To answer a few questions:

This is book one of two. I can't imagine it stretching to three books.

I hope to begin work on volume two almost immediately. The thing is, I need to do some planning before I start to write. when  I was on volume one I could start plotlines without knowing where they would end up. But in volume two, I have to finish all those storylines, so I need to decide what direction they will take. Also, the next thing in Austen's novel is that Mrs. Elton appears, which will be great fun! Unfortunately, Austen doesn't mention what Mr. Knightley is doing for the five weeks or so after Frank Churchill leaves. I mean, we can assume he's around, doing his usual stuff, but there aren't many (any?) scenes with him in them in that time period. Which means I need to make it all up from scratch.

I am having fun figuring out how he's going to try to woo Emma by stealth, but obviously he's not going to spend all his time doing that, and I need to think of other things for him to do, too. And for me, that takes a lot of time!

Thank you so much, those of you who left kind comments! Those motivate me more than anything else to keep writing!

 

• 0 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Chapter 23 is done! You can read it here.

This means that George Knightley, Esquire: Charity Envieth Not (book one) is completed!  I am going to pursue publication with a traditional publisher, but I know some people wanted a copy to give (or get) as Christmas presents. So I am self-publishing it for the immediate present, and information about that will be forthcoming in a week or two.

Thanks for your support. :)

 

• 3 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Ok, the aye's have it. :)  The first part of chapter 23 is up here.

Thanks to those who expressed an opinion.

• 2 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

I have the first four pages of the new chapter done. Should I post them now or wait until the whole chapter is done? I often post sections early, but now I'm wondering if it makes the reading of it too choppy. What do you think?

• 4 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

I was just re-reading the comments on a couple of recent posts and realized that I made a mistake. Someone asked if chapter 22 was the last chapter in volume one, and I said yes. Ooops! No, I just can't count. Chapter 23 is going to be the last chapter in volume one.  It really is coming....

• 0 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

 I’ve now seen all of the 2009 BBC Emma (Emma 4) and I will say that I really love it!  It is not perfect; it would not be perfect unless they had gotten me to write it, direct it, and star in it! J As the BBC did not have the foresight to engage me to do those things, there are several things I would change.

On the other hand, the things I do like about it are numerous and delightful. I like the fact that there are many scenes from the novel that do not appear in any other adaptation. I like that fact that Harriet is believably sweet and dense, and suitably pretty—best Harriet ever.  I like that this adaptation shows Frank Churchill’s immaturity very clearly. I love the after-engagement scenes!!

The things that still bother me:

1. I still would like Emma to be a little more poised, although she seems to improve in this as the series goes on (probably intentionally).
2. I would still like Mr. Weston to be more jolly and Miss Bates to be more cheerful.
3. I still am annoyed by the repeated emphasis on Churchill and Jane Fairfax having left their “natural” homes, and the contrast with Emma staying with her father. Frank does indeed have my pity for his situation, but in the book nobody thinks it a hardship that Jane Fairfax lives with the Campbells—she pays them long visits when she is young, and goes to live with them when she is nine years old. I think that when Miss Bates says that Col. Campbell is “quite our angel,” she really means it; she is very grateful to the Campbells for their care and provision for Jane. IMO, neither Frank nor Jane were “sent away” by their families in the sense that they were not wanted. Somebody said on a blog that this adaptation was “Emma filtered through Oprah,” or something to that effect. On this particular point, I can see that.
4. The one really jarring anachronism is the head-on-the-lap scene on Box Hill. Bad judgement on the part of whoever was responsible.

 Now, having got those all out of the way, I’ll add a little more fun stuff. One of the interesting things about new adaptations is the way people criticise the adaptation for “inaccuracies” that really are not inaccuracies at all. The most amusing ones, of course, are the people who say, “the character of the book would never do such a thing,” when the character in the book actually does that very thing! Or “I didn’t like the scene where such and such happened—who thought of inserting that into the plot?”…when the scene was lifted straight out of the text. Those are the easy errors to correct.

On the other hand, some people have gotten their notions about historical accuracy mostly from other adaptations, and criticise what they think are deviations from reality but are actually only deviations from the inaccuracies of previous adaptations!  Here are a few criticisms I’ve run across, and my little attempt to set things straight (for the handful of people who follow this blog J).

1. “The dances are too wild and not genteel enough.” 

