Play Book Tag discussion

This was meant for September's theme, but I was busy and didn't finish it on time.

This is the classic romance about a man with pride and a woman with prejudice who meet, dislike each other, but first one falls in love and later the other. Oversimplified? Yes, of course! The writing is brilliant and witty and many of the insights into human nature are excellent. It's also a great peak into the manners and mores of Edwardian Georgian/Regency England in the upper classes.

You know the writing is excellent when you have to force yourself to stop to go to bed even though you know full well what happens next.

I'm not adding the above to my various reviews of this book.

Yes, after reading a lot of Austen-like books, reading the original reminds you how much better a writer she was than her imitators.

One quibble, it's not Edwardian - it's either Georgian or Regency
Usually it's classed as Regency, because there was a Prince Regent (who was quite a party guy) while the king was physically and/or mentally ill.

Edwardian is about 1901-1910 - from death of Victoria. Downton Abbey starts just at the end of that - 1912. Apparently after that, eras were no longer named for monarchs.

I knew that! I mix up names and sometimes forget Edwardian was 20th century and I'm big on Royal history. Thanks!

I must admit, I finally read P&P for the first time this year. It was VERY good. My favorite character (please don't be upset) is Elizabeth's father. Also, I have to ask...how much, if any, do you think Darcy's fortune helped Elizabeth with her prejudice, as it seemed like her mindset coincidently shifted upon her visit to Pemberly?

Charlie wrote: "I must admit, I finally read P&P for the first time this year. It was VERY good. My favorite character (please don't be upset) is Elizabeth's father. Also, I have to ask...how much, if any, do you ..."

I think money always has weight in descisions during any book about women and marriage, even well into the 20th century, as the future faced by women who don't marry into financial security at that time faced a really grim future. Her mothers obsession with finding financially secure matches for 5 daughters is not unmerited, nor is her embracing joyfully Lydia's marriage to Willoughby. Have you read Emma? Or seen the excellent Gwenyth Paltrow film adaptation? There is a scene where Emma is being chastized by Mr. Knightly for her cruelty to another character, the impoverished Miss Bates whose life will not improve, only get poorer and lesssecure given her lack of financial security due to her lack of male family or marital support. It's exactly on this point.

This is a frequent theme in Austen, under the comedy of manners. It is in Sense and Sensibility from the first scenes where the 3 daughters and their mother are left to the whims of a week son/brother and his greedy wife. Even in my favorite, Persuasion.

I have always thought that what seeing Pemberly ultimately did is show her what those who knew him best thought of him and told her of them, seeing the care he gives the estate, and genuine respect from his staff and servants. This was what she misjudged him on - his depth of caring, responsibility, emotion,etc. Elizabeth knew from the beginning that he was very rich. Her mother made sure she knew. Of course I like to think it was a love match, I do love romances. I also think Elizabeth matured during the novel, her personal insight and opinions more flexible and perceptive.

This turned into a dissertation! You really posed a great question!

Charlie wrote: "I must admit, I finally read P&P for the first time this year. It was VERY good. My favorite character (please don't be upset) is Elizabeth's father. Also, I have to ask...how much, if any, do you ..."

I'm not upset if her father is your favourite character--we don't all choose those for the same reasons. He's one of my favourite characters. I don't think his money affected Elizabeth's prejudice; he insulted her as well as the others in the room. In his shyness he seemed prideful, and you don't have to be wealthy to come across that way if you're shy. Shy people come off in different ways.

I think it was what the housekeeper said of him that helped catalyze the rest of Elizabeth's change. After watching her parents in a miserable marriage, she wasn't going to do the same thing. If she were mercenary, she'd have accepted his first proposal despite the way he worded it.

Yes, money factors into many marriage decisions and it was especially when women's options to earn a living were so limited. Some women opted to live in penury rather than enter a loveless marriage. She turned down two marriage proposals even knowing she might not get another. Then there were thoughtless women and girls like Lydia who didn't give any of that a thought, although her reluctant husband most certainly did.

Probably my favourite book ever, and one that I keep coming back to. I find I pick up on something new every time I read it.

It was one of the TV adaptations, but I don't think the Colin Farrell one, where I realized how shy Darcy was. But when Elizabeth is visiting (with her uncle?) and he gets to talk about fishing, suddenly he is quite forthcoming. Reminds me of some men I know.

