Page 107 of 153« First~~51015~~103104105106107108109110111112~~120125130~~Last »

Austen Actors with April Birthdays

Published April 11, 2011 | By Regina Jeffers

With the April version of Austen Actors, I thought we might need to play “Six Degrees of Separation” because of the numerous connections. Many in this month’s display, for example, have been in movies with Colin Firth: Anna Chancellor, Renée Zellweger, Emma Thompson, and Susannah Harker. With Ms. Harker, both she and her mother portrayed the part of “Jane Bennet.” Susannah played the role in 1995, and her mother, Polly Adams, in 1967, while her father was Colonel Brandon in 1971′s Sense and Sensibility.
One of our oldest film versions – the 1938 TV adaptation of Pride and Prejudice – gives us Andrew Osborn’s Mr. Darcy. From Pride and Prejudice 1995, we have Anna Chancellor and Susannah Harker; from Lost in Austen, we find Tom Riley and Michelle Duncan. Both Michelle and James McAvoy were in Atonement, with Keira Knightley, who was in Pride and Prejudice 2005 with Rosamund Pike, who recently starred with Sally Hawkins in Made in Dagenham. Emma Thompson worked with Alan Rickman and Hugh Grant in Love Actually, along with Keira and Colin; and, of course, she is married to the dashing “Mr. Willoughby,” Greg Wise. Etc., etc., etc.

So, sit back and enjoy this month’s look at some of our favorite Austen-related actors.

Posted in Actors & Actresses, Austen Authors, Video

Sharon’s release day Winners

Published April 11, 2011 | By Sharon Lathan

Sorry for being a couple days later than I planned for announcing the winners of a signed copy of The Trouble With Mr. Darcy. Life was exceptionally busy this weekend, in a good way. A special, heartfelt thanks to all who celebrated my latest novel with me here on Austen Authors. It was marvelous fun! I already look forward to November when we can do it again.

Now, without further ado, here are the two names selected by random.org –

Sandy H
Vee

Congratulations ladies! Email me at:  sharon@austenauthors.com  with your snail mail address and I will get the book out to you ASAP!
Posted in Austen Authors, Giveaways/Contests

Is this a portrait of the Austen Family in 1781? Jane Odiwe

Published April 9, 2011 | By Jane Odiwe
Recently, the owner of the ‘Rice’ portrait, Mrs. Henry Rice, and her brother, Mr. Robin Roberts contacted me to ask my opinion on a little painting they’d found in an old Christie’s catalogue. I’ve written about this before on my blog, but we’re trying to trace the whereabouts of the painting, and if anyone can help, we’d be delighted!
Is this a portrait of the Austen Family?

Whilst conducting research into the ‘Rice’ portrait, Mr. Robin Roberts discovered this very interesting picture, which seems to have gone unnoticed in a Christie’s catalogue. The sale of the property of Mrs. Robert Tritton took place at Godmersham Park, Kent, between Monday, June 6th and Thursday, June 9th, 1983. Elsie Tritton and her husband had bought the estate in 1936, and the catalogue notes how she and her husband had lovingly rescued the house, and how Elsie, a New Yorker by birth, wished that after her death, their wonderful collection of furniture and clocks, English Conversation Pieces, objets d’art and textiles should be available for others to buy for their own collections. This is a fascinating catalogue to see, and I think the fact that the painting came out of the sale of Godmersham Park is most exciting! Click on the pictures to see a larger image.

The painting is described in the catalogue as belonging to the English School, circa 1780, pen, and black ink and watercolour, measuring 15½ by 19½ inches. It depicts a family sitting round a table, the adults at opposite ends, with four children beyond.

I think what’s so interesting about the picture is that the more you study it; the more the details become fascinating. It appears to be a wonderful allegorical puzzle, full of the humour and charade that the Austen family loved, reflecting so much of what we know about their family history, and finances, with all the literary symbolism they would have enjoyed so much. There are some significant allusions connected with the Austen family, and I am thrilled to share Mr. Roberts’ thoughts and discoveries with you.
Silhouette to commemorate Edward Austen’s adoption 
He wonders if it could possibly be a work by Ozias Humphry painted to commemorate the adoption of Edward Austen by the Knight family who were childless relatives, and executed at a similar date as the commemorative silhouette.
What could be the monogram symbols of Ozias Humphry appear to be scattered in several places about the painting, on the figures, in a curlicue above the mantelpiece, and there is a possible signature in the right hand corner, though it is difficult to be certain without seeing the original, and unfortunately, it is impossible to show all the small details on a blog.


