Critical Analysis of Elsie B. Michie Essay

Elsie B. Michie’s article regarding social distinction in the works of Jane Austen makes the argument that Austen’s narratives contain far more critical value than they have been assigned as simple descriptions of romance and matrimony; in fact, she attests that Austen’s tense and sarcastic narratives provide direct insight into the emotional and psychological strain created by socioeconomic and moral ideals of the time. Specifically, Michie claims that Austen uses the perspectives of men and women at opposing ends of the economic spectrum to demonstrate the inevitable conflict and social absurdity that occurs when wealth is left unchecked.

To make this argument, Michie refers to the work of Walter Benn Michaels, David Hume, Adam Smith, and others, including scholars, philosophers, and contemporaneous authors. Specifically, Michie compares Austen’s references to physical property and social economy to economic theory of the time in order to display the negative effects of wealth on various social classes. Austen, therefore, displays the moral and intellectual ineptitude that is created by an unchecked economy, especially through Austen’s female characters.

I absolutely agree with the author’s perspective. The interpretation that Austen’s narratives are simply vacant social stories meant to entertain is clearly undermined by Michie’s argument. Austen’s clever disguise of her critique is a testament to her valued intelligence as she uses her writing to not only display the behavior created by the very environment that she describes but also to provide a scathing critique of those reading her writing for the sake of entertainment. It also reveals that need for Austen to use those gendered assumptions about women in society in order to publish, gaining access to a larger audience. I do not think that there is bias in the argument. Readers might assume that the female scholar may be biased towards a female author, but this is simply not the case. Michie’s argument is clear, articulate, and well-researched.

The argument to support Michie’s claims is strong. She uses a wide variety of sources and perspectives to make her argument, as well as a wealth of contemporaneous information and direct reference to Austen’s texts themselves. Michie’s references to and analysis of Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments and the Wealth of Nations is particularly apt; drawing connections to a strong male figure in the field of economics and philosophy helps to undermine any conclusions that Michie’s argument might be biased or swayed by her own gendered perspective.

Michie focuses her argument on the irony and satire that Austen uses within her writing, both to entertain and to critique. This allows Austen to serve as participant, observer, and critic all at once, granting her the credibility needed to make the claims within her texts. As such, Austen is established as a well-qualified social judge. The Bennet family in Pride and Prejudice is a fantastic example of the need for social checks and balances. Austen describes her contempt for the connection between society and economy as she describes her characters: “Consisted almost entirely in an estate of two thousand a year, which, unfortunately for his daughter, was entailed in default of heirs male, on a distant relation; and their mother’s fortune, though ample for her situation in life, could but ill supple the deficiency of his” (Austen 25). Here Austen’s sarcasm seeps through as she explores gender, class, and the economy of property through a simple description of the Bennet family fortune. Michie is correct that all of these issues are complex, intertwined, and largely ignored in society at large for the sake of avoiding checks and balances.

Works Cited

Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. New York: Penguin, 2012.

Michie, Elsie. B. “Social Distinction in Austen.” In Pride and Prejudice. Norton Critical Edition. Ed. Donald Gray and Mary Favret. (Norton, 2016): 370-80.