EVERYTHING AUSTEN CHALLENGE - MANSFIELD PARK

THE BOOK AND ITS HEROINE

Mansfield Park has the negative reputation of being disliked by more of Jane Austen's fans than any of her other novels. I've read somewhere that  "Fanny Wars" have broken out in internet discussion forums. This novel  themes are very different from those of Jane Asuten's  other books, which can be easily summed up into one sentence: Sense and Sensibility is about balancing emotions and thought, Pride and Prejudice is about judging others too quickly, Emma is about growing into adulthood, and Persuasion is about second chances. The theme of Mansfield Park, on the other hand, cannot be so easily described. Is it about ordination? Is it an allegory on Regency England? Is it about slavery? Is it about the education of children? Is it about the difference between appearances and reality? Is it about the results of breaking with society's conventions and good manners? Any, or all of those themes can, and have been recognized in  Mansfield Park.

The main problem for most of the novel's detractors is the heroine, Fanny Price. She is shy, timid, lacking in self-confidence, physically weak, and seemingly—to some, annoyingly—always right. Austen's own mother called her "insipid", and many have used the word "priggish". She is certainly not like the lively and witty Elizabeth Bennet of Pride and Prejudice. But Mansfield Park also has many supporters, whose admiration and loyalty can be attributed to the depth and complexity of the themes in the book and to the main character—a young woman who is unlike most heroines found in literature.

One thing is certain, this novel is not like Jane Austen's others. The girl-gets-boy plot of her other work is mostly absent here, and the heroine's success in finding love is treated briefly, quickly, and for many readers unsatisfactorily. Only in the final chapter  Fanny gets the love she deserves.

Jane Austen 's Mansfield Park  was published on May 4, 1814 and it was Austen's third published novel; though, as with all of her novels, her name was not attached to it until after her death.

RE - WATCHING MANSFIELD PARK 1999 & 2007

Before wrapping - up  my beloved EVERYTHING AUSTEN CHALLENGE ( taking part in it was great fun!) ,  I've re-read  Austen's Mansfield Park and especially re-watched comparatively its 1999 film adaptation , starring  Frances O'Connor  ( as Fanny Price) and Jonny Lee Miller (as Edmund Bertram) and its 2007 ITV adaptation with Billie Piper (Fanny) and Blake Ritson (Edmund).

I must confess ,  my mind was caught  into a dizzy confusion seeing both EMMA 2009 's Mr Knightley and Mr Elton propose and kiss Fanny Price!  In fact, Jonny Lee Miller played Edmund Bertram in 1999 and Mr Knightley in 2009, while Blake Ritson was Edmund in 2007 and Mr Elton in 2009. But I want to be immediately clear: my favourite Edmund Bertram is my favourite Mr Knightley , Jonny Lee Miller.

Now, while I loved re-watching the 1999 film version - though not always accurate if compared to the original text - I realized I didn't like 2007 ITV adaptation  so much ( I thought I liked it when I got the DVD from Amazon last year!) once I had compared it to the oldest version. And that  for several reasons, among which:

- its fast pace, which makes many parts of the novel disappear abruptedly

- no irony nor wit

- Billie Piper is not convincingly shy or insecure, her look is too modern ,  her characterization too free and     easy to convey  the  real Fanny Price

- Hayley Atwell 's Mary Crawford loses the match if compared to wonderful Embeth Davidtz in 1999 version
- Blake Ritson's Edmund reminded me 2009 Mr Elton's  stare from time to time and I tended to ... laugh!

SCREENCAPS FROM THE 1999 FILM VERSION

SCREENCAPS FROM ITV 2007 ADAPTATION

THE GAME OF THE PROPOSALS

Yes, I know. This is not the first time I propose this game to you, but, you see, these are the best moments in these movies and I love watching, re-watching and  comparing the emotions they convey. I'm an incurable romantic, you are right. Be patient with me and take part in the game only if you really feel like or if you are as romantic as I am.

