Jane Austen discussion

Please post for this concluding portion of the novel.

I found the whole ending tacky beyond belief. Agreeing to the reality show wedding wasn't something I saw either Regency Jane or Yogi Jane agreeing to.

I actually enjoyed this last part much more than the rest, Liz and Caroline's banter was the closest the book had come to their characters and I made my way through it quite quickly.

I didnt mind the setting either though I certainly wouldn't have wanted to join them!

It didn't really make up for the rest though.

I've put up my review if anyone is interested.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Carol ♔ Type, Oh Queen! ♔ wrote: "I found the whole ending tacky beyond belief. Agreeing to the reality show wedding wasn't something I saw either Regency Jane or Yogi Jane agreeing to."

I don't know about Yogi Jane, I'm not sure she had enough personality to actually disagree, but yes it's extremely tacky but weren't they all the way through? I just felt that this section had a bit more life to the characters.

I enjoyed the last section too, and the action certainly propelled me along. Like many readers here, I got to chapter 152 and read on to the end the same night. I was amused by all the details about the reality show wedding, which seemed quite true to life based on what I know of such shows. I rather liked the irony of putting all the Bennets in a situation of maximum vulgarity, and then it was Elizabeth who acted the worst.

Was it a Jane Austen experience? I dunno, but as its own novel I felt it cohered quite well, and for me the connection with the original story and characters lent an added dimension to my interaction with Eligible. Modern adaptations in general seem to me more like conversations with the original, and I like seeing all the different directions authors go when they set out to re-envision the book, even when I disagree with the choices they make. Their ideas, good and bad, make me look at the original in different ways (e.g., Lady Catherine).

That's a nice way to look at it Abigail.

I think part of the problem with the Austen Project in general is that if you set yourself up to be THE modern retelling of a classic work, you really have to deliver and from what I've read/heard none of them have. You want your readers to go away with a feeling of 'yes, that's how it should be', not, 'What?'

Maybe we should write our own, the Goodreads Austen Group Re-tellings, and work out what's acceptable by consensus ;)

After chapter 152 there was a point I thought to myself, "ok, this is just crazy. I'm out." Ugh. One major point for me, I've always loved Mr. Bingley but Chip just does not do it for me. Who is this guy? In P&P Mr. Bingley, though far more extroverted and less brooding than Mr. Darcy, is also, a man of great integrity. If you doubt this, just remember that Mr. Darcy's good opinion once lost is lost forever, and a good friend of Mr. Darcy's must be a good man, indeed. But Chip? Uhm, no. No, thank you. Not to mention the other characters, including Lizzy and Darcy who were NOTHING like the P&P characters.

I also think the author attempted to do a bit too much as far as civil rights, trying to include major points about race, gender, and sex, all to the effect that no one point was well done. It would have been better, I think, if she had chosen one important controversial item, and written the issue into the story well. Instead it felt like she was just piling as much as she could in: "Here's some antisemitism, some racism, here's a transgender person, here's some feminism, see! look! I write about tough issues! All of them! All at once!" Um, okay, yeah, but none of them are well done. They're just sort of thrown in there. Also, I was a little offended at one comment Liz makes near the end of the story about how certain women shouldn't wear bikinis if they're fat. Again, I thought the author is a feminist? And Liz would never say that. Honestly, I closed this book, just thinking, "what the..."

Lol, thank you Faith, my thoughts exactly! I made this comment in the previous part, but I think it needs repeating here: for a novel ostensibly about feminism, it's really shitty at being about feminism. It's so fixated to be diverse that it doesn't really stop to think whether it's doing it right. Like, I get that Mrs Bennet is a racist, but what was that bit about Liz going for a run and being cheered up by an overly familiar black lady? Why is that even in there? And the treatment of Ham? Why must we be informed precisely what the status of his breasts is? Who the hell needs to know that?

And the feminism. For a feminist book, there's an awful lot of woman-hating, woman-hysteria, woman-attach-herself-to-rich-man-or-else-I-fail-as-human-being. And the clincher was Mary, because you'd think they'd have one female who didn't have her life rocked by a guy, but then it turns out that Mary was asexual all along, so that was the only reason she didn't need one. Ugh. Just. Ugh.

