More of Jill's Reading Notes 2013 - jillmwo

My husband emailed me this link: http://thehairpin.com/2013/08/stone-cold-jane-austen/ and I think he realizes I'm about to embark on another Austen binge. I have Claire Tomalin's biography of Jane Austen sitting on my ottoman as well as Paula Byrne's The Real Jane Austen: A Life in Small Things. It's the latter I'm currently reading. I have Tomalin's biography out for purposes of looking things up. I am seriously enjoying Byrne's book (recommended by that ever-reliable reader, @Marissa_Doyle) and I am charmed by the physical artifacts that the author uses to focus on various aspects of Jane Austen's life and real-world environment.

The link above takes you to an interview with Deborah Yaffe on the date of her book launch Among the Janeites. It's an interesting interview, touching as it does on the idea that Mr. Darcy might have suffered from Asberger's Syndrome. (I'm sorry. Come again? Honey, you do know he's not real, right? Mr. Darcy is really just Sheldon Cooper? Someone needs to pry Austen from that academic's hands and send her out to play in the sunshine and fresh air. )

Sidenote: Spouse is still in the dog house for needlessly running the car into the side of the garage. To say he did so needlessly is undoubtedly redundant, because most people understand that you aren't supposed to take out old brickwork with the car. But my spouse did this back on Wednesday and he thinks I'm unreasonable because I'm still stewing. So he sends me Jane Austen links in the hopes that I'll move on. I'm not sure that's working for him in quite the way he's hoping.

If you are anything of a Jane-ite, you must read Paula Byrne’s book, The Real Jane Austen: A Life in Small Things. Let me be very clear. It is not a biography in the conventional sense. It does not follow a linear narrative from birth to death. Instead, like a tour through any Jane Austen shrine (whether Chawton or Stoneleigh Abbey), it picks up on a few physical items tied to the author and expands on just how those items relate to the author’s work or life experience. Someone here on LT complained that this book was choppy in its presentation, but I think the real issue is that the book presumes a fairly solid familiarity with the particulars of Jane’s life and works, a familiarity that the casual reader may not really have. At the same time, those with more than a passing acquaintance with Austen will be pleased to read this and discover much that they may never have known or properly understood in context. The book is lively and chock full of details that otherwise might never come to the general Austen fan.

For example, there is a chapter early in the book entitled The East Indian Shawl that goes over some of Austen’s extended family’s history and travel to India. Her aunt, Philadelphia, in 1752 took the extraordinary step of taking ship with the plain ambition of finding a husband amongst what author Byrne refers to as “the lonely businessmen, soldiers and administrators who worked in the East Indies.” Phila succeeds in her aim, but the story becomes even more interesting after her marriage, One of Jane’s cousins was apparently the result of an adulterous relationship -- not something that gets covered in a standard Austen biography but the story surrounding this cousin (Eliza Hancock) is used to illuminate for us the idea that Jane was exposed to a great deal more information about the expanding economic and political shifts that were impacting on her safe world at home. She wasn’t just the spinster aunt writing at the vicarage desk in between housekeeping duties. Every chapter is used to bring this woman forward as a person, fleshed out and delightful to know. Claire Tomalin’s biography is excellent if you want the facts of Austen’s life, but Byrne’s work fleshes out far more completely the real woman, a woman who was smart enough to know when to bow to convention and dedicate a work to the Prince Regent (whom she disliked) when it was useful to her to sell a work and thereby earn a better living for herself. She paid attention to her appearance (caps, long sleeves, curls, etc.)

Every chapter focuses on an aspect of Austen’s life through items such as topaz crosses on a chain (remember Mansfield Park?) or a painting of the socially prominent Dido (again, pertaining to Mansfield Park) to note the socially-charged issues that permeate Austen’s work. She was not writing genre romance novels; she was writing for the mainstream readership of her time. I particularly liked Byrnes attention to Austen’s less popular works such as Mansfield Park and Lady Susan. (And now I understand why Marissa Doyle said she *had* to go reread Mansfield Park in the middle of reading this book! I feel a similar need to go reread Persuasion, although I can not force myself to reread Emma even having learned that the theme of that book is actually kindness.) At any rate, I heartily recommend this book. It may have been the best book I’ve read in 2013.

So now I must go read Among the Jane-Ites by Deborah Yaffe while awaiting more duplicate copies of Austen’s works to arrive from Amazon. Yes, wicked profligacy. Jane Austen (if she was anything like Paula Byrne believes her to have been) would certainly have understood. Heck, she might even have egged me on.

Okay so why isn't the review tied to the above cover image showing? Here is the text (*sigh*) that ought to be there:

So the pertinent personal disclaimers up front. While I consider myself to be a fan of Jane Austen’s work, I am not such a fan that I reread her six novels in full rotation on an annual basis. Nor have I ever done DVD marathons of Pride and Prejudice (BBC versions 1 and 2), although I will admit to entertaining the idea upon occasion. I am not a fan of anything to the extent that many others in modern-day America can claim to be. I have gone to science fiction conventions and I enjoyed them until they became too expensive for the family budget.. Heck, as a nod to friendship, I even helped run some. But in light of some of the hard-core media fans around, I can’t be accused of being much more than a light-weight dilettante!

That said, I’m pretty familiar with all of the elements of fandom that Yaffe devotes chapters to in her book. The costumers whose efforts run to complete accuracy and hundreds of dollars, the non-professional, self-taught scholars capable of editing scholarship of academics, the tensions that arise between those fans whose love was born of the texts and those whose love was born of the films. Yaffe’s book, Amongst the Jane-Ites is not a particularly intellectual investigation into fandom and its rationales but it is a rather nice overview of what captures the imagination of those who care for Willoughby, Darcy, Emma and Anne and how they express that devotion. Austen fans -- Jane-ites -- aren’t dramatically different under the bonnet from the fans one might encounter at Comic-Con or Dragon-Con.

In that context, Yaffe’s book raised questions for me. Aside from an excess of leisure time and disposable income (and many fans don’t have that much of the latter), why do we see this level of visible activity by so many devotees? What is missing from the larger Western society that we’ve created these social gatherings for purposes of discussing and/or portraying much beloved characters? Is it just that tribal thing left over from the past? If you don’t over-identify with a particular geographical region or profession or institution, do you have to fulfill that need for tribal identification with something else? Or is it that we have so squelched the human creative impulse in tedious office work that there is a driving need to create in some other fashion? Is this just a sign of frustration in the broader population? I don’t have a good answer, but I know this type of fannish behavior is largely a product of my lifetime. We’ve always had communities but is it excessive to have these kinds of visible communities and activities? (To turn it back into a discussion of the book, I will say that the Jane Austen Society of North America -- JASNA -- has quite its own history as a community and Yaffe told the story well.)

Oh, a sidenote. I didn’t mind reading this in Kindle format; I would not however have been happy paying full price for the paperback. But it was light and fun. And it did make me think about something larger.

BTW, if I were ever to write a Jane Austen sequel of any sort, I'd entitle it Fortune and Fortitude because that's really what her books are about...

#5 good one! hearty agreement.

I'm delighted you enjoyed the Paula Byrne so well...I've downloaded Amongst the Janeites and have that in the reading queue.

Some randon thoughts about fandom...I also wonder if it isn't to fill some perceived gap in one's life. I did SCA in high school (and met my husband there) but dropped it during college for various personal reasons, and have never been moved to go back to it. I live in an area where colonial American recreators are thick on the ground, and apart from being mildly interested in the challenge of sewing an 18th century gown, I haven't pursued that either. Because I'm sufficiently busy with work and family, and get what I need there? And because I work in a creative field, that supplies the need even more? I'll keep your comments in mind as I read.

And Fortune and Fortitude would be a delightful title. Just saying. ;)

>2 jillmwo: What a good review of The Real Jane Austen, Jill! You should post it on the book page. I would thumb it.

I'm adding this to my wishlist. I liked the review of Among the Jane-ites, too, but I'm not enough of a Jane-ite to read it, I don't think. I did just read Lady Susan, and was pleasantly surprised at how funny it was.

Thanks, @jnwelch, for the kind words! @Jim53 and @Marissa_Doyle, it's nice to hear I'm not boring people to death with my latest immersion experience. But wait! There's more! I was reading Sense and Sensibility on the way home this evening.

I hit the chapter where Marianne gets the horrible letter from Willoughby the day after they've encountered him at the ball. He returns the three letters that Marianne had written to him since she and Elinor arrived in London. At the time, this intimate correspondence would have been appropriate only to an engaged couple and Elinor believes that they must BE engaged. Of course, there are many tears and painful recriminations when it emerges that the man coldly sends his letter as an indication that he is diverting his marital attentions elsewhere. Marianne is exposed to unkind talk as a result. STILL Austen will eventually allow Willoughby to voice what was going on with him in a conversation with Elinor who finds it in her heart to forgive the awful cad. He's really a sad excuse for a romantic figure, yet Austen allows him space to be a fallible human.

