I read the Brontë last about 20 years ago and barely remember anything of the story - just my strong urge to reach into the book and slap most of the characters around the head a couple of times. It might be time to re-read it, seeing as I've just worked my way through all the Austens these last ten days. I was most amused how much more my enjoyment was heightened because of the vast background panorama the Pat O'Brien novels had given her two inches of ivory. Things that before didn't mean much to me had sudden and unexpected depth. When John Dashwood goes on about having had so much expense and stress with the inclosure of a common, I found myself muttering 'you swine'.
Ah, I didn't put that very well - I was re-reading the Austen, too. I first read her novels in my teens, have re-read them regularly since, and I have always liked her more than Brontë. I love her sense of the absurd. I also think that there is a lot more darkness and despair in the books than all the talk of sprigged muslin might suggest to some movie makers.
Comments 3
It might be time to re-read it, seeing as I've just worked my way through all the Austens these last ten days. I was most amused how much more my enjoyment was heightened because of the vast background panorama the Pat O'Brien novels had given her two inches of ivory. Things that before didn't mean much to me had sudden and unexpected depth. When John Dashwood goes on about having had so much expense and stress with the inclosure of a common, I found myself muttering 'you swine'.
I also want to spell ankle 'ancle'.
Reply
Yes, this precisely! It's hard not to reflect, too, that Austen is, as you're discovering, considerably richer than Brontë.
Reply
I love her sense of the absurd. I also think that there is a lot more darkness and despair in the books than all the talk of sprigged muslin might suggest to some movie makers.
Reply
Leave a comment