I thought the book moved along well and I did read right through as a result. But more and more it just didn't seem to have any connection to P&P other than the character's names and some vague plot connections.

I found the reality show part fun and at least there was some action. I got the sense that another book was underneath that the author really wanted to write but again was constrained by the parameters of P&P. However I didn't think any of the characters true to life. These are not upper class people. Arrivistes maybe, but old money--nope, not a chance in hell anyone from that group would be caught dead on reality TV.

And I agree with Faith and Emily that this is not a book that cares about the women in it, or has anything to say about women in our society today. That is what is so disappointing because there is more than enough to be said on that score. At times I felt like the book was written by a man, it is so anti-woman and so many of the female characters come across the way a man would imagine them to be. Talk about transgender.

Speaking of hate-sex, I started to feel like the whole book is a hate-book. "Hey Jane Austenites--this is what I think of you and your beloved author. So there." I started the last chapter with Mary, was disgusted and closed the book.

I'm so out of it that I didn't realize there was an Austen Project and that this is one of the books in the series. I'm now interested to read the others. I'm assuming most of you already have. Sorry, I spend most of my time as a writer immersed in comic book world. This is a respite for me!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/15/boo...

"Initially, when an editor from Borough Press, an imprint of HarperCollins U.K., approached Ms. Sittenfeld in 2011 about rewriting the novel as part of the Austen Project, she was skeptical."

“I wondered if it would be cheesy,” said Ms. Sittenfeld, who lives in St. Louis. “But you can’t live your life worrying about being cheesy.”

It sounds like the basic plot was already decided upon before she ever got in the project. Hopefully the powers that be at Harper Collins will realize that you have to let writers follow their instincts. It's too bad Ms. Sittenfeld wasn't able to let loose because she's obviously a good writer.

Hi, Nicky, I’ve read all the Austen Project books and, sad to say, I feel Eligible is the best of them, Val McDermid’s Northanger Abbey coming in second. Speaking of your comment about “another book was underneath that the author really wanted to write,” Alexander McCall Smith’s Emma is a prime example of that—the majority of the book is about Mr. Woodhouse! And Joanna Trollope’s Sense and Sensibility is everything I didn’t enjoy about Eligible’s overprivileged-slacker characters, without the saving grace of a coherent plot. Just nasty, much as I hate to say that about any author’s work.

If you want to read more in this genre, I would recommend that instead of focusing on the ballyhooed books by big-name authors, you hie yourself over to the Austenesque Reviews blog and check out some of the titles under the “Modern Adaptation” subhead here: http://austenesquereviews.com/reviews...

Meredith, who runs the site, is an excellent reviewer; her reviews will give you a clear sense of the various titles. A longtime fave of mine is Jane Austen in Boca by Paula Marantz Cohen; it sets P&P in a retirement community in Florida. I haven’t read Confessions of a Jane Austen Addict but it is high on many people’s lists. Happy hunting!

P.S. Another place you might go for Austenesque titles is a group here on Goodreads: Austenesque Lovers TBR Pile Reading Challenge 2016 (there’s also a 2015). Run by the charming and indefatigable Sophia Rose, it is full of people’s lists and ratings of Austenesque fiction.

I am in agreement with Faith and Emily I am glad you both said what you did. I struggled through this book it had a decent flow and I really wanted to see how the author would or if the author would bring it all together and she did bring everything to a conclusion. But there was way too many intense issues of modern society. I couldn't tell if the underlying vibe in the book that I was picking up on was a " hey I can write about serious issues of society or if she has a resentment toward Jane Austen or resent having to write about Pride and Prejudice or is angry with society or angry at women. I feel she missed the essence of the characters and pretty much missed the essence of Pride and Prejudice . It is okay not to like Jane Austen as an author and it is okay not to like Pride and Prejudice many of my friends can't stand Pride and Prejudice and /or Jane Austen. But don't write a book using Pride and Prejudice if you really resent it.

