Mansfield
Park

In the Mansfield Park novel, there is
morality disagreement between and among its characters. All characters are dealing
with questions about morality, and the acceptable behavior in the community, though some have high regard for the
moral system than others. The entire book through the characters shows that morality is a subjective matter.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

While Fanny and Edmund take that moral laws are universal and essential for everyone, other take relative
perspectives of morality. The Fanny strong
value system dramatically influences the
entire Mansfield park, and all people grow to like her. While most people are
focused on social and economic exchanges, Fanny focuses on maintaining her
principles which ultimately help transform the estate. Although faced with a challenge of poverty (she is from
a poor background), she grows in a rich background characterized by moral decadence and
social status. She perseveres in maintaining her own value system, which teaches the reader that one can live in a
decayed society but still preserve their values and become a positive social force.

The Mansfield Park novel was written
in the nineteenth-century England, and it depicts overlying scheme of social
and economic exchange. Most of the characters in the book, notably Mrs. Norris,
Sir Thomas Bertram, and Mary Crawford, revolve around economies or social schemes founded on riches and sexual
exchange. Their attempt to manipulate other characters in the play affect the
entire Mansfield estate
(Gaston n.p).

Fanny Price, the novel’s protagonist, is the only one who manages to
successfully resist the economies of wealth and marriage, in spite of the
social and economic debt she owes the Bertram’s for her upbringing. Fanny does
not entirely deny the value systems established in her environment, but she has
her own economy by which she responds to
the Mansfield value economies. Also, she is not resistant to other people’s
continued attitude that “wealth and emotions are substitutable currencies, which when given a present of cash or other
gifts of love there ought to be repaid
with gratitude” (Deresiewicz 68). The way she reciprocates is based on redefined feelings of thankfulness by social and economic exchange- not only to
point out the mistakes of the characters in the novel
but to restore the tarnished image of Mansfield estate. Since Fanny’s value system does develop within the estate, instead
of in opposition to it, her moral standards become inseparable from the
physical environment in which it is formed;
therefore, having an image to help the readers to grow the right examples for their historical moment.

The social and economic debt that Fanny accumulates from the Bertrams is
from the start portrayed by Thomas and Mrs. Norris by their social status,
riches, and payment systems. These preoccupations supersede personal concerns
to implicate the economic and social ills
of the estate. In their early debate about supporting Fanny, the two characters
mix the economic factors with those of social differences. As Austen puts it, a
girl should be given proper education, and be adequately
introduced into the world, and there are high chances that she will
settle well, without burdening someone with her expenses (Austen 7). It is around the social and
financial dimensions of her owing that Fanny borrows for her upkeep that she is
first encountering appreciation. Mrs. Norris had been explaining to her on
their way from Northampton good luck, and the unexpected level of thankfulness
and good habits which it should produce (12). Fanny must experience joy and
gratitude, and she has to teach herself to do that, but not according to the terms laid by Mrs. Norris. In fact, Fanny
feels uneasy by the definition of good luck by Mrs. Norris, who is implying it
to mean wealth and social class within the Mansfield estate. She feels so uncomfortable, and she moves with unease,
being unsure of hurting anything she touches, and she grew in fear, often
locking herself in the room to cry. While Mrs. Norris does not stop to hold Franny’s gratitude to account covertly,
it is only through this East chamber where Fanny will ultimately to show her appreciation.

The author of Mansfield Park associates
Fanny’s monetary debt with the revenue and preservation of the estate:
the sugar plantations in Antiqua that force Sir Thomas to have a journey not
only to develop the plot and facilitate the renown theatricals. The extended
voyage by Thomas also signifies the dangerous
social and economic posture of the estate
that depends on in external resources
rather than the rates from its land. All people, including Fanny, rely on this
circle of workforce and products exchange (Habermas 46).

