web counter
 

Emma by Jane Austen

By Caroline | Posted Under Book Reviews | Comments (54)

emma2_gwenythflowersw.jpg

WHOA WHOA WHOA. Look. I don’t mind that someone kept it a secret from me for the last decade that Jane Austen is amazing; I don’t even mind that my eighth-grade literature teacher — one of the worst teachers I’ve ever had — instead made us read Charles Dickens at age 13 though his prose is thick and overly wordy and Austen’s is straight, clean, and utterly readable. All I can say is that I’m glad I read The Jane Austen Book Club and was told that I needed to read Austen in short order.

Let’s get back to the book. Emma is a timeless tale of a meddling young woman, the same as many I’ve known in my life but several-times-over more wealthy and with much more time for mischief. She goes through the story making misguided attempts to bring her friends and acquaintances together, romantically, and fails over and over. She is also comically haughty about the small rural community in which she and her father live, and on which she imposes a strict social hierarchy.

The wonderful part of all this, besides that it reminded me of the sweet meddling of high-school and college friends and their matchmaking, is the way Austen voices each character in the story. Emma is so righteous and passive-aggressive that she fringes on unlikable, if she weren’t counterweighted by the utterly sane Mr Knightley — they would make a good comedy team, he the straight man, she the flibbertigibbet. Emma’s father is paranoid and of delicate health, which comes out in his frequent laments over the women in his life who have married away: he refers to them all as “poor so-and-so,” as if they’ve come down with a life-threatening illness.

And in this small town, Emma and her father are the superstars. When Emma makes an awful remark to an old family friend, Knightley points out to her that others will follow as she leads, even if she intended the comment in good humor. I loved the contrast between outward Emma, so seriously denying every compliment and dodging people’s praise, and private Emma, thinking herself their better and absorbing every good word as if it were her last.

I loved this book, and read it as quickly as one can read a 450-page book from the early 19th century. The language wasn’t off-putting at all and Austen’s faux-haughty tone added great depth to the story and character development. In fact, I laughed out loud a lot of times at the tiny society Emma cultivates and culls down to a few, only to find that her ideas of appropriate matches are a complete disaster. Not even the brightest, most cerebral girl in town can choose for others what they must choose for themselves.

This review is part of the Cannonball Read series. For more of Caroline’s reviews, check out her blog, Of a Golden Age.










Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← The 2010 Academy Awards Open Thread | The Truth Behind the Oscars' Crazy-White-Kanye Lady →









Comments

Meet a Rich Match on

w w w.D i a m o n d R o m a n c e . c o m

The bestclub for
seek ing the rich s i n gl es, sex y beauties. ...what's the most important is that you don't have to be a milli onaire, but you can me et one. ...

Meet a Rich Match on

w w w.D i a m o n d R o m a n c e . c o m

The best club for
seek ing the rich s i n gl es, sex y beauties. ...what's the most important is that you don't have to be a milli onaire, but you can me et one. ...

Posted by: happyone at March 8, 2010 8:39 AM

I love me some Austen. Pride & Prejudice is the most popular, but I always loved Sense & Sensibility more. I have watched the movie of Emma, but not read the book. I need to rectify that immediately.

Great review!

Posted by: Commander Strikeher at March 8, 2010 8:59 AM

I love most of Jane Austen's work, but I hated Emma with the fire of a thousand suns. Not the book. I think I kind of liked the book. I hated Emma the character. She's not very nice, and I disliked that she got SPOILER Mr. Knightly in the end. END SPOILER. Actually, it's hardly a spoiler if you know any of Jane Austen's works at all. The heroine always gets her man. But Emma is my least favorite Jane Austen work.

Posted by: BWeaves at March 8, 2010 9:26 AM

Love me some Austen. I adore Persuasion, and Sense and Sensibility, and Pride and Prejudice will always have a special place on my shelf.

I just love how gently teasing she is when it comes to describing some of the vain, rich, and silly people that surround her generally decent main characters. Mrs Bennet is a hoot, as is Lady Catherine.

Posted by: linny at March 8, 2010 10:19 AM

Oooh, BWeaves, I hated Emma as a character too. The ending ticked me off, but she did learn and grow and blah blah blah.
I love Persuasion and Pride and Prejudice the best, and I also have a soft spot for Mansfield Park. It's certainly not one of the better ones, but the story is so sweet.

Posted by: Blonde Savant at March 8, 2010 10:26 AM

I just went to the Austen exhibition in The Morgan in NYC. They have most of her surviving letters to her family. The writing is super small and faded but the letters are incredibly entertaining. She comes across as someone who would fit in perfectly on Pajiba: witty, very with it, commenting with fabulous sarcasm on the fashions of the day. Wonderful!

