Jane Austen - only for the girls?

Nice one!

Trust you, Aruna!

For those who do actually think that Jane Austen is not for men I suggest reading 'The Janeites' by Rudyard Kipling.

I read her for her wit, social commentary, and biting irony. There's nothing sweet and pretty pretty about Jane's view of her world.

Mr. Darcy is a great character

aruna said:

Here's an interesting article on her:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6426195.stm

And what's with the Mr Darcy thing?

Click to expand...

Both he and Elizabeth learn a lot before they can actually get along.

I'm a man and it seems to me that the dynamic between Darcy and Elizabeth is quite intriguing, not to mention that Elizabeth faces many more disturbing and comic trials and travials within the range of the limited (but omniscient) POV than Darcy does. Elizabeth's attempts to have a difficult nature really are the core of the story....which is why screen versions (for example the 1995 and the very recent one) that cut back on the Charlotte Lucas role throw far too much onto Elizabeth's painfully, comically obvious attempts to have some bad motives.

My husband is fan of P&P plus the rest of Austen's work - go figure a man with five daughters...

I was sorely tempted to name the last one Elizabeth Bennet Graham.

Mr Darcy is hot.

Jane Austen's work was always aimed more at women than men--but that is hardly a law.

My boyfriend loves Jane Austen. We pull out P&P every so often and watch it. We love to chuckle at Mr. Collins.

Purists are going to kill me... but I love the new P&P movie, and I thought the story was sharp, witty, and observant especially when you note the time period and social commentaries. (OK, my fixation on Keira Knightley and the gorgeous soundtrack is a big factor as well.) I love the layers, subtexts, the bickering, etc. Her female characters were strong, and that's very attractive a modern man like me.

I love Jane Austen. I love her so much. She wrote in a way that's still so relevant today. You read her books and you find yourself so often saying "yeah, I know exactly what she means." I love many authors from that era, but I can't say that about any of them except her. And she's funny, cheeky, clever.... I could go on. I love both versions of Pride and Prejudice, but my favourite is Persuasion. Great movie too, but needs updating. I get SO angry at people who think Jane Austen is romance. It's life! It's real life.

I so can't wait for the movie "Becoming Jane". It opens next week. I'm so excited!

And yes, Mr Darcy is hot.

Commenters like the ones at the end of that article (and in the article) are so frsutrating..."Her writing is claustrophobic because she doesn't write about the wars" and "Rich people with servants complaining about being poor."

Bleh. I can't take unimaginative, narrow-minded women like that.

I love Jane, too. I've only read P&P, Emma, and Northanger Abbey (don't know why I haven't gotten around to the others yet) but her prose and characters sparkle.



But sorry, I loathed the Knightley P&P. They changed Elizabeth's character. She didn't cry when she overheard Mr. Darcy saying she wasn't handsome enough to tempt him, she thought it was funny. That's at the very essence of their relationship; that she didn't care what he thought, he didn't hurt her, he lacked the power to do so.

If he hurt her feelings so badly at that initial meeting, it changes her motives for the rest of the story. It changes the power dynamic of their whole relationship and makes her vulnerable to him, when the whole point of the book was that she wasn't, and because she wasn't, she was the one who made him see where his pride had carried him.

Not to mention the revolting sloppy historical innacuracies and innacuracies in general (Mrs. Bennet eyeing the pig's reproductive organs in the hallway was particularly foul, as was the idea that Elizabeth Bennet would have wandered around with her hair down, and especially the idea that Mr. Bingley would have sat at Jane's bedside!)

Or the fact that important and beloved story elements were cut so we could watch Knightley stare at sculptures or views for endless dull moments, looking like a little kid in a dress that didn't quite fit.

Oh, ugh, sorry, but I loathed that film so, so much. My husband hated it too, and I made him watch the original with me one year (and he liked it!) so he's able to judge.

Love Jane Austen but am most in love with Emma and Mr. Knightly myself.

Knowing all of her works gives me great hope as even the great Jane Austen had a dud.

Anyone other than myself ever suffer through Mansfield Park in English class? I was so very bummed at the time, now it just shows, even gifted great writers have off days.

Wasn't Mansfield Park published posthumously? I believe she never finished it so they wrote up the ending from her notes and had it printed. Perhaps that's why you found it lacking?

Well, I've now broken out the Sense and Sensibility DVD and am eyeing both versions of P&P for this afternoon/tomorrow. I wish I had Persuasion, I gave birth to number two while watching it and love the ending. Hmmm, where'd I put my book copy of that?

Mr. Darcy is a studmuffin.

I didnt' really like the Kiera Knightly version of P&P, although in all fairness I thought it was a decent movie -- it just wasn't Pride and Prejudice. There were so many deviations from the original story that it was an entirely different tale altogether. Much of Austen's original wit and satire -- which is present in the A&E version -- is absent.

I love Persuasion too -- Ciaran Hinds is uber-dreamy, and he's perfect for Captain Wentworth.

Interstingly, the one book by Austen that I couldn't stand was Mansfield Park -- not because it was badly written but because Fanny Price is a whiny little git. I thought she was dreadful. Oddly, I watched the movie version with Frances McWhatsername and Johnny Lee Miller, and I really liked it... although it was really nothing like the book. I even got me a little James Purefoy fix out of that one.

Can't wait to see "Becoming Jane" when it comes out, although I can't think of a single person I know who will want to see it with me.

Oh, and for those of you who are into Tarot, I just ordered my new deck -- featuring Eliza and Darcy as The Lovers! Jane Austen Tarot

Persuasion

Mandy-Jane said:

I love Jane Austen. I love her so much. She wrote in a way that's still so relevant today. You read her books and you find yourself so often saying "yeah, I know exactly what she means." I love many authors from that era, but I can't say that about any of them except her. And she's funny, cheeky, clever.... I could go on. I love both versions of Pride and Prejudice, but my favourite is Persuasion. Great movie too, but needs updating. I get SO angry at people who think Jane Austen is romance. It's life! It's real life.

I so can't wait for the movie "Becoming Jane". It opens next week. I'm so excited!

And yes, Mr Darcy is hot.

Click to expand...

Yeah...Persuasion is the best. Bitter, beautiful, funny, economical. One of the best novels of all time.

As I say 2 times a year or so: Fay Wheldon's P&P is best

PattiTheWicked said:

Mr. Darcy is a studmuffin.

I didnt' really like the Kiera Knightly version of P&P, although in all fairness I thought it was a decent movie -- it just wasn't Pride and Prejudice. There were so many deviations from the original story that it was an entirely different tale altogether. Much of Austen's original wit and satire -- which is present in the A&E version -- is absent.

I love Persuasion too -- Ciaran Hinds is uber-dreamy, and he's perfect for Captain Wentworth.

Click to expand...

For P&P, by far the best script is Fay Weldon's for the 1979 BBC miniseries. If you get the most recent DvD release of it, it has a lot that was not on the old video version. This is also the version that the local gang of 11-year-old girls prefers. They do dramatic renditions at dinner parties if you give them a chance. "Charlotte, you are a strange...something by way of a friend...Keep your breath to cool your porridge."

Both the 1995 and the more recent P&Ps just don't have most of the story, though they both have their good points, each tends to reduce the story to a passive ordeal for the MCs, whereas in the 1979 and the novel, Elizabeth and Darcy very obviously cause their own problems.

DecemberQuinn said:

But sorry, I loathed the Knightley P&P. They changed Elizabeth's character. She didn't cry when she overheard Mr. Darcy saying she wasn't handsome enough to tempt him, she thought it was funny. That's at the very essence of their relationship; that she didn't care what he thought, he didn't hurt her, he lacked the power to do so.

Click to expand...

Wait. She didn't cry. She was disappointed because she was attracted to Darcy, but she just brushed him away, and she later had a come back for him: people dance to show affection, even if their partner is barely tolerable.

She didn't get hurt. She even told Jane that night that it was too bad, and they laughed about it.

We must have seen a different movie.

I agree with Aruna, though, that this version definitely has a modern tilt to it, and that's why I say the purists are going to kill me. I do think that it's a good film, especially for the new generation who is not familiar with Austen's work. And I do agree with Aruna that Keira is too lovely to play Elizabeth, but I think they compensate by casting an equally beautiful (at least in a classical way) actress as Jane. Elizabeth is not supposed to be "ugly." She's just not "handsome" enough for Darcy.

Kate Winslet would have been good as Elizabeth, I think.

Anyway, I understand why some people would hate the new, modern version of P&P but I think it's very well done -- gorgeous production, good acting, and exquisite settings and music. Looking at it as a film without the preconception of what P&P should have been, I think it's a marvelous production and if it draws a new generation, including young men, to read the book -- I think it's a good thing.

Of course, we are talking about books, not movies, right?

I think it comes back to the Aruna's first post -- Is Austen only for women? I think they need to modernize the stories and cast lovely actresses in the main roles in the movie versions to lure the young males. And once they get past the superficial, they can understand how wonderful and powerful Austen's stories are.

Problem is...

the KK film simply turned P&P into a Mills and Boon romance. Now that's fine if that's what JA had written, but she didn't did she?

You can't have Jane Austen without her social world. You need to understand class, what life was like for middle and upper class women, the restrictions on them, the small enclosed world they lived in. Oh, of course you can't thrust all that into a film, but unless the film is made with an understanding of those things and what JA was saying about them, then you have things like that ridiculous scene at the end where KK rushed out in her nightie to meet Darcy!!!! Sigh!
JA is not a modern writer and ignoring the social mores of her time means you lose so much depth. You reduce her work to the sort of fairy tale, costume romance the KK film was.

P&P is so much more. Elizabeth will always be quicker witted than Darcy, much more flexible and compassionate, but Darcy is that rare thing, (that's why he's many women's dream man, Aruna!) a man who can change. A man who can accept different ideas and think about them and accept them if they are just. In the social setting of their time he is correct, Elizabeth's family is not suitable for an alliance with Bingley or himself. What he manages to do is see that the characters of Jane and Elizabeth are! Quite something in 1800s.

'Persuasion' has always been my favourite too. Apart from the biting social commentary, what JA has to say about relationships both parental, sexual and marital makes the book worth re-reading every year.

You really can't expect all that stuff in a 100-minute movie. A miniseries, maybe, but not a movie. I hear the same arguments about Peter Jackson "butchering" Tokien's trilogy. But you have to understand the difference between a movie and a book, and to believe one can sufficiently transport all the essence and details of literature to film is a set up for major disappointment.

P&P is so much more. Elizabeth will always be quicker witted than Darcy, much more flexible and compassionate, but Darcy is that rare thing, (that's why he's many women's dream man, Aruna!) a man who can change. A man who can accept different ideas and think about them and accept them if they are just. In the social setting of their time he is correct, Elizabeth's family is not suitable for an alliance with Bingley or himself. What he manages to do is see that the characters of Jane and Elizabeth are! Quite something in 1800s.

Click to expand...

To be fair, I get ALL of that in the KK film. In that sense, I think they did a good job in condensing the film and still get ALL of these points across. It might not be how Austen wrote it, and it might not have everything -- including all the social commentaries and nuances -- but for an adaptation, especially one aiming at a modern audience that may not be familiar with Austen, I really do think we need to be fair.

Such adaptations make me feel a bit icky. I don't think the film should change to suit the audience; I think the audience needs to change to suit the film - that is, it needs to accept P&P isn't a shoot-em-up, explosions and naked girls movie. People need to be willing to try new things rather than insisting 'old' books are given a 'modern' twist to make them more acceptable.

That said, I haven't seen the Keira Knightley adaptation, although I've heard it's been 'up-to-dateified'. I can't seen anything remotely attractive in whatsisface that plays Darcy. I've seen him in other things, mostly Spooks and can't believe any woman would see a smidgeon of sex appeal in him.

I am so TIRED of the complaints that Jane Austen never wrote about the servants or politics. I'd wager that if Jane Austen had been a man, writing about the "middle class" and "domestic concerns" would not be an issue. I don't read her works for a commentary on 19th century class warfare. And I suspect that if she had included such things, her appeal would not be quite so unviersal and her works would not seem quite so ageless as they do even today. We can see Mr. Collinses and Lady Catherines and Mr. Bennets all around us everywhere everyday.

Am I the only one who loves Northanger Abbey above all Jane Austen books? It is certainly the funniest, although not the most subtle.

I didn't much care for the KK version of P&P, but mainly because they made Darcy into a bumbling, shy, misunderstood hero instead of the socially-confident, arrogant jerk who is reformed by the rejection of a strong-willed woman. We had understanding and not conversion, and that just isn't nearly as sexy. I wasn't a huge fan off KK's Elizabeth either. As a movie, this version was fun enough. As an adaptation, it left a lot to be desired and rather missed the point. And that American ending (which I understand the British audiences did not have to suffer) was almost embarassing in its silliness.

While I do not think my husband has read P&P since being forced to in high school, the first time I checked out the A&E adaptation from the library, I watched only two episodes. He dilligently sat with me because I wanted to watch it (or so he said). But then I went to bed, and when I awoke some time later and came downstairs for a glass of water, he was watching the last episode of the series by himself. He quickly reached for the remote as though he had just been caught watching porn.

American ending? What did they change?

Elizabeth and Darcy get on a Harley, and ride off into the sunset while "Freebird" plays in the background.