Sir Thomas had experienced losses in the West India plantation, owing to his
son’s extravagance, and therefore it became desirable for him to be relieved
from supporting Fanny, and any future obligation on her (Austen 19). Sir Thomas departure to the farm leaves his children to do as they
please, proving that the social and economic well-being
of his family depends on the outer
circles; that they cannot manage themselves void their father. The departure
also reveals a social truth whereby in
that historical period to possess a plantation was to be recognized physically
with the country that to be involved with business and a full yet close awareness of the matters of the upcountry where
most people resided made the landowners the ruling class (Jones 269). The departure by this Thomas depicts the social and economic
separation from the productive obligation of children during that time,
therefore signaling the reader the social
status uneasiness in the estate. Thomas is a wealthy man, a slave-owner, and
the owner of the recent-built Mansfield park. He is willing to maintain his
position at all costs. That could be the reason
why his value system to ensure stability
in his home within the given social class might force him to circulate Fanny
and his children with marriage and sexual trade economy.

At the beginning of Mansfield Park,
the reader is introduced to a community
which is used to the integrated exchange of
wealth and marriage, social clusters in which Fanny should repay the debt of
her nurture. Many women in the novel have placed much value on the marriage
economy.  However, it proves disastrous
when Mary Crawford and Maria Bertram attempt to manipulate this system to their advantage. Although the setting
of the novel is entirely on a single patriarchal home (Habermas 46), the author starts the novel with
“Sir Thomas of Mansfield Park…
(Austen 5)” and ends
it with “the perspective of the entire park” (321).  The narrator reveals the secret lives of Sir
Thomas and Lady Bertram’s homes within economic debates and the complex perceptions of other people. For this author,
the only economy for women is marriage, and Mary Crawford becomes a figure
under which this economy and social transactions circulate. She tries to define Fanny in marriage economy perspective and claims that she understands all
people expect Fanny, claiming that she is not entangled in the marriage economy
value which circulates Mansfield estate
(36). Mary’s view on Fanny is based on
the belief that she does not know anyone without the sexual exchange. According to
her, women’s power is based on their
participation in the marriage economy, which she describes in the financial perspective. Therefore, by Mary’s
articulation of marriage economy and Fanny’s outstanding character of defiling
to fit in the Mansfield’s value systems shows the reader that they can still
stand firm to become the right kind of economic value in their historical time.

On the other hand, Maria Bertram thinks that marriage economy is wholly based on money. She takes matrimony
as an obligation, and as marriage with Rushworth would help her attain much
wealth than her father’s (Austen
29). It would also
ensure her home in the city it became her
proved obligation to enter into marriage with Mr. Rushworth, and this made the
house and essential material object, thus
showing her desire for material wealth in exchange for marriage. Nonetheless, this view of the sexual economy will lead to Maria embarking on an affair with Henry Crawford which will banish
her from the ultimate monetary scheme of gratitude and an ethical economy
that will come to rule the novel and the park, all through Franny. Therefore,
the final economy value that is attained
at the park reminds the reader that despite other people’s perception on the current economy, they can still stand and take
charge for what happens in their environment.

Before Fanny gains the upper hand on the Mansfield’s value economy, Sir
Thomas tries to convince her through economy of sexual exchange, by telling her
the importance of gratitude. He does not comprehend what Fanny means by stating
that she will repay her debts Sir Thomas takes the courtship of Fanny and Henry
Crawford in economic perspective (217), both practically and syntactically. He
voices Henry’s marriage proposal and Fanny’s decline as an exchange. When Fanny turns down the offer, sir
Thomas accuses her of ingratitude, which reflects Mrs. Norris’s earlier
discourse on proper appreciation, and thus has a
more significant impact on Fanny than all his other reprimands. He
recognizes that she does not owe him a child’s obligation, but she blames her
for showing such low gratitude. The play of thoughts show that Fanny is aware
that appreciation is one of the most important civil exchange gifts, and therefore
she is deemed to be miserable eternally for showing such ingratitude to
Crawford (Austen 329). Sir Thomas attempts to convince
Fanny to show gratitude for his attention. However, by her standing her ground
is an important gesture of a person’s
ability to establish a value system which shows a sense of responsibility to one’s environment and willingness to
help others change for better.