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 10:27 AM

Spoiler alert.

For me, the major turning point was that Emma took to heart Knightley's comments when she said that mean thing to one of the Bates women. Before that, her world view was completely inward-looking, and she kept screwing up other people's lives but assuming it wasn't such a big deal.

Posted by: caroline at March 8, 2010 10:53 AM

Oooh, I want to see that Morgan exhibit! I hope I get the chance in the next six days before it closes.

I already said this on the original review, but one of the things that kept me from hating Emma, the girl, was imagining Alicia Silverstone as Cher. I probably would've wanted to throttle her all the time, instead of only a few times, if that association hadn't existed. Loved, loved, loved the book though.

Posted by: SaBrina at March 8, 2010 10:54 AM

For any Pajibans in the D.C. Metro-area, the group I facilitate at the Bethesda Library is discussing Emma on Tuesday, 16 March.

And I'd like to offer up a tiny defense of Dickens, whom I love: Instead of thinking of him as "thick and overly wordy," maybe you could consider him a hearty stew to Austen's simple and elegant spinach tofu soup. Both are delicious.

Also, I'll pre-emptively mention that no, Dickens was never paid by the word for his fiction. (He was paid by the word for his journalism; that's how many journalists are still paid today.) When Dickens was writing for others, before he got his own magazine, he was paid by the installment. And, much like a tv show needs about 22 minutes of program to fill a half-hour slot, Dickens knew how much he needed to write to fill in the space alloted for serialized fiction. (Dickens eventually started his own magazine, All the Year Round, when the publishers of Household Words refused to publish Dickens's justification for leaving his wife for the actress Ellen Ternan.)

(Oh, and one last bit of gossip-mongering: it's interesting to look at how many literary magazines start to spring up once Dickens hits the scene. Very few people wanted to work with Dickens as an editor because he was mostly a dick. Rather than publish through him, authors would start their own magazines.)

Posted by: Mike B. at March 8, 2010 11:18 AM

Her letters are wonderful! She was such a GOSSIP, it's hilarious. Although near the end it gets sad because of her declining health. :(
Try and get a copy of them (I think there are several editions, with either all the letters or a selection), I really recommend them.

I never really really liked Emma, mostly because I never really warmed up to any of the characters. P&P and especially Persuasion are my favourites. But then again I used to haaaaaaate Mansfield Park with a passion for years until I finally reread it earlier this year and ended up really liking it. So I guess Emma is due for a reread!

What I love most about Jane Austen are her characters, so lifelike! We all know a [insert character here] and that's what makes the books so amusing and relevant even 200 years later. :)

Posted by: Linda at March 8, 2010 11:21 AM

So glad you've discovered the joy of Austen, Caroline. I really didn't like the character of Emma the first time I read the book, but after seeing "Clueless" and imagining her a bit more like Cher, I found her a lot less dislikeable the second time I read the book.

Reading your review just reminds me that I really do have to get round to reading "Mansfield Park", which is now the only one I have yet to read. Maybe over Easter, when I have some time off school. Need only light fluff when I'm working, and it turns out even Austen is too heavy-going.

Posted by: Malin at March 8, 2010 11:34 AM

Well said, Mike B. I always feel that Dickens gets a hard time (no pun intended) on this here Pajiba. I think we also have to remember that although Austen pre-dates Dickens, she was actually writing in a more liberal environment (Regency England) and was able to be more openly mocking of ridiculous clergymen and societal snobs whereas Dickens was writing in repressed Victorian times when propriety and piety were everything. In Dickens' time there would be absolutely no redemption for Lydia Bennett: the family would have had to cast her off forever; and Mr. Collins would have been perceived as rightfully obsequious to his benefactor. So Dickens had to find his fun in other ways.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 11:46 AM

If you haven't seen the Gwyneth Paltrow version of Emma yet, DON'T. SO AWFUL. I spent the whole movie wanting to stab Emma. But the PBS/BBC miniseries that was recently made, with Johnny Lee Miller as Mr. Knightly, is quite lovely. The girl who played Emma was funny and charming enough that you could see why everyone put up with Emma and everything about it was just worlds better.

Posted by: mandasarah at March 8, 2010 12:52 PM

Strangely enough, I think Emma is my favorite Jane Austen character. She just keeps getting it wrong, even with the best intentions. And I detest women like Jane Fairfax, unendurably perfect!! Perhaps I'm just a catty person.

someone mentioned disliking Mansfield Park and going back to re-visit it; I need to do a re-read of all of them I think. Maybe where I was in my life when I read Emma made her more appealing; and I never could abide Fanny Price.

