Daily Life in Jane Austen’s Time: Political Intrigue

Posted on May 30, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

Austen’s lifetime knew political intrigue that came to light with the splintering of the Whig party and the formation of a Conservative element. From 1788 to 1812, England experienced war after war, King George III’s madness, and the decadent lifestyle to the Prince Regent. The Radical movement had taken root among the disenfranchised lower classes. By 1822, the Reform Act had come to fruition.

The struggle between monarchy and Parliament became more prevalent during George III’s reign. The King shrewdly used the Act of Settlement to choose ministers and emissaries. In doing so, George III carved out a political legacy. In theory, the Whigs represented the aristocracy and the Tories the landed gentry, the class to which Jane Austen’s family belonged. No one represented those who did not own land: the struggling middle and lower classes.

A balance of power did exist to a certain extent during this time of change. For example, George III purposely supported many Tory-sponsored policies in order to keep the Whigs from taking away his power. There was also a system of “checks and balances” in place. The House of Lords controlled most offices of state, but the House of Commons controlled the offices of finance and taxation. Chancellors of the Exchequer had to be appointed from among commoners.

One of the areas of concern was the lack of representation among many of the newly formed cities in the North. The industrialized areas lacked proper representation in Parliament. For example, Cornwall had forty-four seated members, while cities such as Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham were lucky to have representation of any kind. There was also no standard voting qualifications. Boroughs set their own standards. By 1800, fewer than one in ten men could vote, and no woman held that privilege.

The 1790s saw the first political movement in over 150 years. Thomas Paine called for Radical reform in his book, The Rights of Man (published in two parts in 1791 and 1792). Paine targeted inherited wealth. He made an appeal for universal male franchise and the end of all wars. He even advocated old-age pensions, a system of welfare, and a free education. By 1795, Radicalism had been driven “underground” by repressive policies instituted by William Pitt. 

Speaking of Pitt, William Pitt the Younger was Prime Minister throughout much of Austen’s life. A Tory by nature, he was a favorite of George III and of the landed gentry. Pitt was Prime Minister from 1783 to 1801 and from 1804 to his death in 1806.

 

 

 

While George III supported Pitt, his son, George IV, the Prince Regent, offered a nominal support to Charles James Fox, the leader of the Whigs. Pitt and Fox faced off often. For example, with George III’s first bout of madness in 1788, a constitutional crisis arose. The Pittites were had thought that their man might be ousted, but the King recovered before that could happen. The French Revolution also brought changes in the English governmental policies. The Pittites formed a coalition with many Whigs, who were frightened of internal sedition, to conserve property and the “old order.”

Meanwhile the Foxites pushed for mild reforms. One would like to think they did this because of their civic conscience; however, it was more likely that the Whigs feared the growing power of the King more than they cared for the disadvantaged.

Pitt’s death in January 1806 brought the so-named “Ministry of all the Talents,” in which Fox served as Foreign Secretary. It was his first “official” office in 23 years, but he, too, died in September of the same year. By March 1807, the “Ministry” had disintegrated. Five weak governments followed. 1812 saw the assassination of Spencer Percival, the only British Prime Minister to be killed in office. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Everyday Life in Jane Austen’s Time: Meals

Posted on May 29, 2012 by Regina Jeffers


Breakfast

In Jane Austen’s time, breakfast arrived late in the typical country household, usually between nine and ten of the clock. The household would have completed several tasks prior to sitting down to a simple meal. Using fine china, the house’s occupants would partake of tea and toast. Thought to be invented by the English, toast was said to have come about because the English required a means to spread butter on the bread. (One must recall the rooms were quite chilly.) A kettle for tea would be prepared on the same fire over which the family toasted the bread on forks. Tea was an expensive commodity so it was kept under lock and key. Grand households would have a larger spread. Austen’s mother lists the fare at Stoneleigh Abbey as, “Chocolate, Coffee, and Tea, Plumb Cake, Hot Rolls, Cold Rolls, Bread and Butter, and dry toast for me.”

