What is the point of Mrs Norris?

My Jane Austen Rereading Project is more or less at an end (though I may reread one of the better completions of  the novel fragment The Watsons) as I have now finished Mansfield Park. I've already written about Fanny Price, and I hold to my opinion that she is, all in all, a sweet girl who has been too harshly treated by many readers and critics. (However, her reaction to Henry Crawford's and Maria's affair does feel a bit overblown - yes, it's a serious transgression which manages to injure most of the protagonists in some way, but Fanny makes it sound as if they've slaughtered a village). But there are other aspects of Mansfield Park  worth getting into, as after having read and reread the novel they are still a bit of a puzzle to me. One of them is the role of Fanny's Aunt Norris.

Many will associate Mrs Norris with Harry Potter - it's the name of Hogwarts caretaker Filch's cat. I'm pretty sure that her name is inspired by Mansfield Park and is Rowling's way of signalling to her readers that this is an unpleasant animal. Judging from the films, though (I haven't read the Harry Potter books), there is one significant difference between the two Mrs Norrises, apart from one of them being a cat. Filch's Mrs Norris is beloved by her owner, while no-one loves Mrs Norris in Mansfield Park.

The unspeakableness of Mrs Norris is certainly universally acknowledged. She is stingy, officious, petty, stupid and consistently nasty to poor Fanny, whom she treats as a servant while not showing any gratitude for all the errands she makes the girl run for her. She is on the wrong side of any argument, and there is hardly one situation she can't manage to make worse. I can't be the only reader whose heart sinks a little every time Mrs Norris enters the fray. And here is perhaps her worst failing as a novel character: she is no fun to read about. As heroine antagonists go, she doesn't have the villainous glamour of a General Tilney or the entertainment value of a Lady Catherine de Bourgh. She is almost as much of a trial to the reader as to her niece. So why do we have to put up with her?

Something that struck me when rereading the novel is that Mrs Norris doesn't fill much of a plot function. Yes, it's her idea to bring Fanny to Mansfield to start with, but its owner Sir Thomas Bertram could easily have come up with that idea himself. Later, she is active in bringing about the disastrous match between Maria Bertram and the rich and thick Mr Rushworth, but Maria would have been perfectly capable of arranging the match herself. Once Mary and Henry Crawford enter the scene, it is they and the Bertram siblings who drive the plot forward, not Mrs Norris. She is just a hanger-on who can be relied on to do the wrong thing.

So why did Austen include her in the novel? The most important reason is probably to increase Fanny's misery. Fanny's story echoes the Cinderella story in many respects, and Mrs Norris is more reminiscent of the Wicked Stepmother than Lady Bertram, who may take advantage of Fanny but who is in her languid way quite fond of her niece. Then again, one thing to be said for Wicked Stepmothers is that they tend to add spice to a tale in a way Mrs Norris completely fails to do. As I've already mentioned, characters who plague the heroine needn't do the same to the reader. Mary Crawford is a case in point: as the paramour of Fanny's beloved Edmund, no-one makes Fanny more miserable than she does, but she is a delight to read about.

Another possible explanation for Mrs Norris's existence is that Austen may have relished creating a character whom not even the most perverse reader could like. As the Sanditon fragment shows, she was aware that there are readers who will stubbornly root for characters which the author has set up to be warning examples. As a villain-lover, I mostly fall into that category myself, though the rake villain type favoured by Austen isn't really my cup of tea. So if the intention was to force this kind of reader into line - congratulations, Austen, job done. Also, it's probably more enjoyable to write about a thoroughly despicable character than to read about one. Mansfield Park may partly be a tract against self-indulgence, but maybe Austen indulged herself a bit on the part of Mrs Norris.

The best case one can make for the importance of Mrs Norris, I think, is that she acts as a catalyst. Her treatment of Fanny rubs off on the other characters, who would perhaps have treated her with more kindness and respect had they not unconsciously taken their cue from Mrs Norris. The Bertram girls believe they're in the right to despise Fanny, because their aunt agrees with them that she is ignorant. Lady Bertram thinks nothing of employing Fanny to fetch and carry for her because she sees her sister doing the same thing, and at least she does it nicely. Not even Edmund really questions Fanny's inferior position in the family, which makes it easier for him to do her little favours for which she is then suitably grateful. As to Fanny, though I would have preferred Austen to make her suffer in a way less insufferable to the reader, I can't deny that Mrs Norris's behaviour towards her offers a better explanation as to why the girl is so shy and unsure of herself than merely the aloofness of Sir Thomas and the neglect of the rest of the family would have done. She would still have had a hard time at Mansfield Park, but maybe not sufficiently hard to make her what she is.

Mrs Norris is not a badly drawn character - in her awful way, she is believable - and it would probably have been difficult to remove her from the plot altogether, at least not without making the rest of the Bertram family a little worse. Nevertheless, I can't help thinking that we could have done with a great deal less of her.