Jane Austen discussion

I've read a good bit of Austen fan fiction including sequels, retellings from the hero's perspective, and the novels put in a modern setting. Of the three, I've only enjoyed the last one. I suppose it's because the story's are so good and only when the stories completely reset does it seem like the author is doing anymore than ripping off Austen. So, if you know of any good Austen books put in a modern setting, please post! (So far I've read Pride, Prejudice and Jasmin Field and Bridget Jones' Diary. I loved both!)

I really liked Mr Darcy's Diary. It really gave a new outlook on the P&P story.

I agree w/ Mary! I recently finished it, and now I have learned to love even the smallest of characters--Anne and Colonel Fitzwilliam, especially.

This brings to mind the story of Christy Brown, who with his left foot, began to write his own stories in the "style" of Dickens. It read like a boy writing like Dickens. That is how Austen "stories" read....

I'm not sure how many people know this, but the movie "Clueless" was based on Emma. I actually saw Clueless before I read Emma, so as I was reading the book I thought, "This is so much like that movie."

I LOVE Clueless so much that I have a quote from the movie pinned up in my cubicle.

'tis a far, far better thing doing stuff for other people

I saw it way after I read Emma and I enjoyed the way the director, Amy Heckerling, snuck in little clues of the source material (Elton/Mr. Elton), but still kept it very modern.

I saw Clueless years before I read Emma. When I read it though, Clueless was way out of my mind. I saw the movie again about seven months ago and I noticed a similarity, so I looked it up and found out what you found out Annette.

Hum, Blayre, I haven't read that many of such books, alas. I did read the Jasmin Fields one awhile ago and liked it well enough.

Has anyone read Austenland by Shannon Hale. The premise sounds delightful but I've heard mixed reviews on the delivery.

As for movies, I also loved "Clueless." Have you seen "Bride and Prejudice" set in Modern India/UK/US??? That's a lot of fun, too.

I read Austenland and it was absolutely dreadful. The characters were poorly developed and unappealing, the author didn't use half ot the potential of the premise. I would highly unreccomend it.

Thanks, Blayre! That's what I'd heard. I guess the author is quite popular in the fantasy genre but sounds like she didn't cross over into the "chick-lit" type very well.

Bride and Prejudice was tee-hee-larious. I loved it.

I forgot to mention "The Jane Austen Book Club." I didn't read the book and admit that I saw the movie mostly because it features Hugh Dancy (adore him!) I liked the film because he was wonderful in it and the film itself is entertaining enough, some cute moments and some rather lame ones. I think my favorite aspect is Grig being brave enough to come to a book club full of women and realizing that Austen has a lot of wisdom that transcends gender; and how the club member who is "prejudiced" against Sci-Fi books (which Grig loves) comes to realize they have a lot of wisdom, too. Anyway, know JABC has very mixed reactions. The connections between Austen and real-life are a bit vague, so I wouldn't really get it for that reason (it's not like "Clueless" or "Bride and Prejudice").

I love "Bride and Prejudice!" SO funny!
And yes, "The Jane Austen Book Club" is worthwhile seeing - if only from Grig/Hugh;>

Angela - Bridget Jones's Diary is my favorite light, fluffy novel. At the basic level, it covers P&P's plot line, but (like you) I don't think Bridget Jones can really compare. Since Fielding based the story on P&P, though, I was surprised, and irritated, to hear the direction she's taken Bridget since Bridget Jones The Edge of Reason. I don't want to spoil anything in case she puts these new columns into another book, but have you heard about this?

I thought Clueless was much better executed than Bride and Prejudice. Funny how Clueless probably had more to contend with in altering storyline. Well done Clueless adapters.

What did we think of the new P and P movie with Keira Knightly?

I thought the poverty was overstated - they did not live in filth as suggested by scenes...and the characters were too bold to be Austen. Imagine Elizabeth going out to hunt for boys, that doesn't sound like her, sounds more like Lydia. In this version, they're all Lydias...

I was not really a fan of the P&P with Knightly. (Gorgeous romance scene with Lizzie and Darcy notwithstanding; though really the one in A&E's P&P is so much more accurate to the time period when the proposal comes in a quiet and kiss-free moment when they hang back on a walk with Jane and Bingley!) I found Knightly an annoying and sadly lacking Elizabeth and the plot and characters were not developed fully. I know some people have commented that this film (as opposed to the Firth/Ehle version) captures a more "youthful" Lizzie and Darcy but I don't think this excuses lack of depth since Elizabeth was "not yet one and twenty" but had great depth in the flim. I also agree about the overstated poverty. Then again, maybe I am not that keen on recent Austen films with popular actresses...
(Did anyone here DISlike "Becoming Jane"??? I seem to be one of the few!!!)

