Pemberley: Or Pride and Prejudice Continued

If my disastrous experiences reading Joan Aiken's "sequels" to Jane Austen (Eliza's Daughter and Jane Fairfax) weren't enough to convince me that this type of undertaking is generally ill-advised, then Emma Tennant's atrociously written Pemberley did the trick...

Ostensibly a sequel to Austen's beloved Pride and Prejudice, Tennant's narrative of the beginning of Mr. and Mrs. Darcy's marriage strains my ability to suspend disbelief to the breaking point. How is it possible that Darcy has returned to being the cold, distant ass? Wasn't his transformation into a more humane person one of the major themes of the original? And when did Elizabeth Bennett change from a confident young woman, willing to speak her mind to the insufferable Lady show more Catherine de Bourgh, to the cowed, insecure woman we see here?

If you love Jane Austen, value good writing, or simply don't like to have your time wasted, I would advise you to steer clear of Pemberley. I myself regret that I invested the time in reading it, and wouldn't want my fellow readers to make the same mistake. Jane Austen is dead ladies, and no amount of wishful thinking is going to expand her oeuvre.

Addendum: I am simply aghast to learn that Ms. Tennant, in addition to butchering the wonderful Pride and Prejudice, has also turned her dubious talents to the task of rewriting Jane Eyre. Now that is just wrong! show less

Um, how about shockingly bad? For a start? Sigh. Three hours of my life I won’t get back; that’s for damn sure.

This horrid sequel to Pride and Prejudice can only claim to be the sequel if Elizabeth Bennet was destined to turn into the ridiculous, fluttering creature that is her mother. I never thought of her as a jump-to- conclusions kind of girl in the real story–over-eager to believe the worst in someone, if it suits her, sure. But insipid, guarded, able to hold her tongue when she shouldn’t. No. I kept waiting for her to shout out “My poor nerves!”

The entire story is inconsistent. The plot line moves along in fits and starts, magically advancing many days and significant events in the space of a page, while dawdling show more horribly several pages to represent the space of a few hours. There are a few additional characters that Ms. Tennant adds here, but that are all abysmal.

Ridiculous. That’s the sum. Don’t read it. Don’t buy it. And don’t borrow it from your library. Resist the temptation, no matter how much of a Pride and Prejudice geek you are. This can only grossly disappoint. The review snippets giving it a rave on Amazon must be for some other book. Oh, and don’t be deceived, Ms. Tennant published this story previously under the name: Pemberley: A sequel to Pride and Prejudice. Eschew them both! show less

(This review was written before I knew much about Austen, England, or the Regency era's customs, etc. Take it with a grain of salt...)

July 2008: This story seemed true to the original and the language compared well. The only part that frustrated me was the last two pages when everything just suddenly fell into place in a matter of sentences. I understand that this is a common style but it irritates me nonetheless. I figure, if the author spent 170 pages developing a story, then why conclude it in just a short paragraph or two with everything magically working out and falling right into place?

The sequel to Pride and Prejudice, the ultimate what happened next. I saw this in Oxfam, and my curiosity was piqued, how did Tennant see the story continuing?

The book starts a couple of years after the wedding, Mrs. Darcy is still not a mother and her family are descending for Christmas. It would appear that neither Lizzie or Darcy have learnt their lesson, keeping secrets from one another, allowing doubts to creep into their marriage.

This is no happy-ever-after book, but an enjoyable read of what might have been.

The end felt a little too abrupt. Tennant had kept more or less to the same style as the original. Most of the characters too followed a similar arc - I found Mrs. Bennet as annoying as before! Kitty and Mary had a little more to say which was a good thing. Elizabeth seemed rather too anxious. Maybe all that misunderstanding was because of the strict rules of Victorian behaviour??? An entertaining read nevertheless.

Emma Tennant���s language in (one) Pemberley does not suck for a sequel, but she seems not to have read the original text. Elizabeth and Darcy have been married for just under a year, but Jane and Bingley���s older child is already running about and Jane is close to the due date of her second, and the Wickhams have four children under the age of four. The Wickhams ��� Lydia, four children, and George himself ��� are admitted to Pemberley. In this one, therefore, I enjoyed the ignorance of its source.

Sequel to Jane Austen's 'Pride and Prejudice'. Good voices for some of the characters, but inconsistent timeline, rambling plotting, and too-fast conclusion.