The Midday Meal

At an inn, one might partake of “luncheon” or “nuncheon,” but those were not words found in Austen’s novels. She uses each only once in her writing. Occurring in the day’s middle, this meal, which generally consisted of cold food and drink, filled the gap between breakfast and a late dinner. In Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth Bennet is offered cold meat, cake, and hothouse fruit when she visits Pemberley in the afternoon. At Mansfield’s Parsonage, Dr. Grant served sandwiches to Edmund Bertram.

Dinner 

Early on, the English ate their largest meal in the day’s middle when it could be cooked and consumed during the daylight hours. However, by the 18th Century, the most fashionable people began to eat their dinners at an hour later than their social inferiors. A family’s social status could be easily delineated by the hour at which they dined. In 1798, writing from Steventon to Godmersham, Jane Austen wrote, “We dine now at half after Three, and have done dinner I suppose before you begin…I am afraid you will despise us.” However, in 1808, she wrote, “We never dine now till five.”

This evening meal also became a display of the family’s prosperity. “Courses” included several meat and fish courses, those of vegetables, and multiple puddings and sweet dishes. At the end, nuts, sweetmeats, etc., were served, along with wine. This was the “dessert” course. The ranking female would rise at the end of the meal, and the ladies would retire to the drawing room. The men were remained behind to enjoy their port and tobacco, as well as uninhibited conversation.

Taking Tea

When Austen speaks of taking tea, she did not refer to what we now call “afternoon tea.” Instead, she meant the serving of tea when the men joined the women in the drawing room following dinner. Occasionally, invitations to social inferiors were issued purely for the tea time. In Austen’s novels, the reader finds Harriet Smith, Jane Fairfax, and Miss Bates are invited to drink tea at the Coles’s house, while Emma, Mr. Knightley, and the Westons are invited to dine with the Coles.

Supper

At a late hour on the evening of a ball, a supper was served. As the person’s neighbors would not be leaving the event until 2 or 3 in the morning, it was considered good manners to provide a meal at midnight. This meal was substantial and always included soup (usually a white soup) and negus (a drink made from boiled water, wine, lemon, spices, and calves-foot jelly). If no ball was planned, supper became a “midnight snack,” usually served from a tray.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 7 Comments

Women’s Rights During Jane Austen’s Time

Posted on May 25, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

 

Feminism made a long overdue showing in the 18th Century. Society, as a whole debated important issues, and, naturally, well-informed women began to question their place in the whole structure. These women were not called “feminists,” but rather “female philosophers.” They were nonmilitant…no bra burners among them. Rather I should say no corset burners among them. They did not protest for legal rights. Instead, they focused on the lack of education for females and on the moral autonomy and authority of males within the family structure. Early female writers included Mary Astell and Catherine Macaulay. Although few would call her a feminist, Jane Austen spoke of such issues in her writing. Austen simply gave us sympathetic female characters. Yet, how can we believe that she grudgingly dedicated a novel to a prince she did not admire and then think that Jane Austen was not aware of the moral debate going on about her.

Perhaps the most controversial figure of the feminist movement of this time period was a teacher and novelist: Mary Wollstonecraft. She wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792. The book sets the “female perspective” in the context of post-revolutionary Europe. The downfall of the book is its emphasize on rational principles. That is also the strength of the book. Wollstonecraft created a firestorm of sorts and alienated many readers by attacking male icons such as John Milton and Rousseau because both men advocated subjugation of the woman in a man’s world. When I taught high school English, my female students (and some of the males) saw parallels to the pro-feminist speeches found in the 1960s and 70s in the U.S. One of Wollstonecraft’s more controversial comments dealt with how the English education system for girls taught them how to attract a man but how to run a man’s house once they landed him.

