“The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid.”
I can't believe I almost DNF'd this.
“The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid.”
I won't lie, the beginning was so insufferably boring that I almost DNF'd at page 30. But as I kept pushing through, I had a blast. This is only my second novel by Austen following Pride & Prejudice. I disliked her writing so much when I had to read that book for required school reading. So much of Austen's satire just flew over my head back then. Now, I've have come to realize that her satire is one of the many things that makes her books fun. Her writing is just so sophisticatedly humorous.
“Her father was a clergyman, without being neglected, or poor, and a very respectable man, though his name was Richard—”
I've only read two of her books, but I have been told all of her novels follow a common theme: going to other people's houses, dialogue, and balls. This story follows Catherine, a very naïve young woman who is ignorant to so many things. The entire novel runs on Catherine's ignorance and naïveté. And Austen writes this in such a fun way.
Catherine is well-read and is in love with reading books, but unfortunately this gives her a bad tendency to view the world around her the same way she views her favorite gothic novels. Thus causing her to overdramatize the happenings around her. And her own naïveté causes her to view the intentions of others through her own innocent eyes and not theirs. The love interest in this novel, Henry Tilney, explains this perfectly:
“Well, then, I only meant that your attributing my brother's wish of dancing with Miss Thorpe to good nature alone convinced me of your being superior in good nature yourself to all the rest of the world.”
And of course her sincere outlook on the world causes her to become oblivious of other people's intentions towards her. This contrast between Catherine's innocence and Henry's more realistic view of the world makes the dialogue between the two entertaining. Catherine's obliviousness to everything is all the more satisfying as she slowly starts to realize the world isn't really what she thought it to be. She may not be the smartest in the room, and she may not be the wealthiest, but she's definitely the most adventurous. And while Henry sees that she is a little incognizant, he is still captivated by Catherine's personal interests.
During the era in which Austin wrote this novel, reading fictional novels for pleasure was looked down upon. It was seen as something only women (and the poor) have time to do. Catherine assumes Henry does not read for pleasure since not only is he a man, but financially out of her league. She tells him just as much – "they are not clever enough for you – gentlemen read better books."
While not as extreme, this bias still exists today. I see it a lot in critic reviews for romance or soft sci-fi / fantasy – that this is the kind of stuff created for women, backhandedly implying it is somehow lesser.
And of course Henry, our magnificent icon, dismisses this by replying –
“The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid.”
He goes on to show off that he is also great at selecting women's clothing, and enjoys reading literary works, even ones written by women. He is straightforward, and isn't embarrassed to make his interests publicly known, no matter how much society tries to indicate its "for women".
Austen was a woman born in the wrong century. Its a shame how her novels didn't do too well when she was alive. If only she could see how successful her work eventually became.
I just wanted more of the freaky monster than Dr. Idiot Frankenstein himself.
“If I cannot inspire love, I will cause fear!”
Let me start ofI just wanted more of the freaky monster than Dr. Idiot Frankenstein himself.
“If I cannot inspire love, I will cause fear!”
Let me start of by saying that I, like many people, didn't realize that Frankenstein was not the name of the monster, but the name of the man who created him. I am choosing to blame the movies instead of realizing I may have just been very stupid.
So many people pitch this as your classic horror story and I am not quite sure why. And even though I went into this book thinking that's what it was, it was not the reason I found it difficult to enjoy. Ultimately, this is a sad tale of a "monster" who was a product of human creation that was neglected and left to fend for himself against the world. Sounds interesting.
“Nothing is so painful to the human mind as a great and sudden change.”
After Frankenstein creates this monster, he immediately regrets it and takes no responsibility of caring for it whatsoever. So naturally the monster, having the mind of a baby, runs away and freaks out because he doesn't know anything. Peoples fear of him because of the way he looks causes him to be more frightened. He starts to understand that humans are no where near accepting of him, so he tries to steer clear of them. He is cold and hungry, and eventually hides himself in a hovel near the cottage of a very poor but loving family.
Now, I absolutely love books with character study. Especially study of humans. And my favorite part about this book is how the monster closely studies the human family whose hovel he is staying in. And while this is my favorite part of the book, I also felt it wasn't enough.
Victor Frankenstein is ultimately one of the most boring main characters. Not just boring, but ironically real fucking stupid considering he somehow managed to be intelligent enough to create life with his own hands. I know that maybe he was intended to be this way. But I don't think anything about him and his life was interesting after having created the monster to warrant telling the rest of the story. Why was this story written from his point of view, and not the monster's? I don't care about how he misses Elizabeth. I don't care about how much he loves to travel. I don't want to read pages and pages of how beautiful Victor thinks the scenery is.
What I wanted was to be inside the monster's mind. I want to read how fearful he was of humans, but also of how much he wanted to be accepted by them. I wanted to read his thought process from the moment he was created and how he managed to get on with his life since then. Again, he has the mind of innocent baby. He is pushed out into a world he knows nothing about. He is absolutely terrified, but also longs for love. I truly believe all this would've been better conveyed from the POV of the monster. Instead, all of this is quickly verbalized to Victor in a measly few chapters. What was so important about Victor that we had to follow him around instead?
Being inside the monster's head would have made for a much more interesting tale. The monster has more depth than the idiot who consistently makes stupid decision after stupid decision.
I wish I had loved this more. I can see the meaningful messages between the lines. And I loved Shelly's writing style. Lot's of quotable lines. But the way of story telling was not for me....more
This book really hits different when you learn about Oscar Wilde's life. You start to feel that this story might have been very personal to him. A timThis book really hits different when you learn about Oscar Wilde's life. You start to feel that this story might have been very personal to him. A timeless classic about what vanity can get you. This is a story that will stick with you forever.
“You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Not quite sure how a very modern and Westernized woman like me could do the justice of writing a modern review for this fabulous 200+ year-old novel. Not quite sure how a very modern and Westernized woman like me could do the justice of writing a modern review for this fabulous 200+ year-old novel. What can I say? This is my first time reading an Austen novel, and the first thing that comes to mind about the writing is that it is very densely formal. I'm not exactly sure how people talked in the 1800s, but I LOVED the dialogue in this novel.
I officially broke my Jane Austen virginity, and reading such a humorous book is not what I expected. Who knew Jane Austen could be so comical in her writing? Having read nothing of hers previously, laughing was definitely not something I expected to do. I anticipated a whole lot of heartache and tears considering how Pride and Prejudice is known to be one of the best romance novels of all time. I loved that I got a dramatically comedic book with some swoon-worthy romance.
Halfway through the book I thought to myself how I was basically reading a novel about a mother desperately trying to get her five daughters married off to socially respectable men. Then I realized it is a story about the Bennett sisters facing the world of love and friendship in a time where social standards were considered to be everything. It was not at all easy to say "fuck it, screw what everyone else thinks" back in the 1800s. Anything that you do will have an immediate effect on your whole family.
Every character in this book is so dramatic. From the Bennett family, to that douche Wickham, and especially the cray cray that was Mr. Collins. Though most of the book takes place during times when Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth were separated, it made those few moments they were together so intense. They don't even get close to hugging in this book, yet still I found the romance to be so tense.
I definitely want to pick up another Austen novel. If they're anywhere near as funny as this, then I'll definitely be sticking my face in it. If anyone has a favorite Austen novel they prefer over this one, please let me know, and I'll be sure to add it to my TBR and check it out as soon as I can! As for now, I have the BBC TV series adaption of this novel waiting for me!...more
Loading...