If we assume that this is a painting of the Austen family, the central figure shows a young boy who is most likely to be Edward Austen. The family all have their attention turned towards him, and more importantly, their eyes are concentrated on the bunch of grapes, which he holds high up in the air, as if being presented to the viewer. You can almost hear him say, “Look at me, am I not the most fortunate boy in the world? Look what I have!”
Surely the grapes represent the good fortune and wealth that Edward is about to inherit, and the whole family who look as pleased as punch are celebrating with him.
The horseshoe nail at Edward’s feet
As we observe the painting, the small girl with round cheeks to the left of Edward must be Jane Austen herself! This is also one of the most significant parts to the puzzle. Mr. Roberts wonders if she could possibly be clutching what could be a horseshoe nail in her hand, which she points towards Edward, her arm held high in the same way as he holds his grapes aloft. This is where it gets most exciting, and where another connection to Edward Austen is made. On the painting of Edward Austen at Chawton House, there is most distinctly, a horseshoe nail on the ground pointing towards Edward’s feet. Mr. Roberts tells me that this little nail is a symbol, an allusion to the fact that the Knights adopted him, as well as an indication of his good fortune. Most interestingly, Jane makes reference to the horseshoe nail in a letter dated Tuesday, 9th February, 1813. She is talking about Miss Clewes, a new governess that Edward has engaged to look after his children.

Miss Clewes seems the very Governess they have been looking for these ten years; – longer coming than J. Bond’s last Shock of Corn. – If she will but only keep Good and Amiable and Perfect!  Clewes & (sic) is better than Clowes. And is it not a name for Edward to pun on? – is not a Clew a nail?

Jane was punning on the word clew (or clue) and the Old French word, clou (de girofle), which in its turn was derived from the Latin, clavus, meaning nail (of the clove tree). The dried flower bud of the clove tree resembles a small nail or tack. Of course, it was a name for Edward to pun on because of his own associations with a small horseshoe nail. 
Painting from the Christie’s catalogue of the Godmersham Sale
Now we turn to the gentleman on the left of the painting who is dressed exactly as Mr. Austen in the silhouette attributed to Wellings of Edward’s presentation to the Knight family. He is seated, hands clasped together as though offering up a grateful prayer for their good fortune. Within his grasp it appears he is holding a prayer book, or missal, the silk ribbon of which is draped over his fingers, an indication perhaps of his status as rector, and a man of the cloth. Interestingly, he is the only figure whose eyes are not concentrated on the bunch of grapes, but perhaps this is to indicate he is more concerned with offering grateful thanks in his role of clergyman.

In between Mr. Austen and Jane is Cassandra who rests her hand protectively on her sister’s shoulder, whilst also providing an excellent compositional device leading the eye along through to Jane’s arm to the tip of the Golden Triangle where the bunch of grapes are suspended. The painting follows the traditional composition based on a triangle for optimum placing of the main interest of the work. I also think it interesting to note that the girls’ dresses are of the simple muslin type usually worn by children at this time. Mostly white, they were worn with a ribbon sash, at waist height or higher as in Jane’s case.

On the other side of Edward, it is thought this child most likely to be Francis. James would have been at school at this time, and Henry could also have been away. Charles was too young to be depicted, and would still have been lodged with the family who looked after the infant Austens, as was the custom.

To the far right, as we look at the painting is the formidable figure of Mrs. Austen dressed for the occasion with a string of pearls and a ribbon choker around her neck, complete with more than one ‘feather in her cap’, which must represent her pride and pleasure at the whole event, and by extension, the symbols of nobility and glory. She is further emphasizing Edward’s importance by pointing in his direction, and I think it would be hard to imagine a more pleased mama, in her elegant air, and her smile.

On the table is a further connection with Mrs. Austen. The pineapple, a prized fruit, representing health and prosperity, was first introduced to England in 1772, and the Duke of Chandos, Mrs. Austen’s great uncle, was famous for growing them. The symbolism of the pineapple represents many things, not least the rank of the hostess, but was also associated with hospitality, good cheer, and family affection.
Other dishes of food illustrate further abundance, wealth, and the spiritual associations of Christian values. There is bread and wine on the table: Christian symbols, which represent not only life, and the Communion, but also show there is cause for thankfulness and celebration. The glasses are not yet filled, but there are glasses placed before the adults for a toast. Nearest to us in the foreground, there is another fruitful dish, perhaps plum pudding, representing not only the wealth to come, but also a plentiful future. Placed before Edward, another dish, which also appears to suggest the image of a spaniel dog, may be an allusion to Edward’s love of hunting.

