Jane Austen Writing Lessons
One of the best ways to learn to write well is to learn from the examples of great writers. Jane Austen Writing Lessons is a series of blog posts about creative writing principles from plot structure to character development to dialogue. This blog was selected by “The Write Life” as one of the 100 Best Websites for Writers in 2021.
New Posts 2x a Month
New Jane Austen Writing Lessons will be posted 2 times a month. Sign up for the newsletter to get a notification in your inbox anytime there’s a new lesson. Links to the previous lessons can be found below.
Examples from Jane Austen
Each lesson looks to Jane Austen’s novels and her other works for examples of excellent writing. Quotes from her six published novels and an analysis of her craft–and how we can apply it to our own writing–is included in each lesson.
Writing Exercises
Each lesson includes 2-3 writing exercises that will help you practice the creative writing principle and apply it to your own writing.
Most Recent Jane Austen Writing Lessons
Jane Austen Writing Lessons by Category
#1: Make Your Character Want Something
#2: Combine Multiple Elements to Create an Engaging Premise
#3: Use an Inciting Incident to Set the Plot in Motion
#4: Create an External Journey for your Character
#5: Make Things Hard for Your Character
#6: Use a Character Arc to Make Your Character Change and Grow
#7: Create Multiple Relationship Arcs to Show Your Character’s Journey in Relation to Those Around Them
#8: Use Setting to Influence Plot and Character
#9: Use Dialogue to Create Dynamic Interactions Between Characters
#10: Use the Reader-Writer Contract to Create a Satisfying Resolution for Your Readers
Recognition for Jane Austen Writing Lessons
Jane Austen Writing Lessons was selected by The Write Life as one of the “100 Best Websites for Writers in 2021.” They wrote:
“[Jane Austen Writing Lessons] is filled with blog posts about creative writing that use Jane Austen’s novels and other related stories to share what good writing looks and sounds like. Whether you’re interested in plot structure or character development to dialogue, each Jane Austen writing lesson focuses on one principle of writing at a time.”
About the Author
In addition to writing Jane Austen Writing Lessons, Katherine Cowley is the author of the novels The Secret Life of Miss Mary Bennet, The True Confessions of a London Spy, and The Lady’s Guide to Death and Deception. She teaches writing classes at Western Michigan University.
Don’t Miss a Lesson: Subscribe to Updates and Giveaways from katherinecowley.com
Which newsletter(s) would you like to receive?
#68: Establishing Relationships and Character Connections in Fiction
This is the first post in a new series within Jane Austen Writing Lessons which will focus on relationships and character connections. A lot of times we think about relationships as romantic, and we will talk about that (after all, Austen has written some of my all-time favorite romantic relationships). But before we get to that point, we’re going to consider more general principles of establishing character relationships and connections.
In Jane Austen’s novel Emma, the very first spoken dialogue comes from Emma’s father, Mr. Woodhouse. He declares:
“Poor Miss Taylor!—I wish she were here again. What a pity it is that Mr. Weston ever thought of her!”
Miss Taylor is Emma’s former governess. She has recently married Mr. Weston, and as a result she no longer works for Mr. Woodhouse. Mr. Woodhouse is highly opposed to her loss. Emma attempts to convince her father that the marriage is a positive thing, beginning by saying, “I cannot agree with you, papa; you know I cannot.”
In these first few pages of Emma, the relationships and connections between characters begin to unfold:
Even in these first few pages, Jane Austen masterfully establishes the relationships between different sets of characters. Many of these relationships become driving factors in the novel, influencing plot and character, and adding meaning and consequence to the characters’ actions. Some of the relationships shift and change over the course of the novel, while others remain relatively static.
The first definition for the word relationship in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) is as follows:
The state or fact of being related; the way in which two things are connected; a connection, an association. Also: kinship.
It’s only in definition 2b that the OED defines a relationship in an emotional or sexual way, so let’s linger on this first definition of relationship, in which two people are related or connected in some way.
The primary root for the word relationship is the word relation, which, according to the OED, began to be used in English in around 1398. A relation means there is a “connection, correspondence, or contrast between different things.” Examining the relation between two things means considering why they are associated or what connects them. A relation can also mean “the social interactions that occur and feelings that exist between two or more people or groups of people.”
As you write or revise your own fiction, it’s important to look at the relationships and connections between characters, both ones which involve your main character and relationships which only involve the supporting characters.
As I consider relationships in my own stories, I like to ask:
- What connects people?
- How do two characters know each other?
- How do they feel about each other? Why?
- How does one relationship affect other relationships in the story?
- Is the main character aware of the connections between other characters?
- How do the character relationships manifest on the page, in actions and behaviors?
- What events in the novel will cause shifts or changes in these relationships?
In the coming months, we’ll look more closely at how Jane Austen uses relationship arcs, builds webs of relations, and also constructs romantic relationships. But first, here are some writing exercises.
Exercise 1: Consider the first five to ten pages of your book. Make a list of each relationship that is established and what your reader knows about each relationship so far.
Exercise 2: Find a place that has a number of people and spend a few minutes people watching. If you see any relationships or connections between people, write them down. What sort of relationships do you think these people have? What clues help you understand these relationships?
Exercise 3: Write a scene about two characters who would be unlikely to have any sort of prior connection but do have some sort of relationship (i.e. a friendship, a past, same employer, etc.).
#67: Creating an Emotional Map: Making Interconnected Emotions
We’ve talked a lot about writing emotions over the past months, with posts on:
- Planting clues to what characters feel
- Conveying emotion through character thoughts and free indirect speech
- Additional internal emotion techniques
- The size or degree of character emotions
- Different ways that characters deal with and express emotions
- Evoking emotions through external objects (objective correlative)
I wanted to do one final post on emotions, that ties everything together, so today I’ll be talking about creating an emotional map, or making a characters emotions in a single scene connected to their emotions in other scenes.
Near the end of Pride and Prejudice, Jane, the eldest of the Bennet sisters, becomes engaged to Mr. Bingley. Elizabeth opens a door and sees Jane and Mr. Bingley standing next to the fireplace, rather close to each other. Jane and Bingley quickly move apart, looking embarrassed.
Not a syllable was uttered by either; and Elizabeth was on the point of going away again, when Bingley, who as well as the other had sat down, suddenly rose, and, whispering a few words to her sister, ran out of the room.
Jane could have no reserves from Elizabeth, where confidence would give pleasure; and, instantly embracing her, acknowledged, with the liveliest emotion, that she was the happiest creature in the world.