Regency dances were actually very lively. Consider these words from the blog of Susan de Guardiola (“Capering and Kickery”):

As a specialist in early 19th century dance, I regularly get asked what I think of the dancing in the various films of Jane Austen's novels and how to tell if the dancing in the films or being taught by someone or other is authentic to the Regency era (1810-1820).  Sadly, the answer is usually "no."  Here's a little checklist you can use to judge for yourself, either when watching a film or listening to someone teach "just like it was in the Regency" or "the same way Jane Austen danced":

1. Real Regency Dancers Don't Walk

In the 18th and early 19th century, walking was not considered dancing.  The music was lively (jigs and reels), and the dances were performed primarily by people in their late teens and early twenties (not known for their sedate habits).  There were actual dance steps, and demonstrating the ability to perform them well was an important aspect of the dancing.  In Jane Austen's Mansfield Park, Fanny is actually pulled out of the dancing because she had ceased to do proper steps:

"Sir Thomas, having seen her walk rather than dance down the shortening set, breathless, and with her hand at her side, gave his orders for her sitting down entirely."

Notice the important distinction in "having seen her walk rather than dance" (italics mine).  In films, either the inability of the actors, the ignorance of the choreographers, or the needs of the director tend to result in dancers gliding sedately around the set.  But "stately walking" is not part of Regency style.  Those who think that Regency dancing was all slow and elegant must not be familiar with the energy level of your average teenager! 

[…]

4. Real Regency Dancers Are Au Courant

Along with the peculiar notion that dance figures from the 17th century are useful for the early 19th century comes the even more peculiar notion that entire dances of that era are appropriate.  Regency-era dancers were not interested in doing the dances of their great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents, any more than today's teenagers are.  Dances like "Hole in the Wall" and "Mr. Beveridge's Maggot" were written in the late 17th century.  Their music is completely inappropriate for the Regency era.  Their style is inappropriate.  Their steps are inappropriate.  There is no sense in which these dances belong in the Regency era.  Loving obsessions with these dances make me want to cry at the sheer ignorance being promulgated by the people who keep putting these dances in movies.  And any dance advertised as "Playford" suffers from a similar problem.  The Playford manuals were published from 1650 to 1728, which you may notice is significantly before the Regency era (1810-1820).  You can look at a great index of all the dances in the Playford manuals. That index conveniently serves as a list of dances to avoid for the Regency era.

The whole article is fascinating; you can read it at: http://www.kickery.com/2008/03/regency-dancers.html#more

I remember a comment that Ms. de Guardiaola made last year when asked which adaption had the most authentic dances; she said that the 2005 Pride and Prejudice scene of the Meryton Assembly was the most accurate.

2. Along those same lines: “What was with Mrs. Elton calling out the dances at the Crown Inn ball?”

To quote again from the blog post mentioned above, “What to dance and what music to dance it to were separate questions, both to be answered by the leading lady in the set before the dance began.”  The leading lady at the ball is Mrs. Elton. So far, this is the only adaptation I’ve ever seen that got that right!

3. I haven’t actually seen this next one yet, but I am just waiting to read a post that says, “Putting Mrs. Elton on a real donkey and Elton dragging it along was too slapstick.”

 

I think perhaps whoever planned that scene was thinking of this Regency picture:

 

 

I thought it was a great touch!

4. “Where were all the servants? There weren’t enough servants in this adaption!”

I think some people have gotten their notion about the ubiquitous nature of servants from Emma3, which had a super-abundance of them. One of Jane Austen’s nephews wrote in his memoir that in his aunt’s day, servants did not wait so much hand and foot on their employers as they did in years after. He said that when his uncle taught him to shoot, the first lesson was how to clean his own gun. It’s hard to imagine that happening in Emma 3, where the footmen even move the cushions in the strawberry patch for those picking! I do think Emma 3 went overboard in this respect.

Ok, that’s all I can think of for now. I’ll add any more that I think of.

To sum up, I really did love this adaptation. Hope you like it too!

• 1 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

I'm enjoying each episode of the new Emma more. LOVED last night...can hardly wait for next week!! No, it's not perfect, but it's definitely my favourite adaptation now. Unless they ruin it in the last episode by something completely unexpected.

Next chapter is coming along (I always say that, don't I? But I'm quite motivated now).

• 2 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Chapter 22 is up here.

• 3 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Chapter's almost finished! :)

I've been thinking more about adaptations, and Emma2 in particular. I saw it when it first came out, and there were not many adaptations available then. There were the old BBC versions which I wasn't even aware of, and then there were the rather recently-released P&P2, S&S2, and P2. When I saw P2, I hadn't even read the book yet! And though I had read S&S, I hadn't really gotten into it and didn't know the plot very well. So I was quite uncritical of all the adaptations then; I was just happy to have any adaptation at all. I wonder, if S&S 2 were to come out now, would I like it? Probably not. At this point I know every nuance of the book plot and have definite opinions about all the characters, and no doubt I would be extremely put out that characters were deleted and plot elements missing, as well as the ages of the actors not matching those of the book. But by the time I recognized all those things, it was too late. I already loved the movie.