The background to the painting holds its own clues. It’s been suggested that the painting above the mantelpiece could be Zeus abducting Ganymede to the Gods, another reference to the luck of young Edward who has been adopted by the Knight family, and on the opposite wall, could this be a reference to the miniature portrait of George Austen, the handsome proctor, even if this appears to be a larger portrait? In the carpet, the patterns suggest the date may again be replicated, and also an M to symbolize the fact that the couple in the painting are married. Above the looking glass is a crest with what appears to be the date. It would be lovely to have a look at the original to see everything in more detail!

Unfortunately, there appears to be no record of the sale of the painting, and I know that Mr. Roberts, and his sister, Mrs. Henry Rice, would be interested to learn more about the painting. They’ve asked me to make an appeal on their behalf for any information, and if anyone knows of the painting’s whereabouts or can tell us anything about it, please do get in touch with me or with  Jane Austen’s House Museum.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this blog as much as I’ve enjoyed hearing all about this little painting from Mr. Roberts and Mrs. Rice, and I’d like to thank them for sharing their discovery. I’d love to hear your thoughts!
Posted in Jane Austen

Heather Lynn Rigaud’s Monthly Post

Published April 8, 2011 | By Heather Lynn Rigaud
Some of the Austen Authors decided to take some time to talk about our pets this month, and I’m very excited about that. I am not afraid of the stereotype of a romance writer, much less a fan fiction romance writer writing about her pets, because A: I think we’ve proven that those stereotypes don’t actually apply (Austen Authors are a diverse bunch) and  B: because I’m not going to drone on and on about ‘Snooki-Woogums’ hairballs for 8 pages. (No, No, don’t thank me. No thanks are needed. I’m a professional)

I’m blessed with two kitty boys, and hearing that April was going to be pet month, they actually posed for a picture!
May I present Hobbes and CowCat.
We got Hobbes as a little kitten. One of my sister’s friends had adopted him and never realized the work or money that went into having a cat. The kitten developed worms and fleas, and was banished to the woman’s basement. This was too cruel, so I took the little darling and went straight to the vet. Once there I thought I’d be super-clever naming an orange tiger-striped cat ‘Hobbes’, but the receptionist just kinda rolled her eyes and asked me if I spelled it with a ‘bes’ at the end. 

Hobbes is my cat, as much as he belongs to anyone. He enjoys sitting with me when I play video games and will often demand my attention for snuggles and love. His passion is hunting, as the lack of mice in our home can attest. We live in a heavily wooded area and prior to Hobbes I believe we could have been registered as a mouse sanctuary.  His latest trick has been just leaving the heads of his prey for me to find. I suspect he’d like them mounted on tiny poles, but that’s not going to happen. Sorry Hobbes.

CowCat has a much more complicated story: We had a dog named Puppy* who was also a rescue. He came to us (literally) as a little baby and lived for 10 years before dying of cancer. The night we lost Puppy, I had gone to bed and after midnight one of my sons knocked on my door and said, “We need you.” Nothing bolts you out of bed faster than those 3 words from your child, so they brought me to the back door and there was a Black & White cat with very distinctive markings at my door.  I had seen him in the neighborhood a couple times over the summer, so I figured he was a local cat who had accidentally gotten locked out for the night. It was December and in the low 20s, so I let him in. I knew my husband had to get up early for a school function with my other son, and for 6 hours, it’d do no harm to have a guest cat. My hope was that a neighbor would do the same, should it happen to my cat.

In the morning he was gone, but that night he came back. And over the following weeks and months he kept coming back, and I started to wonder if he actually had another home he was going too. He was neutered, so at some point he was someone’s cat, but he clearly wasn’t been cared for now.

Then in February he barfed up a belly full of worms on my bed, so I took him straight to the vet, who listened to my story, vaccinated him, wormed him and advised me to keep him. Which we did. The vet guessed that he was between one and two years old, which made him about the same age as Hobbes. My theory is that Hobbes found him and told him of the vacancy at my house. 

CowCat however, is not a terribly monogamous cat. Over the summer, since I was still trying to find out where this cat had come from (I certainly didn’t want to be stealing someone’s pet) I talked to my neighbors about him. They all asked the same question “Is this your cat?” and I explained that no, maybe, I’m not quite sure. None of my neighbors knew where CowCat had come from, but they all also thought they were adopting him. He had two other names (‘Oreo’ and ‘Black Nose’) and was eating at all three houses. I had a slightly stronger claim, because mine was the only house he was actually entering. I offered the cat to the neighbors, but they all assured me that I was welcomed to him. 