I wasn’t bothered by the contemporary issues in the book. JA’s books are full of what were pressing social issues in her day, though the impact of them is softened by time. Slavery, ideas about liberty, the rights of women, enclosure—they don’t seem as hot-button to us today, but to readers in her time, they probably were. Her focus on manners and polite behavior also doesn’t feel political to us but may have to her first readers, especially when she challenges class boundaries. To me it makes sense to translate those subjects into contemporary politics in a twenty-first century American story, because that’s the lens through which we enact many of the same types of conflicts (apologize for mixed metaphor).

Yes, Abigail, that's all true, but personally I don't object to the fact that Sittenfeld chose to touch on those subjects, it's the way she has executed them. As I said before, it's done badly. To me, the author came off as sexist, transphobic and racist, even though I think her object was the opposite. Do you feel otherwise? I'm interested to know.

The thing about Pride and Prejudice was that it was so funny in the way it pierced expectations, in the way it observed and laughed at types of character. The novel is also beautifully constructed, so that you can see the parallel journeys Elizabeth and Darcy are making, and everything that happens is so precisely and logically mapped out, and it's heaving with irony and wit, each sentence feels like a labour of love. Sittenfeld's 'Eligible' feels like a contemporary romance, and not a very good one. I know several people here have mentioned that if it weren't attached to Pride and Prejudice the original, it would have been better, but I disagree with that. I think if it weren't connected to Pride and Prejudice, it would collapse under the weight of its lack of coherence, random characters and events which add nothing to the plot, and uninteresting premise.

Honestly, this book...it's "chick lit," for lack of better term at my immediate disposal. Another book about a middle-aged woman of questionable morals having a mid-life crisis. That's not what Pride and Prejudice is about. I agree with a lot of your comments on this thread, so I won't repeat them. But is anyone else just really mad about Liz? How Sittenfeld took one of my favorite literary characters and turned her into one I almost hate...well, that couldn't have been easy. The book itself isn't bad, just not what I wanted at all, and not a faithful adaptation of the original. Oh, and did anyone else read the last chapter and think, "Why is this here? What the hell does Mary's bowling have to do with anything?" And why, after adding so much stuff to make Liz seem like a major feminist, did the author have her quit her job and move to Cincinnati for Darcy, and there's no mention of what she's doing independently from him after that. Did she get a new magazine job? Did she join the country club? What?!

Hannah wrote: "And why, after adding so much stuff to make Liz seem like a major feminist, did the author have her quit her job and move to Cincinnati for Darcy, and there's no mention of what she's doing independently from him after that. Did she get a new magazine job? Did she join the country club? What?! "

Very good point! In fact, why couldn't any of the women deal on their own? Why did Charlotte up sticks and move away from her home and her career just to see if it would work out with a man she wasn't even that into? Why did Jane decide to have a baby she couldn't afford and then live off the charity of first a wealthy lesbian couple and second, a wealthy reality show star? Why did both Lydia and Kitty have to be happily paired off with decent people - after we are shown again and again that they themselves were useless, lazy, vein and stupid? Why were all the men decent and all the women terrible drags on society?

In the end, Sittenfeld did not manage to write a decent romantic story, nor an adaptation of P&P, I think. I did not feel the romance between Darcy and Elizabeth. Marriage felt like the last thing these two should be doing after their history. I wasn't amused, I wasn't touched, it didn't evoke any feelings in me but confusion and annoyance.

Emily wrote, “To me, the author came off as sexist, transphobic and racist, even though I think her object was the opposite. Do you feel otherwise?”

First of all, loving this vigorous discussion! Everyone here is making their case so eloquently.

Actually, I do agree with you about the sexist part—the attitudes she has her female characters espouse read as a bit pathetic to me—but Sittenfeld is writing within a genre that has an inherently sexist slant. It’s virtually impossible to write a “marriage-plot” novel without having the female characters want to marry, even though marrying is in no way a necessity for the modern woman. In the case of each character, including Elizabeth and Charlotte, I think she tried to make it not about marrying for wealth and position, although those things are undeniably alluring and it would be dishonest to pretend they didn’t have a glamour about them. (She does make an attempt to set up a contrast between the hollow glamour of the reality show and the more substantive allure of the Darcy family’s lifestyle.) But in the end, I agree that she does give all the female characters some stereotypically girly ideas—about their looks, their social lives, shopping, etc. It’s telling to me about Liz that she works for a magazine called Mascara, which sounds like one of those rags that tries to cover up its old-fashioned preoccupations with a fig leaf of feminism. Self and Vogue, I’m talking about you! A lot of those elements in the book made me squirm, as I am personally way out at the feminist end of the spectrum. But that is the genre, and I took those bits as part of the genre.