That’s why it is particularly striking that Austen grants no similar opportunity to Fanny Dashwood to explain her behaviors. In the second chapter of S&S, we see Fanny talk her weak-willed spouse out of properly allocating money to the Dashwood girls in the wake of the elder Mr. Dashwood’s death. It’s a particularly striking written example of how we humans can talk ourselves in and out of taking a given action. One assumes -- because with Willoughby we are shown by Austen his real emotional connection to Marianne -- that for Austen the lack of emotional connection to any living being is what puts Fanny beyond the pale. Fanny doesn’t connect with anyone anywhere in the book.

We really need a book about the awful women in Austen -- Aunt Norris, Lady Susan, Fanny Dashwood. Everyone thinks of Elizabeth Bennett and Anne Eliot when they think of Austen. But really Austen was amazing (and quite unforgiving) when it came to creating really dreadful women.

By the way, lest you are tempted to go wallow in lovely movie adaptations of Jane Austen novels, I also recommend Roy Adkins' Jane Austen's England which goes out of its way to make it clear that the vast majority of the population were in constant danger of contracting something awful due to poor sanitation and/or eating something utterly unappealing, such as thin oatmeal or frozen potatoes. The author is really quite concerned that those Austen movies make life in the 18th century far too appealing!

I think a book on that would be fascinating. Especially Aunt Norris, whose awfulness comes home to roost and forces her to face it.

I'm enjoying Among the Janeites a great deal. A friend is one of the founders of The Republic of Pemberley, btw, which adds a level of personal interest to the topic.

Found through my feeds at work: 38% of us will finish a book no matter what! See http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/38-of-readers-will-finish-a-book-no-matter-...

I have found this thread very interesting and will add both the Tomalin Biography and the Paula Byrne book to my wishlist, so Thank You jillmwo. I am lucky enough to have a gorgeous Folio Society edition of Jane Austen's letters - or those left after Cassandra Austen destroyed some of them. Reading some of them will knock any sentimental notions about Austen out of one's head . She could be acerbic, dispassionate and sometimes, I would argue, quite cruel in her judgements. This example pulls one up short I feel:

On the Peninsular War: "How horrible it is to have so many people killed! And what a blessing that one cares for none of them!"

One famous example on the issue of childbirth was: On Mrs. Deede's giving birth to another child:
"I would recommend to her and Mr. D. the simple regimen of separate rooms.

There are harsher comments on marriage and children elsewhere, but one must keep the context in mind. Marriage was likely to spell the end of creative life for a woman unless blessed with an undemanding spouse and childbirth must have been feared given it's dangers at the time.

Many of the letters are very funny and give a vivid picture of Jane Austen and her times- a few examples below.

"I do not want people to be very agreeable, as it saves me the trouble of liking them a great deal."

"There was one gentleman, an officer of the Cheshire, a very good-looking young man, who, I was told, wanted very much to be introduced to me, but as he did not want it quite enough to take much trouble in effecting it, we never could bring it about."

"You deserve a longer letter than this; but it is my unhappy fate seldom to treat people so well as they deserve."

I would recommend the letters, but more as a volume to dip into than to read as one would a novel.

I quite agree, @Maura49! I have a copy of the Letters (an Oxford paperback edition edited by Deirdre Le Faye) but I went and looked up the Folio Society edition you reference and now I'm coveting yours! It looks lovely and I am fighting temptation to order it off of eBay or Amazon. (But it is SO pretty. So very, very pretty. I want one...)

I have largely finished the third volume of Sense and Sensibility. This is a title I’ve reread more than once and yet still I encounter new bits, such as:

(1) Mrs. Jennings -- for all her apparent lack of sympathy/consideration in teasing the Dashwood girls -- is not without genuine heart and affection. She is of material value to Elinor when Marianne lies so ill and she manages to keep Colonel Brandon with them (as a recognition of his deep caring for Marianne). I find myself liking her and wondering what she did to deserve Lady Middleton as a daughter.

(2) What was Austen thinking to name three characters in the same novel “John”? There is Sir John Middleton, Mr. John Dashwood, and John Willoughby. Surely there are other names she might have plugged in. On the other hand, this is the worst thing I can find to say about this novel.

(3) The living that Colonel Brandon is in a position to offer Edward isn’t by any means a luxury post. It’s pointed out that the living is only worth about 200 a year, which while sufficient for a bachelor, is insufficient for a married couple. That’s why the increase in income granted to Edward and Elinor in the final paragraphs of the book represent such a good thing for them.

(4) John Dashwood actually fits in well with his in-laws, which is sad.

(5) The chapter of Willoughby visiting Cleveland when Marianne is ill is one of the high emotional points of the novel, in some respects heart-rending, but what is one to think of this man? He shows up drunk (granted, because he had only a single pint of porter on a largely empty stomach, but still). He knows enough of his own bad behavior to accuse himself of meanness, selfishness, cruelty and of being a libertine. However, he then whines about his dread of poverty when we know he’s worth six or seven hundred a year (which is far more than Elinor and Edward will be living on). I think Elinor ought not to pardon him as readily as she seems to do.

(6) When Elinor is in the shop and first encounters Robert Ferrars, she notes that he is of a “strong, natural, stirling insignificance”. As conniving as Lucy Steele proves to be, I’m not sure that this natural insignificance is sufficient reason for saddling him with her and yet this is one of the good things about the ending of Sense and Sensibility. Although it would be wonderful to see Lucy Steele and Fanny Dashwood get their just desserts, Austen doesn’t take the easy way out and hand the two harsh outcomes just to satisfy the reader. We are left with the understanding that sometimes in real life, people don’t get what they deserve. That’s just the way of it.

Richard Jenkyns, author of A Fine Brush on Ivory, is rather dismissive of Sense and Sensibility. He doesn’t think it works and yet I like it for the same reason that I like Mansfield Park. Those two titles of all of Austen’s works are not primarily romance novels; these are explorations by the author of some serious questions about approrpriate social behaviors in real life and she doesn’t hand out pat answers.

By the way, the third chapter of On Rereading by Patricia Meyer Spacks is devoted to re-reading Austen’s works, although she focuses more on Pride and Prejudice and Emma than on any of the other novels.

And on another side note, I can't stay immersed in Austen for much longer. Come September I have to return to the mysteries and other reading obligations to the library.

I've enjoyed reading of your immersions in all things Jane Austen. It's been several years since I've read Austen's novels myself and your forays are making me miss her world. I also have a couple of biographies and her letters to read for the first time. I need to do my own immersion soon.

The last Austen I read was Mansfield Park in 2008, and I completely missed that Fanny's uncle would have used slaves on his plantations in the East Indies. The slavery was thrown at us in one of the BBC adaptations and made me wonder if it was that prominent in the book and I just completely missed it, or if there were subtler hints that I completely missed. Either way I want to reread MP, even though it's not one of my favourites. And I don't remember Persuasion at all. The last time I read the books, I read them as isolated events of a particular place and time. It will be interesting to read the books now keeping a wider perspective.

@sandragon, I think Mansfield Park is one of the most underrated classic British novels ever. I love it, but must admit I didn't come to it until I was an adult and it wasn't until the second or third re-read that I really "got" it. It bothers me that those who try to adapt it to a modern viewing audience feel that they must somehow re-do Fanny Price in order to make her palatable. Fanny is plain, not particularly robust in terms of physical fitness, and generally conservative in what she takes on. It's important that we realize that not everyone in a Jane Austen novel is either lively like Elizabeth Bennet or beautiful like Emma.

Persuasion is only less slightly a favorite but I fell in love with Ciaran Hinds as Captain Wentworth when they made the movie back in the '90's, and that took me through my first reading experience of the novel. It's true that some books are better when you read them as an older person with far more experience. Hmm, has anyone ever done a comparison of John Willoughby and the unworthy Eliot in Persuasion? They both suffer from issues of avarice. (Something else I can stop and think about...)

But, huzzah! WOOt! I just rediscovered two books that I thought I'd passed on after the last Jane Austen binge I enjoyed back in '09. One is A Truth Universally Acknowledged and the other is Lady Vernon and Her Daughter. And while I dipped into the former and enjoyed some of the essays, I clearly didn't read all of them and with regard to Lady Vernon, I think I put it aside when my enthusiasm had been redirected and didn't read it at all. But these have resurfaced at the right time. Don't you love it when that happens with a book collection that has outgrown its organization scheme? (These had been put into a box that had then been put aside and covered up.) I'm settling in with one or the other, now.

I am officially horrified. There is a film maker by the name of Whit Stillman who plans to make a television adaptation of Jane Austen's Lady Susan. I'm all in favor of anything that brings this novella to the attention of more people. I have a certain fondness for the wicked and conniving Lady Susan (she's really quite awful). But I'm not sure that this is the guy I want to make the attempt. He thinks it should be a comedy and he's doing it with a "male-focused" script. Um, no. Just no. I am aware that he did the 1990 film, Metropolitan, which was a re-do of Mansfield Park but I didn't think that one used the right approach either. So, no. Please no.

Read it and weep: http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2013/07/whit-stillman-to-direct-adaptation...

Harrumph. I am displeased. I send no compliments to anyone's mother. (Said in the very best Lady Catherine de Bourgh manner.)