This past winter CowCat stayed indoors almost the whole time there was snow on the ground (and in New York, that’s a long time) but I won’t be surprised if he goes back to his wondering ways come summer.

So that’s my cat stories. Hopefully they weren’t too painful. What are yours?

*Okay, you might have noticed that I have as little bit of trouble coming up with names. Luckily, with JAFF, that’s not too much of a problem.
Posted in Austen Authors

What Is Your Book Preference?

Published April 7, 2011 | By Kara Louise
By Kara Louise

Do you have a book preference? No, I don’t mean mystery, thriller, romance, science fiction, or even Jane Austen sequel, prequel, variation, or mash-up. I mean what type of book do you prefer to read? Are you a hardcover, paperback, or mass paperback lover? Do you love to listen to audio books? Are you an e-book reader of pdfs on your computer? Do you have a device onto which you download your favorite books that you can carry in the palm of your hand? Do you prefer Apple’s IPad, Barnes and Nobles’ Nook, or Amazon’s Kindle? Are you one who prefers to actually hold a book in your hand, turn each page, and who thinks that cuddling up with an electronic book and a cup of coffee is not particularly appealing?

Whatever your preference, could it be that the days of the bound book are numbered? As the devices become more and more sophisticated, easier to read and operate, and as e-books are usually cheaper than the printed version, it’s not surprising that more and more people are going with one of these electronic readers.
But are people really ready to give up their beautiful library to show off their collection of books?
Library – that makes me think of Pemberley. In Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth first hears of the library at Pemberley from Caroline Bingley while she is nursing Jane at Netherfield. We hear that it is grand! We never see Elizabeth enter the library there, and I wonder what her reaction to it would have been. Pemberley’s library certainly would have been bigger than what was at Longbourn. I can only imagine what Mr. Bennet thought of Pemberley’s library the first time he saw it!
My idea of Mr. Darcy’s library was formed forever when we bought a new computer (at least 10 years ago) and one of the screensavers we could choose from was the picture you see below. Of course I used it on my computer and would often stare at it and mentally step in, hoping Mr. Darcy would join me there.
In my newly released book, Only Mr. Darcy will Do, Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy meet several times in the library at Pemberley. Because of her father’s death, she has become a governess to a family that has a prior acquaintance with Mr. Darcy. He invites that family to Pemberley for a couple of weeks.
The first time Elizabeth steps into the library, she is in awe of the expanse of it. As she wanders through, however, she suddenly finds herself in a most embarrassing situation.
Here is an excerpt:
As Elizabeth walked deeper into the library, the smell of leather and the dark, rich wood of the shelves made her think of her father. Her eyes glistened with tears as she thought just how much he would have loved spending time in here. It was her father who had passed on the love of reading to her. She walked to the far end, passed a row of shelves, and ran her fingers along the spines of the books, reading the array of authors and titles.

Her hand absently went from the books to a door at the far end. She reached down to the handle, and at only a light touch, the door opened. To her dismay, she found herself looking into a study.

Darcy was sitting at his desk, leaning back in his chair with his hands cradling the back of his head; his feet were stretched out and resting on top of the desk. At the sound of the door opening, he scrambled to right himself, pulling his feet down, standing up, and turning around.

Elizabeth froze and could not step back and close the door soon enough. “I am so…so… sorry,” Elizabeth stuttered. “I did not know…”

Darcy reached for his coat, which he had taken off and had tossed onto the corner of his desk. He struggled to put his arm into its sleeve as he said, “No… no, it was my fault. I thought I had locked it.”

Elizabeth finally had the presence of mind to take some steps backward, her face flushed with embarrassment. She did not even attempt to close the door but quickly turned to removed herself as swiftly as possible. What was I thinking? She asked herself. What must he be thinking?


*~*~*

I don’t know who was more embarrassed, Mr. Darcy or Elizabeth!
But is there a chance the library as we know it will disappear?
I really don’t think so.  Even though my husband and I each have a kindle and he now has the IPad, we still purchase plenty of ‘real’ books! There are some books that you just have to read in print!
But I also know that having a little device that can hold hundreds of books does make owning one a little enticing. I guess if anyone visiting my house asked to see my library, I would hand them my kindle, first.
What about you? Have you given in to the e-book force?
Posted in Austen Authors

Happy Anniversary King James’ Version of the Bible

Published April 7, 2011 | By Mary Simonsen

Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility is not the only book having a big anniversary this year. The Authorized King James Version of the Bible beats Austen out by 200 years. This translation of the Bible, sponsored by the Church of England, was begun in 1604 and completed in 1611 in response to problems with earlier translations as detected by the Puritans, a cranky lot who found fault with everything. The translation was undertaken by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England. The New Testament was translated from Greek, the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew, while the Apocrypha were translated from the Greek and Latin.
Now for the interesting part. The Authorized Version’s acceptance by the general public did not happen overnight. Biblical scholar, Hugh Broughton, the most highly regarded English Hebraist of his time (but who had been excluded from the panel of translators because of his uncongenial temperament), chimed in with his opinion of the completed work: “I would rather be torn in pieces by wild horses than that this abominable translation should ever be foisted upon the English people.” Fortunately for him, no wild horses were available.