CLIP 1 . MANSFIELD PARK 1999 - Final scene

CLIP 2 . ITV MANSFIELD PARK 2007 - Final scene

 No doubt the more recent version gives us a very lively finale. While,  have you noticed how much Jonny/ Edmund's final revelation of his feelings resembles Jonny/Mr Knightley's declaration to Emma? Try to compare the two ones. Do you agree with me? So, what's your favourite adaptation? Do you also think MANSFIELD PARK is the least enjoyable among Jane Austen's novels? What about Fanny Price? Do you like her?
Now before leaving you to your reflections, I wanted to thank STEPHANIE for hosting such a wonderful challenge!

 

EVERYTHING SENSE AND SENSIBILITY

One of my tasks for the Everything Austen Challenge, has been rewatching Sense & Sensibility in the two adaptations I have in my DVD collection. I compared the two versions and found them different but equally beautiful, accurate and effective. The 1995 film starring Emma Thomson, Kate Winslet, Hugh Grant, Greg Wise and Alan Rickman was the first I saw and is the one I know best – I’ve seen it so many times! The more recent BBC 2008 three-part series has just renewed my appreciation of this great story with new awesome locations and very good actors: Hattie Morahan, Charity Wakefield, David Morrissey, Dominic Cooper, Dan Stevens, Mark Williams, Janet McTeer , Mark Gatiss.

My ideal cast  

 I want to make it clear first, that I consider the actors I’m not going to mention - just for fun – all very good, I'm only trying to imagine what it would be like if I could have the ones I liked best from the two different casts:

I'd love to see Kate Winslet and Greg Wise as Elinor and Edward, as they would be too mature as Marianne and Willoughby now ; then Charity Wakefield and Dan Stevens as Marianne & Willoughby and, finally, David Morissey as Colonel Brandon . Just a game. Try to do the same. What would your ideal S&S cast be? You could put in new names , if you wish.

As I told you, it is not that I don’t like Hugh Grant ( I loved him in About a boy, Bridget Jones films, Notting Hill, etc.) but simply I didn’t like his Edward Ferrars. Too stiff and clumsy. As for Emma Thomson, she is such a talented actress! Only, maybe, she was … too old an Elinor? She didn’t just fit my ideal Elinor Dashwood? I don’t exactly know why, but I preferred Hattie Morahan as Elinor while re-watching them in these days. Ok. It’s just a game. Thomson’s , Rickman’s & Grant’s fans, please, don’t feel offended because I really “think highly” of them, I do appreciate their talent!

Some reflections on S&S

These are the notes I took while re-watching the two S&S and while leafing , once more, through my favourite parts of the book.

Comedy or tragedy?
- It is meant to be “comedy” with its irony and love stories but it opens rather tragically on the descent to poverty of the Dashwood sisters. Though narrated through JA ‘s light touch, what Elinor, Marianne, Margaret and their mother live, is a real shocking tragedy: Mr Dashwood, their father/husband is dying and he knows his patrimony is due to be inherited by his only son from a previous marriage, John. He knows life will be very hard for his second family, daughters and wife, if John doesn’t help them.

Due to John’s wife’s influence, he won’t help them as much as he could or had to. The girls lose their father and their welfare all at once. They have to live their home and move far in the countryside.

Conformist or rebellious?
 

Jane Austen is usually consider quite a conformist writer: she agrees with the code of good manners and propriety, she accepts social roles and respects rank . But I’m sure she, instead, couldn’t bear so many things of the society she belonged to and she would have protested, if she could, much more openly against all that. What do I mean? For instance, the laws regulating inheritance, which were terribly discriminating toward women. Daughters and wives were victims of social/economic discrimination, they had no rights. Estates were entailed on male heirs, patrimonies were inherited by sons; if a woman, anyhow, owned a patrimony her husband took it over once they got married. Women were forbidden to get a living from a profession: working was considered dishonourable if they were of a good family. I’m sure Jane didn’t easily accept such unequal rules. Can’t you feel her rage beyond her bitter irony?
Romance or social criticism?
 While we live Elinor’s and Marianne’s tormented romances, while we sigh at Elinor’s silent sorrow at watching Edward keep his promise to Lucy Steele , while we deeply feel for Marianne’s sorrowful disappointment at being turned down by her beloved Willoughby, we learn a lot about the restrictive social conventions which certainly made Jane Austen angry and willing to satirize the country gentry and their stiff clichés and good manners.

