There’s something I’m rather embarrassed about but no longer wish to be.  My mother and sister and I are Jane Austen addicts.  Pride and Prejudice is our drug of choice, and I will tell you right now I have watched at least 4 versions of it, read the book,  and listened to the Irene Sutcliffe audio version numerous times.  I will also tell you, in strictest confidence, that we bought the board game (this, I blame entirely on my mother).  It turned out we knew all the answers anyway, so we only played it once.

In no way do I wish to argue that this is healthy.  It is merely enjoyable, and it has become a tradition for my mother and sister and I to watch the 1980 version (we imprinted on it like baby chicks; we enjoy the other versions but they do not give the same sense of home) once a year or so when I am back in Iowa.  My dad has typically avoided this activity, presumably out of some half-formed desire to hold onto whatever masculinity can survive living in a household full of women and a pug for however many years — but THIS year, I cleverly brought home a cold virus that weakened his defenses, so he huddled sniffling and gurgling in front of our small television with the rest of us.

And it was the best!  I had feared that a cold-sodden skeptic would dampen the festivities somewhat, but it made it all new again  — watching him chortle at jokes that the females in the room had known so long they had transmuted from joke into Universal Law.

As usual, we drank tea (and Manhattans, my mom has invented a truly amazing new recipe for them) and my Mom made her usual arguments that Mrs. Bennett was perfectly right about all the things that fit into her (admittedly small) worldview;  my sister fought the usual accusations that she was just like Lydia (I am always Eliza, because I was born first and made the call early, though I sometimes think I may be Jane, or fear I may be Mary); we all judged the fashions and yelled along with our favorite lines.  But whenever a pivotal scene or favorite joke came up, all eyes turned to my dad, to catch that first delightful grin of comprehension.

High fives to all the Jane Austen lovers in the world.  (To those of you who aren’t, you’re not reading it right.  Try again.)

As the title suggests I am still waiting for inspiration to kick in. Till then, I am blaming it all on the amount of work piling up. But I have to make a small confession. I have been diligently avoiding work today and been watching Pride and Prejudice instead.

I don’t care how it’s going to make me sound, but I absolutely love that book and I don’t mind the movie either. It takes a lot of guts to admit to that now a days. Somehow, people seem to think you’re nothing more than an air head if you like books like Pride and Prejudice or, God forbid, you actually LIKE the movie! I LIKE certain “chick flicks” that does not make me stupid!

Going completely off topic, I think men are afraid of “chick flicks” because then women tend to expect a lot more from them and are disappointed when these expectations are not met! Sounds logical, for something I just made up a few seconds ago! It’s plausible!

I also think women who completely fall for such movies and are actually waiting for a guy out of a “chick flick” are quite stupid really! Do they think that their life could possibly be full of happy coincidences, where the universe conspires to set them up with their soul mate! Put the ice-cream back in to the freezer and get a LIFE!

Coming back to Pride and Prejudice, I think the series with Colin Firth did much justice to the book, but Matthew Macfadyen as Mr Darcy appealed to me more. If any British girl heard me say that they would probably give me really dirty looks or quite possible do me bodily harm. They seem to be fixated over Colin Firth as Mr Darcy. To them.. Colin Firth IS Mr Darcy, end of discussion, bitch!

What was the whole point of this entry..oh yea, inspiration. I think, for now, finding a dashing Darcy for myself might be a good enough incentive to start sheding the pounds, dont you?

Because of the promo in AstroVision – 3 VCDs for 200, I picked Pride and Prejudice together with one of my favorite movies Briget Jone’s Diary 1 & 2. (People buy originals especially if you want to collect!)

Hmmm it’s a gamble for me to watch this movie as it featured old England. I’m just curious about Keira Knightley, who I watched in the film Atonement.

I don’t know if I just didn’t catch the detail of what the characters were saying because of their British accent, but there were points in the movie that I didn’t fully understand. And I’m actually too lazy to research about those things. My conclusion was its similar to the kind of “Little Women,” my favorite novel.

I admit, I’m not familiar with Jane Austen and that Pride and Prejudice is originally a novel. But I learned and agree that it maybe the source of other arts up to now. And like Josephine March of Little Women, I also can relate to Elizabeth Bennet (Keira). She’s not trying to be different but just want to be real. Even her romance with Fitzwilliam Darcy (Matthew Macfayden), a 28 year old and unmarried man, is appealing to me. Yeah I like older guys.

Keira’s acting is effective for me. Sometimes I see Winona Ryder in her but they are totally different, I know. I like her smile and the way she acts Liz. It’s so natural and not pretentious. On the other hand, Macfayden failed to attract me. Apart from his beautiful eyes, I’m not totally move on the way he carries the character. But yes, physically he’s suited to become Mr. Darcy.

Hmm I can’t talk much about other characters but they are totally fine. Rosamund Spike, who portrays Jane Bennet (the beautiful among the Bennet Sisters), is indeed a pretty one.

Because of this movie, I think I’m interested to read the novel and watch it again.

Humans appear to have a very inefficient memory system. The female has just completed, yet again, a reading of “Pride and Prejudice” only to start it over once more. Is the plot altogether forgotten in her primate skull, or perhaps she is trying to memorize the contents for some sort of performance. The male also tends to do this. His “Pride and Prejudice” is entitled “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.”

For a long time I wondered where he kept his motorcycle, but it suddenly strikes me that this book is more of an owner’s manual for himself than for any bike he may or may not own. The female glimpses at this Zen book too from mealtime to naptime, probably trying to pinpoint a male-malfunction that needs tweaking.

It is possible some neurons have been misfiring in the female’s brain and she is trying to reinstall the basics of her system, like when my iPod crashes and I must restore to factory settings. How bizarre! Are humans programmed to regress into “safe mode” when overwhelmed with their surroundings? Its hard to judge if a human’s functionality has been reduced as this, at times, seems like the default position. Has the female hit her BSOD?

Perhaps a perusal of their owner’s manuals will aid me in my understanding of the human mindset.

