Why does Northanger Abbey end in such a hurry?

Submitted by Recent-Bird t3_10nytot in books

The final events of the book take up so little space - in a matter of maybe two pages we find out why General Tilney had Catherine kicked out of the house, that Henry loves Catherine and wants to marry her, that Eleanor marries a Lord and that it all works out as Henry and Catherine get married within a year. How do we spend pages and pages on breakfast rooms and carriage rides but the actual plot that determines the rest of the lives of our characters is treated as a 'by the way'.

We never find out anything material about Eleanor's husband. What happens to Isabella? Does James ever get over her? Is it awkward between Frederick and James? They must meet at family events now they're connected by marriage. What is marriage like with General Tilney as your father in law? Does he ever apologize to Catherine for having her turned out of the house at short notice? Or do they all just pretend it didn't happen once he gives consent for the marriage?

Did she run out of paper? Run out of time? Get bored? Why does it end like this?

17

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

emi-wankenobi t1_j6bpz8k wrote

If I remember correctly, NA was one of Austen’s earlier novels, so it could in part be due to her still growing into her style and her craft, which probably includes knowing how to satisfactorily wrap everything up.

There’s also the possibility (though this is 100% a guess and I can’t say for sure) that the types of novels NA was both emulating and poking some fun at (the sort of exaggerated gothic romance type novels Catherine was so fond of reading) have equally abrupt “and they lived happily ever after” endings, so it was all part of her matching that style? But like I said, that’s 100% a guess on my part.

30

steampunkunicorn01 t1_j6bqeoe wrote

Northanger Abbey was the first novel Austen wrote after her Juvenalia, so it played with what being a novel even means (hence the lack of info about Eleanor's hubby) She also tended to skip over the marriage portion of her marriage plots and ended on the engagement with a quick aside about the wedding (iirc, the only divergence from this is with Mansfield Park where, instead of just stating that the marriage happened, Fanny also was pregnant)

17

jefrye t1_j6c5ntx wrote

>She also tended to skip over the marriage portion of her marriage plots and ended on the engagement with a quick aside about the wedding

Honestly I think this is the biggest reason: she generally ends her novels pretty abruptly, so it's no surprise that NA is the same. Once the couple gets engaged, the book is basically over.

11

emi-wankenobi t1_j6dj3gz wrote

I was going to add this to my reply as well, but then I got to thinking and I couldn’t remember whether NA was even more abrupt than the rest or not. But I think this is definitely likely to be the largest part of it! Especially because her stories are as much or more about the social absurdities and quirks and journeys of the people in them than they are strictly about the romance.

3

RoseIsBadWolf t1_j6fn74f wrote

Perusasion is pretty abrupt too!

1

emi-wankenobi t1_j6fq63v wrote

It is! Persuasion is also my favorite of hers, but there is def lots and lots of buildup and then “they live happily ever after - as long as there isn’t another war” which is like…. Oh.

5

RoseIsBadWolf t1_j6fq9qq wrote

And did you catch that Wentworth proposed the day Napoleon escaped from Elba?

Another war there shall be!

3

emi-wankenobi t1_j6fqde0 wrote

I did not omg. That’s awful and now I’m sad about it, Ms. Austen whyyyyy

3

RoseIsBadWolf t1_j6fqwx4 wrote

Don't worry too much, the navy hardly played a part. Mostly just trope and message carrying and making a blockade around France. They had already destroyed the French Navy.

But she did clearly do that on purpose.

2

Beamarchionesse t1_j6bqnt9 wrote

Northanger Abbey was actually one of Austen's first completed novels, and she submitted it in 1803. [By contrast, Sense & Sensibility came out in 1813] However the publisher held on to it for about a decade, until Austen's brother bought it back in about 1816. Austen then spent some time revising it. Cathy's name was originally Susan, for one. How dedicated she was to revising it isn't really known [at least not to me]. She was already ill, and she died about a year or so after her brother got it back for her. He had NA and Persuasion published posthumously as a set.

I love Northanger Abbey, but I understand what you mean. I suspect it was just the growing pains of Austen working out how she wanted her novels to be, and then she wasn't able to spend enough time revising it when she had the chance.

12

mikarala t1_j6bwoqk wrote

Fwiw, I think that's typical of all Austen novels. Emma is probably the only one that doesn't feel rushed to me, and even then, once the love confession happens it's just a matter of tying up loose ends.

I've always read Eleanor's sudden marriage as another element of satire. We're told the whole book that Catherine is not exactly a classic heroine, and right at the end Austen is kind of like "you just read a whole-ass book about our quaint and naive little heroine who imagined she was in a Gothic story, but all along Eleanor would have fit the mould of a classical heroine what with her tragic romance so much better lol".

5

PMFSCV t1_j6c6im8 wrote

Ask /r/janeausten

4

bofh000 t1_j6egqnc wrote

I don’t think Frederick is the type to attend family events. On the other hand Catherine had a handful of younger sisters, maybe he shows up to spoil everyone’s fun in a few years.

2

alaskawolfjoe t1_j6fmx6p wrote

It is a parody. It is a satire of gothic novels. Asking for a drawn out ending is like asking for a developed denouement to a SNL skit.

It is just not that kind of book.

1

RoseIsBadWolf t1_j6fn48l wrote

Jane Austen wraps up a lot of her books quickly, especially Perusasion, Northanger Abbey and Mansfield Park. When she's done, she's done.

At least we know that Henry and Catherine have their happy ending.

Also, if you want to discuss more, there is r/JaneAusten

1

ri-mackin t1_j6bqdc3 wrote

If it was serialized, that might by why. Maybe she got canceled before she was ready to wrap up?

−5

jefrye t1_j6c5s4r wrote

It wasn't. I don't think any of Austen's novels were serialized.

11

ri-mackin t1_j6cw3hs wrote

Why not?

−1

emi-wankenobi t1_j6diakf wrote

Based on what I’ve read, most novels weren’t back then. Serialization of novels probably was a thing, but as far as I can tell it became the really popular thing to do in England in the mid 1800s, after Dickens published his Pickwick Paper stories that way. Austen’s contemporaries weren’t serializing their works either, they were publishing them as full novels.

5

ri-mackin t1_j6dwtm6 wrote

I've got a bone to pick with a certain mouthy English major!

1