For November, we are presented with a several actors who have been seen in more than one Jane Austen-related film: Lindsay Duncan and Jonny Lee Miller have each been in two, whereas, Hugh Bonneville has been in three Austen films. Both Duncan and Bonneville were in Lost in Austen. Duncan, Bonneville, and Miller were all in Mansfield Park 1999.
http://pf.kizoa.com/sflite.swf?did=1167687&k=P159235046&hk=1
Yesterday’s post reminded me of a line in Neil Simon’s (one of my favorite playwrights) The Sunshine Boys. One of the main characters, Willy, says, “Fifty-seven years in this business, you learn a few things. You know what words are funny and which words are not funny. Alka Seltzer is funny. You say ‘Alka Seltzer’ you get a laugh . . . Words with ‘k’ in them are funny. Casey Stengel, that’s a funny name. Robert Taylor is not funny. Cupcake is funny. Tomato is not funny. Cookie is funny. Cucumber is funny. Car keys. Cleveland . . . Cleveland is funny. Maryland is not funny. Then, there’s chicken. Chicken is funny. Pickle is funny.”
So, I was wondering if you knew of other funny words or phrases. There is a whole science of etymology which explores such things, but as listeners we have certain phrases or words that spark humor. I mean when Steve Martin first said “Excuuuuuse me!” did we not all laugh? The funniest words and those which many comedians employ are those we can categorize as “double entendres.” (Can you tell I used to teach English Language and Composition?) A double entendre is an expression with a double meaning, one of which is a bit more risque than expected. For example, on TV last evening, one could watch Meet the Fokkers.
Please keep it clean in your responses, but have you seen or heard such phrases? I once remember a restaurant billboard that said something such as, “Try our new fish dinner, just for the halibut.”
I mean, let’s face it: “Kumquats” is a funny word. As is “Oshkosh,” “Peoria,” “Chock Full of Nuts,” Organ Grinder,” and “Chamber Pot.” (The last of which I use quite often, as I write Regency romance.)
In a comedy of manners, witticisms are the rule of the day. People are judged as being wits or being idiots, so to speak. The audience (by silent agreement) allow the wits to be in charge, and anything outside the social norms and expectations are subject to ridicule. They allow themselves the pleasure of sitting back and laughing at their own foibles. Comedies of manners have flourished when a population saw themselves as homogeneous and could accept that they are very much like the superior class displayed within the plot. These comedies are associated with the aristocracy. One can find such plays all the way back in the 17th century. James Shirley’s A Lady of Pleasure is one of the first to come to mind.
The wits in a comedy of manners are self-assured, superior beings. They love to quote poetry or famous writers. The are fine speakers, as well as being very resourceful.
The “butts of the jokes” are clumsy and ridiculously in love with themselves. They are lacking in intellect and cannot succeed in social situations due to their lack of a “swift” mind. The poor “butts” are taught a lesson within the comedy on how to be better dressed, how to be less crude, and how to have a “more fulfilling” lifestyle.
However, do not think of the comedy of manners as only about social snobs. The “snobs” are more than just fancy clothes and social manners. These people are masters of mental agility. They are skilled with the repartee and the epigrammatic phrase. They are pure geniuses when it comes to le most juste.
So, what brought on this look at a comedic form. On their Facebook pages, my former students were bemoaning their required reading of Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest, a play I absolutely love to watch, but abhor to read. In it, Wilde is openly satirical of the middle-class values he meets daily in and about London and Dublin. The idle rich aristocracy in this play see the folly of their ways, but they continue them in order to foist upon the lower class a false illusion. The title and much of the play’s action (or inaction) comes from the concept of being “earnest” or “honest.”
Lady Bracknell: To be born in a handbag, whether it had handles or not, seems to me to display a contempt for the ordinary decencies of family life that reminds one of the worst excesses of the French Revolution.
The scene between Lady Bracknell and Jack Worthing is one of my favorites. I used to include it in my acting classes for young people to see how to create a “stereotype” on the stage.
Lady Bracknell’s one dimensional character adds pure comic genius to the scene.
The wits in a comedy of manners mock the foibles of others with a subtlely amused self-deprecation.
This is more on the differences between males and females:
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.
This morning, like so many of you, I awoke an hour earlier than necessary because of the time change to Eastern Standard Time. At first, I considered turning over and going back to sleep, but I flipped on the TV to see if anything of importance happened overnight in the news. Finding nothing to keep my eyes open, I began a search with the remote. When I landed on Turner Classic Movies, I stopped. Here was a film from the golden age of movies of which I was not aware…actually had never seen it before. It was Till the Clouds Roll By, released in 1946 (before I was born), a film about the life of Jerome Kern. Kern was the genius behind these Broadway classics: Showboat, Roberta, and Sweet Adeline.