Because of Jane Austen’s fleeting references to servants in her works, I have heard  people refer to her so-called method of hiding them, as Her Invisible Servants, implying that, as she was mostly silent on their roles and  physical presence, they meant nothing to her and she was indifferent to them.

This is not  correct.From the evidence of her letters she was clearly involved in the detail of her own servants lives and of those employed by the various branches of her family.The letter written from Lyme of the 14th september 1804 talks affectionately of James and Jenny ,their servants. Jane Austen had a very close and long  friend ship with Anne Sharpe, the governess to Edward Knight’s children.

We have to remember, I think, that she was writing for an audience that understood the milieu in which she set her novels and she didn’t need to specify in a documentary-like manner all the servants employed in a household.

But we do get to hear  about some of them. Tantalising glimpses are given of the amount of servants  that  households large and small would employ: we get to know,  by report,Patty the  maid of all work employed by Miss Bates and her mother in Emma;  Mackenzie the gardener at Kellynch in Persuasion: Rebecca ,the maid of all work in the Prices overcrowded and slovenly household at Portsmouth in Mansfield Park.

Certainly not many of Jane Austen’s servants actually speak in the novels,but those that do are memorable, for they have important plot points to make. Baddesley the  butler at Mansfield plays a small but stellar role, fully ready to rebuke the horrid Mrs Norris, and  in one sentence encapsulates all we need to know about the Servant’s Hall ’s views on that dreadful woman. The redoubtable Mrs Reynolds  in Pride and Prejudice is surely loquacious enough for us all …

Mr. Gardiner, highly amused by the kind of family prejudice to which he attributed her excessive commendation of her master, soon led again to the subject; and she dwelt with energy on his many merits as they proceeded together up the great staircase.

If we want to learn more about  the detail of the servants and their roles in these household we have to look elsewhere. Luckily there are some good books available to us at reasonable prices..

The first I would recommend is The Complete Servant by  Samuel  and Sarah Adams, who both worked as servants in our era and recorded their  views on  the different roles of each category of employee in this book.

This is a reprint of the 1825 text. It is crammed full of  wonderful detail about the role of every possible household , indoors and outdoors servant,together with helpful calculations of the type of income then needed to support different sized households.

If you are only going to purchase one  book on servants in our era than this is the one I would most highly recommend.

Its foreward  is by Pamela Horn and she is the author of the second book I would recommend: Flunkies and Scullions,a marvellous in-depth look at the role of the servant in the 18th century,again impeccably researched and full of glorious detail.

And finally a new book on the subject of servant has been written by  the wonderful historian, Jeremy Musson entitled Up and Down Stairs:the History of the Country House Servant.

Despite only containing  two chapters on servants in our era, it is none the less a fascinating  read, and gives an over view of servants lives  from the middle ages to the present-day. It is a throughly enjoyable read, well researched and has the most fascinating chapter on  black servants in England during the 18th century that I have ever read. I would recommend it for that chapter alone.

As an over view of the history of the servant in country-house households it is a wonderful, informative  read.And that really cannot be said of too many  non-fiction books today.

There are of course  many original texts on servants roles and lives out there: the trick is finding and affording them! I recently bought an 1825 edition of The Lady’s Maid,which is turning out to be a riveting read:

Over the next few months I’ll be posting pieces from it for you. Do join me , won’t you?

Here’s an interesting book to make into a film. I haven’t read this yet but I’m tempted to buy it.

Les: wednesday, wednesday

Linds: dude, that’s not a song.  is it?

Les: no. but we could write one!

Linds: uh

Les: and then ali could talk about it on her blog!

Linds: let’s add that to the list of ill-conceived les and lid ideas that may never see the light of day

Les: there you go being a party-pooper again

Linds: it’s my job, apparently

Les: so it seems

i suppose we should focus and get to our question of the week

Linds: that would be new.  and out of character.  but let’s try it out

Les: k. here goes…  our question comes courtesy of kristan again. i love that girl.

Linds: she is super awesome

Les: she asks: Do you like it, or does it annoy you when books are turned into movies?

Linds: hm.  honestly, i think it all depends on how good the movie is as an independent artistic creation

Les: and they’re usually not that awesome.  don’t think i’ve ever heard anyone say that the movie was better than the book

Linds: and if that’s true, we have a problem

Les: word.  some book movies are fun, because they allow us a second opportunity to experience the story.  like the harry potter franchise

Linds: which is the example i was about to bring up.  they have an advantage, i think, in that there are so many films now that they’ve been able to create a different but complimentary movie world from the books

Les: yes. that’s the fun of it.  they did a fantastic job with the movies.  and the casting…ftw

Linds: that was the single most important thing they did right.  they had to get the characters right, and then they had more freedom to work with the storyline to make it work in a movie format

Les: and they did

Linds: yep.  so i’m ok with them taking some liberties with the story.  because it fits with the version of the hp world they’ve created

Les: totally

Linds: i’m not a total book to movie purist. i just don’t want it to suck.

Les: well, no. no one wants that.

i’m admittedly not much of a movie watcher, so i don’t have a ton to draw from here.  but i always groan when i see another children’s book turned into a movie.  because i remember the attitudes of a few of my peers from middle school.  watching the movies does not equal reading the book

Linds: NO NO NO. IT DOES NOT.

Les: and today’s children don’t need anything else hindering the development of their imaginations.  good gravy, they’re so overly stimulated

Linds: word.  in fact, let’s make a rule right now

Les: ok

Linds: you may not go see a movie based on a book and claim you’ve read the book

you may also not watch the harry potter movies and say you’re a harry potter fan

what you are is lazy

Les: omg, yes

Linds: go pick up the book, open it, and read those black things on the paper.  they’re called words, and they’re good for you

Les: brain food woo

Linds: yes

i’d also like to make a rule that you have to read the book first before you see the movie.  because you need to actually use your imagination to create the images in your head before you let someone else do it for you.  because again: lazy

Les: yes, thank you

Linds: like right now, i just started revolutionary road, because i’ve heard good things about the movie.  but kate and leo or no, i’m reading it first

Les: ew

Linds: ew?

