Back to Top

Category: Jane Austen


You heard it here. Mansfield Park is the Austen equivalent of big girl panties.


I chose Mansfield Park because I was afraid no one else would want it, and I was interested in seeing what I thought of the book decades after my last attempt at reading it. Briefly, it is the story of Fanny Price, who is raised by her wealthy relatives the Bertrams in their luxurious home Mansfield Park (thought to be based on Cottesbrooke Hall), where [i]f tenderness could ever be supposed wanting, good sense and good breeding supplied its place.

I read the Oxford University Press edition–not my first choice but the local library didn’t have a copy and I couldn’t find my collected Austen. No helpful notes or introduction, and so I was left to my own interpretation. First, I had trouble figuring out what is the book really about–it’s unlike Austen’s other works in that it covers so much ground and so many themes, and the point of view shifts frequently; I believe it’s the only one of the novels that uses multiple points of view. It’s the only one of the novels that is concerned in a major way with fashionable mores of the ton and has more titled characters, at least mentioned in passing, than you can shake a stick at.

Is it a comedy? Sort of. Mrs. Norris, the only truly funny character, isn’t that funny after a time as you realize how mean-spirited she is and as you see her fall out of favor with the powerful Sir Thomas Bertram. There’s also the stagestruck Mr. Yates who really really likes his blue dress (no, not that sort of dress) and pink satin cloak.

Is it a love story? Sort of. Edmund and Fanny slide into marriage–and the one thing I do remember from earlier readings is that these two are well matched in vapidity and longwindedness. The moral of the book?–that if you wait, all things will come to you?–Fanny must have a horse, a fire in her room, and ultimately a husband (the cousin marrying thing was not nearly as icky as you might think). That virtue is rewarded, certainly; Miss Prism (The Importance of Being Earnest), whose definition of fiction was that the good end happily and the bad unhappily, probably enjoyed Mansfield Park.

Fanny develops from the poor, sickly relative into an attractive and well read young woman, although shy and given to longwinded rhapsodies on the beauties of nature etc. (this is a book of voluble characters. Edmund, bless him, goes on for pages and pages). She and her Bertram cousins are befriended by the worldly and ambitious brother and sister Henry and Mary Crawford, and Henry becomes involved with both of Fanny’s female cousins, playing them off against each other, even though one of them is engaged. And Fanny finds herself befriending Mary, even though she isn’t really sure she likes her or approves of her, and feels pretty much the same way about Henry.

One of the early crises of the book–ending with a splendid cliffhanger at the end of Volume I–is the amateur staging of a very naughty play, Lovers’ Vows. Fanny refuses to take part; poor Edmund, in a crisis of conscience, decides it is his moral duty to take a part in the play. (I think, but I’m not sure, that you are meant to laugh here.) Much later you find out that Edmund very much enjoyed rehearsing with the fascinating Miss Crawford, with whom he’s fallen in love, even though he suspects her moral code does not match up to his. And, yes, she really does say “What gentleman among you am I to have the pleasure of making love to?”

And then Henry Crawford tells his sister that his next challenge is to make Fanny fall in love with him.

Yikes.

Is Austen writing her version of Les Liaisons Dangereuses? Certainly Crawford, short, dark, flirty, and keen on farming as well as women, is no Valmont. Henry arranges for a promotion for Fanny’s midshipman brother and even wrenches good behavior out of her uncouth family in Portsmouth. But Fanny holds firm–she won’t marry a man she doesn’t love, however persuasive he, his sister, and her own relatives are in gently blackmailing her to accept him, even if Henry does seem to be genuinely in love with her. Her instincts prove to be right.

Mansfield Park is possibly Austen’s sexiest book, and I think this may be one reason–other than the yawn-inducing Fanny and Edmund–why it’s her least favorite. I suspect it may be beyond many readers’ comfort zones–it doesn’t sound like dear Jane. There’s a tremendously strong physical awareness between her characters:

… she gradually slackened in the needle-work, which, at the beginning, seemed to occupy her totally; how it fell from her hand while she sat motionless over it—and at last, how the eyes which had appeared so studiously to avoid him throughout the day, were turned and fixed on Crawford, fixed on him for minutes, fixed on him in short till the attraction drew Crawford’s upon her, and the book was closed, and the charm was broken.

