Tertiary in a series on rereading Jane Austen'southwardPride and Prejudice. You can find Role One hither and Part Two here.

Hugh Thomson's cover for P&P"People themselves change and then much, that in that location is something new to be observed in them for e'er," says Elizabeth Bennet to Mr. Darcy in Chapter 9 of Pride and Prejudice. She's but admitted to Mr. Bingley that she is "a studier of character," and she's objecting to Mr. Darcy's merits that "In a country neighbourhood you motility in a very confined and unvarying society." Even if yous meet the same people all the time, Elizabeth suggests, the people are interesting because they're always changing.

I love what Mrs. Bennet says here when she jumps into the chat. Later on Elizabeth says, "people themselves alter so much," her female parent exclaims, "Yes, indeed … I assure you at that place is quite every bit much of that going on in the country as in town." Mrs. Bennet isn't thinking virtually whether people tin change, or ought to, or whether information technology might be interesting to an observer to witness such alterations. She'due south simply determined to object to whatsoever Mr. Darcy says, especially if it sounds like criticism of her social life.

Which characters change in Pride and Prejudice? Elizabeth arrives at a major turning point in her knowledge of herself after she reads Darcy's letter: "Till this moment, I never knew myself." At concluding she studies her own graphic symbol, and discovers her mistakes. When she and the Gardiners meet Darcy by blow at Pemberley, she is surprised to see him extending "the greatest civility" to her uncle and aunt: "Her astonishment … was extreme; and continually was she repeating, 'Why is he and so altered? From what can it proceed?'" And so Elizabeth and Darcy both alter in the course of the novel, learning from the mistakes of the past.

I'1000 thinking virtually two questions, then:

Is information technology believable that Elizabeth and Darcy change?

And, what other characters in Pride and Prejudice are capable of change?

I'm really interested to hear what y'all think, and I promise you'll comment below.

Norton P&PAmong the many recent articles on Pride and Prejudice marking the 200th ceremony of the novel's publication is one past Sheila Heti, who writes in The World and Mail that "the biggest and best fantasy" of this novel is "non that lovers finish up matched, merely that a lesson can be learned." She says, "If Elizabeth were a real person, her humiliation with Darcy would be repeated with other men and other women — yearly, monthly, daily. Or it would be repeated with Darcy, over and once again. She might castigate herself, as she does in the volume, but she would inevitably echo her mistake." It's much more mutual to debate that Pride and Prejudice is a fantasy because the heroine gets to ally for both love and money, so Heti's idea is unusual and intriguing. Practise you think she'south correct that it'southward a fantasy that Elizabeth and Darcy can both change for the better, not but temporarily merely permanently?

As to my second question, virtually the other characters and their ability to alter — here'due south what Elizabeth thinks of her family (later she has "studied every judgement" of Darcy'southward letter, equally well as every attribute of "her own past behaviour"): "They were hopeless of remedy." Is she right about their characters, or are any of the other Bennets capable of alter? What nearly Mr. Collins? Or Mr. Wickham?

My folioPride and Prejudice at 200 collects all the posts in this series on rereading the novel, along with links to other essays and articles onP&P.