Les: kate and leo.  though i do that too – read a book after hearing good things about the movie.  that’s how i discovered jodi picoult, actually.  the previews for my sister’s keeper looked great, so i stole my mom’s book

Linds: brief time out to revisit the kate and leo thing: if you ignore their first big movie together, are they less offensive?

Les: considerably.  i like her quite a lot

Linds: me too.  so we’ll just pretend that particular travesty never happened.  revisionist history is so handy sometimes

Les: it really is

Linds: did you ever see the new version of pride and prejudice?

Les: no. is it awesome?

Linds: well, let me put it this way:  it was like pride and prejudice if a bronte had written it.  it’s a bit disconcerting, to say the least

Les: oh dear

Linds: i’m certain several of our readers will have an informed opinion about it

Les: i can’t wait

Linds: i think we should pause and give them a chance to tell us what they think.  because i bet we could fill another wednesday on this topic

Les: that sounds good to me

Linds: excellent.  so weigh in, dear readers!

Les: cause we wanna know

So what is it about Jane Austen that captivates her readers? That is a question that I am waiting to find the answer to. I mean here she has written only of women who are waiting to get married or are already married. I agree that at one point I was a major fan and then suddenly I lost interest. I mean: The point of marriage in her books seemed so banal. Like my boyfriend says, “It suits the Indian aesthetics. They can relate to her heroines who lead a provincial life and marriage is the only end to happiness”. True, isn’t it?

Pride and Prejudice to top the list talks of 5 sisters – capable in every single way, talent and otherwise and yet yearning to walk down the aisle with men of substantial income. Yes, may be I get it. The fact that women did not work in those times. Therefore the only occupation was to find them an eligible groom. Have things changed much? At least not in India. The same situation exists around the world as well, I am sure.

I loved Austen’s dry humour while I was growing up. I thought Mrs. Bennett and Mrs. Dashwood (of Sense and Sensibility) were fabulous when it came to comic timing and yet I also think that probably Ms. Austen should not have emphasized on marriage much. In her defense though there is also the fact that women in her novels just happened to get embroiled in the so-called concept of matrimony. They could not do much in the 17th century, could they? How could they defy their parents? We still don’t in our country.

All said and done, there have been times that I have loved reading Mansfield Park, Sense and Sensibility and Northanger Abbey. I think I have outgrown them, however one never knows when the need to read about clashing egos of men and women and marriage in-between arises.

Last June I posted a preview of Darcy’s Hunger, a new Pride and Prejudice retelling of Jane Austen’s famous love story with a vampire theme. Since then, the book has gone through a ‘turning’ so to speak with a new cover, an earlier release date of October 1st, 2009 and complete name change to Vampire Darcy’s Desire: A Pride and Prejudice Adaptation. Here is the publisher’s description:  

In Austen’s original novel, Darcy and Elizabeth are compelled to overcome countless obstacles — but that’s nothing compared to what they face in Vampire Darcy’s Desire. This inventive, action-packed novel tells of a tormented Darcy who comes to “Netherfield” to escape the intense pressure on him to marry. Dispirited by his family’s 200-year curse and his fate as a half-human/half-vampire dhampir, Darcy would rather live forever alone than inflict the horrors of a vampire life on a beautiful wife. Destiny has other plans. Darcy meets Elizabeth and finds himself yearning for her as a man and driven to possess her as a vampire. Uncontrollably drawn to each other, their complex relationship forces them to confront their pride and prejudice like never before and to wrestle with the seductive power of forbidden love. Meanwhile, dark forces are at work all around them. Most ominous is the threat from George Wickham, the purveyor of the curse, a demon who vows to destroy each generation of Darcy’s and currently has evil intentions for the vulnerable Georgiana. 

The author Regina Jeffers has kindly offered to share an excerpt from the novel with us. As you will surmise from this short scene, there is no prolonged mystery over who is and isn’t a vampire that we experienced in the first Darcy themed vampire novel to hit bookstores with past summer. Jeffers has taken an entirely direct approach from the first page. Enjoy the excerpt! 

She was beautiful in all her innocence, much more beautiful than the infamous Mrs. Smith, his latest minion, who arranged this encounter and waited for him in the adjoining woods. Long, thick lashes rested on the rise of her high cheek bones, and although a bit mussed, the golden tresses spread out across her pillow like the rays of the sun. A deep sigh brought his attention to her lips, and for a moment he thought her awake, but Georgiana Darcy slept soundly thanks to his spellbinding charm. She was the embodiment of his beloved Ellender. 

One candle lit the room, casting shadows, which danced in the corners. There was nothing mediocre about the room – rich tapestries and elegant sculpting. “Only the best for the Darcys,” he mumbled as he moved forward to stand over her. 

With a unique swagger not found in many of his kind, he nearly glided to the bed’s edge. Unable to hide his anger and his contempt, a frown furrowed his deep set eyes, and a flash of fire transformed his vision. A torrent of images racked his soul – pictures of blood – of betrayal – of revenge. “You will do quite well, my Dear,” he whispered. “I will enjoy spending an eternity with you.” He lightly twisted one of her curls around his finger. “This is for the first of my kin to suffer at the Darcys’ hands.” 

Slowly, he leaned over her, feeling the blood rush through her veins – hard, dark eyes, seeking the indentation of her neck – relishing a feeling of expectancy – ringing silence broken only by his breathing. 

Fully engulfed in his desire, when the door swung open, it took several seconds before he realized an intruder discovered his inexplicable need for her. “Move away from her, Wickham,” the tall, dark figure ordered as he stepped carefully into the room. “You will not bring your death and decay into my household.” 

“You brought it into mine, Darcy.” He stood, trying to judge his next move. Wickham knew in an out-and-out fight to the end, the man in front of him stood no chance of survival, but sensing no supernatural fear from the intruder made Wickham question what else this confrontation held. Absent of all volition, he hesitated only a moment before moving in a swirling whirlwind to a point of advantage, but the man framed in the light of the doorway did not move. 

A dramatic black eyebrow lifted quizzically. “You forget, Wickham, we already share the same characteristics. You cannot infect what is already infected. Neither my sister nor I will follow you into the darkness. This madness ends – the curse – the wicked allure will die with us.” The deep rumble of his voice filled the room, and a gleam entered his ice blue eyes, intensified by his opponent’s muteness. 

