All Too Tidy: The Problem with Elizabeth Bennet’s Propriety in Joe Wright’s Pride and Prejudice
Keira Knightley plays herself instead of Elizabeth Bennet in the 2005 adaptation
One of the most timeless debates lies in which is better: the book or the movie. Jane Austen’s novels and their adaptations have faced similar critiques, with many interpretations struggling to determine what to include for brevity’s sake. It is oftentimes the subtlest choices made to seemingly unimportant scenes that can have the largest effects on a character’s development. This is evident when contrasting the scene in Austen's novel Pride and Prejudice when Elizabeth walks to the Bingley estate after hearing of her sister falling ill, arriving muddy and disheveled, while Joe Wright's movie adaptation changes the scene and consequently, its significance. Wright’s alterations undermine Elizabeth’s characteristic agency and resolution, in favour of upholding aesthetic visuals and the attractiveness of his female lead.
Elizabeth Bennet is one of Austen’s most liberated female heroines, who proves herself as a resolute woman, willing to do anything for her family, even if it gets her messy. One of the reader’s earliest insights into Elizabeth’s nature is seen in chapter seven of Pride and Prejudice where, upon learning of her sister Jane’s sickness at the Bingley estate, Elizabeth is “determined to go to her”1 (Austen 64), although she was “no horse-woman” (64) and there was no “carriage to be had” (64); thus, “walking was her only alternative” (64). The use of diction in listing the reasons not to go establish Elizabeth’s tenacity and affirms her dedication to Jane. Furthermore, Austen’s wording of “only alternative” (64) implies that not going to Jane wasn’t an option for Elizabeth, maintaining her dedication and loyalty. Mrs. Bennet’s opposition to Elizabeth walking alone in “all this dirt” (64) is characteristic of the traditional disapproval toward this unladylike action that would be seen in this time, casting Mrs. Bennet as a foil to Elizabeth’s unorthodox behaviours, thus portraying Austen’s contention towards confining feminine ideals. Unlike Elizabeth, who shows a disregard for ensuring presentability, women in the Regency era had to be conscious of their appearance. Elizabeth’s non-conformity reflects Austen’s progressive feminist ideals. This is exemplified in Elizabeth’s response to her mother after Mrs. Bennet states that she “will not be fit to be seen when [she gets] there” (64) to which Elizabeth asserts “I will be very fit to see Jane — which is all I want.” (64) Elizabeth’s refutation of her mother’s superficial concern depicts that her priorities lie in her sister Jane rather than her appearance. On her journey, she “crosses field after field at a quick pace, jumping over stiles and springing over puddles with impatient activity” (64). The diction in Elizabeth’s actions seen in her “jumping” (64) and “springing” (64) over obstacles reinforces her tomboyish nature and emphasizes her agility as she carries this out in a dress. As Elizabeth rushes on foot to visit her sister and arrives in an unflattering manner, she is presented as a bold and daring girl, willing to counter the social and gender norms of the Regency era and go to the ends of the earth for her family, even if it leaves her with ratty hair and a muddied petticoat.
Joe Wright’s 2005 movie adaptation of Pride and Prejudice disregards this early understanding of Elizabeth’s character. Rather than upholding Elizabeth running and leaping over puddles to reach her sister, Wright exhibits an Elizabeth who saunters in slightly overcast weather, careful not to jump or spring over any nonexistent obstacles. Wright’s decision to downplay the efforts in which Elizabeth went to see her sister minimizes her character as a whole. His adaptation lacks the debate over appearance seen in the novel between Mrs. Bennet and Elizabeth. Removing this conversation limits Elizabeth’s ability to counter traditional feminine archetypes and assert that her priorities lie in her sister, not her looks. Wright also omits the preceding conversations in the novel where Elizabeth is insistent in her choice to walk to Netherfield, despite her family’s objections. Instead, he includes a scene that lacks the urgency conveyed in the novel; Keira Knightley’s Elizabeth blankly states “I must go to Netherfield at once.”2 (Wright 00:16:56-00:17:19) This, uncharacteristically, enlists no response from the narratively chatty and opinionated Bennet family. Elizabeth’s stoicism regarding her sister’s health is entirely antithetical to Austen’s Elizabeth hence the difficulty in overlooking Knightley’s impassive deliverance of a textually dramatic line. Rather than the exhilarating venture that Austen describes, Wright’s scene looks picturesque: the weather, though cloudy, has patches of blue sky, all tied together with chirping birds and dreamy classical music. There is no indication of the “dirty weather” (Austen 64) that Austen illustrates.
The most drastic distinction is Elizabeth’s appearance once she arrives at Netherfield. In Austen’s novel, Mrs. Hurst describes how Elizabeth’s petticoat was “six inches deep in mud” (66), whereas Wright doesn’t even show her dress, shooting Knightley solely from the chest up, thus refusing to confirm whether Elizabeth’s dress was muddied in his version. The bypass of Elizabeth's outfit separates her from her book counterpart whose situational uncouthness signifies her determination all of which is greatly detailed by Austen—but Wright’s divarication misleadingly implies that a modern, rewritten Elizabeth is above the brassiness of her book equivalent. Moreover, Elizabeth’s hair is described as “so untidy, so blowsy” (66) yet Knightley’s hair convinces otherwise; the only evidence of her trek are a few flyaways. When Mrs. Hurst declares that Elizabeth “looked almost wild” (66), the diction is suggestive of an untamed lion’s mane, which is probable after her walk in the dreary weather, but when Miss Bingley states in Wright’s movie that Elizabeth “looked positively medieval” (00:18:22-00:18:28), Knightley’s appearance displays quite the contrary. It is useless to include this line in the film if there is nothing visibly different from Elizabeth’s regular presentation. He discounts Elizabeth’s agency by showing her meandering around a scenic field in fair weather to Netherfield rather than urgently rushing in harsh conditions to see her sister. Wright’s mistake is favouring a practically-perfect Keira Knightley who is glowing upon her arrival at Netherfield, over a messy, improper Elizabeth whose appearance bears the conditions of her travel. By prioritizing Elizabeth’s appearance to produce a visually-pleasing picture, Wright undoes the work that Austen put into the character to make her the feminist heroine that she is. He spotlights a male gaze on Elizabeth’s character, reducing her to her beauty, rather than promoting her loyalty and determination.
Jane Austen’s Elizabeth Bennet inspired a multitude of round female heroines who fought against the restrictive feminine expectations entrenched in the period and proved that women are more than just pretty faces. Joe Wright’s 2005 Pride and Prejudice takes a step back in this movement, prioritizing aesthetic shots over staying true to the text. While this can be expected when interpreting texts, the scenes that he particularly changes or entirely cuts weaken early insights into Elizabeth’s character and what she stands for. Wright’s promotion of a prim-and-proper Elizabeth after she textually ran miles to see her sister, reduces her to the archetypal female paradigm for this time, the exact mold that Austen intended to break with Elizabeth Bennet.
thank you for reading my literary library. your support never goes unrecognized or unappreciated. as always, if you have anything to add to the conversation: comments, questions, praise, contrarian perspectives… don’t hesitate!
from my heart to yours, kara koblanski. <3
Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. Edited by Robert P. Irvine, Broadview Press, 2020.
Pride and Prejudice. Directed by Joe Wright, performances by Keira Knightley, Universal Pictures, 2005.