Novels are distinctive among the forms of literature in that, among other reasons, they have a thick texture because they offer up narrative prose rather than just descriptive prose, and so allow the author, whether or not assuming an authorial voice, to create a distinctive universe, every novel being its own kind of thing, a creation on its own, because of the way the author decides to tell his or her story, that including the coincidental things he or she cares to notice, whether he uses short or long phrases, as that may influence, for example, the sense of time as it passes in the novel, whether there are foreshadowings or flashbacks, whether there is more or less dialogue amidst the descriptions of place, atmosphere and events, whether and to what extent the language employed is poetic, and so seems terse or to provide metaphors for contemplation, and so forth, the texture of the language providing the medium through which the novelist does his work,
That is very different from what happens in other forms of literature or of writing not even considered literature. Drama works differently. It isn’t just that the actors are right there; it is that the action of the drama is moved forward entirely by dialogue so we wonder how the playwright will move the action forward with some line he provides for one actor or another. Film is different from drama not only because it is not “live”; it is different because it uses the techniques of the novel to alter time, to cut back and forth between different sequences of events, to give the drama the stateliness of a novel. And it is also no wonder that students often find it easier to read non-fiction than fiction. They may not be trained in picking up the clues so as to feel comfortable with some of the devices of fiction or to look deeply into character from the indications of it that are given and prefer, instead, to deal with what seems the straightforward metaphysics of descriptive prose which is out just to explain things, as in a technical manual or a textbook or even in an informal essay where you at least pick up easily enough on the point the author is trying to make even if he or she also includes some jokes or allusions to matters not included in the unfolding of the material, something so different from the unfolding of a story line. Essayists are like textbook writers in that they have a point to make, a thesis to prove or illustrate, while novelists are up to-- whatever that novelist is up to on that occasion of telling a story.
Here is a set piece from Jane Austen’s “Emma”. Any number of passages would serve to demonstrate the distinctiveness of the fictional world of “Emma” but this passage is concise enough to allow commentary that shows Jane Austen at work. It is the scene where Emma is drawing a picture of Harriet Smith as an excuse to draw Mr. Elton into courting Harriet and, as usual, is an occasion for Jane Austen to make fun of cultural pretensions, say something about the nature of art and culture, examine the motives of her characters and move the plot along, all at once. The point isn’t that my reading of this passage is arcane or particularly insightful; it is that any reader will like as not notice the same things.
Harriet was to sit again the next day; and Mr. Elton, just as he ought, entreated for the permission of attending and reading to them again.
“By all means. We shall be most happy to consider you as one of the party.”
The same civilities and courtesies, the same success and satisfaction, took place on the morrow, and accompanied the whole progress of the picture, which was rapid and happy. Every body who saw it was pleased, but Mr. Elton was in continual raptures, and defended it through every criticism.
“Miss Woodhouse has given her friend the only beauty she wanted,”-observed Mrs. Weston to him-not in the least suspecting that she was addressing a lover-”The expression of the eye is most correct, but Miss Smith has not those eye-brows and eye-lashes. It is no fault of her face that she has them not.”
“Do you think so?” replied he. “I cannot agree with you. It appears to me a most perfect resemblance in every feature. I never saw such a likeness in my life. We must allow for the effect of shade, you know.”
“You have made her too tall, Emma,” said Mr. Knightley.
Emma knew that she had, but would not own it, and Mr. Elton warmly added,
“Oh, no! Certainly not too tall, not in the least too tall! Consider, she is sitting down-which naturally a different-which in short gives exactly the idea-and the proportions must be preserved, you know. Proportions, fore-shortening-Oh, no! It gives one exactly the idea of such a height as Miss Smith’s. Exactly so indeed!”
“It is very pretty.” said Mr. Woodhouse. “So prettily done! Just as your drawings always are, my dear. I do not know any body who draws so well as you do. The only thing I do not thoroughly like is, that she seems to be sitting out of doors, with only a little shawl over her shoulders-and it makes one think she must catch cold.”
Austen arranges the scene as a comic ensemble, something like sketch comedy what with the tone of haughty ignorance that is occasionally punctured-- though really more like a comic opera in that each of the characters has his or her own tone. Mr. Woodhouse ends the exchange with the now established joke that everybody is about to catch cold or be overtaken by some other misfortune. Mr. Weston flaunts his ignorance of art by using certain phrases without putting them into sentences that might convey a meaning or an insight. Mr. Knightly makes his as usual mordant and truthful comment that Harriet is represented as too tall. Mrs. Weston is a bit indiscreet in referring to the portrait as giving Harriet the only beauty she wanted, as if this overly generous compliment was not very close to saying its opposite, which is that Harriet lacked beauty. Mr. Elton goes into raptures about the painting which suggests, as the reader knows, that he is more interested in the painter than in the subject of the painting.