Willoughby, Brandon or Edward ?

 I love, really love… Willoughby. I had always imagined him just like Wickham in P&P 2005: long blond haired with blue eyes. But I went on loving him also when he got to have Greg Wise’s handsome face and wavy black hair in 1995 or Dominic Cooper’s fresh, saucy look in S&S 2008. Edward Ferrars and Colonel Brandon, though morally impeccable, are a bit … grey and flat characters if compared to John Willoughby’s vivacity, complexity and roundness. Are you sure JA meant to draw the stereotype of the unscrupulous libertine with him? I’m not that sure. I especially love the final scene in the book – included in 2008 TV series but not in 1995 film – in which Willoughby visits Elinor and tries to apologize, to make his reasons clear, to make her and her sister hate him less. I, just like Elinor, can’t avoid feeling sorry for him. I go on imagining him on his horse, watching down to Marianne’s life from a solitary hill, sad face, sad look, just like handsome Greg Wise at the end of 2005 movie. I know, most of you won’t agree with me but … you know, it’s fatal attraction, you must forgive me .


Marianne or Elinor?
 As for the two sisters, they represent two completely attitudes to life, the two completely different outlooks on life at Jane’s time: classicism (Elinor) and romanticism (Marianne). Though Austen wants us to take Elinor as our model - sensible, reasonable, generous, self-controlled, balanced, great strength and unaltered will-power through hardship – I love, really love, Marianne. Mind you, I’ve never been like her. I’ve always been more like her elder sister , only… I strongly admire this 17-year-old girl’s temper. Austen’s message is an open condemnation of romantic ideals, Marianne is almost killed by her strong disillusionment. Despite all that, I’ve always envied her the beautiful romance she lives with Willoughby – I’m sure she’ll never forget him and will always think of him while devoutly looking after old Colonel Brandon . I’ve always thought Marianne as one of the best heroines I’ve ever met in novels: so full of impetuses , ideals and poetry and, at the same time, so contemptuous of those who can’t abandon themselves totally - like her- to their own feelings and emotions, so excessive both in her love and in her sorrow, so fragile and lively at the same time,

 

S&S greatest fan

To close in the right mood for a wonderful Saturday Night and an even more wonderful Sunday, I need a bit of fun and a bit of RA. You can find both in this hilarious clip.
Geraldine Granger, better known as the Vicar of Dibley, is one of S&S greatest fans! She's there just  re-watching the movie , when someone incredibly charming and very kind knocks at her door ...

JANE AUSTEN'S MINOR WORKS : THE WATSONS, A FRAGMENT

Jane Austen’s first Emma was not Miss Woodhouse but Miss Watson, Emma Watson.

“Emma Watson was not more than of the middle height- well made and plump, with an air of healthy vigour. Her skin was very brown, but clear, smooth and glowing; which with a lively eye, a sweet smile, and an open countenance, gave beauty to attract, and expression to make beauty umprove on acquaintance.”

She is the protagonist of the fragment THE WATSONS which Jane started writing in 1803 or a little later, probably encouraged by the acceptance for publication of "Susan". As she liked the name Emma, she evidently felt it would be a pity to abandon it along with the uncompleted tale, and so used it for a different heroine ten years later. The fragment – left untitled by Jane -was first published in 1871 in the Reverend James Edward Austen-Leigh’s "Memoir of Jane Austen", with the title THE WATSONS.

