Georgianuary discussion

There will be a group read-along of 'Evelina' by Fanny Burney, commencing in January 2020, according to the following schedule:

Seg 1 Jan 1-3 Preface, etc, & Vol. 1 Letters I - XII
Seg 2 Jan 4-6 Vol. 1 Letters XII - XXI
Seg 3 Jan 7-9 Vol. 1 Letters XXI - Vol. 2 Letter I
Seg 4 Jan 10-12 Vol. 2 Letters I - XI
Seg 5 Jan 13-15 Vol. 2 Letter XI - XXI
Seg 6 Jan 16-18 Vol. 2 Letter XXI - Vol. 3 Letter I
Seg 7 Jan 19-21 Vol. 3 Letters I - XII
Seg 8 Jan 22-24 Vol. 3 Letters XII - XXIII

Please refrain from commenting about letters read ahead of schedule.

And as we are all in different time zones, if you are in an earlier time zone and wish to comment on a new segment, please mention this at the start to give a spoiler alert for anyone in a later time zone who might not yet be finished reading the previous segment.

Has anyone begun other than me?

Good morning, Chrissie. (Or at least it is to me.)

It's currently 8:43am on January 1st where I am. I've just woken up and am about to take advantage of the quiet and begin reading Evalina and the other group reads.

I've just started Evelina as well. There isn't a copy of the book in my local library or at the University, so I'm reading a scanned copy I found on archive.org, from the University of Toronto.

I am listening to an audiobook version read by Dame Judi Dench, Finty Williams and Geoffrey Palmer. I think it is Finty Williams that does most of the narration though. She is making it difficult for me to catch the humor. Sigh. I wish I could switch to a paper book, but I have poor vision so I can't. When I rate a book I ALWAYS give two separate ratings--one to the book and one to the narration, It does not seem fair to me to blend the two.

I am stubborn; I am not going to give up!

Here it is 6:30 P.M.

I've just started reading the book and am laughing at the different opportunities the 18th century presented to be a jerk.

In these days of of heavy bureaucracy, rapid communication, and the ubiquitous phone camera, it's no longer possible to destroy a marriage certificate and get away with pretending a wedding didn't happen.

Phew, the audio narration has improved. Why? Dame Judi Dench and Geoffrey Palmer are the readers. Boy can a narrator make a difference in! Now I am enjoying it. And I am happy.

Froggles, I was wondering about that with the ripping up of the marriage certificate. Was that the sole proof of a marriage back in the 1700s?!

Chrissie, I would chalk that up to "poetic license".

With banns, parish records, and witnesses, including the officiating clergy, it would be nearly impossible, even in that time period. It just might take more time to gather the proof, with the means of communication being what it was.

I shan't be surprized if it later comes to pass in the story that the marriage is legitimized.

That always got me. Destroying the one sign of marriage. Surely if they wanted to prove it, they could get the parish records or something??

Hannah, yeah, it's obviously just a device employed for the purposes of the story.

In order to pull off something like that, it would require a conspiracy, or some serious power to be able to threaten or bribe the witnesses to keep quiet. But even then it is highly unlikely.

Thanks for clearing this up about the marriage certificate--we are all thinking similarly.

Froggles wrote: "I've just started reading the book and am laughing at the different opportunities the 18th century presented to be a jerk.

In these days of of heavy bureaucracy, rapid communication, and the ubiqu..."

I have started this one now, and agree with you. So far I'm finding it much funnier than I had expected to.

Tania,

Me too. :o)

I had somehow expected it to be heavy, which intimidated me, but it's not nearly as difficult to understand as I'd feared, and is actually funny.

It's giving me an insight into what influenced Jane Austen's sense of humour.

Froggles wrote: "Tania,

Me too. :o)

I had somehow expected it to be heavy, which intimidated me, but it's not nearly as difficult to understand as I'd feared, and is actually funny.

It's giving me an insight int..."

Somehow, we often seem to think of older books as more 'worthy' and forget that they can be fun.

Is anyone else detecting shades of Mr. Collins in the repulsive man who took offense at being turned down for a dance?

I felt the obnoxious suitor was being more malicious than Mr Collin’s bumbling ignorance. He seemed to deliberately ignoring Evelina’s lack of consent or deliberately being obtuse.

