Jane Austen discussion

Did anyone else pick up the link between the second Bridget Jones' Diary and the plot-line to Persuasion?

Yes, but I already knew about it before I started reading. It would have been fun to read the book and discover the similarities myself. I also wonder if I would have noticed that Clueless was based on Emma if I did not already know. That would have been a nice surprise.

I didn't know that Bridget Jones 2 had a plot taking from Persuasion!!! I figured it out because of the letter that Mark Darcy leaves for Bridget Jones when her father and Mark's father are getting all kinds of drunk. I just thought "that's oddly placed", like there didn't need to be a letter-thing there. Then I thought about the rest of the plot. Proudest moment ever - it's like, finally all that rereading paid off (LOL)

I cannot remember where I heard this but the plots of "Emma" & "Romeo & Juliet" are two of the most copied plots known to mankind. In Emma its the know-it-all who gets her come-uppings but ends with happiness and a lesson learned. Romeo & Juliet with a forbidden love from those who are star-crossed and so dramatic.I guess that is why they are so popular...they are so realistic and emotions that are common in all walks of life, whether in truth or in what we wish for. I myself wish for true love and happiness for myself in the end. NOt that I have found true love, but its the dream that its out there that allows me to go on when I am tired.

Does anyone else know Emma adaptations besides Clueless?

Have any of you watched the Sally Hawkins version of Persuasion? I watched it the other day and, I must say, I didn't enjoy it at all. Since I'd just finished the book prior to watching it, it bothered me how much the movie strayed from the book/switched the timeline of events. Also, I really don't think Hawkins portrayed Ann well at all. Ugh, and I found the kiss at the end to be absolutely cringe-worthy. Lastly, it seemed like the goal was for Mary to just be comic relief in this film; some of her (awkward) scenes made me uncomfortable. So, has anyone seen the 1995 version (Amanda Root)? I'm sure it couldn't be any worse!!

I saw the Amanda Root version; I loved it and I'm a tough sell. I also saw the Ann Firbank version, and although it was a little ho-hum in the direction (picture a stage play filmed), it was lovely in general.

I'm glad to hear your positive remarks about the 1995 version. I'll move it to the top of my Netflix queue. I'm looking forward to it - thanks!

I really enjoyed the Amanda Root version also. The way the movie was filmed seemed more sensitive. It's been discussed how the story is set in the fall. This movie version really made the fall setting more a part of the story. Also, not only were the actors really great, but the tone of the scenes made me feel more that they were people having real conversations. So I suppose the "drama" was less than in the recent PBS version.

I really liked your comment Sarah on the importance of the autumn. I did not pick up on that as a theme, but I am pleased at that kind of seasonal allusion.
I feel closer to this book now that I have grown older, than I had reading it as a teenager

I've watched a little over half of a 1971 BBC adaptation of Persuasion. It's long - almost 4 hours - and it feels long. It's a good example of why following the original novel too closely is not really a good way to dramatize the story. It's almost as if they've acted out the book, page by page, with a few minor additions. I don't know whether I will be able to sit still for the whole thing or not.

The acting is pretty stagey, which I'm starting to get used to. The actor who plays Capt. Wentworth is more natural than the others. The sound is not very good--the bird sounds are too loud and there's an echo whenever someone closes a door, which reminds me that this is not real. I hate the wig that the actress who plays Anne wears. She and the actor who plays Capt. Wentworth are too old for their parts. I'm not an authority on clothing of the time, but the prints of the fabrics on some of the dresses say "1971" to me rather than "1800."

Interestingly, the allusion to autumn is also prominent in this version.

I've always liked the newer version of "Persuasion," despite the fact that most people seem to hate it.

I just saw the '95 version last week for the first time. I liked it okay...I think it will grow on me. But I still like the other one better. The main thing that bothered me about the '95 version is that Anne looks so gloomy and depressed for the first half of the movie, and for the second half, she has a perpetual wide-eyed look of shock or terror. It was a little distracting. :)

Jamie wrote: "Have any of you watched the Sally Hawkins version of Persuasion? I watched it the other day and, I must say, I didn't enjoy it at all. Since I'd just finished the book prior to watching it, it both..."