“’Tis too much!” she added, “by far too much. I do not deserve it. Oh, why is not everybody as happy?”
Elizabeth’s congratulations were given with a sincerity, a warmth, a delight, which words could but poorly express. Every sentence of kindness was a fresh source of happiness to Jane. But she would not allow herself to stay with her sister, or say half that remained to be said, for the present.
“I must go instantly to my mother,” she cried. “I would not on any account trifle with her affectionate solicitude, or allow her to hear it from anyone but myself. He is gone to my father already. Oh, Lizzy, to know that what I have to relate will give such pleasure to all my dear family! how shall I bear so much happiness?”
Jane’s emotions are expressed primarily through her physical actions and through her dialogue (including the diction, word choice, and use of emphasis). It’s an effective scene at conveying emotions, but what makes it work is largely based on what Austen has established in the rest of the book.
An 1895 illustration by CE Brock of Jane and Bingley together, immediately after becoming engaged. Public domain image via Wikimedia Commons.
This post-proposal scene is in conversation with dozens of other scenes which have demonstrated Jane’s emotions. We’ve seen how reserved Jane is in outwardly expressing emotions, especially in groups of people (of Bingley she offers only “cautious praise” to everyone but Elizabeth). We’ve seen the pleasure Jane takes from little interactions with Mr. Bingley and his sister. We’ve seen her hope for an engagement. And then we’ve seen her despair—her utter, all-encompassing despair—when Mr. Bingley leaves without a word to her (though his sister Caroline almost gleefully writes to Jane of the news).
At various points Elizabeth and other characters analyze Jane’s emotions, sensing Jane’s devastation beneath all her attempts to insist that “He will be forgot, and we shall all be as we were before.”
At one point, Elizabeth reexamines all the letters that Jane has written to her:
They contained no actual complaint, nor was there any revival of past occurrences, or any communication of present suffering. But in all, and in almost every line of each, there was a want of that cheerfulness which had been used to characterize her style, and which, proceeding from the serenity of a mind at ease with itself, and kindly disposed towards everyone, had been scarcely ever clouded. Elizabeth noticed every sentence conveying the idea of uneasiness…
Jane’s utter joy at her engagement if effective because of all of these other scenes. Her happiness is the culmination of her earlier attachment to Mr. Bingley, and provides stark contrast to her despair.
An individual emotion does not occur in a vacuum. The emotion found in a single scene is simply a leaf or a branch on a character’s emotional tree. It’s a single block in a Lego tower, part of a larger structure which is more magnificent and complex than an individual Lego can be on its own.
When I am revising a story, I like to consider a character’s individual emotions as part of a larger emotional map. After all, a character has emotional valleys and mountains, fast-moving rivers and muddy bogs. There are cities and villages: parts of the map where a series of emotions relate to a particular person, object, incident, or theme. Some characters experience their emotional map as a journey: they have an emotional arc as their emotions, or ways of dealing with their emotions, change. Other characters circle through the map in a regular fashion, or spend most of their time in a single area of the map. For some characters, we receive only a glimpse of their emotional map, while for others, we explore broad swaths of it with them.
Whenever I am stuck trying to figure out a character’s emotion, or I feel like I’m not effectively conveying that emotion on the page, I think about the characters emotional map and how this emotion connects to all the others in the story. Doing so always helps me to understand the character’s emotion in the moment and what will best convey that to the reader.
1. Write a page about how your current emotions connect to prior emotions you have had. You can focus on a specific emotion or on a specific incident. Reflect on what your own emotions can teach you about the emotions of your characters.
2. Use a visual form to analyze one of your character’s emotions and how they connect to each other. This might be a map (or even a treasure map), a tree, a building/structure, or anything else you think would be an effective medium. You could create this with paper or other objects, or you could print out a map/floorplan/picture, etc. and add things to it. Personally, I like doing this in a tactile way, with pen, paper, glue, etc., but you can do it virtually as well.
3. Find one of your favorite expressions of emotion in fiction, and then find two or three other passages/scenes in the same work that have a strong connection to this emotion (whether in building to it, contrasting with it, foreshadowing it, etc.).
#66: Evoking Emotions Through Objective Correlative (External Objects)
A powerful way to evoke emotions—to make them feel real, material, and defined—is through the use of objective correlative, or using external objects that the reader connects with an emotion. And of course, Jane Austen is a master at this.
In Austen’s novel Emma, the character of Harriet has difficulties with love (largely because of Emma’s interference). She becomes head-over-heels for Mr. Elton, and is devastated when she learns that he is not interested in her. Mr. Elton leaves town for a time period, and comes back with a bride, Augusta Hawkins. A few months later, a ball is held, and even though it is tradition for married men to dance with the unmarried ladies, Harriet is snubbed by Mr. Elton.
After the ball, Harriet comes to visit Emma, bringing with her a parcel on which she has written “Most precious treasures.” She wants to destroy these treasures, and she wants Emma as a witness.
Inside are two objects. First, is court plaister which Mr. Elton had once played with. Dictionary.com defines court plaister as “cotton or other fabric coated on one side with an adhesive preparation, as of isinglass and glycerin, used on the skin for medical and cosmetic purposes.” In essence, Harriet has kept an expensive Band-Aid.
The other object is a “superior treasure,” for Harriet finds it even “more valuable, because this is what did really once belong to him.”
She reveals the object to Emma:
It was the end of an old pencil,—the part without any lead.
Harriet has kept Mr. Elton’s pencil for months after his marriage to someone else. The tiny end of an old pencil stub, without any lead—it’s an evocative image, conjuring up a series of emotions for the reader. We feel pity for Harriet, we feel sympathy for her love and her heartbreak as we understand the depth of her feelings, and we feel negatively towards Emma. After all, it is Emma’s interference which has caused all this, has caused a discarded pencil stub to be another woman’s most prized possession.
This is a classic use of objective correlative.
Defining Objective Correlative and Its Powerful Emotional Impacts
According to scholar George P. Winston, the term objective correlative was coined by the American painter Washington Allston in 1843.
Allston’s definition of objective correlative is rather opaque. In his book Lectures on Art, he talks about how cabbages are different than cauliflowers—a cabbage can’t just change into a cauliflower, for it is a cabbage, and has its own physical properties and meaning.
Picture of a woman experiencing emotions while accompanied by cabbage and cauliflower (and broccoli). Washington Allston would approve. Photo by Ivan Samkov from Pexels.
