# Jane Austen



## mdemanatee (Jan 19, 2006)

I've read all but one of Jane Austen's novels and I love them. They are definatly what would be described today as girly books but they are wonderful. Does anyone else have any opinions on Jane Austen's work?


----------



## Kira the wanderer (Mar 1, 2006)

I love Jane Austen. I'm almost done with Pride and Prejudice-- AMAZING!


----------



## strangedaze (Mar 1, 2006)

words cannot describe the intense dislike i have for jane, ESPECIALLY pride and prejudice  i derive no pleasure whatsoever from her stuff. in fact, i was going to create a thread calling for people to share writers they dislike just so i could share my disgust with austen with the world. 

peace.


----------



## Kira the wanderer (Mar 2, 2006)

strangedaze said:
			
		

> words cannot describe the intense dislike i have for jane, ESPECIALLY pride and prejudice  i derive no pleasure whatsoever from her stuff. in fact, i was going to create a thread calling for people to share writers they dislike just so i could share my disgust with austen with the world.
> 
> peace.



Well what about her don't you like?


----------



## strangedaze (Mar 2, 2006)

Hummm, not that it should make a difference, but I have a general distaste for novels of/about Regency England. As for the novel, it just seems so... pointless. Pampered snots playing their little love games in a society of 'good manners' does nothing for me. All of the conflict seems superficial; try starving, you whiny little bitch (not you, Ms. Bennet  ) then see how woeful your life is. So what if Mr. Darcy is a proud dink? Suck it up, princess. The characters and their innane problems annoy me more than anything. As for Austen's actual writing style, I'm sure I'd be more thrilled about it if she were giving me a story I actually cared about and characters I didn't want to tie up in a plastic bag and drown. 

That being said, none of this is meant as a shot to you or anyone else on these forums. I just intensely dislike Jane Austen. If you find something worthwhile in her writing or her novels, well, we're totally different people and I'm okay with that 

Peace.


----------



## A Glass Thought (Mar 2, 2006)

Strangedaze, if small conflicts turn you away from a novel, then what the hell do you read?
I'm sorry if the wit and ironic humor of Pride and Prejudice was beyond you, which apparently it was if all you saw was little girls bitching.
I hate to bash, so I'm stopping, since I don't know enough about you to formally do it yet, so just tell me, what is a quality book in your opinion? care to share?

As for Jane Austen, I am reading pride and prejudice, but I have seen the recent film, so it is like doing it over again. Other than that I greatly enjoy it. The writing is excellent. Regardless if it's a simple girl story, it is very good otherwise it wouldn't be considered classic literature.


----------



## strangedaze (Mar 2, 2006)

Do you need a hug? I think you do  The reason why I ask is that you seem to have taken my opinion of the novel as a slight against you. Why do you care what I read, hmmm? Will me disliking the book make it any less enjoyable for you? Probably not, because your tantrum has done nothing to make me reconsider my stance on the book.

But since we're flinging clumps of shit at each other like five year olds...

I didn't say the book was or wasn't of quality, luv, I just said that I didn't like it or Jane Austen. And I didn't say the conflicts were "small" - I said superficial. I'm sorry if the difference between the two was beyond you  As for quality: if you need me to elaborate on what the difference between personal taste and recognition of quality is, I'll be happy send you a pm. Just because something is a classic or enjoyed by you, doesn't mean that it will have the same appeal for me, sunshine. Once you're done berating me for not enjoying the same things you do, maybe we can do the adult thing and accept our differences in literary tastes  

Your friend,

Strangedaze!