THE PLOT

The Watsons are a large and rather unhappy family, living in the Surrey village of Stanton, which is on the outskirts of some small town. The Reverend Mr Watson, the head of the family, is a melancholic impoverished widower, barely able to fulfil his clerical duties and quite unable to exercise any control over his quarrelling unmarried daughters. The eldest son Robert, about 30, has become a money-grubbing attorney and lives in Croydon with his conceited wife and their spoilt daughter, Augusta. The youngest son, Sam, about 22, is a surgeon in Guilford, having just finished his apprenticeship there to Mr Curtis. Still at home is the eldest daughter, Elizabeth, aged 28, and so by contemporary standards verging on middle age. She is worn and weary with the difficulties of running the household on a very small income and always trying to keep the peace between her next two sisters, Penelope and Margaret -26 and 24 – and each becoming steadily more desperate to catch a husband. The Watson daughters are well aware that as soon as their father dies, they will have to leave the parsonage in favour of the next incumbent; without any private income for themselves, marriage is the only hope they have of acquiring their own homes and avoiding a rapid descent into poverty.

The youngest daughter of the family, Emma, now 19, was semi-adopted by a widowed aunt fourteen years ago and has lived with her in Shropshire; but her aunt has suddenly married again and her new husband doesn’t want Emma to go on living with them. She is a very pretty girl and Elizabeth, her elder sister, decides to drive her into the town one afternoon in mid-October, so that she can stay with the Edwards and attend the first assembly ball of the winter season and stand a chance of meeting an appropriate suitor.

The most important guests at the ball are the party from Osborne Castle which consists of the Dowager Lady Osborne, her son the present Lord Osborne, her daughter Miss Osborne, and the daughter’s friend Miss Carr, the Reverend Mr Howard, clergyman of the parish, and Tom Musgrave, a constant flirt, who attaches himself to the Castle party in his capacity of social – climbing. In the past ,

Musgrave amused himself flirting with all three of Emma’s elder sisters in turn, Elizabeth, Margaret and Penelope. Emma dances with Mr Howard and likes him but is annoyed by Lord Osborne’s oafish manners and Tom Musgrave’s impudent persistence in forcing his company to her.

In the days following the ball, Emma’s eldest brother Robert and his wife come to Stanton bringing Margaret with them. Once the novelty of Emma’s acquaintance has worn off, Margaret soon shows herself to be perverse and quarrelsome, and Robert and his wife are also in their different ways unattractive characters from whom Emma will obviously not receive any affection or sympathy. Penelope, the other sister is said to be busy husband-hunting in Chichester, and Sam has his professional obligations keeping him in Guilford. So at this stage of the story neither Emma nor we, the readers, meet these last two members of the family.

CONCLUSIONS

This fragment is less than 50 pages in my edition of Jane Austen’s MINOR WORKS (pp. 314 – 362). Like SANDITON it could have become another of Jane’s beloved novels, if she had decided to develop the story but … she did not and what we have is another short but brilliant evidence of her immense talent.

From the second edition (1871) of the Memoir, p.364: “When the author’s sister, Cassandra, showed the manuscript of this work to some of her nieces, she also told them something of the intended story; for with this dear sister – though, I believe , with no one else – Jane seems to have talked freely of any work that she might have in hand. Mr Watson was soon to die; Emma to become dependent for a home on her narrow-minded sister-in- law and brother. She was to decline an offer of marriage from Lord Osborne and much of interest of the tale was to arise from Lady Osborne’s love for Mr Howard, and his counter affection for Emma, whom he was finally to marry”.

RELATED POSTS

JANE AUSTEN’S UNFINISHED WORK : SANDITON

JANE AUSTEN’S MINOR WORKS: LADY SUSAN

WAITING FOR THE NEW EMMA I

WAITING FOR THE NEW EMMA II

A Soirée with Lady Susan : Journal of a Grand Event

It's time to wrap up at Austenprose. The winners have been announced, the schedule has been completed.

Austenprose, Laurel Ann’s wonderful blog, has hosted an exciting group reading experience named “A Soirée with Lady Susan”from September 1 to 14. Reading Jane Austen’s minor works was also part of my EVERYTHING AUSTEN CHALLENGE so I decided to read Lady Susan according to the schedule suggested by Laurel Ann and take part in the soirée. Among Austen's minor works, I have already read SANDITON, a fragment completed by Juliette Shapiro, and still have to read another fragment THE WATSONS.