In 1798, Mary’s husband, William Godwin, wrote a Memoir of her life. This was shortly after Wollstonecraft’s death. Mary lost her life to childbirth. (That child, Mary Godwin, became the wife of Percy Shelley and the author of Frankenstein.) Godwin told the world of his wife’s suicide attempts and of her bearing an illegitimate child, as well as an exaggerated version of Mary’s rejection of Christianity. Mary was labeled an atheist and a whore. Such labels destroyed what good Wollstonecraft created with in her work.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

“Even You Can Write Comedy,” he said.

Posted on May 24, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

A friend of mine recently told me that I should consider writing comedy. I laughed, naturally, because I assumed he meant it as a joke. I am known for those kind of lines, which can strip someone of his dignity, but I would not say I was particularly funny. When I hear a good joke, I do not remember it to retell it to my friends.
He was serious, though. He said, “Writing comedy is the same as writing the romance novels, which are your stock and trade.” Again, I laughed. “Comedy needs real-life situations,” he explained. I thought about that fact and agreed. “It needs strong dialogue, which tells the story.”

My interest piqued. “I think dialogue is one of my strengths in writing,” I confided.

“The characters have to be relatable. You have to see yourself in them.”

“Okay, I get it. What else?” I asked, now enthralled with the idea.

He paused to think what other examples he should use to sell me on the idea. “Pacing is important,” he added.

“Yes. . .” I encouraged.

“A balance between the elements,” he continued.

“Does not one have to know how to write a joke?” I asked when he paused again. “Should not one have a sense of humor?”

“You have an excellent sense of humor,” he assured me. “Maybe a bit too sophisticated at times.”

“So, I do not like bathroom humor,” I countered.

“But you do like word puns and malapropisms.”

“That is true. But just because I enjoy twisting the King’s English, that does not mean I can write comedy.”

“Have it your way,” he said. “But you are funny, whether you know it or not.”

I thought about what he said. Then I noticed the sly smirk turning up the corners of his mouth. “Oh, yeah,” I protested. “Tell me a time when you recognized my natural comedic flare,” I challenged.

He sat for several elongated minutes. Finally, he said, “Besides when you slipped on the ice and looked like a windmill trying to catch your balance.”

“Yes, besides that.”

“Never.”

“I rest my case.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on “Even You Can Write Comedy,” he said.

Pride & Prejudice??? Have You Lied about Reading It???

Posted on May 23, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

Pride & Prejudice Is Top Book Brits Lie About Reading

This article was originally published on Female First: Celebrity Gossip & Lifestyle Magazine.

When it comes to literary classics, Brits are a nation of book bluffers according to the latest research from the Lindeman’s Wine & Book Club, which has revealed 71% of Britons lie to their friends and family, claiming to have read books they haven’t really in order to keep face.

Fear of being perceived as stupid has been cited as the most common reason for the ‘book bluffing’ phenomenon.

Topping the bill as the most fibbed about book is Jane Austen’s Pride & Prejudice, with over a quarter (26%)of the nation claiming to have read the book that captured the heart of millions of women.

Coming in a close second is Lord of the Rings (17%), which supports the theory that there is a tendency to lie about books that have been made into films – perhaps the secret to a bluffer’s success.

What’s more, the findings show men are more likely to bluff about the books they’ve read than their female counterparts and the reason is trying to impress a prospective partner.

Women, on the other hand are most likely to lie to a female friend or colleague, suggesting this is who they feel judged by most.

The top five books Brits claim to have read but haven’t really are:

1. ‘Pride & Prejudice’

2. ‘The Lord of the Rings’

3.  ‘Jane Eyre’

4.  ‘Tess of the D’Urbervilles’

5.  ‘The Hobbit’

Unfortunately, there are pitfalls to being a book bluffer, in particular not knowing the authors of the highbrow novels you’re supposed to have read.

Surprisingly (or not as the case may be) less than half (45%) of the nation recognizes Emily Bronte as the author of Wuthering Heights, commonly mistaking Charles Dickens, Jane Eyre, Charlotte Bronte and even Kate Bush as the master pieces creator.

