I think there's a tendency to exaggerate the differences between Darcy and Elizabeth, of course he was rich, well-connected and above her, but not so far above her -- he was not a prince or a nobleman and she was not a farmer's daughter. The film P&P3 for instance seemed to turn Darcy into a nobleman who was almost princely and reduced Mr Bennet and Longbourn into a farmer and a farmhouse. Longbourn was not a small house, and its estate was not a small estate. A 2,000 a year estate was a wealthy and prosperous estate -- nearly three times the average gentry estate of only 700 a year e.g. Willoughby's estate in S&S of between 600 to 700 a year, and the same as Col Brandon's estate, and Col B is described as rich. The trouble was that the male entail meant it would be inherited by Collins and since Mr B did not bother to save any money, the girls had only small dowries. (But even if Mr Bennet had a son, what if he turned out to be a cold-hearted John Dashwood, under the thumb of a wife who would persuade him not to do anything for his sisters?)
Mr Bennet was the master of a landed estate that had been in his family for several generations -- the very fact that the next male heir was a distant cousin meant that it must have been in the family for several generations when the original settlor created the entail to ensure that it would not be easily sold off or divided but should go to the senior male in the family.
I admit I feel slightly annoyed when I sometimes read of Longbourn being described as a small house, or that Netherfield was much bigger and grander than Longbourn. (If Longbourn was a poor estate, Charlotte would never have married Collins!) Pemberley was of course grander than Netherfield and Longbourn, it was probably on the same scale as Rosings, but with "less of splendour, and more real elegance". I don't think the Darcy townhouse was a grand mansion, it was probably a trim townhouse befitting a man of 10,000 a year. I think part of the reason E found D's pride so offensive was that although he was above her, he was not that far above her -- their marriage would be a brilliant one for her, but not a degrading one for him -- it would have been degrading for him if he had married a servant or a farmer's daughter.
I think when adaptations e.g. P&P3 and fanfics exaggerate the differences, it becomes too Cinderella-like, and diminishes the other aspects of P&P -- the self-reflection and character development of both the main characters. I admit I would like to read stories where the difference of wealth between E&D is reduced rather than exaggerated, but there doesn't seem to be many such stories. Or perhaps I can't seem to find them -- I've read a story where Darcy was a poor curate, but that's an outright reversal of circumstances, not reducing the differences.
Mr Bennet was the master of a landed estate that had been in his family for several generations -- the very fact that the next male heir was a distant cousin meant that it must have been in the family for several generations when the original settlor created the entail to ensure that it would not be easily sold off or divided but should go to the senior male in the family.
I admit I feel slightly annoyed when I sometimes read of Longbourn being described as a small house, or that Netherfield was much bigger and grander than Longbourn. (If Longbourn was a poor estate, Charlotte would never have married Collins!) Pemberley was of course grander than Netherfield and Longbourn, it was probably on the same scale as Rosings, but with "less of splendour, and more real elegance". I don't think the Darcy townhouse was a grand mansion, it was probably a trim townhouse befitting a man of 10,000 a year. I think part of the reason E found D's pride so offensive was that although he was above her, he was not that far above her -- their marriage would be a brilliant one for her, but not a degrading one for him -- it would have been degrading for him if he had married a servant or a farmer's daughter.
I think when adaptations e.g. P&P3 and fanfics exaggerate the differences, it becomes too Cinderella-like, and diminishes the other aspects of P&P -- the self-reflection and character development of both the main characters. I admit I would like to read stories where the difference of wealth between E&D is reduced rather than exaggerated, but there doesn't seem to be many such stories. Or perhaps I can't seem to find them -- I've read a story where Darcy was a poor curate, but that's an outright reversal of circumstances, not reducing the differences.