All of these comments are made in good humor, which means that everyone wants to be affectionate and supportive of the situation, which is not that the painting is good, but that they are there to approve of it, going through this ceremony of courtesy out of mutual friendship and regard. Art criticism is not their object, which is just as well because all they can manage to do is comment on accuracy not the emotions conveyed by the painting, and so a very low level of criticism indeed, Regency painting known for its sentimentality as well as its accuracy. The only participant in the discussion who does not say very much is Emma herself, who accepts the compliments but bristles at her father’s observation, noting the scene is in summer, even if there may be nothing in the painting to indicate that. Emma is also the only one with bad motives in that she is using the painting as an excuse to bring Harriet and Mr. Elton together, and they don’t know that, the two being just as buffonish as Emma thinks them both to be.
Jane Austen does not much comment on these proceedings. The narrator remarks that everyone was caught up in the project and in the affability, which a reader would have noted if Austen had made no reference to it, and so Austen’s observations here, as elsewhere, are a summary or a description of what is going on, rather than an added insight or her own take on what is happening. Austen moves on from one of these set pieces to the next, telling her story in an orderly manner, and before you know it, there is a novel.
Here is another passage from “Emma”, this time as narration by the author rather than as the transcription of the dialogue of the characters. It occurs later on in the novel, when the issue is the mystery of Frank Churchill and why he has not announced himself to his always forgiving natural parents.
Emma was not at this time in a state of spirits to care really about Mr. Frank Churchill’s not coming, except at a disappointment at Randalls. The acquaintance at present had no charm for her. She wanted, rather, to be quiet, and out of temptation; but still, as it was desirable that she should appear, in general, like her usual self, she took care to express as much interest in the circumstance, and enter as warmly into Mr. and Mrs. Weston’s disappointment as might naturally belong to their friendship.
She was the first to announce it to Mr. Knightly; and exclaimed quite as much as was necessary, (or, being acting in part, perhaps rather more,) at the conduct of the Churchills, in keeping him away. She then proceeded to say a good deal more than she felt, of the advantage of such an addition to their confined society in Surry: the pleasure of looking at some body new; the gala-day to Highbury entire, which the sight of him would have made; and ending with reflections on the Churchills again, found herself directly involved in a disagreement with Mr. Knightley, and to her great amusement, perceived that she was taking the other side of the question from her real opinion and making use of Mrs. Weston’s arguments against herself.
Part of what is going on here are Jane Austen stylistics. She uses many claused sentences and moves, even in this small space, to a rhetorical reversal of where she started out, something Emma even notices, but to her amusement rather than as a fault. That play of words no doubt accounts for her charm with her readership over the centuries. But there is more going on. The density of the prose is in what she chooses to notice about Emma’s character or, for that matter, the character of most of the people in the novel, or, really, about all characters in all times. Jane Austen never passes up the chance to make a new pronouncement on the nature of character, such observations amusing because they are offered in an offhand sort of way, and deep because they are the connections between the characters that obtain for the moment and over the long road.
In these two paragraphs, Emma goes through a number of alterations. She begins out of sorts and so decides to take an interest in the gossip about Frank Churchill so as to appear to be a regular member of the company but since, as Jane Austen notices, she is playacting, she overacts and so is more involved in the gossip than would strictly be required if she were only keeping an oar in the conversation. That is what people do so as to seem amenable. This is no great fault, but it is a minor vice, however ubiquitous it is in social life, as Jane Austen is pleased to allow all her readers to note, and so keeping the terms of the discourse cheery rather than malignant or even just meanspirited. The cost of doing so, however, and as Jane Austen notices, is that you will say things fashioned so as to accomplish a goal, which in this case is to be sociable, and the result of that is that you will say things you don’t mean or are even contrary to what you think, having been drawn into the need to do so. The occasion is more important than the meaning of what you say, Only Mr. Knightley seems inclined ever to respect his own sense of what is true, and this is a virtue hardly prized by society. Indeed, Emma is amused at having been drawn into the trap of her own making. She made herself say things she did not think. It is the reader, not Emma, who draws the inference that Emma has become a gossip rather than just feigned being a gossip, and so is not as independent a character as she prides herself on being.
The significance of Austen’s penetration into the psychology of her characters is that, at least if you are Jane Austen, it is so easily won. It does not require endless untangling, as would become the case with Henry James, or plunging into the mythology filled unconscious, as would become the case with Freud, but only what passes for manners in country society in Regency England. No one would find anything untoward in Austen’s observations, except that they set everyone into apposition not only to one another, each one trying to maximize their own impression of and impress upon a conversation, but also to themselves, there being a difference between the role one has created as the stable one a person wants to present to society and the alternative one that springs out of an occasion or is there for some other and unclear reason. So Emma is what other people take her to be and not just what she gives off and that is non too flattering if she allowed herself to notice that she is a bit of a phoney, as we all are, in that we don’t live up to our images of ourselves. That is a very tragic business even if it is presented through the mask of comedy which allows terrible things to go down smoothly. So the density of Austen’s patter covers up how much it reveals, as if the insight were just amusing. That is about as artistic an accomplishment as can be managed.