And the most blatant expression of physical desire of all of Austen’s books:

…Maria, still feeling her hand pressed to Henry Crawford’s heart, and caring little for anything else.

The characters are equally conscious of their physical presence indoors and outside. The book is full of references to space, horizons, the landscape improvements of Repton and others that open up vistas; and their movements around the house are like stage entrances and exits. There’s an extraordinary scene, elaborately choreographed, involving a locked gate, when the Bertrams, Fanny, and the Crawfords visit the estate of Miss Bertram’s fiance. When Fanny visits her family in Portsmouth you almost expect her to whip out a tape measure, so shocked is she by the humble dimensions of the rooms.

Enough from me. Have you read Mansfield Park? If not, why not? If you have, what do you think of it?

This is how Jane Austen herself described Emma, her most flawed heroine. I’m going to focus on this issue because I think it’s the crux of why there are such widely differing opinions on this book.

First I’ll say this isn’t my favorite Austen either. (PRIDE & PREJUDICE and PERSUASION are each my favorite, depending on which one I’ve read most recently.) When I first read EMMA as a teenager, I didn’t like it much. Being insecure myself, I didn’t want to identify with a heroine who made so very many embarrassing mistakes. At the time I would almost (hanging head in shame) rather identify with a Barbara Cartland heroine, though come to think of it they all had that embarrassing inability to complete a sentence in the hero’s presence!

Anyway, once I had outgrown the desire for perfect heroines, Emma grew on me. I’ve become more comfortable with my own flaws so now I also prefer heroines who make mistakes as long as they have the saving grace of learning from them as Emma does.

I even think I’ve come to a better understanding of Emma’s behavior toward Harriet Smith and her unkindness to Harriet’s suitor, the farmer Robert Martin. Emma’s most obvious motivation for “improving” Harriet appears to be an officious desire to manage everything. But reading between the lines, I wonder if part of the cause was loneliness. Emma’s sister married and moved away, then Miss Taylor did the same. She was encouraged to befriend Jane Fairfax but really, Jane Fairfax was not the stuff of which BFFs are made. Even Mr. Knightley admits that she ‘has not the open temper which a man would wish for in a wife.’ That open temper was a quality I think Emma longed for in a friend.

So Emma tried to mold Harriet into something more like herself, with disastrous results. I can sympathise with this because I once made a similar mistake. All I can say is that both Emma and I meant well and we are brave enough to admit when we are wrong. That ought to count for something!

I don’t find EMMA quite as romantic as P&P or PERSUASION, yet there’s a part of the romance that works powerfully for me. I like that Mr. Knightley loves Emma enough to always want to bring out the best in her and that he appreciates her courage in admitting her mistakes. The line from the book, so beautifully delivered by Jeremy Northam in the 1996 film: “I have blamed you, and lectured you, and you have borne it as no other woman in England would have borne it” is one of my favorites. I love the idea of someone being totally honest with you and loving you despite–or even because of–your faults.

So anyway, EMMA has grown on me to the point that it’s a strong #3 in my Jane Austen favorites list. But I still understand why it is last on many people’s lists. I have seen reviews of Joan Aiken’s spinoff JANE FAIRFAX (which I haven’t read myself) written by readers who say they detested Emma in the original. Jane Fairfax is a much more obvious choice of heroine by modern romance terms: virtuous, impoverished, an obvious object for sympathy. But being a bit of a contrarian here…why shouldn’t a heroine who is “handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition” have a romance too?

Let me know what you think about EMMA, either the main character or any others you’d like to discuss. And don’t forget, we’ll be giving away a copy of JANE AUSTEN’S WORLD to a lucky winner chosen from comments all this week!

