In Honour and Affection
Ah, Henry Tilney, who had the good fortune of having the woman he loved and the one (and ONLY one) whose affections he strongly encouraged to be one and the same. I've heard it can get rather awkward, when that is not the case; and might require a firm blow to the head of at least one of the persons involved to solve that.
Yet still, despite this good fortune, I have often seen him pitied. Apparently he doesn't love Catherine at all and had to basically be forced to the altar at gunpoint, more or less, his own superior conscience the sole motivating factor for his proposal.
And why is that? Why, of course, because there's the mention of honour as well as affection. So clearly, only the one plays a part, the other is neglible or mentioned out of kindness, I guess, and clearly Henry's being honour-bound is all his father's fault and so, he is doomed to live with a wife he does not really love and it is all very unromantic, isn't it?
... Okay enough sarcasm, I'm sorry. I'm not but let's pretend I am and instead look at the text, why don't we.
[Henry] felt himself bound as much in honour as in affection to Miss Morland, and believing that heart to be his own which he had been directed to gain, no unworthy retraction of a tacit consent, no reversing decree of unjustifiable anger, could shake his fidelity, or influence the resolutions it prompted.
Now, I know certain adaptations choose to have Henry use these words in his proposal, having him say them to Catherine directly, but actually? At that point they, between the two them, had already long agreed on the marriage bit and do consider each other engaged. Henry already has gained what he came to claim (and then visited Mrs Allen with Catherine, this bit being on the way BACK from the Allens, whereas the proposal is on the way TO the Allens). Now he only explains all the rest, so that the reader, and Catherine, can understand the plot.
So, he doesn't use these words to propose, but he still tells Catherine, doesn't he? Well, the text does not directly state that -- We are told he gives some of the reasons for his father's treatment of Catherine and he recounts the events of his falling out with his father, and the free indirect discourse here implies that those were, roughly, the words he spoke to the general on that occasion, but whether he also gives Catherine a detailed explanation of the reasons behind his feelings in that precise moment isn't clear.
This might be only for the reader, to better understand what happened and gain an understanding Catherine doesn't really need; or maybe will gain at a later point, or perhaps needn't be told at all, understanding Henry without the words.
Because there is something to be understood here, but it's not that Henry wants to marry Catherine out of obligation.
It's that he is doing the RIGHT thing in marrying her. Even though his father forbids the match and as a son he ought to obey his father, indeed, it is his duty to do so, this act of disobedience isn't wrong.
But, in such a cause, his anger, though it must shock, could not intimidate Henry, who was sustained in his purpose by a conviction of its justice.
It is justified.
Henry has encouraged Catherine's affection for him, has given her every reason to believe her feelings returned (and actually does return them, yes), has raised her hopes and, in short, treated her as a man only ought to treat a woman he means to marry. And his father had part in this, giving his "tacit consent", until retracting it out of anger, and actually encouraged Henry to gain Catherine's heart, little as such encouragement was necessary, even going so far as to make several, not at all subtle allusions to such a match; so really, Henry is not the only one honour-bound in this and by saying outright that Henry is NOT ONLY bound by affection, but honour as well, it once again stresses how badly the general is acting in this.
Catherine has no legal claim on Henry at that point; there would be no breech of promise, so General Tilney is not going against the law in what he is doing. But that doesn't make it any less immoral. Remember that we are English, that we are Christians. Those same values Henry invoked earlier are also relevant here. And as such, the general should not be demanding of Henry what he does and Henry is right in not complying.
And when it's about duty? Honour weighs more heavily than feelings.
The text makes it clear, that General Tilney does not, and likely never did, care for the feelings of his children (The general, accustomed on every ordinary occasion to give the law in his family, prepared for no reluctance but of feeling, no opposing desire that should dare to clothe itself in words,) so simply claiming that Henry should be allowed to marry Catherine because he loves her would do very little.
But what the general DOES care for is his public image. By invoking honour, there's also the veiled threat of the smirch this affair would bring on the family's image, were word of it to get out. The argument of honour might actually persuade the general, because the dishonourable conduct of the son could reflect badly on him; and again, the son was not the only one raising hopes.
It does not sway General Tilney (and likely was a futile effort, considering what we know of Frederick and that even if he had proposed to Isabella, he would have still faced strong opposition) but it's a better argument than just affection. Because no one, not a single person and certainly not society as a whole, could argue that a son's duty to his father persists, if to be dutiful means to be dishonourable.
And finally even if he told Catherine in precisely those words, why would that be bad?
The text states as much in honour as in affection. So what this says is that his sense of honour MATCHES the affection he feels for Catherine. It's not that it's mostly honour and little or no affection, it's not that he flirted with her, encouraged her, gave her every reason to feel special, while not actually feeling any of it -- No, he did all that because he fell in love with her and now loves her, deeply, and he is aware of what he did. He encouraged her precisely as much as he wanted her encouraged and created two ties of equal strength.
Everyone, based on Henry's words and actions, could see why he should marry Catherine, to do right by her. It's a fact. But just as much as he should, he wants to! And if he told Catherine that, that his love for her is just as great and firm and irrefutable as the clear obligation created by honour.... Why, I think that's quite lovely. A nice compliment and a reassurance worth having; though, at this point, I don't think she had any doubts left in that regard ;)