As for the racist and transphobic thing, I don’t really agree. Just mentioning racist and transphobic ideas is very different from holding such views, especially in fiction. In each case that those ideas were brought up, it was (a) so that they could be countered or (b) so that the character could travel a learning curve. So for me, they had a literary function. In the case of Mrs. Bennet’s racist and Judaiphobic views, they were a caricature of the ideas of older, privileged white Protestants (sigh, I was raised among the Frozen Chosen and was subjected to a ton of that crap), and in each case they were seen through Liz’s very contrary views. Liz herself, as has been discussed in these threads, has initially a view of Ham that is maybe not fully transphobic but certainly ignorant. (I would join in calling the author on improbability here, because it seems unlikely that someone who had lived in New York for decades would be that trans-ignorant. Really? She wouldn’t know not to speculate about the person’s plumbing?) What Liz then does, however, is immediately try to educate herself, which is a marker of character, of how she approaches the unfamiliar. It never changes her behavior toward Ham, at least.

This seems pretty realistic to me, because I think there’s a vast middle ground of people who have well-meaning instincts toward people who are different, but those instincts are at war with unexamined biases. I had to confront this in my own life when I went to work for an LGBT publication, and everybody immediately assumed I was gay. It took me a while to learn not to care what total strangers were assuming about such a central aspect of my identity. The fact that their reactions were so often ridiculous (e.g., being nervous about being alone in an elevator with me, or congratulating me for my putative gayness, which made me so artistic and creative) certainly helped!

Getting back to Eligible, what I would object to with regard to this injection of contemporary social issues into the story is that it sometimes felt preachy. While my impression was that the social-issues element had its place in the plot, it does feel as if the story were being used to teach us what we ought to think about the issues. We’re supposed to be seeing the world from Liz’s point of view, so we’re supposed to adopt her positions. I’m sensitive to this because I made the same mistake (with regard to a gay character, as well as with some issues of rural poverty) in my own modern P&P adaptation, and that approach now feels a little patronizing to me. In my case, I used it not just to educate the unwary reader but also to force Elizabeth to challenge her own moral certainties, but still . . .

As a side note, I didn’t get from the book that Liz actually quit her job to move to Cincinnati—though if she did, she could easily find sufficient work as a freelance journalist doing the kind of interviews she was known for, and submitting them to different magazines.

As for the rhetorical question, “why couldn’t any of the women deal on their own?” I would return to the genre problem—the marriage plot structure, throughout its history, has been based on the assumption that none of us can deal on our own, we all “need somebody.” In our increasingly disconnected connected world, where sex-based inequities are slowly leveling out, this has become an almost insuperable problem for a plot structure that has served English lit well for centuries. Funny story about that, if I may indulge one other personal note: when I was fourteen, I tried to write a pastoral romance along the lines of All’s Well That Ends Well. I burbled happily along till I got to the climactic moment when the hero proposed to the heroine. It stopped me in my tracks, and I sat up all night just staring at the page. I knew what she was supposed to say, but it felt entirely wrong for her to say it. In the end, I had to head off to class, so I hastily scrawled her answer—No. Then I put the manuscript away and never looked at it again. My point is that the whole marriage-plot house of cards collapses unless the heroine says yes at the end, and the case for yes becomes harder and harder to make.

I guess I accept Sittenfeld’s novel as a coherent whole within the parameters of the genre, though it’s a genre I’m no longer comfortable with. The generally positive remarks I’ve made in these threads reflect that distinction; I try to evaluate everything I read based on what I think the author is trying to do, not on what I personally want from a novel (especially because what I want is not always clear to me, and is often pretty fluid). I also rate Eligible’s connection to Pride and Prejudice higher than some readers here.

