What do you think?
Rate this book
Love & Friendship: In Which Jane Austen's Lady Susan Vernon Is Entirely Vindicated
A fun treat for Jane Austen and Whit Stillman fans alike
Impossibly beautiful, disarmingly witty, and completely self-absorbed: Meet Lady Susan Vernon, both the heart and the thorn of Love & Friendship. Recently widowed with a daughter who's coming of age as quickly as their funds are dwindling, Lady Susan makes it her mission to find them wealthy husbands--and fast. But when her attempts to secure their futures result only in the wrath of a prominent conquest's wife and the title of 'most accomplished coquette in England', Lady Susan must rethink her strategy. Unannounced, she arrives at her brother-in-law's country estate. Here she intends to take refuge - in no less than luxury, of course - from the colorful rumors trailing her, while finding another avenue to 'I do'. Before the scandalizing gossip can run its course, though, romantic triangles ensue.
*NOW A MAJOR FILM STARRING KATE BECKINSALE, CHLOE SEVIGNY & STEPHEN FRY*
Impossibly beautiful, disarmingly witty, and completely self-absorbed: Meet Lady Susan Vernon, both the heart and the thorn of Love & Friendship. Recently widowed with a daughter who's coming of age as quickly as their funds are dwindling, Lady Susan makes it her mission to find them wealthy husbands--and fast. But when her attempts to secure their futures result only in the wrath of a prominent conquest's wife and the title of 'most accomplished coquette in England', Lady Susan must rethink her strategy. Unannounced, she arrives at her brother-in-law's country estate. Here she intends to take refuge - in no less than luxury, of course - from the colorful rumors trailing her, while finding another avenue to 'I do'. Before the scandalizing gossip can run its course, though, romantic triangles ensue.
*NOW A MAJOR FILM STARRING KATE BECKINSALE, CHLOE SEVIGNY & STEPHEN FRY*
288 pages, Hardcover
First published May 17, 2016
40 people are currently reading
969 people want to read
About the author
Whit Stillman
9 books49 followersWhit Stillman (born John Whitney Stillman) is an Academy Award-nominated American writer-director known for his sly depictions of the "urban haute bourgeoisie" (as he terms the upper-class WASPs of the U.S. socio-cultural elite).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 123 reviews
June 2, 2016
I was very excited to see that there was a new Jane Austen movie coming out. The film, Love and Friendship, was based on the Whit Stillman book, Love and Friendship, which was in turn based upon the Jane Austen novel, Lady Susan. Since I hadn’t read either of the two books, I decided it would be interesting to read them both before seeing the movie so I could see how the different versions compared with each other.
ABOUT THE BOOKS: Lady Susan, in its original form, is a short novel, told mostly through letters, which follows the schemes and manipulations of the titular Lady Susan. Love and Friendship by Stillman is a longer book in which Lady Susan’s nephew attempts to re-frame the story in such a way as to vindicate his aunt from the vile slanders of the DeCourcy family and their lackey, “the Spinster Authoress.”
MY THOUGHTS: I am sure this will come as no surprise but, of the three versions, my favorite was the original Jane Austen novel. The story was witty and irreverent and had more than a touch of Oscar Wilde-esque style and wit to it. As a heroine (or anti-heroine), Lady Susan is delightfully wicked and unrepentantly schemes, connives, and seduces her way through polite society. My only complaint was that Jane Austen ended the novel rather abruptly. Rather than continue telling her story as it happened in letters between the characters, Austen opts to sum up what happens next in a short epilogue. Jane Austen never submitted Lady Susan for publication. It was published by her family after her death without the extra polish and editing that she gave to her better known works, which may account for the less than perfect ending, but, as far as I am concerned, being so enjoyable that you wish it was longer is certainly one of the better faults a book could have have.
The Whit Stillman book, Love and Friendship, on the other hand, was less delightful. First of all, I have a feminist issues with the book. The original is a story about a woman who doesn’t feel the need to be likeable or to conform to society’s expectations of what a woman / widow / mother should be. Lady Susan owns her life choices, her sexuality, and has no shame in doing whatever she needs to do to get her way. She doesn’t care about morality, reputation, duty, or shame, and only cares what people think of her when she needs to manipulate them into doing what she wants. In fact, she gets away with the most blatant misbehavior partially because she is so confident in her cleverness and powers of persuasion and knows that she can spin almost anything to her advantage. Her letters to her American friend, Mrs. Johnson, in which she drops all pretenses and actually shows pride in her powers of manipulation, are downright hilarious and a lot of fun to read. Yet Stillman decided that this woman needed a man (the alleged nephew) to tell her story and restore Lady Susan to respectability and likeability by explaining away everything that makes her interesting. To be fair, Stillman made the nephew such a blockhead that the original wit and wickedness of the story still shines through but the layer of whitewash the narrator applies to “vindicate” Lady Susan is totally unnecessary and comes across as peevish and tedious. The narrator’s constant digs at Jane Austen (aka the Spinster Authoress) was clearly supposed to be humorous and clever but was just plain annoying instead and very little of the filler content and extra scenes he tacked on to make his book longer really added anything to the story other than length.
The only time Love and Friendship comes close to holding its own with Lady Susan is at the end. While Jane Austen’s Regency era morality demanded that the wicked Lady Susan get her comeuppance at the end of the book, Whit Stillman is able to frame things in such a way that Lady Susan gets to have her cake and eat it too. If only Stillman had ended his book there, I might have come away with a more favorable impression of Love and Friendship but while Jane Austen’s book ended too quickly, Stillman’s meanders on for another chapter with his insufferable narrator.
The film version of Love and Friendship seems to split the difference between Stillman’s book and Jane Austen’s novel. The vindicating nephew is nowhere to be seen – thank goodness – but the excess padding Stillman added to the story dragged and the overall tone of the film was much blander than the original novel – with much of Lady Susan’s spice and sharpness smoothed away.
Overall, I am grateful for Whit Stillman and his book, Love and Friendship, for giving me a reason to discover a hidden gem of the Jane Austen canon but, in the future, I will be reserving all my love and friendship for Jane Austen’s Lady Susan, rather than waste any more of my time on either of Stillman’s adaptations.
