Austen Actors with January Birthdays

Posted on January 11, 2011 by Regina Jeffers

January brings us lots of “oldies, but goodies,” and I am not speaking of the actors being old in chronological years, although some are just that. I am speaking of some of the older adaptations of Austen films. We have actors/actresses from Pride and Prejudice (1958), Pride and Prejudice(1967), Sense and Sensibility (1971), Persuasion (1971), and Emma (1972). Five of our thirteen have appeared in one of the Pride and Prejudice adaptations, while three have been in Sense and Sensibility films. Joanna David is the only one this month who has appeared in more than one Austen adaptation. She was Elinor Dashwood in 1971 and Mrs. Gardiner in 1995. We also have two lovely Bond girls this month: Rosamund Pike and Gemma Arterton.

http://pf.kizoa.com/sflite.swf?did=1265322&k=P41991838&hk=1

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Austen Actors with January Birthdays

Austen Actors with No Birth Dates in Their Bios

Posted on January 3, 2011 by Regina Jeffers

Austen Actors with Unknown Birthdates
As acting is a business where “age” is an issue, some of our favorite Austen actors list no actual birthdate in their bios. We understand. Austen, too, lived in an age when youth and beauty were the criteria for marriage for a woman – a time when women were on the shelf at age five and twenty. Early 19th Century men were most “masculine” between the ages of 30 and 35. Sounds like Hollywood to me!! As such, we find some of our most endearing Austen actors without a definite birthdate, among them, Amanda Root, JJ Field, Simon Woods, Laurence Fox, Mark Dymond, Adrian Lukis, Elizabeth Garvie, and Mark Strong. We have located three such actors from Mansfield Park 1983, Northanger Abbey 2007, Pride and Prejudice 2005. We have two each from Lost in Austen, Becoming Jane, Pride and Prejudice 1980, Sense and Sensibility 1981, Sense and Sensibility 2008, Emma (TV) 1996, and Persuasion 1995. Six of 25 actors have appeared in multiple Austen adaptations: Peter Wight (Pride and Prejudice 2005 and Persuasion 2007); Irene Richard (Pride and Prejudice 1980 and Sense and Sensibility 1981); Lucy Robinson (Pride and Prejudice 2005 and Emma[TV] 1996); Sophie Thompson (Persuasion 1995 and Emma 1996); David Savile (Pride and Prejudice 1967 and Persuasion 1971); and Sylvestra Le Touzel (Mansfield Park 1983 and Northanger Abbey 2007).

<object width=”560″ height=”420″><param name=”movie” value=”http://pf.kizoa.com/sflite.swf?did=1293323&k=P82672504&hk=1″></param><param name=”wmode” value=”transparent”></param><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><embed src=”http://pf.kizoa.com/sflite.swf?did=1293323&k=P82672504&hk=1″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” wmode=”transparent” width=”560″ height=”420″ allowFullScreen=”true”></embed></object>

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Austen Actors with No Birth Dates in Their Bios

Northanger Abbey 1987 – Movie Discussion

Posted on December 30, 2010 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 and Mansfield 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 , , | Comments Off on Northanger Abbey 1987 – Movie Discussion

Scotland’s Nostradamus

Posted on December 29, 2010 by Regina Jeffers

The Brahan Seer, Kenneth Mackenzie (or Coinneach Odhar), is Scotland’s most famous prophet. Often referred to as the Scottish Nostradamus, Mackenzie lived in the 17th Century. Most experts believe that he was born on the Isle of Lewis (at Baile-na-Cille in the Parish of Uig) and that he later worked as a laborer on the Earl of Seaforth’s Brahan estate near Fortrose. Mackenzie is said to have been gifted with the “Sight.” He could predict futuristic events. Amazingly, many of those predictions have come true, with a high degree of accuracy.