Lady Vernon and Her Daughter is a refashioning of the relatively unknown epistolary novel by Jane Austen, Lady Susan. In the original, the title character is a conniving and manipulative woman who seems primarily concerned with finagling marriages for herself and her daughter, Frederica. The letters pass between 4 female correspondents, Catherine Vernon, Lady deCourcy, her mother, Lady Susan and her friend in town, Mrs. Alicia Johnson. There are male characters but with only one or two exceptions, we are not allowed access to how those men interpret the actions of Lady Susan while visiting the Vernon household. Ultimately Lady Susan finds a spouse for both herself and her daughter, but the reader doesn’t find her to be a very sympathetic character during the course of the correspondence. Lady Susan was an “unfinished” early work of Austen’s and it wasn’t actually published until 1871 when it appeared as part of the Memoir of Jane Austen written by James Edward Austen-Leigh.

What the authors of Lady Vernon and Her Daughter did was to begin with the outcomes of the original text (with the title character and her daughter married) and work backward to come up with an alternate point of view of the same set of events. Rather than being the nasty woman of the original, the Lady Susan that Jane Rubino and Caitlin Rubino-Bradway develop is gracious and courteous. It’s Charles Vernon, her brother-in-law and the spouse of Catherine Vernon who is transformed into the duplicitous and calculating villain. Lady Vernon and Her Daughter is fairly well done, but it does help if you’ve read the original work and can appreciate how the authors have had their fun. There are passages from the letters in Austen’s novel that are nicely woven in here as well. The authors provide a flavor of Austen’s style although not so much the wit. I’m not sure that Lady Vernon works as well if you come to it without any awareness of the original, though. I found it enjoyable as a leisure read, and I’m glad that it resurfaced in my house before it got hauled off to the Goodwill. But having it read it, will I hold on to it for a future reread? Haven't made up my mind yet on that question...

A Truth Universally Acknowledged: 33 Great Writers on Why We Read Jane Austen

This is one of those handy, kind of light-weight reference books. If you need to *know* what Ian Watt, Anna Quindlen, Lionel Trilling, or Kingsley Amis wrote about Jane Austen, the essays are here for consultation. If however you try to read this book through in some linear fashion, you will find yourself overwhelmed. Some of the essays are serious scholarship and consequently dense; others are light-hearted appreciations of Austen but not particularly memorable for their insights. And unsurprisingly, most of them praise Austen. (The others quibble.)

Honestly, the thing I’m taking away from this book? There are sixteen instances of kissing in Austen’s novels. I never knew that. But the essay by Donald J Greene entitled the “The Myth of Limitation” quotes critic Lionel Stevenson on this point. Of course then I had to visit Project Gutenberg and leverage the power of the Find command in my browser (ctrl + F) and see what the machines came up with. As it happens, most instances of kisses in Austen’s novels pertain to quieting wailing children and kissing of hands in moments of high emotion. Oh, wait, there is that moment when Willoughby kisses the lock of hair he’s cut from Marianne’s head. Very romantic stuff! One heaves a sigh. I don’t think any man has ever asked me for a lock from my head.

I've changed my mind and removed this one from the box that is to go to Goodwill.

Mansfield Park is the only one of the 'big six' I haven't read yet. Soon. I am still hemming and hawing over buying the Kindle version of The Real Jane Austen. This might be something I prefer in corporeal form.

Persuasion

I know why it is I’m less fond of Persuasion. We learn within the first 3 chapters that the Elliots are not a happy family. Sir Walter is a class-conscious and extravagant man, remote from all but one of his daughters. The favored daughter (on most slim grounds) is Elizabeth who has all the very worst qualities of her father. There is Mary, the youngest, who is married to a man who took her as a second choice. And there’s Anne, a somewhat invisible soul insofar as the others are concerned. Mary only wants her older sister as a surrogate mother/care-taker and Elizabeth and Sir Walter don’t feel her to be particularly in sympathy with their own views of what is properly due the Elliot status and rank. Nobody is happy. It's painful to read.

Anne is the only one of the three sisters with any sense whatsoever and Anne’s own unhappiness is due to the fact that she was talked out of launching herself in the direction her heart would have led seven years prior to the opening of the story. Both family and neighbors talked her out of marrying the man she loved. Persuasion is all about the second chance that comes to Anne most unexpectedly.

What’s struck me in re-reading Persuasion is the theme of ill-health and brevity of life. I don’t think I registered this as strongly in previous readings. It’s not just that the Elliot family’s fortunes began to go downhill with the death of Anne’s mother in the opening pages of the novel. Mrs. Smith (a pivotal character who appears in the latter third of the book) is a woman whose mobility is seriously crippled due to both rheumatic disease and lack of income. The Admiral (tenant of Kellynch Hall) arrives in Bath to take the waters on the grounds that he is suffering from gout. Louisa Musgrove very nearly dies of a head injury. There’s a theme of dis-ease, both in terms of illness and in terms of Anne never really feeling herself to be at home in any of the locations she visits.

Anne is shown in a state of intermittent travel throughout the course of the 2 or 3 months covered by the novel. She closes down Kellynch Hall in order to yield it to the new tenants, goes to her sister’s home in Uppercross, visits the Harvilles in Lyme and then ends in apartments in Bath where there is no real home for her, even residing with her sister and father. Her friendship with Lady Russell is subject to that lady’s obligations and consequently offers no shelter during this period of need. Anne has no place of comfort and ease. Even though the novel ends with her love vindicated and fulfilled, there are no indications that her happiness is a lifelong state. (Actually, the closing passages have to do with the balance between the equilibrium found by Mrs. Smith ultimately in comparison with the equilibrium found by Anne.)

It’s all too sad and disheartening, however true to life. And Austen is nothing if not true to life when it comes to human behavior.

But one last note of irony that just occurred to me while thinking about the ending of this last of Austen's novels. Everyone is so worried about the elder Sir Elliot marrying the ill-favored Mrs. Clay. Doesn’t anyone think that it’s just as wrong to try to manipulate his “relationship” as it is to manipulate Anne’s? I mean, I know his isn’t a genuine connection of feeling the way that Anne’s is, but what if it had been? Everyone was still focused on him *not* marrying and for all the wrong reasons -- her general level on the social rung and the possibility of him begetting a new heir. I am flummoxed because I don't think any of the criticism I've seen over the years talked about that, but maybe I'm wrong.

Okay, I promise with the advent of September we'll be back to the gore and mayhem of murders. (Of the two I'm obligated to read and discuss, one is an idiotic cozy with little to recommend it and the other a thriller that will probably rattle my chain and disrupt the security regained by this period of revisiting the early 19th century.) Oh, and maybe some space ships!

20: Although I'm not a huge Austen fan myself, I'm enjoying your reviews and thoughtful analyses.

I agree with Meredy. I've only read P&P myself, but I like reading your commentaries.

I'm actually thinking of how I could work the murder of Sir Walter Elliot into a mystery. Of all of the self-absorbed characters that Jane Austen invents, he really is dreadful. I imagine one could poison him easily and there are so many people who'd like to do it. Lady Russell wouldn't miss him although her reverence for the aristocracy might be a barrier to her actually doing him in. He stands between Mr. William Elliot and the title so that would make the younger Mr. Elliot an obvious suspect. Perhaps Charles Musgrove would do him in, just because he's a pain as a father-in-law. Or what if the eldest sister, Elizabeth, did it? She's not much of a prize herself which makes her either the second corpse in the mystery or else the murderer. I'm thinking we could get Captain Harville to be the sleuth since he can't go back to sea due to his injury. (See another person who is not particularly fit in Persuasion; I didn't mention him earlier.)

Just like in the Mikado, it seems I've got him on the list!

@meredy and @SylviaC, you are wonderful to say that I can keep on keeping on and shouldn't worry about living up to expectations of a readership or anything like that.

@clamairy -- Mansfield Park isn't for everyone. I don't necessarily know that you'd enjoy it. But I think (talking about living up to expectations of a readership) that the problem is that people go in, expecting another Pride and Prejudice style romance and Mansfield Park isn't really about two people finding each other. Edmund doesn't fall in love with Fanny onstage. The book is all about finding your moral compass and adhering to that compass even when the world around you is pressuring you to do otherwise. Many people find Fanny Price to be priggish and the first time or two that I read MP, I could easily see why. Mary Crawford is far more attractive as a potential heroine. Except that she has no moral compass to speak of (or at least that's Austen's point, I think.)

I concur re Mansfield Park, having come to a new appreciation of it earlier this year--nice summation! I gained a better appreciation of Fanny as a character (though not necessarily as a heroine, if that makes any sense), and think she ended up as a much more moral person than Edmund (and think he totally didn't deserve her!)

I actually also see Persuasion in a similar light--Anne understanding the error she made and coming into her own as a person of agency.

Maybe your Persuasion mystery could have multiple murderers, a la Murder on the Orient Express. :)

#23 - I have yet to read any Austen I didn't appreciate, so I am reasonably sure I'll find some enjoyment there. But thank you for your words of caution. I will probably give it a go when the snow is on the ground.

