Aww, Emily, you're so adorable when you try to sound like you know what you're talking about! I doubt many people (if any) would hate you for what you simply don't understand. My guess is that you are right to decide not to read any of Jane Austen's books. I'm afraid you wouldn't like any of them. Unlike books such as Twilight, Jane Austen's novels are not brainless enough for most young people these days.
A few comments on your specific complaints, however. Your first mistake is in judging 19th century behavior by 21st century standards. That is never successful.
Now, to be more specific:
Emma is an extremely meddlesome, coniving, selfish, self-riteous, b***!
Actually, most people would agree with you on that, but somehow everyone loves her anyway!
When Frank is telling her he has love for someone, she automatically assumes that he was referring to her!
Emma had every reason to believe that Frank was about to profess his love for her, as he spent the majority of his time at Hartford or otherwise with Emma, at the almost complete exclusion of every other young lady in Highbury.
When Harriet states she has feelings for Mr. Knightly, Emma says that he could 'never reciprocate the feelings of a woman' or in other words, 'he's gay'.
Actually, dear, what she says is that "Mr. Knightly is the last man on earth who would intentionally give a lady the idea of his caring more for her than he really does." This means that if Mr. Knightly acts like he is in love with a young lady, he probably is. Thus her extreme sadness when she says it, because this scene is where she finally realizes that she herself is in love with Mr. Knightley.
When she made that comment about the woman who speaks only of dull things I wanted to leap onto the screen and smack her a thousand times.
Yes, that comment she made was really quite rude.
Then Knightly says the dull-speaker is poor... the next scene was the 'poor' woman's home and it was a big house! How is that considered 'poor'?
Here you are judging 19th century life by 21st century standards. Miss Bates is very poor compared with Emma and Mr. Knightley. She may have a house, but she probably inherited it; she has only one maid (most households had several) and she often has to accept food from friends and neighbors.
When Knightly declares her love for her, she says 'no, i must sty with my father.' She said she loved mr. knightly, but is willing to give him up for a dieing man.
Mr. Woodhouse is not dying. He is Emma's father, and she is obligated to see that he is well taken care of. If she leaves, there is no one to care for him or be a companion for him in any way. It would have been extremely selfish and self-righteous of her if she had left her own father to fend for himself in order to make herself happier.
Also: She is appauled at Frank for keeping his engagement a secret, acting as if it is the worst thing a person could do. What is wrong with that?
What's wrong with it, dear, is that Frank acted, in every way, as if he were completely in love with Emma, paying attentions to her at the exclusion of everyone else, including Jane. He could easily have made Emma fall in love with him (and very nearly did). This is called playing with someone's heart, and once you get old enough to be treated this way by a boy, you will understand how dangerous and selfish it is.
In Frank's defense, he behaved the way he did
because he was sure that Emma did not really love him, and he was trying to be absolutely sure that nobody suspected his engagement to Jane, because he knew that his aunt Mrs. Churchill, would do everything in her power to prevent their being together.
And during the game where people are supposed to say clever things to Emma, they never showed Frank's reaction to Emma's awful comment.
Emma made the comment because of Frank's influence over her, so I'm sure he would have approved of it.
When he declares his love for Emma, he states that he rode in the rain for her... what's the big deal about riding in the rain?!
Well, Mr Knightley didn't have a car or a train to ride in. He rode on a horse. If you had to travel from London to Highbury on nothing better than a horse, and it started to rain, my guess is you would wait until the rain cleared up. Also, Mr. Knightley continued by saying that he would "ride through much worse" for her.
Also, he interrupted Ewan's singing because 'they would become ill'. Who becomes 'ill' after singing a couple songs?!
Mr. Knightley is not concerned about Jane becoming ill from singing, dear. He says that because he knows it will get Miss Bates to stop them, and he wants to stop Frank from being in the limelight at all costs because he's insanely jealous of the guy. Do you remember his comment right before asking Miss Bates to get them to stop? Something to the effect of "This fellow thinks of nothing but showing off."
Mr Knightly yells at Emma for making fun of the woman who talks too much of dull things. Then he declares his love for Emma throwing away his morals and ideals!
Perhaps he is less throwing away his ideals than realizing that Emma had tried to rectify her mistake and learn from it and become better. Remember that as he was leaving for London, Emma had just come home from visiting Miss Bates, showing that she was trying to make things right after her rude comment.
When he proposes to Emma, he says "Emma, my dear friend, will you marry me?" It's as if he was settling for a friend so spend his days with, not very romantic.
You are misquoting here. What Mr Knightley actually says is, "Marry me, my wonderful, darling friend." It is actually quite romantic considering that just before this conversation, after his telling her that he didn't want to be friends anymore, Emma begged him to "Please tell me I am still your friend."
***
"You're awfully smug for a man in a paper coat!"
reply
share
ewanfanatic88
15 years ago
all i have to say is how dare you think i read books as stupid as twilight.
"Go on. Use my body like the pages of a book. Of your book." -Jerome (Ewan McGregor)
reply
share
classycassie
15 years ago
I am happy to be wrong about that, Emily. If that's true, then you are only the second female I've found (other than myself) who thinks so about them.
***
"You're awfully smug for a man in a paper coat!"
reply
share
Chefeetaboopers
9 years ago
You'll be happy to know that there are others who dislike that series, as well. I can't stand it and I deliberately read the books and saw the movies just to prove my point to people what is wrong with them and why they're so bad.