And that's what I love most about Jane Austen; I feel like I'm talking about real people who live down the street or something when I discuss her characters.

Posted by: banana at March 8, 2010 12:54 PM

@ PaddyDog: "Dickens was writing in repressed Victorian times when propriety and piety were everything."

What's so frustrating is to read about the actual lives of the actual people, and then to remember again about the Polite Fiction of the conservative morality of the. (Sort of exactly what we have today, no?) Dickens carried on with an actress after abandoning his wife. Wilkie Collins kept two separate households, though didn't marry either of the women. George Eliot would walk several miles to a party with her already-married lover George Henry Lewes, only to have to turn around and walk home alone because she wasn't welcomed in the house. Mary Elizabeth Braddon lived with a still-married man whose wife was in an insane asylum.

These people -- and I love them all -- are just hot messes. They're socially trapped by these false ideas of morality. That we aren't doing better at all today probably means something about the nature of society.

Posted by: Mike B. at March 8, 2010 1:09 PM

@ banana: "someone mentioned disliking Mansfield Park and going back to re-visit it; I need to do a re-read of all of them I think. Maybe where I was in my life when I read Emma made her more appealing; and I never could abide Fanny Price."

Mansfield Park is my favorite of all the novels. (Followed superclosely by Lady Susan.) But, like you, and others, I didn't like it at all my first time through. I think I wanted the novel to be a mirror; I wanted to see myself reflected in the heroine (nevermind that I'm a thirtysomething guy in Rockville, Maryland) rather than allowing the novel to be a door to a different way of being.

Fanny Price is unlikeable. She's also always right. I think the book ends up being almost achingly sexy, with Fanny's sadomasochistic reliance on passivity and moral fortitude. I also think about the ways Fanny and I are different (beyond penis/vagina) -- the biggest one being how often I'm willing to compromise my ideals in order to just move any process along. Fanny would never do that.

Also -- think about the marriage at the end of the novel. Is it a success? Who is happy and why?

Finally: Mary Crawford is one of Jane Austen's greatest creations. It's a shame Austen didn't have the courage to redeem her in the end.

Posted by: Mike B. at March 8, 2010 1:16 PM

Mike B:

I agree with your take on Mary Crawford. I always felt that she would have done Edmund a world of good by marrying him and injecting some personality into him. Emma may be people's least favourite Austen heroine, but Edmund is my least favourite Austen hero. He really needs to lighten up. He displays none of the wit or presence of the typical Austen prize man. I've always felt she had planned a different ending and changed some of her characters' arcs after beginning the book.

On a side note, it was quite interesting to see the most recent PBS Emma since Jonny Lee Miller played Mr. Knightly and was able to infuse the character with quite a lot of humour whereas when he played Edmund, I just wanted to give him some Benefiber.

Shit, I wish I still lived in DC (I spent 5 years there) and could go to your book club. My neighbourhood book club is just an excuse for the ladies to get together and drink wine (not that there's anything wrong with that).

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 1:40 PM

I forget to mention that I don't think Fanny Price is totally unlikeable. I think she's scared to death of doing the wrong thing: her mother defied convention and look where it got her. Her cousins can afford to take some chances, but Fanny can never go back and has to make sure she never errs.

On the other hand, I have often wondered how much of Cassandra's influence is in parts of Mansfield Park. By all accounts, Cassandra was quite morbid and determined to be a martyr (I'm basing most of this on Claire Tomalin's excellent biography) and if you read her letters to Jane, there are many echoes of Fanny Price in there.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 1:44 PM

PaddyDog:

"I agree with your take on Mary Crawford. I always felt that she would have done Edmund a world of good by marrying him and injecting some personality into him."

YES! And, likewise, Henry Crawford could probably use a dose of Fanny Price.

The thing that I find frustrating in the Fanny/Edmund pairing [that's not a spoiler, right? I mean, one doesn't read Austen for the mystery-fun of the weddings] is that Edmund has proved himself unworthy of Fanny. I would think that a prig like Fanny would write off someone who would choose Mary Crawford over her.

And also agreed: I'm rarely wowed at all by the romantic hero in Austen's novels -- unless it's Captain Wentworth. The other men all seem...English. And they all run together for me. Except Henry Tilney, whom I especially hate, with his love of muslin and his patronizing ways. He's a Larry Craig situation waiting to happen.

