Class and Social Snobbery in For Richer For Poorer

Definition of Thematic Claim

In For Richer For Poorer, Danielle Steel portrays class snobbery not as an innocent privilege but as a corrosive force that disguises insecurity, fuels racism, and strains the very family ties the protagonist Eugenia Ward struggles to hold together. The novel argues that genuine worth lies in character—not titles, bloodlines, or inherited status—and that snobbery, whether directed at others or internalized, ultimately harms those who practice it.

The Crawfords’ Disdain and Entitlement

The most overt representatives of class snobbery are Prudence and Henry Crawford, the Earl and Countess of Westingham. When they arrive for the wedding, they complain about everything from the cost of hotels to the lineage of the bride’s family. The Crawfords boast of their manor and ancient blood while dismissing whole nationalities: they “take a dim view of the Irish,” hate Germans, and consider Italians worthless. Their contempt for Americans is matched only by their hatred of Catholics—all of Eugenia’s children are Catholic. Yet their own “pauper aristocracy” status is exposed when they shirk financial responsibility for the rehearsal dinner, dumping the cost on Eugenia. The Crawfords’ snobbery is a mask for their declining fortunes; they project superiority precisely because they can no longer afford it. This hypocrisy undercuts their claim to social distinction.

Geoff’s Racism and Entitlement

Geoff Crawford, the groom, inherits his parents’ prejudices and amplifies them with a self-importance that borders on the absurd. In East Hampton, he refuses to engage with anyone at dinner, acting as though “no one at the table was quite good enough for him.” When Sofia Ward brings her boyfriend Brad Jackson, a Black trauma surgeon, Geoff immediately objects. He tells Sofia, “My parents might be upset,” and later threatens to walk out of the wedding if Brad attends. When Eloise Ward defends Sofia, Geoff snaps that Gloria is “lucky to be marrying into a family like ours” because she’ll get a title. Eloise correctly labels him a “racist” and a “pompous, arrogant, entitled” man. Geoff’s snobbery is weaponized racism; he uses his father’s earldom to justify bigotry, and his refusal to respect Brad reveals that class snobbery in the novel is never separate from racial prejudice.

Gloria’s Entitled Demands

Gloria, the bride, oscillates between defending Geoff and embracing the same snobbery. When her mother arranges a rehearsal dinner on Patrick’s yacht after the Crawfords drop the ball, Gloria complains: “Why did you interfere and do it on a yacht so you could show off, when you know Geoff gets seasick?” She dismisses the dinner as “small and skimpy” and accuses Eugenia of disrespecting Geoff’s “sensibilities.” Eugenia calls her out: “How did you get so entitled?” Gloria expects her mother to pay for everything while demanding control, revealing that she has adopted Geoff’s sense of superiority. Her entitlement is a learned behavior, reinforced by her fiancé’s snobbery. Yet Gloria is also a victim: she is already making excuses for Geoff’s behavior (“he’s just tired”), showing how class snobbery warps her judgment and strains her relationship with her family.

Symbol Connections

The symbols in the novel reinforce the theme. The morals clause that Eugenia uses to sever ties with Austin Wylie underscores that integrity transcends class—Wylie’s oil money is tainted, and the clause protects Eugenia’s reputation regardless of her background. Patrick’s yacht, the setting for the rehearsal dinner, symbolizes genuine wealth earned through honest means, in contrast to the Crawfords’ hollow titles. Patrick is modest and generous, never parading his status, while the Crawfords flaunt a crumbling pedigree. Even the Cotton Candy line, a simple ready-to-wear collection, represents Eugenia’s shift from haute couture (elite fashion) to accessible design—a rejection of exclusivity. These symbols collectively argue that class snobbery is a false measure of worth.

Complexity and Contradiction

The novel does not present a simple good-versus-evil dichotomy regarding class. Eugenia herself is not immune to snobbery. She privately muses that her ancestors were “probably horse thieves” in response to the Crawfords’ obsession with bloodlines. She uses her late husband’s Italian title—Umberto di San Benedetto—when it suits her. Her inner thoughts occasionally betray a class consciousness she would deny. Moreover, the Crawfords’ snobbery is partly a reaction to insecurity; they are “pauper aristocracy” struggling to maintain status. Gloria’s entitlement mirrors her mother’s willingness to spend beyond her means for appearances. The complexity lies in the fact that almost every character, even the sympathetic ones, is tangled in class assumptions. The novel suggests that escaping snobbery is difficult, but that recognizing it is the first step—something Eugenia achieves by the end, prioritizing love and resilience over wealth and title.

Study Questions and Answers

1. How do the Crawfords’ attitudes toward different nationalities expose the irrationality of their snobbery?
The Crawfords claim contempt for Americans, Australians, Catholics, Irish, French, Germans, Spaniards, and Italians, yet they admit to having Irish ancestry and rely on American hospitality. Their arbitrary list of prejudices shows that snobbery is not based on genuine cultural knowledge but on a need to feel superior to anyone outside their shrinking circle.

2. In what ways does Geoff’s racism intersect with his class snobbery?
Geoff objects to Brad Jackson not because of Brad’s character—Brad is a respected trauma surgeon—but because Brad is Black. Geoff uses his family’s title to justify excluding Brad, telling Sofia that his “parents might be upset.” He equates racial purity with aristocratic lineage, revealing that his class snobbery is a vehicle for racist ideology.

3. Why does Gloria defend Geoff’s rudeness, and how does this affect her relationship with her mother?
Gloria repeatedly excuses Geoff’s moodiness and entitlement by saying he is “tired” or that his family has different customs. She believes marrying into a titled family elevates her own status, so she tolerates and adopts his snobbery. This causes a painful rift with Eugenia, who confronts Gloria’s “entitled demands” and lack of gratitude, culminating in a heated argument over the rehearsal dinner.

4. How does Eugenia’s own behavior complicate the novel’s critique of class snobbery?
Eugenia uses her former husband’s princely title on her stationery, feels relieved that Episcopalian is “close” enough to the Church of England for the Crawfords, and privately thinks of her ancestors as “horse thieves” in a mocking tone. These moments show that Eugenia is not free of class consciousness, even as she condemns the Crawfords. Her own snobbery is more subtle but still present, making the critique more nuanced.

5. What role does Patrick Hughes play in contrasting genuine merit with empty status?
Patrick is wealthy but understated, never boasting about his success. He offers his yacht for the rehearsal dinner without fanfare, and his relationship with Eugenia develops based on mutual respect and honesty. Unlike the Crawfords, who flaunt a title they can no longer afford, Patrick demonstrates that true class lies in generosity, integrity, and humility—the qualities the novel upholds as superior to any inherited rank.