I so agree on the kiss!! Absolute worst movie kiss I've ever seen! I can't even watch it. Aside from Capt. Wentworth, I didn't care too much for the cast.

Try the '95 version with Amanda Root. So much better!

Kristin, I agree about the 95 version of Anne. The trouble with all film adaptations of Jane's books is that we have to suffer with the ego of the film makers and the adapters to put there own spin on the subject matter. Always claiming they have to make it palpable for modern society. I truly watch all adaptations with a shovel full of salt.
Patg

Kristin wrote: "I've always liked the newer version of "Persuasion," despite the fact that most people seem to hate it.

It is my favorite adaption as well, despite the horrible ending. That kiss is so hard to watch that I fast forward through it. Otherwise I feel that this adaption captured the mood of Persuasion quite well and I like Sally Hawkins in the role of Anne and Rupert Penry-Jones as Wentworth. The rearrangement of the story elements worked for me and I enjoyed how they used some of the longer passages of the book as background ambiance, shortening the film and moving the story along, but still retaining these excerpts.

I feel that the problem with the film mainly stems from the director. He choose many shots where he focused on Anne to the exclusion of the other characters, even having her break the fourth wall at times. This technique worked sometimes, for instance when she was writing in her diary and crying into the camera so we could see her pain, but it did not at other times: when Wentworth helped her up from her fall on the way to Winthrop, when she and Mary were discussing the trip to Lyme and the kiss at the end. Had the director used a little more traditional filmmaking skills, I have a feeling everyone would be raving about this version of Persuasion.

Reviving this just to say that watching the newest season of "The Crown", I recognized two of the actors, Samuel West and Tobias Menzies, as William Elliots in adaptations of "Persuasion" - West in '95 and Menzies in '08.

Part of the 'British rep company'! It's quite common on British TV to see the same actors time and time again, almost as if it were a rep company in the theatre!

Who are they playing in the Crown? (I think TM might be the Duke of Edinburgh?) I don't watch the Crown as I haven't got Netflix or whatever - though I've seen some of the original episodes with Clare Foy.

The early episodes were very good, from an acting and portrayal point of view (they were already making historical mistakes to 'sex it up' alas). Olivia Colman seems horrendously miscast, as does Helena BC.

The trouble with OC is that she looks nothing like the Queen (OC's short upper lip!), and anyway just looks like OC - she is always 'the same' in whatever she acts, and her voice is hopelessly distinctive as well.

Clare Foy is a brilliant actress - her depiction of Anne Boleyn's final moments approaching the scaffold in Wolf Hall were mesmerising and incredibly moving - she made it so real, a woman knowing she had minutes left to live....

I thought Matt Smith was as good a Duke of Edinburgh as it gets - not lanky like the real Duke, but that ascerbic personality. And whoever played Princess Margaret (such an unsympathetic character, yet pitiable in her own way) was good too.

Apparently, loads of historical bloopers in the OC series - emabarrassingly so. Shame.

All I remember from the Rupert Penry-Jones version was all that ludicrous running backwards and forwards at the end!

Didn't dislike the rest of it, though I don't really recall it much. The original Amanda Root/Ciarian Hinds version was far more memorable!

I hated that scene where Anne was running round Bath like mad - it was so out of character!!!!!! The rest I liked.

Yes, it just looked silly!

It must be difficult to make a new adaptation of a classic novel when the previous one was not that long ago. You feel you have to do 'something different'.

That can be a complete disaster alas, like the Keira Knightly Pride and Prejudice.

Thankfully the Rupert PJ 'remake' of Persuasion was perfectly acceptable by and large (though my memories of it are poor, I have to say - I just remember the running about....so, memorable for the wrong reason alas!)