“I have not given up taking my fill of beautiful young ladies.” A glowering presence exuded from him, right before a squall-like eruption pushed Wickham forward, arms extended to the side, sending Darcy rolling along the floor, scrambling to avoid the chasm – an abhorrent shudder of death. “I am coming for you, Darcy,” the voice boomed through the room as cold blasts flew from sinewy hands, reminiscent of the grave. 

Sucking noises filled Fitzwilliam Darcy’s senses, and he realized the tall, pale form loomed over him in an infuriating counterattack. Sliding against the far wall, it was all Darcy could do to bite back a scream, but he ducked first and came up, arm flung overhead, preparing to unload. “Now, Wickham,” he hissed, and then he released it. 

A vial, carrying clear liquid, tumbled end-over-end through the air, splitting the silence surrounding them – each figure moving in slow motion, playing out their parts in a deliberately swirling tableau. 

And then the stopper exploded, and the transparent fluid rained down on the apparition of George Wickham. A scream filling the room mingled with agony and terror, smelling of old blood and dark radiance. The shadow hissed in the moonlight, and the odor of burning flesh wafted over both of them. 

Fitzwilliam Darcy’s smile turned up the corners of his mouth. “Holy water,” he whispered in affirmation. 

“You will rot in hell!” Wickham threatened. “I will see those you love ruined – see them lick the blood from your body. Sharp fangs jutting from their mouths – smelling of death and decay – ghoulish nightmares!” He started forward again, prepared for another reprisal, but Darcy anticipated the move. Pulling the double crucifixes from his pocket, he met Wickham’s intent with one of his own. “Iron,” he mocked, unfurling the chain and reaching out to his enemy. 

Panic played across Wickham’s fever-filled eyes as he backed away from the symbol of the Trinity, stumbling – recoiling – and suddenly, he was gone in a grey shadow moving across the lawn, a highly combustible howl billowing upon the breeze in his retreat. 

Darcy stood motionless for several long minutes, needing to clear his head. He took a slow breath, trying to control his anger, and then he smelled it – smoke. Against his better judgment, he rushed to the bedchamber’s open door. “Wickham!” he cursed. The house he rented in Ramsgate heated with a fiery blaze, started at three separate points of entry on the bottom floor. Thick smoke, fueled by heavy draperies and fine upholstered furniture, rolled from the doorways of the lower rooms and rose in a black drape to cover the stairway. Acrid smoke drifted his way. Immediately, he turned toward the body still reclining on the bed where George Wickham left her. 

“Georgiana!” he called in a panic as he scooped her into his arms and pulled his sister tight to his chest. Darcy grabbed a towel on the washstand and dipped it into the tepid water she used earlier. He draped the wet towel over her head and face, repeating the procedure for himself. Then he made his way to the top of the stairs. Thick smoke covered the lower half of the rise. He took a deep breath and lunged forward.

Author’s Biography 

Regina Jeffers currently is a teacher in the North Carolina public schools. A self-confessed Jane Austen “freak,” she began her writing career two years ago with the encouragement of her Advanced Placement students. Vampire Darcy’s Desire will be her sixth book in that short time. 

Vampire Darcy’s Desire has been published by Ulysses Press and is now available for purchase. Trade paperback, ISBN: 978-1569757314

His name is St. John Rivers.  Every. Darn. Time.

I admit, after having read this book four or five times, this shouldn’t surprise me.  The book is in stages.  The childhood stage.  The long and dreary Lowood School years.  Thornfield, Thornfield, wonderful Thornfield, and then…. St. John Rivers.  Sigh.

I understand that he’s a very important foil for Rochester.  He is everything good, and straight, and narrow, but also everything cold, hard and passionateless.  Actually, worse, he has passion, but denies it thoroughly.  St. John Rivers is exactly as unappealing as Charlotte Brontë ever could have wanted, and that’s a fact.  What’s also a fact is that it makes for slow reading.  Trudging, more like.

Don’t get me wrong, this is my favorite book in the history of books (or at least in the history of books I’ve read, which is a decent number for my four-and-score years) but St. John Rivers is a drag.  He just is.  He’s more cringe-worthy than Mr. Collins of Pride and Prejudice, because at least Eliza isn’t listening carefully to every word Mr. Collins says.

I suppose I could always skip over St. John… but I never do.  I just don’t roll that way.  And if I did I might miss his sisters who I do adore.  I honestly want to pluck him from the book sometimes, though.  He’s just so unenjoyable to read.  Though I suppose if he were gone, there’d be no one to save Jane from starving to death, would there?  And we can’t have that, so St. John will have to stay, no matter how much I whine and resist him.  Poor Rosamond Oliver.  He really must have been pretty for her to fall for him like that.

~Lisa, who has six more books to finish (this one included) before hitting her goal of 52 books in 52 weeks.  It may just happen this year!

I recently walked into Anthropologie last week and instead of falling in love with a sweater or a dress – my eyes caught on the ornaments of a nearby coffee table: books. These weren’t just any type of books – they were hardcover, cloth-bound, reprinted Penguin Classics adorned with elegant designs stretching from top -to-bottom.

The set of hardcovers include Great Expectations, Wuthering Heights, Pride and Prejudice, Jane Eyre, Sense and Sensibility, The Picture of Dorian Gray and Cranford.

For every lit lover -  these books would be the perfect addition to your bookshelf and collection of literary classics.  Also, THE CUT featured a post regarding these books – and mentioned that they are also available at amazon.com! Perfect timing for the holidays . . . just an idea . . . hint.hint.hint.

You know when you’re a LIT Lover when you go into Anthropologie and want nothing but . . . books.

-jo

I finished sewing the dresses for Larisa, who is playing Lydia in P&P, in the nick of time. The lame pattern had these cute, inefficient draw strings at the neck and the empire waist…. that just produced a gaping hole with white skin showing on the back.  So I sewed the cord in place, chopped it off and put in a zipper.  Whew.  No ivory skin beaming forth.   I also made a green gown that had four handmade roses on it… which were also finished the night before the show.  WHEW, again.  The cute lavender dress kept blowing open in the back because the snaps and hooks wouldn’t hold up to Larisa’s flamboyant movements.  So I added some hooks and the squeezed them all tight with pliers…. and the dress stayed shut… but was very difficult to get off!

