Dear Folks,

Sometimes, much is happening in a Jane Austen novel when the writing seems the simplest. I am thinking of the production of the play Lovers' Vows in Mansfield Park. Maria Bertram and Henry Crawford behave badly and it is so disturbing that the others almost pretend that it isn't happening. Eventually, however, many do understand what this couple is perpetrating. I want to underscore the way that Jane Austen describes this growing awareness.

Fanny Price was a nothing to everyone except Edmund and the Bertram parents; however, she was the proverbial fly-on-the-wall and so she was allowed to see more than others. Fanny was made aware of the impropriety of Crawford's attentions to Maria during the family excursion to the Rushworth estate, that time when the couple took an opportunity to move off to be alone. By the way, that is an impropriety for a newly engaged woman anywhere, anytime - in Regency England or in present-day Manhattan or Georgetown. Any alert person will notice and be disturbed unless in a state of denial. And everyone but Fanny was in denial. Fanny tried to broach the subject with Edmund; they were discussing Crawford and Fanny opened with

" 'What a favourite he is with my cousins!'

'Yes, his manners to women are such as must please. Mrs. Grant, I believe, suspects him of a preference for Julia; ... He has no faults but what a serious attachment might remove.

'If Miss Bertram were not engaged.' said Fanny cautiously. 'I could almost think that he admired her more than Julia.'

'Which is, perhaps, more in favour of his liking Julia best, than you, Fanny, may be aware; for I believe it often happens, that a man, before he has quite made up his own mind, will distinguish the sister or intimate friend of the woman he is really thinking of, more than the woman herself. Crawford has too much sense to stay here if he found himself in any danger from Maria; and I am not at all afraid for her, after such a proof as she has given, that her feelings are not strong.' "

Talk about denial! Actually, it would have taken sense and an honorable nature for Crawford to have absented himself. (You might compare this to Darcy's behavior at Netherfield after he found himself attracted to Elizabeth Bennet and after deciding a match to her unsuitable - he tried to stay away from her.) There is nothing wrong with Crawford and Maria developing an attachment after her engagement and before her marriage, but the only honorable course was to play it completely one way or the other. Either declare themselves or stay away from each other. Crawford was only dallying and Maria wanted to keep the possibility of Rushworth's fortune as a fall-back in case someone better didn't come along. Disgusting!

Both Julia and Rushworth were aroused by the events at the estate, but Crawford smoothed things over by paying each some extra attention; that was enough because it is easier to be in denial than otherwise, and because Crawford was so adept at simulation. (Later, Fanny would discover that Crawford was, by far, the best actor of the Mansfield players - she didn't like him as a man, but she could acknowledge his abilities.) During the organization of the play, the suspicions of both Julia and Rushworth were resurrected.

For Julia, full knowledge came during the casting of the play. Crawford had taken the part of Frederick and both Julia and Maria then wanted the part of Agatha. Agatha is the mother of Frederick and so it seemed a perfect cover for rehearsing tender scenes and "motherly" embraces. Crawford steered Julia away from the part with the following nonsense

" ...'I must entreat Miss Julia Bertram,' said he, 'not to engage in the part of Agatha, or it will be the ruin of my solemnity. ... The many laughs we have had together would infallibly come across me, and Frederick and his knapsack would be obliged to run away.' "

But Julia was no longer the fool:

" Pleasantly, courteously it was spoken; but the manner was lost in the matter to Julia's feelings. She saw a glance at Maria, which confirmed the injury to herself; it was a scheme--a trick; she was slighted, Maria was preferred; the smile of triumph which Maria was trying to suppress shewed how well it was understood, ... "

The oily Crawford would not give up his cover so easily and so he tried to convince Julia to take on the part of Amelia - it was the last straw.

" The influence of his voice was felt. Julia wavered; ... He was perhaps at treacherous play with her. She looked suspiciously at her sister; Maria's countenance was to decide it; if she were vexed and alarmed--but Maria looked all serenity and satisfaction, and Julia well knew that Maria could not be happy but at her expense. ... "

Julia disengaged from the players and would have nothing else to do with their play. But was she now concerned about her sister's honor? Should she not be concerned about family honor?

