Pride and Prejudice

Discuss books, film, tv, music, games and all other arts here.

Moderators: Blip, The_Metatron

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#21  Postby Aurlito » Apr 04, 2010 5:26 pm


I'd say, if you're having so much trouble with the language of the book itself, then give it up (if you can, and aren't reading this as a school assignment) since you're missing out on the main reason to read it. It'd be like trying to convince yourself to enjoy an omelette, when you simply cannot stand eggs.

You're right. there's no compulsion so it's better to give it up and give it another chance when I'm more fluent. I have to admit that I love post-modern literature, specially American, and I'm afraid of this fact more than coming out to my parents because it's very embarrassing. (hypothetically).

19th century was not a good era for English literature. I mean there are authors like Dickens that have remarkable works, but his so called masterpieces just have good plots. there's no tension and desire in their lines. but 19th century was golden era for French literature. I prefer to read "Le Comte De monte-cristo" rather than anything in the world.
If your thoughts are the same as they were yesterday, your retired.
User avatar
Aurlito
Banned Troll
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 652
Age: 28
Male

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Pride and Prejudice

#22  Postby Julia » Apr 04, 2010 5:29 pm

Aca wrote:i have a problem with English classics.

Not that they are bad books, but how much social drama can you take in before they all start to feel like rehashing of the same theme? :?

I know what i think does not do justice to some really good work, it's just how i feel about it...


Well, but, for me anyway, part of the enjoyment of such a book as P & P is in the reading itself--the journey taken with such a well-written book.

When you think about it, the plots of most of her books had some similar elements and seem to be a kind of wish-fulfillment for Austen. There's always the intelligent heroine who feels pressure to marry but has no suitable person. There's often the older married couple who are the model of the kind of marriage Austen felt to be ideal--a marriage of true love and friendship. And you always have one or two weddings at the end.
User avatar
Julia
 
Name: Julia
Posts: 1858
Age: 66
Female

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#23  Postby j.mills » Apr 04, 2010 5:33 pm

Aurlito wrote:19th century was not a good era for English literature. I mean there are authors like Dickens that have remarkable works, but his so called masterpieces just have good plots. there's no tension and desire in their lines.

Exsqueeze me? No tension?? Our Mutual Friend? The Woman In White (Collins)? Lady Audley's Secret (Braddon)?

"...just have good plots"??? Bejeez. Characters! WIT! Colour! Social commentary! Vivid reportage! If anything, Dickens' plots are his weakest point!

(Mind you, I'm struggling to think of something 19th-century-ish with overt "desire". Someone else can find you a counter-example for that one. :dopey: )
WordsVoiceLimericky tweets

There is grandeur in this view of life
Where one becomes many through struggle and strife,
But the Mother of Mysteries is another man's call:
Why is there something 'stead of nothing at all?

The Darwin Song Project
User avatar
j.mills
 
Posts: 10269
Age: 55
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#24  Postby Julia » Apr 04, 2010 5:36 pm

Mr. Shrunk wrote:
See, that's what I love about Austen. You don't read her for the plot, or the characters, but for the words themselves, arranged into long, sensuous sentences that loop around and double back on themselves in surprising ways, all the time perfectly obeying all rules of syntax.


Exactly.
User avatar
Julia
 
Name: Julia
Posts: 1858
Age: 66
Female

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#25  Postby Aurlito » Apr 04, 2010 5:38 pm

j.mills wrote:
Aurlito wrote:19th century was not a good era for English literature. I mean there are authors like Dickens that have remarkable works, but his so called masterpieces just have good plots. there's no tension and desire in their lines.

Exsqueeze me? No tension?? Our Mutual Friend? The Woman In White (Collins)? Lady Audley's Secret (Braddon)?

"...just have good plots"??? Bejeez. Characters! WIT! Colour! Social commentary! Vivid reportage! If anything, Dickens' plots are his weakest point!

(Mind you, I'm struggling to think of something 19th-century-ish with overt "desire". Someone else can find you a counter-example for that one. :dopey: )

Maybe I just don't like them.
If your thoughts are the same as they were yesterday, your retired.
User avatar
Aurlito
Banned Troll
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 652
Age: 28
Male

Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#26  Postby j.mills » Apr 04, 2010 6:20 pm

That's better. Now I have no grounds for disagreement. :grin:
WordsVoiceLimericky tweets

There is grandeur in this view of life
Where one becomes many through struggle and strife,
But the Mother of Mysteries is another man's call:
Why is there something 'stead of nothing at all?