A primary concern of the translators was to produce a Bible that would be appropriate, dignified and resonant in public reading. Hence, in a period of rapid linguistic change, they avoided contemporary idioms, tending instead towards forms that were already slightly archaic, like “thee and thou,” “verily” and “it came to pass.” The translators also “tended to enliven their text with stylistic variation, finding multiple English words or verbal forms in places where the original language employed repetition.” In other words, they used a thesaurus.

There are so many phrases that we use in everyday language that come from this translation. Here are a few of them from the Book of Matthew:

Man shall not live by bread alone. (4:4)
The salt of the earth (5:13)
The light of the world (5:14)
Turn the other cheek. (5:39)
O ye of little faith (6:30)
Seek and ye shall find. (7:7)
Every kingdom divided against itself shall not stand. (12:25)
The blind lead the blind. (15:14)
The signs of the times (16:3)
Take up the cross. (16:24)
Suffer little children (19:14)
The last shall be first, and the first last. (20:16)
Out of the mouth of babes (21:16)
The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. (26:41)

Steventon Rectory

George Austen, Jane’s father, was an ordained minister in the Church of England. When Mr. Austen read Scripture from the pulpit or aloud in the parlor at Steventon, it was the lyrical phrases of the King James’ Version that Jane and her siblings heard.

I did not grow up with the King James’ Version of the Bible, but I know a stylistic masterpiece when I read it. British Theologian, F. W. Haber, said it best.  [The King James Vesion of the Bible] lives on the ear, like music that can never be forgotten, like the sound of church bells, which the convert hardly knows how he can forego. Scholars may argue about the accuracy of this translation, but it would be hard to find a more beautiful one. Happy Anniversary!

This post was compiled from on-line sources including Wikipedia as well as The History of the English Language by Professor Seth Lerer, The Teaching Company.

Posted in History, Jane Austen

The Better Mash-Up: An Exoneration of a New Literary Genre – Part I

Published April 6, 2011 | By Vera Nazarian

by Vera Nazarian

If you’ve ever been in the San Francisco Bay Area in California and driven by car, chances are you’ve driven past a small town called Gilroy, home of the Gilroy Garlic Festival, and also known as “the garlic capital of the world.”
The aroma is amazing. Miles before you’re within city limits, you smell garlic. Tasty, yummy, overpowering—but never annoying. 
It tempts you to stop and grab a bite of something, and acts like the perfect seduction tourist trap. Indeed, garlic is cultivated and grown here, and they put it in everything—including ice cream.
Garlic ice cream, you say? Woah!
I’ve personally never had the chance to taste it, but I am told it’s perfectly delicious.
How can ice cream and garlic ever mix together into something palatable? Isn’t that bizarre and impossible? 
Photo by Rüdiger Wölk
Well, then there is chocolate. And peanut butter. And we all know what happens when you put the two together! More realistic to mix these two?
What about sweet and sour beef? Marinated meat? Or sweetmeat? Whoever thought of sweetening meat?
There are plenty more examples. In fact, most of the world’s culinary history revolves around accidental combinations of rather disparate ingredients. People make accidental discoveries of wonderful dishes by dropping one thing into anther or spilling a bit on one liquid into another.
Sometimes (frequently) it turns out awful. At other times it takes several tries, with ingredients mixed in different proportions, to get it right. But with time and much trial and error, you get a marvelous new product!
Photo by Lotus Head
 