I think the same thing happened with Emma2. I didn't know the book all that well back then, and I didn't see Emma3 for years (I was living in California then), and because Emma2 is a nice movie in itself I didn't mind the changes. I think if it were a new movie coming out now, I might be highly critical of it! 

Anyway, that's what I've been musing on as I work out the last bit of this chapter. :)

• 0 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

  Ibmiller left a comment asking what my thoughts were on other Emma adaptations. You’ll probably be sorry you asked, because I could go on all day about this topic! For clarity I will refer to each adaptation by the numbers they use at the Republic of Pemberley: Emma1 is the 1971 version, Emma2 is the 1996 Gwennyth Paltrow version, Emma 3 is the Kate Beckinsale version, and the newest one is Emma 4.

I must say, I like all the Emma adaptations for one reason or another. Emma the novel has been pretty lucky in its adaptations (unlike poor Mansfield Park).  There aren’t any versions that I consider absolutely horrendous.

The central problem in adapting Emma is, of course, the problem of how to present the mysteries of the book. When I first read the book, I had no idea that Frank Churchill and Jane were secretly engaged, or that Mr. Knightley was in love with Emma (and she with him) until all was made clear in the last few chapters, and I think that is the way Austen intended it. It is easier to hide those things in a book, because we follow the story from Emma’s perspective and she doesn’t notice everything or place importance on certain things. It isn’t until a re-read that you notice the clues that are sprinkled throughout. 

In a film version, you see the story from more than just Emma’s perspective, and it’s much easier to pick up on the clues. I think it would be very difficult to hide from the viewer that Mr. Knightley is the hero. The book may leave out a physical description of him (except for his age), but a movie can’t. I have heard people express ideas about keeping Knightley in the background of shots, never focusing on his face, etc, to keep him more of a minor character for longer. That might work, but I can see viewers then saying that the lead couple had no chemistry and they couldn’t believe in the relationship.

I think some productions have tried to make Knightley not-so-obviously the hero by making him a good deal older even than the book makes him (like in Emma1), or by making him almost always very serious and scolding (Emma3). My least favourite Knightley is the Emma3 one (Mark Strong), because he just seemed too angry much of the time, with not enough cheerful friendliness toward Emma to make up for it. I know others see his portrayal as absolutely perfect, though, so my mental image of Knightley is not universal.

Anyway, I’ll tell you what I like and dislike about each adaptation.

Emma1:  I do like John Carson as Mr. Knightley. He is too old, but the way he interacts with Emma is perfect. They are obviously good friends and have little in-jokes and tease each other, but he is quite stern at times and really does lecture her when she deserves it. Perfect.  It definitely suffers from the old BBC production values, though, and the only way to overcome it is to think of it as a play that got videotaped. Harriet is ok, I like the Eltons, and Mr. Woodhouse isn’t bad either. I like Frank Churchill. For some reason they got a Jane Fairfax that couldn’t sing well (!), which is really annoying. And they changed a few plot details for no apparent reason, which is also annoying. But because it is long, they were able to include a lot of the book that was left out in other versions.

Emma2: Some have called this version “Emma lite” and I can see why, but I like it very well. I think Gwenneth Paltrow fits my mental image of Emma almost perfectly. I like Mr. Knightley’s banter with her in this version, too, and his scolding hits the right note. I like most of the minor characters as well, but what I like best about Emma2 is the tone. It is a romantic comedy, and that’s how I see the novel. There is so much humour in the book! Much of it comes from the narrator, and that is what is hard to transfer to the screen. I didn’t mind them putting in extra funny lines, because it made the tone of the film what I thought it should be. Of course, it’s the shortest of the versions, and leaves the most incidents out. The language is also quite modern at times, and that can jar a little. On the whole though, I really love this version.