PS I mean, Elizabeth had great depth in the BOOK. (oops)

Angela - Yes, there may be another book after The Edge of Reason (I agree with you that it wasn't as good as the first book). Apparently, Bridget Jones started out as a newspaper column over in the U.K. In 2005, Fielding continued the column from where The Edge of Reason left off, but none of this newer material has been included in a book as of yet. I don't want to say much about it because I don't want to spoil it for anyone, but I'll just say that Fielding took Bridget in a direction that I was very sad to see happen.

I haven't read any of the new columns, since I'm pretty unhappy about what I know about them, but you can find them here: http://www.friendsoffirth.com/bjd/col...

The Edge of Reason is based on Persuasion! But I think she struggles alot more with this adaptation. It doesn't flow as well as the first adaptation. The plot of Persuasion is so much more complex than P and P, as well as lesser known. A bold move on Fielding's Part...
I've read some of her other literature and I have to say I enjoy it better when she steals from Austen,because her creations are too fluffy...the fluff sits best on top

I realize, going back to your comment 17, Kathryn, that adaptations sometimes have to shorten and "spice up" adaptations. I would rather people gain entry into Austen from spicy adaptation than think Austen boring...I take issue, as I believe you do, with the "spicing up" of Lizzie's character because her tension with Darcy rises from her soundness of mind and good behavior, which shows her to be his equal, combined with her wit and vivacity, which makes her sexy. If Wit and Vivacity are revealed by outbursts and low-cut gowns, what's left for Lydia? Soundness of mind and wit are traits left fighting for air against Keira Knightly's exasperated huffing and puffing and outraged little squeals. Is that dramatic acting? I never knew.
As for the supposed poverty, the point is the family was gentile poor - like yuppies. The distinction is not between a prince and a pauper, but like Ivy League vs. Community College. Sorry guys, but that's Austen's world. She had a fear of poverty that didn't provide her with white gloves, not the kind where she had to "work out" (like the BRontes). The movie wants to overstate and misses the delicious nit-picky quality of rank in Austen's world.

I wonder if our opinions of the movie adaptations are too based on our modern ideas, instead of the situations and attitudes that may have actually existed in the early 1800's.

I think I enjoy more the P&P version that shows the dirt and muddiness of their homes and surroundings. Austen in her books was trying to tell us that these women faced genteel poverty. If they didn't marry well, they could hope that a male member of the family could help provide the basics of living in their future. The Bennet's home MIGHT have resembled that of the Kiera Knightly version. The estate was entailed, Mr. Bennet wasn't a very good provider, and there were 5 daughters to provide for.

The Colin Firth version is legendary, and for good reason, but that Longbourn did seem too pristine for their economic condition.

Also a comment on behavior --
Maybe Jane Austen was trying to move ideas ahead in her novels and our 21st century movies (while not altogether Jane-accurate) may have caught that. I like to think that the conversations and actions between two people alone might have been more modern than some versions show. Lovers were living in a formal society, but, after all Lizzie and Darcy had been through, I think their coming together could have been more like the Keira/Matthew scene. They had pretty much exposed much of who they were by that point, so things might have been more intimate.

I think our impressions of manners in the drawing room may not have carried over to how people reacted to each other in intimate settings.

I think that is why I also like the movie Becoming Jane. The portrayal of Jane showed her as intelligent, imperfect, frustrated, and willing to seek a solution that was outside of "polite society" in her future with Tom Lefroy.

I am not a nut for historical accuracy, I just like to look into how people might have really behaved and lived in their day-to-day lives. I think it connects me to the past better.

Also, I think Colin Firth is unbeatable -- dont miss him in The Importance of Being Earnest and Nanny McPhee. Enjoy!

Great points, Michaela and Sarah. I guess it just goes to show what a brilliant author Jane Austen truly was that her characters provide so much depth and the plots so much breadth that the appeal is enduring and allows for new interpretations that may or may not be what Austen originally invisioned, but brings something to the modern audience. (Like with Shakespeare adaptations--I saw "Midsummer Night's Dream" at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival this summer; while all the dialogue was unchanged from the Bard's original, it was set in '60s/'70s, Bottom's troupe came onto the stage in a VW van with neon flowers on it, and the "fairies" were men in tu-tus--certainly not what Shakespeare would have invisioned, but it struck a chord with the audience!)