What does any of this have to do with literary mash-ups?
Well, mash-ups are exactly the same thing—human attempts to combine two or more very unrelated literary ingredients into one rather marvelous new whole. Multiple styles, storylines, mores, tones, moods—and yes, genres—are mixed together, in varying proportions and, with enough trial and error, something magical and new happens…
A new literary flavor is born! 
The mash-up genre has been around under different guises for centuries. Stage drama started out in places such as Ancient Greece as a combination of religious ritual and popular entertainment. Talk about putting together two unlikely companions!
However, in its modern re-emergence, the literary mash-up has really taken off a few years ago, since Quirk Books released the phenomenally popular Pride and Prejudice and Zombies by Seth Grahame-Smith. Part of its initial draw—its compelling power—can be attributed to everyone simply being stunned and curious to imagine such a thing, really a big joke.
It’s the global shock of combining two very disparate flavors of entertainment—the “proper and genteel” chick lit historical romance and the “rude and crude” macho violence and bloody monster gore of zombies (the popularity of which is in part an outgrowth of “first person shooter” video games that are always in need of some basic enemy splatter material—and zombies are the perfect dumb monster).
P&P&Z is a fun gargantuan romp, written by a man (and it is unclear if the author is a particular fan of Austen or not) and as heartily entertaining as a single rude joke often is. It is completely irreverent, “in your face,” and makes no particular attempt to stay within the style of the original classic (nor is that the point of the joke). It does not adhere to the spirit of Austen, but boldly puts the characters and plot smack into the dizzy madness of a zombie apocalypse. Nothing remains of the original subtlety; any woeful remnants of “nuance” are clobbered over the head with bloody zombie guts.
This is the literary equivalent of a crude smelly frat boy crashing a formal garden party, stomping on the fine china, and giving a drooling kiss to the debutante.
An act of rampage driven by the need to “despoil.”
(Or, to put it in culinary terms, it’s like throwing large chunks of one ingredient into a batter, and never really mixing it properly, ignoring all sense of homogeneity in favor of blunt contrast, and the weird flavor factor.)
The reader either hates it instantly or gets a huge kick out of it; laughs at the crazy situations, wacky fine illustrations; possibly never quite reads the novel in its entirety but dips into it for an occasional laugh, and gives the book as a gag gift for the holidays.
And the literary purists? The die-hard fans of the original classic that has been thus mangled? They are naturally disgusted, upset, and often furious.
True Janeites boycott and disdain the first popular mash-up and its many successors and imitators (from a variety of publishers both big and small, written by different authors with a phenomenally wide range of skills and dedication). All right—maybe they crack it open in a discreet bookstore aisle (after all, this is a riff on their beloved Jane, and the pull of “all things Austen” is hard to resist), and then giggle painfully (and very much in private), and quickly put the book back on the shelf, to dissociate themselves from such derogatory “literary product.”
But—how accurate, and how fair really, is such a response?
You might be surprised to find out, next time!
(Continued next month in Part Two.)
Posted in Austen Authors

Another Jane – a Review of Jane Eyre by Diana Birchall

Published April 6, 2011 | By Diana Birchall

There have been at least 18 filmed versions of Jane Eyre, and I’m happy to confirm that this latest version ranks very high and thoroughly deserves its great reviews.  It is an artful film that isn’t unbalanced in any way, and which inhabits the mid-19th century to perfection.  Filmed mostly in Derbyshire, with rugged old Haddon Hall standing in for Thornfield, the visual setting is more true to the atmosphere and period than any other Jane Eyre I can remember.  The moor is one of the stars of the picture, and the sense of isolation, of nearly uninhabited desolate country, is beautifully conveyed, reflecting on the restricted lives people lived in the midst of these miles of wildness. Costumes, interiors, add to the verisimilitude:  Jane’s gowns look hand made in their plainness, and for all Thornfield’s massiveness, its decor is austere, and the sense that light only comes from the vast gray sky by day firelight at night, also takes us back in time.
The story is not a straightforward literal retelling, but artful director Cary Fukanaga and screenwriter Moira Buffini use a sort of circular structure, opening with Jane’s running from Thornfield and finding refuge with the Rivers family, and then working forward to that point again. It’s very dramatically effective, and brings sometimes overlooked aspects of the story into notice, in a way that refreshes the narrative. Yet, purists will be relieved that the plot does not fail to hit the essential notes, and familiar beloved scenes receive their homage. Those of us who are as attached to our Jane Eyre as we are to our Jane Austen (any hands?) will have the happiness of a few plot nits to pick.  I won’t pick them here (it doesn’t really matter, for instance, that the movie’s Rochester doesn’t lose his hand, as the book’s one did, or that we never find out what happens to Adele in the fire), but one line did make me flinch, it seemed as awful as the scene in Emma when she is rude to Miss Bates:  I refer to the moment when Mr. Rochester says that he has no use for “simple minded old ladies” – in Mrs. Fairfax’s hearing!  How unthinkable!  This does not and could not happen in the book.  But it was a rare sour note.
Now for the actors!  The principals, Mia Wasikowska as Jane and Michael Fassbender as Mr. Rochester, are good.  They are, especially Ms. Wasikowska, who looks little and plain (but not too plain) and portrays just the right mixture of honesty and delicate grit, though she is arguably slightly less successful at rising to the proper level of suppressed intense passion.  With the casting of Mr. Fassbender I am not satisfied.  He is too young and pretty, and his acting just too small scale to qualify him as a great Rochester. Mind you, there have been some truly spectacularly awful Rochesters, and he is not one of those.  Still, anyone who has seen Timothy Dalton…Well, comparisons are odious. Suffice it to say that Wasikowska and Fassbender turn in more than respectable performances, but it is a telling fact that the show is completely stolen by Dame Judi Dench in the comparatively minor part of the housekeeper, Mrs. Fairfax. 
  