"Interestingly, the allusion to autumn is also prominent in this version. "

Autumn is the key metaphor (pathetic fallacy??!!) of Persuasion and permeates it.

Anne is in the 'autumn of her youth'....and Austen must have felt that she herself was 'in the autumn of her life', and knew that 'winter was coming' and she would not make old bones....

The most famous reference to autumn is when Anne is out walking with the Musgrove girls and Mary's husband and Wentworth, and she sees the farmer ploughing his field 'meaning to have spring again'.

And of course, because this is fiction, Anne does get her 'second spring'.....which is what makes Persuasion so much a 'feel-good' novel.

I'm sure Austen 'felt' this novel more than any others, and put into it all her own yearning for a 'second spring'.....and a second chance at life, love and achieving old age.

Actually Autumn is when I do like to re-read Persuasion! :)

First, I did it totally unconsciously - but just a few years ago I realised that I connect certain Austen books to certain seasons and that's when I like to re-read them the most. :)

Interesting point - Persuasion is definitely 'the autumnal' book, and I would say Emma (which I think you've said is your favourite Austen?) is 'summer' (the strawberry picking party, and the picnic).

How would you seasonally assign and align the others?

Yes, Emma is definitely summer. :)

Northanger Abbey is winter

P&P and S&S are spring.

Mansfield Park is the odd one out (and my least favourite of her novels).

Beth-In-UK wrote: "Part of the 'British rep company'! It's quite common on British TV to see the same actors time and time again, almost as if it were a rep company in the theatre!

Who are they playing in the Crown..."

West plays Anthony Blunt, the art curator and historian who was exposed as a spy. Menzies is the Duke of Edinburgh. I agree that Matt Smith was a bit of brilliant casting. I never would have thought of him, but he was pitch perfect.

Perhaps Mansfield Park should be another winter. After all, it is the 'bleakest' perhaps of her novels, in that it deals with the very tricky subject of a good man falling for a bad woman (Edward falling for Mary Crawford).

I know Austen says he was sufficiently revolted by her in the end (especially when she so callously and carelessly tells him that it's a pity his older brother hadn't died of his illness so that Edward could become Sir Edward after his father dies....rather than a boring old vicar! .....and how she justifies her brother totally ruining Edward's sister's life by running off with her and disgracing her for ever), but, all the same, the issue at the heart of it - a good person 'obsessed' by a bad one - is a difficult moral issue in itself.

It's like Marianne falling for Willoughby - giving your heart to someone who just is not worth it. Can you ever truly 'reclaim' your own heart again to place it where it is more worthy?? Or do the scars remain?

There is a new Persuasion adaptation in the works! https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...?

I like the looks of the lead actress—she has a face that could be plain or beautiful depending on the circumstances. To my eye, previous actresses have been either plain all the time or pretty all the time.

Oh no! The 1995 version is so lovely! We don't need a remake. Of course I'll watch it to support historical and literary films but it can't be as good as the book and there's no way it can surpass Ciarán Hinds and Amanda Root.

Abigail wrote: "I like the looks of the lead actress—she has a face that could be plain or beautiful depending on the circumstances. To my eye, previous actresses have been either plain all the time or pretty all the time."

Oh I so agree! She looks great and I've got high hopes, although recent Austen adaptations have made me wary of getting my hopes up...

True that!

I see what you mean about the actress's looks - almost 'jolie-laide' in that French style of 'unusual'. However, I think the lush mouth probably tips her firmly more on the side of 'jolie' rather than 'laide'. (She's a brave woman to stick with Snook as an acting surname - I guess it's memorable, but it's definitely not glamourous. In the old Studio days they'd have never let her get away with it!!!)

In terms of whether Anne Elliot is pretty or plain, I think she was 'once pretty' (when she first knew Wentworth), but has 'faded with the years'. Austen is pretty brutal about how the passage of time, seven years or so, has made Wentworth more handsome and 'sexy' (OK, not a word in Austen's vocab, but you know what I mean!!!), but has had the opposite effect on Anne.