The Darwin Song Project
User avatar
j.mills
 
Posts: 10269
Age: 55
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#27  Postby Hollis » Apr 04, 2010 6:24 pm

Aurlito wrote:

19th century was not a good era for English literature. I mean there are authors like Dickens that have remarkable works, but his so called masterpieces just have good plots. there's no tension and desire in their lines. but 19th century was golden era for French literature. I prefer to read "Le Comte De monte-cristo" rather than anything in the world.


:lol: That's a good one. Got any more?

Well, I have read all of Austen's books (I know, how many times do you hear that in a day?) but seriously, I think her books are really enjoyable. You can analyse them if you want or you can just read them as excellent novels, which is what they are. A lot of people complain because are ''merely'' about women who get married. Apart from missing out on the fact that the main characters are always married off at the end of comedies for reasons I need not go into (think of Shakespeare, for example), this just mystifies me. I really don't care what a book is about as long as it is good: it can be about marriage, robots, serial killers, pedophilia, etc etc. And they are good. If you don't like them, don't read them.
Monotheism is easily the greatest disaster to befall the human race. ~ Gore Vidal

The art of writing is mysterious, the opinions we hold are ephemeral... ~ Jorge Luis Borges
Hollis
 
Posts: 687
Age: 30
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Pride and Prejudice

#28  Postby mark1961 » Apr 04, 2010 6:29 pm

Aurlito wrote:Is this book any good? I've read 30 pages and it was all about a stupid ballet and a rich man that danced twice with a girl. will there be any improvements in the story at all?


Yes and it has one of my favourite characters in literature-Mr. Wickham. I find comprehending hundred plus word sentences without modern grammar good practice for filling out most types of form sent to you by the British Civil Service.

I came to P&P a year or two ago after watching the ITV series Lost In Austen. Which it's loosely based upon. Liked the series, bought the book, almost put it down too because I thought Darcy was a twat. I came to warm to all the characters during the course of reading.
User avatar
mark1961
 
Posts: 957
Age: 59
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#29  Postby cherries » Apr 05, 2010 8:05 am

i especially love how she paints these scenes with her words and her sense of humor.
read her the first time over 20 years ago when i was looking for a novel by a woman writer from as early back as poss.
pride and prejudice used to be my favourite but changed later to mansfield park which gives an insight of how people in that situation of life thought at that time.though mansfield park is not as funny as the other books.
totally agree with shrunk that just reading her is a pleasure in itself.
"Most books on witchcraft will tell you that witches work naked.
This is because most books on witchcraft were written by men."
-Terry Pratchett / Neil Gaiman




A theists for Conservation
User avatar
cherries
 
Posts: 6834
Age: 57
Female

Country: deutschelande
Germany (de)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#30  Postby Wilde » Apr 05, 2010 6:24 pm

It's a great book.
I'm not a fan of "girly" books, and was put off picking it up by all the fawning over Darcy. When I finally decided to give it a try, I instantly fell in love with Austen's language and wit. It's an absolute joy to read - not nearly as saccharine as I expected it to be and a hell of a lot of fun.
User avatar
Wilde
 
Posts: 302
Age: 35
Female

Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#31  Postby Julia » Apr 05, 2010 10:53 pm

Wilde wrote:It's a great book.
I'm not a fan of "girly" books, and was put off picking it up by all the fawning over Darcy. When I finally decided to give it a try, I instantly fell in love with Austen's language and wit. It's an absolute joy to read - not nearly as saccharine as I expected it to be and a hell of a lot of fun.


Great!

Jane Austen was FAR from saccharine! :lol:

If you read a biography of her you will see. . .
User avatar
Julia
 
Name: Julia
Posts: 1858
Age: 66
Female

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#32  Postby Emmeline » Apr 06, 2010 7:24 pm

I become quite exasperated when people judge Austen novels by the plot alone and write them off as "girly" just because there's romance in them. They are so full of wit, intelligence & social comment. She was a genius and I agree with those above who laugh at the notion of Austen being saccharine. Her pen is MUCH more acidic than sweet and there are many levels to mine in her books. Film & TV adaptations tend to exist on the top, most accessible level but there's much more beneath the surface than a skimmed plot and shallow character sketches for those willing (and able) to delve deeper by savouring the books over several readings of each one.
Emmeline
 
Posts: 10401

Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#33  Postby Wilde » Apr 06, 2010 7:38 pm

Topsy wrote:I become quite exasperated when people judge Austen novels by the plot alone and write them off as "girly" just because there's romance in them. They are so full of wit, intelligence & social comment. She was a genius and I agree with those above who laugh at the notion of Austen being saccharine. Her pen is MUCH more acidic than sweet and there are many levels to mine in her books. Film & TV adaptations tend to exist on the top, most accessible level but there's much more beneath the surface than a skimmed plot and shallow character sketches for those willing (and able) to delve deeper by savouring the books over several readings of each one.

