Never too Late to Read Classics discussion

It tells the story of the Dashwood sisters, Elinor and Marianne, both of age to marry. The novel follows the young women to their new home with their widowed mother, a meagre cottage on the property of a distant relative, where they experience love, romance and heartbreak. The novel is set in southwest England, London and Sussex between 1792 and 1797.

The two sisters have distinct personalities. One is practical and focussed on reality (Sense). The other sister has a romantic personality and is very emotional (Sensibilty).

I like how both Eleanor and Maryanne are portrayed as both positive and negative, with neither Maryanne's extreme sensibility and Eleanor's equally rather extreme sense being lauded, that one must have a good combination of both in order to be happy and healthy (although it must be stated that Maryanne's rather extreme sensibility and her idea at first that dying for love is glorious is much more of an actual and physical danger to and for her than Eleanor's reserve and tendency to not divulge anything about herself even to her nearest and dearest).

I'm still laughing at the "meagre cottage" which by today's standards is a large house, & the idea that they will have "only" 3 servants!

Trisha wrote: "I'm still laughing at the "meagre cottage" which by today's standards is a large house, & the idea that they will have "only" 3 servants!"

I find that funny as well, but by 18th century British landed gentry standards and compared to what the Dashwoods were used to, the cottage would indeed be considered meagre and the amount of servants as well (especially considering that in those days, unless one was truly destitute, even most lower middle class families would have at least had a maid for helping in the kitchen).

I enjoyed this novel much more than I anticipated. It is definitely tied in my heart with Pride and Prejudice. This was the first novel that Austen wrote and it does have the teenage angst feel. I love to see how Austen's writings progress and become more mature over the years.

Dawn, that is true. There is a change in her female characters towards maturity, which is shown the most in Persuasion, a novel I also truly enjoy.

I started this around the end of March. It definitely feels like a first novel. I'm still enjoying it.

I can't understand Edward. why did you do this to Eleanor? at least he could tell her tiny word about what happend!

Emiliy200 wrote: "I can't understand Edward. why did you do this to Eleanor? at least he could tell her tiny word about what happend!"

Edward was in many ways as reserved and as shy as Eleanor, and because of his reserve, he did not really consider that Eleanor liked him as more than just a friend at first (and remember, every time that there was an opportunity for Edward to say anything, someone usually interfered, like his horrible sister, Fanny). Yes, Edward should have maybe said something, but in many ways, he seems to have been too shy and too unsure of himself and not realised until a bit too late that Eleanor was actually romantically interested in him).

I read somewhere that Austen wavered over the merits of sense and sensibility while she was writing the book. You can kind of sense her weighing the two viewpoints as the story progresses.

Phil wrote: "I read somewhere that Austen wavered over the merits of sense and sensibility while she was writing the book. You can kind of sense her weighing the two viewpoints as the story progresses."

Which is what I have always loved about the novel, that she attempts to find a bit of a balance between the two.

It is sad that when the father of a family dies the second wife and girls have no resources of their own to live in the family home, and have to depend on the kindness of a relative.

Of the girls Marianne and her relationship with Willoughby is heartbreaking.

Jane's desire to show the struggles of society, and the lengths certain people will go to gain credibility makes the novel very romantic and exciting.

Lesle wrote: "It is sad that when the father of a family dies the second wife and girls have no resources of their own to live in the family home, and have to depend on the kindness of a relative.

Of the girls ..."

And in those days, except for being a governess, there were NO opportunities for so-called well bred girls/women to even make a living. In some ways, it would probably have been more liberating to have been a woman of the middle or lower classes, as there were at least some opportunities to make a living available for them.

That is probably why so many female authors at that time wrote under pen names.

Lesle wrote: "That is probably why so many female authors at that time wrote under pen names."

And pen names that disguised their femininity, look at Mary Anne Evans (George Eliot); I doubt she would have had as much success publishing under a female name.

I think this is a sign that I should reread Sense and Sensability... I started it earlier in the year, and didn't move on.
I never liked Marianne's character when I was younger, but as a reread I can see her a little better now. The two personalities are really a well-written cast.

I'm about to start rereading Sense and Sensibility. Had to read it in school (more than 20 years ago) and back then I didn't really care much for it. Even though I later came to love Persuasion, Emma and Pride & Prejudice, for some reason Sense and Sensibility never really worked for me. Didn't even like the movie adaptations.
But I'm giving it one more chance : )

Hm. I just checked my review from 2015. Looks like I was unimpressed:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I enjoy 19th century literature, but I am not a romance fan. Does this book hold any appeal beyond the romance angle?

Phil, totally! This book is so much more than romance! It teach you about life, it teach you to see life in other perspective.

