Austen's novel
Persuasion was published posthumously (after death) along with
Northanger Abbey. According to some sources, she began writing it not long after
Emma and "completed" it a year before she died. Interesting enough, both
Persuasion and
Northanger Abbey were not titled by Austen herself. Apparently, Austen had referred to
Persuasion as
The Elliots, which honestly makes much more sense to me. While persuasion itself is definitely a running theme in the novel, and the word is repeated many times over throughout, it is by no means the absolute focus of the novel. The novel itself seems to revolve heavily around subtle dilemmas in family relationships and the dichotomy of family by blood versus family by nature.
The book itself gives the reader a lot to think about when compared to Austen's previous novels. While
Pride and Prejudice and
Sense and Sensibility are rather overtly didactic and heavily influenced by their Enlightenment era, fictional predecessors,
Emma zeros in on painstaking character development and superb construction of conversation between characters.
Persuasion seems like a unique balance between the two writing styles -- it traces the character development of Anne who gains more confidence in her own moral judgments and that of Captain Wentworth who learns to prize moral fortitude and conviction over his personal emotions and ambitions. At the same time, the didactic theme of
Persuasion still works its magic throughout the novel, questioning the relationship between the persuading and the persuaded and how this relationship is changed by differences in class, character, gender, and economic position.
Though being completely awed by Austen's rapidly increasing writing abilities, I still had an overwhelming feeling that she would have wanted to rewrite this novel a few more times before publishing it. I was really shocked by the way in which the novel ended -- nothing but a very concise summary that seemed more like the ending to a fairy tale than the natural result of the trials and tribulations of such realistic characters. There was still so much more that could have been done to explore the outcome of some of the lesser characters in the novel while still tying up all the loose ends of the main plot. It seemed very hurried and (dare I say it?) somewhat lazy. In addition to that, the character of Mrs. Smith is still bothering the heck out of me. When Mrs. Smith believes that Anne is going to marry her cousin Mr. Eliot, she attempts to persuade Anne that Mr. Eliot is a very good honorable man. Of course, both Anne and the reader learn somewhat surmise that this is not true. We even learn for certain that Mr. Eliot is a terrible man from Mrs. Smith. When Anne asks why Mrs. Smith tried to completely deceive her, she answers very unsatisfactorily that she believed Anne had already truly formed an attachment to Mr. Eliot and she did not want to insult her by proxy. So, by that logic, she should have just kept her mouth shut and not said anything pointedly mean; instead, she actively tries to seduce Anne even further. Anne is VERY keen on this sort of behavior when she sees it in Mr. Eliot. Mr Eliot is fueled by completely selfish motives and is only charming and bubbly because he is trying to trap his flies with honey. Mrs. Smith blatantly lies to Anne in a way which might have persuaded Anne to make a horrible, life-altering mistake just for the chance to gain some economic stability through Anne's assumed influence. Is she not JUST like Mr. Eliot? Why does Anne still choose to associate with her after this? Why does the reader not receive evidence of mortification from Anne, even if only inward?
On the whole, I was really impressed by the novel, but like many of Austen's works it leaves much to be debated if you really look close enough.
Also, I found a really awesome website about Jane Austen. Check it out:
Jane Austen's World
