"What is right to be done cannot be done too soon": can a code of misconduct turn proper?

There is a good chance that readers of this article, or any English speakers for that matter, have encountered Jane Austen’s work at some point in their lives. Her novels have gained a place in the canon of English literature in the context of both high and popular culture and have been adapted into media spanning all literary genres and art forms, among which is the topic of this article – films. The novel-film duo our analysis is concerned with belongs to the author’s most controversial works and has sparked debate among critics and casual readers alike ever since its publication in 1815. I am, of course, talking about "Emma", which has sparked three or five movie projects depending on whether we consider direct adaptations or, more broadly, inspired alterations, the most recent of which is of particular interest to me because of the adjustments it has made to its source material and its implications for society and the future of adapting classic works in the spirit of modern retelling aimed to retain adequacy.

Edmund Brock, Charles. Jane Austen: Emma Walks. Green Tiger Press.

Firstly, we should state why exactly "Emma" was so unconventional in its times and why that controversy is still relevant today. Before the advent of the modern novel, the most common literary form in Austen’s home country was known as the "conduct book". This genre’s main goal was to “shape”, usually young and usually female, minds through inculcating them with messages praising behaviour congruent with prevailing social norms and stigmatizing practices extending beyond them. Through the use of this method, they effectively shaped generations of literate, upper-class youths and equipped them with a full set of religious, class, and gender role-based conventions following them into adulthood and upholding the social order, in which aristocracy and patriarchy reigned. In this literary landscape, one particular character archetype continuously occupied the minds of writers – the young, virtuous, high-society woman. By inspiring sympathy and admiration among readers, such heroine could support the general didactic message of the book they inhabited. Emma Woodhouse, however, was in many ways the exact opposite. Similarly to the protagonists before her, she exhibited multiple "blessings of existence": monetary wealth, exceptional beauty, and extensive knowledge of such high-class pursuits as music and literature. In contrast with preceding role models, she cast aside the characteristics of ideal femininity, obedience, and moral purity in favour of more conventionally negative traits such as vanity, prejudice, and, simply put, rudeness. These flaws united to make Emma "a heroine whom no one but myself will much like" in the words of Jane Austen. This unlikability is precisely what set Miss Woodhouse apart from her contemporaries and helped create an image which defied many established social norms.

Box Hill Films. Mia Goth and Anya Taylor-Joy in Emma. (2020). Accessed 20 Mar. 2025.

The 2020 film adaptation of Emma introduced noteworthy changes to the plot of the original material, a few of which signalled a significant shift in the perception of the main character by the audience. Most of these served to, in my view, cut back on factors causing Miss Woodhouse to be exceptionally unlikable, and showcase her in a more positive light. The earliest example can be found at the very start of the movie when we witness bidding farewell to her treasured friend Miss Taylor before her wedding. While the novel opens shortly after the wedding, the motion picture places significant emphasis on just how much Emma cared for the newlywed by employing the "show, don’t tell" rule of storytelling. This immediately inspires tender feelings in the viewers and predisposes them to sympathise with Emma. Another instance in which the movie departs from the image of the titular character present in the book is in the moment of Mr. Knightley’s declaration of love. While the most iconic element remains in the form of the "If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more. But you know what I am. You hear nothing but truth from me" quote, the entirety of the scene takes on a much different mood due to subtle script choices and Anya Taylor Joy’s interpretation. In the novel, Emma’s response to the proposal is largely understated. Sure, we are informed of the thoughts racing in her mind combined with some conflicting feelings, but the heroine never externalizes those thoughts by way of direct dialogue.  Miss Woodhouse’s emotional turmoil and vulnerability take center stage in the movie because of two different devices. The first of them is a sudden nosebleed springing onto the character’s face when she hears of Knightley’s marital intentions perfectly illustrating her shock combined with confusion and excitement. As opposed to the book version’s demureness, the film Emma also shows outward, perhaps even aggressive, concern for her „little friend” Harriet by exclaiming that the latter’s interest in Knightley prevents the former from marrying him. The last change I would like to mention is one that is the most striking when compared with the source material, namely, Emma’s reconciliation with Mr. Martin’s proposal to Harriet. No such event took place in the book, but the film makes it a moment of great significance in Woodhouse’s character arc forcing her to humble herself before someone of a lower social standing. This was likely meant as an attempt to showcase the growth of a prejudiced aristocrat.

Box Hill Films. Johnny Flynn and Anya Taylor Joy in Emma (2020). www.cap-that.com/austen/emma/2020/index.php?image=emma(2020)_8302.jpg. Accessed 20 Mar. 2025.

Consequently, a few questions arise from an analysis of the 2020 "Emma". What can we gather from these adaptation choices? Have we, as a society, returned to the overly positive portrayals of heroines found in conduct books? Is Autumn de Wilde trying to program our social order? And finally, do the aforementioned modifications undermine the source material’s goal? In my opinion, the answer to all of these questions is a resounding "no". While the portrayal of an unlikable heroine was considered groundbreaking and liberating in Jane Austen’s times, over two hundred years of literary history have broadly changed our expectations towards protagonists. Characters, whose nature challenges the established social order have therefore become much more common. Moreover, the feminist tones of the novel have grown insignificant or even harmful in the movement’s era of emphasizing the significance of class struggle, reflected in the third-wave feminism, a matter Emma was originally only slightly privy to. Irrefutably, the set of adjustments, while undercutting Emma’s unlikability, has modernized the story and allowed it to function in modern discourse in a way that is much more period-appropriate.

Bibliography

Austen, Jane. Emma. 1815. London ; New York, Penguin Books, 2015.

Emma. Directed by Autumn de Wilde, Universal Pictures, 14 Feb. 2020.

trinhallcomms. “Oh Behave! Conduct Books for Women.” Trinity Hall, 8 Mar. 2021, www.trinhall.cam.ac.uk/library/oh-behave-conduct-books-for-women/.