oureternity
Collection of short stories bought by Random House
bam.
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by oureternity on Sept 28, 2007 1:56:51 GMT -5
Well there are already many threads about books and all - and I thought it would be fun discussing about the writers for a change. I've noticed some names come up on the forum of all kind of famous writers, who happen to have/had an interesting life. I think it's an interesting matter of discussion due to the simple fact that most writers (the good ones especially) write expressing their own feelings, adventures and opinions. Or, you could talk about what influences them. So if there's a writer you like in particular and would like to start discussing about knock yourself out. (P.S thanks Jefie I'll start - Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice - Do you know what encouraged Austen to create a character like Mr. Darcy? Austen was never married, but she did flirt (Yep, she was a naughty girl!) with a guy called Tom Lefroy, she also wrote two letters to her sister Cassandra mentioning him. This is the second one: "Friday. -- At length the day is come on which I am to flirt my last with Tom Lefroy, and when you receive this it will be over. My tears flow as I write at the melancholy idea".Even though her affair with him didn't last long - most people are convinced that when she created the character Mr. Darcy she had him in mind.
|
|
Isa
Administrator
Posts: 6,995
|
Post by Isa on Sept 28, 2007 7:51:34 GMT -5
That could very well be - when I get home tonight I'm gonna want to read my Austen biography again! If I'm not mistaken she wrote that letter in 1796, the same year she started working on P&P. She was quite romantic as a young woman - I remember reading somewhere that she thought the whole "illegitimate son" idea was incredibly romantic and that's why Mr. Darcy's first name is Fitzwilliam, because "Fitz" was usually given to the illegitimate children of kings and princes. So it would make sense that she would base this character on a man she had a crush on
|
|
oureternity
Collection of short stories bought by Random House
bam.
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by oureternity on Sept 28, 2007 8:00:28 GMT -5
Well in her short life she wasn't involved with many men - if I'm not mistaken this one guy she mentioned in her letters to her sister was the only one, but then again I might be wrong. It's only an assumption though, I don't think she actually ever mentioned basing Mr. Darcy's character on him. It makes sense though, since she had to have a source, and other than her involvment with this guy I can't think of any other source (Except for books she read).
P.S: Do you know why she ended her affair with Lefroy?
|
|
jobean
First novel published
Posts: 2,479
|
Post by jobean on Sept 28, 2007 8:03:29 GMT -5
I'm sure you all know this, but Rowling based Professor Lockhart on a pompous man she knew herself.
|
|
Isa
Administrator
Posts: 6,995
|
Post by Isa on Sept 28, 2007 8:13:38 GMT -5
I don't think it ever became a serious relationship - they flirted a bit, but at that time Lefroy couldn't afford to get married (he later became fairly wealthy, oh the irony!) and as we know, that was often more important than love itself back then. No wonder this theme comes up in all her novels! As for being with other men, she did get engaged to a Harris Bigg-Wither in 1802. He was a wealthy man, but she did not love him, and she ended up breaking up the engagement after less than 48 hours. Jane, like Elizabeth Bingley, was not one to marry without love!
|
|
Michelle
First novel published
Posts: 2,563
|
Post by Michelle on Sept 28, 2007 8:35:10 GMT -5
Jane, like Elizabeth Bingley, was not one to marry without love! Did you mean to say Elizabeth Bennet?
|
|
oureternity
Collection of short stories bought by Random House
bam.
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by oureternity on Sept 28, 2007 8:42:02 GMT -5
I see what you mean! Wow I never thought about it that way. Well due to the fact that P&P was written during the late 18th century, at this time in England women were in a very different position. Like you said - they married wealthy men, and despite Austen's negativity for a loveless marriage I think that in some aspects you can see that she wrote what's typical for that period in England. Other than love - money, beauty (both inside and out), social status and such were to be considered too.
|
|
oureternity
Collection of short stories bought by Random House
bam.