Elena
www.elenagreene.com

Posted in Jane Austen | Tagged , | 26 Replies


What if, hidden in an old attic chest, Jane Austen’s memoirs were discovered after hundreds of years? What if those pages revealed the untold story of a life-changing love affair? That’s the premise behind this spellbinding novel, which delves into the secrets of Jane Austen’s life, giving us untold insights into her mind and heart.

Today we welcome to the Riskies Syrie James, whose wonderful first novel The Lost Memoirs of Jane Austen is now on the shelves. As usual, your relevant comment or question enters you into a contest to win a signed copy of the book, and Syrie will drop by to chat and answer questions.

Syrie, welcome to the Riskies. How did you come up with the idea for The Lost Memoirs of Jane Austen? (which I loved, by the way–it was such fun to identify Austen’s inspirations and I found the ending tremendously moving).

I’d read and loved all of Jane Austen’s novels, and couldn’t accept the historians’ theory that this wonderful, romantic writer never fell in love herself. Since Jane Austen was a very private person—all her books were published anonymously during her lifetime—I realized it was entirely possible that she had a love affair no one knew about. I decided to give her that love affair, with the man who was her soul mate; to write the book that I wanted to read.

Tell us about the research.

I read dozens of Jane Austen biographies. I studied her letters in minute detail, reread all her novels, her juvenilia, and her unfinished works. I researched her era extensively and watched all her movies. I took a self-guided Jane Austen Tour of England. I even took English Regency Country Dance lessons!

Did you find anything unusual or unexpected in your research?

I was delighted by the gossipy, irreverent tone of Jane Austen’s letters and juvenilia. I was overwhelmed and awed when I visited Jane Austen’s house at Chawton, and walked through the very rooms she lived and wrote in during the last nine years of her life. Godmersham Park (the estate formerly owned by Jane’s rich brother Edward, where she often made extended visits) is far larger, and has more extensive grounds, than I ever imagined. The Cobb at Lyme Regis (made famous in Persuasion, and featured in my novel) offers absolutely gorgeous vistas, and is far windier than I expected!

Did you find channeling Jane Austen intimidating?

Only at first. After all the research, when I finally started writing, her voice seemed to come naturally to me.

Why do you think Jane Austen is so popular?

Austen was witty and ironic, and a brilliant craftsman. She wrote about real people in recognizable circumstances, and she examined what people risk when they fall in love—a very relatable topic in any era. I think her recent surge in popularity owes a lot to the movies. Something magical happens when you put Jane Austen’s stories on the screen!

Was this your first novel or do you have a collection of mss. under the bed that may never see the light of day?

Before The Lost Memoirs of Jane Austen, I wrote a medical thriller which my agent loves, but has (so far) been unable to sell. That was heart-breaking. In my years as a screenwriter, although I sold 19 scripts, I wrote several that are still available!

Sorry, I have to ask you–have you seen Becoming Jane and what did you think of it?

I thought it was beautifully and reverently filmed, but I was disappointed by the story. I didn’t find it romantic. However, I loved the film adaptation of The Jane Austen Book Club.

What’s your favorite Austen novel?

Pride and Prejudice.

What else do you like to read?

I read everything! I read the newspaper every day. I subscribe to a lot of magazines. I usually have at least three or four novels in progress on my nightstand. I especially enjoy historical fiction, historical romance, women’s fiction, biography, memoir, mystery, humor and the classics.

What’s next for you?

I’m busy maintaining my website at http://www.syriejames.com/ … and I’m researching and writing my next book for Avon: a love story for Charlotte Brontë (another one of my favorite writers.) As you can imagine, I’m having a fantastic time “being” Charlotte!

As usual, we welcome your questions and comments!