ABOUT THE BOOKS: Lady Susan, in its original form, is a short novel, told mostly through letters, which follows the schemes and manipulations of the titular Lady Susan. Love and Friendship by Stillman is a longer book in which Lady Susan’s nephew attempts to re-frame the story in such a way as to vindicate his aunt from the vile slanders of the DeCourcy family and their lackey, “the Spinster Authoress.”
MY THOUGHTS: I am sure this will come as no surprise but, of the three versions, my favorite was the original Jane Austen novel. The story was witty and irreverent and had more than a touch of Oscar Wilde-esque style and wit to it. As a heroine (or anti-heroine), Lady Susan is delightfully wicked and unrepentantly schemes, connives, and seduces her way through polite society. My only complaint was that Jane Austen ended the novel rather abruptly. Rather than continue telling her story as it happened in letters between the characters, Austen opts to sum up what happens next in a short epilogue. Jane Austen never submitted Lady Susan for publication. It was published by her family after her death without the extra polish and editing that she gave to her better known works, which may account for the less than perfect ending, but, as far as I am concerned, being so enjoyable that you wish it was longer is certainly one of the better faults a book could have have.
The Whit Stillman book, Love and Friendship, on the other hand, was less delightful. First of all, I have a feminist issues with the book. The original is a story about a woman who doesn’t feel the need to be likeable or to conform to society’s expectations of what a woman / widow / mother should be. Lady Susan owns her life choices, her sexuality, and has no shame in doing whatever she needs to do to get her way. She doesn’t care about morality, reputation, duty, or shame, and only cares what people think of her when she needs to manipulate them into doing what she wants. In fact, she gets away with the most blatant misbehavior partially because she is so confident in her cleverness and powers of persuasion and knows that she can spin almost anything to her advantage. Her letters to her American friend, Mrs. Johnson, in which she drops all pretenses and actually shows pride in her powers of manipulation, are downright hilarious and a lot of fun to read. Yet Stillman decided that this woman needed a man (the alleged nephew) to tell her story and restore Lady Susan to respectability and likeability by explaining away everything that makes her interesting. To be fair, Stillman made the nephew such a blockhead that the original wit and wickedness of the story still shines through but the layer of whitewash the narrator applies to “vindicate” Lady Susan is totally unnecessary and comes across as peevish and tedious. The narrator’s constant digs at Jane Austen (aka the Spinster Authoress) was clearly supposed to be humorous and clever but was just plain annoying instead and very little of the filler content and extra scenes he tacked on to make his book longer really added anything to the story other than length.
The only time Love and Friendship comes close to holding its own with Lady Susan is at the end. While Jane Austen’s Regency era morality demanded that the wicked Lady Susan get her comeuppance at the end of the book, Whit Stillman is able to frame things in such a way that Lady Susan gets to have her cake and eat it too. If only Stillman had ended his book there, I might have come away with a more favorable impression of Love and Friendship but while Jane Austen’s book ended too quickly, Stillman’s meanders on for another chapter with his insufferable narrator.
The film version of Love and Friendship seems to split the difference between Stillman’s book and Jane Austen’s novel. The vindicating nephew is nowhere to be seen – thank goodness – but the excess padding Stillman added to the story dragged and the overall tone of the film was much blander than the original novel – with much of Lady Susan’s spice and sharpness smoothed away.
Overall, I am grateful for Whit Stillman and his book, Love and Friendship, for giving me a reason to discover a hidden gem of the Jane Austen canon but, in the future, I will be reserving all my love and friendship for Jane Austen’s Lady Susan, rather than waste any more of my time on either of Stillman’s adaptations.
September 5, 2017
After just completing both a re-read of Lady Susan and re-watching of Love & Friendship, I thought it was high time that I read the movie adaption's companion book.
It was meant to be read with an understanding that the author has his tongue firmly planted in his cheek and as such I knew it would be best not to take it too seriously. I also realized as I barely got started that it was a very good thing to read this book after experiencing the movie and the Lady Susan novella as it assumes the reader is cognizant with both. In fact, the whole last half of the book is Lady Susan. I definitely recommend skipping to that first and then going back if this is the reader's first encounter with the story.
My impressions of Love & Friendship the book were milder than I was hoping. It was fun, but it felt more passive voice than I was expecting. I felt like someone was telling me about a story and inserting his opinions of what he observed rather than me as the observer along with the narrator, if this makes sense.
All in all, I was glad to pick it up and again, I would suggest it as a follow up companion rather than standalone. Lovers of the movie adaption would probably enjoy it most as recap to enjoy.
It was meant to be read with an understanding that the author has his tongue firmly planted in his cheek and as such I knew it would be best not to take it too seriously. I also realized as I barely got started that it was a very good thing to read this book after experiencing the movie and the Lady Susan novella as it assumes the reader is cognizant with both. In fact, the whole last half of the book is Lady Susan. I definitely recommend skipping to that first and then going back if this is the reader's first encounter with the story.
My impressions of Love & Friendship the book were milder than I was hoping. It was fun, but it felt more passive voice than I was expecting. I felt like someone was telling me about a story and inserting his opinions of what he observed rather than me as the observer along with the narrator, if this makes sense.
All in all, I was glad to pick it up and again, I would suggest it as a follow up companion rather than standalone. Lovers of the movie adaption would probably enjoy it most as recap to enjoy.
June 23, 2016
Ostensibly written by Lady Susan Vernon's nephew by marriage in 1858, this is an attempt to vindicate Lady Susan, who, in the original novella, is the most awful mother and an accomplished flirt. The nephew claims that anonymous spinster maligned his aunt by making up certain situations and dialogues. He attempts to remedy that with his own memories - and fails. The dialogue is terrible. It's stilted and unnatural but in the movie, it's funny! The actors can pull it off and make it seem funny. The narrator is a dreadful, pompous, bore who inserts his very Victorian ideas into the story. While I do feel bad for Lady Susan, being around the same age, it would have been hard for her as a poor widow, to find another husband or some other way to live. In the original novella, she's scheming and callous but according to her nephew, Lady Susan and Alicia had their own language and often shared inside jokes any listener would misunderstand. Riiigghttt...
