“…to recommend parental tyranny, or reward filial disobedience”
Alert Janeite and AustenBlogger-at-Large Allison T. wrote to tell us of an article in her hometown newspaper, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, about men asking the permission of their prospective brides’ parents to propose to their daughter.
Marry me.
(And by the way, your father says it’s OK.)
That’s the shorthand version of an elaborate mating ritual most often associated with Jane Austen novels, but one with surprising resilience today: would-be suitors first asking permission of the bride’s father before proposing.
Allison wrote,
Alack, alas and well-a-day! How sweet and romantic, and yet, how wrong. In the most well-known Austen novel, P&P, both Messrs. Bingley and Darcy come to an “understanding” with their beloveds *before* going to Mr. Bennet to request permission. And, with regard to Mr. Darcy, Mr. Bennet says something like “he is so great a man that I dare not refuse him anything he requested” or words to that effect.
In fact, the only time I can recall a suitor going to Papa first is in MP, when Henry Crawford reaches an understanding with Sir Thomas well before he makes his position clear with Fanny. And look how that turned out!
Although it also occurs to me that Mr. Collins also makes his wife-hunting intentions clear to Mrs. Bennet before attempting to fix the attentions of one of the daughters. It would appear that going around the girl to her family first is actually a sign of boorishness and lack of delicacy, rather than conformation to an economic ideal, in which the marriage is between two fortunes.
In Henry Crawford’s case we also would call it manipulative, as he had to know that Sir Thomas would attempt to persuade or coerce Fanny, considering her social position and the attractiveness of such a match for her.
And really, poor Mr. Knightley would have given Mr. Woodhouse a stroke if he had demanded permission to marry Emma. It was a kindness to speak to her first–even though he spoke without intending to. 
Could Mrs. Bennet conspiring rather obviously to leave Jane alone with Bingley be intended as tacit consent? Hmm.
It should be pointed out that, under the marriage laws of the time, brides (and grooms) younger than 21 had to get their parents’ or guardians’ permission to marry, unless they ran away to Scotland.* However, that could be accomplished just as well after the big proposal. Since all of Jane Austen’s heroines marry for love, it wouldn’t make sense to do it any other way!
Go on, discuss, you know you want to.
*Why Scotland? Because the age of consent there was 14 for boys and 12 for girls, and all the happy couple had to do to get married was declare themselves husband and wife before witnesses; a marriage legally contracted in Scotland was recognized as legal in England. Gretna Green or bust! And that’s why the Bennets were so upset when they learned that Lydia and Wickham had NOT gone to Scotland; they could not have married in England as Lydia was only 16, and therefore had to be living together without benefit of clergy.
November 15th, 2007 at 9:09 am
Wait a minute, wait a minute. Henry Crawford DOES propose to Fanny before going to Sir Thomas. It occurs in the breakfast parlor when he brings her the news about William’s promotion. It is only afterward that he talks to Sir Thomas about it. Before that, Sir Thomas has only noticed “in a grand and careless way” that Mr. Crawford was distinguishing his niece but he doesn’t come to any understanding with Crawford before the actual proposal.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
In a Chicago bookstore recently I heard an account of a modern Crawford. The bookstore guy’s cousin had refused to marry her suitor twice already, so the man decided to rig the wheel by planning a giant public surprise proposal in a fancy restaurant filled with many of the lady’s relatives and friends, all of whom joined the plot because they thought it was ” cute” and “romantic.” The book guy thought it was dumb, and was going to tip her off, but was concerned that she might knuckle under to the pressure anyway. He had nothing in particular against the man; he just felt that his cousin had a right to hold out for true happiness. Now that’s romantic.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Ruth: Thanks for the reminder. You are, of course, correct (not that I ever suspected otherwise!). From Vol. II, Ch. XIII:
Of course, Fanny says “NO” in no uncertain terms, at which point he goes back to the parsonage and gets a note from Mary that assumes silly Fanny of course means yes when she says no, and when she repeats her negative in a note back to Mary, which no doubt was shared with Henry, he STILL goes to Sir Thomas the next day and asks permission to pay his addresses. He is a manipulative jerk. Of course, that’s not really the subject of the article. But I have issues.