"... and now that the conviction of [Henry's] preference for Maria had been forced upon [Julia], she submitted to it without any alarm for Maria's situation or at any endeavour at rational tranquillity for herself. ... For a day or two after the affront was given, Henry Crawford had endeavored to do it away by the usual attack of gallantry and compliment, but he had not cared enough about it to persevere against a few repulses; ... "

Rushworth was a limited man, but the kind of man who would probably never do harm. He was a bit foolish and Maria manipulated him disgracefully during the preparations for the play. While giving too much attention to her scenes with Crawford, she did nothing to help Rushworth prepare for his part. Fanny took pity, and since she knew Rushworth's part very well, she tried to help him prepare. Bravo. In that context, Rushworth came to trust Fanny and to confide in her his growing awareness of the Crawford-Maria improprieties. Fanny was mortified and embarrassed for her cousin.

Even Edmund came to understand that something was wrong with the way that Maria and Crawford were manipulating events. His own sense of things was a bit nebulous because he was being seduced by Mary Crawford; however, after trying to convince his brother to set aside the play, Edmund turned to Maria and the debate there touched upon her status and situation.

Remember that Crawford had two sisters at Mansfield Park - we tend to forget Mrs. Grant because she is a minor character. Who knows a man better than adult sisters? Unlike Mary, Mrs. Grant was an honorable woman and she first broached the subject with brother Crawford.

"...she could only renew her former caution as to [Maria], entreat him not to risk his tranquillity there, ..."

And then Mrs. Grant entered into discussion with sister Mary.

" 'I rather wonder Julia is not in love with Henry.' was her observation to Mary.
'I dare say she is,' replied Mary coldly. 'I imagine both sisters are.'
'Both! no, no, that must not be. Do not give him a hint of it. Think of Mr. Rushworth.'
'You had better tell Miss Bertram to think of Rushworth. It may do her some good. I often think of Mr. Rushworth's property and independence, and wish them in other hands--but I never think of him. ...'
...
'If you have such a suspicion, something must be done, and as soon as the play is over, we will talk to him seriously, and make him know his own mind; and if he means nothing, we will send him off, though he is Henry, for a time' "

Good, sweet woman! And yes, it was only Mary Crawford whose view of things was as clear as Fanny's. Later she would joke to Fanny.

" '...and the theatre is engaged of course by those indefatigable rehearsers, Agatha and Frederick. If they are not perfect, I shall be surprised. By the bye, I looked in upon them five minutes ago, and it happened to be exactly at one of those times when they were trying not to embrace, and Mr. Rushworth was with me. I thought he began to look a little queer, so I turned it off as well as I could, by whispering to him "We shall have an excellent Agatha, there is something so maternal in her manner, so completely maternal in her voice and countenance." Was that not well done of me? He brightened up directly. ...' "

So stonehearted, so morally obtuse - we can only imagine Fanny's thoughts at those remarks.

Even Aunt Norris must have understood at some level. I say that because when she overheard her sister, Lady Bertram, begin to question Fanny about the nature of the play, this aunt quickly and forcefully moved to distract Lady B.

So, it seems that nearly everyone came to understand what was happening at the Park. Why didn't someone put a stop to it? Edmund and Mrs. Grant made muted attempts, but should not someone have made a more concerted effort? Of course not, put yourself in the place of one of those onlookers. I have had this experience - has this ever happened to you? I can remember a few times when I knew things before I believed them. I mean I would see bad things developing and make explicit, dire predictions, but when those very things actually came to pass, I was shocked. I was as shocked as I would have been had the events been a complete surprise. I don't think I am talking about denial here because denial is a refusal to know the truth; I think this is something else - a capacity to know without believing. I mean I think that there are deeper levels of knowing that have a lid over them to protect us. All this reminds me of the theatrical play almost produced at Mansfield Park. I think Jane Austen would have understood what I am trying to describe.