The story is a bit funny in parts but mostly because I saw the movie so I can picture the actors' facial expressions. I don't think Jane Austen would have written a character so stupid as Sir James Martin. She poked fun at people but not people who are truly intellectually challenged, as Sir James seems to be. Lady Susan still isn't very likable despite her nephews assertions to the contrary and Frederica comes across as kind of Fanny Price-ish.
This is a so-so attempt at fan-fiction and I applaud his attempt to go with a lesser known work. I didn't have high hopes coming into the movie but expected better of the novelization.
The story is a bit funny in parts but mostly because I saw the movie so I can picture the actors' facial expressions. I don't think Jane Austen would have written a character so stupid as Sir James Martin. She poked fun at people but not people who are truly intellectually challenged, as Sir James seems to be. Lady Susan still isn't very likable despite her nephews assertions to the contrary and Frederica comes across as kind of Fanny Price-ish.
This is a so-so attempt at fan-fiction and I applaud his attempt to go with a lesser known work. I didn't have high hopes coming into the movie but expected better of the novelization.
May 6, 2017
29th Dec 2016: Watched Love and Friendship in the cinema and enjoyed it very much.
9-10th Jan 2017: Reading the first 22% of the book while always wishing that I could re-read Lady Susan before continuing with this version.
11-13th Jan 2017: Realizing that Lady Susan is in the appendix and reading 60-100% of the book. (the original is so much better)
13th/16th Jan 2017: Reading 22-60% and getting more and more frustrated about this silly defender of Lady Susan.. He's getting on my nerves! And this unnecessary chapters about him and things he thinks are important... argh
Realization: Of course I prefer the letters of the genius authoress to this version. OK, maybe reading/watching the same story three times in 3 weeks was not the best idea. But well it showed clearly how much better her letters are.
Conclusion: Read the original Lady Susan or watch the film adaption of this book instead! No stupid narrator and it's so much funnier thanks to the good cast, especially Kate Beckinsale is perfectly conceited and outrageous as Lady Susan.
9-10th Jan 2017: Reading the first 22% of the book while always wishing that I could re-read Lady Susan before continuing with this version.
11-13th Jan 2017: Realizing that Lady Susan is in the appendix and reading 60-100% of the book. (the original is so much better)
13th/16th Jan 2017: Reading 22-60% and getting more and more frustrated about this silly defender of Lady Susan.. He's getting on my nerves! And this unnecessary chapters about him and things he thinks are important... argh
Realization: Of course I prefer the letters of the genius authoress to this version. OK, maybe reading/watching the same story three times in 3 weeks was not the best idea. But well it showed clearly how much better her letters are.
Conclusion: Read the original Lady Susan or watch the film adaption of this book instead! No stupid narrator and it's so much funnier thanks to the good cast, especially Kate Beckinsale is perfectly conceited and outrageous as Lady Susan.
February 15, 2019
Deliziosa e simpatica questa rivisitazione di Lady Susan.
Ci troviamo così di fronte a uno scritto di Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocchi, un lontano parente di sir Martin che cerca in tutti i modi di riabilitare l’onore di Lady Susan, che la “scrittrice zitella” ha calunniato con i suoi falsi scritti.
Insomma una sorta di mr Collins che con infinita pedanteria, racconta la medesima storia che scorre così fluida dalla penna della nostra cara zia Jane.
Strana la lettura di questo libro. Dopo infatti essermi accorta che da pagina 151 in poi erano riportate le lettere originali, ho deciso di proseguire la lettura in parallelo.
Bello, ma non senza difetti.
La pedanteria del fantomatico autore dello scritto, fa sorridere all’inizio, ma continuando per tutto il romanzo diventa pesante e le digressioni “non richieste” risultano solamente noiose. Esattamente come mr Collins che legge i sermoni di Fordais.
L’alternare della narrazione con le lettere come ho fatto io, stempera questa sensazione, ma non la fa sparire.
Sono arrivata alla conclusione che Lady Susan non possa essere salvata, ma rimane comunque la mia anti-eroina preferita!
Ci troviamo così di fronte a uno scritto di Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocchi, un lontano parente di sir Martin che cerca in tutti i modi di riabilitare l’onore di Lady Susan, che la “scrittrice zitella” ha calunniato con i suoi falsi scritti.
Insomma una sorta di mr Collins che con infinita pedanteria, racconta la medesima storia che scorre così fluida dalla penna della nostra cara zia Jane.
Strana la lettura di questo libro. Dopo infatti essermi accorta che da pagina 151 in poi erano riportate le lettere originali, ho deciso di proseguire la lettura in parallelo.
Bello, ma non senza difetti.
La pedanteria del fantomatico autore dello scritto, fa sorridere all’inizio, ma continuando per tutto il romanzo diventa pesante e le digressioni “non richieste” risultano solamente noiose. Esattamente come mr Collins che legge i sermoni di Fordais.
L’alternare della narrazione con le lettere come ho fatto io, stempera questa sensazione, ma non la fa sparire.
Sono arrivata alla conclusione che Lady Susan non possa essere salvata, ma rimane comunque la mia anti-eroina preferita!
March 20, 2023
Jane would have loved this. It is an absolute scream. Funnier even than the film (which, I think, came first). Definitely the best Austen homage fiction I've ever read. Bravo, Mr. Stillman. You've done yourself and the anonymous lady author proud. The Austenite, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in this adaptation, must be intolerably stupid.
The narrator was good except for his American accent for Mrs. Johnson, which sounded too twentieth century to be creditable. No, I was not actually around in the late eighteenth/early nineteenth century to be able to tell you what a Connecticut accent of the day would have sounded like, but I just know it wasn't like this.
The narrator was good except for his American accent for Mrs. Johnson, which sounded too twentieth century to be creditable. No, I was not actually around in the late eighteenth/early nineteenth century to be able to tell you what a Connecticut accent of the day would have sounded like, but I just know it wasn't like this.
November 12, 2025
4.5, rounded up.