Posted by: Mike B. at March 8, 2010 1:52 PM

"I forget to mention that I don't think Fanny Price is totally unlikeable. I think she's scared to death of doing the wrong thing: her mother defied convention and look where it got her. Her cousins can afford to take some chances, but Fanny can never go back and has to make sure she never errs."

Your take is better than mine. I completely agree with it.

I haven't read the Claire Tomalin biography; however, knowing that Cassandra's responsible for burning so many of Austen's letters, I think it's probably completely correct to read some of Cassandra in Fanny Price. Fanny's a total letter-arsonist.

Posted by: Mike B. at March 8, 2010 1:56 PM

Ha! Henry Tilney = Larry Craig. Beautiful.

I think we can agree that the statute of limitations on spoilers expires when the book has been published for well over 100 years.

However, we can't agree on Austen's men. It's always been a curiosity to me that so many men (even those who get Austen) don't like her men. Let's discount Tilney because no-one really knows what Jane was doing with Northanger Abbey. The whole book is off. Edmund, as I've said needs to have his bowels cleaned out on a regular basis, but Captain Wentworth, Colonel Brandon, Mr. Knightly, they're all fine men, even Edward Ferrars when he's not being played by Hugh Grant is an interesting man. And let's face it, in Mr. Darcy, Austen created the Lloyd Dobler of her day. After the Regency ladies met Mr. Darcy in print, no man was ever going to quite shape up.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 2:11 PM

@banana: I too love Emma the most. I think it's because she grows the most as a character, and learns from her own mistakes. I love Austen's voice in this novel and her critique of Emma's small community.
I have grown up on Austen's work and I really really hated Mansfield Park. It's like she took everything I love about her writing - fearless heroine, dumb and lacklustre supporting characters, biting satire and turned it on its head. The heroine is a dull holier-than-thou shrinking violet, the brilliant Mary Crawford is represented as the villain of the piece and the love interest is Fanny's cousin (yuck) who manages the almost impossible task of being duller than Fanny. Austen went from wry and subversive into literal and sanctimonius in one novel. Quite a feat if you ask me. I still think she was pulling our collective chain with that one. Or she got her hands on some good laudanum

Posted by: astounded at March 8, 2010 2:11 PM

Mike B. and everyone here, I wish we could have a pajiba get-together! great insight on why I *should* like Mansfield park...but Astounded has my back. Not that I won't give it another read!

What did you all think about the adaptation of Persuasion (the one with Amanda Root)? I have yet to persuade (haha) my husband to read any Jane, but he's seen all the movies I have and Anne Elliot is his favorite. She's also my dad's favorite (partly why my name is Anne!)--so guys out there, who is *your* favorite Jane Austen character?

Posted by: banana at March 8, 2010 2:23 PM

OH and Mike B, have you read the atrocity called "Drood" by Dan Simmons? It started out so promising but was about 500 pages too long. Interesting premise but I was heartily sick of both of my beloved Wilkie and Charles by the end of it.

Posted by: banana at March 8, 2010 2:24 PM

@ astounded: "It's like she took everything I love about her writing - fearless heroine, dumb and lacklustre supporting characters, biting satire and turned it on its head."

I'll meet you half-way on some of these (not because you asked me to, but because I'm bossy) -- but I think Aunt Norris is one of Austen's greatest narcissistic achievements. And Lady Bertram -- and Lady Bertram's dogs? Yes please.

I don't ever find Fanny dull. But she's always going to be overshadowed by the Little Miss Sunshine that is Lizzie Bennett. I really like PaddyDog's fear-based morality spin she has on Fanny's character; and I think Austen wanted to try her hand at something unexpected.

But yeah: Mary Crawford is brilliant in the novel, and Austen has to do some pretty serious acrobatics (poorly, I agree) to get Mary Crawford in her right place. I think that maybe subconsciously Austen got caught up and captivated by Mary Crawford, and then had to remind herself, "The novel's not about her."

And all of this is why I like the novel maybe more than the others. There seems to be more there to grapple with. Austen actually has an argument other than the irony of marriage.

Posted by: Mike B. at March 8, 2010 2:29 PM

@ banana: I HATED DROOD.

"What's that you say?" I remember thinking. "A novel with both Charles Dickens and Wilkie Collins? This, Universe, more than makes up for the six extra years of adolescent acne that followed me into my mid-20s AND the fact that my mom and I shared a hair-style for most of my high school years. Thank you, Universe, thank you."

And then I read it. And then I just spent days mad at the world. Or, specifically, the Universe.

Not only did Simmons get basic facts about Wilkie Collins wrong, he would insert these rambling digressions of all the things he found out about Dickens from Wikipedia into the novel. I don't need to know how many horses Dickens owned.