Dear Meister,

I just found this site and am finding it of interest. In your reviews of film versions of P&P I've noticed that you don't mention the one that made the most impression on me, but was shown so long ago that I cannot remember all the details.

The version I refer to was shown on PBS twenty or more years ago. I do not remember the names of any of the actors involved. The woman who played Elizabeth Bennet played her somewhat arch. The man who played Darcy seemed brooding. In appearance he looked slightly like Chris Sarandon.

The PBS version was three or four hours long, and I thought it was quite good. But, at that time I hadn't read much J.A.

By the way, the redeeming factor of the 1940 version of P&P was Greer Garson. Just to see her looking so radient was worth the nonsense of the movie.

Dear Dave,

Welcome to the community.

I believe that you are referring to the 1979 version starring Elizabeth Garvie. We often see postings from people who like that version; the most recent was from Marian on 9/14/99. My own views were expressed on 2/12/98R and 5/15/98R. I once saw an interview of Susannah Harker - she played Jane Bennet in the A&E version - and she said that her mother played the same role in the 1979 version.

I most heartily agree about Greer Garson's performance - I never mention her because I don't want to make any positive statements in public about the 1940 version. Did you know that Clark Gable was originally cast as Darcy in that film? I can't think of a better choice, he would have been perfect, and it is a terrible shame the deal fell through.

To All,

Yeah, and the accent would have been a bloody joy, wouldn't it!

Signed,
the last of the Luddites.

Dear Julie,

The 1940 version was an American film and that is why the great majority of accents were American. I always prefer a consistent set of accents, either all American or all English. Of course, that is not what you meant.

Given the history of the English language, do you really think that Jane Austen would have been familiar with Olivier's accent? I don't think so. In any case of the portrayal of Darcy, a manly presence with any accent will be an excellent trade for the effeminate with the boarding-school.

Dear Ashton,

My liking for the 1979 version of P&P is based on the fact that I've only seen two versions of P&P; the 1979 version and the 1940 version.

I don't have cable television so I haven't seen the A&E version. Videotape-wise, I'm at the mercy of the local Blockbuster Video where it's easier to find the Spanish version of Spawn than anything with any real content.

I will say that each reader brings different things to the things read. I thought the 1979 Darcy was a bit distant, more suited for Jane Eyre, but it wasn't awful. I shudder to think of what Hollywood would do to the novel. Keanu Reeves as Darcy and Nikki Cox as Elizabeth? Yikes! The point is that it is really hard to please everyone with a movie based on a novel because everyone creates a different world in their mind.

As far as the accents go in the 1940 film are concerned, that's an interesting question. I do not think that we really know what the English accent was like in early 19th century. Supposedly, the English accent at Shakespere's time was more like that of the modern American Appalacian accent than the accent used by Olivier and Co. Using that as a datum, Dolly Parton would make a more accurate Titania than Michelle Pffiefer. I would have to agree than in a movie the consistancy of the accent is more important than the actual accent used.

One word of advice to any future film makers of any of JAs works: Lose the Kinsale cloaks. While they were used at the times of the novels' writing, they make the women looked a little too fragile, too girly. JA's heroines are not girly. Save the hooded cloaks for Bronte stuff.

Dear Dave,

You don't need an excuse for anything around here.

Boy, are you ever going to love the A&E version when you see it. That version is five hours in length, the screenwriter was highly respectful of Jane Austen, and Jennifer Ehle is Elizabeth Bennet. Actually I have seen that version for rent at our local Blockbuster.

As I understand it, the best examples of the accent that Shakespeare used are to be found in parts of Ireland and in isolated regions of the American Chesapeake Bay. I remember seeing an all-Irish production of Hamlet on television about forty years ago. I can't tell you how much more sense Hamlet makes when delivered in a tonal accent. If Brannaugh proves anything, he proves that the success of the atonal boarding-school accent in Shakespeare is incomplete.

You are right, the 1979 Darcy was like something out of a Bronte novel.

You mention Michelle Pffiefer as Titania - what is your opinion of the recently filmed version of Midsummer Night's Dream?