Much as he did with his earlier tome, The Last Days of Disco, With Cocktails at Petrossian Afterwards, this both is - and isn't - a novelization of Whitman's own film. As the cover indicates, it is, rather: 'The motion picture story expanded and corrected'.
The conceit here is that Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocca, the nephew of Sir James Martin, one of the characters in the film (itself loosely based on Austen's Lady Susan) has written and published the proceedings herein from some 77 years after the publication of her original work, and has done so in high dudgeon over the scandalous liberties the 'spinster authoress' has taken in her tale.
So even though we DO get the events and dialogues of the film, the wrap-around story is drolly delicious in its own right, written in a hilarious faux Regency patois. I concede I am a Whitman super-fan and adore each of his (sadly only five) films - but this, his latest to date from 2016, is my absolute favorite - and is ALSO my favorite film adaptation of Austen - sorry, devotees of the various others!!
If one HASN'T seen the film, do yourself a favor; I doubt this would be of much interest to anyone who hasn't. The volume ALSO contains the full text of Austen's original, with footnotes by Rufus, but as I read THAT for the first time a month ago, I didn't bother to reread it - skipping directly to said footnotes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MaSK...
Much as he did with his earlier tome, The Last Days of Disco, With Cocktails at Petrossian Afterwards, this both is - and isn't - a novelization of Whitman's own film. As the cover indicates, it is, rather: 'The motion picture story expanded and corrected'.
The conceit here is that Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocca, the nephew of Sir James Martin, one of the characters in the film (itself loosely based on Austen's Lady Susan) has written and published the proceedings herein from some 77 years after the publication of her original work, and has done so in high dudgeon over the scandalous liberties the 'spinster authoress' has taken in her tale.
So even though we DO get the events and dialogues of the film, the wrap-around story is drolly delicious in its own right, written in a hilarious faux Regency patois. I concede I am a Whitman super-fan and adore each of his (sadly only five) films - but this, his latest to date from 2016, is my absolute favorite - and is ALSO my favorite film adaptation of Austen - sorry, devotees of the various others!!
If one HASN'T seen the film, do yourself a favor; I doubt this would be of much interest to anyone who hasn't. The volume ALSO contains the full text of Austen's original, with footnotes by Rufus, but as I read THAT for the first time a month ago, I didn't bother to reread it - skipping directly to said footnotes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MaSK...
August 2, 2016
Lady Susan by “A Partial, Prejudiced, and Ignorant Historian”
(Note: This review is coming from the perspective of someone who has not yet had the pleasure of seeing the movie, Love and Friendship, but has previously read Jane Austen’s epistolary novel, Lady Susan.)
TYPE OF AUSTENESQUE NOVEL: Retelling, Epistolary Novel
SETTING: England, 1794 (Surrey, Kent, and London to be specific)
MAIN CHARACTERS: Lady Susan Vernon, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Vernon, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, Miss Frederica Vernon, Mr. Reginald DeCourcy, Sir James Martin, The Spinster Authoress, and our narrator – Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocca
WHY I WANTED TO READ THIS NOVEL:
- Only once in a blue moon will an author attempt to write about Jane Austen’s Lady Susan!
- I read and enjoyed Lady Vernon and Her Daughter back in 2009 (which did redeem Lady Susan) and was interested to see Mr. Stillman’s interpretation.
WHAT I LOVED:
- Sparkling and Sharp: This is how I would describe the humor of this story. The narrative is written from the point-of-view of a younger relation of Sir James Martin who claims to possess the “extraordinary ability to imagine just how everything was, even in those circumstances when [he] could not have been present.” Not sure how much of reliable a source Rufus is, but it is clear from his first paragraph he is a bit of a buffoon puffed up with self-importance. I think Mr. Stillman was poking fun at a lot of Jane Austen’s characters who rattle, pontificate, and are cut from the same cloth. Aside from his pointed and subjective defense of Lady Susan, Rufus’s takes plenty acerbic jabs at Jane Austen and the DeCourcy family and how they manipulated and falsified the true history of this story.
- Layout: What may not be evident from the book blurb is that this book is divided into two different parts. The first is Rufus’s narrative of the events, the second is Jane Austen’s complete novella Lady Susan with some annotations and such from Rufus. So if you haven’t had the pleasure of reading Lady Susan yet or if it has been awhile, no need to fret – it is included in this tome! Even though I read Lady Susan a little over a year ago, I appreciated that it was included here so I could read it again.
- Fleshed Out: In Lady Susan, not all characters exchange correspondence with each other. There are some characters we only learn about through the letters of others. I really enjoyed how this narrative gave readers a fuller picture of all the key players in this story. I especially enjoyed the extra attention given to Sir James Martin, Frederica Vernon, and Charles Vernon.
- Helpful Extras: Character list, locations list, genealogical table, and numerous annotations – I love all the organized and useful extras provided in this book. They definitely lend themselves to understanding the story better.
WHAT I WASN’T TOO FOND OF:
- Sometimes Hard to Follow and Inconsistent: Some of Rufus’s speeches are a bit long-winded and circuitous, which while hilarious in a Mr. Collins/Dogberry kind of way, they sometimes left me wanting to say like Mr. Bennet “I have not the pleasure of understanding you.” Especially early on in the story. In addition, I was disappointed that Rufus only had comments on Letters 1-15 of Jane Austen’s Lady Susan. After reading his snarky remarks and edits for the first fifteen I started to look forward to seeing them after each letter, but from Letters 16-41 they were discontinued because Rufus felt the “malicious falseness” of Jane Austen’s account to be “self-evident.”
CONCLUSION:
I think Whit Stillman’s retelling of Lady Susan is a remarkably clever and appropriate way to celebrate Jane Austen’s selfish, scheming, and infamous antiheroine. While maybe not entirely successful in the attempt to vindicate Lady Susan, like Jane Austen’s novella, this work was a satirical and irreverent diversion! I’m looking forward to comparing it to the film!
Austenesque Reviews
(Note: This review is coming from the perspective of someone who has not yet had the pleasure of seeing the movie, Love and Friendship, but has previously read Jane Austen’s epistolary novel, Lady Susan.)