Posted by: Mike B. at March 8, 2010 2:33 PM

Aunt Norris and Lady Catherine are the strong female characters whom we all love to hate. But they also get the action going and are the main plot catalysts in both P&P and MP.To me it seems that Austen had a limited stock of female character outlines: plucky, witty heroine (Lizzy, Emma, Mary C.), insipid matriarch (mrs Bennet, Mrs Bertram), the scheming aunt, the insufferable bore (Mary Bennet, Fanny Price, Jane Fairfax) and then spun them around for her own amusement, trying out various combinations.

Posted by: astounded at March 8, 2010 2:37 PM

There's not nearly enough love for Northanger Abbey in this thread! It's so often dismissed because it's a parody (of Gothic horror novels), but the characters are universally wonderful. Henry Tilney isn't a half-formed mess--he's witty and charming. The problem is that he's observed through Catherine's dim, starstruck eyes.

And the writing in Northanger Abbey is uproarious. Do give it another read and appreciate it on its own terms rather than in comparison to Austen's other novels.

Posted by: Joanna at March 8, 2010 2:42 PM

I think we have to remember that Mansfield Park was written after Jane, her sister and her mother had been through their worst period of financial stress and had finally landed in relative security at Chawton. It's likely that her thoughts on life had changed a little because of that. She may at that point have valued keeping ones head down and securing a nice little cottage much more than she did before.

Also, we can't judge the cousin-on-cousin relationship too harshly. It was common among the aristocracy to marry close-degree relatives (that's why they are so X-files looking today) so there was nothing icky there in Jane's mind.

I also think Lady Bertram is a great subtle message character. Her sister marries out of physical attraction but marries beneath her and lives a pretty miserable life once the multiple kiddies come along. Lady Bertram marries for position as she was brought up to do but is equally miserable with her lot because she didn't marry for good reasons. I think Jane is showing us that the only option that would work well would be to marry someone that you can laugh and talk about books with and share some values with. Mary and Henry Crawford represent all the choices: Mary is exciting and witty and very kind but ultimately flawed in judgment. Henry is fun and great to be with and boosts a girl's morale quite a bit, but it would never last. Edmund and Fanny's marriage may seem too safe, but I can see why safe based on deep affection and an ability to talk to each other would be very attractive to Jane Austen.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 2:52 PM

I agree that they had a slightly different view on cousin-on-cousin action. However, the Bertrams are at first wary of having Fanny there because of the possibility of incest between her and one of her cousins. Later on, that aspect is disregarded

Posted by: astounded at March 8, 2010 2:59 PM

astounded:

Yes, they are concerned about one of the boys forming an attachment to her early in the book but I don't read that as a fear of incest, it's simply that they have far bigger plans for the boys and they don't want them distracted by her.

Remember Jane's brother Henry married his first cousin Eliza and there is nothing to indicate that anyone in the Austen family was opposed to this.

In Mansfield Park, Mrs. Norris says it's "morally impossible" for them to fall in love if they are brought up as brother and sister in response to Lord Bertram's fear that they would fall in love as cousins. There's an important distinction there I think.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 3:28 PM

@Mike B yes...furious with the universe over Drood. What a colossal waste of my precious reading time!

I hear you on the love for Northanger Abbey Joanna. I really, really loved it and it almost stands alone for me, I can't quite compare it to the others though it has all the usual elements. And don't forget, it contains Jane's wonderful Defense of the Novel passage! (very out of character for her to insert an authorial voice in one of her books...but I love it still).

Posted by: banana at March 8, 2010 3:46 PM

Thirding Northanger Abbey. I read it soon after Emma, and while it wasn't as great, it was still very funny.

Posted by: SaBrina at March 8, 2010 4:23 PM

banana, I ADORE the Amanda Root version of Persuasion. Ciaran Hinds is the perfect Captain Wentworth, and I just love.

Posted by: linny at March 8, 2010 4:58 PM

banana:

I completely forgot that question until linny brought it up. I love the Amanda Root adaptation. She hits Anne Eliot perfectly. Ciaran Hinds nails the role of Wentworth and I love the supporting cast. Casting another Irish actor as Wentworth's sister (Fiona Shaw) made them seem so much more like brother and sister. Sophie Thompson is the perfect Mary. Corin Redgrave: no-one plays an asshole like Corin Redgrave.

Contrast it with that dreadful version with guppy-mouthed Sally Hawkins that came out last year. Total mis-interpretation of Anne Eliot; guy who played Wentworth was way too young. Ugh!

