An Unequal Yoke
Jane Austen’s Emma is brought to a conclusion in a fashion that its readers may find puzzling, if not entirely unsatisfactory. Austen resolves the major tensions of the story with a triple marriage: Emma and Mr. Knightley, Jane Fairfax and Frank Churchill, Harriet Smith and Mr. Martin. The curious thing about these marriages is the substantial inequality that is involved in each. In each case, one of the parties is considered to be the clear superior of his or her spouse in terms of sense, intelligence, or morality. The expectation for each couple is that the less gifted spouse will benefit from the influence and guidance of the other. This system for marriage seems to defy conventional wisdom or at least, twenty-first century wisdom which ordinarily dictates that partners in marriage ought to be of comparable abilities. Though there is more than sufficient material in Emma to comprise dire warnings against such unbalanced matches, the novel concludes with the narrator’s unequivocal assurance that the unequal yoke between Emma and Mr. Knightley results in nothing less than “perfect happiness” (446). Leaving aside the question of the narrator’s reliability (which is a subject for its own study), I want to address the significance of these unequal marriages, in hopes of uncovering the principle that enables them to function as profitable, fulfilling relationships. It turns out, particularly in the case of Emma and Mr. Knightley, that the success of the marriage lies in a relationship that is motivated by and therefore produces an attitude of humility and sincerity.
So why is it that the marriage of Emma and Mr. Knightley is such a success, in light of his evident superiority? Emma’s own thoughts on the matter are useful. “What had she to wish for? Nothing, but to grow more worthy of him [Knightley], whose intentions and judgment had ever been so superior to her own” (437). This passage encapsulates the source of Emma’s happiness. In the beginning of the book it seems as though Emma has everything she could wish for, but now she has even more; in having Mr. Knightley himself, she has a goal to strive for. One might argue that Austen is promoting the idea a woman’s happiness finds its capstone in having a husband who, as her superior, she must strive to match. It is easy and tempting to read this text as an endorsement of male dominance. This reading would seem to be corroborated by the somewhat fatherly nature of Mr. Knightley’s relationship to Emma, in addition to her real father’s inadequacy as a guardian.
It is probably an oversimplification to attempt to explain Emma’s happiness as a result of patriarchy. To be sure, the idea is quite present in Emma, but it is not accepted so blithely. The relationship between Frank Churchill and his bride suggests that there is something more at work. Mr. Knightley observes that Frank will “have the advantage of being constantly with her” and that his character will “acquire from hers the steadiness and delicacy of principle that it wants” (411). It is evident that the Churchill marriage is unequal, but in this case, it is the husband who is the inferior. Granted, the Churchill’s prospects for happiness are somewhat less certain than the Knightley’s, but this circumstance still casts significant doubt over the idea that Emma sanctions patriarchy wholeheartedly, and it seems pretty plainly to indicate that male dominance is not the factor that makes Emma’s marriage a happy one. One might propose, then, that Emma is simply promoting the learning experience as the factor that makes a happy marriage. It does not seem that it matters whether the husband or the wife is to be the pupil; perhaps what is important is simply that at least one partner is challenged to learn and grow.
This theory also turns out to be insufficient. It is possible that the learning experience may turn out to be an important ingredient, but it does not a happy marriage make. This is demonstrated simply by the fact that just as easy, if not easier, to learn bad habits as it is to learn good ones. This is seen in the effect that Mrs. Elton has on her husband. Emma notices that Mr. Elton’s manners begin to change immediately after his marriage. “As for Mr. Elton, his manners did not appear but no, she would not permit a hasty or a witty word . . .” (246). Emma is at first not willing to judge him; after all, he has only just been married and has a lot on his mind. The initial change quickly becomes a trend, however. Emma is quickly convinced that Mrs. Elton’s “society would certainly do Mr. Elton no good” (247). Emma’s judgment, admittedly, is not always to be relied upon, but in this case she is right. “Her manners, too and Mr. Elton’s were unpleasant towards Harriet” (257). Remember how affable Mr. Elton had been formerly, in comparison to how unpleasant he becomes. Granted, one might offer other explanations for this change, but it seems that there is good reason to suspect his wife’s bad influence.
So how is it that Emma and Mr. Knightley are able to avoid this trap? The reader is left with a very definite sense, at the end of the book, that Emma will continue to profit from Mr. Knightley’s guidance. Why is it that there is no fear of the reverse occurring? To answer this question it is useful to set aside the discussion of marriage relationships exclusively, and consider Emma’s interactions with Harriet Smith. Mr. Knightley’s thoughts on the friendship are instructive. “Her ignorance is hourly flattery. How can Emma imagine she has anything to learn herself, while Harriet is presenting such delightful inferiority? Hartfield will only put her out of conceit . . .” (34). Knightley is saying that the friendship will only feed the pride of both parties, and his assessment quite right, at least in terms of Harriet’s unintended flattery. Emma finds Harriet charming in that she is “not clever, but . . . sweet, docile, grateful . . . totally free from conceit, and only desiring to be guided . . .” (22-23). How can Emma not feel somewhat uplifted in such company? How can Harriet, while producing such an effect in Emma, be expected to learn anything but vanity from her?
Mr. Knightley, for whatever reason, is not so easily flattered. However frequently he may lecture Emma, his attachment to her is also characterized by humility. Despite his frequent censure, he stoutly insists that they have “every right that equal worth can give, to be happy together” (427). It is difficult to argue that he is not genuine; besides his consistent refusal to flatter Emma, his sincerity is attested to by Emma’s confession that he “is the last man in the world who would intentionally give any woman the idea of his feeling for her more than he really does” (378). His esteem for Emma further evidenced by his willingness to be “changed also; for I am now very willing to grant you all Harriet’s good qualities” (436). Emma is plainly not alone in highly esteeming her spouse.
So it seems that a good case can be made for the importance of mutual esteem in Emma. Certainly Emma esteems her husband more highly than herself. And Mr. Knightley, though by no means blind to Emma’s faults, is able and willing to see in her such merits as to make her worthy of similar admiration. However real the inequality may be, it appears that the stumbling block it presents can be overstepped by a relationship that is based on humility and the willingness of each to regard the other more highly than him- or her- self.