Persuasion

 Persuasion is my favorite novel by Jane Austen. 

Anne Elliot lives is on the verge of becoming an old maid. At 27, and having been persuaded to decline two proposals in her younger years, she depressed-ly resigned herself to the fact that she will be living with her Father and older sister for the rest of her life. When family debts become so high that the family must "retrench" to Bath instead of living in their family hall, Anne is invited to visit her younger, married sister, Mary, while her father and sister move to Bath. The new tenets of her father's estate she learns is the sister and brother-in-law to her only love and the first proposal she was persuaded to decline eight and a half years ago. When Captain Fredrick Wentworth visits his sister and visits the surrounding families (which Mary is one), Anne finds that he stays but seems to have no wanting to continue any relationship they had had previously. And yet he stays around.

Anne is my favorite Austen heroine in that I find, to a degree, similarities between myself and her--or at least I hope so. For one simple point of Anne being the most quiet, and probably has the fewest lines, for any of Austen's heroines. 

Anne's growth throughout the story is delicately weaves throughout the book, where she also stays diligent to her beliefs and her character is strong. I like the brief glimpses we get into Anne of her seriously having depression after she first declines Captain Wentworth's offer, where it says that "her bloom" isn't there anymore, but then by then end getting out of the depression and seeing Wentworth again and associating with him, her very vain father comments on how she has it back. While Austen never says that she has depression, she does make a point to say that her "bloom" returned. 

This is a simple love story that I adore. I found out that it was probably based on a real love story, which makes my romantic and historian side of my brain love it even more (A book you can find about it is called: The Real Persuasion: Portrait of a Real Life Jane Austen Heroine). I brings the romance of the sea along with the reality of navel life. 

The real love I have for the book is Wentworth's Letter he gives to Anne. It is simple, sweet, and so full of hope. Sends my heart a flutter. 

I am also very biased as to my preference to the movie adaptations. Persuasion 1995 with Amanda Root and Ciaran Hinds is by far the best. There is no running through Bath scene for one (and it's a big "one') and it is more accurate to the book. Ciaran Hinds also, I think plays a more dignified Wentworth and I care more for Amanda Roots Anne simply for her facial expressions, if nothing else. The 2007 version struggles. Hard. I hate the wardrobe; the background for scenes seemed very off (especially the ones in Bath); Sally Hawking's performance as Anne was subpar; I don't find Rupert Penry-Jones stoic or a charming Wentworth at all; I hate, hate, hate the running across the Royal Crescent in Bath so much--it's when she's reading the letter and it just ruins the whole atmosphere of the most important scene!!  

If you are going to watch an adaptation, stick with 1995. Favorite actors/actresses with brilliant performances and it stays true to the story. 

Emma

 Jane Austen's Emma is a classic. 

Emma considers herself quite the matchmaker. With not wanting to marry at all and being the second daughter to the wealthiest man in the town, she has found it a fun game to meddle in the love lives (with the best of intentions) of the people around her. She was able to get her sister and their wealthy neighbor to marry as well as her governess and an older gentlemen in their neighborhood to marry as well. Now that they are married and she's realized she's lonely, she finds a new friend in Harriet Smith, a young girl with not much known about her background. Emma has her eyes on Mr. Elton, the towns clergyman, for Harriet, not the farmer Mr. Martin. Emma enjoys influencing people and can make a mess of things, which her ever present neighbor Mr. Knightly is more than willing to let her know. 

I took a Jane Austen class in college and, upon seeing the length of Emma and the fact that I didn't much care for the main character, I moved on to the next book on the list that I needed to read so then I might actually complete one of the assigned books that semester. (It didn't happen, fyi.) I watched the movie with Gwyneth Paltrow to get the basics and moved on. 

Now that time restraints and pressures to read it were off, it finally got back to it and still struggled. I tried it but was daunted by the text and characters. So I decided to listen to the audio book and I DID IT!! 