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 8, 2010 5:16 PM

I wish I'd gotten in on this thread a little earlier. I love Emma. And I'm with you, caroline: she changes. I think that was the point. And I love Knightley. I want to marry someone like that -- dry, sarcastic, but good-hearted and practical and wise. Maybe not twenty years older than me, though.

And maybe Gwyneth Paltrow as Emma was shrill, but I loved that scene where -- SPOILER!! Istermay Eltonyay iestray otay oposepray inya ethay arriagecay. Ahay ahay ahay!! Alanyay Ummingcay asway itchpay-erfectpay!!

And while Austen's heroines always get their man, we don't know who that man is for most of Emma, which ratchets up the fun factor.

Posted by: Jelinas at March 8, 2010 5:26 PM

I'm trying to catch up with the great conversations -- so apologies for the length of this comment.

@ astounded: "To me it seems that Austen had a limited stock of female character outlines: plucky, witty heroine (Lizzy, Emma, Mary C.), insipid matriarch (mrs Bennet, Mrs Bertram), the scheming aunt, the insufferable bore (Mary Bennet, Fanny Price, Jane Fairfax) and then spun them around for her own amusement, trying out various combinations."

Here's the pass I give Mrs Bennett: she's got six daughters and she has to get them married off RIGHTNOW. And some of those daughters (*cough*Lydia*cough*) are going to be a real chore to get wed. Plus, she's got a non-partner in Mr Bennett and what's a woman to do? She's not a favorite; however, I give her much love.

@ Joanna: I love Isabella Thorpe. I quote the line "I wear nothing but purple now: I know I look hideous in it, but no matter" all the time -- partly because it's true; I do look hideous in it. But also because it nicely encapsulates the things I've done for the wrong man.

@ PaddyDog: "(that's why they are so X-files looking today)"

Yes, please.

Also, Mendel isn't for almost a hundred more years, so folks didn't have a firm handle on heredity. I think the hope was, as long as you didn't end up with Carlos II of Spain (who was so malformed he couldn't chew on his own. Also, his family dug up the carcass of St Francis of Assisi and stuck it in bed with Carl to see if that would help. *spoiler alert*: it didn't) you were doing okay.

@ astounded: "However, the Bertrams are at first wary of having Fanny there because of the possibility of incest between her and one of her cousins. Later on, that aspect is disregarded"

I may be wrong, but I think it's less the incest and more the fact that, since they're cousins and close in age, it would be even more likely that they would marry each other. The Bertrams want a better match for Edmund, and if he had any dalliance with Fanny it could harm his chances. Incest wasn't as worrisome to the nineteenth century -- at least, distant incest -- than it might be to us, because we have all those jokes about Alabama.

(And I see that PaddyDog (who will be my wife -- my boyfriend be damned) has already beaten me to this one with a similar explanation.)

@ banana: "And don't forget, it contains Jane's wonderful Defense of the Novel passage!"

I have that printed and posted in my cubicle at work. (Next to my quote from Julian of Norwich.)

Posted by: Mike Bevel at March 8, 2010 8:34 PM

@Mike Bevel (who I assume is Mike B) -- But I thought *I* was going to be your wife, after what you said in the cannonball read thread! You cad, proposing to paddydog!

sigh. What a fitting end to a Jane Austen thread! 'Tis alright, I already have a lovely husband :) But he doesn't read much outside of current events/political science/nonfiction -- blah.

Posted by: banana at March 8, 2010 8:53 PM

Yea! This is perfect timing. I've only got about 40 pages left in my first reading of Emma, and I'm loving it. It's up there with Pride and Prejudice and Persuasion as being one of my favorites. Emma might be one of my favorite characters exactly because of her faults, but Austen is so good at balancing her character out with good intentions that even when I was groaning at what Emma was doing, I didn't hate her. Thanks for the review.

Posted by: Sophia at March 8, 2010 10:02 PM

I'll probably just marry everyone. I'm in a marrying mood. D.C. finally passed legislation for marriage equality; and since I'm already marrying my boyfriend, I may as well make a day of it. I figure I can fit up to three rings per finger.

Now -- when are we going to get some Bronte love in here? Not Jane Eyre. I'm talking Shirley or Agnes Grey or my personal favorite, Villette? Oh, and George Gissing. And George Eliot (only not Silas Marner, thankyouverymuch; and definitely not Romola). And, and, and: Mrs Henry Wood, Mary Elizabeth Braddon, Sheridan Le Fanu, and maybe a hint of Edward Bullwer-Lytton.

And Charles Reade.