Exactly.
I could have kicked my own arse after I finally got over the whole "sweet and girly" prejudice, actually read her books and discovered how incredibly clever they are. I could have enjoyed them much earlier had I not let the nostalgia-prone Darcy fangirls in my acquaintance drown out the voices of reason informing me that her books were brilliant. ;) I thought I was reading a different novel.
User avatar
Wilde
 
Posts: 302
Age: 35
Female

Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#34  Postby j.mills » Apr 06, 2010 10:00 pm

And she had the good manners to only write 6 novels, not like that vulgar Mr Dickens! :grin:
WordsVoiceLimericky tweets

There is grandeur in this view of life
Where one becomes many through struggle and strife,
But the Mother of Mysteries is another man's call:
Why is there something 'stead of nothing at all?

The Darwin Song Project
User avatar
j.mills
 
Posts: 10269
Age: 55
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#35  Postby Spinozasgalt » Apr 07, 2010 1:49 am

j.mills wrote:And she had the good manners to only write 6 novels, not like that vulgar Mr Dickens! :grin:


You'd like Jeffrey Eugenides. :naughty2:
When the straight and narrow gets a little too straight, roll up the joint.
Or don't. Just follow your arrow wherever it points.

Kacey Musgraves
User avatar
Spinozasgalt
RS Donator
 
Name: Jennifer
Posts: 18770
Age: 34
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Pride and Prejudice

#36  Postby j.mills » Apr 07, 2010 6:17 pm

One of your more cryptic utterances, Spinozasgalt (which is saying something). However, googling indicates he has published only two novels and a handful of short stories, which I take to be your point. Of course, by this criterion of "the less, the more", I am myself a better writer than Eugenides, Austen or Dickens. :grin:
WordsVoiceLimericky tweets

There is grandeur in this view of life
Where one becomes many through struggle and strife,
But the Mother of Mysteries is another man's call:
Why is there something 'stead of nothing at all?

The Darwin Song Project
User avatar
j.mills
 
Posts: 10269
Age: 55
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#37  Postby mmmcheezy » Apr 07, 2010 6:19 pm

Spinozasgalt wrote:
j.mills wrote:And she had the good manners to only write 6 novels, not like that vulgar Mr Dickens! :grin:


You'd like Jeffrey Eugenides. :naughty2:


Ooooh, I love his work.
Middlesex was fantastic.
http://www.rantingnraging.tumblr.com

I'm not larger than life, I'm not taller than trees
User avatar
mmmcheezy
RS Donator
 
Posts: 4171
Age: 33
Female

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#38  Postby Spinozasgalt » Apr 08, 2010 1:25 am

j.mills wrote:One of your more cryptic utterances, Spinozasgalt (which is saying something). However, googling indicates he has published only two novels and a handful of short stories, which I take to be your point. Of course, by this criterion of "the less, the more", I am myself a better writer than Eugenides, Austen or Dickens. :grin:


:lol: Expect to get that Nobel Prize call shortly. :grin:

mmmcheezy wrote:Ooooh, I love his work.
Middlesex was fantastic.


I have it waiting on my shelf. The Virgin Suicides took over all my thoughts when I read it.
When the straight and narrow gets a little too straight, roll up the joint.
Or don't. Just follow your arrow wherever it points.

Kacey Musgraves
User avatar
Spinozasgalt
RS Donator
 
Name: Jennifer
Posts: 18770
Age: 34
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#39  Postby tnjrp » Apr 08, 2010 6:04 am

Pride and Prejudice is a massively entertaining book. Literary classic status aside, Austen's dry British wit is an ageless treat.
The dog, the dog, he's at it again!
tnjrp
 
Posts: 3587
Age: 55
Male

Finland (fi)
Print view this post

Re: Pride and Prejudice

#40  Postby Aurlito » Apr 08, 2010 10:01 am

Topsy wrote:I become quite exasperated when people judge Austen novels by the plot alone and write them off as "girly" just because there's romance in them. They are so full of wit, intelligence & social comment. She was a genius and I agree with those above who laugh at the notion of Austen being saccharine. Her pen is MUCH more acidic than sweet and there are many levels to mine in her books. Film & TV adaptations tend to exist on the top, most accessible level but there's much more beneath the surface than a skimmed plot and shallow character sketches for those willing (and able) to delve deeper by savouring the books over several readings of each one.

I don't think feminine reputation of Austen's books originate from their romance. Les Miserable has romance too, but it's a very manly book.
If your thoughts are the same as they were yesterday, your retired.
User avatar
Aurlito
Banned Troll
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 652
Age: 28
Male

Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to The Arts & Entertainment

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest