It is with great pleasure that I announce our save arrival, the roads being somewhat muddied and a great storm suffered at Baltimore, but all was well. My luggage arrived safely later that night by another conveyance and I am happy to report my bonnets, gowns etc. emerged quite unscathed.

All the ton was in attendance yesterday at the gathering of the Beau Monde, a bluestocking gathering accompanied by delicious food and edifying speakers. In the evening, after my maidservant had tied me into my gown, we attended the soiree, where I determined that a lady need not remove her gloves to drink a bottle of beer. Much dancing and merriment took place. The renowned Miss A— McC—- was in attendance, wearing a most elegant gown of dark red with matching shoes. Upon my admiration of her shoes, she admitted to Payless; my new shoes, golden slippers which proved excellent for dancing, came from Target.

We have reason to believe pictures will be available at a later date.

The weather is quite fine although somewhat heavy and humid as one would expect.

I remain, my dear friends, your most devoted friend, etc.

A week or two ago Amanda complained about the lame “sitting around in our underwear” ending on the 2007 version of Pride & Prejudice. It made me wonder (not for the first time) how I would have ended the film.

Riskies and friends probably all know that scene was added for the North American version; in the British release the film ends with Mr. Bennett giving his blessing to the marriage.

While I like a bit of basking in the glow of the happy ending–and definitely wanted something there, this ending didn’t hit me quite right. The first time I saw it it felt too sentimental. On viewing it again, though, when Lizzie talks of Darcy being cross with her, it reminded me of this passage from the book:

She began now to comprehend that he was exactly the man who, in disposition and talents, would most suit her. His understanding and temper, though unlike her own, would have answered all her wishes. It was an union that must have been to the advantage of both; by her ease and liveliness, his mind might have been softened, his manners improved; and from his judgment, information, and knowledge of the world, she must have received benefit of greater importance.

It’s a realistic happy ending. They won’t always agree but they’ll find a balance. I’m glad there was at least a hint of that in this final scene.

A couple other things bothered me more. First, the “sitting around in our underwear” thing. Not that I’m against characters cavorting half-naked in a garden–I’ve written such scenes. Nor do I have anything against snogging–only purists argue that JA never wrote a snogging scene. But I like to know the setup, i.e., what happened to all the servants? Surely they’re not all staring from their attic windows?!

The other thing is that this scene feels post-coital, so it seemed a bit out of order for them to be discussing what to call one another. It was just confusing.

I’m not sure how I would have ended the film. Jane Austen ended the book with a chapter of narrative describing what happened to everyone. It’s all nicely encapsulated in the wedding scene at the end of the 1995 Firth/Ehle version. Yet a double wedding scene doesn’t seem right for the 2007 version which is shorter, more intimate and more focused on Elizabeth and Darcy.

My idea would be to show the beginning of the wedding night, in their bedchamber (more believable for their first time) and with more of the lovely, youthful, somewhat awkward chemistry that we saw in the mist scene. Then a discreet fadeout to the theme music.

So anyway, it’s time for a poll. How would you have ended this film and why?

A) North American ending as is, sweet talk, snogging and all.

B) British ending, with Mr. Bennett welcoming suitors for Mary and Kitty.

C) Wedding scene as in the 1995 version

D) My idea – wedding night scene

E) Something else – do tell!

Elena
www.elenagreene.com

I’ve been back from my England/France trip for over a week now, and I’m beginning to settle back in. (Though a quick trip to Kansas City didn’t help, either in terms of jetlag or Putting Stuff Away.) So today’s post will be catching up on this and that, and rather miscellaneous.

JANE AUSTEN MOVIE CLUB

Thank you to everyone who joined in the discussion for our first “meeting” of the Jane Austen Movie Club last week, when we discussed the 1995 Persuasion! What a lot of fun.

Our next meeting will be August 7 (remember, it’s always the first Tuesday of the month), and we will discuss the 1996 Emma (the one starring Gwyneth Paltrow.) It’s short, it’s easy to find, and I know there are differences of opinion on it, so I think it should be fun to discuss! (And Lois already has a copy.) 🙂

KEAN

While in London, Todd and I saw the new production of the 1953 Sartre play Kean (which is itself a reworking of a much earlier Dumas play).

I know very little about the Dumas original, but the Sartre play takes what it wants from Kean’s life, and substitutes fiction for the rest. So the Kean socializing with the Prince of Wales is not only older than Kean was during the Regency, but older than Kean ever lived to be. (And still single!)

So what Sartre did, basically, was take the idea of Kean — a not-terribly-handsome actor from a lowly background, whose passionate and groundbreaking acting style made him an overly-indulged celebrity — and use it to talk about reality vs art (and various other things) in a play (which is nonetheless full of humor).

One choice of director Adrian Noble really threw me in this production: he set it during the 1950’s… I confess, I’d much rather have seen a Regency setting!

Here’s a picture of Antony Sher as Kean. (Photo credit: Tristram Kenton.) Interestingly, Sher is famous on the London stage for playing some of Kean’s favorite roles, including Richard III and Shylock.

Reviews of this production were mixed, with most seeing some problems with it. (For a nice overview, see http://www.theatre.com/story/id/3007600 ). The mixed reviews may have led to the low attendance which is causing the show to close earlier than originally stated…though it’s not the only show in the West End with that problem. (The musical The Drowsy Chaperone, even with Elaine Paige in the lead, is closing six months ahead of schedule, after a miniscule run.)

I confess I was severely jetlagged while watching the play…so perhaps I didn’t give it a fair trial. I found it amusing, and it certainly held the attention (the gentleman next to me who slept through it was, I am convinced, even more jetlagged than I.) But it didn’t seem to entirely succeed as much of anything, in my opinion. Sher was fine, as were the other actors — I’m not sure if I’d blame the script or the direction, but in the end none of it seemed to matter (and there were parts where things seemed to suddenly change, and the audience felt like we’d been lied to a bit, which I hate.)

I’M BACK!

The big news is I survived Heathrow! We flew the day after the terrorist attack on Glasgow — it was insanely confused and stressful (though, come to think of it, most of that was probably just Heathrow being true to itself). Then we flew to Kansas City and back, ending up stuck in our plane on the runway for an extra hour due to an unattended package.

But now I’m back! Back from London and the French Riviera. Back in the land of Mexican restaurants, the land of soft drink refills (and iced tea!), the land of wide streets and too many, too-wide cars. The land of cheap stuff, of smoggy skies, of dollar bills that all look alike, of freeways and Asian groceries and ranch dressing.

So…what do you notice when you come back home from somewhere?

And for those of you going to conference — have a great time!

Cara
Cara King, author of My Lady Gamester, who hasn’t left a bag unattended in a very long time