EGOTISM
THE THREAT OF EGOTISM OR
VANITY
The dangers of egotism run through Emma. It threatens the
happiness and lives of individuals. Despite Emma's material advantages
and positive qualities, her egotism fueled her desire for flattery
(however undeserved), for preeminence, and for power and led her
into snobbery, self-deception, and cruelty. Because of vanity, she
believed in the superiority of her judgment, which in reality was
led astray by her fancy or imagination. As a result, she interfered
with Harriet's marriage prospects and future, told Frank malicious,
baseless gossip which had the potential to destroy Jane's reputation
and future, and believed she had destroyed her own happiness by
putting Harriet in Mr. Knightley's way.
Whether the aggression of egotism is covert, as in Frank's game-playing,
or overt, as in Mr. and Mrs. Elton's treatment of Harriet at the
ball, it threatens social stability and cohesiveness. Thinking
only of her own gratification, Mrs. Elton monopolized Jane after
dinner and began the unraveling of the social fabric; she forced
the four women into two pairs and so into disunity. At Box Hill,
the vanity of Emma, who was determined to enjoy herself, and the
vanity of Frank, whose anger with Jane and petulance at not getting
his own way, contributed to the breakdown of the party into separate
groups.
EGOTISM VERSUS SELF-LOVE
Should a distinction be made between egotism, a self-centeredness
which subordinates the needs and rights of others, and legitimate
self-love? If so, is the egotistical Emma also capable of a legitimate
self-love? Is self-love necessary in order for her to be able to
acknowledge her mistakes, to learn from them, and to change significantly?
Is it self-love that enabled her to act responsibly, as in her concern
for Harriet's distress over the Elton and Churchill fiascoes? Would the possession of a legimate self-love make her more morally appealing and likable?
Lionel Trilling, for one, finds the basis of Emma's appeal in her self-love;
it generates her energy, style, and intelligence and has a moral
aspect. He believes, however, that in our culture self-love in
women differs from self-love in men:
We understand self-love to be part of the moral life
of all men; in men of genius we expect it to appear in unusual
intensity and we take it to be an essential element of their power.
The extraordinary thing about Emma is that she has a moral life
as a man has a moral life. And she doesn't have it as a special
instance, as an example of a new kind of woman, which is the way
George Eliot's Dorothea Brooke has her moral
life, but quite as a matter of course, as a given quality of her
nature....
Women in fiction only rarely have the peculiar reality of
a moral life that self-love bestows. Most commonly they exist
in a moon-like way, shining by the reflected moral life of men.
They are "convincing" or "real" and sometimes "delightful,"
but they seldom exist as men exist–as genuine moral destinies.
Obviously Trilling's interpretation requires that a distinction be made
between egotism and self-love.
SCALE OF EGOTISM
The characters can be arranged on a scale of egotism, ranging
from vanity to a proper self-respect which does not subordinate
others to one's self.
- Frank Churchill was arguably the most successful and the most
dangerous egotist in the novel. A master game player, he fooled
everyone except Mr. Knightley. Frank not only manipulated others
and events to gratify himself, but also enjoyed the manipulations
and the sense of superiority they gave him. He laughed with
such enjoyment at memories of his previous dissembling that
Emma charged, "I am sure it was a source of high entertainment
to you to feel that you were taking us all in" (pp. 407-8).
Frank was willing to ignore the pain that his manipulations
and self-gratification caused; he ignored Jane's tiredness in
urging her to sing one more song with him, causing Mr. Knightley
to intervene; he ignored her distress at his flirting with Emma
and at his teasing about Mr. Dixon.
  At all times his game-playing (secrecy)
excluded everyone except Jane, and even at times when he seemed
to be flirting or allied with Emma, she was excluded from his
real purpose and meaning. Thus he threatened social harmony
and cohesiveness. Also, Highbury was a world of recognition
and predictability; people recognized the meaning and behavior
of others and knew what to expect; does Frank's behavior disrupt
their security as well as society's stability by violating these basic premises?
- Most of Emma's efforts to shape people and events to her fancy
were unsuccessful, though her egotism deluded her into believing
she was autonomous and had the power to direct other people's
lives. She regretted the pain that she unintentionally caused
others when her schemes failed; neverntheless, her self-involvement
could make her unconscious of how her behavior was affecting
others; if Harriet had loved Frank as Emma believed, wouldn't
her flirtation at Box Hill with Frank have wounded Harriet deeply?
- Mr. Woodhouse, with his "gentle selfishness" (p. 29), contends
with Frank for the title of most successful egotist or manipulator.
He could not imagine that anyone else saw the world differently
from himself and, through his nervousness and delicate health,
bent all others to his will. He was, at the same time, concerned about the
health and well-being of others, in his own way, and as a host
treated his guests courteously and welcomingly.
- Mr. Weston displayed the egotism of a parent, with his pride
in Frank. In his conversations with Mrs. Elton at his own home
and at the ball, he was interested only as long as he could
discuss Frank, even taking advantage of Mrs. Elton's cough to
hold forth about Frank.
- The egotism of Mrs. Elton, who acts as a foil
for Emma, was glaringly obvious. Mr. Elton's egotism motivated
him to aspire to Emma.
- How would you assess Harriet's egotism? or was she selfless?
or did she change in this regard as a result of Emma's encouragement?
- Do Mr. Knightley, Mrs. Weston, and Miss Bates illustrate self-respect
and a proper selflessness that contributes to individual well
being and to social harmony?
OTHER SCALES
The characters can be arranged on other scales, reflecting other
major themes, like sociability. At one end of the scale can be
ranged the characters whose sociability was marked by snobbery
and a lack of consideration for others. Who do you think they
would be? Then there is Mr. Weston, whose genuine friendliness
or amiability lacked judgment; Emma, thinking of his "unmanageable
good will" (p. 306), decided, "General benevolence, but not
general friendship, made a man what he ought to be. She could
fancy such a man" (p. 279). How would you rate Mr. John Knightley
and his preference for domesticity with his own family, Miss Bates,
Jane, Mr. Woodhouse, Mrs. Weston, and Mr. Knightley? Do any characters
represent the ideal sociability in Austen's view? Clearly, Mr.
Knightley represented Emma's ideal, though she was unaware of
this fact until the end.
I have discussed egotism and sociability separately, but in the
novel and in life they are intertwined. Mr. Elton is an egotistic
snob; Frank's ostensible openness and gregariousness conceal his
egotism; John Knightley's sociability is egotistic in its limitation
to family; Mr. Woodhouse is selfish sociability.
DISCUSSION OF EMMA
| Day 2 (M, Feb. 4) |
Austen, Emma, pp. 7-102
Austen Overview
Point of View and The Narrator |
| Day 3 (W, Feb. 6) |
Emma, pp. 103-209
Emma, Harriet, and Mr. Elton
|
| Day 4 (M, Feb. 11) |
Emma, pp. 209-317
  Society
Highbury |
| Day 5 (W, Feb. 13) |
Emma, pp. 317-412
Mr. Knightley
Egotism
Women's Lot
The Ending
Other Issues
Quotations
Web paper due (1-2 pages) |
February 18, 2002
|