I think Austen does intend some sarcasm on Elizabeth's seeing Pemberton and its financial implications, but also Karin is right about her getting others' input on him. And I agree that making a business decision was realistic. That's what Charlotte Lucas did with eyes wide open to the flaws of her husband. At least he didn't drink or beat her. And both Elizabeth and Jane would now be in a position to help their younger sisters meet eligible men.

Robin P wrote: "It was one of the TV adaptations, but I don't think the Colin Farrell one, where I realized how shy Darcy was. But when Elizabeth is visiting (with her uncle?) and he gets to talk about fishing, su..."


Was it my favourite TV one with Elizabeth Garvie as Elizabeth? (But my ideal cast would have a couple of actors from the Colin Firth one in it, but not Colin Firth. The actress who played Caroline Bingley was superb in the Firth one, plus a couple of other actors.)

Karin wrote: "Robin P wrote: "It was one of the TV adaptations, but I don't think the Colin Farrell one, where I realized how shy Darcy was. But when Elizabeth is visiting (with her uncle?) and he gets to talk a..."


David Rintoul was Darcy in that one from the 1980s and definitely plaid him as clearly shy and reserved. My favorite is the Colin Firth; however, the best Mr. Collins and the only one I think truly reflects that character, whether in a series or movie.

Theresa wrote: "Karin wrote: "Robin P wrote: "It was one of the TV adaptations, but I don't think the Colin Farrell one, where I realized how shy Darcy was. But when Elizabeth is visiting (with her uncle?) and he ..."

Many liked Colin Firth, including my mother, but he just isn't "hot" for me and I had a mad crush on David Rintoul (NOT as Mr. Darcy--as a thespian I pictured him with a different personality than that, but not one based on any actual knowledge of the man) when I was very young after watching him.

As what one woman wrote who compared those two miniseries, Austen purists tend to prefer the one with David Rintoul, and I prefer films to follow the books closely

A couple of years ago I watched both and compared them with the books. My opinion remained the same but it was easy to see which few actors in the latter should have been in the former had they been the right age at that time.

They have fantasy football--how about fantasy casting?

To celebrate Austen's 250th birthday, The Readers Review group on GR where I am one of the Mods, will be reading P & P Nov- Dec (we read maybe 40 pages a week), then Sense & Sensibility in Jan-Feb and I will be leading my favorite, Emma in Mar-Apr. The group has read the others in the last couple of years.

Somehow I got on a mailing list for something called Plain Jane from the Austen Connection. I just get the free version but I have been very impressed with the analysis of the books, their relevance today, historical info, etc. - often better than I got in grad school. They are currently going through the books in order and are on Emma. I plan to use some of their info in my discussions.

Robin P wrote: "To celebrate Austen's 250th birthday, The Readers Review group on GR where I am one of the Mods, will be reading P & P Nov- Dec (we read maybe 40 pages a week), then Sense & Sensibility in Jan-Feb ..."

Emma and Sense & Sensibility are my least favourite, along with Lady Susan, all at 3 stars. P & P is 5 stars followed by Northanger Abbey & Mansfield Park, both at 4 stars.

Emma is a divisive book, even Austen said she was a heroine nobody would much like, but I adore her. I think it is the funniest Austen, where Mansfield Park is way too serious. Fanny in Mansfield Park is always right about everything, even though she has no power most of the book. That is admirable but boring to read about. Emma is almost always wrong, which is much more interesting. I think I empathize with Emma because I also like to give unwanted advice!

Robin P wrote: "Emma is a divisive book, even Austen said she was a heroine nobody would much like, but I adore her. I think it is the funniest Austen, where Mansfield Park is way too serious. Fanny in Mansfield P..."

Yes, you either find Emma funny or you don't. I haven't reread Mansfield Park in some years, so can't remember why I gave it four stars (but not five, so there was something about it that made it less.)

I liked a film version of Emma better than the book.

For me, the best film version of Emma is Clueless. I think it's brilliant how it was updated, keeping the same essential features and characters.

Robin P wrote: "For me, the best film version of Emma is Clueless. I think it's brilliant how it was updated, keeping the same essential features and characters."

I didn't know Clueless was a modern Emma when I first saw it and can't remember how much I liked it. I liked the Emma film starring Gwyneth Paltrow.