As for other classics 15% of respondents thought Jane Austen wrote Jane Eyre and the Bronte sisters were most commonly mistaken as the authors of Tess of the D’Urbervilles.

If you are interested in reading the complete article, please visit http://www.femalefirst.co.uk/books/Pride++Prejudice-238592.html

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Authors Pressed to Produce More Than One Novel Per Year

Posted on May 22, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

This article was originally posted on the NY Times.com.  

Writer’s Cramp: In the E-Reader Era, a Book a Year Is Slacking

For years, it was a schedule as predictable as a calendar: novelists who specialized in mysteries, thrillers and romance would write one book a year, output that was considered not only sufficient, but productive.

The author Lisa Scottoline, who writes thrillers, has increased her yearly output from one book to two because, she said, “the culture is a great big hungry maw, and you have to feed it.”

But the e-book age has accelerated the metabolism of book publishing. Authors are now pulling the literary equivalent of a double shift, churning out short stories, novellas or even an extra full-length book each year.

They are trying to satisfy impatient readers who have become used to downloading any e-book they want at the touch of a button, and the publishers who are nudging them toward greater productivity in the belief that the more their authors’ names are out in public, the bigger stars they will become.

“It used to be that once a year was a big deal,” said Lisa Scottoline, a best-selling author of thrillers. “You could saturate the market. But today the culture is a great big hungry maw, and you have to feed it.”

The push for more material comes as publishers and booksellers are desperately looking for ways to hold onto readers being lured by other forms of entertainment, much of it available nonstop and almost instantaneously. Television shows are rushed online only hours after they are originally broadcast, and some movies are offered on demand at home before they have left theaters. In this environment, publishers say, producing one a book a year, and nothing else, is just not enough.

At the same time, the Internet has allowed readers to enjoy a more intimate relationship with their favorite authors, whom they now expect to be accessible online via blogs, Q. and A.’s on Twitter and updates on Facebook.

Some of the extra work is being pushed by authors themselves, who are easing their own fears that if they stay out of the fickle book market too long, they might be forgotten.

(At least, I know I am ahead of my time. I recently released my 14th novel in a little over 4 years. I am a writing machine.) For the complete article, please visit http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/business/in-e-reader-age-of-writers-cramp-a-book-a-year-is-slacking.html?_r=4&ref=arts

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

What Is the True Cost of an eBook?

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

This article comes from CNET News.

Here’s something that tends to get lost in the debate over e-book prices: Paper doesn’t cost very much. There’s a perception among consumers that an e-book should cost very little or next to nothing because there is no paper, printing, and shipping involved. But in fact, for a new best-selling hardcover, all of the costs associated with print, from the printing to the shipping to the distribution to the warehousing to returns, amount to a mere few dollars per copy, depending on the size of the print run.

The vast majority of a publisher’s costs come from expenses that still exist in an e-book world: Author advances, design, marketing, publicity, office space, and staff. You can therefore imagine the fear that e-book prices instill in publishing executives’ hearts. They’re only saving a few dollars per copy in the switch to the e-book world, but the prices of books were slashed more than half: from $24.99 to $9.99 and even lower.

That begins to explain why publishers are trying to keep e-book prices high. But it doesn’t tell the whole story.

It’s still a print world
Not only are publishers’ margins better on higher-priced print books, but when bookstores close it has enormous ramifications for the industry. When Borders went bankrupt, for instance, Penguin Group was its single largest creditor, with $41.1 million outstanding.

And even aside from financial considerations, publishers’ entire reason for existence is bound up in print. The major publishers are, quite simply, the best companies in the world at getting print books from authors to readers. Most of the tools at their disposal for making a book a hit are tied to a print world, from buying front-of-the-bookstore placement (yes, publishers pay for that) to book tours.