Then Allston writes:
So, too, is the external world to the mind; which needs, also, as the condition of its manifestation, its objective correlative. Hence the presence of some outward object, predetermined to correspond to the preëxisting idea in its living power, is essential to the evolution of its proper end,–the pleasurable emotion.
In other words, the things that happen inside our heads—and I would like to add, inside our hearts—are difficult to understand or to manifest. It’s so easy to go about our days and not understand why people are making the choices they’re making. It’s so easy to feel like others don’t truly understand our emotions—or that we don’t truly understand the emotions of those around us.
This becomes tricky for the writer. How do we take an emotion, something which is inherently abstract, intangible, and in many senses, undefinable, and make it feel real and substantial to the reader? There are numerous techniques that writers, including Jane Austen, use, including body language, facial expressions, dialogue, silence, free indirect speech, punctuation, syntax, repetition, and physical sensation, to name a few.
Allston doesn’t address these approaches, in part because he is a painter, interested in things which can take visual, material form on the canvas. But his advice can be useful for writers as well: he says that what we need do is manifest the mind—manifest the internal, unfathomable emotion—by finding a concrete, external object that can correlate to what is happening on the inside.
For Washington Allston, objects are “predetermined to correspond” to a “preexisting idea” or emotion, and I agree that there are some objects that have a standard emotion that are attached to them. For instance, in Western culture a coffin often evokes emotions related to sadness and mourning.
Yet we don’t automatically associate a pencil stub with the powerful emotions that Jane Austen conveys through it. So in order see the true power of objective correlative, we need a more expansive definition.
While others used Allston’s term, it was T.S. Eliot who popularized it in his 1919 essay, “Hamlet and His Problems.” He writes:
The only way of expressing emotion in the form of art is by finding an “objective correlative”; in other words, a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion; such that when the external facts, which must terminate in sensory experience, are given, the emotion is immediately evoked.
For T.S. Eliot, the emotional meaning of the object is contextual—it’s dependent on what happens around it in the poem or story. Objects are part of a situation and a chain of events, and it these groupings which create a formula for a particular emotion.
Let’s consider a few more examples of objective correlative in Austen’s work to see how we can apply this to our own writing.
In Sense and Sensibility, Marianne sees and reflects on the dead leaves with all the passion of romanticism. The leaves embody Marianne’s endless emotions and grief as she loses her home. The podcast The Thing About Austen has an excellent episode on Marianne’s dead leaves.
In Mansfield Park, the play Lovers’ Vows becomes an object which conveys emotions, both of Fanny and the other characters. This is truly a set of objects: there’s the script itself, the assignment of roles, all the preparations, and of course the physical set which is built and then torn down by Fanny’s uncle, leaving the play unperformed.
In the uncompleted novel Sanditon, the characters drive past Mr. and Mrs. Parker’s old house on the outskirts of Sanditon, which they have left in order to live in a new house, in the heart of the action, so they can pursue Mr. Parker’s dreams for Sanditon. Both Mr. and Mrs. Parker see different things in the old house and its gardens—they notice different attributes, and the things they notice and comment upon reveal that they feel very differently about the past, present, and future. While Mr. Parker praises it as “the house of my forefathers,” he remarks that it is “built in a hole” and that he is happy to have moved on. Mrs. Parker, on the other hand, says that it was a “very comfortable house,” and notices the beautiful garden, the places for the children to run and play, the desirable shade, and how it is always sheltered from the effects of winds and storms. It is clear that she misses the house and wishes they could return to it, and it is clear that turning Sanditon into a resort town is her husband’s dream, not hers.
It is important to note that Jane Austen uses objective correlative with moderation. None of her novels are packed with objective correlative, and not every object included in the novels is meant to create an emotion. Yet when she does use it, she does so to great effect.
How to Use Objective Correlative to Convey Emotions in Fiction
There are a number of principles we can take from how Jane Austen uses objective correlative:
- Objects can be used to correspond to emotions large and small.
- Some objects are important or evocative in their own right, but many are made important by the attention given to them. The context and history of the object can also help imbue meaning.
- In crafting fiction, it’s important to consider what people do with the objects or how they interact or talk about them.
- Highlighting the characteristics or attributes of an object can help open up our understanding of the corresponding emotion.
- The same object can engender different emotions for different characters. While sometimes an object reveals only the emotions of the main character, it can also reveal the emotions of other characters in the story.
- An object can be used in a single scene (like the pencil in Emma), or in sequence of scenes (like the play in Mansfield Park).
- In addition to revealing the emotions of characters, objects can create emotions in the reader.
I want to use one more example from Austen, to further explore the last two points: how an object can be used in a sequence of scenes, and how an object can create emotions in the reader.
Using Objective Correlative to Build to Moments of Emotional Weight for the Reader
In his definition, T.S. Eliot talked about a SET of objects and a CHAIN of events which immediately evoke a particular emotion in the audience.
One of the most effective ways to create a strong emotion in a reader is to build emotion with an object over time.
A great example of this is in Sense and Sensibility. (Warning: there will be major spoilers for the novel below!) As discussed in a previous post, Elinor keeps her emotions mostly inside. So how do we know that she is feeling strongly, and how do we as readers feel strongly with her? And how can we as readers draw parallels between Elinor’s heartbreak and her sister’s heartbreak, even though they are both such different characters? Austen achieves all of this through objective correlative.
The objects used by Austen are locks of hair.
Locks of hair inlaid in a pearl bracelet. This piece was made in England between 1790 and 1810, and is owned by the Walters Art Museum. Image used through Creative Commons license.
Austen sets up these objects early on in the novel as meaningful tokens of affection when young Margaret tells Elinor that she saw Willoughby take a lock of Marianne’s hair:
Last night after tea, when you and mama went out of the room, they were whispering and talking together as fast as could be, and he seemed to be begging something of her, and presently he took up her scissors and cut off a long lock of her hair, for it was all tumbled down her back; and he kissed it, and folded it up in a piece of white paper; and put it into his pocket-book.
In a later chapter, the man Elinor loves, Edward, comes to visit. He is wearing a ring which contains a lock of hair. Marianne immediately assumes it belongs to Elinor, and teases Edward by pretending to wonder if the hair belongs to Edward’s sister, Fanny:
[Marianne] was sitting by Edward, and in taking his tea from Mrs. Dashwood, his hand passed so directly before her, as to make a ring, with a plait of hair in the centre, very conspicuous on one of his fingers.
“I never saw you wear a ring before, Edward,” she cried. “Is that Fanny’s hair? I remember her promising to give you some. But I should have thought her hair had been darker.”