Lady Susan

An “epistolary novel” written almost entirely in the form of letters sent between characters, Jane Austen’s Lady Susan has rarely been staged and never filmed, despite its audacious heroine and lively plot. Fascination and deception come naturally to the beautiful widowed Lady Susan who manages, “without the charm of youth,” to captivate every man who comes within her orbit. She schemes to marry the gentlemanly Reginald De Courcy while enjoying the attentions of the rakish Manwaring and consigning her sweetly intelligent daughter to dubious marital felicity with a vacuous dandy – all to the chagrin of her highly respectable former sister-in-law.
Jane Austen’sLady Susan has never received much attention in comparison to her other six major novels. It is only 70 pages and consists of forty-one letters and a conclusion. Scholars estimate that it was written between 1793-4 when the young author was in her late teens and represents her first attempts to write in the epistolary format popular with many authors of her time. In 1805, she transcribed a fair copy of the manuscript but did not publish it in her lifetime. Lady Susan begins to explore many of the themes of Austen’s later works, and amply demonstrates the wit that would become the author’s hallmark.
Although the themes, together with the focus on character study and moral issues, are close to Jane Austen's published work, its outlook is very different, and the heroine has few parallels in 19th-century literature. Lady Susan is a selfish, attractive woman, who tries to trap the best possible husband while maintaining a relationship with a married man. She subverts all the standards of the romantic novel: she has an active role, she's not only beautiful but intelligent and witty, and her suitors are significantly younger than she is (in contrast with Sense and Sensibility and Emma, which feature marriages of men who are old enough to be their wives' fathers). Although the ending includes a traditional reward for morality, Lady Susan herself is treated much more mildly than the adulteress, Mariah, in Mansfield Park, who is severely punished.

Was young Jane fascinated by her wicked creature? I actually think so. Lady Susan Vernon is a totally free woman who, unlike Austen's major heroines, isn't molded nor bent by conventions, formality and good manners but bends them at her own convenience.

My Journal of the Soirée

September 2nd - Letters I – XI

Lady Susan reveals herself surprisingly … unconventional. I thought Emma was the most “imperfect” – and for this reason the most human , realistic and likeable - among Austen’s heroines but reading the first eleven letters I’ve immediately realized Lady Susan was pleasantly … evil: vain, selfish, enterprising, free, cold, emotionless, deceitful. May I stop here? Despite all that, just like Mr Manwaring or Reginald De Courcy, one can but be charmed by “the most accomplished Coquette in England” because she indeed “possesses a degree of captivating deceit which” IS “pleasing to witness & detect”.
If I have to be utterly honest there is something I do NOT like in her: as a mother, I found incredibly disturbing her indifference, if not cruelty, to her daughter, Frederica. Her calculated subtle deceiving trick of faking an interest in her daughter’s education - but in a boarding school far from home and everybody the girl knew - in order to push her to marry Mr James ( a man Frederica deeply disliked) was awfully evil!

September 5th - Letters XII – XXII

- I’m enjoying this reading more and more. Twists and turns make this second part, letters XII – XXII , quite thrilling. For instance, the unexpected attempt to escape reveals Frederica’s personality and real situation to the reader who, so far, has known her only from her mother’s point of view - which is not very positive at all.
- Another satisfying turn involves the character of Reginald de Courcy who, after meeting Frederica, realizes he has been blinded by Lady Susan skillful charming art : she has manipulated him just like any other person around her. When that happened, I was a bit disappointed at seeing him take Lady Susan's bait, since I had had a different impression of him at the beginning ( Mr De Courcy to Mrs Vernon - IV).
- Now that Frederica asks HIM for help against the wicked plans of her mother everything seems to turn against wicked Lady Susan. But reading the last lines of letter XXII I expect new turns and twists due to her devilishly vindicative rage : “She –Frederica- shall not soon forget the occurrences of this day. She shall find that she has poured forth her tender Tale of Love in vain, & exposed herself forever to the contempt of the whole world, & the severest Resentment of her injured Mother”. She is terribly jelous, she had not expected to find a rival in her daughter! Reginald seems to prefer Frederica to her! I’m looking forward to discovering what is going to happen … I’m avoiding spoilers as much as I can and respecting the deadlines in our reading schedule!