Last week my friend Therese Walsh from Writer Unboxed posted a blog on gender differences in dialogue:Turning X’s into Y’s: Guy Talk That Works. A critique partner had told her that her hero sounded too effeminate. She ran her hero’s dialogue through Bookblog’s Gender Genie, a tool that predicts the gender of an author based on key words and is sometimes used by authors to test if their characters’ dialogue is gender appropriate. Gender Genie thought Therese’s hero was a girl.
This made me wonder because I had read the same manuscript and did not see anything wrong with the dialogue. Therese’s hero is half British and an antiques dealer: polite, well educated, pretty much as close to a Regency hero as one can get in a contemporary novel. I thought maybe he sounded fine to me because I’m so steeped in historical fiction. Gender Genie is based on an algorithm developed using post-1960 documents. The results may have some validity for modern writing (though many people have broken the test) but should a historical author worry about it?

I decided to run some dialogue from Jane Austen’s heroes through it. The first one I tried was Mr. Darcy and he checked out as male. Whew! Next I tried Edward Ferrars and Edmund Bertram. Both tested out female–not so surprising as they are some of Austen’s more “beta” heroes. But then Mr. Knightley checked out as a girl. And the highest female score of all was from Captain Wentworth, even though the sample dialogue I used was all about the ships he’d commanded. I’d always considered him Austen’s most macho hero!

Then the final surprise. The highest male score of any of Jane Austen’s heroes came from Henry Tilney. While he was talking about muslin, no less!

Looking at Gender Genie’s key words, I’m pretty convinced that historical changes in speech patterns explain these results. Though perhaps Gender Genie did detect Jane Austen as the puppeteer behind some of her heroes?

To me, masculinity isn’t determined by speech patterns alone. For me, the character’s actions and ways of thinking about things are more important. In that respect, Jane Austen’s male characters feel like men to me. And many other readers, presumably!

What do you think about Gender Genie? Do you think it’s bogus? Do you think historical authors should adapt their heroes’ language to modern standards of masculinity? (One would hate to have an effeminate hero!) What makes dialogue feel masculine or feminine to you?

This was a fun experiment. Maybe next week I’ll try some dialogue from other authors, male and female, historical and contemporary. Who knows, I may even test out my current hero’s dialogue. But maybe not–wouldn’t it be dreadful to learn that my Waterloo veteran turned balloonist sounds like a girl?!

Elena


I asked my friend, author, and Pemberley co-founder Myretta Robens what she thought of the movie Becoming Jane and she sent me the following rant (see how I cleverly avoided having to think of fresh writing myself?). But before she starts, let me say we both recognize the importance of seeing something before judging it. She does admit, however, she went in with more of a closed mind than she would’ve liked.

Myretta Speaks:
Wrong, wrong, wrong! Becoming Jane is just wrong. Okay, I realize that for the regular movie-goer, this is probably a nicely filmed, affecting story. But for someone who is deeply and passionately interested in Jane Austen, it’s just wrong! And here’s why:

Location – Ireland is NOT England and the parts used for this film didn’t look at all like the bits of England they purported to be. And…Godmersham by the Sea? What the heck was that? Although Godmersham (one of the homes of Jane’s brother, Edward Austen Knight) is in Kent, and Kent has some coast, Godmersham is, most emphatically, not near it.

Anachronism – Steel nibbed pens. That’s all I’m saying.

Historical inaccuracies – This is a big one. Almost none of this story ever happened. Yes, Jane Austen met and flirted with Tom Lefroy for a couple of weeks in 1795-6. There is nothing to indicate that she ever did most of the other things depicted in the movie. And that last scene was totally impossible. I could go on and on about these inaccuracies in serious detail, but you probably don’t want to hear it.

The gravest problem of all is the implication on which the film is based: That Jane Austen was a frustrated and mediocre writer until a man entered her life, introduced her to Tom Jones and taught her love. And the idea that some of her most sparkling prose was cribbed from other
people’s ideas. The premises of this film denigrate the genius and originality of Jane Austen. I am outraged on her behalf and on behalf of other women writers who are fully capable of telling their own stories.

End of Rant; Beginning of Q&A Period:

Thanks, Myretta! Have you seen the movie? What did you think? And what do you think in general of historical fictionalized accounts of something that may or may not have happened?