There is some sort of anti-family-photo regulation with the shows, so only the staff photographer can take any pictures.  So we’ll have to wait for those, which are always fabulous, by the way.  I just hate waiting.  AND I forgot my camera for before and after the shows… so I have no pictures.  But, alas, another dad posted pictures on facebook and I lifted one so you could see just the top of the cute lavender dress:

This is post-production hair that has been flattened by matching bonnets, by the way.  And that is Matt, aka Mr. Darcy…. and Hannah, aka Kitty, in the background.

So the Friday night show was a packed house and they had to bring in more chairs.  With such a lively crowd, the cast was also lively and the show was fantastic, if I do say so myself.  Larisa’s portrayed the giggly 16-year-old, Lydia, who runs away with Mr. Wickham…. the floozy.  But I must say, she portrayed her quite vivaciously and was the true comedy relief of the show…. bouncing, smiling, fluttering, primping, swaying, flirting, and on and on.  Makes a mama proud…. well, her ACTING ability…. not the floozy part.  )

Darcy’s Passions: Pride and Prejudice Through His Eyes by Regina Jeffers

This book vacillated between two and maybe three and a half stars (out of five) for me. The author did a good job of fleshing out the story while sticking to Jane Austen’s framework. She paraphrases from the original, which I don’t mind, but sometimes ends up changing the intent. (The original is better.) It begins just after Bingley has taken Netherfield Park, and ends with a New Year’s party at Pemberley two months after the weddings. The last third of the book covers those two months. Here is where it got a bit tedious for me. If you like romance stories, and don’t mind the constant mutual adoration going on (with a few little slips into self-doubts) then this is the book for you. I got a little tired of the affectedness of italicizing words for emphasis, and the female characters repetitive giggling over everything. There are also some annoying misuses of words, and mispellings (like “peaked his curiosity… Arghhh!) The author tries to make it sexually titillating, but never delivers anything explicit. That could be a plus or a minus depending on what you like. I found it very distracting, and really not in the style of Jane Austen. It’s everything I hate about romances without much substance. Her insights into Darcy and his behavior lifted the book out of mediocrity. On the whole, it wasn’t bad.

Book Description from Amazon:
Witty and amusing, this novel captures the original style, themes and sardonic humor of Jane Austen’s novel while turning the entire story on its head in a most engaging and entertaining fashion. Darcy’s Passions tells the story of Fitzwilliam Darcy and his obsession with the most impossible woman—Elizabeth Bennet.

It presents Darcy as a man in turmoil. His duty to his family and his estate demand he choose a woman of refined tastes. Yet, what his mind tells him to do and what his heart knows to be true are two different things. He loves a woman he first denies for being unworthy, but it is he who is found wanting when Elizabeth Bennet refuses his proposal of marriage. Devastated, he must search his soul and transform himself into the man she can love and respect.

Fitzwilliam Darcy in the original Pride and Prejudice is a major “minor” character. He is the hero of the tale, but the reader never really knows how he creates the changes we accept as part of his personality. This book tells how Darcy found the way within himself to become the hero, and not the villain, of this beloved tale.

Twilight by Stephenie Meyer

Stephanie Meyer has noted that each of the novels in the Twilight Saga pays homage to other literary classics. For Twilight, she has said Pride and Prejudice was the key inspiration. Well, I suppose it isn’t any worse than some of the other P&P fanfic out there. Beyond the superficial – the relationship of Bella and her father, a mother prone to hystrionics, a boyfriend who goes out of his way to avoid her (at first), and a passionate love that develops out of very little substance, oh, and a few letters thrown in here and there – there is no comparison. Bella is no Elizabeth Bennet. She is a very insecure teenager who seems to have a classic martyr complex. While Edward is a creepy stalker, made somehow wholesome by the fact that he abstains from human blood.

I assigned this book to a local book club of Red Hat ladies because of its popularity. I didn’t know what to expect. To my surprise, they all loved it! What is the appeal, I asked, because I don’t get it. It’s spiritual, one woman replied. It opens you up to the paranormal – I like the idea that there are things out there that we don’t know about. Okay, I get that. It’s a fantasy. On the other hand, these women will tell you that they don’t “like” the fantasy genre. We all have fantasies about flirting with danger. I think the idea of becoming immortal also has a certain appeal. But I still don’t get the romance. I failed to understand what the characters saw in each other. Silly me, wanting some depth of character. It had about as much substance as Nights in Rodanthe by Nicholas Sparks, which I read for the same book club, not too long ago. And that one, we all agreed, was “fluff.” A quick and easy book for a day at the beach – no thinking required.

Perhaps a few Twilight fans will go on to read Pride and Prejudice. Harper has come out with a new “Twilight” edition of classics aimed at teen readers with covers reminiscent of the Twilight series. And will Pride and Prejudice fans turn to the likes of “Mr. Darcy, Vampire”? I have to admit that there is a certain logic behind imagining the haughty and stone-faced Fitzwilliam Darcy as a vampire.

I have to admit to a terrific curiosity from the moment I heard about this book. My first thought was–ridiculous. And then–sacrilege!

But curiosity won out and I purchased the download from Audible.com. I wasn’t about to waste my precious reading time on this nonsense, but I’m always looking for a good listen for my time in trains, planes and automobiles not to mention the treadmill.

I’m now about four hours from finishing the 11 hour book and I have to say–it is good. The zombies really add to the hilarity of Austen’s original. Listening to Elizabeth Bennet discuss her warrior’s honor as she contemplates beheading Darcy for ruining her sister’s happiness. Well–you can’t help but chuckle.

And reader, Katherine Kellgren is absolutely brilliant in portraying the voices of the various characters. I think she’s the equal of Jim Dale who does such a wonderful job on the Harry Potter books. I’m going to look for more books read by her in future.