Marianne spoke inconsiderately what she really felt—but when she saw how much she had pained Edward, her own vexation at her want of thought could not be surpassed by his. He coloured very deeply, and giving a momentary glance at Elinor, replied, “Yes; it is my sister’s hair. The setting always casts a different shade on it, you know.”
Elinor had met his eye, and looked conscious likewise. That the hair was her own, she instantaneously felt as well satisfied as Marianne; the only difference in their conclusions was, that what Marianne considered as a free gift from her sister, Elinor was conscious must have been procured by some theft or contrivance unknown to herself. She was not in a humour, however, to regard it as an affront, and affecting to take no notice of what passed, by instantly talking of something else, she internally resolved henceforward to catch every opportunity of eyeing the hair and of satisfying herself, beyond all doubt, that it was exactly the shade of her own.
Edward’s embarrassment lasted some time, and it ended in an absence of mind still more settled. He was particularly grave the whole morning. Marianne severely censured herself for what she had said; but her own forgiveness might have been more speedy, had she known how little offence it had given her sister.
Elinor is secretly pleased that Edward wears her hair in a ring. This is a promise of hope, a promise of affection, a promise that someday they might wed. And all of this emotion is embodied in a lock of hair.
A memorial ring from 1804 or 1805 with locks of hair set between pearls. Mourning rings were given out to family and close friends at funerals, and often included locks of hair. In Sense and Sensibility it is clear that a ring with a lock of hair was not assumed to be a mourning ring, and that it was quite common for the ring to commemorate a living person. This ring is also owned by the Walters Art Museum. Image from Wikimedia Commons.
A few chapters later, as the chain of events progresses, Austen once again uses this same lock of hair. This is the prime example of what T.S. Eliot’s emotional formula, for she has set up the object to produce a very specific emotion from the reader.
What happens is that Elinor meets Lucy Steele. Lucy deduces that Elinor is in love with Edward, but Lucy is also in love with Edward, and she wants to mark her territory.
Lucy makes Elinor promise not to tell anyone what she is about to share, and then she confides in Elinor that she has been secretly engaged to Edward for four years.
Elinor cannot believe her, but Lucy provides more and more evidence, including dates and places that align with Elinor’s knowledge of Edward’s whereabouts, a miniature painting of Edward, and a letter written in Edward’s hand.
Then Lucy manages to completely decimate both Elinor and the reader’s emotions by bringing back a reference to the key object:
“Writing to each other,” said Lucy, returning the letter into her pocket, “is the only comfort we have in such long separations. Yes, I have one other comfort in his picture, but poor Edward has not even that. If he had but my picture, he says he should be easy. I gave him a lock of my hair set in a ring when he was at Longstaple last, and that was some comfort to him, he said, but not equal to a picture. Perhaps you might notice the ring when you saw him?”
“I did,” said Elinor, with a composure of voice, under which was concealed an emotion and distress beyond any thing she had ever felt before. She was mortified, shocked, confounded.
We too are mortified, shocked, and confounded, and we feel it deeply because these emotions are attached to a physical object. We thought the ring and the hair meant one thing, and to discover without a doubt that it means something else—this immediately evokes a reaction.
For me, this is the most powerful use of objective correlative in Sense and Sensibility, yet Austen continues to use locks of hair for emotional effect by bringing back the other lock of hair: Marianne’s.
When Marianne and Elinor spend the season in London, Marianne is snubbed by her love, Willoughby, and Elinor finds Marianne on her bed, completely and “violently” distraught. Next to Marianne, she discovers a letter from Willoughby, who has returned Marianne’s lock of hair.
It is with great regret that I obey your commands in returning the letters with which I have been honoured from you, and the lock of hair, which you so obligingly bestowed on me.
Marianne had asked for her letters and the lock of hair back, “if your sentiments are no longer what they were.” But she did not actually want him to return the hair. As she tells Elinor, she thought they were engaged:
“I felt myself,” she added, “to be as solemnly engaged to him, as if the strictest legal covenant had bound us to each other.”
“I can believe it,” said Elinor; “but unfortunately he did not feel the same.”
“He did feel the same, Elinor—for weeks and weeks he felt it. I know he did. Whatever may have changed him now, (and nothing but the blackest art employed against me can have done it), I was once as dear to him as my own soul could wish. This lock of hair, which now he can so readily give up, was begged of me with the most earnest supplication. Had you seen his look, his manner, had you heard his voice at that moment!”
Marianne rereads Willoughby’s letter, and the reference to the lock of hair only makes her more upset:
“It is too much! Oh, Willoughby, Willoughby, could this be yours! Cruel, cruel—nothing can acquit you….‘The lock of hair, (repeating it from the letter,) which you so obligingly bestowed on me’—That is unpardonable. Willoughby, where was your heart when you wrote those words? Oh, barbarously insolent!—Elinor, can he be justified?”
Once again, Austen employs objective correlative to show the depth of Marianne’s emotion by attaching it to a physical object. And, like Elinor, we feel deeply for Marianne.
Having built up this chain of events, with this set of objects (the locks of hair), Jane Austen continues to use them to great effect, bringing up each lock of hair one additional time.
When Marianne is severely ill and almost dies, Willoughby comes to visit, and tries to justify and redeem himself to Elinor. He blames his fiancé for forcing him to break Marianne’s heart and return Marianne’s lock of hair.
“[Marianne’s] three notes,—unluckily they were all in my pocketbook, or I should have denied their existence, and hoarded them for ever,—I was forced to put them up, and could not even kiss them. And the lock of hair—that too I had always carried about me in the same pocket-book, which was now searched by Madam with the most ingratiating virulence,—the dear lock,—all, every memento was torn from me.”
Elinor is tempted to absolve Willoughby—his speech is long and passionate, and the way he talks about Marianne’s lock of hair is definitely a point in his favor. Yet he returned it and broke his heart (and behaved like a rascal in other ways).
A brooch containing hair, so you can wear someone’s hair in your own hair. This was made in the 19th century, and is part of the permanent collection of The Children’s Museum of Indianapolis. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Finally, Lucy’s lock of hair is once again brought back. After marrying Edward’s brother, she writes one last letter to Edward, saying that she feels no ill will to him, and that she decided that she could bestow her affections elsewhere since she thought she had lost his. The postscript of the letter reads:
“I have burnt all your letters, and will return your picture the first opportunity. Please to destroy my scrawls—but the ring with my hair you are very welcome to keep.”
Oh, dear Lucy. You are married to Edward’s brother, but you want him to keep your lock of hair. You want him to treasure and remember you still.