As the exponential growth of e-books has slowed, some publishers are even whispering their hopes that perhaps the rate of e-book adoption will slow further and print will be viable well into the future.

But meanwhile, on the other side of the e-book price divide are consumers. Whatever the cost of paper, $10-plus e-books look mighty expensive when they’re undercut by 99-cent Kindle best sellers sold by authors who don’t have a publisher’s overhead.

Publishers have a massive problem with perception of value. When you can’t hold it in your hands and easily pass it along to a friend, $10-plus just feels too expensive to many people.

For the complete picture and more analysis of the problem, please visit http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57412587-93/why-e-books-cost-so-much/

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Northanger Horrid Novels – Were They Real?

Posted on May 18, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

With this post, I wanted to introduce my visitors to what are known as the Northanger Horrid Novels, seven early Gothic examples of fiction mentioned in Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey. These books were among the many published by Minerva Press in the late 1700s and early 1800s.

William Lane established Minerva Press at No. 33 Leadenhall Street, London, when he moved his circulating library there in 1790. The seven books, which comprise the Northanger Horrid Novels, were once thought to be creations of Jane Austen’s imagination, but research in the early 1900s by Michael Sadleir and Montague Summers proved that the stories did exist. In Northanger Abbey, Isabella Thorpe tells Catherine Morland …

“Dear creature! How much I am obliged to you; and when you have finished Udolpho, we will read The Italian together; and I have made out a list of ten or twelve more of the same kind for you.”

“Have you, indeed! How glad I am! – What are they all?”

“I will read you their names directly; here they are, in my pocket-book. Castle of Wolfenbach, Clermont, Mysterious Warnings, Necromancer of the Black Forest, Midnight Bell, Orphan of the Rhine, and Horrid Mysteries. Those will last us some time.”

“Yes, pretty well; but are they all horrid, are you sure they are all horrid?”

“Yes, quite sure; for a particular friend of mine, a Miss Andrews, a sweet girl, one of the sweetest creatures in the world, has read every one of them.”

Some years back, Valancourt Books began a project to bring these titles and many others from around the world to the reading public. Along with those found on Valancourt, most of the titles are available from online book sources. Some are even available in their entirety at internet reading sites. So, what are the stories in each of these books? And would Jane Austen have read them?

The Castle of Wolfenbach (1793) by Eliza Parsons
A lecherous and incestuous uncle forces Matilda Weimar to flee her home and to seek refuge in the ancient Castle of Wolfenbach. Horrifying mysteries also dwell in the castle, including that of the missing Countess of Wolfenbach. Matilda must unravel the clues before her uncle tracks her down and takes her away with him.

The Mysterious Warning (1796) by Eliza Parsons
When the much revered Count Renaud dies, his degenerate heir, Rhodophil, assumes his father’s title. The count has disowned his son Ferdinand, who has married without his father’s permission. Rhodophil swears he will share his riches with Ferdinand and the younger brother’s wife, Claudina, but a “mysterious warning” from the grave sends Ferdinand fleeing for his life. To make matters worse, Claudina has aligned herself with Rhodophil. Ferdinand’s quest for his own fortune and adventure brings him to the doorstep of a recluse, who has a horrible secret. Later, he becomes imprisoned by the Turkish army and then encounters one of Gothic literature’s most depraved female characters, Fatima. If he survives all his meanderings, Ferdinand must then return to Renaud Castle to uncover the ghostly truth about his wife and his brother.

Clermont (1798) by Regina Maria Roche
Madeline lives in seclusion with her father Clermont, who holds a mysterious past. That seclusion is interrupted by one of Clermont’s former friends, a Countess. Madeline is allowed to reside with the Countess, with whom she will receive an education. However, the Countess is attacked by unknown assailants, and Madeline is assaulted in a ghostly crypt. Compounding their problems, a sinister stranger appears to claim Madeline as his bride. The stranger knows Clermont’s secret and threatens to ruin Madeline’s father. Madeline must avoid her pursuers, solve the mystery of her father’s past, and win the love of De Sevignie.