----------



## ms. vodka (Mar 2, 2006)

i love how you can say whatever you want to someone, and then just add a winky...   that's one of my favorite unspoken forum rules.

glass thought, it _is_ a little odd that you became so personally offended by mr. daze's comments.  i speak from experience when i assure you that strangedaze is definity up to understanding the wit and ironic humor of pride and prejudice.

i can definitely see both sides of this arguement... but am wondering glass thought which other books are you comparing this to?  are you so willing to believe it is good simply because it's considered a classic?  

perhaps you could admit that the novel is a bit dated? 

curiously,
vodka


----------



## A Glass Thought (Mar 3, 2006)

Yeah, reading what i wrote does make me come off as personally offended. I was simply wondering what strange found good. I have no intention of trying to make him like a book. No matter how much you force me, I will never like Great Expectations. I can understand where he stands, I just want to know what he stands for.
As for classics, I agree that many of them are a bit outdated, but pride and prejudice has enough in common with todays social beliefs to be bearable at least. Parents wanting their children to marry someone of an equal or higher social class. The concept is not as bad as one would imagine, and considering it's aged standing, it makes it more original than any book written about the same conflict nowadays.

Strange, the question still stands: What books do you like?


----------



## Kira the wanderer (Mar 3, 2006)

strangedaze said:
			
		

> Hummm, not that it should make a difference, but I have a general distaste for novels of/about Regency England. As for the novel, it just seems so... pointless. Pampered snots playing their little love games in a society of 'good manners' does nothing for me. All of the conflict seems superficial; try starving, you whiny little bitch (not you, Ms. Bennet  ) then see how woeful your life is. So what if Mr. Darcy is a proud dink? Suck it up, princess. The characters and their innane problems annoy me more than anything. As for Austen's actual writing style, I'm sure I'd be more thrilled about it if she were giving me a story I actually cared about and characters I didn't want to tie up in a plastic bag and drown.
> 
> That being said, none of this is meant as a shot to you or anyone else on these forums. I just intensely dislike Jane Austen. If you find something worthwhile in her writing or her novels, well, we're totally different people and I'm okay with that
> 
> Peace.



Well I hate to burst your bubble, but it isn't Jane Austen you seem to be disliking. that is generally how victorian novels are. You have to realize that in different places and different times things weren't as they are now. Its a love story and you need to realize that. This society of "Good Manners" existed, so its not superficial. That is how people acted back then. Its not like she was making it up at the top of her head, Miss Austen LIVED through that time period. The characters are strong and realistic for that time period. I don't see what you dislike.


----------



## strangedaze (Mar 3, 2006)

Glass - I agree with you on Dickens  See? We're not all that different after all. As for authors I enjoy: Kafka, JD Salinger, Salman Rushdie, Irvine Welsh, Mordecai Richler, Arundhati Roy, Joyce, Bret Easton Ellis, Hunter S Thompson, Vladimir Nabokov, etc. Oh, and though it pains me to admit, I LOVED Jane Eyre  Again, no hard feelings!

Kira - Are you really arguing that because the Victorian Age happened that I should like the novel? Because that seems to be your main argument and I'm not sure it sits with me. War happens - are you a fan of historical war fiction? Homosexual intercourse happens - are you a fan of gay erotica, if the homosexual characters are real and lifelike to their time period? If you answered yes to both, then I have to say that your reading breadth is stunning, but I'm sure there's something that other people like that you just don't, simply because it does not concur with your literary tastes. Instead of treating me like an invalid by making statements like:



> You have to realize that in different places and different times things weren't as they are now. Its a love story and you need to realize that.



...you could just do the adult thing and accept that we differ in taste. Is there anything else I HAVE TO REALIZE? I don't know if your assumption that I'm unaware of how time runs its course in a linerar fashion makes me laugh or if it makes me sad, and for whom. Sigh. Again, I typically find Victorian novels of romance innane and boring. I don't relate to any of the characters on a level I find meaningful. Even though their conflicts DID happen, back in the day, I still find them superficial, and since you're not reading the novel for me, your opinions on whether I should or shouldn't be enjoying the novel count for absolutely nothing. You are welcome to differ on your thoughts regarding Austen and her work, but you just come off sounding like a five year old when you try to tell me that I can't dislike something that you enjoy. 

Again, I harbor no hard feelings and though I derive some pleasure in seeing people get so worked up over my dislike for Austen, it makes me wonder whether the discussion is actually about her writing or if people are somehow taking my thoughts on it personally. 