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by oureternity on Sept 28, 2007 8:42:51 GMT -5
Jane, like Elizabeth Bingley, was not one to marry without love! Did you mean to say Elizabeth Bennet? I was thinking about the same thing.
|
|
Isa
Administrator
Posts: 6,995
|
Post by Isa on Sept 28, 2007 8:51:11 GMT -5
Did you mean to say Elizabeth Bennet? I was thinking about the same thing. lol, yes I did! Hmmm, what a weird Freudian slip!
|
|
Isa
Administrator
Posts: 6,995
|
Post by Isa on Sept 28, 2007 8:57:06 GMT -5
I see what you mean! Wow I never thought about it that way. Well due to the fact that P&P was written during the late 18th century, at this time in England women were in a very different position. Like you said - they married wealthy men, and despite Austen's negativity for a loveless marriage I think that in some aspects you can see that she wrote what's typical for that period in England. Other than love - money, beauty (both inside and out), social status and such were to be considered too. I think that's part of the reason why Austen's novels are so popular with scholars all over the world, because they offer a pretty accurate record of what life was like for middle-class people during the Regency era. After all, Austen wrote about what she knew of - she never travelled much and didn't lead an eccentric life, so she simply wrote about her own little world. And she did so incredibly well!
|
|
oureternity
Collection of short stories bought by Random House
bam.
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by oureternity on Sept 28, 2007 13:52:34 GMT -5
It's weird how things change so much though. For example Little Women, I had no idea it took place in the US - I was sure the novel took place in England until Alcott mentioned they were American (Especially because of the way they spoke and dressed). But maybe the language and all was different because it was in Boston (if I'm not mistaken), and the English they're speaking there is different.
|
|
Isa
Administrator
Posts: 6,995
|
Post by Isa on Sept 28, 2007 14:43:44 GMT -5
It's probably because of the time period because people in Boston don't really speak a different English nowadays (though some of them have a funky East Coast accent!). I guess at the time Little Women was written, it hadn't been that long since people had left England to live in America, and the language and traditions still hadn't changed much. Funny though how after a while, you get so used to reading 19th century novels that you don't even raise an eyebrow when you see words like "barouche" and "whist"
|
|
oureternity
Collection of short stories bought by Random House
bam.
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by oureternity on Sept 28, 2007 14:57:18 GMT -5
Hahaha, yep! When I got started with these kind of books (19th century-ish) I remember when I first read the words "gay friends" or "gay parties" I laughed so bad! Haha, now I just got used to it!
And that reminds me that I have this English teacher from Boston and she speaks in a funny way - now I know why! She doesn't pronounce all kind of letters, lol.
|
|
Kristie
Novel turned into BBC miniseries
"If a book is well written, I always find it too short."
Posts: 7,214
|
Post by Kristie on Sept 28, 2007 15:13:01 GMT -5
I love all this talk of Austen As for one of the most recent comments, I love how, when I'm really into the reading, I start to use old English words. I don't use baroche and whist, but just the style I sometimes start to use. When I started reading Austen I would write down words I didn't know and they were long. But I stopped after awhile By the way, I'll never remember what's so special about the types of carriages Austen writes about. I looked them up in the dictionary, all the different kinds mentioned, but I can't remember what exactly they are, just that some are very nice.
Anyways, to comment on what you were really talking about Austen, I do think it's amazing how she tied in the real life of her time along with making the readers understand that some people really would've preferred to marry for love but just couldn't. So, at the same time she represents historic fact (to an extent) and also the way she wished it would've been different.
|
|
oureternity
Collection of short stories bought by Random House
bam.
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by oureternity on Sept 28, 2007 16:44:07 GMT -5
Yep it takes some time to adjust to the language. Although that's what I like the most about these books. It's like a runaway for me. When I read these novels I actually feel what it was like for them so long ago. It was much more - rustic? haha, I suppose you could call it that. Another thing - concerning Louisa May Alcott, Jane Austen and all the writers of the past centuries that strucks me, is the innocence. Things today are being taken either for granted or too seriously, today's affairs are nothing like it used to be, today's discpline is nothing like it used to be - it was much more... inoccent. That's probably the most suitable word to describe it. So it's actually letting you take a deeper look into what it was like back then.
|
|