And--

Posted by: Mike Bevel at March 9, 2010 6:22 AM

Mike B: how about the Tenant of Wildfell Hall, if we're talking about the Bronte's? I've never read Villette. I love George Eliot, but I also found Romola kind of boring...Bulwer Lytton? My god man! My father must be one of about three genuine Lytton scholars in the world!

congratulations on the upcoming nuptials! I do so love a happy ending.

Posted by: banana at March 9, 2010 8:50 AM

banana: Wildfell Hall is still on my to-read list. I've started it a couple of times, and then I put it down. The thing is, I don't put it down because it's bad; it just hasn't been the right time for that book.

(When I was younger, I was definitely more of a "Dead to me!" reader, in that, if the book didn't immediately grab me, or if the book made what I assumed to be a fatal misstep, then I'd write the book off and never read it again. Now, I'm a little more forgiving, and assume that the bulk of the problem is me, and not the book. I read, and fell absolutely in love with, The Forsyte Saga. When it ended, which I didn't want it to ever end, I picked up the next book from the pile, Balzac's Lost Illusions. "This sucks!" I kept thinking, not because it actually sucked, but mostly because it wasn't The Forsyte Saga. "These Frenchies need a healthy dose of Aunt Ann," I said before putting it down, never to pick up again.

Until this past summer. Then, I re-read Lost Illusions and rank it among my favorite French novels. So now the rule is: if I hate it, I have to try it again in three years. Something about me might have changed just enough to "get" it.)

And as to Bulwer-Lytton -- I'm actually really interested in his crazy-as-fuck wife, Rosina. She spends her days writing thinly veiled novels about her husband, casting him as the villain, and the heroine is always Rosina in a variety of different names. And I got interested in both of them because Rosina is briefly mentioned in a Wilkie Collins bio I read, whispering to Wilkie, "If you want a true villain to put in your novel--" (Wilkie had just published The Woman in White) "--then I know just the man." And Edward shows up in Wilkie Collins's life because a piece he wrote, A Strange Story, turned out to be A Bad Idea, and nearly bankrupted Dickens and All the Year Round. Collins's next novel, No Name, put AtYR back on firmer fiscal footing.

And now I want to marry you most of all so that your dad can talk to me about Bullwer-Lytton. When are you free for that?

Posted by: Mike B. at March 9, 2010 10:09 AM

Oh wow, I know what you mean about putting a book down because it is not the one you just finished reading. I loved the forsyte trilogy as well.

and I didn't know all that about Lytton's wife, that's a riot!!

My pop is a retired Victorian scholar (can you tell I've been raiding his library since I was a wee one?). A couple of years ago he went to a Bulwer-Lytton conference in England, which was attended by approximately 8 people :) They were treated to dinner and a tour of the old estate by Lytton's grandson? great grandson? Perhaps a nephew; at any rate the current patriarch of the family. He was quite a nice fellow according to my dad.

since we're hanging out here, friend me on fb -- if you're on it. I promise I don't do farmville or mafia wars or any of that crap. Anne Poston

cheers

Posted by: banana at March 9, 2010 10:26 AM

There are five Anne Poston's on Facebook (including one who's a fan of something called "YouthJuice" and if that's you, I have a lot of questions, and if that's not you, I still have a lot of questions) -- which one are you?

Posted by: Mike B. at March 9, 2010 10:35 AM

I want to marry you all.

I have a great husband but he loves to mock my obsession with what he calls "bonnet literature". His tastes veer more toward the Tom Clancy direction. That's why we have a schizophrenic book case and two TVs in our house. Come Sunday night I am plonked in front of "Masterpiece Theatre" and he is upstairs watching "100 Great Weapons of World War II".

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 9, 2010 10:50 AM

Oh, Mike B.

I should have warned you in advance. Don't bring up the Brontes around here. For some reason the average Pajiban hates the Brontes with the venom of a thousand snakes. It gets nasty really fast when you start talking about the Brontes.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 9, 2010 10:53 AM

Is the hate Brontes-specific? Or is it Wuthering Heights-directed? I can almost get on board with the latter, because it's such a weird book that's been taught poorly and misunderstood mightily by too many teen girls. But that book was by Emily, and she's a nutter.

