was attacking, just expressing some mild annoyance with some minor points of the programme ;) in the main I enjoyed this episode, and the Jane Austen part was interesting. But I didnt like the scenes in the gift shop etc. it’s very easy to sneer, and I didn’t think it really added to the points Ian Hislop was making.
October 3, 2012 at 11:36 pm
Cathy Allen
LOL! I had no idea that the phrase Stiff Upper Lip is an American expression, apparently. I’ve recently seen (on the web) what purports to be a WWII poster that encouraged the British to “Keep Calm and Carry On” during the Blitz (!!!). I assumed it was yet another reflection a British attribute that I thought has always existed. I am amazed that it originated in Jane Austen’s lifetime! Thanks for the links. I’ll take a look at whatever I can view of the show as soon as I can; it sounds interesting. AND, I agree that Jane Austen would be very pleased that the Gift Shop is helping the Museum stay afloat. Thank you, Julie.
October 4, 2012 at 7:57 am
jfwakefield
My objections to the gift shop sequence are many and varied. The question was asked,as the presenter bought the “I heart Darcy” bookmark, “what would Jane Austen have thought of it?”( and the teatowels and other standard gift shop fare that you can find in every museum / country house in the realm). First, I think she might have been amused by it all, and not a little bemused to find her popularity now is such that companies and people who produce these itesm( I’m thinking Etsy) can make money in this way. Second, I think she may be pleased that her fame is such that her brothers little cottage is now a place of pilgrimage for so many ( and that the proceeds from the gift shop help fund it) and I have no doubt that her reaction would also involve some ironic comment on it all. My objection to it was that it implied, to me at least, that admirers of Jane Austen who like such items are somehow less serious than say admirers of other literay figures mentioned in the programme, Wollstonecraft and Boswell. Liking these items implies some form of trivial cast of mind in Janeites who indulge in buying such “fripperies”.I don’t agree, and don’t like such an implication. It’s not one I’d make at the RSC, for example, where similar items are for sale, and I wonder if TV presenters would even think of trying to make the same point anywhere else than at Chawton. There is regrettably still,a tendency to view admirers of JA as twee, and I really object to instances of it.I understand it was a “gift” to a satirically minded presenter to use such items in that way, but I didn’t think that was the high point of the programme * getting off my soapbox now*
October 4, 2012 at 3:37 am
thevalueofsparrows
Miss Marianne isn’t the only “passionate” Jane Austen character. Her “other” half, Willoughby, was highly emotional, recklessly so. Then there’s Mrs. Bennett, the queen of emotion. The lead of Northanger Abbey is notorious for her rampant emotions. In Persuasion you have the two farm girls/sisters who compete with each other, not to mention Mary who is disabled at times by her emotions, or illnesses, or emotions that bring on illness, or….
October 4, 2012 at 7:17 am
jfwakefield
I agree, but Marianne is the only openly, recklessly passionate main character, or heroine;) the programme was making the point that such emotions were not the desired model. The more restrained,stiff upper lip characters, Elinor and Anne Elliot for example, conformed to the new buttoned- up emotional standard of behaviour. Though, to be honest, the programme ‘s emphasis was on male stoicism rather than female. The programme made the point that the characters that you list are not ones we should aspire to emulate, in Jane Austens world, due to many factors but mostly for their lack of self control.
October 4, 2012 at 4:53 pm
thevalueofsparrows
I apologize for continuing this discussion, but I think it too facile an assertion, this stiff-upper lip vs. emotionalism, with the former being the preferred virtue in Austen’s work. As to Marianne vs. Elinor, Elinor, as stiff-upper lipped as she is, openly treasures Marianne, perhaps because of her emotionalism. And Brandon, the quintessential man with the wooden lip, adores her also. He even gives a little speech on the very value of Marianne, for her unbridled passions.
And the overwrought, emotion-driven heroine that you are overlooking is the queen of Austen heroines herself: Elizabeth Bennett. She is driven by her “wrong” emotions. First against Darcy, then for Wickham, then for Darcy. In spite of wishing anyone to acknowledge it out loud, Elizabeth is, in her own ways, very much her mother’s daughter. (I knew I was right. I knew I was right.)
Like Marianne and Elinor, (passion and calm), you could set Jane and Elizabeth as the yin and yang of emotionalism, with Jane as the quiet sufferer, and Elizabeth with the outspoken emotions at every turn.
And, don’t forget, Darcy is made the better man, not by increasing the stiffness of his upper lip, but by softening it. By admitting he was wrong. By going with his feelings.
This softening of his is the whole swoon of the book, after all.
October 4, 2012 at 5:32 pm
jfwakefield
Don’t apologise…but do remember I’m only the reporter. In short, don’t shoot the messenger :)It is not I who is overlooking different characters but THE PROGRAMME! I said the argument was interesting, not that I was wholly swayed by it ;)
In fact I agree with you that Elizabeth Bennet may be an exception to the rule as posited by this programme( but she was rather stoical once she’d read and accepted the truth of Darcy’s letter) And remember,they didn’t really concentrate on heroines, but on heroes)And while Darcy did become less judgemental,under the influence of Elizabeth, I still think of him as a somewhat repressed character.Even at the end of the novel.
October 4, 2012 at 7:36 pm
Tina
“I can keep silent no longer”….. it is very difficult and unfair to judge someone in the 18th century with the eyes and culture of the 21st. The small circles Jane described in her books were never in an imaginary country, in an undetermined century. There are constant references to where and when the story developed. What she wants to mention of outside events is up to her. As the author it’s her choise at to what is important to the plot. As small country circles, far from the political turmoil of the cities, they probably weren’t living these events on an every day basis. These events where so far away that the could hardly modify their every day life very much. Jane herself had brothers serving in the navy during the war, and she lived on her life. She had first hand knowledge on how it affected her circle. If it was important to the plot, or had she wanted to, she’d of included it, I’m certain. As for the gift shop: beside the fact of the very appropiate motives towards the recollection of funds, suvenirs are what today’s society likes and buys. It happens in Museums, it happens in the Vatican, it happens any and everywhere people visit. (Please, I’m just stating a fact, not judging.) So why not in good taste and for a good cause ?? I don’t think Tolkien is turning in his grave lamenting all the Lord of the Rings merchandising round the world, and feeling underestimated because of it. His still inmense popularity is expressed according to these times, not his. Yes, I confess, not only am I a Tolkien fan since the age of ten, but also a trekkie. Fantasy is my undoing. Now despise me if you dare.
October 4, 2012 at 7:57 pm
jfwakefield
Tina, as if I’d despise you;)
But I happen to agree. And I think we miss a lot of her references to current events, because, as I have discovered, most are subtle and not obvious; they were not obvious to late 19th century readers of Austen and they are certainly not obvious to people of the 21st century.But they are there, all the same, and they confirm her to be a woman who was vitally interested in the politics of her day, national and international.
Ans yes, I think the gift shop criticism was rather cheap too.