Once again:



> That being said, none of this is meant as a shot to you or anyone else on these forums. I just intensely dislike Jane Austen. If you find something worthwhile in her writing or her novels, well, we're totally different people and I'm okay with that.





Regards,

'Daze


----------



## Kira the wanderer (Mar 4, 2006)

Strangedaze I think you are being a little too sensitive and too quick to jump on people. Yes, while you do have your own opinons on the book I do as well. What I meant when saying you have to realize is that those types of things actually happened, so I don't understand how they are "superficial." I am not attack you as you interpret that I am.

You can like what you like but I didn't say that you had to enjoy it. I was trying to understand more logic to your opinons. 





> but you just come off sounding like a five year old when you try to tell me that I can't dislike something that you enjoy.



And I never said you can't dislike it. I was trying to understand why. From what I understand you feel that the events and problems occuring in the novel did not seem real, I was merely trying to explain that it was how things happened during that time.



> Again, I harbor no hard feelings and though I derive some pleasure in seeing people get so worked up over my dislike for Austen, it makes me wonder whether the discussion is actually about her writing or if people are somehow taking my thoughts on it personally.



It is obviously about Jane Austen and you said that it wasn't her writing style that bothered you but her plots lines. It seems to me that you are the one taking this thread personally. As you have stated your opinons I have as well. nothing was aimed at your latge ego, but apparently its too big to miss.



> ...you could just do the adult thing and accept that we differ in taste.



I'm sorry but there is nothing "adult" about that, not that I don't agree. I have accepted your opinons I just have had a hard time understanding the reasoning where my reasons conflict. I'm sorry for trying to have a disscussion with you as you obviously are more interested with taking everything so personally than discussing reasons of your opinons with other members.


----------



## strangedaze (Mar 4, 2006)

I'm glad my ego is large enough to not be missed  I'll pm you my thoughts on this whole shi-bang.

'daze


----------



## Avril_rocks07 (Apr 9, 2007)

Jane Austen's good, I just started Pride and Predjuice. I'm thinking of reading Emma.


----------



## Mike C (Apr 15, 2007)

A Glass Thought said:
			
		

> Strangedaze, if small conflicts turn you away from a novel, then what the hell do you read?



Anything that involves the use of crayons.


----------



## strangedaze (Apr 15, 2007)

and crutons.


----------



## LadyPenelope (Apr 22, 2007)

Yikes...it's all kicking off in here. I quite like Jane Austen, although sometimes they're not the easiest books in the world to follow due to the difference in language. I guess they are a little outdated, but it doesn't stop them being wonderful books with a great characters. Pride And Prejudice is my favourite of the ones I've read, because I like Elizabeth. Sense and Sensibility is good too, mainly because of Elanor. I don't really like Mansfield Park, as Fanny annoys me. Anyone seeing a pattern here? Whether I like a book or not really depends on the main character!


----------



## Adamboy (Jun 23, 2007)

I liked pride and prejudice, i thought i'd hate it but i became very concerned with how it would all turn out in a girly sort of way.


----------



## Patrick Beverley (Jun 23, 2007)

_Persuasion_ is wonderful. It's very subtle, and very accurate in getting to the heart of the way people experience life, and how they feel about it.

_P & P _is still probably the best though.


----------



## Himani (Jun 24, 2007)

I think it's funny how some people LOVE Jane Austen and some people HATE her. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say, "Her books are OK." 

I remember in high school english AP, we were meant to read Pride and Prejudice (I admit, I LOVE Jane Austen and had read P & P about 5 times by then) and the English teacher, who was a pretty feisty woman, said: "I know some of you hate her books, and I know a lot of you have read her in middle school, or have read her work before. So, I'm giving you a choice of two different authors. But, just because I'm curious, raise your hand if you've read Jane Austen before."

99% of the class raised their hand.

"OK, now keep your hands up if you've read Pride & Prejudice."

Nearly everybody raised their hand.

"OK, now keep your hand up if you love Jane Austen's work."

I don't think one guy kept their hand up, and a few girls put their hand down too.