The film was loaded with some of Kern’s finest pieces. Some of these were featured:
“Ol’ Man River”
“Can’t Help Lovin Dat Man”
“A Fine Romance”
“Smoke Gets in Your Eyes”
“The Way You Look Tonight”
“Long Ago (and Far Away)”
“I Won’t Dance”
“Make Believe”
“Bill”
“The Last Time I Saw Paris”
The movie starred Robert Walker as Jerome Kern, but it had smaller bit parts for some of Hollywood’s finest, some of whom appeared in cameo parts, while others played characters in Kern’s life.
Among them were Frank Sinatra, Dinah Shore, Esther Williams, Angela Lansbury, Lena Horne, Van Heflin, Kathryn Grayson, June Allyson, Tony Martin, Van Johnson, and Judy Garland. Add to that the dancing talents of Gower Champion and Cyd Charisse.
So, although my body clock still needs readjusting, I do not regret the moments of watching the film version about a man whose music we still sing after all these years. It was an enjoyable way to start my day.
Here are some other distinct differences between males and females of which writers must be aware in developing characters:
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.
Today on the TV show, The Doctors, they 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 responded as if he is a female. So, understanding some of the basics about male/female relationships is important.
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 today, 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.
(by Abigail Reynolds) It’s almost NaNoWriMo! NaNoWriMo is the (Inter)National Novel Writing Month, celebrated each year in November. Anyone who wants can join in the fun, even if you’ve never written anything before. The goal is to write 50,000 words of a novel between November 1-30. Yes, that’s about 1800 words a day, which is far more than most authors write, but that’s the point of it. It’s a chance for people who have never dared to write before to set a pen to paper, as well as for more practiced writers to give themselves a push and a challenge. For a good summary of what NaNoWriMo is about, check their website.
But why do NaNoWriMo instead of writing on my own schedule? Because it works. My worst enemy as a writer is myself. I write a sentence, then second-guess it. Did I show, not tell? Did I use an adverb where I shouldn’t? Is this phrase evocative enough? Then I erase the sentence and start again… and again and again. NaNoWriMo helps me avoid that trap. So what if I told instead of showed, or used an adverb or a speech tag? It’s words, and it counts towards that 1800 words a day! So what if it’s bad? So I keep what I wrote instead of erasing it. Then, in December, I go back and improve it. But I can’t improve and edit something I haven’t written in the first place, hence NaNoWriMo. It gets me through that first draft. Yes, it’s awful, but at least I have something to work from later.
Meantime, NaNoWriMo gives me a kick in the pants. I can’t decide not to write that day, because I know I’ll have to post online how many words I’ve done and all my writing buddies will see it. There’s no “I’m not in the mood” or “I don’t have time.” More importantly, there’s a certain energy that goes along with writing in the company of others. It’s inspirational.
In our Austen community, we have a variety of authors of all stripes – published, unpubbed, and ones who have never dared show a word of what they’ve written to anyone – who participate in JaAuNaNoWriMo. Yes, that’s Jane Austen NaNoWriMo. We also have complete newcomers to writing. The more, the merrier! If you’ve ever thought about writing, this is the time to give it a try. You’ll get lots of encouragement… without ever having to show anybody what you’ve written. No fear of criticism, no angst, just lots of fun, support, and writing. Who knows where that could lead?
So who is in and what are you planning to write? It doesn’t matter if it’s not Austen-related. I’m wavering between two stories, both Regency, one a variation and one a sequel. Sign up on the NaNoWriMo site – it’s free, and you get some cool stuff including a free copy of your story from CreateSpace. I love NaNoWriMo writing buddies! My username there is littorina if you want to be buddies.
Does anyone know if there’s already a JaAuNaNoWriMo group? If not, we could start a thread in the NaNoWriMo forums for Austen-related fiction. I’ll be posting follow ups here every week or two about how I’m doing, and I hope to hear from some of you as well!
Well, Abigail Reynolds convinced me. I have two projects. First, I wish to finish A Touch of Cashémere, the third book in my touch series. Secondly, I need to produce a short story for Ulysses Press’s new project entitled, The Road to Pemberley. If I can accomplish both by the end of November, I will have had a successful month. Come on. Join in. We all can go crazy together.
My latest book, The Phantom of Pemberley, is part of the promotion for Borders new eBook Reader, KoBo.