In this case, Austen is creating a very different emotion. We are meant to laugh at Lucy—and this becomes a laugh of relief, and we do feel relief, for Edward and Elinor have finally been able to come together. Edward and Elinor are able to read the letter and move past it. As Shakespeare would say, “All’s well that ends well.”
Jane Austen does not reveal what Edward actually does with the ring and the lock of hair, but based on his words to Elinor, and what that lock of hair meant to Lucy, we can safely assume that he does not keep it.
It amazes me what a simple lock of hair can do in the hands of an author like Jane Austen. This is my favorite example of objective correlative in literature.
There will be one more Jane Austen writing lesson to wrap up the series on emotion—I will be talking about other ways to build emotion across multiple scenes. And as always, there are three writing exercises below.
Exercise 1: Think of a scene you have written that has an important emotion (the emotion can be important, whether it is a large or a small one). Now imagine that you’re a painter. Instead of painting the character with their facial expression, you’ve decided to paint an object that corresponds to their emotion. If you have artistic inclinations (or want to try something new), paint or draw a picture of the object. If not, search for images online to find a representation of the object that best captures your character’s emotions.
Exercise 2: Reread one of your favorite stories or rewatch one of your favorite shows. Find an example of objective correlative. Is the object used once or as part of a sequence? What is the character’s relationship with the object? What emotions does the object reveal, and what emotions does the object create in the audience?
Exercise 3: For a story idea that is either new or in early stages of development/writing, choose an object or set of objects that could be used in a sequence of scenes to create emotions for the reader. Try to use the object at least three times. What does the object mean to the characters? What do you want the object to mean for the readers?
Mary Bennet and Mr. Collins
In Jane Austen’s novel, Pride and Prejudice, several of the characters make good matches, not just financially, but emotionally and romantically. Elizabeth marries Mr. Darcy, and Jane marries Mr. Bingley. Other matches are more complicated, like Lydia’s marriage to Mr. Wickham, and Charlotte Lucas’ marriage to Mr. Collins. In fact, many readers have wondered if Mary Bennet and Mr. Collins might not have been more suited for each other. Why didn’t Mr. Collins marry Mary Bennet? And if they had married, would it have been a good match?
It’s Jane Austen’s fault that these questions are asked, for she planted seeds for these speculations in the text. At the same time, she clearly demonstrates what led Mr. Collins to choose Charlotte Lucas as his bride rather than turning to Mary Bennet. Let’s look at the sequence of events, as conveyed in the book:
- Mr. Collins proposes to Elizabeth.
- Elizabeth turns down Mr. Collins.
- Mrs. Bennet congratulates Mr. Collins on his engagement to her daughter. He explains that she turned him down, but that he also believes that despite her refusal, Elizabeth actually intends to marry him.
- Mrs. Bennet attempts to convince her husband to force Elizabeth to marry Mr. Collins. When Mr. Bennet refuses to do so, she tries—and fails—to convince Elizabeth on her own.
- Charlotte Lucas comes to visit the Bennets and finds the house in an uproar. Mr. Collins shows Charlotte civility, and she politely pretends not to notice the hubbub about the failed marriage proposal.
- Mr. Collins spends the rest of the day trying to ignore Elizabeth, and spends much of the time talking to Charlotte Lucas: “the assiduous attentions which he had been so sensible of himself were transferred for the rest of the day to Miss Lucas, whose civility in listening to him was a seasonable relief to them all, and especially to her friend.”
- The next day, the Bennets eat dinner with the Lucases, and Charlotte is so kind as to entertain Mr. Collins. (Austen lets us know that Charlotte’s actual “object was nothing less than to secure [Elizabeth] from any return of Mr. Collins’s addresses, by engaging them towards herself.”)
- The next morning—his very last day visiting Meryton—Mr. Collins walks towards Lucas Lodge. Upon seeing him from the window, Charlotte contrives to “accidentally” run into him in the lane. Mr. Collins proposes to Charlotte, and Charlotte accepts.
An 1894 illustration by George Allen of Mr. Collins proposing to Charlotte Lucas with “so much love and eloquence.” (Image in public domain; accessed through Wikimedia Commons)
- That evening, after becoming engaged to Charlotte Lucas, Mr. Collins must say farewell to the Bennets. He does not inform them of his engagement, but he does offer them his gratitude, affections, and wishes of health and happiness, even making a point not to exclude Elizabeth. Then he informs them that he plans to return soon to Longbourn, and the narrator finally tells us how Mary Bennet feels about the whole affair:
With proper civilities, the ladies then withdrew; all of them equally surprised to find that he meditated a quick return. Mrs. Bennet wished to understand by it that he thought of paying his addresses to one of her younger girls, and Mary might have been prevailed on to accept him. She rated his abilities much higher than any of the others: there was a solidity in his reflections which often struck her; and though by no means so clever as herself, she thought that, if encouraged to read and improve himself by such an example as hers, he might become a very agreeable companion. But on the following morning every hope of this kind was done away. Miss Lucas called soon after breakfast, and in a private conference with Elizabeth related the event of the day before.
Poor Mary Bennet.
Unlike her sisters, she actually values Mr. Collins’ abilities—or at least, “rated [them] much higher” than her sisters did. She is often—key word, often—struck by the “solidity in his reflections.” She does not think he is as intelligent or clever as she is, but she sees in him potential. He could read and improve himself. Even if he is not truly agreeable now, “he might become a very agreeable companion.”
Alas, Mary admits her feelings to herself to late to act on them. And even if she had admitted her feelings for Mr. Collins earlier, she would be unlikely to actively and swiftly pursue him, as Charlotte Lucas does. It is Charlotte’s willingness to converse with Mr. Collins, and then her direct pursuit of him, that leads to their marriage.
In one of my favorite card games, Marrying Mr. Darcy, Charlotte Lucas starts the game with a score of three cunning, which is rather fitting. (In the game, none of other characters start with any cunning, though they can acquire it throughout the game.)
In Melissa Leilani Larsen’s fabulous stage version of Pride and Prejudice, Mary actually makes Mr. Collins a pudding, which she is about to give him when she is cast out of the room by her mother so that he can propose to Elizabeth. I saw a Zoom production of the play in early 2021, and the way Mary said “But he hasn’t tried my pudding” almost brought me to tears. In this adaptation, Mary’s realization of her feelings for Mr. Collins comes earlier, but still too late.
Now let’s dive into the text of Pride and Prejudice to consider seven arguments for why Mr. Collins should have married Mary Bennet, and seven arguments on why that would have been a bad idea.