What were some of the Brahan Seer’s predictions?
The Seer predicted the joining of the lochs in the Great Glen. The Caledonian Canal was built in the 19th Century.
He reportedly foretold of The Battle of Culloden in 1745. “Oh, Drumossie, thy bleak moor shall, ere many generations have passed away, be stained with the best blood of the Highlands. Glad am I that I will not see the day, for it will be a fearful period; heads will be lopped off by the score, and no mercy shall be shown or quarter given on either side.”
He spoke of “streams of fire and water” running beneath the streets of Inverness and into every home. In the 19th Century, gas and water pipes fulfilled this prediction.
The Seer told of a time when Scotland would once again have its own Parliament. He foretold of this occurring when men could walk dry shod from England to France. In 1994, the Channel Tunnel opened. A few years later, the first Scottish Parliament since 1707 took its seats.
He said, “There is a day coming when the jaw-bone of the big sheep will put the plough into the rafters and no man will drive cattle through Kintail. The sheep will become so numerous that the bleating of one shall be heard by another from Lochalsh to Kintail. You will not see it, but your children’s children will see it when they are forced to flee before the march of the great white army.” During what is known as the “Highland Clearances,” families were driven from the land, and it was given over to the sheep grazing.
“A village with four churches will get another spire, and a ship will come from the sky and moor at it.” In 1932, this incident proved correct when an airship was lashed to the spire of a new church after an emergency landing.
The most impressive of the Seer’s predictions was the elimination of the Seaforth clan. Reportedly, the Countess Seaforth requested Mackenzie’s sight in regards to her husband, who was away in Paris. Mackenzie was made, on threat of death, to tell Isabella, the wife, that the Earl was with another woman. He also told of the eventual end of the Seaforth line, with the last of them being deaf and dumb. Scarlet fever, when he was a child, left Francis Humberston Mackenzie, deaf and dumb. Francis inherited the title in 1783. All four of Francis’s male children died prematurely, and the line ended with his death in 1815. For his troubles, Kenneth was tried for witchcraft, found guilty, and burned in a tar barrel.
To compound this tale, another part of the prediction for the Seaforth line was that “His possessions shall be inherited by a white-coifed widow from the east, and she will kill her own sister.” When the male line of the Mackenzies died away, Mary, the eldest daughter and widow of Admiral Hood, returned from India, where she had been living. She wore the traditional Indian white mourning hood in honor of her husband. One day, Mary and her sister, Lady Caroline, were riding together in a carriage driven by Mary. The ponies bolted, and Mary could not control the coach. Caroline was thrown from the carriage and died from her injuries.
A stone by the lighthouse at Chanonry Point, near Fortrose, supposedly marks the place where the Brahan Seer died. The inscription reads, “This stone commemorates the legend of Coinneach Odhar, better known as the BRAHAN SEER. Many of his prophecies were fulfilled and tradition holds that his untimely death by burning in tar followed his final prophecy of the doom of the House of Seaforth.”

No one knows the truth for sure. However, the legend of the Brahan Seer remains. A Celtic stone, known as the Eagle Stone, stands in Strathpeffer, Ross-shire. Reportedly, the Seer predicted that if the stone fell down three times, that Loch Ussie would flood the valley below so that ships could sail to Strathpeffer. The stone has tumbled twice. Today, it sets in concrete to prevent a third fall.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Scotland’s Nostradamus

Pride and Prejudice 2005 – Movie Discussion

Posted on December 28, 2010 by Regina Jeffers

This is a film where the spectator enjoys a lesson in Voyeurism 101. We follow the story as we view the characters through windows, eavesdrop on them through doors, read over their shoulders, stand behind them while they are conversing, etc. From the opening shot to the closing kiss (in the American version), we are drawn into the Bennet family through the character of Elizabeth, portrayed by Keira Knightley. The opening shot establishes Elizabeth as being both “inside” the action, but also an “outside” observer through which the audience will view the story. Joe Wright, the director, uses camera angles and filmography to tell the story of Darcy and Elizabeth’s love. He gives us a story steeped in Romantic elements, which seems a bit odd to those who have been taught that Jane Austen rejected the concept of “self,” emphasized by Romanticism.

In that opening shot, Elizabeth is walking home reading what is thought to be Austen’s First Impressions. In other words, Elizabeth is reading “her story.” Reaching her home, (through the camera’s lens) we follow her around the house. We see that this is a “working” estate, rather than what we sometimes see in the more traditional “Heritage” films. Elizabeth walks behind the sheets hanging on the line. They obstruct our vision, but this also tells the viewer that Elizabeth’s perceptions are hampered.

In one of my favorite shots in the film, we see Elizabeth most intimately in the “mirror” sequence. Masterly, Wright summarizes three chapters of Austen’s novel with soft lighting and darkness, using both to show the passage of time. We find various blurred medium long shots and medium close-ups of Elizabeth, of Darcy, and of the letter. They provide the viewer with insights into Elizabeth’s internal turmoil. She turns suddenly when she realizes that she has misjudged Darcy, but he is gone. To Charlotte’s question of her health, Elizabeth responds, “I hardly know.” Hardly know what? Herself? Darcy? the Truth?

