Remus Lupin = Jane Austen villain

[donnaimmaculata]

I said so some time ago to neotoma, commenting on how to write Lupin, whose notorious passive-aggression makes it difficult to see him in action.

Now, I'm in the middle of Jane Austen's "Persuasion", and here's what she's got to say about Mr. Elliot, the resident villain:

His manners were an immediate recommendation; and on conversing with him she found the solid so fully supporting the superficial, that she was at first, as she told Anne, almost ready to exclaim, "Can this be Mr. Elliot?" and could not seriously picture to herself a more agreeable or estimable man.



Every thing united in him; good understanding, correct opinions, knowledge of the world, and a warm heart. He had strong feelings of family-attachment and family-honour, without pride or weakness; he lived with the liberality of a man of fortune, without display; he judged for himself in every thing essential, without defying public opinion in any point of worldly decorum. He was steady, observant, moderate, candid; never run away with by spirits or by selfishness, which fancied itself strong feeling; and yet, with a sensibility to what was amiable and lovely, and a value for all the felicities of domestic life, which characters of fancied enthusiasm and violent agitation seldom really possess.

In the next chapter:

Though they had now been acquainted a month, she could not be satisfied that she really knew his character. That he was a sensible man, an agreeable man,--that he talked well, professed good opinions, seemed to judge properly and as a man of principle,--this was all clear enough. He certainly knew what was right, nor could she fix on any one article of moral duty evidently transgressed; but yet she would have been afraid to answer for his conduct. She distrusted the past, if not the present.

And later:

Mr. Elliot was rational, discreet, polished,--but he was not open. There was never any burst of feeling, any warmth of indignation or delight, at the evil or good of others.

Later still:

Mr. Elliot was too generally agreeable. Various as were the tempers in her father's house, he pleased them all. He endured too well,--stood too well with everybody. He had spoken to her with some degree of openness of Mrs. Clay; had appeared completely to see what Mrs. Clay was about, and to hold her in contempt; and yet Mrs. Clay found him as agreeable as anybody.

Of course, Mr. Elliot turns out to be a lying, manipulative scumbag, whose only goal is to make sure he's not cut out from the legal succession of the baronetsy.

I should take the opportunity to point out that I like the Jane Austen villain. Colin Firth's magnificent smouldering in "Pride and Predudice" notwithstanding, the character bores me to death. Wickham, now, Wickham is fun. His cheerful lies and charming insolence never fail to make me smile. The discrepancy becomes ever more evident in "Bridget Jones" (the movie), where Daniel Cleaver has much better chances to win my, ah, heart than Marc Darcy (here again, Darcy's redeeming feature is Firth's magnificent smoulder). I love Firth's Darcy, mind, but I don't love Austen's Darcy.

In "Emma" in particular I developed a major crush on the anti-hero (Frank Churchill), while Mr. Knightley made me roll my eyes in exasperation. Frank's got charm, style and panache, while all Mr. Knightley's got is integrity. Frankly, I'd rather be entertained. Her villains might be great coxcombs, but at least they're fun.

To come back to Remus: He's got exact that sense of self-preservation and carefully maintained facade that characterises Austen's villains. He lies and sidesteps neatly and is generally pleasant and well-liked. The only one who sees right through him is Snape, which, logically, would make Snape the Austen hero.

When I was considering a HP adaptation of "Sense and Sensibility", I settled for the obvious cast of Snape as Col. Brandon (naturally), Sirius as Willoughby and Remus as Edward Ferrars. But this is nonsense. Remus doesn't have any of that moral integrity that is Edward's most striking feature. He should be Willoughby and abandon the girl in an act of self-preservation. - In fact, this is what Remus does at the end of PoA, when he abandons Hogwarts (and Harry) because his condition becomes known and he finds himself socially stigmatised.

Comments

[donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com]

I am one of the tiny minority who feel that Remus's actions are questionable.

I've got the impression that there are plenty of those who find Remus' actions ranging from highly questionable to outright unexcusable *g*

Remus is morally ambiguous (which, of course, is exactly what makes him a fascinating character), and I'm very glad he is perceived as such, because I heartily dislike the concept of sweet, enduring, loving Remus. He's pragmatic, and most of his actions derive from the desire to maintain a respectable facade.

I'd like to know in how far Austen's work has influenced Rowling's; I don't think that Rowling based Remus on the Austen villain, if only because she likes Remus. Then again, I love Remus and I still think he's Mr. Elliot.

Nice to meet you too. I'm glad you popped in :-)

[seventines.livejournal.com]

I don't think that Rowling based Remus on the Austen villain, if only because she likes Remus.

I don't think she did either, but on the other hand, she may have chosen to develop him like Mr. Elliot (whom I also rather love). I mean, creating an initial conflict, where liking is tempered by an uneasy (but unsubstantiated) gut feeling that all is not well. Also the gradual dropping of small, unsettling details into the story, so that you remain seduced by outward appearance but begin to see cracks in the facade.

Or maybe she's not that subtle at all.

Thanks for the interesting discussion, btw. Your lj seems a nice safe place to hide from the *saintly Remus* brigade, I'll visit occasionally if you don't mind :-)

[donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com]

Or maybe she's not that subtle at all.

She definitely developed Remus (as most of her characters) to be conflicted and multi-layered. I think this is her strong point when it comes to characterisation (of the good guys, at least, her villains are rather flat). And as readers, we are, in addition, entitled to look for different interpretions of the characters and their motives. Actually, I led several discussions about Psychopath!Remus - not because I believe he is a psychopath, but because it's a possible extrapolation of his characterisation

By all means, visit as much as you like. I talk about Remus a lot, and I'm always happy to meet people who're willing to discuss him :-)