Emma3: Probably my least favourite version because the tone is so much darker. There also seems to be a lot of social commentary running through the production with so many scenes of contrast between the rich and the poor and the masters and servants. That annoys me a bit, because while all of that is true, it’s not what Emma is about. If you want social commentary, watch Gaskell or Dickens. J And I’ve already mentioned that this Mr. Knightley is too generally stern for my taste. The scolding on Box Hill loses its punch for me, because he’s gotten angry so often before. On the other hand, there are a few funny scenes (Mr. Knightley’s line, “Very sprightly” made me laugh out loud), and Mr. John Knightley is perfect. I think this is my favourite Jane Fairfax, too. Frank Churchill is too sinister for me in this one. I am one of those people that sees Frank as immature and a bit selfish, but not really evil. He seems a lot more consciously crafty in this version. They way his talk with Emma finished at the very end of the film was odd, and not true to the book at all. I do watch Emma3, though, because it has things no other version has, and does some things extremely well.

I suppose every adaptation has things that make us cringe; a true Austen fan can nit-pick all day on any given adaptation!  The test of a good adaptation is whether we can overlook those things and enjoy the rest or whether those things bother us so much that we can’t bear to watch it at all. I’m thankful that for me, none of the Emma adaptations falls into the last category.

• 2 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Just watched the second episode of the new Emma, and must say that I like it very much! The dark tone mostly vanished, and there was a lot more humour. Mr. Elton is perfect, and I still like the interaction between Emma and Mr. Knightley. And lots of the book is in there...whole scenes taken straight out of the book instead of the truncated versions of conversations that adaptations usually give us. Yay!! 

I still have a couple quibbles...Emma is still not poised enough, Mr. Weston is still too morose and John Knightley is a little too bad-tempered... but their characters are recognizable at least! Oh, I'm so relieved to like it!

The chapter is coming along. It will probably take me a couple  more days to finish it, and a couple days after that to edit it, but hopefully it will be ready by the end of the week! :)

• 1 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Hooray! I think I'm over the block. Got a page and a half written today, with the rest of it planned out.  I was going to post what I have, but really, it's so rough that you wouldn't want me too. Let me polish it a bit first. But I thought you'd like to know it's coming along.

• 0 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

I got four new paragraphs written today. They were small, but they were paragraphs! And I got more planning done for the rest of the chapter. 

Last night was the airing of part one of the new BBC adaptation of Emma. I sat down and wrote a review last night while it was fresh in my mind:

I do feel for those who write the scripts for adaptations of Jane Austen’s novels. Really, I do. For one thing, there have been so many adaptations already (this is the fourth adaptation of Emma made since 1971, besides one with a modern setting) that they must do something different or risk being accused of copying everyone else. 

For another thing, Jane Austen fans tend to have memorized the books, and any slight deviation from the storyline is sure to be criticized. This leaves a writer very little room to do anything different if the previous adaptations were faithful to the book (and they have been, by and large). 

The final difficulty is that while some parts of the novel are unarguable (the cast of characters, the events, the dialogue), a great many things are open to interpretation (characterizations, the tone of the novel, the motivations of characters, and so on).  Some people see Emma as essentially a dark novel, with Frank Churchill being a sinister figure and Emma an almost irredeemable snob. Others see the novel as a light-hearted comedy with serious moments, and view Churchill as a bit selfish and immature, but not a bad chap in the long run, and Emma as a delightful but slightly delusional young woman with a good heart.  Therefore, viewers who have read the book each have their own ideas of what the tone should be, what the characters’ motivations should be, and so forth. Many viewers therefore are bound to disagree with the choices made by the scriptwriter, director, and actors, no matter what the decisions are.

Like I said, I feel for the writers. That doesn’t mean I excuse them when they get it wrong, however.

So what choices have been made in the new Emma?  From the outset, the tone of this version is quite dark. It begins with the backstory of the novel; indeed, it takes us about twenty minutes to get to the events which start Jane Austen’s book. The deaths of the parents of Emma, Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax are emphasized, and I think minor facts were trifled with in order to make the point that Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax were sent away from their natural homes. (Examples of minor facts trifled with: I don’t believe Jane Fairfax was a tiny girl when she left the Bates’, and I don’t think the Bateses repined so much about it.) These opening scenes set the tone of the adaptation as rather dark, and since I have never seen Emma as a dark novel, I disliked this innovation.

Mr. Woodhouse seems to be reduced to one attribute—the worry about health—but he is also given an explicit motivation: the early death of his wife. Now, it is not a farfetched motivation by any means, but since the book is silent about what motivates his fears of safety, it did seem to change his character to have so much attention paid to it. As far as I could see, the book’s explicit statement that Mr. Woodhouse doesn’t like change doesn’t come into the adaptation much as a motivator for him; if it was in there, it was certainly overshadowed by the other.