At the very end of Persuasion, when the Musgroves arrive in Bath, there is a point where we see how Anne is welcomed into and appreciated by that family. It's a stark contrast to the way in which Anne's birth family behaves. I see Anne making a conscious choice to move more into that kind of loving group (which parallels or is analogous to the comraderie and friendliness of the naval community in Lyme and Bath). She doesn't find that level of genuine connection among those of her own social class. She realizes that she'd rather live (or sail) in the one kind of community rather than the other. The thing one wonders at is how her sister Mary can be so foolish as to not appreciate the warmth of the family she married into.

Another thing that occurred to me was the risk that Anne might well have been taking had she married Wentworth at a younger age. When you think about Mansfield Park and the poverty of Fanny's birth family in Portsmouth, the reduction in her mother's status when she went and married a "lieutenant of the marines without education, fortune or connexions", you can't help but sympathize to some extent with Lady Russell's hesitations. Had circumstances of war not been what they were, Anne could have ended up in much the same situation as Fanny's mother. We like that Anne's story ends more happily.

You know, one of the things that demonstrates to me the hold that Austen has on her readers is that I haven't really been able to stop thinking about either Persuasion or Sense and Sensibility this week. I've had plenty to do at work, and have had the normal number of phone calls, etc., in the evening to deal with, but drifting off to sleep last night, I was still thinking about Jane Austen and why we still read her novels.

Which makes those Austen fans that Deborah Yaffe was writing about a bit more intelligible; they're not as crazy as one might think. I did get to the point last night of thinking that if I were on a desert island or for some reason if I were forced to give up all of my books but some limited few, I'd have to keep all six of Jane Austen's novels and maybe even her unfinished bits as well.

What a great point you make in comparing pre-war Wentworth with Fanny's father in Mansfield Park, Jill. I hadn't really thought about the risk it would have been, and Lady Russell's hesitations do seem more reasonable when you think about it that way. The road to riches and alternative of poverty get a lot of coverage in the Hornblower nautical series, too; it also ends happily, but the other possibility is always there.

I agree with your desert island thought, too. Her books stand up so well on re-read, an important quality in that situation. :-)

I love this observatoin from Richard Jenkyns' A Fine Brush on Ivory: An Appreciation of Jane Austen:

Persuasion is, like Mansfield Park, a novel about lonely endurance... (pg. 175)

I find that to be so very true. Both Anne Elliot and Fanny Price have to soldier through long periods of being isolated in the midst of family groups, undervalued while others garner attention and esteem. Maybe that's why some of us tend to root for them. (Which should not be interpreted as me saying I fall into either category personally. Believe me when I tell you I'm more like Mary Musgrove or Fanny Dashwood than I am like Anne Elliot.)

I was also reminded today of something I noted last year while reading Ursula K. LeGuin's Wild Girls. There was an essay included in that book entitled The Conversation of the Modest about which I wrote "This contains a statement re Fanny Price of Mansfield Park that makes more sense to me than the average analysis of that text. (LeGuin actually “gets” Price, whereas most modern readers believe Fanny to be priggish in the extreme.) “That a girl could really, truly, actually be modest - that is, assess her situation realistically, choose the behavior appropriate to it, and stick to it through immensely powerful opposition --to many readers seems so strange, even unnatural that they can only dismiss her as a hypocrite. Fanny’s fault is not falsity, but an undue lack of self-confidence...” (page 81)."

I was reading one of the essays in A Truth Universally Acknowledged by James Collins where he discusses why he doesn't mind Austen's ostensibly priggish moralizing in her novels -- specifically he means Fanny Price. But he talks about a different world view held by Austen that made sense to me.

I totally agree with your comments on Mansfield Park jillmwo. I have rarely found anyone to agree with me regarding it's beauty and profundity. I would be interested in your views on the play at the heart of the novel which seems to be a stumbling block for many. I have always felt that the modern reader finds Fanny's views prissy to say the least and careful reading is required. She feels deeply that Sir Thomas would disapprove of the project and that the subject matter is somewhat immoral. Of course the situations in the play reflect the romantic relationships developing at the time and Fanny's distress has personal resonances which I am not sure she is fully conscious of herself. A contemporary reader might agree with her views , but we tend to give a modern gloss to the whole business and fail to understand the fuss.

This novel also provided me with an object lesson regarding introductions. My Penguin edition has a superb introduction by Tony Tanner which impressed me so much that I later bought a volume of his essays on Austen. Unfortunately his highly perceptive comments on Mansfield Park stuck in my mind and rather affected my interpretation of what I was reading. Ever since then I have largely avoided reading introductions until after I have read the book. Thank you for a really enjoyable thread which has lightened the chaos of my current moving house experience considerably.

If you agree that MP has as one of its theme the idea of acting authentically in relations with others, then the play provides an interesting puzzle piece. Sir Thomas Bertram would not approve of the play that they've selected; as a parent, he would not approve Maria's and Julia's involvement because it's as questionable in that historical context in much the same way as Miley Cyrus' "twerking" was questionable for modern parents. You just don't want to see your daughter doing that kind of thing. So the entire theatrical troupe has some understanding that this is a rebellious thing in which they are engaged; they're appalled when Sir Thomas returns early and all react defensively.

But if you then look at the idea of "acting" authentically, you've got Maria and Henry playing mother and son when they're not in the least authentically feeling that way one to the other. Their "rehearsal" which Mary breaks up when she is with Mr. Rushworth shows them behaving authentically in terms of sexual attraction but inauthentically, given that Maria is supposedly promised to another man. (Although let's remember that Maria is playing Mr. Rushworth off against Henry to see how jealous each will become.) Henry is acting inauthentically, because he isn't' really interested in Maria. He's just playing a game out of boredom. So neither is acting authentically, although they are both "acting".

You've got Mary Crawford and Edmund in something of a similar situation. They are interested in each other and they are playing roles that have them as mutual love interests. So much is authentic but there is still an element that is lacking in authenticity. The two are playing with fire. What's inauthentic is that neither has any intention of meeting the other halfway in terms of their social levels or their personal ambitions. Mary wants to talk him out of being a clergyman and Edmund wants to persuade her to be a clergyman's wife

Fanny is the only one acting in an authentic fashion. Fanny doesn't want to act at all; some people just don't like to be in front of others in that way and this fits with what we've seen of Fanny's personality. She isn't trying to be priggish but she doesn't want to flout her uncle's wishes/rules, she doesn't want to perform, and she doesn't want to see what she's seeing in the behavior around her. She's somewhat shocked by the subject matter of the play. She is deeply perturbed when Edmund ignores his own personal beliefs about the appropriateness of the activity because she knows it is inauthentic behavior for Edmund emotionally and professionally.

For that matter, even Mary recognizes that her role in the play is not one she wants to perform against a stranger; some elements of the role are just too intimate for acting out in public. Mary may be a town=reared sophisticate but she has her limits as well.

The play puts everyone in such awkward situations. It's a blessing in disguise when Sir Thomas comes home early. (Does this respond to your question, @Maura49? Is this what you see in MP?)

I was really struck by your perceptive comments on authenticity and I can see what you mean although my own thoughts have not previously taken me beyond the "acting" and "inappropriate" side of this situation. Fanny's sheer abhorrence of acting becomes a yardstick by which the reader judges other characters. However, looking at it from the viewpoint you present, jillmwo, makes one see more clearly the divisions between characters. The relationships between authentic and inauthentic characters are surely doomed to failure. Would Fanny really have been lured into marriage with Henry Crawford? surely only by betraying her essential self.

One could also extend this question of authenticity to other Austen novels. Does Elizabeth Bennett's initial attraction to Wickham fail as she realises the inauthenticity of his feelings for her, Miss King's fortune being of more interest to him? Even more striking is the case of Willoughby and Marianne in Sense and Sensibility where the passion and commitment she feels for him is totally authentic, but can one say the same of this man who feels that he needs a rich wife. More intriguing is the possibility that Willoughby's love for Marianne is totally authentic but he betrays their love for material reasons.

I haven't really thought so much about this in relation to the other novels, @Maura49, but when I was thinking about what the larger theme of MP was, the phrase "taking action without authentic feeling behind it" took me to the first thing we see Aunt Norris do. She ostensibly is arranging for charity to her sister by offering to remove her daughter from Portsmouth to Mansfield Park and thereby improving the girl's situation in life. But she is behaving inauthentically because her act of charity is being borne by others. She does this throughout the book -- not taking those actions that might cost her something and only acting when it saves her pocketbook or saves her labor. So that is how I got to thinking about acting per se.

When you get to the play, it gets very very complicated because people are acting at different levels of sincerity and insincerity. And of course, Fanny isn't faced with the potential consequences of her principled behavior until she refuses to accept Henry Crawford and Sir Thomas sends her back to Portsmouth. And when she's at home, she's faced with the realities of THAT existence. Her mother (Lady Bertram's sister) had married out of her class -- beneath her economically -- and Fanny has to see that if she doesn't marry advantageously, she may be finding herself in what would be an equally unhappy situation. Is she really sure she can't marry Henry? Is she really sure she couldn't love him? At one point, Austen says that if Henry had maintained proper self-discipline and hung in there until Fanny could trust him, he could very easily have won her as a wife.