September 9th – Letters XXIII - XXXIII

I’ve just closed my copy of Jane Austen’s Minor Works at page 304. I was SO tempted to go on reading but this forcing myself to respect the deadlines of our schedule is making the experience much more thrilling and , as I already wrote, great fun.
1. Reading and re-reading this third group of letters, I started reflecting on young Jane Austen being so masterful in the use of language. If she created an incredibly skillful heroine who could master people and the same course of the events with her ability in using words like Lady Susan, how good did she herself have to be with words? She was indeed an already wonderfully talented young writer though only in her teens!
2. I’ve been particularly charmed by evil characters recently. Especially well written or well acted ones. Not the stereotyped flat villains but those with a certain complexity and psychological insight. This Lady Susan is the result of a particularly free Austen. She is definitely and devilishly wicked. In the letters to her friend, Mrs Amelia Johnson, L.S. reveals the most evil of her feelings, her most unscrupulous soul, she confesses with no dismay all her worst thoughts. She is so confident in her skills and feels no sense of guilt at all nor any regret for what she does. Once her affair with Mr Manwaring is revealed to Reginald – who wants to marry her! – and to Mr Johnson by Mrs Manwaring herself Lady Susan is so bluntly sure of herself: “Reginald will be a little enraged at first, but by Tomorrow’s dinner, everything will be well again”. These evil soul are so fascinating! Don’t you think so?
3. I like Mrs Catherine Vernon ( Lady Susan sister-in-law) much. She is the only one who is not subjected to Lady Susan’s schemes and tricks. So, this means she must be quite intelligent and very sensitive. She is balanced and pragmatic, so different from Lady Susan. But she is her only real antagonist, the only one who can cope with her in a fair confrontation.
4. Last but not least, I hoped Reginald was the hero of this novel but it seems Jane Austen had not a very high esteem of men in that period of her life (What about the rest of her short life, I wonder?!?) if we have to judge from the men we meet here and so far! What disappointment! They are really at the mercy of the women around them! Look at poor Mr Johnson, dead Mr Vernon, Lady Susan’s brother , Mr Manwaring (soon found out by his wife!), young Reginald. Not a dashing bunch of heroes!

12 September - Letters XXXIV – XLI

Even the epilogue of this novella is rather unusual. Lady Susan is bad to the bone - forgive me for this not very Austenish expression - and she ends up happily married with a well-off younger man. She is not fully rewarded but not punished either. She does not fullfil all her plans but she is not beaten either. Incredible Jane Austen!

Boldness, impudence and brass prevail in Lady Susan’s behaviour till the end. Once her falsity and her secret affair with Mr Manwaring are revealed, she doesn’t show any discomfort nor regret. She plans her revenge on Reginald, who dared disert her, and on Mrs Manwaring, who ruined her affair . She will use fragile Frederica to get to her revenge: “… Frederica shall be Sir James’s wife … She may whimper & the Vernons may storm; I regard them not. I am tired of submittin my will to the Caprices of others – of resigning my own judgment in deference to those… (Letter 39 p. 308)
Is there any good in this woman? Not at all. She is one of the most wicked and unscrupulous heroines I’ve ever met in fiction. Never as a protagonist, anyhow, rarely as an antagonist.
What about the last sensational turn? When she apparently seems worried about her daughter’s health? No way. She is not changing, no motherly affection: she just wants to get rid of Frederica, leave her at her aunt’s and uncle’s, in order to enjoy her marriage to Sir James!
And how about my hero? Reginald . Again, I was quite disappointed. It took him 12 months to propose to Frederica! Was it because he had been pondering the fact that, so doing, he was going to make Lady Susan his mother-in -law? If so , his indecision can be forgiven.

"Adieu, my dearest Susan, I wish matters did not go so perversely. That unlucky visit to Langford! but I dare say you did all for the best, and there is no defying destiny". (Mrs. Johnson, Letter 38 )

Thanks Austenprose. Thanks Laurel Ann. Till next soirée. Adieu. Arrivederci.