Indeed, gratitude plays a critical role in the entire play, particularly
in the courtships. It comes in a different
perspective for different people. During the courting of Edmund and Fanny,
Edmund starts to find Fanny and interesting
object when she shows gratitude and happiness. On Fanny’s side, she took Edmund
as a cousin, and therefore he deserved such appreciation
from her, as no emotion could repay him adequately (17). Handler and Segal (17) posit that appreciation
is only a reaction and an only acknowledgment
of awareness receives and an initial return that keeps the vow of rising returns in the coming moments. And therefore,
it is through social responsibility and ethical value mode as portrayed by
proper gratitude that Fanny will ultimately respond. In refusing the proposal
by Henry Crawford as subsequently other character’s prevailing value systems of
economic exchange, Fanny provides a
different model of living, a model of moral value. Fanny’s refusal to Henry’s
hand in marriage shocks not only Sir Thomas, but other characters as well because they wonder how she fails to show
gratitude for Henry helping her brother to get promotion in the navy (Elliott 1). Defying her benefactor’s will and failure to reciprocate for a
promotion gift is very courageous and shows that Fanny has an independent mind
which she uses as a positive social force for change. Her rejection of Crawford
because of their moral principle differences belong to a value system that is
not known to Sir Thomas, as well as other characters contaminated by
Mansfield’s moral “decadence”.

Fanny’s best East chamber, her solace space, physically reveals the
growth of the social and economic transactions that will often be seen in other power models in the
novel.  Everything in the East chamber
for Fanny is a friend, or it represents a friend (Austen 106).

This internal appreciation for others, developed by attachment to place, results
in Franny the anxiety founded on the memory
of how to pay back the amount owed which all the memories produce. Thus, when
Sir Thomas meets Fanny in the east room after rejecting Henry, his accusation
of being ungrateful bears an enormous
burden in a place that already suggested to her the burden of debt she had for
him. The things in this room, almost all tokens, show that Fanny does not have
anything for herself (Gaston n.p). The statements of her relatives to
being grateful were fostered by the amount of the gifts they had given her. However, her gratitude could not be
reciprocated in the same manner, or in the same “currency” (Handler and Segal 72). By regarding these things through their relationship
with the cousins, Fanny shows emotional value by which she repays what she owes
to other people. She says that emotional economic gives an actual payoff for
her creditors, thus demonstrating that the best way of settling social and
economic exchange is showing affection to people who have been close to one’s
life.

In developing Fanny’s emotional economy as a type of currency that she
must use to pay back to those she owes, contained in a place in the East room, the author additionally shows this
physical place as a location of
significant representation
(Austen 106).

Just as Fanny grows within and not against the limits of the house, she
undermines the economic value models in which she has lives by describing
herself within them. She obtains agency by declaring possession of structural
restrictions. Furthermore, such human and memory-based fortification permits
Fanny to be a mistress if her effective
selfhood and of her homestead location. First, she can only say a soft welcome
to Edmund when she comes to her room, and they
cannot give her position. She is so uncomfortable with her opinion, and she
shrinks from such a compliment. When Mary
Crawford visits her, Fanny tries to prove herself the owner of the
house, but can only view with consideration her obligatory adversities the
shining bars of her void grate. Symbolically, the radiant bars can be read in
opposition to Maria’s perspective whose error is to want extended limits, to go to privations. Fanny attains agency by
allowing herself to adapt to the household limitations. In the end, she can naturally allow
her visitor Mary Crawford to come to her room, and she has no fears concerning
belonging to a location, and in this, she
speaks her mind. She claims that she cannot take it lightly when a man plays
with the woman’s emotions
(Austen 246).

