Jane Austen economics

[cerat0n1a]

Can anyone tell me off the top of their head if Trollope treats economics Subjects well? My public library has two shelves full of Trollope novels, and I told myself that when I retired I would start reading them. But I didn’t.

Depends on what you mean by 'well'. He was writing at a time when industrial capitalism was taking over from the earlier land-based economy (which he was nostalgic for). He writes a fair bit about the power of money, and about the problems of debt. Some of the books have major plotlines about scams or fraud, and the fortunes made and lost in the 1840s Railway mania - the dotcom boom of its day. He churned out a *lot* of books, so if you like them, there's like many box sets worth more to read.

[TomTX]

Since we're "all in" and Mustachian - here's the Project Gutenberg link for Sense and Sensibility:

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/161

Um, do we need to petition to move this thread to a new forum? Start a new thread? Historical economic analysis via (free) period novels isn't exactly anti-Mustachian...

[chaskavitch]

I am 100% in for this book club.  I just finished my annual re-reading of North and South, actually, so I'm ready for a new (for this year) book :) 

[diapasoun]

Since we're "all in" and Mustachian - here's the Project Gutenberg link for Sense and Sensibility:

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/161

Um, do we need to petition to move this thread to a new forum? Start a new thread? Historical economic analysis via (free) period novels isn't exactly anti-Mustachian...

:3 Yeah PG!

Agreed that we should minimally move book club talk to a new thread. I'll set one up in a little bit and update this post with it.

Here y'all go!

[Zoot]

Um, do we need to petition to move this thread to a new forum? Start a new thread? Historical economic analysis via (free) period novels isn't exactly anti-Mustachian...

Yes, I totally agree--the thread came about as a result of a discussion in the Relatives Who Just Don't Get It thread, and I posted it in this forum by mistake.  ;-)

Not really sure of (a) how to ask for that, or (b) what forum it really belongs in.  Education/suggestions, anybody?

[TomTX]

Um, do we need to petition to move this thread to a new forum? Start a new thread? Historical economic analysis via (free) period novels isn't exactly anti-Mustachian...

Yes, I totally agree--the thread came about as a result of a discussion in the Relatives Who Just Don't Get It thread, and I posted it in this forum by mistake.  ;-)

Not really sure of (a) how to ask for that, or (b) what forum it really belongs in.  Education/suggestions, anybody?

Scroll back one for a link to the new thread.

[314159]

@Hadilly, thanks for that article, it was great!

[partgypsy]

This is a good idea! 

[Leisured]

Excellent topic, zoot. Thank you also to Hadilly for the New Yorker article. Post 24.

Cerat01an raises the custom of entailed estates, to stop profligate sons squandering the capital. On the other hand, the ancestors of Mr Darcy and Mr Bigley were able to buy land from nobles, so that Mr Darcy and Mr Bingley were gentlemen, but not nobles. The gentry class in old England was confident, as was the gentry class in old China.

Jane Austen is said to have remarked that 'she wrote about love and money, because what else is there to write about?' I cannot vouch for the quote, but it is in character.

Supporters of Jane Austen are known as Janeites.

I think Jane accepted the world as it was. She may have privately held some feminist views, but in her day, agitating for change would have got nowhere.

[Leisured]

I tried but failed to download a Gainsborough paintings of landowners Mr and Mrs Andrews. The link is below. The painting, in 1750, shows the confidence and good life of landowners of that time.

https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.SsObux1xAipRqcZzvj8DZgHaEo?pid=Api&rs=1

[LightTripper]

Just joined the other thread!  Thanks for coming up with the idea.

Somewhat off topic (wrong author) but I was listening to an Agatha Christie the other evening (Dumb Witness) and one of the characters talks about inheriting £30k, which yields £1,200 per year (on which one can "manage very prettily" - but she doesn't want to, she wants to wear the best clothes and go on holiday to the Med so has basically spent it all ... definitely not very Mustachian!)

Good old 4% rule rearing its head again....

It was published in 1937 and I think they tended to be set contemporaneously, so that £1,200 would be about £82k these days (on which one could more than "manage prettily" - but I suspect that was true in Christie's day too, and that was the point!)

[talltexan]

I'm pleased to see the Picketty treatmeant mentioned here, but it should also be acknowledged that--because of being on the gold standard--these landed gentry had very little inflation to worry about during the eighteenth and nineteenth centures. Perhaps 0.1% annually. It wouldn't become a factor during a lifetime of saving.

As if any of these people living week-to-week could find a way to save and move up!?!