SWAPPING LIVES & TIME TRAVELLING

EVERYTHING AUSTEN CHALLENGE- Task 3

“Today’s women are no less desirous of love, and marrying for love, than they were in your time. But they, like so many women before them, simply fear it is an unattainable goal. And thus they settle for what fleeting plasures they can find, creating an endless cycle of pleasure, despair, ad infinitum. Human nature is the same today as it was in your time. The only difference between today’s world and your world is that people have more choices now than they did then.” ( RUDE AWAKENINGS OF A JANE AUSTEN ADDICT, p.265)

This Everything Austen Challenge has revealed a very pleasant and enriching experience to me. I must again thank Stephanie ( at STEPHANIE’S WRITTEN WORD) for this great adventure! Two days ago we were just discussing here on my blog the topic of dating and courting today respect to Jane Austen’s time and the discussion was brought about by Laurie Viera Rigler (HERE) , author of the book I’ve just finished as my third task for the challenge: RUDE AWAKENINGS OF A JANE AUSTEN ADDICT.
This is my first Austen-based book, never read one before, only the original novels by Jane. So I’m not an expert of the genre. RUDE AWAKENINGS is the sequel of Laurie’s first novel, CONFESSIONS OF A JANE AUSTEN ADDICT, which I didn’ t read. What was this first experience like? Great pure amusement which reminded me the same kind of hilarious reaction I had after skeptically approaching LOST IN AUSTEN when the DVD got to me last September (or was it October?). I mean, I studied Jane Austen’s novels at university after reading some of them (only P & P and S & S) in my adolescence and that brought me to read them ( and every other novel ) professionally, because of my job (teaching literature). This is why I was rather skeptical toward Austen based fiction or adaptations. So, in order to read this novel for the challenge, I had to go back to the time I use to read just for fun day and night and leave apart the “professional tools”. Anyway, I was truly involved in the narration of the story, since Laurie knows Austen quite well and it is a pleasure to recognize that background while smiling at the entertaining series of misunderstandings, blunders, weird situations her time – travelling protagonist, JANE MANSFIELD, finds herself involved in . Jane wakes suddenly up in 2009 in Los Angeles but she is an English girl living in 1813, fondly in love with Jane Austen’s Pride & Prejudice. She is completely misplaced and shocked, her body even is a stranger’s one: she looks at herself in the mirror and sees a nice blondie everybody calls Courtney Stone!
Reading this novel I thought of LOST IN AUSTEN many times. There are many analogies between the stories, though I think CONFESSIONS has got more : In CONFESSIONS OF A JANE AUSTEN ADDICT, a twenty-first-century Austen fan Courtney Stone awakens one morning in 1813 England as a gentleman’s daughter, Jane Mansfield—with comic and romantic consequences. In RUDE AWAKENINGS as I told you, Jane, the gentleman’s daughter from 1813 England, finds herself occupying the body of Courtney in the urban madness of twenty-first-century L.A. Since in LOST IN AUSTEN an Austen fan, Amanda Price (Jemima Rooper in the photo on the left) swaps her life with Elizabeth Bennet, the protagonist of her favourite novel…I think it is obvious that I was always drawing comparisons while reading.

Have you seen LOST IN AUSTEN? It’s such fun!

I know many academic would turn up their noses at this kind of readings or TV series but I am convinced that reading as well as studying literature must be a pleasure. This is my philosophy even when I teach Austen or Dickens or Shakespeare to my students: they must contrast and compare those stories to their own experience and amuse themselves as much as they can. Not always an easy task, mine!

Warning you that there are huge spoilers in this clips, I invite you to see my favourite scenes from LOST IN AUSTEN. Are you ready?

Sex and the Austen Girl (& a BIG giveaway)

You know I've joined this great Austenish adventure, the Everything Austen Challenge, and at the moment I'm completing my third task, that is reading my first modern fiction inspired to the world of Jane's novels: RUDE AWAKENINGS OF A JANE AUSTEN ADDICT by LAURIE VIERA RIGLER.
Stephanie at Stephanie's Written Word has given us this wonderful occasion to blog to a purpose, revive our love for Jane and improve and enrich our knowledge. And today she's done even more: she's posted something written by Laurie Viera Rigler, thet is she in person is Stephanie's guest today! Now, if you comment her extremely interesting contribute about "Sex and the Austen Girl", you can take part in a big giveaway : you might win two novels by this brilliant writer and Janeite! You simply have to answer a question in your comment:

"Have you ever wondered how our dating rules and rituals today might look to someone from Jane Austen’s England? Are we better off now, or would we be better off back then?