I knew the story of Emma from the movies and multiple variations that are out there. They all have their pros and cons, but the 2009 mini-series and the 2020 are my favorite. Clueless was pretty awesome too. Knowing the story I think helped with the actual text, but even listening was somewhat hard to digest at times. As opposed to Pride and Prejudice where there was a lot of conversation and dialog, this book seemed to get bogged down by exposition and describing what was happening instead of letting us be there. And when there was dialog between characters, the lack of discourse between characters and major monologues (such as that of Mrs. Bates, which does fit her character, obviously) would have got me stuck if reading it off the pages. This problem is one that early novels  have or what makes them dramatically different from the novels of today. The writing is just such a struggle. 

In the end, though, I did enjoy the book. I enjoyed the communication (or lack there of which causes a bunch of conflicts) between the characters. Specifically between Mr. Knightly and Emma. I also liked how kind and compassionate they all were towards each other. Mr. Woodhouse is wealthy, yes, and full of peculiarities, but all the characters are sensitive to his oddities and willing to help him and avert his anxieties. Between the 2020 and 2009 variations of Mr. Woodhouse, I enjoyed them both--probably my favorite character in the 2020 version. 

The people in Emma were real. I think think this is an applicable statement for pretty much all of Jane Austen's stories. There is a realness about them, if not their circumstance, then their attitudes and actions. That is, what I believe, Jane's truest strength in her writings is. 

Read on, Jane-ites. Read on! 

Pride and Prejudice

The lovely classic that is Pride and Prejudice.

The Bennet family in regency England has five daughters and no boys to become heir of the family's estate. And what is on the mind of the ever dramatic Mrs. Bennet is to have her daughters married to wealthy young men so they aren't out on the street when "your father is dead." So when a Mr. Bingley purchases Netherfield Park not far away, obviously one of her daughters must marry him. With this entrance comes many more members of society that the Bennet's weren't aware of, such as: their cousin Mr. Collins, the magnificent Lady Catherine de Bourgh, Mr. Bingley's meddling sisters, the charismatic Mr. Wickham, and the every handsome but off-putting Mr. Darcy.  All these eligible young men must marry one of the Miss Bennet's, right?! 

This is a great story. One that I happily read and watch over and over again. The story is fantastic; the romances charming; the characters are engaging, villainous when appropriate, and very memorable. 

I think the reason I love this book so much is the characters. I think the reason why this book has stayed so popular over the 200 years it's been around is because of the characters. There are so many with different, full personalities that it seems to breathe. There is no one like Mr. Collins and Lady Catherine de Bourgh let alone their relationship. Charlotte Lucus is understandable and though she makes an unbelievable choice is still in the good graces of all her readers. Mr. and Mrs. Bennet are a hoot and a holler and one of my favorite "parental couples" in almost any book. I especially love Mr. Bennet's quotes and his constant picking on his wife, as well as his commentary saying, "My dear child, let me not have the grief of seeing you unable to respect your partner in life" because he most definitely cannot respect his and knows the importance of it. Jane is amazing too and reminds me a lot of myself (though probably not nearly so handsome). The best things I saw online concerning Jane Bennet is this: 

It makes my day. 

It is a classic and a good classic. It was written 200 years ago so the writing style is different and for some may be hard to understand, but persevere my friend! If you a have troubles, go find the movies. There are many to choose from and while many praise Keira Knightly's 2005 version, go for the 1995 one instead. Jennifer Ehle and Collin Firth are amazing and the movie gets so much right! Read and watch it now. Just go! 

Sense and Sensibility

Jane Austen's first published work Sense and Sensibility has been read over and over again for more than 200 years. It is a classic that has been loved and survived the years because it's a good book full of vibrant characters and an engaging story.  

After the death of their father, Elinor, Marianne, Margaret, and their mother are forced out of their home to live in a cottage in a different county while their half brother and his wife take over the family estate. Their time in this cottage, making new acquaintances and enjoying the countryside, is quickly changed to lovestruck conversations when Marianne is saved by a young gentleman and love blooms. For Elinor though love is a trying thing when she learns that the man whom she admired is in love with someone else whom she also is acquainted.