Arguments for a happy union between Mr. Collins and Mary Bennet, aka, why he should have married her
- Mary is interested in Mr. Collins, sees his positive qualities, and believes he could become an agreeable companion—and is not interest a base upon which something more substantial can be built?
- Mr. Collins doesn’t really care which sister he marries. He transfers his interest easily from Jane to Elizabeth upon a gentle nudge from Mrs. Bennet. Mary is also a Bennet sister! Could he not shift his interest to her?
“Mr. Collins meant to choose one of the daughters.” A humorous 1894 illustration of the five sisters, one of whom Mrs. Bennet has marked as unavailable, by Hugh Thomson. (Source: Wikimedia Commons, Creative Commons license.)
- They have similar speaking habits: Mr. Collins like to wax eloquently about any subject, and Mary likes to make profound statements on life. Neither individual is as clever, intelligent, or witty as they think themselves.
During a dinner conversation, Mr. Collins mentions that he frequently compliments Lady Catherine de Bourgh and her daughter.
Mr. Bennet says:
“It is happy for you that you possess the talent of flattering with delicacy. May I ask whether these pleasing attentions proceed from the impulse of the moment, or are the result of previous study?”
Mr. Collins replies with one of the best lines from the novel:
“They arise chiefly from what is passing at the time; and though I sometimes amuse myself with suggesting and arranging such little elegant compliments as may be adapted to ordinary occasions, I always wish to give them as unstudied an air as possible.”
Both Mr. Bennet and Elizabeth find his reply pleasingly absurd.
Earlier in the novel, after the Meryton assembly, Elizabeth is complaining of Mr. Darcy’s behavior to her sisters and Charlotte Lucas. Elizabeth says,
“I could easily forgive his pride, if he had not mortified mine.”
Mary immediately gives a long speech on pride, which, while it contains some insights, does not truly add to the conversation:
“Pride,” observed Mary, who piqued herself upon the solidity of her reflections, “is a very common failing, I believe. By all that I have ever read, I am convinced that it is very common indeed; that human nature is particularly prone to it, and that there are very few of us who do not cherish a feeling of self-complacency on the score of some quality or other, real or imaginary. Vanity and pride are different things, though the words are often used synonymously. A person may be proud without being vain. Pride relates more to our opinion of ourselves; vanity to what we would have others think of us.”
No one acknowledges Mary’s statement, nor does it shift anyone’s views on the subject at hand.
- Neither Mr. Collins nor Mary completely fit into society. Both have trouble understanding and behaving appropriately in social situations, such as when Mr. Collins introduces himself to Mr. Darcy at the ball, and, at the very same ball, Mr. Bennet must stop Mary from performing on the pianoforte. Mary seems to have an innate social awkwardness and lack of awareness, and Mr. Collins’ deficits are caused, at least in part, by his upbringing and education.
- Mary is bookish, and Mr. Collins likes reading religious tracts and books.
- Mr. Collins is a clergyman, and Mary cares deeply about moral values.
- They are both judgmental. After Lydia runs away with Wickham, Mary declares,
“Loss of virtue in a female is irretrievable, that one false step involves her in endless ruin, that her reputation is no less brittle than it is beautiful, and that she cannot be too much guarded in her behaviour towards the undeserving of the other sex.”
And in a letter, Mr. Collins writes,
“The death of your daughter would have been a blessing in comparison of this.”
Ouch. That’s harsh.
As we consider these seven reasons, we find ourselves asking:
What better foundation for marriage is there than social ineptitude, bookishness, and a healthy dose of self-righteousness?
Mary and Mr. Collins do share some fundamental values, and both relate to people in a distinctive way. And this could be enough to argue that they would be well suited.
In Jack Caldwell’s novel The Companion of His Future Life, Mr. Collins does marry Mary Bennet. While the novel still focuses on the stories of Elizabeth and Jane, we see a fair bit of Mary, and both she and Mr. Collins seem quite satisfied with their choice. As a result of their marriage, Mary grows in new ways. She does not let Lady Catherine de Bourgh control her life, and goes behind her back to become close friends with Anne de Bourgh.
Arguments against a happy union between Mr. Collins and Mary Bennet, aka, why it’s a good thing he married Charlotte Lucas
- Being similar does not actually mean you are suited. Were they to marry, their similarities could cause them trouble in the future, particularly since they both struggle in social situations.
- Mr. Collins is actually a lot less bookish than Mary. He’s not as well read, and even Mary, with her inability to see how to apply her knowledge, can see that he is lacking in this area:
Though by no means so clever as herself, she thought that, if encouraged to read and improve himself by such an example as hers, he might become a very agreeable companion.
- Mr. Collins needs someone to manage him. He already follows Lady Catherine de Bourgh’s every suggestion. After his marriage to Charlotte, she helps him restrain some of his less-desirable tendencies in ways that make her life better:
To work in his garden was one of his most respectable pleasures; and Elizabeth admired the command of countenance with which Charlotte talked of the healthfulness of the exercise, and owned she encouraged it as much as possible.
Would Mary be able to do this in the same subtle yet effective manner? It is likely that she’d choose a different, more direct tact. Yet some of the reason Charlotte and Mr. Collins’ marriage works is because he does not feel any friction. At the end of Elizabeth’s six-week visit, Mr. Collins says:
“Only let me assure you, my dear Miss Elizabeth, that I can from my heart most cordially wish you equal felicity in marriage. My dear Charlotte and I have but one mind and one way of thinking. There is in everything a most remarkable resemblance of character and ideas between us. We seem to have been designed for each other.”
Unlike Charlotte, Mary is not strategic in being tactful, and Mary would likely directly tell Mr. Collins if she disagreed with him. This would create a very different marriage, one with the potential for conflict.
- Even after his marriage, Lady Catherine is the most important person in Mr. Collins’ life. Charlotte is willing to praise Lady Catherine, be quiet during large portions of meals with her, and ignore any difficulties she causes in her life.
While it’s possible Mary could do the same (and in Caldwell’s novel, she not only does that, but also manages to subtly influence Lady Catherine in ways that help her meet her own goals), it’s just as possible that Mary would follow the path of Elizabeth and state her mind to Lady Catherine. When Elizabeth speaks up to Lady Catherine, it causes great consternation on the part of Mr. Collins, and he would likely be even more upset if it were his wife disagreeing with her.
- Mary wants Mr. Collins to change (“to read and improve himself”). Could Mr. Collins change in a way that would suit Mary?