Phil wrote: "Hm. I just checked my review from 2015. Looks like I was unimpressed:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I enjoy 19th century literature, b..."

I would say it does because the romance angle is not the most important aspect of the novel. There are many nuances and many facets, from how the laws of inheritance discriminate against a second wife and children to how one needs to live one's life in a balanced fashion, eschewing both extremes of sensibility and sense (not to mention the plight of upper class women, raised to be mere objects and denied opportunities of employment even when, even if they are left in meagre financial straits).

And I have to say, finally England change their coin to Jane Austen. :)
( they needed to do it a long time ago!)

Emiliy200 wrote: "And I have to say, finally England change their coin to Jane Austen. :)
( they needed to do it a long time ago!)"

Really? Who got bumped off? We had a big argument here in the US last year about Andrew Jackson vs. Harriet Tubman on the $20.

Phil wrote: "Emiliy200 wrote: "And I have to say, finally England change their coin to Jane Austen. :)
( they needed to do it a long time ago!)"

Really? Who got bumped off? We had a big argument here in the U..."

No! The Queen is on our coins. There were just 5 notes, £5 each, that were specially engraved by artist Graham Short to celebrate the Jane Austen anniversary earlier this year. These notes were given away anonymously, each estimated to be worth about £50000 as they were so rare. At least one of these was given to charity by the person who found it. Our new £10 note, due to be issued later in 2017 I think, will feature Jane Austen on the back, replacing Charles Darwin.

Going back to the book, I've only started reading Jane Austen recently & am quite shocked by the negative way she portrays women. Everyone is obsessed by money & knowing people's incomes, & many of the women seem, to me, to be silly & hysterical. While I agree with Manybooks that they were denied the opportunity of employment I think that was probably sensible - imagine asking any of them to do a full-time job & look after a home without a single servant to help as many women do now!

Oh well, good to know, thank you Trisha, I think this tribute is very nice to her, for her anniversary.

Manybooks wrote: "I would say it does because the romance angle is not the most important aspect of the novel. There are many nuances and many facets, from how the laws of inheritance discriminate against a second wife and children to how one needs to live one's life in a balanced fashion, eschewing both extremes of sensibility and sense (not to mention the plight of upper class women, raised to be mere objects and denied opportunities of employment even when, even if they are left in meagre financial straits)."

I guess for me, the puffy romance-ness obscured the social critique for me. Jane Eyre, for example, makes a much stronger statement on those issues.

The question of, "Is it better to be smart or listen to your heart?" is a pretty obvious false choice in my opinion, so there wasn't a lot of thematic tension in the book for me.

Phil wrote: "Manybooks wrote: "I would say it does because the romance angle is not the most important aspect of the novel. There are many nuances and many facets, from how the laws of inheritance discriminate ..."

Being kind of pro Enlightenment in so far that extremes on either side should be avoided, I have always appreciated that like some of my favourite German 18th century satirists, Jane Austen also strives for a moderate lifestyle of not too much and not too little (either sense or sensibility). Listening to one's heart is as important as using common sense, and at the beginning, both Eleanor and Maryanne tense to stick to extremes, although I would say that Maryanne's romantic extremism, her only listening to her heart is a bit more potentially damaging than Eleonor's attitude of always using one's head, and even surpassing one's emotions.

Someone told me manly man can't connect to Austen's books, is it true?
I think it's stupied to say something like that!

Emiliy200 wrote: "Someone told me manly man can't connect to Austen's books, is it true?
I think it's stupied to say something like that!"

I think any kind of generalizations like that are at best a bit naive. There are men who enjoy Jane Austen as an author, there are men who do not like Jane Austen as an author, just like there are women who like Jane Austen and women who do not enjoy her works, it is a matter of choice and personal preferences.

Manybooks wrote: "Emiliy200 wrote: "Someone told me manly man can't connect to Austen's books, is it true?
I think it's stupied to say something like that!"

I think any kind of generalizations like that are at best..."

You're right! I agree! this stereotype really wrong and all the hard work people did against it is gone.

Emiliy200 wrote: "Someone told me manly man can't connect to Austen's books, is it true?
I think it's stupied to say something like that!"

A scan of my friends list and the GR reviews reveals a lot of men who identify as masculine yet still enjoy Jane Austen's books. Still, I think it's fair to say that they have a stronger appeal for women. I am the only man on this thread, and also the least enthusiastic about the book.

I read a lot of 19th century fiction by listening to librivox in the car with my wife. She consistently enjoys Jane Austen more than I do. The questions we ask about books that we read together reveal a lot about our differences as readers and, I think, between a typical male reader and typical female reader.