I think this book has stood the test of time, unlike many of the other romantic stories of the time, because it hits home more than some of the others. The things that Elinor and Marianne deal with, loss of father, home, loves, sickness, surviving monetarily as well as plain surviving your family relations and acquaintances. These are things that we all struggle with at one point. We read things that are often similar to our own lives via theme or circumstance. Sense and Sensibility does that, even to today, which is fascinating. There have been many critics, papers, articles, and readers of this book over the years and if you search them out can find a lot of enlightening information and opinions.

I like the play on opposites that is presented here. Elinor is the sensible one in the family (rather logic based) and Marianne is full of sensibilities (and can often let her emotions run rampant). Willowby vs Colonel Brandon, The Ferrar's brothers, John Dashwood vs Sir John Middleton, even the rolls that men play vs women and how they are portrayed (hunters vs mothers). The way Austen plays with opposites is engaging and can be thought provoking.

The characters, though, aren't only opposites of one another, but they are their own people. They aren't merely a stereotype but do have their own personalities and quirks that make them unique.

This, again, is an older book. Classic for a reason, but not everyone's cup of Sleepy Time tea. It's language is different and more wordy than what present novels give. There were times when I needed to put it down because my head was starting to ache or I couldn't pay attention because of how the language was constructed. It is what it is. I also have the Oxford World Classics edition which honestly read more like a textbook than a novel which might be published in a different format. But it did have a lot more insights, critiques, and definitions which were very much helpful and fun to look up without having to go very far. It also had a good introduction by Margaret Anne Doody who has done many other critiques and papers for the Oxford World Classics company. Again it was very enlightening to aspects that I didn't see my first "read through" during college. In the end, be forewarned that it is older, wordy, and "harder" to read for the "modern" reader.

Read it. Enjoy it. Take it slow if you need and please go and find articles about it. They can be very enjoyable.

The Watson's

I have learned now that it is important to read through all the introductions first in a book. They can be very helpful.

When I came across The Watsons at the end of my Northanger Abbey book, I started reading it just as I did Lady Susan not realizing that The Watsons was an unfinished work, almost along the lines of a blip from one of her other stories.

Our main character is Emma Watson who is invited to go to a Ball by a neighbor. She is set apart by her family as she looks over her invalid Uncle and doesn't get out much. She is given a diagnosis of the people going to the Ball and told whom to look out for. She is given offers to dance, seen by many, and gets the basic notions of those around her. There are visits after the Ball along with her family coming into town and trying to get her to come back home instead of enjoying the solitude and pleasant companionship of her Uncle.

It is only about forty pages and doesn't have much in the way of extended plot, but, as I said earlier, it's not finished. I think someone described it as a scribble. There is definite possibility for this story, and it resembles a bit of Pride and Prejudice in some aspects, but it is it's own story.

I found it very funny that the main character's name is Emma Watson, though I'm sure the actresses parents didn't know about this story. It made me happy. As for the other characters, there were so many in such a short period of time that it was hard to keep some of them straight. Few had solid characteristics in my mind that it was hard to keep many of them separated. I would have liked to read more about this particular story, but, alas, no such luck.

I did really enjoy one part of the story where the gentleman who would, if the story went on long enough, and Emma sat somewhat awkwardly in silence and talked some. It seems to be that that particular part might have been the founding part of this short story. It fit well and made me smile. Jane Austen has it well written, all of the story, but this part had that extra bit of "umph" to it that made me rather like the story and want more.

One other thing that I did struggle with, and it might just be that I have an "older" copy of the text is that there are sometimes four to five pages of text without a paragraph break. Pages full of conversation that has no breaks for the mind. This, I believe is only on my Oxford World Classics edition (that had awesome footnotes and explanations about the times) that had it that way. If I were to read it again, I'd go for a different edition, one that made it easier to read.

Miss. Jane, you need to "have an affair with the tab key." ~Mr. Bradley

Northanger Abbey

Upon reflection, I realized I haven't written about Northanger Abbey and how much I thoroughly enjoyed Jane Austen's first written novel, thought it was published after she died in 1817 alongside Persuasion.

