People can be so dense.

[jedusor]

You know that fold in the top front part of your ear? It's kind of hard to clean under there, don't you think? It would be easier to just cut off that part. Then you'd never have to worry about lifting up that flap to clean under it. Wouldn't life be so much easier that way? Besides, you don't really need that part to hear. And if you had it done when you were a newborn infant, you'd never miss it, and you wouldn't remember the pain either.

Religious reasons for circumcision are tricky to argue with, not that I don't try, but I am fucking fed up with people who are in favor of it because it's "easier to clean without the foreskin."


Aaaanyway, I finished "Pride and Prejudice." Two things about it bugged me:

1. Mr. Darcy's change of character. Too sudden, too abrupt, too unbelievable. I was starting to like his character, actually, and understand a bit how his upbringing and circumstances had affected him and contributed to his overblown vanity. Then, all of a sudden, he's nice and sweet and polite and well-mannered and everyone likes him. I was seriously expecting this to be explained right up until the very end. Nope, all it says is that it happened because Elizabeth's rejection of him made him realize what a twerp he was being. Nice as it would be for life to work like that, it doesn't.

2. Jane Austen is the queen, nay, the empress of run-on sentences. Complex structure is one thing, but when I have to reread a sentence four times to understand what's being said, it really takes away from the flow of the book.

Other than that, it was good. I kind of wish I had Mr. Bennet as a dad.

Comments

My take on Mr. Darcy...

[shoutingboy.livejournal.com]

I don't think Darcy really changes his character. He's always brusque until you get to know him; the fact that Bingham is his devoted friend shows, I think, that the warmer side has always been there, too.

Darcy gets off on a really bad foot with Elizabeth, then works on presenting himself better. I think the big, drastic shift is in Elizabeth's perception of him. We're mainly seeing the world through her eyes, and she's firmly convinced that she knows exactly what Darcy is like (the "pride" and "prejudice" are hers quite as much as his). All of a sudden, she's forced to confront how wrong she is about a lot of things--Wickham first and foremost--and that makes her realize how badly she was misjudging Darcy, too.

I do think Darcy changes his attitude a lot after the first proposal, but I don't think that's a change to his fundamental character. Rather, he'd been self-absorbed for a while--so wrapped up in how inappropriate Elizabeth was for him that he didn't realize how he must seem to her--and after all, most of the women around him adore him (especially Miss Bingham and his sister), and he did get a bit full of himself. But I think Elizabeth's rejection brought him to himself more than it changed him.

That said, it's been a while since I've read it. It's possible I'm misremembering a lot (not least of which, I may have gotten any of these names wrong).

Re: My take on Mr. Darcy...

[kaberett.livejournal.com]

I think the big, drastic shift is in Elizabeth's perception of him.

Yes! Yes. That. Precisely.

Elizabeth's rejection of Darcy's proposal is pretty much the only time in the text when she's presented in a genuinely bad light, I think. Notice also that almost the entire novel is from Elizabeth's perspective (with a few switches to seeing things from Charlotte's PoV), so we don't get to see what other people think of her- she's just always right, obviously, because she's got to be always right. She does judge Darcy incredibly quickly, because her vanity[1]- more than anything else- has been hurt; the original title of the novel was First Impressions, remember. She then goes on and on and on about how badly she misjudged the situation etc etc etc, following the letter- and, of course, so have we, because seeing through Elizabeth's eyes, we accepted Elizabeth's understanding of events as pretty much infallible.

I think it's a pretty neat trick that Austen plays on us- it's kind of fun the way she makes us revaluate how much we trust sources, and so on, and as Elizabeth is questioning herself, so does the reader. :)

Sorry for ranting- this is so much more fun than the other essay I'm supposed to be writing!

[1] "Pride," observed Mary, wh piqued herself upon the solidity of her relections, "is a very common failing I believe. [...] Vanity and pride are different things, though the words are often used synonimously. A person may be proud without being vain. Pride relates more to our opinion of ourselves, vanity to what we would have others think of us."

Re: My take on Mr. Darcy...

[jedusor.livejournal.com]

We're mainly seeing the world through her eyes, and she's firmly convinced that she knows exactly what Darcy is like (the "pride" and "prejudice" are hers quite as much as his)

Hmm. I hadn't really thought of that. It tends to be a bit difficult for me to realize that what I'm reading is being influenced by a character's opinion, particularly when the book is written in third person and occasionally switches to other perspectives. I do still think that the unfavorable way Darcy was first presented was overdone, but it's easier to see that as being on purpose the way you look at it.

Perhaps Miss Austen intended Darcy's sudden change to inspire this kind of discussion.

[kaberett.livejournal.com]

I could copy up some of my notes on the subject.

But I don't think that the character change is so unbelievable: Darcy only acts in the fashion that all his servants and locals are accustomed to. He does mention, elsewhere, how uncomfortable he is in company- and I think that's entirely understandable.

Note also the way he's described in the opening volumes: His character was decided. Or that he was judged by all to be...

Note that: judged by society.

Compare with the descriptions of Collins, f'rex: Collins is described as something, rather than Austen saying that other characters considered him to be something. I think that's important.

I could ramble on at more length, if you like- this is my GCSE set text. :)

[jedusor.livejournal.com]

Collins is described as something, rather than Austen saying that other characters considered him to be something.

Hmm. I'd have to get my copy of the book, but I'm fairly sure Darcy wasn't always described in that manner. It could be that Elizabeth's perception influenced the descriptions even when it wasn't expressly shown, as Andrew said (and you so strongly agreed with). I didn't get that feeling of questioning when Elizabeth was going on about her misjudgment, though, probably because when I was reading the first part of the book, I didn't think of it as being from her point of view.

Ramble away, darling. You know I always love hearing what you have to say.

[mercymckinnon.livejournal.com]

I love that book. Then again, I love most of Jane Austen's books. Anyways. If you want to give yourself a nice treat now that you've read the book, find the BBC movie adaption with Colin Firth in it. ::Sighs:: That man makes the sexiest Mr. Darcy...

[jedusor.livejournal.com]

I might. I want to see the Keira Knightley one, too.

[mercymckinnon.livejournal.com]

I was kinda curious about that one myself.