Questions my wife asks while reading:
Do I like these characters?
Do I connect emotionally to the situations?
Do I approve of the author's attitudes?

Questions I ask while reading:
Does this author have something interesting to say in terms of theme?
Does the plot progress in a way that keeps me thinking, or is it too predictable?
Am I learning something new from this?
If the emphasis is on emotional content, am I surprised by the type or intensity of the content?

This also explains how she can love Harry Potter, and I never made it past the fourth book. So repetitious...

Phil wrote: "Emiliy200 wrote: "Someone told me manly man can't connect to Austen's books, is it true?
I think it's stupied to say something like that!"

A scan of my friends list and the GR reviews reveals a l..."

I ask both the questions your wife asks and the questions you ask when I read a given book (and for me, as a woman, but one who has advanced degrees in German literature and is thus used to reading intensely and academically even if I am reading for enjoyment, while a likeable character is indeed important to an extent, if the themes are presented badly or awkwardly, if the writing style is problematic, dragging or tedious and especially if there are potential issues with believability and such, that will wreck or at least that can wreck a novel for me even if the characters are likeable and I agree with the author's point of view).

And funnily enough, if the questions you ask about interest, plot progress, learning something and the like do not mesh, I actually end up feeling generally disconnected and not at all emotionally engaged.

Phil wrote: "Emiliy200 wrote: "Someone told me manly man can't connect to Austen's books, is it true?
I think it's stupied to say something like that!"

A scan of my friends list and the GR reviews reveals a l..."

And I'm asking all the questions you wrote here in a lot of books, also Jane Austen's books, what is it tell about me?

But still, you touched an important point.

Emiliy200 wrote: "Phil wrote: "Emiliy200 wrote: "Someone told me manly man can't connect to Austen's books, is it true?
I think it's stupied to say something like that!"

A scan of my friends list and the GR review..."

It tells me that you are like me, and ask ALL the relevant questions and that these questions are in fact universal and not a male/female issue so much.

People read for different reasons and in different ways. This applies to the individual as well. Sometimes I am in the mood for a certain author, other times I really can't enjoy the same author.
As for questions while I am reading. I ask myself, Am I enjoying this book? Is it worth my time to read it? Am I getting anything out of this book? Do I like the characters? Do I enjoy the author's way of writing?
If the answer is "yes" to any of the questions, I keep reading.
I have occasionally abandoned a book, but only if the answer to all of the above questions is No.
Re: Jane Austen. Generally I have really enjoyed her books. But I did abandon Northanger Abbey the first time I tried to read it. I came back to it years later and loved it. The first time I read Emma, I didn't like it all that much, but again enjoyed it that much more the second time.
I really liked Sense and Sensibility, so I am not going to reread it this time. Just in case the process also works in reverse!

Manybooks, exactly!

Rosemarie wrote: "People read for different reasons and in different ways. This applies to the individual as well. Sometimes I am in the mood for a certain author, other times I really can't enjoy the same author.
A..."

Reading for enjoyment, that means having the option of abandoning a book one does not like or one is not in the mood for at present, something that I often missed at university, where if one was covering a given author or needed to plough thorough a certain book that was tedious was not something that could be put off, as one was either being tested on it or had to write a term paper/give a presentation on it.

Emiliy200 wrote: "Manybooks, exactly!"

I just do not and have never bought into the concept of there being "female" or "male" type questions, as I personally have often posed questions from both so-called camps.

Me too, I think these questions are very Stereotype.

Emiliy200 wrote: "Me too, I think these questions are very Stereotype."

I like the questions, but I simply do not consider them "male" type or "female" types of questions, as I ask myself most of these whenever I read a book. I find their division a bit stereotypical, but I actually find the questions themselves very good.

Maybe I didn't explain myself very well. These questions by themself are okay but when someone take them and tagging as female or male it's a stereotype.

Emiliy200 wrote: "Maybe I didn't explain myself very well. These questions by themself are okay but when someone take them and tagging as female or male it's a stereotype."

I think we both agree on that :-)

Yes, I guss so.

I started today.

I hope you enjoy the book, Rafael-- and all our other members who are reading it too!

I hope you like it too it is a girlie romance! So we will forgive you if you do not care for it!

I do not sort by this type of issue, Lesle. Thank you for the advice, though!

I expect to like it.

Rafael, Jane Austen is good a writing subtle entertaining comments about her characters. If you pay close attention, you will see that she has a sense of fun in her writing.

Sorry Rafael.
What me an my friends call Girlie Romance is also known in our circle as Fluff! Meaning an easy and enjoyable read. No real thought process is needed just enjoyment!