Another masterly crafted scene is the Netherfield Ball. The camera steps in to refocus the audience’s attention that this is a turning point in Darcy and Elizabeth’s relationship. The camera leaves the traditional set up and follows them in their movements. We whirl and complete the dance steps along with them. Then the camera “crosses the line” by moving more than 180 degrees. I must tell you when I first saw this, I nearly jumped out of my chair. One rarely sees this film technique used so well. The characters’ positioning from right to left in the frame reverses, telling the viewer that everything has changed for both of them. It is a leap from spatial reality to a dream. The characters complete each other. This scene forecasts the film’s resolution: Social isolation will ultimately unite them. They dance alone. Before, they were only going through the motions of social performances.

In the “Accomplished Lady” scene, the dialogue mixes idioms with archaic sounding sentence structure. Simon Woods (Bingley) says, “amazing you young ladies” and “you all paint tables….” The script says, “It’s amazing how young ladies…” and “They all paint tables….” Therefore, Caroline’s use of “She must have …” makes her appear more distant and impersonal. A look at the filmography of this scene shows Elizabeth surrounded by emblems of the ornate femininity that she rejects: a decorative vase, a framed portrait of a young woman in white, a bowl of flowers, etc. During this scene, both Darcy and Elizabeth remained seated. This gives them visual authority. The change in shot from character to character is often slightly off sync with the beginning and ending of each speech. This creates movement in an otherwise static scene. The final shot shows Caroline and Elizabeth separating, crossing behind Darcy, and sitting. They represent different potential mates for Darcy. Of course, any student of Austen knows that Wright combined two separate incidents from the novel into this one scene (the letter writing scene and talk of Bingley’s poor handwriting and the walking about the room scene).

At Pemberley, Elizabeth sees Darcy’s sensual side. She realizes his true worth through the beauty of his home. There is constant camera movement, which emphasizes the significance of the moment. The camera circles Elizabeth and then Darcy’s statue, showing her emerging feelings for Darcy. Did you notice the right to left tracking shot of (Chatsworth) Pemberley’s facáde? As Elizabeth moves through the house, she touches the various objects, giving her a “true” picture of Darcy. “I hope to afford you more clarity in the future.” Elizabeth peers through the door to see Darcy with Georgiana. His role as a loving brother softens Elizabeth’s opinion of him. Did you happen to notice that the music Elizabeth overhears Georgiana playing is the same as at the beginning of the film when she is walking “home.” In other words, Elizabeth is at home at Pember

Rosings Park’s murals show men laboring under tyrannical conditions – under the oppressive social order represented by Lady Catherine. The murals at Pemberley depict men and women in a pastoral setting. It is the ideal place for Darcy and Elizabeth’s love to grow.

Wright shows that Elizabeth needs to be in a natural setting. That is where she will bloom. In Derbyshire, Elizabeth stands on the bluff. She is part of the rugged landscape. She belongs in Derbyshire with Darcy. She sits on the roots of a 200+ year old tree (which is really in Nottingham). She must set down roots in this area. The free running deer represent Elizabeth’s new sense of freedom.

Darcy is seen as a social outsider. The film creates him as a Byronic hero. He is a reluctant social participant. Matthew Macfadyen’s body language and facial expressions suggest discomfort – a true dislike for social practices – an unhappiness rather than hauteur or censure. The film begins in the countryside at dawn. It ends with the second proposal in the same setting. Neither Elizabeth nor Darcy is dressed properly. They will, therefore, live their lives on their own terms.

As one can see, there are many areas of discussion on this film. It is quite different from the more traditional 1995 P&P, but that does not mean that it is not worthy in its own right. Keep in mind, that a 2-hour commercial film should not be compared to a nearly 6-hour “heritage” adaptation. I welcome your comments. I will check in regularly to respond.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Austen Actors with December Birthdays

Posted on December 26, 2010 by Regina Jeffers

December brings us several of our favorite actors from Jane Austen film adaptations. Enjoy the show.

name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><embed src=”http://pf.kizoa.com/sflite.swf?did=1232602&k=P29291238&hk=1″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” wmode=”transparent” width=”560″ height=”420″ allowFullScreen=”true”></embed></object>