By using the constrained location of Mansfield both to build her mushrooming
representation and her return economy, founded on moral obligation and
gratitude, Fanny attains the authority to save an estate. The estate needs
redemption from the damage caused by
excessive dependence on financial and sexual value models, systems that
facilitate the thriving of Henry Crawford and Maria’s relationship.

Fanny recognizes that personal agency supersedes the personal self, going to associations of
responsible social action based on principles of debt and thankfulness (Handler and Segal 59). It is this perspective that results in her becoming a moral example for the rotten Mansfield
park. Though she does not depart from the initial social and economic systems
in Mansfield, Fanny refutes all influences of other people in the novel inside
those economies, notably Mary Crawford
and Sir Thomas. By doing this, she establishes her own agency and value system with the economy and social economy transactions, which is not against the
estate. This allows her to influence
Mansfield with a new value model that portrays more stability for the families
than the uncontrolled flow of rich and
social exchange. In building Fanny to be a character that establishes a value
system that is based on morality economy,
the author depicts a story of revolt against the ever-more closer community of
early 19th century England. As the novel closes, when Fanny comes
back from Portsmouth, the story leaves her cherished East chamber. The other
people in the novel have recognized her worth, and her impact now supersedes
the location in which she grew her
memory-based value system. The book acknowledges
that by applying this distinct, proper model of gratitude, the novel’s
protagonist repays her debt, by recognizing
that buying liberty from Sir Thomas was not cheap, and it required more than
just financial or gratitude return
(Austen 486).

To her, she repaid all her debts by showing the community that there was a
better way of viewing people relationships, and not just as economic and social exchanges. She, therefore, tells the readers people can
stand out of the crowd and make a desirable change, despite how other people in
the community try to manipulate or pull an individual into the prevailing moral
and value systems.

Just like Mansfield park is made of social stratification, the Great
Gatsby novel is also made of social class
which portrays three kinds of classes.

There is a class of “old money”, “no
money”, and “new money”. The class of the “old money” made fortunes
in the 19th century, and the “new money” class became rich in the
1920s, and they could overcompensate this by showing their vast wealth (LitCharts n.p). As the name sounds, the class of “no money” was not recognized and was easily ignored. Also, the author depicts an
economy that is made up of people who are ready to work hard to be rich.

However, in pursuit of the American Dream, the novel shows that people are no
longer interested in building a life, but
creating more wealth and thus accumulating more power. Gatsby stands to
represent both the original pure and the corrupted American Dream. The characters
view that the solution to the problems they face could only be money, and they
pursue wealth by unclear schemes. Gatsby, one of the characters in the book
disregards all the value systems and re-establishes himself so much that he
becomes empty, without connection with his past. His corrupt vision of becoming wealthy
is motivated by his indestructible love for Daisy (LitCharts n.p). His failure does not show that the American Dream is dumb. Instead, it shows how possible it is to
fall by letting materialism and wealth to rule over hard work, truth, and true affection. This
infects all other characters in the play, all of whom are hollow beyond their
desire for money. Therefore, reading this novel opens the mind of the reader to
understand that a society that puts wealth ahead of integrity and true love is deemed to the wreckage.

Overall, Mansfield
Park is a novel centered on a social and
economic exchange; where individuals expect something in return for a thing
they do for someone. Most of the characters are
characterized by the view that
morality is subjective, which is profoundly
influenced by the background in which they are brought up. However, by studying
the life of the novel’s primary
protagonist, Fanny, the reader can conclude
that it is possible to stand firm in the moral principles and become a positive
social force, which addresses moral decadence and setting an example to become an
excellent economic subject in a historical moment. The Great Gatsby is
also a novel characterized by social stratification and pursuit of American
dream instead of pursuing integrity and real
affection. The failure of Gatsby and the other characters is a lesson to the
reader that there is a better of life other than economic value system, but moral value system

Author