I’ll admit to having trouble with this one.
While S&S seems to be about two likable people overcoming their nature to find love. Their nature being common traits of youth or…just common.
P&P’s main characters don’t seem all that likable. It’s the story of a pain in the neck chick and a emotionally detached (is he autistic?) dude. They’re both at ages where these problems should be behind them or else they should just move on.
I’ve not much interest in the story of a barely likable woman finding a boyfriend…who isn’t likable.
In my mind, I have an image of Darcy and Elizabeth’s marriage in 5 years. I picture it as one of the nastier ones. One’s where Darcy is failing to live up to Elizabeth’s hire standards and Darcy is unable to communicate what he wants in the least so he lashes out in anger and she plots about all day devising ways to twist the knife into him.
Also unlike S&S, the writing seemed a bit more cluttered. For instance, there’s this 82 word sentence:
Having never even fancied herself in love before, her regard had all the warmth of first attachment, and, from her age and disposition, greater steadiness than most first attachments often boast; and so fervently did she value his remembrance, and prefer him to every other man, that all her good sense, and all her attention to the feelings of her friends, were requisite to check the indulgence of those regrets which must have been injurious to her own health and their tranquility.
An 82 words and 9 comma sentence! Ugh.
Darcy’s servants were at least mentioned in this book – to give testimony to his greatness. Otherwise, they get short shrift in the Bennett household.
Tags: Book Review
My politics tend to lean libertarian/anarcho-capitalist but when I watch Downton Abbey I want to get my Bernie Sanders on real bad and hang the Crowley family.
The same goes for the characters in Sense and Sensibility.
That doesn’t bode well for my 2016 reading goal of working my way through all of Miss Austen’s six novels, does it? But it was my reaction about 50% of the way through when I realized that although a soldier is a character, the Napoleonic Wars are not mentioned and although servants in the households are mentioned and moved about like furniture, none are given names or allowed to speak a single line until the near end of the novel when one screws things up.
That and nothing happens. Lots of talk. Lots of not talking. The most exciting course of action any of the characters take is to go for a walk or to hold their tongues.
Also, the money-conscienceness of all the characters – of the society – was simply gauche and depressing.
That being said, I breezed through the novel because strewn about the text where Austen’s incisive and understated character observations. And there were simply entertaining because people don’t really change and I saw my own family, friends and acquaintances in them.
I also liked the novel because it doesn’t do anything. It must have taken huge courage – and a large amount of skill – to NOT pack in some action. In fact, it must have taken a huge amount of sensibility over sense(see what I did there?).
I’m surprised the title of the novel wasn’t Sensibility Over Sense. The message is pounded home very clearly. Act too rashly, too youthfully, follow your heart, have flights of fancy, go for an unchaperoned walk with a man and your life will end up pretty dreadful. Shelley and Lord Byron are fine for the sitting room and in small doses, Austen seems to say, but I’m here to tell you how to be British. Listen up.
Tags: Book Review
When I was young, my grandfather told me he had read the Bible cover to cover when he was young. I was impressed by that and had a desire to do it myself.
But never did. I mean. It’s the Bible. Who wants to read that for pleasure?
Finally, in 2015, I did. And not for pleasure. Just to do it.
First off, my perspective of the Bible stories was so off. Things that loom large in my mind – Jonah and the Whale – for instance, is just a few hundred words of narrative. Before reading, I would have given a much larger estimate. In fact, most of the most memorable stories are told almost in passing.
Second, if you wanted to write a book and have a people of the book that had guilt encoded into their DNA, this would be the book. If you want to feel horrible about mankind and it’s place in the world, this is the book. If you want to really feel like you were born with original sin, dive into this.
Third, aside from the laws and the stories what I was most left with is the relationship between God and his people. And that relationship was pretty messed up. As I kept reading again and again about how his people were special and chosen but had disappointed God and he was going to punish them, I felt like I was in a couple’s psycho-drama. I felt like it was the telling of a classic abusive relationship. A masculine God telling his ‘chosen’ people that they were alternative loved and horrible. That they were special and in need of punishment.
I wanted to take his people to a shelter and get them away from this guy messing with their head all the time.
Tags: Book Review
My reading goal in 2015 was to really get to know Tolkien. I wanted to read the Hobbit, LOTRs, and the Silmarillion.
I almost did it.
When I read the last page of the Return of the King in early December and started looking at the Silmarillion, I just couldn’t. I debated but I’d had enough of Tolkien. It isn’t naturally my cup of tea and reading what one reviewed wrote of the Silmarillion – a cross between the Bible and the phone book – just put me off.
As noted in my notes on the Hobbit, I’m not a fantasy guy. I don’t lean that way and after reading the LOTRs, I still don’t. I especially didn’t enjoy Tolkien. Yes, this is blasphemy. But it’s not a critic of Tolkien, as I confess, it’s not my thing and I simply don’t have the education or appreciate for all that Tolkien was doing.
I get the hero’s journey and all that. I can see much of the symbolism. But as a story – as just a story – there were two huge faults keeping me from enjoying the story. If you’ve not noticed, it’s all about story for me.
First, there needed to be an editor. I feel like the emperor in Amadeus saying there’s “too many notes” but…there’s too many words. So much of the book is padding that doesn’t add to the story. Maybe it adds to the atmosphere or the world Tolkien was creating but all those extraneous words deflates the story and simply drags it out. It just wouldn’t end.
Second, far too much of the story is told off-page. A beginning writer dictum is to “show don’t tell”. How many times in the LOTRs does a character (often Gandalf) reunite with some of those of the Fellowship and then goes on for page after page TELLING us what he’s been up to. I would have far preferred to go on that journey with him. And with Gandalf after the Balrog.
Overall, I’m glad I did it. I’m glad I put this series of books behind me and brought what has become so much of the culture into my own mind.
But I’m glad I didn’t punish myself with the Silmirillion and I’m glad it’s behind me. If I want to revisit it, I’ll rent one of the films.
Tags: Book Review
One of my reading projects for 2015 was to read the Hobbit, Lord of the Rings and the Silmarillion.
As I wrote about The Hobbit back in January, I’m not a fantasy guy. Wizards, magic, dragons, elves and the like make me go running. But I read the books incompletely as a teenager and knew so so a more thorough reading was always out there as a challenge.
After reading The Fellowship, I still don’t get fantasy but not long after starting it, I did know enough to know I wasn’t educated enough to appreciate half the novels – it’s history, it’s roots, it’s background in Northern European traditions. So I found a lecture series to guide me a bit. I would recommend that to anyone. If the importance outside the novel of the novel wasn’t explained to me, I would have lost interest in the middle of an argument between a dwarf and an elf.
As for the story telling…it’s imaginative but…that old writers dictum about showing and not telling? I wish Tolkien had done more of that. So many thinks are described by one character to another character. Gandalf, mostly. He has all the adventures off stage and then comes back and tells Frodo or someone about it.
Just show us what’s happening, Professor Tolkien. Jeez.
And the talking…so much talking…which is often my thing…if it gave any insight. Maybe it does and I’m missing it. I may be blinded by my prejudice against fantasy. And I see that as something I lack, not the novel. I wish I could sink into that world a bit more…or at all. It would be a wonder, I’m sure, to be immersed in it.
Tags: Book Review
My newest piece for Bow Tie Aficianado is here.
Here is my second post for Bow Tie Aficionado.