TYPE OF AUSTENESQUE NOVEL: Retelling, Epistolary Novel
SETTING: England, 1794 (Surrey, Kent, and London to be specific)
MAIN CHARACTERS: Lady Susan Vernon, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Vernon, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, Miss Frederica Vernon, Mr. Reginald DeCourcy, Sir James Martin, The Spinster Authoress, and our narrator – Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocca
WHY I WANTED TO READ THIS NOVEL:
- Only once in a blue moon will an author attempt to write about Jane Austen’s Lady Susan!
- I read and enjoyed Lady Vernon and Her Daughter back in 2009 (which did redeem Lady Susan) and was interested to see Mr. Stillman’s interpretation.
WHAT I LOVED:
- Sparkling and Sharp: This is how I would describe the humor of this story. The narrative is written from the point-of-view of a younger relation of Sir James Martin who claims to possess the “extraordinary ability to imagine just how everything was, even in those circumstances when [he] could not have been present.” Not sure how much of reliable a source Rufus is, but it is clear from his first paragraph he is a bit of a buffoon puffed up with self-importance. I think Mr. Stillman was poking fun at a lot of Jane Austen’s characters who rattle, pontificate, and are cut from the same cloth. Aside from his pointed and subjective defense of Lady Susan, Rufus’s takes plenty acerbic jabs at Jane Austen and the DeCourcy family and how they manipulated and falsified the true history of this story.
- Layout: What may not be evident from the book blurb is that this book is divided into two different parts. The first is Rufus’s narrative of the events, the second is Jane Austen’s complete novella Lady Susan with some annotations and such from Rufus. So if you haven’t had the pleasure of reading Lady Susan yet or if it has been awhile, no need to fret – it is included in this tome! Even though I read Lady Susan a little over a year ago, I appreciated that it was included here so I could read it again.
- Fleshed Out: In Lady Susan, not all characters exchange correspondence with each other. There are some characters we only learn about through the letters of others. I really enjoyed how this narrative gave readers a fuller picture of all the key players in this story. I especially enjoyed the extra attention given to Sir James Martin, Frederica Vernon, and Charles Vernon.
- Helpful Extras: Character list, locations list, genealogical table, and numerous annotations – I love all the organized and useful extras provided in this book. They definitely lend themselves to understanding the story better.
WHAT I WASN’T TOO FOND OF:
- Sometimes Hard to Follow and Inconsistent: Some of Rufus’s speeches are a bit long-winded and circuitous, which while hilarious in a Mr. Collins/Dogberry kind of way, they sometimes left me wanting to say like Mr. Bennet “I have not the pleasure of understanding you.” Especially early on in the story. In addition, I was disappointed that Rufus only had comments on Letters 1-15 of Jane Austen’s Lady Susan. After reading his snarky remarks and edits for the first fifteen I started to look forward to seeing them after each letter, but from Letters 16-41 they were discontinued because Rufus felt the “malicious falseness” of Jane Austen’s account to be “self-evident.”
CONCLUSION:
I think Whit Stillman’s retelling of Lady Susan is a remarkably clever and appropriate way to celebrate Jane Austen’s selfish, scheming, and infamous antiheroine. While maybe not entirely successful in the attempt to vindicate Lady Susan, like Jane Austen’s novella, this work was a satirical and irreverent diversion! I’m looking forward to comparing it to the film!
Austenesque Reviews
June 19, 2016
I had never read Jane Austen's "Lady Susan" and wanted to read it. I happened to pick this book up from the new release section in the library. The pretense of "Love and Friendship" is that Lady Susan's nephew is accusing the, "spinster authoress', Jane Austen of slandering his aunt's reputation and he intends to clear her name. His excuses and explanations fall flat and really serve to make her look even more devious and the foolish characters even more foolish. Both of the books were written with a sort of satire and commentary of the deviousness and scandalous deeds of Lady Susan. The full text of Jane Austen's Lady Susan is at the end, as the "Appendix" with snide comments interspersed by the "nephew" who tried to vindicate Lady Susan. This was an easy, quick, enjoyable read. I got to kill two birds with one stone and was finally able to get around to reading Jane Austen's Lady Susan.
June 4, 2016
Really glad I did not give up on this book. Especially cracked up reading about the semi colon (p.132)." if we learn to master the semicolon we would expect to be successful in whatever path you chose in life"
December 10, 2016
This strange volume was a won in a twitter giveaway along with tickets to the movie. I say strange because I don't know who the target audience for this book is. To any Austen fan, Stillman's interpretation is condescending. The footnotes, which I initially found humorous and very "meta" become patronizing and irrelevant. However, a more narrative version of the story would not aid newcomers to Austen as it is no more accessible than the original story. My biggest gripe with this book, and I very much wanted to enjoy it, is that the narrator is constructed as this new character and he is completely unnecessary to the plot. His story adds no value on top of Austen's and just serves to insult the reader.
The film based on the book was excellent, and a much better use of my time. Even better is the original text of Lady Susan, unannotated for the true Austen fan.
The film based on the book was excellent, and a much better use of my time. Even better is the original text of Lady Susan, unannotated for the true Austen fan.
May 26, 2016
I'm sorry to say I didn't enjoy the book as much as the movie. While all(nearly all?) the lines in the movie are in the book, the book has a Collins like narrator who I found tedious. My mood was not the best when reading it, so perhaps the fault is all mine. I'm glad I saw the movie first! Barely 2.5-2.75
June 3, 2016
Both Austen's original and Stillman's additional defenses of the story are poignant and the best form of satire.
January 1, 2024
Ma davvero è Lady Susan la perfida intrigante?
A me pare che Catherine Vernon e Frederica siano state altrettanto intriganti e abbiano portato a casa un risultato anche migliore. Del resto, di chi è figlia Frederica?
E che sia la prima vera eroina austeniana è indubbio, dal momento che riesce a rifiutare una proposta di matrimonio e a sposarsi per amore.
A me pare che Catherine Vernon e Frederica siano state altrettanto intriganti e abbiano portato a casa un risultato anche migliore. Del resto, di chi è figlia Frederica?
