Here’s a look at another passage from Mansfield Park.

     In Mansfield Park, Jane Austen uses an assortment of styles to establish her narrative thought, and a close analysis of each variant reveals the underlying manipulations of the reader’s vision of the characters. Free indirect discourse, which linguistically equates a character’s thoughts with the rest of the narrative, serves also to establish a deeper connection between the speaker of the thoughts and the narrator. Linguistically, free indirect discourse places thoughts in the main clause rather than a secondary one. This structurally aids Austen’s efficacy of bringing Fanny to the forefront of situations, when she wants to be, rather than an afterthought. This style is also especially effective in this novel because the narrator presents a seemingly straightforward and unbiased account of happenings at Mansfield Park, which creates a trust in which the reader accepts the narrator’s accounts as unquestionable. Free indirect discourse’s ability to diminish boundaries between the narrator and speaker permits an interesting analysis of specific passages and their importance to the entire novel.
     The following passage illustrates Fanny’s response to Henry’s marriage proposal with the free indirect discourse technique:
She was feeling, thinking, trembling, about every thing; agitated, happy, miserable, infinitely obliged, absolutely angry. It was all beyond belief! He was inexcusable, incomprehensible!--But such were his habits, that he could do nothing without a mixture of evil. He had previously made her the happiest of human beings, and now he had insulted--she knew not what to say--how to class or how to regard it. She would not have him be serious, and yet what could excuse the use of such words and offers, if they meant but to trifle? (Austen 206)

    This passage not only reveals Fanny’s intricacy with her conflicting emotions, but it also internalizes her thoughts, rather than quoting them as spoken dialogue, which makes them feel more personal. This intimacy of her thoughts creates an honesty in them that cannot exist in her dialogue because her politeness and good manners prevent her from speaking entirely truthfully. Even if Austen had quoted this passage as Fanny’s thoughts, the effect would decrease the passion in her emotions--the confusion she feels between appreciation of Henry’s service to her brother and disgust at his proposal--because the ideas seem too abstract even to put into definite thoughts, and “she [knows] not what to say.” Therefore, Fanny becomes more relatable to the reader because of the closeness one experiences with her conflicts.
     Since this narration style questions the liminal boundary between the narrator and the character’s thoughts, it also seems to encourage readers to accept the character’s opinions and feelings through the narrator’s assertions. Thus, Fanny’s alleged declaration that Henry is “inexcusable” and “incomprehensible” might actually be the narrator’s opinion, which legitimizes Fanny’s dislike of his character. Austen manipulates the reader by allowing this ambiguous narration style to imply that the idea that Henry “could do nothing without a mixture of evil” is not necessarily limited to only Fanny--even if the rest of the family encourages the alliance between the two. Instead, some unseen, superior force acknowledges Fanny’s acute judge of character and applauds her decision, thus encouraging the reader also to advocate Fanny’s refusal.
     Since Fanny’s arrival at Mansfield Park, the other characters have repeatedly distinguished Fanny as being different from her cousins and the Crawfords. In Fanny’s internal response to Henry’s proposal, the narrator makes a similar distinction without the pejorative implications. Rather, Austen’s exploitation of the narration shows that Fanny’s intuition of Henry’s nature is accurate--since it is stated as more of a fact than Fanny’s thoughts by the narrator. Thus, her adamant refutation of Henry’s proposal, despite his status in society, serves to set Fanny apart from the other, greedy girls in a very positive light. This narration is so significant because it provides the reader’s connection with the main character who otherwise has few qualities of an intriguing protagonist.