Again, another took me forever, but I finally finished and got around to posting it blog. This time for Mansfield Park... which we read in March, and had the meeting for in early April, and now look - it's the end of MAY! I'm on a ROLL with these Austen books and blogs! I am trying to break the habit for the last few though. *fingers crossed*
Mansfield Park is another Austen that I was familiar with but had never read the book in full. And after reading it fully, it has to be one of my least favourite ones! My thoughts on this one are kind of going to be all over, so bare with me. There will of course be reviews of the adaptations at the end as well!
We had fun picking apart this one because there are no likable characters in it. The only two remotely likeable ones are Fanny and Edmund, but then as Jane said, they're still "sanctimonious, holier-than-thou sticks in the mud". I love how she put it that way, it describes them perfectly. As for the other characters: Aunt Norris is the WORST, the Crawfords are so stuck up, Tom is barely there, the Bertram girls are ridiculous and Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram are oblivious. Not one character is really very likeable.
We discussed the classism in British culture - historical and current - and how Austen, even as an outsider herself, did a fantastic job commenting on and portraying the class dynamic in Mansfield Park. Janean had a lot to say about the "benevolence of rich people", which is a key plot point at the center of Mansfield and gets brought up a lot by the characters in the story. The Bertram's take in Fanny, their niece, and support her as she grows up. A "kindness" that is never far from Aunt Norris' notice and she is apt to bring it up often and ridicule Fanny. Clearly this is just a deflection on Aunt Norris' side because of her own lowly place in society compared to the Bertram's. Like I said - the WORST. Fanny doesn't even do anything and never believes herself above the station she is well aware she's in.
Mary and Henry Crawford, basically the 'villains' of Mansfield Park, are quite intriguing. Austen doesn't often write actual villains into her works, mostly the issues are of a character's circumstance to overcome, but with Mansfield there are recognizable people as the issue and causing issues. For example, Mary's intentions towards Edmund are never honest. She constantly belittles him about his choice of the clergy and even revels in the fact that Tom may die and Edmund will become the heir apparent. Evil motives from the get go. And as for Henry! Well, he dallies with an engaged woman's feelings, uses the other young ladies as emotional play things and is a complete tool-bag to Fanny despite his supposed "love and devotion" for her. Ugh, his character really disgusts me by then end of the book. What an ass.
My biggest gripe with this book is the part involving the play. It was waaay too long of a section and other than it advancing Mary and Henry Crawford's motives, it really did not have any other point. Oh yes, so Tom gets pissy and runs away, big deal. And Fanny sees Henry's attentions to Maria, but she witnesses that at Sotherton too. And you learn how much of a puppy Edmund is to Mary Crawford wiles, but again, that is covered in other parts of the story. I just don't understand why it had to be 50 pages worth of drivel about a ridiculous play. I digress.
As I said, after reading Mansfield Park, it is probably my least favourite Austen novel. To those of you who love it: #sorrynotsorry. I just don't like it. Too many problems, even aside from the borderline incest of Fanny and Edmund. (Yes, I know they're cousins, BUT they're first cousins, AND they were raised to be like brother and sister, soooo.... no thank you).
Obviously this is a novel for Austen fans and it cannot be left out when doing a marathon of Austen's works. With the way we're reading them, in written order, it actually works well as a middle of the pack book because you can compare it to early works like Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice, massive fan favourites, as well as to the later works of Emma and Persuasion which are more refined and polished stories in regards to characters and plots.
__________________________________________
Now, on to the critiquing of the adaptations! The 1999 version is probably the most well known and features many familiar faces such as Johnny Lee Miller as Edmund, Frances O'Connor as Fanny, James Purefoy as Tom Bertram, Victoria Hamilton as Maria, Embeth Davidtz as Mary Crawford and the most unlikely Mr. Rushworth - Hugh Bonneville of Downton Abbey fame! While all the actors were well cast, the most disappointing was the really attractive Henry Crawford. He is supposed to be plain. Like I get sexing it up a bit, but it took away from the idea of the character and his ability to woo women despite being plain and not overtly handsome.
One of the biggest let downs of this adaptation is that fact that the creators overlaid some of Jane Austen's own qualities onto Fanny Price for the film. She is a writer, she breaks the fourth-wall and talks directly to the audience (a trick perfected by Deadpool) and they swap her brother William, a key character in the novel with a sister, much like Austen was very close with her own sister. Regardless, it seems to work and the main points of the novel are all there. Another interestingly added side-plot to the adaptation is Tom Bertram's abhorrence of the slave trade and his father keeping slaves in Antigua. It added some controversy to the film that isn't present in Austen's writings and it added some controversy to the film's reception as well.
The saving grace for me of the 1999 adaptation is obviously Johnny Lee Miller. He's fantastic and I love him in everything. Especially Austen adaptations. He does period dramas so well, especially all the tailored clothing. He just looks good.
The other adaptation I watched was the 2007 version starring Billie Piper as Fanny Price. Other notable appearances by Hayley Atwell as Mary Crawford, James D'Arcy as Tom Bertram and Douglas Hodge as Sir Thomas. I believe the casting was better in the 1999 version, but perhaps that's just me or the Johnny Lee Miller talking.
I did not like this adaptation as much as the older one. A big part of that has to be because of the ending. Completely ruined the ending! And where the heck was Fanny's family?! The fact that her family is poor and she goes home to see them in that state is a HUGE factor in Fanny's character development towards the end of the novel. WHY DID THEY NOT INCLUDE THEM?!
I may be going out on a limb here, but I think Frances O'Connor was a better Fanny Price than Billie Piper. However, they did at least get Henry Crawford right in this adaptation, he was plain and unexceptional, just as he ought to be. I also think Embeth Davidtz did a better job as Mary Crawford than Atwell. Don't get me wrong though, I love Hayley Atwell and she is a phenomenal actress, I just don't think she played the suave woman-about-town Mary Crawford as well as Embeth. And oh my did James D'Arcy in his long luscious locks make me cringe when he was on screen. Ooo boy, it was not a good look for him.