E che sia la prima vera eroina austeniana è indubbio, dal momento che riesce a rifiutare una proposta di matrimonio e a sposarsi per amore.
July 13, 2016
A Delightful Gem With Austen's Flair for Wit and Charm
I bowled over laughing after reading every sentence written in this outstanding Austen re-creation! Whit Stillman is at his very best comical self with Love and Friendship, and I can very well imagine his book being applauded the world over for its ingenious and sparkling humor! Lady Susan Vernon is not vindicated at all, and therein lies the intelligent irony of this novel. Austen would be very proud! This book is a must-read for everyone who ever claimed to be a Janeite!
I bowled over laughing after reading every sentence written in this outstanding Austen re-creation! Whit Stillman is at his very best comical self with Love and Friendship, and I can very well imagine his book being applauded the world over for its ingenious and sparkling humor! Lady Susan Vernon is not vindicated at all, and therein lies the intelligent irony of this novel. Austen would be very proud! This book is a must-read for everyone who ever claimed to be a Janeite!
July 25, 2016
An adaptation of Jane Austen’s unpublished novel Lady Susan, re-written from a different perspective by the writer and producer of the recent movie adaptation of the same title. The novel takes the form of a written defense of Lady Susan Vernon as written by her nephew much later in life. Stillman introduces his hilariously hapless narrator but wisely lifts Austen’s knowledge of the setting, manners and mannerisms of her own time direct from the original.
June 23, 2016
As I said in my review of Lady Susan, this is one of the rare cases where I prefer the movie to the book.
July 21, 2016
Well done. Very well done. A pleasing companion to the movie that I suspect also works on its own, with an added narrative layer that provides a lot of fun.
October 29, 2021
Βασικά είναι ότι πρώτο βιβλίο που διαβάζω από την Τζειν Όστεν και σίγουρα θα διαβάσω και άλλα δικά της βιβλία... Ήθελα να βαθμολογήσω μεταξύ 3 και 4 και έβαλα 3 τελικά.. είναι ένα βιβλίο που το διαβάζεις χαλαρά και που σ προκαλεί ένα ενδιαφέρον ...μου άρεσαν αρκετά τα κεφάλαια λαίδη Σούζαν και Κάθριν..
June 16, 2016
Love and Friendship is a sharp and witty reimagining of Jane Austen’s novella, Lady Susan. I love the entire title which is “Love and Friendship: In Which Jane Austen’s Lady Susan Vernon is Entirely Vindicated. Concerning the Beautiful Lady Susan Vernon, Her Cunning Daughter & the Strange Antagonism of the DeCourcy Family.” The novel is “written” by Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocca, nephew of Sir James Martin. He has taken offense at the “spinster authoress” Jane Austen’s take on Lady Susan Vernon’s story and tells the tale from his point of view to vindicate Lady Susan as well as his Uncle. What is hilarious is that even though Rufus tries to tell the tale with vindication, the buffoonery of Sir James and deviousness of Lady Susan cannot help but pop out.
I am happy to be a part of the Love & Friendship – The Janeite Blog Tour. After my review of the novel, stay tuned for more information about the novel, author, tour, and giveaway.
Lady Susan Vernon is the widow of a ruined gentleman. Her late husband’s family blames her for the ruin as well as making her husband unhappy for her love of other men before his death. It is rumored that she has left the home of her friends the Manwarings after she succored both the affection of the married Lord Manwaring as well as the affection of Sir James Martin who was pursuing Miss Manwaring at the time. Lady Susan leaves their home to visit her brother and sister in law, Catherine and Charles Vernon. Catherine has no love for Lady Susan, but is more than dismayed when Lady Susan manages to attract the affections of her brother Reginald DeCourcy. Lady Susan’s daughter, Frederica arrives on the scene after getting kicked out of her school for trying to run away. She is distressed that her mother is arranging her marriage to Sir James Martin, who also arrives at Churchill, the Vernon’s estate. How will this end? Will Lady Susan find her own true love? Will Frederica find happiness? Will they all discover Lady Susan’s true personality or are all they thinking the worse of a kind woman?
I loved the humor in this book which is apparent in this quote:
“I admire those people who are willing or, even more admirably, firmly resolved to rise above the slights and antagonisms of the past. Catherine Vernon was not one of them.”
Poor Rufus is trying to vindicate his Uncle Sir James Martin in the novel, but it is hard.
“…Perhaps most significant in forming one’s principles is that of the old prophet who came down from the mount with tablets bearing the Twelve Commandments – which our Lord has taught us to obey without fail.”
“The Twelve Commandments?” Reginald asked.
Sir James nodded affably in the affirmative.
“Excuse me,” Charles interrupted in an apologetic tone, “I believe there were only Ten.”
“Oh, really?” Sir James said, “Only Ten must be obeyed? Well, then . .. Which two to take off? Perhaps the one about the Sabbath,” he said with a smile. “I prefer to hunt.”
I love Lady Susan – two of my favorite quotes from the cunning lady:
“When it comes to flattery, don’t hold bank,” Lady Susan commented. “Men are such gluttons for praise, it’s never enough.”
“Oh.” Lady Susan was briefly silenced “Facts are horrid things.”
Love and Friendship contains a great character list, Genealogical Table, and Jane Austen’s original epistolary novel is included in an appendix with Rufus’ notes on where Jane Austen got it wrong. It was fun to read the original novel as well.
Overall, I loved Love and Friendship. It’s a fun novel that shows the great comic humor of Jane Austen while also adding another layer of humor by trying to vindicate one of Austen’s best villains. I highly recommend this novel for all lovers of Austen as well as anyone looking for a great comic novel. I can’t wait to watch the movie!
Book Source: A Review copy as part of the Blog Tour.
My original review was posted at: http://lauragerold.blogspot.com/2016/...
I am happy to be a part of the Love & Friendship – The Janeite Blog Tour. After my review of the novel, stay tuned for more information about the novel, author, tour, and giveaway.
