Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

JA is a great author.

Expand Messages
  • Anders Henningsson
    I think that JA is a great author, but great authors use to be exhibitionists writing autobiographical also when they not writing an autobiography, often they
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 9, 2001
      I think that JA is a great author, but great authors use to be
      exhibitionists writing autobiographical also when they not
      writing an autobiography, often they are more popular after
      their dead than they were alive!

      But JA seems to be different, she never had any love affair
      and still she write about love with an insight as if she
      had have a lot of experiences of her own!

      Can anybody of you explain this paradox?

      Yours
      Anders
    • Jane Dunsworth
      ... Dawn, What makes you so sure of this? Jane Austen lived a far more sheltered life than nearly any woman does today in western society, and I can speak
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 9, 2001
        > Not that I'm saying that she was like her character Lydia
        > Bennett, but I'm sure that she must have done a few things that just
        > weren't talked about among nice young ladies.

        Dawn,

        What makes you so sure of this? Jane Austen lived a far more sheltered life
        than nearly any woman does today in western society, and I can speak from
        personal experience that there are people walking this earth who have not
        done anything that would not have been talked about among "nice young
        ladies" of JA's time, even in our youth.

        That said, Jane Austen did indeed have two romances in her life, however
        fleeting. Any biography will give the general details. I might have them
        backwards as to time, but at one point she was engaged, or nearly so, to a
        young man who died suddenly during the course of the courtship, and at
        another point, she engaged herself to a young man and broke the engagement
        within days. (Austen scholars like to point out that this may be the seeds
        of Anne Elliot's first involvement with Captain Wentworth, with the rest of
        "Persuasion" being Jane's dream of what might have been. That may be a
        stretch, but it's likely that it at least created the scenario in her
        imagination.)

        While I'm here, I'd like to share something: I recently went through the
        audiobook version of "Emma." I had an excellent version, read by Prunella
        Scales (for those who've seen the Paltrow movie, she played Miss Bates; for
        those fond of British comedy, think "Sybil Fawlty.") Especially if you're
        the kind of reader I am, who has trouble concentrating on every word,
        audiobooks of Austen are a wonderful experience. But please, do get the
        unabridged versions! It doesn't make sense to "do" Austen without the
        details and turns of phrase!

        Jane
      • Jane Dunsworth
        Goodness, my last post was long and convoluted. Maybe you can make more sense out of it if I summarize it like this: My proposition is that teaching as Paul
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 9, 2001
          Goodness, my last post was long and convoluted. Maybe you can make more
          sense out of it if I summarize it like this:

          My proposition is that "teaching" as Paul used the word is *by nature*
          authoritative. If women are speaking in a setting or a role that is by
          nature spiritually authoritative, they are teaching, and men should not be
          present. If they are speaking in a setting or a role that is not by nature
          authoritative, they are free to speak. Valerie and RCJR and I are, I
          believe, attempting to make the case that Ligonier conferences do not carry
          spiritual authority -- they are voluntary meetings of people not accountable
          to the speakers, who are not invested with any kind of spiritual authority
          over the hearers. Hence, the authoritative nature is not present, and what
          is going on is not really subject to the definition of "teaching."

          In contrast, the church formally gathered is not a voluntary setting, the
          speakers ought to be invested with authority or they are not qualified to
          speak, and the hearers are accountable to them.

          (If anyone wants to repost this to RCJR to see if I'm close to representing
          him properly, and/or whether my thesis is a crackpot one in his view, feel
          free.)

          Jane


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Jane Dunsworth" <jdworth@...>
          To: <JaneAusten@egroups.com>
          Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 9:31 AM
          Subject: Re: [JaneAusten] JA is a great author.