Now, however much you enjoy it, you have to admit that a Jane Eyre where Mrs. Fairfax is the fascinating spirit that warms and animates the piece, has something about it that’s not quite right!  Still, let other pens cavil; I only adjure you to go and see this Jane Eyre.  It’s lovely and admirable but not beyond criticism, which makes it all the more enjoyable.
Posted in Austen Authors, Movies & TV, Reviews

Interview with Deborah Moggach

Published April 6, 2011 | By Sharon Lathan

Deborah Moggach was the primary screenwriter of the masterful Golden Globe and BAFTA nominated Joe Wright directed 2005 version of Pride & Prejudice. Adam Spunberg, famed co-conspirator of the Austen Twitter Project with our own Lynn Shepherd – Murder at Mansfield Park – scored a major coup in sitting down with Deborah for an extensive interview.
That interview aired in two parts on the online magazine Picktainment.  I love Adam’s introduction:

Pride & Prejudice might very well be the most beloved novel in the history of the English language, so imagine how challenging it must be to apply a modern fingerprint to Jane Austen’s revered, two-century-old text without tainting the parchment. And by the way, not only is the task to metamorphose her work into a screenplay, but to condense it all into two hours, potentially earning the ire of Austen devotees worldwide and the lady herself, from the grave.

That was what Deborah Moggach set out to do when writing the script for Keira Knightley and company in the 2005 Pride & Prejudice, directed by Joe Wright. There were some who thought it impossible, but Ms. Moggach proceeded to dazzle audiences with a brilliant script, vaulting herself into the pantheon of all-time great adapters of classic novels.

I was fortunate enough to interview her this week for Picktainment, a delightful encounter in which I found her to be every bit the Austen heroine, minus any traces of pride – or prejudice.

It is a wonderful article. Here are the links to each part. Thanks, Adam, for continuing to share your enthusiasm for Jane Austen with us. And for the record, I don’t agree with her about the American ending either!

Scripting Pride & Prejudice with Deborah Moggach: Part I

Scripting Pride & Prejudice with Deborah Moggach: Part II

Posted in Austen Authors, Movies & TV

Party with Sharon!

Published April 5, 2011 | By Sharon Lathan

Once upon a time a clueless woman sat down at her computer and decided to type the lines of a story that were racing unrelentingly through her brain. Upon completion of that short story deemed adequate enough to be read by others she posted it on a fan fiction website. Feedback was positive so she continued on with transcribing her crazy ideas onto indelible computer paper and one thing lead to another as they say until lo and behold she eventually ended up with a publisher, an editor, and five novels to her name! 
The moral of the story?

I have no idea! Obviously I am that woman and am still largely clueless! Whatever the case, I’ll accept it and happily celebrate the launch of The Trouble With Mr. Darcy – Volume Five of The Darcy Saga series.

Even charmed lives will encounter troubles along the way….

After a time of happiness and strife, Darcy and Elizabeth gather with family and friends in Hertfordshire to celebrate the wedding of Kitty Bennet. Georgiana Darcy returns from a lengthy tour of the Continent with happy secrets to share, accompanied by the newlywed Colonel Fitzwilliam and Lady Simone, who may have secrets of their own. The stage is set for joy until the party is upset by the arrival of the long absent Mr. and Mrs. Wickham.

Wickham’s jealousy and resentment of Darcy has grown steadily throughout the years and Darcy rightly suspects that Wickham is up to no good. Darcy enlists the aid of Colonel Fitzwilliam to keep an eye on Wickham’s activity, but neither anticipate the extreme measures taken to exact his revenge. Nor do they fathom the layers of deception and persons involved in the scheme.

