Comments on: Ethics and Estates

By: Sylwia

Sylwia — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:29:51 +0000

Though I’m not entirely sure there is evidence in either texts that points to extensive remodeling, the idea is well worth doing more research on.

I hope you’ll write about it. I’d love to read it.

By: Rebecca @ Grey Pony

Rebecca @ Grey Pony — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:33:09 +0000

Thanks for your comment Sylwia. I do agree with your assessment of Donwell and it’s owner as Reptonian, the same could be said of Pemberley. When using the term improvements, I refer to alterations that go beyond maintaining and running an estate properly, that go beyond efforts to highlight the natural beauty of a place. Though I’m not entirely sure there is evidence in either texts that points to extensive remodeling, the idea is well worth doing more research on. Thanks for your feedback!

By: Sylwia

Sylwia — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 13:29:50 +0000

I enjoyed your series on picturesque, but I wouldn’t say that either Darcy or Knightly are non-improvers. Pemberley is a show of picturesque in itself, and though it looks natural, it certainly didn’t grow on its own. There are obvious references to improvements, and there are in fact only two possibilities: either the house and grounds are very new, and so the Darcys abandoned their old house, or the old house and grounds were totally remodelled. Donwell Abbey is very Reptonian, with improvements kept in reasonable limits so that they wouldn’t destroy what was already there, without any possibility of creating a fully picturesque estate. Knightley isn’t even rich enough to attempt bigger changes. But there are picturesque spots instead, that must have been achieved by human intervention, i.e. breaking an avenue.

Mr. Rushworth has neither talent nor taste, and he totally misunderstood Repton, so his improvements will only ruin the estate, and Crawford would have improvements made without any consideration to Edmund’s income. So, as you said earlier, Austen doesn’t criticise picturesque. On the contrary, she was a great fan of Gilpin, and good improvements are a testimony to the excellent characters of her heroes. But she criticises fools who follow fashion without taste or good judgement.

By: Jonnie Comet

Jonnie Comet — Sat, 16 May 2009 02:38:25 +0000

The Augustan sensibility about ‘improving’ nature, and by extension, estates, was always tempered with a fundamental understanding of good taste. In ‘Mansfield Park’ JA openly commends landscape architect Launcelot Brown for respecting limits and knowing how far to go. The Palladian architect James Gibbs once made the point that those contracting a new house or renovations to an existing one could overstep the bounds of good taste, citing an actual case (with which surely JA would have agreed) of a new-home owner whose lack of good sense resulted in a structure so garish that he had to have it pulled down directly and rebuilt merely to regain friends lost over such folly. Mr Rushworth’s indecision about remodelling his house comes directly from his awareness that a false step might be his last social gaffe… and he cannot risk it, for he desperately needs friends fast.

By: Vic (Jane Austen's World)

Vic (Jane Austen's World) — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:55:10 +0000

Thank you for a most illuminating post. John and Fanny Dashwood were cast in a negative light when Jane described their plans for the Norland Estate. She had a definite point of view about enclosures as well, I suspect.