I’m curious whether any other Austen fans out there have read or listened to the book and what you think? Personally, I feel that being familiar with the original adds to the pleasure of this outrageous spin on the tale. Anyone feel differently?

Lauren & Tracy

The exhibit contained research gems such as a board game from 1809 called Journey Round the Metropolis: An Amusing and Instructive Game with pictures of London sights and an 1811 book called Ellen or the Naughty Girl Reclaimed with instructional stories for children illustrated by cut out figures. I think a rather prosy relative will present the book to Jessica in one of my future novels. Jessica will enjoy playing with the cut outs but wrinkle her nose at the text.

The exhibit also included a print of a portrait Austen said was Jane Bennet Bingley. I’ve always loved the letter of Austen’s in which she talks about attending an exhibition and finding a portrait of Mrs. Bingley. She adds that she looked for a portrait of Mrs. Darcy but didn’t find one, which she puts that down to Mr. Darcy not wanting to let go of any portraits of her. What I love about this letter, as I told Lauren Willig, is that it shows Austen imagined her characters having a life outside the pages of her novels.

Which is just what Lauren and I were doing throughout my visit (including at a wonderful brunch at the Atlantic Grill in the picture above). Talking about our characters, their pasts, their interconnections, events we envisioned for them in the future. Questioning each other about spoilers for future books (fortunately neither of us minds knowing spoilers) and how various characters’ paths might cross. Of course we both write series, which lend themselves to this sort of speculation, but I’ve always loved continuing the stories of books I read in my head after I turn the last page. I think it’s one reason that the books I write have always been interconnected.

I love the idea of Austen looking for her characters among the paintings at an exhibition. Much as today we look for our characters while watching a movie or turning the pages of a magazine. Such as when I watched the recent adaptation of Little Dorrit and thought Matthew MacFadyen would make a wonderful Charles. Or thinking how like Mélanie Eva Green was in Casino Royale.

Do you find yourself discovering characters (your own or other writers) in movies or paintings or photographs? Writers, do you think about your characters ongoing lives after the story ends or between books in a series? Readers, do you do the same with books you read?

I’ve just posted a new Fraser Correspondence letter from Lord Carfax (David’s father and Charles’s spymaster) to the Foreign Secretary, Lord Castlereagh.

I have been home sick for the last few days. Here are some of the exciting things I’ve been up to:

I’ve been drinking lots of this:

and this too, 

By the way, did you know that you can go visit the Celestial Seasonings Tea Room in Boulder, CO? First you take a tour of the tea production plant and try free samples, and then you can visit the tea shop or eat at Celestial Cafe. It’s a whole tea experience. I think I need to go visit some friends in CO and take them out for tea.

I’ve been eating this:

Sadly what I’m eating  isn’t homemade; but it’s from our grocery store deli and tastes very yummy right now. Here is the recipe for this soup – Tuscan White Bean soup.

What I really want is homemade chicken soup. Maybe I can get my hubby DA to make me Fast Chicken Soup Base – it’s made with a rotisserie chicken.

I’m also using these – lots and lots of these:

Did you know that you can design your own box of Kleenex? For 4.99 you can get your very own personal box of tissues. How cool would it be to put your kid’s artwork on a box? Or how about designing a holiday box with all of those family Christmas photos? What a great gift for the person who has everything!

I’ve also been taking these:

Say it with me – Riiiiiiiiiiicola!

And I’ve been watching this:

Colin Firth – be still my heart!

and this too,

Josie Grossy, Josie Grossy!

And now I think I’m going to do this:

Except I’ll really be sleeping –  instead of laughing and looking cute.

I’ll be back to regular blogging in a few days.

Pride and Prejudice (2005)

Starring: Keira Knightley, Matthew Macfadyen

Director: Joe Wright (IV)

Length: 127 minutes

I probably should have tagged this “18th century” since the producers chose to set this film in 1797 rather than Regency England. It makes for more flattering costumes perhaps, though it presents a more rural England. The Bennets seem much poorer and lower class than Jane Austen wrote them. By contrast, Darcy and Lady Catherine seem much richer, almost on a par with royalty. This is a wonderful film, although Jane Austen purists will have to set aside their, um, prejudice…  The cinematography is highly artistic and well-done. The musical score is wonderful. I’d buy a CD of just the soundtrack.

The script alters lines from Austen, often losing the irony of the original. But the romance is well done. The girls look their ages, which is refreshing. This was the best Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, in my opinion. And Mr. Collins was also wonderful. The proposal scene between Collins and Elizabeth is priceless. On the other hand, I did not care for the stilted acting of Wickham and Caroline Bingley. Fortunately they had minimal parts. Mr. and Mrs. Hurst were omitted entirely from this movie. And the Gardiners had no children.

Besides what I felt were 20th century mannerisms, there was at least one scene which seemed like a historical faux pas to me – the scene where Elizabeth asks Darcy to dance. Perhaps someone will correct me, but I don’t think that would have been done. It wasn’t even very common when I was in high school, let alone in the 18th century! I also thought it was silly to have the entire room come to a standstill and gawk when Darcy and Bingley entered the ball. They might have been rich, but I think the gawking would have been much more surreptitious.

Anyway, it is a beautifully done film. Just don’t expect it to be true to Jane Austen.

Tomorrow I have to talk about my “favourite” book, and I am still mulling over what to say!  What an impossibility was my first reaction; after all I have been reading for rather a lot of years – well actually since I was about four or five, I think!  So what do I say?   I could have said “no” I can’t, but didn’t want to disappoint the person making the request.   So I guess I have to spend much of the time given to me explaining just why I can’t choose just ONE!

I realise that some of the possible choices were the same as I put on Facebook, and I still stand by them.  To me a favourite is a book I can re-read, and I think it would be fair to say that I have re-read both Jane Austen’s Pride and prejudice and Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre at least five or six times throughout my life – almost once in each decade?   I recently picked up a copy of Pride and prejudice, and enjoyed it just as much as I did the previous times, while appreciating some nuances that I had probably missed earlier.

Others on my possible list would be Lewis Carroll’s Alice in wonderland and Through the looking glass. These I am sure I read or had read to me as a child, but when I came upon them as an adult, it was very different, yet still enjoyable on that totally different level, and I am neither a mathematician nor a chess player, so all those allusions still pass me by.

