I have a confession to make: last Sunday afternoon I went to the movies and I enjoyed myself. No, I’m not guilt-ridden because I went to the cinema, or even because I went on a Sunday (though I have no doubt my grandfather would not have been impressed). The problem is that I enjoyed the particular movie I saw: Pride and Prejudice. That’s right. I, an avowed Jane Austen hater, enjoyed the latest film version of one of her novels. Someone check the sky for flying swine.
Before we get too carried away, let me explain. I grew up with older sisters who read and loved all the typical older sister books: the Anne of Green Gables series, the Brontes, the random trashy romance, and, of course, Jane Austen (Zane Gray being the notable exception). Being a typical younger brother, I ridiculed them for reading such “girly” books at every opportunity. The summer before I entered eighth grade I was going after one of them (I think Jen) for reading Austen when she very reasonably asked me if I had ever read any. I was crestfallen because she was right. That day I dug up a copy of Pride and Prejudice and started. I was determined to finish it, and though it took me three years, I did. My general pattern was to read steadily for about two weeks, get so angry I would throw the book across my bedroom, go back to reading Horatio Hornblower for a few months, then return to Austen in my dogged determination to get the moral high ground on my sisters. I finally finished the stupid thing, and guess what showed up on the syllabus for my 12th grade world lit class – that’s right. I’ve since raised my repertoire of Austen novels to two because I had to read Persuasion in college.
I don’t want to alienate the entire female gender, so let me elaborate on my frustration. I respect Austen, I just don’t like reading her novels. The whole cultural satire thing – brilliant. She investigates societal gender roles and their implications generations before those sorts of discussions became commonplace. Furthermore, she’s a good writer. Her dialogue is snappy and witty (or at least as snappy as Victorian English people can get), and she finds the right balance between exhaustive over-description and stark narrative. But here’s the problem: her characters drive me up the wall. I wanted to get all of them together in one room and make them talk to each other like normal, functional human beings. Why doesn’t Jane Bennet simply tell Mr. Bingly that she wants to marry him and have lots and lots of babies, and why doesn’t Mr. Bingly bother to simply ask Jane if she’s interested before running away to London? Is this too much to ask? (And I understand that in Victorian England it probably was too much.) For me, reading Austen is an exercise in controlling frustration and about as relaxing and enjoyable as a long distance run – after a short while I just don’t see the point.
And so back to Sunday, when SJ and I were going to meet to see The Constant Gardener. It wasn’t showing until late, so (God only knows why) I thought it might be ok to see Pride and Prejudice. I had heard good things and was interested in seeing if Keira Knightly is really an actress or just another pretty face, but ultimately my motivation was probably the same I had in reading the book years ago. However, the movie was great. However, the movie was great. Many of the same old frustrations surfaced, but in the relatively short time frame of a movie they’re more bearable. The supporting characters were extremely well acted, especially Donald Sutherland’s Mr. Bennet, Claudie Blakley’s Charlotte, Judi Dench’s Lady Catherine, Talulah Riley’s Mary, and Jena Malone’s deliciously horrible Lydia. If my memory serves, a great deal of the dialogue was taken directly from the book, and if not it was a good approximation.
Despite that, the film would have never worked for me if not for the way the two key figures, Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy, were portrayed. I’ve spent hours of my life arguing that they are two of the most overrated characters in all of literature, but for the first time, while watching this film, I sympathized with them. It all seemed somehow more believable. Knightly can indeed act, and her Elizabeth was introspective and thoughtful where the Elizabeth I remember was haughty and downright foolish (it helped that in the movie she didn’t fall nearly as hard for the pathetically transparent Mr. Wickham). Lest you think I’ve had a complete turn around I can assure you I’m not going to pick up the novel any time soon. However, I’ll conclude by saying the film was an enjoyable way to spend the afternoon, which is more than I ever thought I would be able to say about an Austen story.
7 comments:
HA! I knew it would happen sooner or later. I still haven't seen the new version, but I can attest to the value of the four hour BBC version. (I'm guessing you never saw that one, right?)
You, the persecutor of Jane Austen lovers everywhere, saw Pride and Prejudice? And even enjoyed it a little bit? The thing about Austen and real life is that life IS frustrating, especially in the affairs of love. Shakespeare wrote about it - what if Benedick had just admitted that he really did love Beatrice? Then it would have been Little Ado about Nothing. What if Rosalind hadn't dressed up? Would she have ever convinced Orlando to woo her? Unrequited love is the story of human experience. Some of the behavior in her book may have to do with the social climate of Victorian England, but I think some of it is just human interaction in general. How much of high school drama would happen if boys would quit being dorks and just ask a girl out? How many late night dorm discussions would happen if people were as straightforward as you wish they would be? How different would my own life be if a person had spoken up a week earlier?
This is why girls love Jane Austen - she captures the frustration of life and love. It shows us that we are not alone (thanks, C.S. Lewis). I find her frustrating as well, but it's not a bad frustration - it's a frustration I can identify with.
I still can't believe that you went to go see Pride and Prejudice.
I am shocked! That is shocking! I think I MAY have to tell Courtney!
I am glad you enjoyed it. I saw it with someone who also hated the book. He basically said the movie was more palatable because it lacked the pages and pages of E.B.'s inner monologue and other such frustrating elements of Jane Austen's novels.
I applaud you. ;-)
So I decided to post a comment after reading the other comments, and I truly hope this means I will no longer be attacked for my passion for Jane Austen novels? Truth be told, it probably won't ever change. I agree with your friend kbush. Love is not always an easy thing, and it can sometimes cause more pain than joy (when it is unrequited). Yes, people should speak up. They should be up front with their feelings. But as wild as the human heart is, it is also very tender, very fragile. There are hearts out there that are afraid to be broken, or perhaps have already been broken before. Declaring your feelings and putting your heart on the line to perhaps get stomped on is not always worth the risk. Should it be? Perhaps. But perhaps not. And sometimes the mind and the heart are in conflict as well. For any of us who have ever experienced unrequited love, we understand the depth of feeling of Jane Austen's characters, and we hope that we, too, might have a happy ending. The stories, unreal as they are, teach us that love is still worth hoping and fighting for, despite all of the confusion.
But perhaps, if we let the Divine Author write our stories for us, they'll be a lot less confusing and much more satisfying.
I finally saw the movie, and I agree with you that the casting was spot-on. I thought the movie moved faster than the book, which might account for it being a bit more sympathetic and less frustrating. I'm glad you were able to enjoy something austen-related.
Post a Comment