It has taken forever for me to write about Northanger Abbey! Honestly though, it has been because I keep forgetting, or putting it off. I am really rather busy these days what with work, class, reading for book club or for pleasure and trying to get my cross stitch projects done. I think I may have taken on too much over the course of the pandemic.
I had not read Northanger Abbey before book club so it was an adventure. Some of the other girls have, and thus the discussion was a nice juxtaposition on fresh eyes and revisiting ones to the story.
The naiveté and ridiculousness of Catherine Morland's character was a fun part of the discussion. Austen's description of her at the beginning of the novel really sets the tone for how the reader interacts with her during the rest of the story. I know there were plenty of times where I was shaking my head at what crazy idea she'd have or bonkers situation she would get herself into next. The idea that Catherine thought of herself as a heroine like in her books was ludicrous because her life, no matter how she tried, was not like a novel and she came off a really silly most of the time, especially once she got to Northanger Abbey.
We all agreed that the Thorpes were the worst part of the book, particularly the brother, John Thorpe. I could not stand it any time he was on the page. I really liked the sister, Isabella, right up until she flakes on Catherine's brother and then expects Catherine to still be on her side. Just wow. There are quite a few really unlikeable characters in Northanger Abbey. But of course, we all loved Mr. Tilney. He is a much more quirky and down to earth male character than Austen's other main men. He stands out as more of an actual partner than just a "good match" to the heroine.
Some of the discussion circled around how Northanger, while written later, has less nuances and substance than Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice when read back to back (like we are). The story is much more simple and things like chaperones and manners around introductions are explained in a way that fits the story. Additionally, the narrator (Austen) inserts herself more into the story by pointing out certain details or explaining the significance of the novel format or criticizing the necessity of history, for example.
Overall, the book was funny and light-hearted, a very different type of Austen experience for me. I liked it even though it almost seems out of place with the rest of her novels. Especially if one doesn't read the anthology works of her early life in Love and Freindship and Other Youthful Writings. It fits in much better with those stories and makes more sense in context with them than with the other full length published novels.
___________________________________________
And I also watched the adaption from 2007 starring Felicity Jones and JJ Feild as Catherine and Mr. Tilney. Considering the book itself was quite ridiculous, this adaption steps that up a notch by including interspersed scenes of Catherine imagining or dreaming she is the heroine from the book The Mysteries of Udolpho. It was weird... And honestly, JJ Feild aside, I thought this adaptation was quite terrible.
I also learned from IMDB that while "Catherine is shown multiple times reading, fantasizing, and talking about The Mysteries of Udolpho by Mrs. Radcliffe... the bulk of her fantasies and voice over come from The Monk by Lewis, a much more lurid novel than the tame Mrs. Radcliffe's." So that's very interesting and a funny goof up!
If I thought I didn't like John Thrope in the book, well then the casting for him in the 2007 film just did it in for me. The actor cast was beyond creepy and I just couldn't every time he was on screen. Like... *shudders* blech. However, it was interesting to see Carey Mulligan in another Austen film and playing a completely different character to her Kitty Bennet in the 2005 Pride & Prejudice adaptation.
No comments:
Post a Comment