And lastly – but it isn’t really, really, lastly – I would put the Tintin series.  I first read these graphic novels cum comics in French in Belgium, when I must have been around eight or nine, and that was in the 1950s.   I don’t think I fully understood them, but the pictures were fun and carried the stories.  And I remember having the whole collection – with additions for Christmas presents – at some point in my childhood, and they could be read, and re-read, and re-read, and passed on to others – my sister and brother.

And then rediscovered in all places at the Ashanti Regional Library of the Ghana Library Board in 1980/81 when I first joined them, and was in charge of the children’s library.   I took them home, and everyone loved them, even if they couldn’t understand the stories fully – kids, teens, husband, even husband’s friend! And I myself found myself with new enthusiasm entering the world of Snowy, Captain Haddock and the Thompson/Thomson twins as well as Professor Calculus (though I still prefer his French name, Tournesol).

I saw them somewhere recently in Accra, and it was very, very hard to resist!

Hilltop, Beatrix Potter's Cottage (Image: TopFoto)

For the last week I have loved having my sister Sarah and friend Mel stay with me. We took to the road to see some of England’s best bits. First stop was Stonehenge. Surprisingly, the millions of photos we’d seen prior to taking in the real thing didn’t take away from the enjoyment of doing the “lap of honour”, as Sarah dubbed it, around the ancient stonesBath was next. Driving down the valley into the town is an amazing sight. The rows and rows of sandstone buildings are tall and impressive and the Circus and the Crescent are equally as impressive close up.

Battling wind and rain, we followed the M6 all the way up to the picturesque Lake District. We felt very welcomed by Cheryl when we arrived at the Backpackers lodge we stayed in. The next morning we found Dove Cottage in Grasmere, the home of William and Dorothy Wordsworth, and then later the home of Beatrix Potter, a short ferry ride across the lake from Windermere. Despite regular downpours, the scenery was beautiful, and we even managed a short walk among the golden trees and swollen river.

But probably the funniest moment of the trip was when we arrived at Lyme Park on the way back down south, hoping to see the Pemberly of the BBC version of Pride and Prejudice. It was just after 4 in the afternoon, and darkness was rapidly approaching. The gardens around Lyme hall had closed two hours earlier, but we were not to be deterred. Sarah climbed one of the fences to see how far away we were from the site of the scene in P&P. (On the hill, Lizzy running into Mr Darcy). By now the wind was howling, and rain beginning to pour. Sarah slipped over twice, covering herself in mud. She discovered that there was still another fence blocking her view of the estate. So we found the right spot to climb over the barbed-wire fence and sneak onto the grounds, hoping to avoid the embarrassment of being caught by the park ranger who was driving around in his van. We managed to get ourselves in a spot where we could view the lake and the hill and the back of the massive house. Worth it.

Back down south the next day and the sun was out as we went for a lovely winding Sunday drive through the country to the village of Shere, where The Holiday was filmed, and had lunch in the old pub, The White Horse. Very English.

Som de fleste har fått med seg, er vesener fra underverden hete på lerretet om dagen. Mange har latt seg bite av vampyrdilla, men kan vi også gå gode for deres naboer, zombiene og øvrige monstrer?

Det mener tydeligvis amerikaneren Ben H. Winters. For anledningen har han spritet opp Jane Austens to klassikere “Pride and Prejudice” og “Sense and Sensibility”. Etter han har lagt hånden på disse verkene har de byttet navn til følgende; “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” og “Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters”.
I en reportasje i Store Studio forrige mandag forteller Winters hvordan han lager sin egne sprøe versjoner av de gamle bøkene. Han beholder rundt 85 prosent av selve hovedhistorien, men spriter opp de kvinnelige hovedrollene og birollene så det holder. I ekte “Buff – vampyrjegeren”-stil kaster overklassekvinnene fra seg broderiet og begir seg ut på deres oppdrag i livet; å drepe zombier/ sjømonstre. I alle fall inntil de er gift…

Bøkene høres hysterisk morsomme ut! Ser ikke bort fra at jeg leser dem etter hvert;)

I finished reading Mansfield Park yesterday. I usually get sucked into the world of Victorian novels when I read one, and before you can say “what the dickens!” I’ve read five novels from the same time period in a row. Consequently, I’ve started using phrases like  ”leave me be,” “you are a gentleman; I am a gentleman’s daughter; so far we are equal,” and the ever-popular, “I’m a starving orphan, but I’m good at heart and everything will work out in the end.”  My first introduction to the world of Jane Austen was when I watched the Colin Firth version of Pride and Prejudice with my family during our first Christmas in Russia. We stayed up until early in the morning to finish it, and when it was all over, I asked, “So the whole movie was just about them getting married?!” But of course, I loved the movie and read the book soon afterwards. I’m sure you don’t need me to tell you that Austen is a fantastic writer, though, even if she did choose to name one of her heroines “Fanny.” Can we all agree that it’s an unfortunate name?

According to not-very-reliable internet sources, Mansfield Park seems to be the “Speed 2″ of novels. “Speed” was a “great” movie, and next to “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure,” it’s the best movie Keanu Reeves has ever been a part of, but “Speed 2″ was about a boat, people! No one cares about sequels that are about fast boats minus Keanu Reeves. Jane Austen’s plight is similar: she wrote a book about Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, and then she wrote other books, none of which have Lizzy or Darcy in them. Pride and Prejudice is, in my opinion, one of the greatest novels ever written, and it also has the added bonus of not having a character named “Fanny” in it. DH has a crush on Elizabeth Bennett and I like to think that I AM Elizabeth Bennett, minus the quick wit and the ability to dance. I’m also probably clumsier than Lizzy and less able to hold my own in conversations with people like Lady Catherine de Bourgh, but that’s neither here nor there. My point is that Lizzy Bennett is amazing, and Fanny pales slightly in comparison. Austen herself seems to have gotten bored with her Mansfield Park heroine because she quickly whisks through all the parts where Edmund professes his undying love for his own dear Fanny in the end. If I sound like I’m being uncharitable, just remember that mediocre Austen is still genius by all other standards. And Mansfield Park isn’t even mediocre, it’s just not Pride and Prejudice. You know, now that I think of it, Jane Austen was kind of a talent hog, and she makes me feel bad about myself. Oh well, at least my name isn’t Fanny.

