I'm Running Out of Things to Call These

but the funniest part of this is not that they were debating the exile of a man who has been dead for over 500 years.

She is the more rational choice for Darcy vs. the Bennets. She has education, manners, a fortune, and clearly, relatives that he likes. So many fan fiction authors make her vulgar and/or unfashionable, but she isn't! That is why Darcy enjoys hanging out with her in the beginning; he would not have her at his house if she was embarrassing. Even when angry with Elizabeth, Caroline does not dare go further in attacking Elizabeth at Pemberley. She has self control. She understands boundaries, which Jane and Elizabeth mostly do, but the rest of the Bennet family struggles with. This is why she's a foil for them.

As for Darcy, at the beginning, Caroline is a nearly perfect mirror of his opinions and snobby attitude. She is doing this on purpose as a way of flirting, but it's probably pretty close to her real personality anyway. She's right that Darcy looks down on Elizabeth's uncle being a lower class lawyer. She's right that he finds the Bennet family intolerable to marry into. However, as Darcy falls in love with Elizabeth and then reforms, Caroline's mirror distorts. That shows his growth in the novel. She, like Elizabeth, fails to update her priors, though to be fair to Caroline, she didn't build her knowledge of Mr. Darcy on first impressions. It's harder to change her mind because she did once know him very well.

Side note: this is also why people woobyfying Darcy hurts Caroline as a rational character. They start in a very similar place and love mean girl gossiping together, then he changes. When Darcy's flaws are erased, it makes Caroline look super irrational and much crueller.

an antagonist in a story is someone who stands in the way of the protagonist (not always the same as the main character! but in P&P it is), or at the very least is able to obstruct them, or something else. but caroline is not a villain because after darcy falls in love with elizabeth, she holds no real power. not even influence! she does try to sway darcy away from elizabeth by continuing to make jokes about her and her family, and while it can't be said that darcy doesn't disagree about the family in general, he is very quick to show his colours regarding his feelings for elizabeth. this might and probably does put caroline on the back foot, but she wises up relatively quickly, especially once she sees their behaviour at pemberley. caroline is an annoyance to elizabeth, and hurtful to jane, but she's not a villain. if darcy's opinion of elizabeth had never changed and elizabeth fell in love with him anyway, caroline might have had a villain opportunity then, but his opinion did change and it shuts caroline out of that role completely.

a villain in a story is someone who actually has power to derail things for the protagonist. to use a different example, what would change about the wizard of oz if the wicked witch of the west had lost all her powers, or never had any in the first place? without the ability to affect dorothy's storyline in any meaningful way, she is no longer a threat. caroline was never a real threat to elizabeth, and i believe this is true even before darcy falls in love with lizzie. i don't think miss bingley was ever really a contender to become darcy's wife, at least, not from his point of view. there would have been no point in darcy's waiting to marry her if she had any real shot at it, because we know from the book he can act quickly and decisively if he wants to.

this is why wickham is the true villain of P&P, and the only villain of P&P. it is his destructive impulses (and perhaps liking the idea of revenge) that nearly leads to the bennet family's downfall. the worst part is, they're not really his target. of course, he probably didn't hate the idea of getting to hurt elizabeth in the bargain because she was no longer taken in by him, but his actual target was always darcy and darcy's money, money wickham felt entitled to. the bennets were merely collateral damage in wickham's quest to try to inflict as much damage on darcy's bank account and his reputation and his social standing as he possibly could.

it's also why jane austen is such a brilliant writer, because she's got this whole vengeance plot going on and it's not even directed towards the protagonist! much of it takes place outside of the events of the novel and is already well underway by the time it opens. did wickham benefit from lydia bennet's neglected upbringing and education? absolutely. but even if lydia had never been in the picture, wickham would have still done what he did.

caroline bingley and lady catherine are definitely antagonists to elizabeth's protagonist, but they are not actually able to inflict harm in the way a villain can. i'm not saying they don't try, but they're not villains because they do not realise they don't have as much power as they think.

the thing i can't stop laughing about this is that it reads like an actual sentence you might find in shakespeare, with slight error in tenses (though you could argue that the past tense of "am" could be either "was" or "were").

"would i were [x]" is used in shakespeare frequently. rosalind's "i would i were at home". henry vi's "would i were dead". romeo's "i would i were your bird". i could go on.

If you struggle writing descriptive details when you're using third-person omniscient, it becomes much easier when you switch to a "tighter" POV, like third-person limited or first person. You can come up with descriptive details by imagining what your POV character would notice and find most relevant in the scene.

Here are different people looking at the same tree:

Gary, who hates the outdoors and resents being forced to leave the house: There was a tree. Whatever. I've seen them before. I was more concerned with the giant wasp nest up in the branches. We hadn't even unpacked our camping gear and our weekend was already ruined. I waited for Rachel, itching to tell her "I told you so." No, wait, that itching was mosquitoes. God, I hate it here.

Dave the arborist: I found the tree and immediately realized what was wrong. The canopy was thinning, woodpecker holes, S-shaped larva tunnels under cracked bark... The emerald ash borer. This poor thing was infested.

Zenith the witch: The tree was more twisted than a maze, with more knots than a hangman's noose. A staff carved from this tree could warp a knight's bones and bend a castle wall until it fell to bits. But first, you had to straighten it. And I had just the spell.

Terry the Tree: I looked across the clearing and saw another tree, and immediately realized that it didn't have eyes. In fact, none of the other trees did. Why am I the only one with a face? Am I a monster? Oh god oh god oh god...

*puts a dandelion in your hair*