The Orphan of the Rhine (1798) by Eleanor Sleath
Sleath is very much an Ann Radcliffe wannabe, and she models many of her pieces on Radcliffe’s works, using several of Radcliffe’s signature plot devices: mysterious monks, ruined towers, assumed names for the characters, last-minute rescues, and death-bed scenes. In this novel, Julie de Rubine discovers that her marriage to the Marchese de Montferrat is a sham. Unfortunately, this news is not delivered until after Julie gives birth. Julie takes her child and an orphan by the name of Laurette to live in a half-ruined castle on the Rhine. She remains there under the Marchese’s threats until Laurette becomes old enough to “stir the passion” of other key characters. Then things get very interesting!

The Necromancer; or, The Tale of the Black Forest (1794) by Karl Friedrich Kahlert

This book is a series of interconnected stories, each of which deals with the enigmatic character Volkert the Necromancer. This is a very strange novel. It is filled with murder, dark magic, and plenty of ghosts. The plot takes too many twists and turns to describe in so short of a space, but for the true Gothic fan, it is a must.

The Midnight Bell: A German Story, Founded on Incidents in Real Life (1798) by Francis Lathom
Alphonsus Cohenburg finds his mother covered in blood. She tells him that his uncle has murdered Alphonsus’s father, and he must flee for his life. He is never to return to Cohenburg castle. Alphonsus’s adventures include being a soldier, a miner, and a church sacristan. He meets and weds Lauretta, but she is kidnapped by a group of ruffians. Alphonsus must solve the mystery of his wife’s disappearance and the question of his mother’s strange pronouncement. Add to those dilemmas the news of ghosts haunting his family’s castle and the sound of great bell each night at midnight, and one has a complete Gothic delight.

The Horrid Mysteries: A Story from the German of the Marquis of Grosse (a translation of the German Gothic novel Der Genius) (1796) by Carl Grosse
The Marquis of Grosse is a member of “a secret revolutionary society, which advocates murder and mayhem in pursuit of an early form of communism. He creates a rival society to combat them and finds himself hopelessly trapped between the two antagonistic forces. The book has been both praised and lambasted for its lurid portrayal of sex, violence, and barbarism.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Northanger Abbey 1987 – Movie Discussion

Posted on May 17, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

When we read our favorite novels, we bring our own imagination to the experience. Film adaptations, however, leave less room for interpretation. We have all, at one time or another, been disappointed in the casting, not inherently evident to us at the time, of a particular actor in a role.

There have been only two film adaptations of Northanger Abbey. I chose the one from 1987, a BBC/A&E production, because I thought many of you might be less familiar with it, and my blog visitors would want to add it to their studies of all things Jane Austen.

Hopefully, our Austen Authors fans will comment on the costumes, the music and sound effects, the sites used in the film, and even some film errors (i.e., The film is set in 1794, but John Thorpe speaks of reading The Monk, which was published in 1796.). I would also love to hear your opinions of the 2007 version within this discussion. Northanger Abbey(1987) starred Katherine Schlesinger as Catherine Morland and Peter Firth ( not Colin’s brother) as Henry Tilney.

Published, along with Persuasion in December 1818, Northanger Abbey takes a satiric look at the Gothic novel. In reality, Northanger Abbey has never been a popular choice for modern readers, as Catherine Morland, the 17-year-old heroine, lacks the development we find in Emma Woodhouse or Elizabeth Bennet or Elinor Dashwood. Austen even says that Catherine is “in training for a heroine.” The 1987 cinematic adaptation of Austen’s novel serves as a bridge between those earlier cheaply-made Austen offerings and those of the 1990s. Although both Sense and Sensibility andMansfield Park were also released in the 1980s, they mimicked the style of the earlier works, especially lacking on location filming. Northanger Abbey (1987) was one of the first to use on-location settings effectively.