Catherine Morland was not born to be a heroine. That is how Jane Austen starts it. She isn't particularly pretty. She isn't super accomplished. As she grew, she started to love novels and reading. But being born out in the country, she didn't have much in the way of possible social interactions which is what a young girl in her station needed in order to find a good husband to marry. So, joining a family friend in Bath in hopes of finding that social interaction, she runs into a boy--well, man--who seems shrouded in supernatural mystery. Or maybe she's reading too much into his family secrets. Mr. Tilney isn't the only one looking to become better acquainted with the somewhat naive Miss. Morland as well. Love and potential Gothic encounters are in the air. Or maybe she's reading too much into all interactions.

This is one of my favorite Jane Austen books, so much so that I wrote my under-graduate thesis on it in college. Jane has her satirical fingers all over this book as she's poking fun of the Gothic novels that were circulating around her in her teenage years, when she started to write. Catherine reads these types of books and when presented with Northanger Abbey, which is Mr. Tilney's family home, she can't help but imagine secret passageways, diabolical schemes, ghosts, even vampires that reside behind each fluttering curtain. Jane Austen was critiquing The Monk, The Castle of Otranto, The Mysteries of Uldolpho (which she names specifically) and many others (none of which I've read). She pokes fun of them all because, in her opinion, they are kind of ridiculous.

I love the fact that Catherine isn't really the heroine of her own story. It says she is and it is her story but she doesn't save the day, she didn't solve a mystery (maybe I could give that one to her, but I probably wouldn't), she wasn't taken captive by a roving spirit where Mr. Tilney had to come and save her from a fire that the ghost started. No fainting spells, no vampires, no vindictive vendettas she needed to evade, or whatever. In part, she nearly lost it all because her imagination was wild and got the better of her.

Catherine and the rest of the characters are fun. Jane Austen is really good at making her characters human and realistic. Even though her writing style is older it works and stands well against time. Honestly, not many can do that well. They are human with fault and problems, with family who are sometimes the problem, with tempers, and schemes for marriages, for wealth, for love, for stability and survival. Jane Austen took the situations, and sometimes the people, around her and gave them to us to see. One could say she gave a big portion of the truth of Society to Society. (It kind of make me think of The Help by Kathryn Stockett. Such a great book.)

I think the biggest hang up that people have for this is the older writing style of Jane Austen's books. Modern minds have to take a second and slow down to actually think about what is being said instead of having the language be as simple as it is today. It's like they have to adjust their eyes and minds to the colorful words.

Lady Susan

Jane Austen is a well known name for many of her works. Mainly Pride and Prejudice, Emma, Sense and Sensibility, &c. but there are some of her works that people don't know. Lady Susan is one of those, though it has risen in popularity though people may not know it.

Lady Susan is a story written in letters between the different characters about the flirtatious whims of Lady Susan. After making a quick leave from friendly relations, she imposes herself on her brother and his family for a time. She is an expert in the ways of speech and a ridiculous flirt. Mrs. Vernon--Lady Susan's sister-in-law--after being invaded by this woman with a sour reputation, has a full house when her brother, also a lover of flirtation, comes to meet her and have lively conversation. But then Lady Susan starts captivating the young Mr. De Courcy. She has snatched away his sense and has him completely wrapped around her finger. Other characters are introduced that shed light on Lady Susan's character, or lack there of, which characters include her daughter and a certain Mr. Manwaring and Mr. James. People all around her can see her intentions and falsehoods, yet are still bewitched by her words.


This story has recently been retold in the movie adaptation "Love and Friendship" (Not to be confused with Jane Austen's satirical story "Love & Freindship," which is also funny, but different). I think Kate Beckinsale did an amazing job at this proud, rather obnoxious character.

I think Jane Austen did an expert job with the letter writing between characters. It gave enough information to not lead the reader astray, but also make it feel like they were letters to friends or family. There was even voice change, even slight at parts, between the different writers, which (as a writer) was fascinating.

I really like the characters. I like they they are a family that has to work through a family problem and that this story doesn't have a "we fixed her and she's not who she was." There is no way to fix Lady Susan because she doesn't think she needs fixing. She is insufferable, but she doesn't think so.