I think what annoyed me about "Becoming Jane" was the insinuation that Jane could not be a truly good author until she had had a passionate/romantic relationship. While certainly it could add new dimensions to her character, I just found it rather insulting to assume that she could not have simply been an astute observer of humanity and still been a fine author. I'm not trying to dis relationships (I am happily married myself) but I just found the attitude of LeFroy (and Jane's acceptance of it) irksome. (Again, most people I know really liked the movie, so maybe I just wasn't in the mood for it!)

PS For another side of Colin Firth, don't miss "Mamma Mia!" (Hint: he wears spandex bell-bottoms and sings ABBA!)

That's a great comment Sarah - things could have been tight enough financially that there might have been some dirt on the floor...but if you read Mansfield Park where Fanny is sent home to Portsmouth to visit her mother's house for the first time in ten years...Austen is absolutely revolting herself describing unmended clothes, small amount of dirt, dishes that weren't cleared away, and THIS was meant to describe the Price's level in society. I believe the "reimagining" is being done by the new P and P - by dropping the Bennets several levels in society for dramatic effect. They wanted Darcy richer and Elizabeth even poorer...in other words, I see the new P and P is somewhat more guilty in viewing things with a "modern view".
Certain many people had dirty homes but not the people who moved in the Bennets' circle. Those were people that worked, hired help, etc. That was people of Fanny Price's social calibre. Filth was not part of Austen's life, and not part of Elizabeth's...ask Fanny if you want to know what that kind of house looks like.
Also, clearly babies were being made, and kisses exchanged (if Willoughby could knock a girl up). But that's a shadowy man's world, Austen never goes there for the simple reason that she might not have known what to write (picture the movie "The Forty-Year-Old Virgin" where the guy is describing women's breast feeling like "bag's of sand"...LOL). Perhaps it IS safe for us to write kisses in, but then, it was never from Austen's pen, nor perhaps from her imagining. That's why she never had her heriones married. What does she know about it...

Wow! I read no idea! Very interesting!
When I read the Edge of Reason II wasn't looking for the parallels, but I suppose if I ever read it again I will.
Thanks for that tidbit!

I guess we have differing viewpoints on Austen and the "polite rules of society" issue of my earlier post.

And I guess I didn't really walk away from the Kiera Knightly version of the story thinking that Longbourn looked exactly filthy. The yards looked more cottagey and not particularly stately, but I still don't believe the Bennets were meant to be too stately.

I am behind on Bridget Jones. Did the author say The Edge of Reason was based on Persuasion? I dont see it. Is Bridget Jones in one movie supposed to be inspired by Elizabeth Bennet and in another movie inspired by Anne Elliot? I don't understand.

Sarah - I found this, regarding the parallels between The Edge of Reason and Persuasion (it's not much, but it's a bit of an explanation!):

"There are similar parallels between The Edge of Reason and the Austen novel Persuasion, in which the main character is persuaded by her friends to break off her relationship with her "true love." Other similarities include the naming of Giles Benwick, after Captain Benwick in Persuasion as well as the scene where Rebecca, Bridget's rival for Mark's affection, dives into a shallow river and hurts her foot. This is reminiscent of the incident in Persuasion when Louisa, Anne's rival, falls on her head at Lyme."

Thanks Jamie,
That is interesting how much Jane-influence there is among us modern women. I will have to look at Fielding's books more closely.

That brings up another thing I had in mind --

Are there any books by modern writers that aren't necessarily Austen resets, but that remind you of Austen -- maybe similar to her tone or style? If anything comes to mind to anyone, please share. I will ponder over the idea myself and see what I come up with.

Also the letter that MArcy Darcy leaves for Bridget and she reads the back by accident. I believe that was an illusion of the Wentworth "will you marry me?" letter that Wentworth writes quickly and leaves for Anne to find.
For a great article from the Jane Austen Society on the parellels between Br.Jones I and P&P and Br.Jones II and Persuasion see: http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-l...

Try "Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrel" by Susanna Clarke for writing style (it's a fantasy/Austen-like book set in England), "The French Lieutenant's Woman" by John Fowles - it's set in Lyme too, and I would try "Shirley" by Charlotte Bronte. The writing is nothing like, but the story is good for Austen fans.

Thanks very much Michaela,

I have had so many recommendations for Jonathan Strange -- it is on my winter reading list -- it sounded like something I would enjoy getting cozy under the blanket with the cup of tea and reading slowly!

Also, I have read the Fowles book. Wasnt it interesting? I cant say I liked ita lot, but scenes and thoughts of that novel have carried with me for several years. Do you ever have that experience with a book you thought you didnt like?

YES! Absolutely. "Atonement".