Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/19272
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

I'm not entirely sure your example demonstrates the lack of public stakes. The world of the novel is the immediate world the character inhabits, a social world that encompasses all the characters whose lives are affected by what happens in the novel. In your Jane Austin example, this would then suggest that the public stakes would be the social standing of, not just her (as in Elizabeth's) family, but also the families of those around her that are affected by decisions made, which in turn has implications for that society.

There are public stakes if Elizabeth does or does not marry Darcy. It would affect her family's standing, and it certainly has implications for Darcy and his family: Darcy initially showed he thought Elizabeth and her family were inferior, and Lady Catherine de Bourgh was dead set against the marriage of Darcy and Elizabeth because she wanted Darcy to marry a cousin instead.

At a more subtle level, choosing to marry someone based on love rather than accepting an arranged marriage and going against what could be seen as normal for the upper classes has wider implications for this sort of society. Perhaps others could be inspired by this and marry for the same reasons, thus changing what was a normal practice.

Most novels are character driven (perhaps a controversial statement, I don't know), it's just that sometimes the "public stakes" are more obvious and literal (for example, in Armageddon, if they don't succeed, the world is going to die), but in others, "public stakes" refers to very specific social and cultural consequences that could just encompass a few groups of people (and perhaps have very subtle effects on society as a whole).

Original score: 2