I like how this also shows Jane Austen's humor. Honestly, how many people were writing books like this where the title character is willingly being a lover to a married man and thinks its the wife's fault, and writing this story at the turn of the 19th Century? I mean this two decades before the Victorian Era where they were the most prude and proper society. Twenty years, that's not a lot. (Yes, I know Shakespeare made fart jokes, let us move on.) That is not what we think of when we think Regency, not initially any way.

It is a great read. A short read comparatively, though it comes from a different age. Therefore, writing style and wordage's are different. (Similar to the Hardy Boys, The Belgariad, and Shakespeare.) That change in age can take some getting used to, but once you do it flows so quickly. I love it.

Enjoy the book. Watch the movie and enjoy that too.

Shades of Milk and Honey

I have been wanting to read this book a for a while. Jane Austen with magic! What could a romantic fantasy lover ask for?

Jane Ellsworth can manipulate folds from the ether and can do it as any fine, accomplished woman can do, though she has a bit more talent than most. However, she is older, not as pretty as her younger sister, and slowly accepting her spinsterhood.

The neighborhood is excited for the famous glamorist who is taking up a job at the Viscountess' home to glamor her home. He is amazing at his craft, being able to bring the outside indoors complete with birds, a babbling brook, and nymphs hidden in the woods all in the Viscountess' drawing room. Not only is the new glamorist in town, but the Viscountess' favorite nephew is here as well, stealing the hearts of many of the towns girls; and Mr. Dunkirk's younger sister has come for a visit. So many people have come that it throws everything into a happy chaos full of balls and growing friendships.

There are a lot of similarities to Jane Austen's work. The time period, the romances, and aura. Kowal did a good job mimicking and giving the experience of an Austen novel. The magic was a great twist and well explained as the story went on. It fit well into the setting that she produced. I rather enjoyed it and am excited to read on.

I do have two problems though. It is very much like Jane Austen, probably too much so. I have read all of the novels she produced and there are many, many instances and characters that are unnervingly similar to Austen's work. <<SPOILERS>> Melody reminds me very much of Lydia Bennett, Mr. and Mrs. Ellsworth are practically Mr. and Mrs. Bennett with all the cases of nerves and toying with the nerves, Jane reminded me over a mixture of Jane Bennett and Elizabeth Bennett, Beth is a type of Georgiana Darcy with troubled pasts of boys,  and Mr. Vincent is our Mr. Darcy, of course. They had events from Emma and plot of Pride and Prejudice and others. I don't appreciate that as much as some. If I want to read the plot of P&P I'll read P&P.  (Though Mr. Bennett is one of my favorite characters and it was fun to see him in another place.) <<End of SPOILERS>> I wanted this to be different.

Oh, and number two, the ending. There was good and bad about the ending. Much like above, it ended like a JA book would with the main character and her beau getting together and a quick, omniscient conclusion.  It is expected and I'm okay with it. I'm not okay with kisses and embraces. Normally it is expected, but if we were going for historical propriety, kisses and embraces don't happen. The British at this time didn't hug or kiss on the lips, especially in public, because it was an improper display of affection. You didn't do it, even if no one was watching. Or if you did, you'd be ridiculed and seen as a Mr. Wickham/Lydia Bennett. A reputation, especially the girls, would be tainted so fast. So while it is nice in a modern America, it wouldn't have happened. (I blame this response on my JA Professor in college and her making mention/lecture on how although Persuasion did a fantastic job in a portrayal of the novel, the kiss at the end wouldn't have happened, as I explained above.)

Oh, and his words to Jane at the end were rather cheesy. Not a "squee" cheesy, but "oh, that is dripping in cheese there; probably too much."

I go on about dislikes, but I really did enjoy the novel. The conversation and the happening were well done. It was well paced and had good foreshadowing. I could have easily read this in two or three days (except I got super busy  at my house so it took a tad longer). It was fast. It was enjoyable to have a sweet romance with dashes of fantasy in it. You don't get that often in many fantasy novels. Often it is the other way around, where the magics are the focus and the romance is in the background. I plan on reading the next four books.

Enjoy.