Dear Meister,

A kinsale cloak is a full length cloak or cape with a hood. Usually the hood can be folded back and be made to look like a decorative part of the cape by appearing to be a wide collar on the back of the cloak. The photos on the boxes for the A&E Emma and the 1979 P&P show the actresses wearing such cloaks. Originally they were made of wool and were quite warm. Later they became a little more fashion oriented and were made out of fine materials.

I have not seen the latest Midsummer's Night Dream. I am leery of any Hollywood production of any classic work and presume Hollywood adaptations guilty and have to be proved innocent. My reference to Michelle Pffiefer was simply as a constrast to Dolly. You know, silk compared to denim, Diana Krall against Minnie Pearl.

That's all I have to say on the subjects. I shall hunt for the A&E P&P. I'll save any further postings for when I get a little more eddycashun on the matter.

Dear Voices,

It has been my belief for ever so that Jane Austen had Elizabeth Garvie and Mr. Rintoul in mind when she wrote Pride and Prejudice. Nor can I really imagine any other change in the cast. What I can and do imagine is what terrible misfortunes will rain down upon the people who cut out so much of the serial that the tape-for-purchase version is flat and matter-of-fact. If there is justice--well, I should not wish to observe the just desserts visited upon them.

Ashton: Does my daughter think that Fermat's last has been proved? She says, "They say it has. The problems with Andrew Wiles's proof have been solved." I think that this answer means that she thinks that we may all go on to other interests. Maybe. Perhaps.

Her general field of study is non-linear partial differential equations. Whether or not she will be looking particularly into dynamic systems again (chaos theory, the dynamics of shallow water) has not been determined.

From the Meister: I know some dynamic systems theory and I have glanced at the mathematical theory of chaos - so I know about fractals and strange attractors. The study convinced me that Rintoul sprung, full grown, from the brain of Charlotte Bronte and his appearance in P&P-1979 is properly thought of as "Charlotte's Revenge".

Dear Sir,

You know perfectly well that I consider ANY attempt at portrayal or (God help me) adaptation of Jane Austen's work the height of impertinence.

You'll have to excuse the brevity of this post, but I have to go smash some spinning jennies.
Julie

From the Meister: I think that you and Dave are in
a conspiracy. What is a "spinning jenny" and what
is a "Kinsale cloak"? I know about the Luddites.

Dear Folks,

I am NOT on my way back to England to see Our Lady’s writing box. I would expect that it is firmly in the hands of some tweed encrusted twit who has already printed up the "DO NOT TOUCH" signs.

All I can say (other that what I just said), is that the world at large had better thank their lucky stars that the box was not mine. If it had been, no museum or Jane Austen industry would have ever seen it. I have seen what they do to such holy relics. I would keep it to myself and each night I would sit in front of it, quite pleased with myself for having the good sense to keep it. Then, after a suitable period of time (like twenty years) I would arrange for it to be sent around to each member of this board. We would each then write an essay on "What it has meant to me to have Jane Austen’s writing box in my life." The winner would get to keep the box. That way I would know that the box was where it belonged.

The assignment that Laurie received: "Show examples of politics in the writings of Jane Austen" sounds like something that a teacher would dream up after a person like me had gotten on their case about always asking for examples of irony in the writings of Jane Austen. Every day I live I am thankful that I no longer have to read Jane Austen while trying to fit some teacher’s assignment into the reading. The truth of the matter is that I do not want to look for ANYTHING in the writings of Jane Austen. I just want to enjoy myself.

However, since Laurie is one of my Harry Potter buddies, I did think about politics in the writings of Jane Austen. What came to me was that we do not see so much of politics in her writings as we see of people with a hidden agenda trying to make something political out of her every word. The current Mansfield Park film being a perfect example. My feeling is that if one has an agenda, one would be well served to write their (My word processor just said that this was a reflexive pronoun. Perhaps a good assignment would be "Find examples of reflexive pronouns in the writings of Jane Austen own novels" and leave Jane Austen’s writings alone.

It seems I am headed towards a position that would prevent the teaching of Jane Austen’s writings. No matter what teachers ask, it ruins the enjoyment. I say let them read and assign Hardy or one of those  Bronte girls.. Let Our Lady breathe!