Lady Susan Vernon is the widow of a ruined gentleman. Her late husband’s family blames her for the ruin as well as making her husband unhappy for her love of other men before his death. It is rumored that she has left the home of her friends the Manwarings after she succored both the affection of the married Lord Manwaring as well as the affection of Sir James Martin who was pursuing Miss Manwaring at the time. Lady Susan leaves their home to visit her brother and sister in law, Catherine and Charles Vernon. Catherine has no love for Lady Susan, but is more than dismayed when Lady Susan manages to attract the affections of her brother Reginald DeCourcy. Lady Susan’s daughter, Frederica arrives on the scene after getting kicked out of her school for trying to run away. She is distressed that her mother is arranging her marriage to Sir James Martin, who also arrives at Churchill, the Vernon’s estate. How will this end? Will Lady Susan find her own true love? Will Frederica find happiness? Will they all discover Lady Susan’s true personality or are all they thinking the worse of a kind woman?
I loved the humor in this book which is apparent in this quote:
“I admire those people who are willing or, even more admirably, firmly resolved to rise above the slights and antagonisms of the past. Catherine Vernon was not one of them.”
Poor Rufus is trying to vindicate his Uncle Sir James Martin in the novel, but it is hard.
“…Perhaps most significant in forming one’s principles is that of the old prophet who came down from the mount with tablets bearing the Twelve Commandments – which our Lord has taught us to obey without fail.”
“The Twelve Commandments?” Reginald asked.
Sir James nodded affably in the affirmative.
“Excuse me,” Charles interrupted in an apologetic tone, “I believe there were only Ten.”
“Oh, really?” Sir James said, “Only Ten must be obeyed? Well, then . .. Which two to take off? Perhaps the one about the Sabbath,” he said with a smile. “I prefer to hunt.”
I love Lady Susan – two of my favorite quotes from the cunning lady:
“When it comes to flattery, don’t hold bank,” Lady Susan commented. “Men are such gluttons for praise, it’s never enough.”
“Oh.” Lady Susan was briefly silenced “Facts are horrid things.”
Love and Friendship contains a great character list, Genealogical Table, and Jane Austen’s original epistolary novel is included in an appendix with Rufus’ notes on where Jane Austen got it wrong. It was fun to read the original novel as well.
Overall, I loved Love and Friendship. It’s a fun novel that shows the great comic humor of Jane Austen while also adding another layer of humor by trying to vindicate one of Austen’s best villains. I highly recommend this novel for all lovers of Austen as well as anyone looking for a great comic novel. I can’t wait to watch the movie!
Book Source: A Review copy as part of the Blog Tour.
My original review was posted at: http://lauragerold.blogspot.com/2016/...
June 26, 2016
Who better to capture Austen’s witty social commentary than filmmaker and writer Whit Stillman? His first film, Metropolitan, was one of my favorites from the 1990s, but I confess that I didn’t catch its similarities to Mansfield Park until many years later. Now Stillman has written a companion piece to his latest film Love & Friendship in straight narrative form. He introduces a new character to the story: Rufus Martin-Colonna de Cesari-Rocca, Lady Susan’s nephew. Rufus has penned his “true narrative of false-witness” to expose Austen’s supposed hatchet job on his aunt. His loyalties are made clear with the novel’s subtitle, “In Which Jane Austen’s Lady Susan Vernon Is Entirely Vindicated (Concerning the Beautiful Lady Susan Vernon, Her Cunning Daughter & the Strange Antagonism of the DeCourcy Family).”
Readers familiar with Austen’s Lady Susan will notice an inversion of good and evil from the outset. Rufus has dedicated his novel to none other than the Prince of Wales, mimicking Austen’s dedication of Emma to the Prince Regent, but in a much more effusively toad-eating style. After two knowing winks from Stillman in two pages: consider yourself warned. Rufus is the quintessential unreliable narrator, writing his rebuttal of Austen’s version of events from debtors prison in Clerkenwell in 1858. The vindication of his maligned aunt, riddled with inconsistencies and bizarre logic, is peppered with tirades on a range of subjects: history, theology, and grammar. These make for some of the funniest passages in the novel.
Since many movie tie-ins offer little more than a printed version of the screenplay, Love & Friendship surprised and entertained me. Stillman’s playfully Austenesque sensibility delivers an imaginative interpretation of the story that Austen abandoned “to the great detriment of the Post office Revenue.” (273) His clever tribute to the original Lady Susan showcases tongue-in-cheek humor perfectly suited to this comedy of manners.
-------------------------------
Note: I received one review copy from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
Readers familiar with Austen’s Lady Susan will notice an inversion of good and evil from the outset. Rufus has dedicated his novel to none other than the Prince of Wales, mimicking Austen’s dedication of Emma to the Prince Regent, but in a much more effusively toad-eating style. After two knowing winks from Stillman in two pages: consider yourself warned. Rufus is the quintessential unreliable narrator, writing his rebuttal of Austen’s version of events from debtors prison in Clerkenwell in 1858. The vindication of his maligned aunt, riddled with inconsistencies and bizarre logic, is peppered with tirades on a range of subjects: history, theology, and grammar. These make for some of the funniest passages in the novel.
Since many movie tie-ins offer little more than a printed version of the screenplay, Love & Friendship surprised and entertained me. Stillman’s playfully Austenesque sensibility delivers an imaginative interpretation of the story that Austen abandoned “to the great detriment of the Post office Revenue.” (273) His clever tribute to the original Lady Susan showcases tongue-in-cheek humor perfectly suited to this comedy of manners.
-------------------------------
Note: I received one review copy from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
June 9, 2016
Clever satire rather than satisfying romance. Lady Susan is a recent widow with a teenage daughter. The widow is widely suspected of clever and immoral machinations designed to snare unsuspecting men (married and otherwise) into matrimony or indiscretions. That she succeeds spectacularly on all fronts despite justifying all of the negative gossip shows the power of marrying an immensely stupid man with 10,000 pounds per year. Readers of any Austen novel should also read Thomas Piketty's CAPITAL IN THE 21ST CENTURY for a better understanding of the importance of money in that era. The average income in Jane Austen's time was some 30 pounds per year. In those days a salary 10 times that in a highly successful profession --- say 300 pounds per year --- afforded a decent existence, but still grinding and uncomfortable without much in the way of carriages, horses, stables, servants, etc.. The only way for a large enough income to afford a "dignified existence" would be to inherit or marry big money (1,000 pounds per year and up). If a clever, adulterous woman succeeds in snaring a fortune, the whole world smiles at her virtue.