I do feel for Evelina! Those social anxieties forced on a girl from the country. Mrs Mirvan ‘... good-naturely blames herself for not having better instructed me. She took it for granted that I must know such common customs.’

Froggles wrote: "Tania,

Me too. :o)

I had somehow expected it to be heavy, which intimidated me, but it's not nearly as difficult to understand as I'd feared, and is actually funny.

It's giving me an insight int..."

Froggles, I was also thinking that I could see shades of the future Austen. I was reminded of Northanger Abbey and Mansfield Park.

I'm surprised by the light and sweet tone of the story. I didn't expect it to be quite what it seems to be. I wasn't sure I was going to enjoy the epistolary format of the book, but it seems to be working nicely.

As I read this book, it is becoming more apparent to me that the 1995 BBC production of 'Pride & Prejudice' would be more properly titled 'Pride & Prejudice & Evelina', as it's obvious that Andrew Davies supplemented the dialogue in his screenplay with snippets from 'Evelina'.

I have a confession to make that I have watched that mini-series literally dozens of times, as I used to put it on when I cross-stitched and wanted to be able to follow along without actually having to look up and pay attention, as I would with a show I hadn't yet seen. As a result, I have memorized large swathes of the dialogue, if not all of it.

The conversation in the cardroom between Lord Orville and the "gay-looking" man is almost identical to the conversation Darcy and Bingley have at the Meryton Assembly Rooms, with their talk of the "most beautiful creature" and "she is an angel".

Jane Austen famously has no scenes in which men are alone together, so Davies obviously chose to fill the void with Burney's authentic 18th century words, rather than his own. Knowing too that Burney was an influence on Austen, this only makes sense.

So I just went and rewatched that scene, and realized that though the "most beautiful creature" line was in it, the line about an angel is said back at Netherfield Park.

It's the first time I've looked at it in years, after glutting myself on it. :o)

Wow! That’s really interesting. I didn’t notice that! Keen to see if anything else was used by Andrew Davies ☺️

Louise, I'm a little bit behind, but am starting to get into it too.

I'm mostly enjoying it, but have to admit that I find the ignorant treatment of the French woman tiresome. I get that England and France had a long history of war and hostility, and I suppose it's meant to be funny, but it's just so petty and childish.

Freya, I didn't realize that about 'Clarissa'. Perhaps we should make that one of the groupreads for next year?

Thanks, Freya. :o)

I hadn't realized that about the length of the book.

I agree Froggles. Maybe it’s used to highlight the childishness of Madam Duval and the Captain. They both seem to play well off each other. The Captain is definitely not a gentleman. I like how distinct all the gentlemen are in they way they act and their manners.

I'm just about to begin Volume II. I was glad to see a plot shift at the end of Volume I. I'm enjoying the book very much, but it should make the story more interesting with the new developments.

This book was published in 1778. George III was the King of England, and in the U.S., we were fighting our Revolutionary War against the British. I find it so fascinating to think about where the books I read fit in the timeline of history.

Also, I think Volume II, Letter II is hysterical! The Captain is very mean. I hope he gets his comeuppance!

My word! Those Branghton’s. So vulgar. The sisters remind me a little of Kitty and Lydia Bennet - but with never having the influence of Jane and Lizzy.

It seems that all of France Burney’s heroines need a strong willed fairy godmother

Hannah wrote: "My word! Those Branghton’s. So vulgar. The sisters remind me a little of Kitty and Lydia Bennet - but with never having the influence of Jane and Lizzy.

It seems that all of France Burney’s heroi..."

So true!

Hannah wrote: "My word! Those Branghton’s. So vulgar. The sisters remind me a little of Kitty and Lydia Bennet - but with never having the influence of Jane and Lizzy.

It seems that all of France Burney’s heroi..."

That is a good description of them, I do think Evelina's stand-offish manner towards them might be making them behave even worse towards her.

I'm a bit behind the schedule; I must admit I'm weary from reading about Evelina and her escapades. I'm only about 100 pages from the end, and I will finish the book, but I must admit that the book has moved in a direction that I am finding tedious.

When her father was introduced back in Volume I, I thought that would provide some interesting tension to the story. The book just seems to move from one situation where Evelina is tortured by some gentleman to another. I will chalk this up to learning more about 18th-century British literature. I'm curious to hear from the rest of the group.