Charlotte gives us the brittle Lucy Snow (in Villette), who, when told to "cultivate happiness" says, "What does such advice mean? Happiness is not a potato, to be planted in mould, and tilled with manure." And she gives us the great "Men of England!" speech in Shirley ("Men of England! look at your poor girls, many of them fading around you, dropping off in consumption or decline; or, what is worse, degenerating to sour old maids—envious, back-biting, wretched, because life is a desert to them; or, what[Pg 345] is worst of all, reduced to strive, by scarce modest coquetry and debasing artifice, to gain that position and consideration by marriage which to celibacy is denied. Fathers! cannot you alter these things? Perhaps not all at once; but consider the matter well when it is brought before you, receive it as a theme worthy of thought; do not dismiss it with an idle jest or an unmanly insult. You would wish to be proud of your daughters, and not to blush for them; then seek for them an interest and an occupation which shall raise them above the flirt, the manœuvrer, the mischief-making tale-bearer. Keep your girls' minds narrow and fettered; they will still be a plague and a care, sometimes a disgrace to you. Cultivate them—give them scope and work; they will be your gayest companions in health, your tenderest nurses in sickness, your most faithful prop in age.")

People are going to dislike who they're going to dislike -- and I'm certainly guilty of not liking things for bad reasons. (I can't bear "Six Feet Under" or "Mad Men" -- but my reasons aren't well-thought-out, or even intelligible.) I just think there's good stuff in almost all of the Brontes (even Anne, though I find Agnes Grey to be creepy in the wrong ways), and everyone should love them as much as I do. Because I'm a narcissist.

Posted by: Mike B. at March 9, 2010 11:32 AM

It is mostly Wuthering Heights based (the hate), but a lot of people hate Jane Eyre as well and I think many haven't read any other Bronte stuff because they were so off-put by WH. I just don't get the WH hate. It's an amazingly passionate book, especially when you think about who wrote it. Most people loved it when it was renamed Giant, moved to Texas and Heathcliff was played by James Dean. Hell, pretty much every John Hughes movie and of course the iconic "Say Anything" borrow heavily from the first half of the book in terms of taking an odd creature from the wrong side of the tracks and having them develop a passionate love affair with a wealthy bright young thing. Wuthering Heights is the prototype.
I know people are put off by Heathcliff's bitterness and the revenge-driven second half, but really that's what makes the book. It's right up there with Citizen Kane in terms of a man driven to madness and paranoia by love.
And I suppose as an Irish person I have a genetic predisposition to revenge-fueled fantasies.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 9, 2010 11:44 AM

oh sorry I forgot to check this thread before asking you about the 'youthjuice' lady :) Glad you found me!

Those two quotes are pure awesomeness. I need to go visit my dad today to see if he has Villette, I must read it.

Posted by: banana at March 9, 2010 11:45 AM

Paddydog, I always felt that WH was just a bit too overwrought for me, and I never quite got it. I have a friend who is passionate about it for many of the same reasons you are (except that as far as I know she is not irish ;). I certainly don't hate it, but of the two I prefer Jane Eyre. The characters and motivations just make more sense to me.

I think for these two books it's a bit like how some people love Huckleberry Finn and dislike Tom Sawyer, or vice versa. It's not often that you find someone who loves both.

also, friend me too on FB! I'm the non-youth juice Anne Poston, live in Mt. Pleasant MI (I'm not sure what shows up as info for people who are not yet friends).

Posted by: banana at March 9, 2010 12:05 PM

Thanks banana. after much deliberation and pressure from the Boozehound, I have decided to do Facebook so count me in.

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 9, 2010 12:22 PM

*puts up her hand*

I loved both Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer. I didn't know I was a genetic anomaly...*sad*

In any case, Austen reads just wonderfully even now, though I'll have to admit to enjoying the filmic and novel versions almost equally for different reasons. Yes, even the most recent Keira Knightley P&P, though mostly for it's delicious cinematography.

I actually liked both Mansfield Park and Fanny Price (though I agree Edmund could've used some personality). I could actually relate to her quite a bit, being the kind of person who grew up with an inverse-entitlement complex. Her introverted personality makes sense when you consider that every day of her life at the Bertrams has been slathered with people telling her how grateful she should be that they're condescending to let her exist/how she's not as good as everyone else and shouldn't aspire to be, etc.

I also enjoyed how there were no real villains (except maybe the two female cousins), just people of varying temperaments and intelligence making mistakes of various degrees of seriousness.

Posted by: DaftSteampunk at March 9, 2010 6:44 PM

I don't know if I see where you are comming from, but do indeed elaborate a little more. Thanks

Posted by: best leads for plastic surgeons at March 11, 2011 3:18 PM

Between me and my husband we've owned more MP3 players over the years than I can count, including Sansas, iRivers, iPods (classic & touch), the Ibiza Rhapsody, etc. But, the last few years I've settled down to one line of players. Why? Because I was happy to discover how well-designed and fun to use the underappreciated (and widely mocked) Zunes are.

Posted by: Carroll B. Merriman at March 16, 2011 4:19 PM