----------



## duston (Nov 1, 2007)

Jane Austen is in my opinion the greatest ever English novelist. Her witticism and irony inter-threaded with dramatic appeal is something only Fielding and Shakespeare managed to achieve whilst writing in prose. 

  It's easy to dismiss her as superficial, saying she is the Bridget Jones of her day, but there are so many implicit truths and meanings behind her words. Look at Pride and Prejudice. Not only does it contain brilliant social commentary, but also an aspect into the human condition. This is in part due to her incredible talent at constructing character. Darcy and Elizabeth are the only two characters who can both assess and evaluate their society role whilst upholding to it. Read Tony Tanner's introduction to Pride and Prejudice, it'll change your whole perspective on the book.


And of course Emma is a technical masterpiece. Austen herself said Pride and Prejudice is too "bright and sparkling," and whilst it is my favourite of her novels, it isn't as well written as Emma. Emma is probably the greatest novel of the nineteenth century.


----------



## Mike C (Nov 2, 2007)

My biggest criticism of Austin would be that she writes a very insulated version of 19th century life. To her, poverty involved not making a good marriage and only having a couple of servants. Having to live in a 5 bedroom cottage rather than a country house. In her books, the working classes don't exist except insofar as those that were employed to serve. From that perspective the Brontes probably provide a more balanced social commentary.


----------



## duston (Nov 2, 2007)

Austen wrote about what she knew. Her conservative manner can be off-putting, but she delivers expert and insightful commentary for the middle classes. In comparison, the Brontes are somewhat melodramatic, and whilst of course still brilliant (Wuthering Heights is extraordinary) rely on their romanticism to gain evocative response. 

   Charlotte made criticisms of Austen, saying she wrote with no passion, but she clearly misunderstood the entire point of Austen's classical style.


----------



## damselfly (Nov 4, 2007)

I suppose, with Austen, you either love her or hate her. Or you just simply don't know her. I wouldn't go as far as to say that she's the best writers of all time and perhaps with content; she's not exactly the most engaging because she deals with the simplest of issues (or inane, if you please).

I do enjoy Austen, but what I liked about her was how it was bare and not too much, in comparison to Wuthering Heights, for example. It seemed somewhat symbolic to show that life at that time was simple. It's something completely opposite to what I'd normally enjoy from the fiction I read nowadays, but I appreciate Austen more for the way she wrote the book than WHAT she wrote.


----------



## Mike C (Nov 5, 2007)

duston said:


> Austen wrote about what she knew. Her conservative manner can be off-putting, but she delivers expert and insightful commentary for the middle classes.



Indeed.



duston said:


> In comparison, the Brontes are somewhat melodramatic, and whilst of course still brilliant (Wuthering Heights is extraordinary) rely on their romanticism to gain evocative response.



Granted, although melodrama was the order of the day. I guess from a social history POV maybe both should be read in combination; Austen's 'classical'(?) passionless style was indicative of the reserve of her class and the way that she and members of her class were insulated from the lower orders, whereas Bronte saw them as being the fiery, excitable ones and wrote accordingly. 

Of course one could view Wuthering Heights as an allegorical satire showing how the working classes would rise up and destroy the class system; it was published a year before Marx's Communits Manifesto. That's one to try out at your local book club!


----------



## Olly Buckle (Nov 5, 2007)

The working classes didn't exist as far as a writer was concerned at that time, they were illiterate, one only wrote about them not for them, that comes later with Dickens who wrote to be read aloud to them. What I like most about her is her wicked sense of humour, the way she exposes people totally whilst making it sound like she is just making casual passing remarks, I am glad I will never get on the wrong side of her.


----------



## lilacstarflower (Jan 13, 2008)

Glad i found this thread! I love Jane Austen. My favorite book is Sense and Sensibility followed by Northanger Abbey.

