![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
averygoodun42Now I remember what it was I was going to write about! Jane Austen.
I recently read Sense and Sensibility, Mansfield Park and Persuasion. I thought I had read two of them (S&S and MP) before, but if I had, I had completely forgotten them.
S&S I enjoyed quite a bit, of course. I didn't think it was as good as P&P, but only because I found Marianne to be a terribly embarrassing character. Since she was one of the main characters -- one could argue the main character -- it made the book a bit harder to read for pure enjoyment. THe plotting and pacing was better than P&P, though, I thought, with fuller, more real characters. As much as I love Elizabeth Bennet, I do think she is a bit of a Sue. The other half of Jane's Mary.
Mansfield Park... I didn't like. Her writing was excellent, if punctuationally obscure as always, but I hated ALL the characters. Fanny most especially, although Edmund came in at a close second. By the end of the book I felt the most sympathy for Henry. If Fanny had unbent a little, just a little, and considered and examined Henry's feelings rationally, she might have found that he was in fact in love with her, and he was trying to become a better person for her. It seems very possible to me that had Fanny accepted him, he might have turned out to be a respectable person under her daily (overtly) moral influence.
But she couldn't unbend. She had the larger end of the same stick that was stuck up Edmund's bum... yeah.
Edmund I didn't like because he was a pill. A hypocritical pill. His falling in love with Fanny at the end was terribly convenient, as well. Although, I must say, that having that same stick in common would make marital felicity a bit easier. They know each others feelings quite well.
The rest of the family? I actually felt a bit sorry for Maria, as well. Henry really was a cad to her, but then again, if she had used an ounce of sense, she would have seen him for the player that he was.
Julia probably got the best deal. Not only did she get a husband who wanted to improve, but he had a bit of a sense of humor as well. No acting abilities, though.
I could go on, but I won't. Except to say that I think Mrs. Norris was more vile a character than even Madam Defarge, and I think that's saying something. It would have been interesting to see Austen take on revolutionary propaganda like Dickens did.
At this point in my reading I had gained the opinion that Austen didn't think much of mothers. All the women characters who made motherhood their profession were silly, dimwitted or otherwise inferior. That irks me somewhat. That one of the most popular, widely read female authors was actively denigrating a HUGE part of womens' lives (past and present) is... a shame. Yes, I know the times were very different, but Austen seemed (without knowing a bit of the history, or even her biography) to be a forward thinking, rational person. She obviously could put more than two thoughts together without taxing herself in the slightest, and yet she reiterated the men's party line?
Yes, women would inevitably be mothers, but only the women who put their kids into their governesses care so that they could apply themselves to improving their education in rational thought were worth respect. The business of motherhood itself was not worth a rational woman's time. Unless the mother does the respectable thing and dies young. Then she has the redeeming quality of leaving her children motherless, and therefore earns the sentimental vote of a fond memory.
ahem.
Anyway, as for Persuasion, I really enjoyed it. I'm glad I read it after Mansfield Park as it was a nice relief from unlikable characters.
Anne was delightful. She was everything Fanny should have been. Yes, I know that their circumstances were different, but not terribly. The only (crucial) difference was that Anne had a mother's love for the first 11 (?) years of her life, and was raised the entire time in wealth and privilage. Oh, and there was the presence of Mrs. Norris in Fanny's life. The Baronet and Elizabeth's indifference did not equal the malice of Mrs. Norris.
I started reading Persuasion a while ago, but got bored, or I was read-out or something. Maybe I was basing it on the movie which, IMO, is not very good. Not bad, just boring.
I think I'll like the movie a lot more now.
There were an awful lot of convenient plot twists, but, well, I liked Anne enough that I could overlook them. I was really routing for her. She deserved Captain Wentworth, Worthington... Whatshisname, just for being sensible and loving and likeable. He deserved Anne just because he was likable, charming and good. At the end of that story it was all as it should be, and what higher praise can be given to a fairytale of that sort?
I might read Northanger Abbey sometime this week, although without a good background on Gothic lit, I know I won't get most of the jokes.
Ah well. My being a mother doesn't stop me from enjoying P&P or S&S... ;-j
I recently read Sense and Sensibility, Mansfield Park and Persuasion. I thought I had read two of them (S&S and MP) before, but if I had, I had completely forgotten them.
S&S I enjoyed quite a bit, of course. I didn't think it was as good as P&P, but only because I found Marianne to be a terribly embarrassing character. Since she was one of the main characters -- one could argue the main character -- it made the book a bit harder to read for pure enjoyment. THe plotting and pacing was better than P&P, though, I thought, with fuller, more real characters. As much as I love Elizabeth Bennet, I do think she is a bit of a Sue. The other half of Jane's Mary.
Mansfield Park... I didn't like. Her writing was excellent, if punctuationally obscure as always, but I hated ALL the characters. Fanny most especially, although Edmund came in at a close second. By the end of the book I felt the most sympathy for Henry. If Fanny had unbent a little, just a little, and considered and examined Henry's feelings rationally, she might have found that he was in fact in love with her, and he was trying to become a better person for her. It seems very possible to me that had Fanny accepted him, he might have turned out to be a respectable person under her daily (overtly) moral influence.
But she couldn't unbend. She had the larger end of the same stick that was stuck up Edmund's bum... yeah.
Edmund I didn't like because he was a pill. A hypocritical pill. His falling in love with Fanny at the end was terribly convenient, as well. Although, I must say, that having that same stick in common would make marital felicity a bit easier. They know each others feelings quite well.
The rest of the family? I actually felt a bit sorry for Maria, as well. Henry really was a cad to her, but then again, if she had used an ounce of sense, she would have seen him for the player that he was.
Julia probably got the best deal. Not only did she get a husband who wanted to improve, but he had a bit of a sense of humor as well. No acting abilities, though.
I could go on, but I won't. Except to say that I think Mrs. Norris was more vile a character than even Madam Defarge, and I think that's saying something. It would have been interesting to see Austen take on revolutionary propaganda like Dickens did.
At this point in my reading I had gained the opinion that Austen didn't think much of mothers. All the women characters who made motherhood their profession were silly, dimwitted or otherwise inferior. That irks me somewhat. That one of the most popular, widely read female authors was actively denigrating a HUGE part of womens' lives (past and present) is... a shame. Yes, I know the times were very different, but Austen seemed (without knowing a bit of the history, or even her biography) to be a forward thinking, rational person. She obviously could put more than two thoughts together without taxing herself in the slightest, and yet she reiterated the men's party line?
Yes, women would inevitably be mothers, but only the women who put their kids into their governesses care so that they could apply themselves to improving their education in rational thought were worth respect. The business of motherhood itself was not worth a rational woman's time. Unless the mother does the respectable thing and dies young. Then she has the redeeming quality of leaving her children motherless, and therefore earns the sentimental vote of a fond memory.
ahem.
Anyway, as for Persuasion, I really enjoyed it. I'm glad I read it after Mansfield Park as it was a nice relief from unlikable characters.
Anne was delightful. She was everything Fanny should have been. Yes, I know that their circumstances were different, but not terribly. The only (crucial) difference was that Anne had a mother's love for the first 11 (?) years of her life, and was raised the entire time in wealth and privilage. Oh, and there was the presence of Mrs. Norris in Fanny's life. The Baronet and Elizabeth's indifference did not equal the malice of Mrs. Norris.
I started reading Persuasion a while ago, but got bored, or I was read-out or something. Maybe I was basing it on the movie which, IMO, is not very good. Not bad, just boring.
I think I'll like the movie a lot more now.
There were an awful lot of convenient plot twists, but, well, I liked Anne enough that I could overlook them. I was really routing for her. She deserved Captain Wentworth, Worthington... Whatshisname, just for being sensible and loving and likeable. He deserved Anne just because he was likable, charming and good. At the end of that story it was all as it should be, and what higher praise can be given to a fairytale of that sort?
I might read Northanger Abbey sometime this week, although without a good background on Gothic lit, I know I won't get most of the jokes.
Ah well. My being a mother doesn't stop me from enjoying P&P or S&S... ;-j