Crucially, though, Anne 'un-fades' during the course of novel, most noticeably at Lyme (the key turning point of the novel) where a combination of the sea air returns a bloom to her cheeks, plus the open admiration of Mr Elliot (whose noticing of Anne 'as a woman' definitely arouses the 'pique' of Captain W - ie, if other men are fancying her, hey, he might once more as well!)

A little earlier in the novel, before they head for Lyme,, in the long walk scene with the Musgrove girls, Austen has the wonderful 'foreshadowing' line referencing the farmer ploughing his field 'meaning to have spring again'....always chokes me up! So will Anne Eliot 'have her spring again'.....

I always think that Anne's 'second spring' makes me grovellingly grateful that our generation of females has recourse not only to make up, but to cosmetic surgery etc as well!!!!! (Oh, and hair dye, too, of course!)

We don't have to take advantage of any of those 'rejuvenating' and 'enhancing' products, but it's nice to know they are there if we feel like it!

QNPoohBear wrote: "Oh no! The 1995 version is so lovely! We don't need a remake. Of course I'll watch it to support historical and literary films but it can't be as good as the book and there's no way it can surpass ..."

**

I agree. I thuink Amanda Root was excellent as Anne, and she also very satisfyingly 're-bloomed' as well, in a convincingly realistic way. I liked the shot of her looking at her reflection in the mirror, seeing herself faded and then at Lyme I think she looks at herself again, and definitely looks better.

Ciaran Hinds was very good too, and my only complaint was that he never seemed to comb his hair. Why it had to be so messy I don't know.

Abigail wrote: "There is a new Persuasion adaptation in the works! https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...?

Do we know who is playing Wentworth??! Crucial!

I have no information of who is playing Wentworth. It sounds as if the project is only in the formative stages—probably they got the actress attached and are now trying to sell production companies on investing in the project.

Ah well, let's hope they choose appropriately! It's probably 'about time' they remade Persuasion - the (most recent?) Rupert (?) Pendry one was quite some time ago now. Can't remember who Anne was in that one. There was a lot of rather silly running around in the final reconciliation! It was a creditable attempt, however, overall, though the Root/Hinds version remains the gold standard.

(It's probably even getting time for another version of P and P!!)

I’d like to see a serious version of Mansfield Park.

Abigail wrote: "I’d like to see a serious version of Mansfield Park."

Oh yes please!! Not that I can get enough of seeing Darcy and Lizzy or Emma and Knightley, but come on, Mansfield Park is such a rich, complex novel! So much there to show and unpack! I hate that it's being overlooked just because it's not as sexy as the others.

Trouble is, directors and screenwriters don't seem to be able to bear the brute fact in the novel that Fanny - and Edmund, come to that - are dull. And, of course, very virtuous. That lead to that disastrous abomination of the Harold Pinter version that shoehorned in Austen's juvenalia as if Fanny (good grief, of all people!) had written in, and then added insult to injury by shoehorning slavery into it with a sledgehammer (a slave ship moored off the Chanel coast...as if it had any business being there!) rather than let Austen's subtle references suffice (Sir Thomas's business in Antigua, the name of Mansfield Park, etc)

I've just Youtubed Persuasion and sorry, it's Rupert Penry Jones of course (but still can't spot the actress for Anne.)

Then I couldn't resist watching bits of the TV version made in the 1970s, which I must have enjoyed at the time in my youth but which now seems extraordinarily mannered and stilted. The naval officers are all wearing mufti, which is not nearly as glamorous as in the Ciaran Hinds version. Did we really think that was good TV in the 1970s? I suppose we must have. One day the modern versions will look as dated I suppose....

I don’t agree that Fanny is dull. Her actions are consistently virtuous but she struggles mightily with rage and jealousy to get there; she’s in a constant battle to rise above her lesser self. It’s a bit of a challenge to portray inner struggle on screen, but nothing that can’t be overcome. And the plot and themes of the story have such beautiful symmetries, and those could make for a very well shaped screenplay with recurring visual motifs.