I just finished the latest Jane Austen novel.  Not that she’s writing from the grave (although, come to think of it, that would be a good subject in light of this latest development); she simply has a new co-author, Seth Grahame-Smith who’s come out with Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, a mashup of the classic tale with the classic zombie details of gore, beheaddings and rapidly rotting malefactors.  The premise is simply that over the last 50 years England has been terrorized by a plague of zombie undead attacking the countryside.  Gentlemen and Ladies alike have trained in the Orient to be able to fight off these attacks.  Other than that the plot is the same.  The book is about three quarters original text with occasional interventions and digressions to include musket fire from speeding coaches and daggers snatched from ankle holsters in order to repel the undead from a public event.  The contrast is very amusing.  For example, Mr. Bennett, in his opening statement of intent not to visit Mr. Bingley, dismisses his daughters as “silly and ignorant” but recommends Lizzy as having “something more of the killer instinct than her sisters.”  Darcy’s definition of an accomplished young woman is likewise familiar and yet … strange.

“A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing and the modern languages; she must be well trained in the fighting styles of the Kyoto masters and the modern tactics and weaponry of Europe.  And besides all this she must possess a certain something in her air and manner of walking, the tone of her voice, her address and expressions or the word will be but half-deserved.  All this she must possess, and to all this she must yet add something more substantial, in the improvement of her mind by extensive reading.”

For the most part its very funny indeed.  It pretty much garuntees laughing out loud to any fan of Austen who’s familiar with all the classic text.  I’m not sure how far it would go with someone who wasn’t already a fan however.  The main weaknesses are the non-zombie additions to the text; some unnecessary internal monologue for Lizzie (annoyingly rendered in quotation marks) and the odd bit of raunchiness thrown in for no apparent reason.  There isn’t enough of the latter to make it feel like an intentional shift in the tone of the book.  Its still a comedy of manners.  So the occasional double entendre on “balls” and the Lizzy’s reference to snugness of trousers as opposed to “his beautiful grounds at Pemberly” as the origin of her affection for Darcy just come off as weird rather than funny.  All that aside, however its a great idea and I laughed out often as I went through it.

Now we just sit back and wait for the movie – which should be an absolute gas.  Come to think of it perhaps the latest P&P adaptation had this kind of zombie marital arts training in mind when they continually costumed Kiera in those ridiculous boots.  How forward looking!

Thanks for voting and helping us choose our classic for January. We will be reading Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austin.  Pride and Prejudice was first published in 1913 and was Austin’s most popular novel. The original version of the novel was written in 1796-1797 under the title First Impressions. This romance novel takes place in rural England during the Napoleonic Wars (1797-1815)  and tells the story of the courtship between Darcy and Elizabeth.  Over 20 million copies of Pride and Prejudice have been sold worldwide.

After working today, I decided to watch Pride and Prejudice, the 2005 version, again — oh, I don’t know, I guess for the fifth or so time.

Equipped with a slice of chocolate mousse cake (I bought a whole one earlier in the afternoon whilst sauntering about the mall), I inserted the DVD in my drive (I watched from my laptop) and readied myself for the warm, fuzzy feelings. Ha! Yes, I still get that every time I watch the movie and read the book.

I must say that the movie stayed true to the book, although it was thoroughly tailored for the modern taste, in my opinion. I watched the alternate U.S. ending once, I remember, and regretted it ever since. Jane Austen must have been turning in her grave with those kisses that never were. Goddess Divine?! So not Lizzie Bennet! And I must have missed it but I never thought Kitty and Lydia to be so overly giddy about almost everything. The scene where they close up on Mary with her yearning look for Collins after he proposed and got rejected by Elizabeth also got to me. Mary in the book was wanting culture, focused in refining her skills and busy reading. I didn’t remember her having such inner, possibly romantic, regard for Collins; or any sort of regard for that matter.

Overall, though, the movie was great (strictly arbitrary opinion, owing to the fact that this is the only Pride and Prejudice adaptation I saw; though I’m very much eager to see the 1995 series with Colin Firth). I’m fairly interested to see his version of Darcy for, I dare say, Matthew was a superb Darcy with a little hint of 19th century…sexiness, to put it tamely. Keira was spot on as the fiery Elizabeth; and her scene at the ball where she snuck away from the embarrassing farce her family was flaunting, except for Jane of course, was absolutely exquisite.

The book will still remain on top, as in the case of any other movie adaptation. Jane Austen with her wit and perfect grammar concocted a romantic story that will stand the test of time. I used to loathe romantic novels because, well, I really never believed in that kind of love anyway. And although I still am the same cynic, I deeply appreciate what Miss Austen had bestowed to the world.

Lizzie was prejudice, for sure, and Darcy the pride. I like to think, however, that both have the two qualities only in different nuances. Lizzie’s hasty branding of Darcy as the bad son who shunned Wickham of his inheritance is evidence of her prejudice. But who can blame her? She managed to hate Darcy from the moment she overheard him saying she wasn’t attractive enough to interest him. Darcy, on the other hand, was pride incarnate. His quizzical look, manner of talking are manifestations of his high rank, thus may seem proud to those below. But his aversion for the whole Bennet family, for me, showed his prejudice for the bourgeois. Nevertheless, Jane Austen showed us their struggle to overcome their shortcomings and eventually break the barriers of status and wealth; the overwhelming hurdles of matrimonial matches during her time until today.

The personalities of Austen’s characters fit perfectly in the broad spectrum of human dynamics; and this is the reason why I deeply adore this particular story of the pursuit of those fettered in society’s norms and their desire to break the boundaries and step beyond the threshold of what is considered acceptable to the pernicious eye of high society.

As I finish my slice of cake and eject the DVD from the drive, I will leave you with this:

“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortunate, must be in want of a wife.”

Photo courtesy of Flickr