The issue in MP is understanding who you can trust in a world where others behave insincerely. It's a common theme with S&S. Is Henry very different from Willoughby? I need to think about that. On one level, they're cut from the same cloth. Did Willoughby really love Marianne? Did Henry really love Fanny? Is Mary right when she blames Fanny at one point because Henry has gone to perdition with a married woman? (Trying not to put in too many spoilers although it may be too late. Sorry, @clamairy.)

Thanks for your mention of UKL's Wild Girls. I had managed to miss it somehow and it sounds interesting. Lately I have preferred her essays to her fiction, but the story sounds intriguing.

Okay, so today's question has to do with taking notes on the books you read. How pervasive a habit might this be with other Green Dragon pub members?

This afternoon, I pulled a plastic storage box off the top of a set of bookshelves to see what was in it and whether the contents might be safely chucked out. To my complete and utter amazement (because I was thinking it was background material pertaining to books I'd read for the township library group or titles which might be read with the township library group), when I opened the box, I found it was notes. And not just any old classroom type stuff -- more notes on Jane Austen and on Mansfield Park in particular. Articles which apparently date back to roughly 2000-2003 and which I had completely forgotten about printing out, reading or storing away. Interesting scattered bits of knowledge or things I'd noticed when I had last read MP -- which appears to be about ten years ago. I even checked the page numbers I'd written down to be sure I knew which edition it was that I had been reading at the time.

Now I know I'm a little bit nerdy but I can't be sure just HOW nerdy. Do the rest of you make notes as you read and think about what you're reading? If you do, do you keep those notes? Or do you tuck them inside the book? Are you one of those wild rebellious sorts who actually write your notes in your books?

I have to go back to finishing a non-Austen title for the mystery discussion group tomorrow evening -- S.J. Bolton's Now You See Me. I'm impressed that the author is inducing me to read a gritty London police procedural with body bits scattered about, because I don't like that kind of thing. It's a bit more intense but definitely off the Austen track.

But do please tell me if you are one who is jotting down thoughts as you read. And if you do, how long do you hold onto those notes? After all, I'm really a tad disconcerted by my discovery. Ten year old notes about Jane Austen. Ten year old notes. Is the universe telling me something?

35: I view most books as a dialogue, and I read with a sharp pencil. This is a habit I learned from my father, who was a teacher and marked his books as he read.

Some of my nonfiction readings have extensive notes in the margins and various symbols and underlinings, not to mention cross-references. I also treat the blank flyleaf at the back as a place for page references with key phrases--sort of an informal personal index. (And I annotate indexes.)

Ordinarily I mark up fiction much less than nonfiction, but a few novels have taken extensive annotation. Sometimes it's not a matter of thoughtful response and analysis but of compulsive editing. There's a lot of sloppy work out there these days.

This is the reason why, in general, I prefer to own books that I intend to read seriously and attentively. I can't do this with library books, and I feel as if my reading process is incomplete when I'm a passive recipient of a one-way flow of words.

I don't usually write in the books, unless they move me greatly, either for better or worse. Some books compel me into dialogue with the author.

For the most part, I keep a composition book (covered in lovely printed paper) by my reading area and jot down the date I started reading a book, the title, author, format and page number. Also who it came from if needed. In that, I write my feelings and impressions, thoughts, criticisms and favorite quotes or passages. Also the date finished. This is not a review, sometimes it is barely coherent, but I like it. I have three of these full so far, almost finished with a fourth. I started these in 2004. When a year finishes, I print out my reading stats from the computer and stick it in these.

If I find a good article about a book or author I keep on my shelves, I will stick it in that book. Then of course there are my LT reviews which are anywhere from a brief reminder to me that I liked a book, to a more full review. The more reviews there are for a book, the shorter mine will be.

35-27

Many of my books have the inside back cover, and in many cases any available space in back pages, full of page references and brief notes pointing me to interesting parts of the book. Sometimes these notes reference an interesting concept or a worthwhile quote.

In some cases I will write notes in the margin.

With non-fiction books I will often go back and draw together thoughts on issues in the book into a document that I will use for other writings and musings.

In many cases I never get back to the book to process the notes on the inside back cover.

These notes are fun when I find a book that I haven't read for a while and I enjoy rediscovering things I thought were interesting as time in the past.

I do not do this with the collectable books I have.

This is one way that a Nook or Kindle can be helpful--a place to keep notes on books without generating mysterious storage boxes full of notes. But maybe not as much fun...

I am afraid that my memory is suffering a bit as I get older and I find it very helpful to take notes as an aid to retention. I took a deep breath and began reading War and Peace recently and find that notes on characters and brief synopses really help to keep the novel's development clearer in my head.
This method is particularly useful with factual material too. I am currently enjoying Ghost Train to Eastern star by Paul Theroux but as with other travel books get confused by the whizzing from one country to another and find that brief notes help to keep the author's progress clear in my mind.
I have noticed that all members of my book group take notes in advance of meetings, but perhaps that is common to all readers in such groups.
I loathe writing in books, but must admit that I have done it when studying, always lightly in pencil, so that I can rub out afterwards. More recently I have made notes on post-it's and stuck these in relevant pages as they can be removed without damage.

Oh Dear! I can hear the pernickety librarian in me coming out again. Sorry folks- each to their own.

#38 - I love coming across used books which have had thoughtful or interesting notes written in the margins. It's almost like reading in a book group, you have the feedback of another reader right there. :) I remember one book though, I had to wonder if the writer was even reading the book they were making notes in. They seemed to have nothing to do with the story! Maybe it was a book owned by a spy, and was all in code!

#41 I would say your right, MrsLee.

Those books you buy for the hotel, do you find many visitors, especially Europeans, write weird messages in margins and leave the books is strange places, like under the third white stone to the left of the entrance gate? How many copies of The Catcher in the Rye are in your hotel?

Now You See Me by S.J. Bolton

The marketing blurb advertises this as a gritty London-based police procedural. Told from the viewpoint of Lacey Flint, a rookie cop, the events take place across a two or three week period in the fall of 2010 or 2011. So this is a contemporary mystery that has as its organizing element the five canonical murders committed by Jack the Ripper. No flashbacks to Victorian London, but the same type of grisly gruesome criminal mind at work. The research into the Ripper is sound but this isn’t a book I’d normally choose to read. It’s definitely written as suspense. The police are not omniscient in working out the challenge presented, but it’s clear as well that our narrator -- a member of the police force -- has something of her own agenda at risk in the resolution of the case. To say more would constitute spoilers. It's the first in a series, but there's really none of that slow build-up introducing the continuing characters. You're on a roller coaster with this story, and you just have to grab on to who these people are in the midst of fast-moving events (rather how you'd have to do it in real life).

What this book is REALLY about is the creation of a mythology -- a narrative that may have some root in real world events, but which has been expanded to explain at a larger scale the reasons why certain things happen as they do. There are some macabre images included in this book, but the writing is good. Structurally, the whole thing works brilliantly. You might not want to like this book, but it’s really worthwhile reading.

The ladies in the township discussion group didn’t themselves *like* the book (with one or two exceptions) but they all finished it and all contributed to the wider discussion. (Honestly, I had to call a full stop to the discussion because the library was closing and it takes fifteen minutes to get this crowd moving. But they would have kept going with some level of enthusiasm, had there been another hour or so.) The moment that warmed my heart however was when one of the women said that she’d read the book and then immediately re-read it in order to figure out how the author had so completely misdirected her attention. She had with her a full size notebook with all her notes that she’d taken the 2nd time around. I usually encourage these women to take notes as they read for their own purposes in remembering and discussing a book, and about 50% of them do so. But this was the first time I’d seen this level of engagement with the book! It just warmed my heart so and I shared with them bits of your comments here about taking notes. It's important that they understand that note-taking is not a sign of old age (average age is 65+) but rather a sign of involving themselves with the author.

Now You See Me is in my TBR. I might have to root it out earlier rather than later.

# 42 - It would take some fine brainwashing to make me buy The Catcher in the Rye! :)

Jill, that sounds like a great group you have going there.

It is my recollection that the founding Idea for LT came about when TIM wanted a place to record his marginalia. But then he realised first he'd have to have an accurate record of the book, and it all kind of sprang from there.

I don't write anythign anywhere, other than my reviews on here, and my reading thread that is a condensed form of the review.

Okay, so zipping around the country, I did manage to read the following.

The Emperor's Soul by Brandon Sanderson. He's justified in thinking this is the best short work he's ever done (novella-length) and now I understand why @clamairy has gone so far as to call him a sort of literary deity. He's good! The novella is very good. So good that I ran out and ordered it in hardcover; I'd initially only ordered it in Kindle format since I didn't think it was likely I'd read it again. But I was so wrong. It's really good. Did I mention that it won a Hugo? It's really good. No, seriously. I mean it. I am going to read it all over again as soon as the signed copy arrives in the mail. (You have to get it in hardcover from the author's website. That's how far I was willing to go.)

Did I tell you how much I enjoyed it? It's about art and about the roads one follows over the course of years. Our hero faces danger. Real danger. There's stuff to think about. Twists and turns and marvelously worked out magic.

Really. Good. Stuff.

