Jane Austen: Then and Now

In the film’s adaptation of Mansfield Park, Fanny’s brother William is eliminated from this version. While he is an integral part of the novel and very crucial to Fanny as a friend and confidant, his absence from the film does not take away from the overall significance of the novel.

The film, however gives Fanny strengths in other ways. In lieu of a brother Fanny is more willing to question the actions of others. She reminds Sir Thomas that had he brought slaves from Antigua that they would no longer be in bondage. And there is defiance in Fanny reply when she returns from Portsmouth and Mrs. Norris asks her how long she is to be at Mansfield Park and Fanny redirects the question back to Mrs. Norris.

Fanny’s only friend (William) other than Edmund seems to be represented as personal strength in Fanny rather than a separate individual.

After watching the film, you’ll know that there are several ways in which this adaptation departs from Austen’s novel. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, of course! Adaptations needn’t always be entirely faithful to be good or to be interesting or to be worthy of analysis. We should think of any adaptation as an interpretation of its source text, an argument about what’s important and how the source text creates meaning. That said, we needn’t agree with every interpretation, either!

In a comment to this post, discuss one decision made by the creators of this film that you find particularly worthy of analysis. First, explain what the decision is and (more importantly) how it interprets the novel (for example: does it turn a verbal pattern in the novel into something visual? does it highlight a certain theme? does it make explicit something that is only implicit in the novel? etc.). Then, say a bit about what you think about this decision. Is it a solid interpretation of the novel? Is it an interesting (but ultimately failed) departure? Does it miss something crucial in the novel? Does it deepen your appreciation of that aspect of the novel? You can be honest here, but the important part is to explain why you think the decision works or doesn’t work (or something in between).

If, like me, you like the tv show Parks and Recreation, which ended last night, you might want to treat yo self to this Parks & Rec/Pride & Prejudice mashup.

Here’s a short (but scandalous!) piece in today’s New York Times about some newly-discovered Austen family letters.

Are those “pickles” really “pickles”?

And, if you’d like to learn more, a quick overview of Austen’s brothers.

Austen’s all over the internet, but I thought you might find these recent items interesting.

First, a piece in the Guardian about a collection of Austen family letters:

Jane Austen family letters offer ‘deeply personal’ insight into author’s world

And, on a much lighter note, an imagined series of text conversations with one of Austen’s most loathsome characters (whom you’re just getting to know!): Fanny Dashwood.

Texts from Fanny Dashwood

Fanny Dashwood is not amused.

This site will primarily serve as a repository for readings, handouts, and any other little bits of paper that might be kept conveniently in one place. But it’s also a handy way for us to share links to Austeniana, including film clips, merchandise, and other kinds of adaptation. You’ll have author privileges that will allow you to make new posts; please feel free to do so at any time!

As always, if you have questions, don’t hesitate to contact me.