          > > Not that I'm saying that she was like her character Lydia
          > > Bennett, but I'm sure that she must have done a few things that just
          > > weren't talked about among nice young ladies.
          >
          > Dawn,
          >
          > What makes you so sure of this? Jane Austen lived a far more sheltered
          life
          > than nearly any woman does today in western society, and I can speak from
          > personal experience that there are people walking this earth who have not
          > done anything that would not have been talked about among "nice young
          > ladies" of JA's time, even in our youth.
          >
          > That said, Jane Austen did indeed have two romances in her life, however
          > fleeting. Any biography will give the general details. I might have them
          > backwards as to time, but at one point she was engaged, or nearly so, to a
          > young man who died suddenly during the course of the courtship, and at
          > another point, she engaged herself to a young man and broke the engagement
          > within days. (Austen scholars like to point out that this may be the
          seeds
          > of Anne Elliot's first involvement with Captain Wentworth, with the rest
          of
          > "Persuasion" being Jane's dream of what might have been. That may be a
          > stretch, but it's likely that it at least created the scenario in her
          > imagination.)
          >
          > While I'm here, I'd like to share something: I recently went through the
          > audiobook version of "Emma." I had an excellent version, read by Prunella
          > Scales (for those who've seen the Paltrow movie, she played Miss Bates;
          for
          > those fond of British comedy, think "Sybil Fawlty.") Especially if you're
          > the kind of reader I am, who has trouble concentrating on every word,
          > audiobooks of Austen are a wonderful experience. But please, do get the
          > unabridged versions! It doesn't make sense to "do" Austen without the
          > details and turns of phrase!
          >
          > Jane
          >
          >
          >
        • Jane Dunsworth
          A thousand million apologies! I just posted that to the wrong list!!!! AAARRRRGGGGH!!!!!
          Message 4 of 8 , Jan 9, 2001
            A thousand million apologies! I just posted that to the wrong list!!!!
            AAARRRRGGGGH!!!!!
          • starwalk1@juno.com
            On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 13:22:31 +0100 Anders Henningsson ... Very possibly she had had *some* experience, but she probably never talked about it. It s my
            Message 5 of 8 , Jan 9, 2001
              On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 13:22:31 +0100 Anders Henningsson
              <anders-b.henningsson.768@...> writes:
              > But JA seems to be different, she never had any love affair
              > and still she write about love with an insight as if she
              > had have a lot of experiences of her own!
              >
              > Can anybody of you explain this paradox?
              Very possibly she had had *some* experience, but she probably never
              talked about it. It's my understanding that a lot of her correspondence
              and other writings have been lost in the mists of time, whether
              accidentally or on purpose by relatives who wanted to preserve the image
              of Aunt Jane. Not that I'm saying that she was like her character Lydia
              Bennett, but I'm sure that she must have done a few things that just
              weren't talked about among nice young ladies.

              Another possibility is that she was such an insightful observer of
              relationships and their effects on the people involved that she channeled
              that into her writing. What impresses me most is that 200 years later
              the way people react in the situations she writes about is basically the
              same. It amazes me that we haven't really evolved that much (except for
              maybe downwards).

              Now I have a question. I was at Barnes and Noble the other day, and saw
              a copy of Lady Susan which had been given an ending by an anonymous
              female author (the title said "another lady"). The reviews on the back
              were raving about how good it was. Does anyone know if this would be
              worth my time? I already have a copy of the fragment that she left
              behind.

              Thank you,
              ~Dawn
              ________________________________________________________________
              GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
              Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
              Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
              http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
            • starwalk1@juno.com
              ... Nothing really in particular, it was just an idea. I know that she was very sheltered. I was just throwing an idea out there. Probably she was just an
              Message 6 of 8 , Jan 10, 2001
                > Dawn,
                >
                > What makes you so sure of this? Jane Austen lived a far more
                > sheltered life
                > than nearly any woman does today in western society, and I can speak
                > from
                > personal experience that there are people walking this earth who
                > have not
                > done anything that would not have been talked about among "nice
                > young
                > ladies" of JA's time, even in our youth.
                Nothing really in particular, it was just an idea. I know that she was
                very sheltered. I was just throwing an idea out there. Probably she was
                just an informed observer with a vivid imagination; and I believe also
                that more value was placed on a person's character than there is now. I
                certainly wasn't hinting anything bad; I just meant that the Victorians
                probably had more knowledge of things than we give them credit for.

                I just read "Pride and Prejudice", and started thinking about what would
                happen if what Lydia and Wickham did happened now. Instead of taking
                their lumps like they did in the novel (because they knew they did
                something wrong) Lydia would blame Wickham for being a bad influence,
                then sue him for mental harassment, and the whole family would end up on
                Jerry Springer where the rest of their secrets would come out. That's a
                very sad and depressing statement of our times, and probably why I like
                her novels so much. There's very few--if any--characters who play "poor
                innocent victim" and blame other people for their faults. It used to be
                the exception, now it seems to be the rule.

                Jane herself didn't have a good relationship with her mother, but she
                still grew up to be a model of propriety. So you have to wonder about
                the "victim" theory.

                Wow, that was a real rant, wasn't it? :) I guess I'm more disillusioned
                than I thought.

                > While I'm here, I'd like to share something: I recently went
                > through the
                > audiobook version of "Emma." I had an excellent version, read by
                > Prunella
                > Scales (for those who've seen the Paltrow movie, she played Miss
                > Bates; for
                > those fond of British comedy, think "Sybil Fawlty.")
                Is the film version of Emma good? I was looking for the movies made from
                the novels at the movie rental place and couldn't find too many. There
                is a box set of all the films, right? Are they worth my time?