In her novels, Jane Austen is open to the idea of people changing, but this change generally happens before marriage. For instance, inspired by Elizabeth’s critique, Mr. Darcy lets go of his pride:
“I have been a selfish being all my life, in practice, though not in principle. As a child I was taught what was right, but I was not taught to correct my temper. I was given good principles, but left to follow them in pride and conceit….Such I was, from eight to eight-and-twenty; and such I might still have been but for you, dearest, loveliest Elizabeth! What do I not owe you!”
- A large part of Charlotte and Mr. Collins’ marital harmony is due to Charlotte’s ability to ignore that which she doesn’t like in her husband. When Elizabeth visits, she watches their interactions:
When Mr. Collins said anything of which his wife might reasonably be ashamed, which certainly was not seldom, she involuntarily turned her eye on Charlotte. Once or twice she could discern a faint blush; but in general Charlotte wisely did not hear.
Being able to largely ignore the little bothers in each other is of great service to other relationships as well (Mr. Bennet must do the same for Mrs. Bennet). This is something Mary would need to learn.
- Mary’s interests thus far have been to devote as much time to her studies and the piano as possible. She seems ill-prepared to manage a household, while Charlotte is ready and willing to do so. Mary would need to develop those skills and, by necessity of not having many servants, would need to take time from her books and devote herself to running a house. This is something she would need to learn if she ever marries anyone. But because it is something Charlotte already has mastered, and that she finds intrinsic value in, this is a source of joy for her.
When Elizabeth leaves after her six week visit, she reflects:
Poor Charlotte! it was melancholy to leave her to such society! But she had chosen it with her eyes open; and though evidently regretting that her visitors were to go, she did not seem to ask for compassion. Her home and her housekeeping, her parish and her poultry, and all their dependent concerns, had not yet lost their charms.
One of my favorite novels which explores Charlotte’s perspective, with its joys and struggles, is The Clergyman’s Wife. Even for Charlotte, even with her need for security, it is not an easy path.
In looking at these seven reasons, Mary seems ill-suited for Mr. Collins. Charlotte already has the perspective and the skills to make matrimony to Mr. Collins be as smooth as possible, while if Mary were to marry Mr. Collins, their path would be bumpy, at least at the start.
Reflections on Marriage: What we can learn from the marriages that did and did not occur
Any marriage requires give and take, and if the marriage of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet is a good indication, there are plenty of workable marriages in which the two individuals are not particularly suited for each other. Whether or not the pros outweigh the cons, or the cons outweigh the pros, ultimately Mary Bennet and Mr. Collins could have had a tolerable, successful, or perhaps even joyful marriage.
Regardless of whether they would have been suited for each other, Charlotte took the initiative and as a result, married Mr. Collins. From a story standpoint, this is powerful, because while Elizabeth doesn’t think highly of Mary’s life philosophies, Charlotte Lucas is her close friend. Charlotte and Mr. Collins’ engagement shakes Elizabeth.
When speaking to her sister Jane of Charlotte’s impending marriage, Elizabeth declares:
“It is unaccountable! in every view it is unaccountable!”
“My dear Lizzy, do not give way to such feelings as these. They will ruin your happiness. You do not make allowance enough for difference of situation and temper. Consider Mr. Collins’s respectability, and Charlotte’s prudent, steady character. Remember that she is one of a large family; that as to fortune it is a most eligible match; and be ready to believe, for everybody’s sake, that she may feel something like regard and esteem for our cousin.”
“To oblige you, I would try to believe almost anything, but no one else could be benefited by such a belief as this; for were I persuaded that Charlotte had any regard for him, I should only think worse of her understanding than I now do of her heart. My dear Jane, Mr. Collins is a conceited, pompous, narrow-minded, silly man: you know he is, as well as I do; and you must feel, as well as I do, that the woman who marries him cannot have a proper way of thinking. You shall not defend her, though it is Charlotte Lucas. You shall not, for the sake of one individual, change the meaning of principle and integrity, nor endeavour to persuade yourself or me, that selfishness is prudence, and insensibility of danger security for happiness.”
Later, when Elizabeth visits Charlotte and Mr. Collins, she comes to accept—perhaps even understand—Charlotte’s choice, despite knowing that she would never have been able to make such a choice herself. She thinks, “Poor Charlotte!,” but her anger for her friend’s choice has been replaced by melancholy.
Elizabeth does not adopt Charlotte’s outlook on life—if she had, she would have accepted Mr. Darcy’s first proposal, despite her dislike of him.
Mr. Collins and Charlotte’s marriage acts as a foil to Elizabeth’s ultimate decision to marry Mr. Darcy. Yet it also influences Elizabeth, and helps her have a more expansive perspective on life.
If Mary had married Mr. Collins, it would have been less likely to change Elizabeth in any significant way.
My Personal Stance
While I can understand the opposing perspective, personally, I don’t think that Mr. Collins and Mary would be particularly happy together. When I wrote my own continuation of Mary’s story, a trilogy which begins with The Secret Life of Miss Mary Bennet, I didn’t give Mary a romance in the first book, because I didn’t think she was ready for marriage. I felt like she needed to grow and develop, and figure out herself first, before she would be ready for a relationship. However, in the very first chapter, she does reflect on the fact that she did not have the opportunity to marry Mr. Collins: this is an event that has stuck with her and continues to influence her.
What do you think? Do you side with Jack Caldwell and others who see great potential in a Mary-Mr. Collins relationship? Or do you think that it would have been a bad choice for one or both of them? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments!
Note: sometimes I used affiliate links to Amazon and other websites. When that occurs, I may receive a small commission, but at no additional cost to you.
#65: Different Character Approaches to Dealing With and Expressing Emotions
Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility focuses on two sisters, Elinor and Marianne, who act as foils to each other. They see the world differently; they treat relationships differently; Elinor places more value on reason while Marianne places more value on feelings and sensibility. One of the most stark contrasts between the two sisters is how they deal with their emotions and how they express them to others.
Elinor and Marianne, as depicted in the 1995 film version of Sense and Sensibility
Both Elinor and Marianne experience similar loss: they are both separated from and hurt by the men they love.
When Willoughby leaves Marianne, she has a very dramatic response, and suffers “violent affliction.” Her emotions become less violent, but they continue to be marked by outward pining and despair. She becomes very inwardly focused, not noticing the needs or circumstances of those around her, and she makes a scene at a London ball when she sees Willoughby. After he marries someone else, goes out in bad weather and becomes deathly ill.
