A Simple-Minded Supporting Cast: A Criticism

When considering the larger cast of characters within Pride and Prejudice, it stands out how many of the supporting characters are oblivious and one-dimensional, excluding Elizabeth herself and Mr. Darcy. Jane, is the embodiment of a proper lady: beautiful, mild, and as Elizabeth says, has “never [spoken] ill of a human being in [her] life,” (11). Mrs. Bennet is delusional and dramatic, being rendered “violent from delight” at the unfortunate circumstances of Lydia’s marriage, and later going so far as to designate Jane as her “favorite child” simply for her advantageous marriage (260, 299).  Mr. Collins is obnoxious and presumptuous, “[flattering himself]” at Elizabeth’s refusal (94), and Miss Bingley is manipulative and selfish, designing to keep her brother “totally ignorant” of Jane’s presence in London in order to avoid their marriage (299). 

Making this decision with your supporting cast is not always the wrong thing to do; I think in the case of Pride and Prejudice, it adds much of the entertainment value that for-pleasure readers enjoy so much. Perhaps more importantly, I feel that the greatest impact of the flat background of characters is to further emphasize the romance between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy. Surrounded by such people who fail to understand the complexities of society and interpersonal relationships, it is all the more satisfying to finally see Elizabeth meet her match. All of this adds to the novel’s extreme commercial success and the size of her fan base even hundreds of years later, but I think it also diminishes the social commentary that Austen attempts to make.

In terms of thematic content, Pride and Prejudice focuses largely on class, most clearly evidenced by the main plot line of Darcy overcoming his classist hesitations towards Elizabeth and her family, but this message is diluted by the hyperbolic, almost laughable characters which pervade the novel. Austen attempts to criticize the class structure by making fools of the characters who play into the rat race of advancing one’s wealth and give up less superficial values. Mr. Collins sucks up to his much wealthier patron Lady de Bourgh, Miss Bingley makes a fool of herself trying to win rich Mr. Darcy’s affections, and Mr. Wickham trades off girls like they’re playing cards in an attempt to marry rich.

By mocking those who obsess over wealth and caricaturing them as frivolous and selfish people, Austen fails to depict any real problems within a classist society. There is no character who gives up more wholesome, genuine values due to the necessity of gaining wealth in a classist society. Each character that values wealth does so due to selfish and personal faults. In this, the commentary is weakened. It only suggests the foolishness of those who chase after money, not the failure of a society that values wealth over character. In fact, the greatest hardship faced in the novel due to actual classist prejudice, is the offense Mr. Darcy causes Elizabeth in his first proposal, a proposal Elizabeth never designed to accept regardless. 

It must be said that creating more nuanced background characters would change the tone and charm of the novel which has led to so much of its success, but I wanted to also note the shortcomings of taking such an approach.