Hannah wrote: "Honestly, this book...it's "chick lit," for lack of better term at my immediate disposal. Another book about a middle-aged woman of questionable morals having a mid-life crisis. That's not what Pri..."

Ha! I put it on my chick lit shelf.

The transgender stuff made me wince. I'd actually love to read a transgendered person's review on this book.

While on the subject of Ham - why call him that. What adult would pick that as a nickname? Why not call him Ryan Ham or Ryan Hamilton. I think most of us would pick up that she had split Wickham's character in two!

Abigail I have to disagree, I've seen a lot of stories executed far more skillfully in the romance genre. A really good writer can at least make it believable while you're reading it, even if you question it later, and some just get it right.

I binged watched The Lizzie Bennett Diaries btw, (who needs sleep,) thanks so much for that! ;) Seriously though it was inspired.

Louise Sparrow wrote: "Abigail I have to disagree, I've seen a lot of stories executed far more skillfully in the romance genre. A really good writer can at least make it believable while you're reading it, even if you q..."

I'm spacing The LB Diaries out! If it's allowed I'm going to post in the threads here when I have finished. :)

Abigail wrote: "Emily wrote, “To me, the author came off as sexist, transphobic and racist, even though I think her object was the opposite. Do you feel otherwise?”

First of all, loving this vigorous discussion! ..."

Thank you for elaborating! I can see where you are coming from, and I think perhaps as an author yourself you take a more lenient view of things, because you must know better how hard Sittenfeld's job was!

But I think there is a slight misunderstanding here. I am not accusing Sittenfeld of racism because she wrote a racist character. I am accusing her of racism because she is writing racist things. Mrs Bennet being a racist is not the writer being a racist. But the writer writing disposable black people with no personalities besides serving the comforts and needs of white characters, and dispensing moral wisdom, is. Similarly, Lizzy learning to understand about transgender people is not the writer being transphobic. The writer making it a point in her narration to tell us precisely at what stage of transition Ham is is, at the very least, not very enlightened of her (transphobic may have been too harsh a word to use). And finally, of course in a romance novel the two main characters have to get together, but in a modern romance they don't have to end up married, surely!? I mean, I'm no expert on contemporary romance, but this is my guess. And even if Lizzy and Darcy do get married in the end, is it necessary to pair everybody else off too? In the original Jane Austen was able to keep herself from doing so, so why not here?

Louise Sparrow wrote: "I binged watched The Lizzie Bennett Diaries btw, (who needs sleep,) thanks so much for that! ;) Seriously though it was inspired.."

Yay! So glad you liked it!

Carol ♔ Type, Oh Queen! ♔ wrote: "I'm spacing The LB Diaries out! If it's allowed I'm going to post in the threads here when I have finished. :)"

If not here, at least write about it somewhere else in this group, I am interested to know opinions! :)

You ask great questions, Emily, and I agree about the disposable black characters thing, though I’m not sure I’d call that racist in the full-on hostile sense, more like the persistent blindness of the privileged. I hate books like The Help where a story about black folk is told through the eyes of a white heroine—“Look what wonderful things I’ve discovered about black people! Look at what a heroine I am for championing them!” As if it weren’t the black people’s story, as if they had no agency without the white person granting it to them. Gotta fly, but I will think more about your shrewd ideas.

Abigail wrote: "You ask great questions, Emily, and I agree about the disposable black characters thing, though I’m not sure I’d call that racist in the full-on hostile sense, more like the persistent blindness of..."

Yes! That is precisely what I mean!

I am with Hannah still mourning the loss of Lizzy as an archetype. I am enjoying reading details and questions from others who are probing Sittenfeld's work more but for me my utter dislike of Liz creates a barrier where I cannot like this book. I was thinking about donating it to my library.

Karen wrote: "I am with Hannah still mourning the loss of Lizzy as an archetype. I am enjoying reading details and questions from others who are probing Sittenfeld's work more but for me my utter dislike of Liz ..."

I've already donated my copy to the op (charity) shop I volunteer for.

I've also finished the book by now and I wasn't satisfied with the ending. I didn't like the whole Eligible-wedding and actually it just struck me how I also didn't like Chip as a character.