What else did I read? With regard to Jane Austen, I dipped into Those Elegant Decorums which is promising and into Miniatures and Morals which is so not promising. Sometimes academic analysis is just so bizarre. But if you're into Jane Austen at the moment, do go take a look at a web site called: What Jane Saw (http://www.whatjanesaw.org) which is a digital humanities project out of Univ of Texas - Austin. It reproduces an art gallery showing that Jane Austen attended in 1813. Really impressive stuff.

Edited to clarify: The point of The Emperor's Soul has to do with the act of creation, the act of writing stories, and the actions of the person we are and/or hope to be. I am very much looking forward to rereading this more slowly a second time.

*adds The emperor's soul to wishlist*
*sigh*

I have learned that one can never fully account for tastes, but for your sake, Sakerfalcon, I do hope you enjoy The Emperor's Soul. (You're the fourth person in as many days that I've roped into reading it. I leaned on my book group to read it as well.)

However, the other book I've read in recent days is E.F. Benson's Queen Lucia which I was not overly enamored with. Until today on the commute home as I was reading Why Jane Austen and was able to tie something together in my head. Benson's Lucia is too much like Austen's Emma. Lucia may be older than Emma and she may be a hundred years later as a literary character, but they're sisters under the skin. Interfering beings whose sense of superiority ultimately causes them to embarrass themselves publicly. Both live in small village societies where they are leading lights and both are forced to discover that they cannot always manipulate those around them to their satisfaction. They're both unkind to those around them who are simply less fortunate than they. While I see the humor in Benson's Riseholme, I don't like the people there any better than I like the people in and round Highbury. So while I'll eventually read all of the Mapp and Lucia books over the course of time, I don't think I'll want to read them very often. I've come to them too late to find them particularly comforting reads.

I wasn't crazy about Queen Lucia either. I liked it well enough to finish it, and if more of the series come my way, I'll read them, but I'm not going looking for them. None of the characters were likeable, but I did have the the faintest whisper of sympathy for Georgie. And the book had a wonderful line that beautifully summed up Lucia's personality. When asking Georgie to help her arrange some impromptu tableaux, Lucia instructed, "Everything impromptu must be sketched out first."

Personally, I prefer the later books when Lucia moves to Tilling and her mammoth contest with Elizabeth Mapp for dominance in the community begins. I am probably influenced by the great TV dramatisation from the 1980's in which the great comic actor Geraldine McEwan played Lucia. This sent me scurrying off to the books and I devoured the lot!
That said I would agree that they are an acquired taste and there are some distinctly odd characters peopling Benson's books. Georgie and his 'bibelots' would be at the top of my list here.

I'm in the process of reading Queen Lucia and actually liking its satire. I can see the connection with Emma and the discomfort in reading it, though. It's tough to successfully feature unsympathetic characters in a series. I am looking forward to the battle with Miss Mapp. Someone needs to be able to stand up to Lucia!

It took me a couple of attempts to get into the Lucia books and really enjoy them; you do have to be in the mood for bitchiness and backbiting. If you are, then the books are hilarious.

I have an omnibus edition of the Lucia stories which I read years ago, but haven't been drawn back to re-read. The Emma parallel is perfect!

Because @pgmcc and @MrsLee ganged up on me about something @clamairy was reading, I have spent the past two nights immersed in Wyrd Sisters which is utterly laugh-out-loud delightful. The allusions to Macbeth are fun and I do enjoy some of the lines that go zipping past, such as:

The duke had a mind that ticked like a clock and, like a clock, it regularly went cuckoo.

If you're going rapidly through Pratchett, you might miss bits like that (which would be a shame). I also like Magrat, particularly when she's trying to use magic to break down the wooden door of the dungeon. And the Fool who loves her. I chortled when Granny Weatherwax was arguing with the beasts of the forest who're sitting out there in front of her porch and just staring at her expectantly.

Really good stuff if you like theater and Shakespeare and humor (which in this house we do!)

Jill, I must accept full responsibility for your reading Wyrd Sisters. I would not hear tell of MrsLee taking any of the blame. It would be unfair of me to allow her to take any of the blame.

:P~~~~~~ pgmcc ;)

Glad you are enjoying it, jillmwo!

#57 What? Did I do something wrong? Did I say something wrong? What did I do wrong? What did I say wrong?

;)

Oh dear. I might have to go read this stuff just so I know what Peter is making fun of. It sounds as if that might not be the only reason.

Pratchett is not everyone's cup of tea, and some like/dislike different books in the series. SO it's worth trying one or two to see which one's appeal to you most. Generally the very earliest two or three are poorly regarded. But if you've never read any then you certainly should try them!

Wyrd Sisters is a good starting place, Guards Guards another frequently recommended one. There are a few min-series within the total run of 40? books. There is usually a thread in the All Things Discworldian group about best places to start. I haven't re-read any for a while, but they are old favourites.

Still enjoying Wyrd Sisters but at the moment, I'm gnashing my teeth over stupidity of publishers, cataloging, libraries -- EVERYONE! I thought I had bought two different books by the same author Susan Watkins. One was titled Jane Austen in Style and the other was entitled Jane Austen's Town and Country Style. It turns out that these are the SAME BOOK - same illustrations, same text -- only difference is the paperback vs. hardcover and British publisher (Thames and Hudson, 2nd Edition) and American/Italian publisher (Rizzoli, credits Hugh Palmer as photographer.).

*beating any lurking publishing professional within easy reach about the head and shoulders*

AAAaaarrrgh! Could someone not make a note somewhere to alert unwary Jane-ites? Why is this not compiled into some handy-dandy resource somewhere? Amazon clearly sees these as two separate titles (different reviews associated with each title) so they're utterly clueless.

*Pats Jill on shoulder and offers a nice cup of tea*
I've gotten very careful about checking books like this that are published in both the UK and US--I've have the same thing happen (not specifically with a Jane-ish book, but one about Regency culture), and it's very annoying. Using the "Look inside" feature on Amazon can be helpful.

Or maybe we need to start a thread on this in the Jane Austen group listing these.

I should think it a sufficiently big enough issue to warrant a thread that is not just limited to Jane-ish books. I have come across it, and fallen into the same trap, with books by Jose Saramago, D G Compton, and other authors. In some cases the two editions of the same book with different titles were not from publishers on different sides of the Atlantic Ocean.

Hot Wireless Sets, Aspirin Tablets, The Sandpaper Sides of Used Matchboxes and Something That Might Have Been Castor Oil is the same book as Chronocules.

I think the longer title is much more intriguing.

A while back, I bought the same "Richard Bachman" book under two different titles. I agree, there ought to be some sort of warning. But realistically, unless the duplication was premeditated, only the second release could have a warning. The earlier published version will come out without anticipating a second release later under another name.

Transatlantic book buying used to be ever so much more cumbersome and expensive than it is now. Probably until fairly recently the variant titles didn't much matter because the clientele was different; recall that the first Harry Potter book was retitled for the presumably ignorant, uncultured American audience. Are these older works, jillmwo?

>64 Meredy: Variant titles were probably more of an issue here in Canada, where our books traditionally came from both the US and the UK. I have certain authors whose books I never buy until I check for alternate titles.

65: How do you check for alternate titles?

Now I usually start by looking at LT. I check for disambiguation notices in Common Knowledge, or check the editions link for the book that I'm interested in. For some authors there are official or fan websites which list all their books with different title variations, like this one for Elizabeth Cadell.

Well, I did add the information to the Common Knowledge area for Jane Austen in Style, indicating that Jane Austen's Town and Country Style was the original edition. Heaven knows if it will save anyone else from making the same mistake.

Been reading The Sterling Inheritance for the township book group tomorrow night. Lightweight, but tidily handled. My biggest complaint was that there was an insufficient number of suspects. Not as hard-boiled as one might fear, but nicely done with deft handling of the humor. I believe there are two other books. But nothing really recent from this particular author.

#47 - Did I call him that? LOL I know my daughter considers him one. I have enjoyed what I've read of his books very much, but mostly I love him because he's such a nice normal guy in person. Plus, he remembered us at the Green Dragon so fondly. :o)

#55 - Isn't it a blast? I've been listening to it and trying not to attract too much attention walking outside while listening. I really think I'll have to buy a copy to read as well, though.

Haven't downloaded this yet, but it sounds like a fun idea: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/30564009/ever-jane-the-virtual-world-of-jane... (looking for funding) and from CNET, coverage that explains it: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57610410-1/jane-austen-game-is-a-proper-mmor...

Duty is valued, but gossip will get you every time...

I have stepped slightly away from Jane Austen and have gotten through the first chapter of J.J.Abrams' and Doug Dorst's complex construction, S. or -- as it may otherwise be known -- Ship of Theseus by V.M Straka. The touchstone is wonky so go see the work page here: http://www.librarything.com/work/14246785/book/103516419. It's not your usual novel. There's the story of the printed text, and then there is the story told by the translator, the story as interpreted by the shallow grad student, and finally the annotations of the story by the male, expunged grad student and the soon-to-graduate female college senior. By the end of the first chapter, one can tell that the two annotating the story are flirting but it's not certain that this is going to go well. Because in the background is the story that this trailer hints at (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sgN3zHi6P0). I have a sense that this book will have much in common with J.J. Abrams science fiction television series, Fringe, in that it seems to be telling one story and then you realize at the end of the first season that the story is somehow very very different from the one you thought you were following. He did that in Person of Interest as well. So the challenge here is not that Abrams and Dorst are poor story-tellers but that they absolutely thrive on complexity.