George Wickham returns to Hertfordshire bent on creating trouble, and Elizabeth and her son are thrown into danger. Knowing that Wickham has nothing left to lose, Darcy and Fitzwilliam rush to the rescue in a race against time.  This lushly romantic story takes a turn for the swashbuckling when Mr. Darcy has to confront the villainous Wickham and his own demons at the same time… devoted as he is, what battles within will Mr. Darcy have to face?

Intrigued? I do hope so! But how did the story evolve to this place? What came first?

Mr. and Mrs. Fitzwilliam Darcy ~
Beginning on their wedding day, Darcy and Elizabeth are two people who are deeply in love with one another and are excited to begin their marriage.  Their courtship was tempestuous; misunderstandings and misgivings nearly tore them apart. But now that they’ve seen each other without prejudice, their trust, attraction, and delight in each other grows with every passing day. Both are inexperienced and innocent, sharing moments of shyness and boldness as they discover the kinds of intimacies that a newlywed couple shares.  As their love story unfolds, they reveal their innermost secrets and feelings, embracing each other in a marriage filled with romance, passion, humor, and drama that will keep you spellbound.

Loving Mr. Darcy ~
Darcy and Lizzy venture away from Pemberley to journey through England, finding friends, relatives, fun, love, and an even deeper and more sacred bond along the way.  Having embarked on the greatest adventure of all, marriage and the start of a new life together, now the Darcys take the reader on a journey through a time of prosperity, enjoyment, and security. They experience all the adventures of travel, with friends and relatives providing both companionship and complications, and with fun as their focus.  

The sights and sounds, tastes and flavors of Regency England come alive. Through it all, Darcy and Lizzy continue to build a marriage filled with romance, sensuality, and the beauty of a deep, abiding love.

My Dearest Mr. Darcy ~
Darcy is more deeply in love with his wife than ever. As the golden summer draws to a close and the Darcys look ahead to the end of their first year of marriage, Mr. Darcy could never have imagined his love could grow even deeper with the passage of time.  Lizzy is full of surprises. She is unpredictable and lively, pulling Darcy out of his stern and serious demeanor with her teasing and temptation. Looking ahead and planning for celebrations and life events large and small, Lizzy can still catch Darcy unawares when he least expects it.  But surprising events force the Darcys to weather absence and illness, and to discover whether they can find a way to build a bond of everlasting love and desire.   The romance and bewitchment is never-ending…

In The Arms of Mr. Darcy ~
Darcy and Elizabeth are as much in love as ever—even more so as their relationship matures. Their passion inspires everyone around them, and as winter turns to spring, romance finds nearly everyone.  Confirmed bachelor Richard Fitzwilliam sets his sights on a seemingly unattainable, beautiful widow, Georgiana Darcy learns to flirt outrageously, the flighty Kitty Bennet develops her first crush, and Caroline Bingley meets her match.  But the path of true love never does run smooth, and Elizabeth and Darcy are kept busy navigating their friends and loved ones through the inevitable separations, misunderstandings, misgivings and lovers’ quarrels…

So now I am up to #5 and thrilled to be here on Austen Authors amongst this fine group of writers and amazing readers sharing my accomplishment and happiness. Is there anywhere else on the web better than Austen Authors to express love of Jane-related literature? I think not! In honor of my release and joy in being a part of this amazing collective, I will be giving away 2 signed copies of The Trouble With Mr. Darcy!  Simply leave a comment to be entered into the drawing, which I will conclude at midnight on Friday, April 8. Check back over the weekend to see if you won!

 At the same time I am hosting an extravaganza with fun and games over on my website – Sharon Lathan, Novelist. I am giving away even MORE copies of my novel – also signed – so come on over. Plus, the virtual book tour has begun with giveaways galore at those websites. WOW!

Let the confetti fly and balloons soar! Talk to me about the Darcys and happily-ever-after since apparently that is a subject I never tire of.

Posted in Austen Authors
Page 107 of 153« First~~51015~~103104105106107108109110111112~~120125130~~Last »

Our Novels

P&P: RC

P&PRC_badgered2Info on P&P:RC page

Be sure to vote!

*Giveaways

Enter our monthly contest using the Rafflecopter form on the
Giveaway Page.
All rules and prizes are listed there! Click the image or link provided.

Our Imprint

Subscribe

Enter your email address to receive updates of our blog posts.

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact Us

Authors can be contacted via their email link on the Austen Authors page. For general information or to contact the admins, click the image to the left.

Archive

Categories

April 30

MDCTD_cover

Copyright © 2011. All Rights Reserved by the Austen Authors. Wordpress theme created by Sharon Lathan using Artiseer. Banner created by Abigail Reynolds.

Powered by WordPress and WordPress Theme created with Artisteer.