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Austen Actors with December Birthdays

Jane Austen’s Will

Posted on December 15, 2010 by Regina Jeffers

This comes from the National Archives.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/dol/images/examples/pdfs/JAusten.pdf

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Free E-Books from Sourcebooks

Posted on December 14, 2010 by Regina Jeffers

From Leah Hultenschmidt of Sourcebooks:
December 16 is Jane Austen’s birthday and as the world’s leading Jane Austen publisher, Sourcebooks, is throwing a huge one-day-only birthday book bash. Sourcebooks will be offering special ebook pricing on 10 of the best Austen-inspired novels – and what better pricing could there be than free?

On December 16 only, the following bestselling ebooks will be available free through Sourcebooks’ retail partners (Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Borders, etc):

Mr. and Mrs. Fitzwilliam Darcy: Two Shall Become One– by Sharon Lathan
Eliza’s Daughter – by Joan Aiken
The Darcys and the Bingleys – by Marsha Altman
Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife – by Linda Berdoll
What Would Jane Austen Do? – by Laurie Brown
The Pemberley Chronicles– by Rebecca Collins
The Other Mr. Darcy– by Monica Fairview
Mr. Darcy’s Diary – by Amanda Grange
Lydia Bennet’s Story– by Jane Odiwe
Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy– by Abigail Reynolds

But the party doesn’t stop there, because also for one day only, Sourcebooks is offering free illustrated ebook editions of all 6 of Austen’s novels. These special editions include the full novels plus the legendary color illustrations of the Brock brothers, originally created to accompany the books in 1898.

Be on the lookout for these deals and spread the word around!

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

Austen Actors with December Birthdays

Posted on December 13, 2010 by Regina Jeffers

name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”>http://pf.kizoa.com/sflite.swf?did=1232602&k=P29291238&hk=1

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Austen Actors with December Birthdays

Open Carriages in the 19th Century

Posted on December 12, 2010 by Regina Jeffers

I am writing a new book where I have had to do additional research on early 19th Century carriages. I cannot imagine traveling during this time period. Seven to ten miles per hour was the average speed. Just think how long it would take to go from London to Edinburgh, Scotland. Most books agree with two weeks being the norm for this trip. These types of facts are very important when writing an historically accurate novel. It drove me crazy in A Touch of Cashémere, which I just finished. I wanted to bring the characters together in a speedier fashion, but I had to allow several days of travel because of the locations. Railroads, as a form of transportation for people traveling great distances, did not appear until the latter part of the 19th Century. In the early 1800s, which is the focus of much of my writing, the horse and carriage was the norm.

So, what type of carriages would one find during this time period?
A Barouche was a four-wheeled carriage, with two inside seats facing each other. It was a favorite among the aristocracy who liked to put on airs. Lady Catherine, in Pride and Prejudice, tells Elizabeth Bennet and Maria Lucas that she could take them part of the way from Kent to Hertfordshire in her Barouche. The carriage had a fold-up hood, which could protect the delicate skin of the ladies at that time.

Likewise, a Landau was also a “fancy” carriage. It too had four wheels and two opposite facing seats, but it had a hood a each end. Two horses were necessary to pull a landau.

A Victoria became popular at mid century. Up until then, a woman driving her own carriage was frowned upon. The Victoria, however, was popular with women drivers. It was an open carriage with four wheels, and it sat lower to the ground than some carriages. It was made for only one to two occupants.

A Berlin was a four wheeled carriage with a hood. It was quite large in comparison to the others available at the time. It could seat four “comfortably.”

The Phaeton was a lightweight carriage with open sides. Again, in Pride and Prejudice, in her letter explaining Darcy’s involvement in Lydia Bennet’s and George Wickham’s speedy marriage, Elizabeth’s Aunt Gardiner asks for a Phaeton ride about the estate grounds once Elizabeth marries Mr. Darcy. A Phaeton could be drawn by one or two horses. It sat higher than many of the other carriages.

A Gig was a two-wheeled carriage. It was lightweight and designed for a single horse. It sat 1-2 people. Young “rakes” during the Regency period often owned a gig or a curricle.

A Curricle was also a two-wheeled carriage. It was considered essential for driving out in Hyde Park during the “fashionable hour.” Two horses pulled a curricle, and most young nobles at the time found it necessary for their masculine image to own one.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Open Carriages in the 19th Century