It does however make for marvelous and engaging reading. Of course, you have to figure out *how* to read it. I have chosen to read the printed text first and then go back and read all the annotations (which appear in pencil, in Sharpie pen, in orange, green and blue ink) and scan the included artifacts (telegrams, translated letters, etc.) at the point where encountered (just because that way I can leave them where they were intended to be found). This is why there are publishers of both books and computer software and producers of television who think that story-telling should in some ways include "easter eggs" hidden in the experience.

It will take me a while to get through this I'm afraid if only because I have to read each chapter twice but so far I think this is going to be totally worth it!

71: It sounds to me as if this work fit the term ergodic literature, which (according to Aarseth in Cybertext) is literature that must in some sense be navigated by the reader, who has to figure out how to do that as part of the process of reading the work.

It's definitely in that category, Meredy! It seems to me one could easily speed through just reading the annotations and get a quick sense of where this was going, but then I think you'd miss all the undercurrents suggested by the gothic aspects of the print. And I can't believe one would write a book in the style of the 1940's without it playing a role in how you unpack the author's intent. Like I said, I'm worried it will take me a while to finish it, but I am taken with the approach to the narrative.

Have you read House of Leaves? Is "S" like it?

It sounds like fun, if one has the time to read it properly.

I haven't read House of Leaves, in part because it was published initially when I was too busy to try to read that kind of layered complexity in a novel. The style wouldn't normally attract me, but because of the name recognition held by J.J. Abrams, I thought I would give it a whirl. Based on what I saw on Amazon, however, House of Leaves runs 700+ pages. At that length, I'd be reading it from now until the Apocalypse.

#75 I thought House of Leaves too long for the story it contained. I had at least three bookmarks in operation when I was reading it. While I am glad I have read it and found it interesting I think the fact that I gave it away to a charity shop when I finished it speaks volumes.

I have this one on order, and think I'll try your method of reading it when it arrives.

I'm going to have to treat myself to this!

More on this intriguing book: http://www.fastcocreate.com/3021011/inside-jj-abrams-brain-bending-book-within-a...

I particularly like this quote, "Aside from which kind of copy a person ends up grabbing, though, there are many different ways to read the book. You can read Ship all the way through and then make a second pass to read the margins. You can do a chapter or a page at a time and then go back to catch up. Or you can try to do everything simultaneously, like a human born with an extra set of eyes. Ultimately, every reader has to find the way that works best through trial and error."

For those of you who've gotten used to the idea of reading ebooks, the only ebook version of this title is on iTunes, but for this, I'd really recommend springing for the print copy.

PS Thank heaven for Starbucks' WiFi. My hotel has really crappy wifi and my phone seemed to have trouble operating as a hot spot in my room. So I'm here on Capitol Hill, sitting in the Green Mermaid's Den (right near the Library of Congress and the Folgers Shakespeare Library -- both of which are closed due to Veterans Day). I've verified with some relief that I don't have to do anything in advance of tomorrow, like printout emergency name tags or agendas or some other nonsense task. I just have to show up.

Are you there for a conference? I hope you'll have a chance to visit fun places while you're there.

No fun places for me, Marissa -- just plain old plodding along for work. I'm cheating today and working from home. Some days I get alot done that way and sometimes, like today, I'm not nearly as productive as I ought to be. (Although calling surfing the Web "research" can sometimes cover a multitude of sin...) But I still have to knock out 2000 words.

#70 - Did you download this yet? It looks like fun, but I'm afraid it would take away from my reading time.

@clamairy I haven't downloaded it as yet. Like you, I'm trying to actually *read* but real life keeps interfering. It's exhausting.

Explanatory note: Right now, my life is largely in churn-mode. Every time I think it's going to settle down, some kind of long-term issue arises involving someone else's health (my father), retirement (my boss), general change in status (son graduating w/ Ph.D., unknown new boss, etc.). I haven't even gotten to think about the holidays. Shopping for Christmas? Hah! Surely, you jest.

I have been reading the following but haven't completed any of them:
1. Elantris by Brandon Sanderson
2. Sworn to Silence by Linda Castillo for the township book group discussion
3. God In Concord for the Other Book Group
4. John Mullen's What Matters in Jane Austen about which I will just say that the chapter on the use of names was worth the price of the book.

I am not experiencing the hard times that others are experiencing, but I do feel my own levels of stress and worry and tiredness. Bear with me. Last December I had the time and the wherewithal to do a chapter a night of The Hobbit but I don't think I'll be able to do anything like that again in 2013. (*sigh* *murfle*)

I may need to pick up God in Concord since Walden Pond is about 5 miles north of me. :) I hope life resumes a more even keel for you very, very soon.

So do I, Jill. I miss your posts in here and on Facebook.
May you stay strong, and keep your wits about you through the maelstrom. :o)

Sworn to Silence - Linda Castillo

This was a gruesome read. The key point being made by the author is the contrast between Chief of Detectives Kate Burkholder and Agent John Tomasetti. She killed a man who attacked her as an adolescent (no one knows but it’s a relevant aspect to the crime she’s currently investigating). He came home one night to discover his wife and two daughters dead at the hand of a home invader. (He killed the man.) Both of these people have been motivated to violence for purposes of defense and revenge. How do they come together? The pacing is fast -- roller coaster fast -- and one reader in my book group called the work “mesmerizing but repulsive”. There is torture as well as murder and quite detailed in its description.

Kate grew up as a member of an Amish family but she has removed herself from that life. They don’t speak if the contact can be avoided. She has four policemen in her department and a town council that meddles with irritating frequency.

Not recommended for the faint of heart.

Elantris - Brandon Sanderson

I’m so glad I read The Emperor’s Soul before I read Elantris. I suspect that this one suffers from its length in comparison. It was Sanderson’s debut novel and while it was an interesting read, I didn’t fall in love with it.

I expected to. There is a certain humor to it that I liked. The book starts out great because you meet the hero on the day when he realizes he’s “damned for all time” which is actually a tad inconvenient as the man had other plans. Of course he’s merely transitioned into a different state, albeit one with implications for his father’s throne and the clever princess to whom he was betrothed. We do get other interesting points of view presented as Sanderson tells his story. There is the view of his displaced fiancee (a woman gifted with diplomatic capabilities) and a religious fanatic who is in opposition to both Raoden and Sarene. Hrathen -- as a gyorn -- is part of a religious order that seems a cross of the Knights Templar, Japanese Samurai, and perhaps even the Jedi Order. Sanderson worked some nice twists into the chain of events.

There’s a bit of the old statement “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” by Arthur C. Clarke in this story, but also there’s a bigger problem from my perspective. Some of you may have read the essay by Ursula K. LeGuin entitled “From Elfland to Poughkeepsie” where she critiques those writers of fantasy who provide us with characters whose dialogue may be transmitted into a modern setting without the dialogue requiring any changes. LeGuin notes that if this is the case, then the work is flawed; fantasy *should* transport us to someplace removed from this world. Sanderson does a good job of world-building but the characters sound exactly the way mundane folk would sound in 2009 -- the year Elantris was published.

Perhaps part of my dissatisfaction was that I was hoping I would be carried away by enchantment with Elantris and distracted from real-world events. Instead I never felt entirely immersed or engaged.

#88 - Have you read the group read thread on Elantris? Sanderson participated with us there. It's been so long, I don't remember if the dialogue was mentioned. I remember not loving this book, but being intrigued enough to pick up more of his books, and loving the Mistborn trilogy, along with any others I have read from him. Now I'm interested to know if he has changed the way he writes the dialogue in his later books. I can't say for sure that I ever notice one way or the other.

I just tried to find the group read but was unsuccessful, @MrsLee. I did just want to say, however, that I am not unwilling to read other stuff by Sanderson, just that I wasn't as enchanted by Elantris as I was by The Emperor's Soul. Soul was actually very tightly written and that added to its appeal for me. I felt like Elantris could have used some judicious cutting although I must admit that I'm not quite sure where or what would be cut or condensed.

If you go to the group home page, and click on the link for "Green Dragon Book Discussions" you will find the Elantris thread.

I followed your directions, @MrsLee, and you're right! That was an excellent thread. I liked that he intended Raoden to be an optimist. It was an attractive aspect to the book.

BTW, like so many others in the Dragon this weekend, I was looking at what I read this past year. When I worked it out, it seems I read a lot of material (75+ titles) but to my horror, I also read a lot of light, non-taxing stuff. Stuff that was perfectly legitimate entertainment, but which had surprisingly little staying power. I could post to the Best Non-Fiction Read in 2013 thread, because I really did read some good solid non-fiction. But OMG, there was an awful lot of brain candy in the fiction category... (Leaving aside Jane Austen, Dorothy Sayers, and The Emperor's Soul)

Guess what my resolution for the new year might be? I don't know if it really will be, but I know what it ought to be. (A good friend of mine once scolded me for all of my "oughts"...)