Why are Zombies being mixed with my Jane Austen?
Most people seem to agree that zombies and other monsters are an open testament to a troubled time. Zombies found their peak in George Romero movies, and they reflect whatever we might fear. These monster stories cover everything from pure horror to campy humor. Bela Lugosi appeared in 1932’s White Zombie, based upon traditional Caribbean voodoo, which was followed in 1943 by I Walked with a Zombie, also a Caribbean voodoo story line. Zombie stories were very popular during the Great Depression. So what does this hodge podge of information say about “Zombies”?
It says that zombies and similar monsters represent different things in different times. Zombie stories in the 1950s symbolized the Cold War; in the 1980s, they represented pollution. Beth Accomando in “Zombies Invade NPR,” says, “Zombies are the blank canvas to reflect whatever scares us, be it racism, disease, or the end of the world.” She goes on to say, zombies “reflect the fact that people are currently in crisis mode.”
Unlike vampire stories, which have been found in literature for hundreds of years, zombie stories are a relatively new phenomena. Haitian folklore involving the raising of the dead by a voodoo master appears to be the basis of zombie stories; and, like the folklore, troubled times seem to raise the dead. Nowadays, zombies symbolize the global economic recession and a world in turmoil. Where vampire story lines touch on “divisive” issues, zombies satirize the demise of contemporary culture. 1994’s Interview with a Vampire reflected our country’s varied opinions on AIDS; 1968’s Night of the Living Dead demonstrated our angst during the Vietnam era, even going so far as to dehumanize the combatants. The Vietnamese were “a faceless people, who wished to do us harm” – such as portrayed by the zombies.
Currently, we are being bombarded by countless zombie stories: Breathers: A Zombie’s Lament, which is a novel turned into a movie and being produced by Diablo Cody of Juno fame; Zombieland, which starred Woody Harrelson and Abigail Breslin; World War Z, a novel by Max Brooks, which has been turned into a movie by Marc Foster, director of Quantum of Solace; Resident Evil 5, a zombie video game, and Michael Jackson’s “Thriller,” which is being made into a Broadway show. Zombies plus subgenre combinations seem to be the way of publishers. For example, Star Wars: Death Troopers is a mix of zombies and science fiction. In fact, a romance anthology, entitled My Zombie Valentine, exists.
One of the ideas, which I found very unique, came from Illogic Tree, which purports that American politics set the trends for zombie and vampire films. Quite simply, zombies are popular when a Republican is in office because “Republicans fear the revolt of the masses.” And likewise, vampire films are popular with a Democrat in office because “Democrats are often fearful of upper-class America and believe the rich are bleeding the country dry.” Illogic Tree even using statistics to prove their point that vampires are “blue” and zombies are “red.” According to the article, 183 zombie films were produced in the seven years that Bush was in office (beginning in 2000). During Clinton’s era, we saw Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Interview with a Vampire, Blade, and Dracula: Dead and Loving It, as well as many other less popular offerings. Who knows whether this idea is true, but is it not just fascinating?
Again, how do zombies fit in with my Jane Austen? Lev Grossman in “Zombies are the New Vampires” says, “Apparently no one is safe from the shambling, newly marketable armies of the dead — not even Jane Austen. The author of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, Seth Grahame-Smith, tells a tale about a strangely familiar English family called the Bennets, who are struggling to marry off five daughters, while at the same time fighting off wave after wave of relentless, remorseless undead — since, as the novel’s classic first line tells us, ‘It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains.’”
Grossman continues, “It is surprising how easily Austen’s novel succumbs to the conventions of a zombie flick. Much of Austen’s work is about using wit and charm and good manners to avoid talking about ugly realities like sex and money. In Grahame-Smith’s version, zombies are just another one of those ugly realities. ‘What was so fun about the book is the politeness of it all,’ says Grahame-Smith. ‘They don’t even like to say the word zombie, even though their country is besieged by zombies. They’re everywhere, and people are literally being torn apart before their very eyes, and other than the very few, like Elizabeth Bennet, who face this problem head on, they would almost rather not talk about it.’”
Grossman goes on to say, “If there’s something new about today’s zombie, it’s his relatability. Sure, he’s an abomination and a crime against all that is good and holy. But he exemplifies some real American values too. He’s plucky and tenacious — you can cut off his limbs and he’ll keep on coming atcha. And he’s humble. You won’t find zombies swanning around and putting on airs like some other monsters. They’re monsters of the people. So, down with vampires. Long live (or is it die?) the zombie: the official monster of the recession.”
Every Woman Dreams... 