Click here, read the interesting post, comment, and ...GOOD LUCK!

P.S.This is my comment on Stepahnie's blog, this is what I answered Laurie's question:

"Guess what! I 've just stopped reading "Rude Awakenings" - which is my third task for the challenge - to see if there were something interesting in my blog roll and ... here I am commenting this wonderful post! Thank you Stephanie for giving us all these great opportunities. Your Everything Austen Challenge is becoming more and more fun everyday! Now... My answer to Laurie's question: I think our modern straightahead way of approaching each other, get acquainted, have a free sexual relationship has stolen much from our emotional life more than adding much. No magic, little romance, no delayed gratification so ... quick disillusionment and boredom!
That's all! I'll go and post about it on my blog!"

Do you agree with me? Was it better at Jane Austen's time? Is it better now?

WAITING FOR THE NEW EMMA or ...the ambiguous pleasure of liberty

Eagerly waiting to see the new BBC EMMA 2009 with Romola Garay and Jonny Lee Miller (sob! Why not Richard Armitage?!?), I’ve been re-reading parts of the novel and comparing the different film versions of it: I saw for the first time

1. BBC Emma (1972)

2. ITV Emma (1996)

then I re-watched the film starring Gwyneth Paltrow and Jeremy Northam (1996).

This “Emma marathon” was my second task for the EVERYTHING AUSTEN CHALLENGE.

First of all, let's have a look at the atmosphere of the new EMMA. Here's the official BBC trailer.

When , in January 1815, Jane Austen began to write her fifth novel, EMMA, she stated that she was working at creating a heroine that nobody but herself would be able to like ("I am going to take a heroine whom no-one but myself will much like.")
Emma Woodhouse is beautiful, clever and wealthy (the only Austenean heroine to own all these “virtues”) but also spoilt and a bit snob. Readers, especially Austen’s contemporary readers, shouldn’t like her much since Emma definitely lacks the common sense, balance and measure of other heroines. Yet, even with her faults and her mistakes, the character of Emma is drawn to get sympathy and understanding; the reader tends to forgive her and to side with her in a totally irrational way. Emma’s defects, constantly underlined in the text, make her the perfect anti-heroine: she is not particularly accomplished, she has been educated by too an indulgent father
and too a friendly governess, she has great self-esteem and tends to misinterpret reality according to her wishes. In a few words, she is not “by the book”, if we think of the 18th century “conduct - books” about the education of girls belonging to high society. But , of course, Jane Austen, is mocking those clichés, so her Emma is not only beautiful and intelligent but , above all, free. It is Mr Knightley himself to acknowledge that Emma is perfect with all her imperfections. And it is for her being so humanly imperfect that we still like her so much nowadays.

Now let’s go back to my overdose of Emma. Let’s see…The oldest version, Bbc 1972, is the nearest to the original text but the ITV adaptation is the one I liked best, though I didn’t mind the film with Gwyneth Paltrow at all. For a more deatailed and technical review of all the adaptations there’s a very good blog HERE.
What I want to propose to you now is a comparison between the 3 different final proposals. Watch the three clips and decide which is your favourite one. I’m in a crisis ‘cause I can’t choose between Mark Strong’s and Jeremy Northam’s versions of the scene. Which Mr Knightley do you prefer?

1. MR KNIGHTLEY ‘S PROPOSAL (BBC 1972)

Doran Godwin & John Carson

2. MR KNIGHTLEY'S PROPOSAL (ITV - 1996)

Kate Beckinsale & Mark Strong

3. MR KNIGHTLEY'S PROPOSAL (Film 1996)

Gwyneth Paltrow & Jeremy NorthamEMMA ADAPTATIONS BLOG