                As long as we're on the subject of movies and audio books, I just
                recently viewed "Sense and Sensibility" with Emma Thompson and Kate
                Winslet. Am I the only one who thought that Hugh Grant was a total
                miscast? He was way too goofy and bumbling for someone as serious as
                Elinor. And his entrance into every scene with his mouth hanging open
                made me laugh so hard. He wasn't cast in any of the other Austen films,
                was he?

                OK, I'm done now. If you've made it this far thanks for bearing with me!
                :)

                ~Dawn
                ________________________________________________________________
                GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
                Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
                Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
                http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
              • Jane Dunsworth
                ... Oh, certainly -- technically, of course, JA wasn t a Victorian -- she died before Victoria started her reign, maybe even before she was born. The period
                Message 7 of 8 , Jan 10, 2001
                  > Nothing really in particular, it was just an idea. I know that she was
                  > very sheltered. I was just throwing an idea out there. Probably she was
                  > just an informed observer with a vivid imagination; and I believe also
                  > that more value was placed on a person's character than there is now. I
                  > certainly wasn't hinting anything bad; I just meant that the Victorians
                  > probably had more knowledge of things than we give them credit for.

                  Oh, certainly -- technically, of course, JA wasn't a Victorian -- she died
                  before Victoria started her reign, maybe even before she was born. The
                  period she's identified with is "Regency" -- I think because that's when
                  George III was mad and a regent was in charge of things -- not sure about
                  that part. But your point holds, just the same.

                  > Is the film version of Emma good? I was looking for the movies made from
                  > the novels at the movie rental place and couldn't find too many. There
                  > is a box set of all the films, right? Are they worth my time?

                  IMO the film version of Emma is quite good. It's a little too "modern" for
                  me -- the language and mannerisms are a bit too 20th century, but they get
                  the characters and plot right, and don't mess with the book. The "feel" is
                  not quite as lyrical as the wonderful A&E P&P -- but IMO that's the "gold
                  standard" of Austen adaptations. I'd definitely recommend Emma -- Mrs.
                  Elton is just perfect. Persuasion is very good, too.

                  I don't know anything about a boxed set, maybe there is one.

                  >
                  > As long as we're on the subject of movies and audio books, I just
                  > recently viewed "Sense and Sensibility" with Emma Thompson and Kate
                  > Winslet. Am I the only one who thought that Hugh Grant was a total
                  > miscast? He was way too goofy and bumbling for someone as serious as
                  > Elinor. And his entrance into every scene with his mouth hanging open
                  > made me laugh so hard. He wasn't cast in any of the other Austen films,
                  > was he?

                  Nope. I agree. I think overall S&S was pretty well done, but Grant did not
                  belong there. I also thought the man who played Colonel Brandon was a bit
                  too colorless. Brandon was supposed to be reserved and serious with a
                  certain quiet, dignified charm, but in the movie he seemed to me like a
                  boring guy you wouldn't give the time of day, except out of charity.

                  >
                  > OK, I'm done now. If you've made it this far thanks for bearing with me!
                  > :)
                  >
                  > ~Dawn

                  Always a pleasure to talk Austen! :-)

                  Jane
                • starwalk1@juno.com
                  On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:22:59 -0500 Jane Dunsworth ... Of course the period is Regency --I knew this, really I did! :) ... Was Persuasion done by A&E too?
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jan 11, 2001
                    On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:22:59 -0500 "Jane Dunsworth"
                    <jdworth@...> writes:
                    > Oh, certainly -- technically, of course, JA wasn't a Victorian --
                    > she died
                    > before Victoria started her reign, maybe even before she was born.
                    > The
                    > period she's identified with is "Regency" -- I think because that's
                    > when
                    > George III was mad and a regent was in charge of things -- not sure
                    > about
                    > that part. But your point holds, just the same.
                    Of course the period is "Regency"--I knew this, really I did! :)

                    > IMO the film version of Emma is quite good. It's a little too
                    > "modern" for
                    > me -- the language and mannerisms are a bit too 20th century, but
                    > they get
                    > the characters and plot right, and don't mess with the book. The
                    > "feel" is
                    > not quite as lyrical as the wonderful A&E P&P -- but IMO that's the
                    > "gold
                    > standard" of Austen adaptations. I'd definitely recommend Emma --
                    > Mrs.
                    > Elton is just perfect. Persuasion is very good, too.
                    Was "Persuasion" done by A&E too? Are there any plans to repeat these
                    movies? Maybe they are part of that boxed set that I'm thinking of.

                    > I don't know anything about a boxed set, maybe there is one.
                    It may have been limited edition, but I'm positive that I saw it in a
                    catalog, because I remember Hugh Grant's goofy face plastered across the
                    side of it. I'd love to see these movies, someday! :)

                    ~Dawn
                    ________________________________________________________________
                    GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
                    Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
                    Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
                    http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.