July 17, 2016
#30 A book coming out as a film in 2016
I loved this reworking of Jane Austen's epistolary novella Lady Susan. The title evokes her hilarious juvenilia Love and Freindship, although the first part of the novel is not written in letters, but ostensibly by the nephew of Lady Susan as a narrative vindicating her in the face of the scandalous version given by the spinster authoress (Jane Austen). This nephew writing about his aunt deliberately evokes the biography of Austen written by her nephew. The nephew author (who, it transpires, is in prison) also provides Austen's novel as a counterpoint to his narrative with annotations explaining how Austen prejudices the reader against Lady Susan.
Lady Susan is a widow who has spent all her husband's money and now relies on extended visits to relatives and friends to live in the style she expects. She is determined to marry her daughter off to a dim but wealthy noble and flirts outrageously breaking up marriages and attachments in her wake. She is viewed with suspicion by her relatives but is able to charm men into viewing her actions benignly.
A fun read which promises to be a great film with Kate Beckinsale as Lady Susan
I loved this reworking of Jane Austen's epistolary novella Lady Susan. The title evokes her hilarious juvenilia Love and Freindship, although the first part of the novel is not written in letters, but ostensibly by the nephew of Lady Susan as a narrative vindicating her in the face of the scandalous version given by the spinster authoress (Jane Austen). This nephew writing about his aunt deliberately evokes the biography of Austen written by her nephew. The nephew author (who, it transpires, is in prison) also provides Austen's novel as a counterpoint to his narrative with annotations explaining how Austen prejudices the reader against Lady Susan.
Lady Susan is a widow who has spent all her husband's money and now relies on extended visits to relatives and friends to live in the style she expects. She is determined to marry her daughter off to a dim but wealthy noble and flirts outrageously breaking up marriages and attachments in her wake. She is viewed with suspicion by her relatives but is able to charm men into viewing her actions benignly.
A fun read which promises to be a great film with Kate Beckinsale as Lady Susan
July 9, 2016
Books based on Jane Austen's work and I have a love/hate relationship. Mostly hate. I adore the characters and works she creates so I try to peer back into the world she wrote. Usually it fails spectacularly and I'm left wondering who these characters are supposed to be. I loved this book. For one thing it's the right length. Lady Susan was short, so is this retelling. We don't have pages and pages of fluffy filler. It's told from the perspective of Lady Susan's smitten nephew by (second) marriage. He's absolutely determined to explain away her horrible actions, but instead further entrenches the original impression. His dialogue took me a moment to get into, but once it all clicked I thought it was hilarious. Imagine Mr Collin's trying to defend someone. That's pretty much the style. When I first heard it was a 'defense' of Lady Susan I wasn't super interested. Some books just try too hard. I'm glad I gave it a chance.
If you are unfamiliar with Lady Susan I recommend reading that first.
If you are unfamiliar with Lady Susan I recommend reading that first.
July 15, 2016
Pure delight for Jane Austen fans. Having squeezed in the movie during trip preparations, I almost gave this novella a pass, as on first glance it follows the movie closely. However, Stillman has so much fun with wordplay ("argufy," "despisefy," "the stride of faith" instead of "leap of faith"), Austen-era use of ampersands, references to the original source material "Lady Susan" (full text included as appendix), irony, voice, etc., that I found it irresistible. Library read that will have to land in my library once it's in paperback. Kudos to the publisher for use of nice-to-touch paper for the hardcover, defying the unfortunate modern degradation of hardcovers to newsprint quality pages.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 12, 2016
This is a re-telling of Lady Susan and I'm not quite sure why it's called Love & Friendship. That aside, it's a clever take on the original story line... a novelization both of the movie of the same name and of the original epistolary novella by Jane Austen herself. The novel succeeds in filling out the plot and characters while keeping the sharp witty tone of the original villain, Lady Susan Vernon. It's refreshing to see an Austen adaptation that's not focused on the love story; instead the focus is on the untoward influence Lady Susan has on the unfortunate people around her. Well done, Mr. Stillman.
gave-up-on
August 27, 2016While I loved the movie, there are too many characters and the dialogue is too quick for me to keep up with the story in book form. I HATE saying this, but if I hadn't seen the movie first I might have been more motivated to read through the book.
2nd edit: After reading several reviews- I'm wondering if this is even the same story? This is written from the nephews perspective. Maybe I'll give it another go after I finish Inspector Gamache's fourth book ;)
3rd edit: I'll definitely give this one another go.
2nd edit: After reading several reviews- I'm wondering if this is even the same story? This is written from the nephews perspective. Maybe I'll give it another go after I finish Inspector Gamache's fourth book ;)
3rd edit: I'll definitely give this one another go.
October 12, 2016
I was confused about how to tackle this book but decided to read it from 'front to back'. This meant that I read the original text last and therefore was not always sure what the 'snippy' remarks and foot notes were intended to convey. Perhaps I should have read the chapters and letters concurrently. There was an interesting plot woven around the original story but I did feel some of the asides and commentary were too trivial and petty to be interesting but perhaps this was the authors intention.
July 17, 2016
At times reads like a screenplay, overwhelmingly dialogue-based; at times though, sounds like WS is overwriting. For this case, I think the Jane Austen epistolary is more enjoyable and direct. I've to say too, that I'd enjoyed the movie more. My single qualm, how can a young boy know so much 'insider's' views and detailed events and in particular, the sentiments of a strictly adult world. Thus the weak positioning of the narrator.
July 9, 2016
A witty novelization that adds a good deal to the experience of watching the movie. Stillman is good at capturing the voice of the self-centered, narrow-minded, self-righteous narrator . . . a little TOO good, actually. He reminded me so strongly of people I've known who are just like that, it sometimes set my teeth on edge!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 123 reviews