Since I’m talking about things I didn’t like, I might as well finish them off here: Miss Taylor/Mrs. Weston looks too young to me, Mr. Weston is too tragic, and I don’t like the Bateses at all. Miss Bates is talkative enough, but she’s not even slightly amusing, and the humility and heartfelt thankfulness which makes her so endearing in the book is just not there in this adaptation. She seems sad much of the time. Such a pity, as she’s one of my favourite characters.

BUT I love Mr. Knightley!  So far, the characterization is perfect! He and Emma interact beautifully. He is neither too angry nor too conciliating, AND they kept just about all the dialogue in the scene where they argue about Harriet Smith rejecting Robert Martin. I don’t think any adaptation yet has done such a good job with that scene. Really, that scene changed my perception of the whole adaptation so far.

As for the character of Emma, I don’t know what to think yet. She is not being played as elegant and poised as I have always thought her or seen her portrayed. I think this actress may be my least favourite Emma so far, but there were moments in this first part that were quite good. Maybe my overall impression will change. I didn’t hate her, at least.

Elton…I don’t know. I’ll have to think more about him. At this point I don’t love him or hate him.

So far, this version of Emma isn’t very funny, which is a shame. One of the things I like most about Emma is the humour. It is hard to transfer the wit of the narrator to film, but in this adaptation they actually have a voice-over, so they could have tried a little harder. Bummer.

On the other hand, this will probably be my favourite portrayal of Mr. Knightley. And that is certainly worth something!

*  *   *   *   *

Now, that is what I wrote last night. I re-watched it today and liked it better. At least, I decided that I may learn to overlook the things I don't like.  And if Mr. Knightley stays good the whole way through, I will probably be happy to add it to my collection.

 

• 0 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Hey, I wrote a whole paragraph!

Well, it's something, right?

Permanent Link

Who in the world thought it was a good idea for me to make a commitment write a little bit every day? Now I'm not only suffering from writer's block, but from guilt as well!  I still don't have anything more written.

But I did figure out why Mr. Knightley goes to Kingston. Maybe tomorrow I'll get something written.

Permanent Link

Ok, here's where I'm stuck. Mr. Knightley needs to go to Kingston. Jane Austen says he goes to Kingston the day after the Coles's party. But WHY does he need to go to Kingston? Lucky, lucky Jane Austen who never had to come up with specifics about Mr. Knightley's business.  But I have to decide why he's going to Kingston before I can go on with the story. 

And I have a note to myself that I must have written weeks ago that Kinghtley should talk to Mrs. Catherwood before he goes to Kingston. Apparently it's important to the plot. I just wish I could remember why!  I'm going to go do something for half an hour and see if I can figure anything out.

{interlude}

oooohhh...kaaaayyyyyyy....I just took a shower so I could spend the time thinking about the plot......and I forgot to think about it!

Well, the bread machine is beeping, meaning that the dough is done, so I'm going to go and make cinnamon rolls for tomorrow. I will try to think about the plot as I'm doing it. 

{interlude}

Ok, cinnamon rolls rising now. I got as far as knowing that I don't want him going to Kingston for some really serious thing, as I would then have to go into detail about it. It's perfectly possible that he would go for some fairly trivial reason so that he could just ride there and try to clear his head, right?

Well, after thinking a little more, I still haven't come up with anything. And since it's now 1:20 am, I probably should leave off for the night. But hey, thinking it through this far is bound to help for tomorrow. Isn't it? 

Don't answer that.

Permanent Link

Oh dear. It's been a month. I haven't written anything more. This is ridiculous.

Ok, new plan. Every day I have to write something, even if it's very, very rough and just a paragraph.  I will post whatever I write. You probably shouldn't read it until I finish the chapter and polish it a bit, but having to post something will hopefully give me enough of a push to get me over this writer's block.

• 1 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Sorry, Real Life has intruded again. leaving my muse stymied and my leisure time very much contracted. I have, however, a small peace offering....the first couple pages of the next chapter. You can read them here.

It seems that much of the busy-ness will subside next week, and I hope to get the chapter finished before too long.

• 2 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

I've changed the front page of my website. Don't get your hopes up too high...my computer skills are mediocre to the last degree. But I thought it might be a nice change from the purple.

I've also got two pages of the next chapter done. :) 

And thank you, kind readers, for your encouraging comments.

• 2 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

I really appreciate the patience of my few persistant readers who keep on checking for new chapters when hope is dim! I am pleased to announce that the rough draft of Chapter 21 is finally up, here. Let the angst begin..... :)

• 5 Comments • Post A Comment! • Permanent Link

Page 1 of 5
Last Page | Next Page