And then I was even less satisfied with Liz and Darcy's ending. They just skipped dating and got married straight away? She even proposed at her sister's wedding because she couldn't wait for a more appropriate moment?

I thought the story in general was enjoyable but I really disliked this last part. I''ve started the Lizzie Bennet diaries at your recommendation and I'm really curious how they will have translated all these different storylines to our modern times. I really like it so far!

Nathalie wrote: "I've also finished the book by now and I wasn't satisfied with the ending. I didn't like the whole Eligible-wedding and actually it just struck me how I also didn't like Chip as a character.
."

Chip had a character? How did I miss that? :D

Yes I'm still loving the Diaries.

Carol ♔ Type, Oh Queen! ♔ wrote: "Nathalie wrote: "I've also finished the book by now and I wasn't satisfied with the ending. I didn't like the whole Eligible-wedding and actually it just struck me how I also didn't like Chip as a ..."

That made me laugh out loud, Carol! I'm glad you're also enjoying the Diaries.

Carol ♔ Type, Oh Queen! ♔ wrote: "Chip had a character? How did I miss that? :D"

Lol!

I finished and enjoyed it. I took the view that it isn't a retelling and took the general traits of the characters and refashioned them. A good summer read. I really enjoyed the discussions here!

OK, having finished the book now, I have settled on a three-star rating. I really wanted to give it more but that's where my feelings were after finishing. Perhaps the fact that this novel is forced to stand up to the original is an unfair starting point to judge it from, but that's the way the situation is, and though I liked a lot of it I was hoping to love it. Entertainment Weekly actually gave this a great grade so I was eager to read it; however the criticism in that review, that there was less romance than the original, was probably why I liked it less. I have to say it again-- Liz didn't feel like Elizabeth Bennet to me. I didn't like how she said "like" so often--she sounded like a teenager instead of a grown woman--and shouldn't she have been funnier? This novel is definitely not a waste of time for an Austen lover but this is not the place to go for a great modern P & P.

BTW: Liz says near the end of the novel that she will work out of Cincinnati so I don't think she quit her job, just to clear up that question.

I would also like to join the other moderators to say what a WONDERFUL discussion this has been. A lot of insight and passion expressed. Thanks a lot for that, everyone!

This was fun! Would love to do another group read.

Abigail wrote: "This was fun! Would love to do another group read."

Yes even though I didn't like the book, I've loved meeting new people & catching up with old friends. & Random House's efficiency getting the books to us - colour me impressed!

Definitely want to have a discussion when I finish viewing The Lizzie Bennett Diaries!

I also hope there will be more group reads in the future because I really enjoyed the discussion.

Carol, I believe there's already a topic about the Lizzie Bennet Diaries and I would definitely like to discuss the LBD with you and other enthusiasts.

Rachel, I have to agree with your opinion about the book. I also gave it 3 stars and I had the same feeling about it. I think it was a fun summer read but perhaps I expected something more.

Same here, thanks for organising this SarahC!

Nathalie wrote: "I also hope there will be more group reads in the future because I really enjoyed the discussion.

Carol, I believe there's already a topic about the Lizzie Bennet Diaries and I would definitely l..."

Yes I have found the thread but want to wait tll I'm finished (or nearly finished) before commenting - in case of spoilers. :)

We should organize another group read/discussion! Is there any other Austen-themed/based novel people have been wanting to read?

Hannah wrote: "We should organize another group read/discussion! Is there any other Austen-themed/based novel people have been wanting to read?"

I'd love to do an actual Austen especially Pride & Prejudice. I also haven't reread Mansfield Park recently but see this group has had quite a recent discussion.

Hey, Carol, are you familiar with the Web site Republic of Pemberley? That site is just finishing up a group read of P&P—some very interesting chat.

Abigail wrote: "Hey, Carol, are you familiar with the Web site Republic of Pemberley? That site is just finishing up a group read of P&P—some very interesting chat."

sigh. I always just miss every group read of P&P. I may reread while away on holiday in August.

Attention: USA participants. Jane Austen marathon going on this moment on TCM (Turner Classic Movies cable channel)!