Dear Laurie,

I can think of only two references to Parliament: In S&S a man is in fit of rage because he must canvass his constituency and make everyone like him.  In MP Fanny Price reminds Edmund that she had asked Sir Thomas about slave trading.

The other political allusions refer to the military. In the five novels from which films were made, the army or the navy feature prominently concerning the Napoleonic wars.

As well, I believe that Henry Tilney is astonished by the implication that Catherine had been abroad (the Napoleonic wars, again).

Dear Laurie,

Edward Ferrars tells Miss Dashwood that his mother wants him in parliament or associated with some great man.

Correction: the canvasser was not enraged, he was fatigued.

In MP Sir Thomas is an MP,  it is suggested that when he returns home, he will find a borough for Rushworth and so get him into parliament, Mary Crawford tells Edmund that he ought to be in Parliament (Sir Thomas has a house in town because he must stay somewhere in London as his parliamentary duties require his presence. Lady Bertram no longer goes to London. Mary Crawford would like to be in London during the glittering season.) Edmund says that there would have to room for impecunious younger sons.

Dear Laurie,

I suppose that your assignment has to do with politics in the narrow sense of suffrage and office holding. I recommend that you read Thomas Paine's Common Sense published in America about one month after Jane Austen's birth. This was after the shots fired at Lexington but before the Declaration of Independence. This was a time before the words "feminist" and "feminism" were coined but you will find all of the issues addressed there. I think you will be surprised and impressed. Mary Wollstonecraft met Paine in England and he must have influenced her Vindication of the Rights of Woman, but I don't recall her mentioning America - I may be wrong. Also, get a hold of Tomalin's biography of Wollstonecraft to learn of the revolutionary things happening to European women at that time.

I strongly urge you to reread the Constitution at this point. It is short and beautifully written and you will find that women are not disenfranchised in any way - it was left to the states to do that. In fact, a number of states granted women the right to vote from the very beginning - I bet you can't guess which ones. I think that the writing is remarkably gender-neutral with a only a few minor lapses. I will be interested to see if you agree.

At the other end of the scale, at the place of the very powerful, there is no real beginning - woman have always been among the most powerful. Catherine the Great died when Jane Austen was a young woman after commanding the greatest expansion ever of the Russian empire (extending, even, to northern California where a preserved Russian fort is within an afternoon's drive of my home.) Catherine's death marked the end of a one-hundred year, absolute rule of women over an empire generally considered to be "patriarchal" and "male-dominated".

In the world of political ideas, you may be able to use material on Mary Wollstonecraft. Mary's lover was an American and the father of her first child. I can't remember the details, but I seem to remember that when Mary and the American went to France to bask in the revolution, she convinced another friend to leave her husband, place herself in the hands of a lover, journey to France, and then help Mary organize a commune in America.

DON'T forget Harriet Beecher Stowe!

I believe that Ray is dead-on correct. In a time of great political hullabaloo, our Lady clearly made a decision to treat of nothing of that kind and she succeeded. Closely question anyone who attempts to ring out any political interpretation of the novels. Every faction wants Jane Austen to be on its side, but not all may have her. You may safely disregard anyone who uses the fact that Cassandra burned Jane's letters as partial proof of a political theory - the vacuous assumption that since evidence might have been burned in the letters, then it must have been.

Dear Voices,

My daughter-the-mathematician dropped by yesterday to pick up her mail (she's still sitting "Crazy" the cat for her brother).

Her exclamation of pleasure drew attention. Out of the box came Harry Potter, third in the series. It seems that there is another fan of Harry. In self defence we'll all have to read the series. Daughter says that it is best to read them in chronological order.

Julie, it seems that Jane Austen's writing box is a laptop. I had been picturing a stand-on-the-floor desk. I wondered why she called it a writing box. Now I think that I know.

From the Meister: I have an amateurish interest
in mathematics. What is your daughter's area of
specialization? Is she convinced that Fermat's
last theorem has finally been proved?

Links