I feel fortunate just to have read through some of the candy I read this year. I think some seasons of life are just like that. My job's mental demands have increased tenfold in the last year and a half, so some nights it's all I can do to crack open a book, and I need the light and airy. What I'm saying is, it is good that you are aware, but don't consume the guilt. :)

What MrsLee said...and it's a pleasure to see you posting more!

I think I enjoyed Elantris more than you did, but have to agree about Sanderson's weakness in his characters' speech. They do sound very like 21st century Americans a lot of the time. Other than that I do really like his books.

jillmwo - Reading another reading thread just reminded me, you might enjoy Lords and Ladies by Terry Pratchett if you haven't already read it. It is loosely based on A Midsummer Night's Dream. It is one of my favorites, although, I tend to say that about a lot of his books. :) Can't remember if it was already recommended to you.

Also, on your Jane Austen trek, have you read anything by Diana Birchall? I have not, but I know her from another group, and she is well-known I believe in the Austen following.

Actually, MrsLee, I have read Diana Birchall's In Defense of Mrs. Elton, which I found on the web some years back. It really was enjoyable.

We just returned from a long trip down to Atlanta to watch our son graduate with his doctorate from Georgia Tech. It was a lovely weekend and it was all about his success and our celebration of his achievement. He's officially smarter than the rest of us.

On the plane trip down and back I read Jane Langton's God in Concord which is a Homer Kelly mystery. Light hearted and rather in the style of Edmund Crispin's mysteries (very convoluted and very humorous in tone). I don't know that I loved it, but I carried and read it in print format on the plane and never touched my Kindle throughout the weekend. Not very challenging and certainly something that one can easily read in close quarters on an airplane.

The first of Jane Langton's Homer Kelly books, The Minuteman Murder (also known as The Transcendental Murder), was a favourite of mine. As I read more in the series, I became increasingly disappointed, and actively disliked a couple of them. I can't remember whether I read God in Concord because they kind of run together for me.

Okay, the question for the day is "If you have to marry one of the two, which one would you find less intolerable? Mr. Collins of Pride & Prejudice? Or Catherine Earnshaw of Wuthering Heights?" No fair picking solely on the basis of gender. All answers must refer to the personality of the individual in the context of the specified title. (So, no references to Pride and Prejudice and Zombies) However in the spirit of the season, I will grant a gift to @pgmcc and say that since he struggled through Jane Eyre in 2013, he may substitute Eliza Reed for Catherine Earnshaw.

Lightness of heart and kind spirits appreciated during this season.

#99 @jillmwo, thank you for the present. To take full advantage of it I will now read Wuthering Heights and Pride & Prejudice. (I know, I can see your rolling your eyes, and smirking.)

By the way, I enjoyed Jane Eyre and did not consider it a struggle. My slow reading may have given a different impression.

Peter

Ugh, I choose the life of a spinster, thank you very much!

#99 & #101 - I'm with MrsLee. I'd rather be lonely than miserable.

Just a quick note to explain my silence these past few days-- we laid my father to rest yesterday. I know the kindness of all of you here and will just say that I know you will understand the nature of the past week. I can tell you that he was a wonderful man who worked hard and loved his family --- one of the things that struck me during the service was the number of people who referenced his humility as well as the great love he had for my mother. I hope you'll also understand that our emotions as a family are somewhat colored by relief. He had developed Altzheimer's in his last years and this is really a blessing of sorts. My mother could not continue as his primary caretaker and that was hurting her. But now is the time when we begin to move forward again.

As you might expect, I didn't have time to read the book that I was supposed to lead a discussion on for our local library. The title was The Savage Garden and for all intents and purposes, I merely skimmed it so that I could claim a very general sense of the book and what it was about. It isn't a bad book and as a mystery, it's got three stories going on that all pertain to uncovering the layers of personal histories that accrue over time and create mysteries within families. The conceit framing this particular mystery involves a 16th century Italian garden of planned grottoes and pools dotted with various sculptures of figures from Greek mythology. Fortunately, none of the other participants tonight (and it was a really small crowd) had much to say about the book, Christmas events having distracted most of them from finishing it. So we just ended up nibbling on sherry cake and chatting together and talking about the roster of books for 2014.

My library is cutting back on the number of meetings of that group; it's so sad. The librarian who has been working as our liaison told me tonight that she would pay the fee for our December meeting in 2014 (rather than the Friends group) so that we will be able to keep the group's momentum. I am flabbergasted at that kindness as it is not necessary. The fee is really minimal; that's not the point. I think she just knows how much these women rely on the group.

*sigh*

More tomorrow as we close out the year. It's not been a bad year, but the year is certainly threaded with changes that will be felt in the coming months.

Oh Jill, I am so sorry.
:o(
Massive hugs to you and yours.

I'm sorry for your loss, Jill, and for the difficult times before. My best wishes to you and your family.

Jill, you know you are in my heart. My daddy had Alzheimer's too, and I missed him for quite a while before he actually died.

My mother is doing very well. She says, "I know where he is, and I know he is safe," and she is content with that.

I can't promise that the pain goes away, but the memories become more and more comforting and the smiles will come easier.

I wish you peace.

Sorry for your loss. Best wishes for the new year.

Jill, I am very sorry to hear your sad news. It is never easy when someone close dies. My thoughts are with you and your family.

Thinking of you and your family Jill. I'm glad that you have so many good memories of him to treasure.

I was so sorry to hear of your loss. My mother died at this time of year several years ago and It is true that the pain eases and good memories remain.

(((((Jill)))))

Very sorry for your loss. May you, you family, and friends help each other heal.

Sorry to hear of your loss.

Jill, sorry to hear of your loss.

I'm never sure of the right thing to say because sometimes death can be, as you say, both a chance for a new beginning and the opportunity to celebrate having had someone wonderful in your life, as well as a time to grieve. My best wishes to you and your family.

You are all very kind. Thank you.

One last review before moving on to the new reading year (and new reading thread...note to self: Try to come up with something clever this year as a title for the thread. Maybe a theme?)

S. By J.J. Abrams and Doug Dorst

(The various paragraphs of this review were written across a number of weeks. Thus, they may seem somewhat contradictory. But I really think the purchase of this one was money well spent)

The novel is about the art of creation of a text, of building understanding (so in some ways about literary criticism) and scholarship. How do we tell a story and what is the primary experience of that text? Knowing that the way we read a story differs, that the story I read and experience is not the story that another reader finds. I happen to think that S. is a marvellously multi-layered work, with something in common with J.J. Abrams’ creations in Lost and Fringe. You have to think as you pore over the text and examine the artifacts tucked within its pages with S. It’s not a light read; I can’t fathom how some folks are claiming they got through it in just two or three days. It’s taken me two months!

You have to pick which narrative you’re following -- that of the fictional hero, S. -- published as the 1949 novel, Ship of Theseus -- or that of the two young people writing in the margins of that printed text. Jen and Eric are not even really interested in the text surrounding S. They’re interested in the author, V.M. Straka, surrounding whom there is something of a mystery, just as there is a mystery surrounding S, an amnesiac who knows little of his own story. (Can you say thematic parallel? I knew you could.) To say more might spoil it, but as I read the book, I realized how much of it seems to relate to other reading this year -- literary biography, scholarship, creation of a mythos, creation of a soul. It’s all in there.

Note: The chapters themselves are LONG. There are only ten chapters but each might constitute a full evening’s read.

I am loving the experience of the physical bits of supplementary material tucked inside the heavy volume itself, including the very long legal size sheet of paper included in one section that fleshes out the story of one of the two young people. It looks just like something I’d stick inside a book to prompt a memory or to keep it close to hand, thereby creating an illusion of reality and fostering a sense of immersion. Postcards, notecards, dinner napkins, yellow legal sheets, a photograph. (When I think what the production process for this book must have involved, it boggles my mind.)

This really is about the mystery of constructing an identity (as accomplished through the act of writing.) An identity for the self, an identity for the public, an identity that can survive the fog created by passage of time. There is the story (told somewhat in code) that we choose to tell others and there are the more honest accounts that we save up to tell only those we trust.

Think about the process of creating a narrative and the reading of that narrative (as it differs from reader to reader) as you move through this one.

Edited to add: Oh, and I figured out the whole compass/wheel thingie that got included as one of the physical artifacts. It's an encouragement to the reader to go out and navigate his or her own discovery of identity (and potentially, love). That is, IMHO.

Worthwhile read but bear in mind that the narrative can upon occasion be bewildering. One really does have to pay attention while reading.

Jill, you are in my thoughts. Wishing you strength and peace for the new year...and many, many good books.

My sympathies, Jill. Losing my father was very hard. It's been 30 years and I still miss him. But it does get easier. Give yourself all the time you need.

Love to you, Jill.

I am looking forward to your reading thread in 2014. I love especially when you discuss a book I have read, because you make my brain light up with new thoughts, or illustrate thoughts or feelings I had but was not able to articulate.

Jill, I'm sorry to hear about your loss.