This particular adaptation takes a number of liberties with the original text, most obviously the opening scene. Austen’s novel introduces us to Catherine Morland, chronicling her short life and her lack of accomplishments. The film, however, begins with a feeling of sexual awakening in the young Catherine. The viewer sees the girl reclining on a tree limb while reading a Gothic novel. We see Catherine’s “scandalous” white stocking-clad leg. We hear the female voice over reading aloud from the book: “the horrors of that evil chamber.” Sketches from the novel show us a dead body on the stairs and a male figure carrying a supinated woman’s body. Add the eerie sound effects and choral chanting, and we make the assumption that Austen discussed these Gothic images in her book, which is not true.

So, what else do we see in this adaptation that is not found in Austen’s novel?
* the character of the Marchioness de Thierry, General Tilney’s friend and confidant – Her back story of a husband being guillotined reminds us of Austen’s cousin’s story. The lady is the general’s source of gossip.

* a soft criticism of Ann Radcliffe and the Gothic premise for its sexual pandering – As opposed to the movie, in the novel, Austen seems more likely to be criticizing poorly “educated” readers of Mrs. Radcliffe. “The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid.”

*In Austen’s novel, we only become aware of Eleanor’s attachment to a young man in the last chapter. Note in the film, upon her arrival at the Abbey, Catherine finds the message sent to Eleanor from Thomas arranging a secret meeting. “The same day at 3:00. You and I beside the unknown woman.”

*In Austen’s Northanger Abbey, Catherine visits the Tilney residence in town twice to apologize for not walking out with Henry and Eleanor. The novel includes a scene at the opera, where Catherine gushes her apologies to Henry. The film combines these visits and omits the opera scene.

*Catherine burns her copy of The Mysteries of Udolpho in the film.

*The general and the Marchioness are seen in the background at the Upper Rooms and also entering the same building when Catherine and Mrs. Allen first arrive in Bath. In the novel, the general is not mentioned until after Catherine rides out with John Thorpe.

*The Tilney brothers enjoy taking snuff together in the film.

*In the adaptation, the general encourages Catherine’s acquaintance from the beginning (assumably based on information from the Marchioness). In the novel, he only encourages Catherine’s relationship with the Tilneys after Thorpe misleads him regarding Catherine’s wealth.

*Catherine in the film is discovered in Mrs. Tilney’s room in flagrante delicto. In Austen’s novel, she leaves the room “and a shortly succeeding ray of common sense added some bitter emotions of shame.” In addition, Mrs. Tilney’s forbidden bedroom is hideous and sinister in the film, where in the novel is sports bright and modern decor (for that time period).

*The film combines the evening entertainments when Mrs. Allen and Catherine visit the Upper Rooms with their later visit to the Lower Rooms into one scene.

*The film allows the Abbey to keep the element of mystery with dark corridors, high windows, winding stairs, etc. In the novel, Catherine is disappointed by how modern the Abbey is.

*Catherine, Eleanor, and the general visit Henry at Woodston in the novel, but the film does little to establish him as a clergyman (presumably because modern audiences would not see this as a desirable occupation for a potential husband).

*In the novel, Catherine recognizes Isabella’s deviousness in the letter when Isabella begs for the return of James’s affections. In this TV version, there is no such letter.

*In the adaptation, Henry chastises Catherine by saying, “Dearest Miss Morland, has reading one silly novel unbalanced your judgment so completely?” The novel has Henry saying, “Dearest Miss Morland what ideas have you been admitting?” Henry no longer prods Catherine to think for herself in the film version.

*Austen tells the reader that Catherine has not read any Gothic novels before meeting Isabella Thorpe. “It is so odd to me, that you should never have read Udolpho before.” The film begins with Catherine’s Gothic fantasies.

*In the film, James Morland introduces Catherine to Isabella after he comes to Bath.