I wonder why a lot of people dislike the ending to S&S - Brandon was perfect for Marianne in my opinion; he was full of passion and romance - both with his love before and with Marianne. I sometimes think Brandon is superior to Darcy. This novel has everything for me - wit, tension, love rivals and happy endings all round

Lady Susan is also very good - i liked its style and read it at one sitting. I would have preferred it more if it were written in her usual style but i guess it was a fresh look at things

Has anyone here read the Pamela Aiden series that begins with "An Assembly Such As This"? - it is the story of P&P from Darcy's point of view. Just wondered what your thoughts were on that


----------



## wren (Mar 4, 2008)

See I used to absolutely love the style of Jane Austen, Charlotte Bronte - all that lot, but now I find it really protracted and dull.  No idea why...

...actually I guess it's because so much of what everyone does in those books is posturing to create their niche in polite society.  I know that was terribly important at the time (probably is in some way today even), but I just find I don't have the patience for it any more.  It's a shame really...I did used to love p&p


----------



## lilacstarflower (Mar 18, 2008)

I think it builds tension between the characters. I would much rather have a ninety page build up of love or hate rather than, ten pages in, having two people knock lumps out of each other or rip each others clothes off. 

In P&P you know there is so much that Darcy and Lizzie want and need to say to each other but societal constraints force them to stay silent. 

The only Austen book I don't read as much of as the others is Mansfield Park. I actually liked Henry Crawford and thought Fanny would be better off with him. He desired her, whereas Edmund didn't (or didn't realize he did). Once I had finished it I was a little disappointed. Then, later, I discovered that the only reason Henry wanted Fanny so bad was because she didn't give him the attention he wanted. He was all about the chase. It made me question my judgment

Thank god I'm older and wiser now :^o


----------



## lilacstarflower (Apr 3, 2008)

Anyone have any thoughts on 'Lesley Castle'? or her Juvenilia work?


----------



## TheOneTheyCallWriter (Apr 6, 2008)

I love Jane Austen. SHe writes brilliantly. Pride & Prejudice is my favourite, and at the moment I'm reading Persuasion, which could easily become my favourite.

Emma was just brilliant. I agree that is one of the best novels in the ninteenth century - it is just so beautifully written. Plus it doesn't help when you imagine Jeremy Northam as Knightley. 

Does anybody else think that for a nineenth century novel, Northanger Abbey is quite modern in terms of writing?


----------



## trent13 (Dec 16, 2011)

lilacstarflower said:


> Has anyone here read the Pamela Aiden series that begins with "An Assembly Such As This"? - it is the story of P&P from Darcy's point of view. Just wondered what your thoughts were on that



Me! me! me!  I read it!   I thought it was definitely one of the better spin offs of P&P, more in keeping with the sentence structure, the wit, Darcy's complex character, and (thankfully!) clean.  One of the big problems I have with the modern regencies is that they fail to capture the spirit of the age, mostly in how they write.  They don't try to write with the same complexity as Jane Austen did (even I find Georgette Heyer to be, as JA would have put it, insipid), and their characters are usually too modern to be believable within the historical context in which they are set.  But how much can our modern regency authors be blamed?  In general they cannot genuinely conceive of living in a patriarchal society.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Dec 16, 2011)

strangedaze said:


> words cannot describe the intense dislike i have for jane, ESPECIALLY pride and prejudice  i derive no pleasure whatsoever from her stuff. in fact, i was going to create a thread calling for people to share writers they dislike just so i could share my disgust with austen with the world.
> 
> peace.



I hate people who sit on the fence.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Dec 16, 2011)

Jane Austen wrote the best opening line in the history of the novel:

_It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife. _


----------



## Sharon L (Dec 19, 2011)

Woo hoo on crayon use--and love to all Jane Austen critics (pro or con). I'm considering joining a JA book club and we start with _Persuasion_ in January--anyone read it yet?

Sharon L.


----------



## 123man (Dec 19, 2011)

I've only read P&P.  I wanted to read it before reading Pride and Prejudice and Zombies a few years ago.  I thought it would be good to have an insight to the original before reading the spoof.  I was floored by how much I enjoyed it!  I was expecting a slog through confusing writing from a different time period, but I understood it.  I found it funny at times and kept reading to find out what happened to the characters (they must have been well-written because I can't really figure out why I would care about them!).

After reading P&P, I had no interest to read a spoof of it.  I think it's time to pick another Austen.


----------