When Elinor discovers that Edward Ferrars is secretly engaged to Lucy Steele (through Lucy confiding in her), she suffers intense pain, but she refuses to outwardly show it to Lucy. And then she continues to mask her emotions with her family, even though doing so pains her. She knows that Marianne is suffering, and she doesn’t want to add any more burdens to her family by sharing her own suffering; furthermore, she is bound by a promise she has made to Lucy Steele, and because of that promise she does not know how to share her pain with those closest to her. Yet because she is a point of view character, as readers we see and understand her suffering and her internal angst.
Elinor and Marianne, as depicted in the 2008 Sense and Sensibility miniseries
These two characters react to similar situations differently because of their contrasting personalities and because of different outside circumstances. In addition to considering how the same character will express small, medium, and large emotions differently, writers should consider how different characters deal with and express their emotions.
Later, when it becomes public knowledge that Edward is engaged to Lucy Steele, Marianne is in complete shock. But she notices that her sister is not surprised.
“How long has this been known to you, Elinor? has he written to you?”
“I have known it these four months. When Lucy first came to Barton Park last November, she told me in confidence of her engagement.”
At these words, Marianne’s eyes expressed the astonishment which her lips could not utter. After a pause of wonder, she exclaimed—
“Four months!—Have you known of this four months?”
Elinor confirmed it.
“What! while attending me in all my misery, has this been on your heart? And I have reproached you for being happy!”
“It was not fit that you should then know how much I was the reverse!”
“Four months!” cried Marianne again. “So calm! so cheerful! How have you been supported?”
Marianne struggles to understand how Elinor’s outward reality could be in such contrast to her inward reality, because for Marianne, her inward and outward realities are typically aligned.
To Marianne’s question, Elinor responds:
“By feeling that I was doing my duty.—My promise to Lucy, obliged me to be secret. I owed it to her, therefore, to avoid giving any hint of the truth; and I owed it to my family and friends, not to create in them a solicitude about me, which it could not be in my power to satisfy.”
Marianne seemed much struck.
“I have very often wished to undeceive yourself and my mother,” added Elinor; “and once or twice I have attempted it;—but without betraying my trust, I never could have convinced you.”
“Four months! and yet you loved him!”
“Yes. But I did not love only him; and while the comfort of others was dear to me, I was glad to spare them from knowing how much I felt. Now, I can think and speak of it with little emotion. I would not have you suffer on my account; for I assure you I no longer suffer materially myself. I have many things to support me. I am not conscious of having provoked the disappointment by any imprudence of my own, I have borne it as much as possible without spreading it farther.”
Elinor goes on to tell Marianne how she has forgiven Edward and does not blame him. Then she says:
“Edward will marry Lucy; he will marry a woman superior in person and understanding to half her sex; and time and habit will teach him to forget that he ever thought another superior to her.”
Marianne cannot accept that her sister could reach such a point if she truly and fully loved Edward:
“If such is your way of thinking,” said Marianne, “if the loss of what is most valued is so easily to be made up by something else, your resolution, your self-command, are, perhaps, a little less to be wondered at.—They are brought more within my comprehension.”
But Elinor will not accept Marianne’s judgment. She rebukes Marianne, in essence saying that she has loved and felt as deeply as Marianne:
“I understand you. You do not suppose that I have ever felt much. For four months, Marianne, I have had all this hanging on my mind, without being at liberty to speak of it to a single creature; knowing that it would make you and my mother most unhappy whenever it were explained to you, yet unable to prepare you for it in the least. It was told me,—it was in a manner forced on me by the very person herself, whose prior engagement ruined all my prospects; and told me, as I thought, with triumph. This person’s suspicions, therefore, I have had to oppose, by endeavouring to appear indifferent where I have been most deeply interested; and it has not been only once; I have had her hopes and exultation to listen to again and again. I have known myself to be divided from Edward for ever, without hearing one circumstance that could make me less desire the connection. Nothing has proved him unworthy; nor has anything declared him indifferent to me. I have had to contend against the unkindness of his sister, and the insolence of his mother; and have suffered the punishment of an attachment, without enjoying its advantages. And all this has been going on at a time, when, as you know too well, it has not been my only unhappiness. If you can think me capable of ever feeling, surely you may suppose that I have suffered now. The composure of mind with which I have brought myself at present to consider the matter, the consolation that I have been willing to admit, have been the effect of constant and painful exertion; they did not spring up of themselves; they did not occur to relieve my spirits at first. No, Marianne. Then, if I had not been bound to silence, perhaps nothing could have kept me entirely—not even what I owed to my dearest friends—from openly showing that I was very unhappy.”
Marianne was quite subdued.
“Oh! Elinor,” she cried, “you have made me hate myself for ever.—How barbarous have I been to you!—you, who have been my only comfort, who have borne with me in all my misery, who have seemed to be only suffering for me!—Is this my gratitude?—Is this the only return I can make you?—Because your merit cries out upon myself, I have been trying to do it away.”
This is a powerful scene between the two sisters, in part because their different approaches to dealing with and expressing emotions requires them to reconcile with each other.
When writing character emotions, it’s important to remember that there is a full range of ways a character can react to the same event: a more dramatic, outward expression or a quieter, more internal expression could both be used for either large or small emotions. A more “emotional” character, like Marianne, does not actually have more emotions—they simply express them in a different manner. It is important to note, however, that the way a character chooses to express their emotions does have consequences: Marianne pining for months does have negative effects on her well-being, and prevents her from dealing with her emotions and facing the truth about Willoughby.
There are a full range of possibilities responses in between these two opposite approaches: there are endless ways a character might deal with or express their emotions. There is no guide, no rule on whether your character should express emotions in a big or small manner, an internal or an external way: this is something you have to choose for each character, and this choice will reveal a lot about the individual and their circumstances.
Exercise 1: Write a scene with two characters. They can be siblings, friends, coworkers, or have something else that ties them together and creates similarities between them. In the scene, have something negative happen to both of the characters. The two characters should deal with and express their emotions in different ways (they do not need to be polarly opposite in their reactions, but they can be).
Exercise 2: Write a second scene with two characters with something in common—they can be the same characters from exercise 1, or new characters. In this scene, have something positive happen to both of the characters. Once again, have the characters deal with and express their emotions in different ways.
Exercise 3: Choose a handful of people in your life that you know well or interact with on a regular basis. For each person, write a several sentence sketch about how they deal with and express their emotions.
Then reflect on the differences between these people, and how their reactions are impacted by their personalities and circumstances.