*Henry rebels against his father in a scene where the predatory-like General Tilney ironically trains a hawk. Also in this scene, the general accepts the fact that a dowry of 400 pounds per year is adequate, after all.

I am ready to hear what you think of this adaptation. Please leave your comments, and I will check in regularly to hold our discussion.

P.S. – One might wish to check out Ashley Judd’s 1992 film Ruby in Paradise, which is considered by many as homage to Northanger Abbey. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Mars vs. Venus – Identifying Male/Female Stereotypes

Posted on May 16, 2012 by Regina Jeffers

On a recent rerun of the TV show The Doctors, the featured physicians answered questions from audience participants on male/female stereotypes and comparisons. As a writer, those differences are forever part of one’s psyche. One cannot have an Alpha male responding to a situation as if he is a female. So, understanding some of the basics about male/female relationships is important.

So, these are “givens” when it comes to creating story lines:

Whereas men have excellent abstract orientation, women, for example, need landmarks to orient themselves. That is why women do not read maps well.

On the show, they showed an experiment that proved that women can multi-task better than men. Men are more linear. They must stay with one task at a time – until it is completed.

Women seek acceptance, where men seek respect.

Men who lie do it to cover up something or to build up their ego. Women lie to make someone feel better.

Women in a committed relationship report that they reach fulfillment only 20% of the time, where men say they satisfy their partners completely 55% of the time.

When a group of women eat out, they will divvy up the bill by calculating who owes what. Men, in a similar situation, will compete for the “honor” of paying the entire bill. They will toss money on the table and pretend they would not like some change.

When listening to a person of authority will maintain a neutral face, while women will show up to six distinct expressions.

Women can speak and listen at the same time. Men are totally lost in this type of situation.

Women smile more (showing their teeth) than men do.

Women talk through their stress, while men close up and withdraw to deal with his stress.

Women learn quickly in a cooperative setting, where men need competition. For YA authors, this means differences in a classroom setting (all female vs. traditional classrooms).

Women need the emotional bonding of hearing a man talk to them and to listen to them to be “turned on.” Men react to visual responses: nudity, sexy underwear, etc.

Women are interested in developing relationships; men are interested in the baser forms of recreation.

Women like to talk through their problems; men rarely speak of their problems to anyone.

Being more right brained, women are more in tune with their emotions.

They will, therefore, cry more often. Men have difficulty accessing the right brain centers, which control grief or sadness or depression. A man will seldom cry because of this. Plus, society looks down on a man who cries, saying he must “act like a man.”

For women, testosterone levels control her depression (literally, reducing her irritability, and her nervousness. Men with high testosterone levels, rarely suffer from sadness.

Women not on the pill, find masculine features attractive, but women on the pill find feminized male faces more attractive.

When men sweat, pheromones, which have no odor themselves, are mixed with the sweat to attract the opposite sex.

Males see a female’s waist to hip ratio instinctively when meeting the woman for the first time. It probably has something to do with childbearing and whether a woman might conceive easily.

Large amounts of dopamine and oxytocin surge in a woman’s body when she is talking/bonding with her partner.

Women pay more attention to the tone of a person’s voice and his body language when interpreting meaning. Men are likely to miss these cues to meaning because they need precision in word choice. 

Obviously, the woman’s nurturing center of the brain is more developed than a man’s, while his sexual center is more developed.

Women show their teeth when smiling. Men do not. In a man, showing one’s teeth is considered a weakness.

Women can recall the spoken word exactly. They have a better blood supply to that part of the brain. Men remember the “gist” of the conversation.

Women have a stronger sense of smell, and the chocolate cravings are natural for they also taste sugar better. Men have a better sense of taste for salty and bitter foods/drinks.

Women are physically and neurologically mature at 17; men not until age 22-24.

Women have better finger dexterity than a man, but he has better eye-hand coordination.

What do you think? Do these assumptions play true or not?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on Mars vs. Venus – Identifying Male/Female Stereotypes