I don’t think slavery can be ignored in a film of Mansfield Park, but I think Austen’s point was less about slavery as practiced in the Caribbean than it was about the smaller enslavements of poor relations like Fanny. In the classic words from Middlemarch, “Obligation may be stretched till it is no better than a brand of slavery stamped on us when we were too young to know its meaning.” That’s an MP adaptation I would pay to see!

I think you're right Abigail, but Beth has a point of course in that while we, Austen-lovers, can see the subtleties and wonders of Mansfield Park, in order for the film to make money many film-makers think a Fanny and Edmund are really too dull. They're not, of course. I like to cite the example of Little Dorrit, which had a lovely adaptation in 2008, and which has a meek, shy heroine and which still was powerfully emotional and had so much going on.

With the right actors, who know how to convey subtle emotions (and how to subtly convey big emotions) this can and should be done!

Beth-In-UK wrote: "Then I couldn't resist watching bits of the TV version made in the 1970s, which I must have enjoyed at the time in my youth but which now seems extraordinarily mannered and stilted. The naval officers are all wearing mufti, which is not nearly as glamorous as in the Ciaran Hinds version. Did we really think that was good TV in the 1970s? I suppose we must have. One day the modern versions will look as dated I suppose...."

I have recently watched the 1970s Persuasion and... I kinda loved it? Weirdly the theatricality of it makes it less glamorous and thus more real-feeling. These old adaptations tried to cram in every scene from the book, which for an Austan fan is lovely.

I like the 1970s Persuasion the best—so long as I can look away from the hypnotically over-the-top hair. That one has the most elegant and self-possessed Anne, which is how I see her.

The 1970's version is my favourite Persuasion too.

I used to be excited to see new adaptations but my automatic reaction now is a slight groan. I want them to be good, but my expectations are low.

Anne's hair definitely is a character in its own right!

But everyone is so unemotional and stilted. Mary is simply 'posh', not the complaining moaning minnie she is in the book (and brilliantly played in the Root/Hinds version).

I can't remember who played Wentworth in that old TV version, but he's very familiar from my youth - turned up in a lot of programmes, including, I think, an adaptation of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.

There was a rare moment when he's tellilng his sister and BIL that any woman can have him now, and his sister deplores his cavalier attitude and says something along the lines of 'you don't know anything about love', and he is standing by the fireplace and says something quietly like 'I do, you know'....(I'm paraphrasing, obviously!) .

However, it's unfair of me to criticise it because, as I say, that was the style of dramatisation all those decades ago (around 50 years now!), The poor quality of the film itself, compared to our HD, doesn't help either alas.

That one has the most elegant and self-possessed Anne, which is how I see her.
**

I think she's too confident and commanding, and doesn't come across as the crushed youngest sister ignored and bullied by her older ones and her horrible father. She's too outwardly serene for my liking!

I didn't like the sisters in the Roots/Hinds version, they seem to be trying to embody the deadly sins... sloth and gluttony at least.

I think Wentworth is much better in the 70's version as well, I bought Ciaran Hinds as the bitter old sailor but not so much as the dashing heroic captain that made women swoon. Bryan Marshall had a warmth and energy that I like.

At the beginning I did think Bryan Marshall wasn't handsome enough (Rupert Penry Jones does make a dashing Wentworth) but he played him so well, and the chemistry between the leads was so good, honestly I loved him.

Beth-In-UK wrote: "I think she's too confident and commanding, and doesn't come across as the crushed youngest sister ignored and bullied by her older ones and her horrible father. She's too outwardly serene for my liking!"

She does have a bit more confidence in this version, often for the purposes of exposition (e.g. when she confronts Lady Russell about her interference in the past, she sounds almost angry), but I don't think this is an invalid interpretation of the character. And I liked it much better than Sally Hawkins's wet-eyed Anne, who seemed constantly to be shrinking into herself. I always imagined Anne as self-possessed, kind, mature, not scared of her own shadow.