I have an extreme dislike for it because I wound up late several times in college by a giant group of idiot girls who would beg me to tell them whether I chose Jacob or Edward and would refuse to move from the dooryway of my classroom or the hallway entrance until I told them who and why. It was so annoying having to always explain that I dislike the books and to leave me alone. Took almost a year for those women to grow up and stop doing that. Still not sure if they graduated or dropped out.
reply
share
Unwanted_Birdtamer
15 years ago
Here you are judging 19th century life by 21st century standards. Miss Bates is very poor compared with Emma and Mr. Knightley. She may have a house, but she probably inherited it; she has only one maid (most households had several) and she often has to accept food from friends and neighbors.
It's unlikely the Bates' owned that house. Miss Bates' father was a curate, once he died or retired, whatever house they lived in would have gone to the next curate. So unless they had another source of inheritance that brought the house, it was undoubtedly a rental house they were living in. Additionally, the first floor of the building appears to be a store, so the Bates would have only occupied the second floor.
Come, we must press against the tide of naughtiness. Mind your step.
reply
share
Julie-30
15 years ago
I thought he was a rector, not a curate. He'd have been able to put away a little more money than a curate would.
http://currentscene.wordpress.com/tag/jane-austen-odyssey/
reply
share
Unwanted_Birdtamer
15 years ago
You're probably right--I remembered it as curate, but didn't have time to look it up.
Come, we must press against the tide of naughtiness. Mind your step.
reply
share
ppllkk
14 years ago
Julie-30 wrote:
I thought he was a rector, not a curate. He'd have been able to put away a little more money than a curate would.
Emma By Jane Austen Chapter 03
Mrs. Bates, the widow of a former vicar of Highbury, was a very old lady, almost past every thing but tea and quadrille. She lived with her single daughter in a very small way...
So, Mr. Bates had been the vicar of Highbury. (Rectors got more tithes then vicars did. Curates got none.) We are told that Highbury is a small parish. Emma believes that Elton has independent properties.
The Bates family is now very poor.
Jane knew from her own experience about the situation of a clergyman's family, if it's only income had been from the living, after his death.
Jane, Cassandra, and their mother were left in a precarious financial situation [after Mr. Austen's death]. Edward, James, Henry, and Francis Austen pledged to make annual contributions to support their mother and sisters.[66] For the next four years, the family's living arrangements reflected their financial insecurity. They lived part of the time in rented quarters in Bath and then, beginning in 1806, in Southampton, where they shared a house with Frank Austen and his new wife. A large part of this time they spent visiting various branches of the family.[67]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Austen
Note that the financial situation of the women was precarious and insecure in spite of the success of several of the Austen sons. Ultimately, the sons rescued the woman.
Around early 1809, Austen's brother Edward offered his mother and sisters a more settled life--the use of a large cottage in Chawton village[69] that was part of Edward's nearby estate, Chawton House. Jane, Cassandra, and their mother moved into Chawton cottage on 7 July 1809.
For easy markup see
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/42255
reply
share
Mandyjam
13 years ago
With regards to the poverty of Mrs and Miss Bates, although they appear to own a house, they have no money to maintain it. There are many thousands of elderly people today who are in exactly the same situation. In the movie there is a small detail that gives this away. The state of the roof.
"great minds think differently"
reply
share
ppllkk
13 years ago
Mandyjam wrote:
With regards to the poverty of Mrs and Miss Bates, although they appear to own a house . . .
I have read
Emma fairly recently, and I was able to find a reference.
The house belonged to people in business. Mrs. and Miss Bates occupied the drawing-room floor; Emma, chapter 19.
They rent the second floor, and my memory is that it is above a shop.
For easy markup in Firefox & Opera, see
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/42255
reply
share
locusnola
11 years ago
Mr. Bates had been the vicar of Highbury during his life, FWIW.
Oh, right. So, she secretly trained a flock of sandflies.
reply
share
classycassie
15 years ago
I don't remember the Bates' background from the book, Birdtamer, but I think you're right. In the movie, the space they live in does seem much smaller than it looks from the outside so it makes sense that they are renting a portion of it.
***
"You're awfully smug for a man in a paper coat!"
reply
share
stevem-26
15 years ago
Welp, I think Emily is either a clever troll (aren't they always, or don't they think they are?), or she has had one too many gin pahits, which may explain the spelling errors, or she is a troll who has had too many gin pahits.
But....all in all, Emily, I can't muster up much negativity about you. You see, I'm in such a good mood. And why? Because I just saw "Emma" and enjoyed it so much in so many ways.
But do tell us what you do like in films.
reply
share
classycassie
15 years ago
Oh, I love this version of Emma. It is by far my favorite. I watched it again this week for the nth time. I think my opinion is tainted by the fact that this version was my introduction to the story of Emma. I have seen the Kate Beckinsale version, and another, older (BBC, I think?) version, and I have seen the 2009 version, and I have read the book twice (and adore it!), but I just can't get over this version. I know, it is less true to the real story, but in my opinion, almost all of the characters are captured perfectly, or very nearly so. I think that Jeremy Northam is absolutely dreamy as Mr. Knightley, and he has great chemistry with Gwenyth Paltrow. I have heard complaints that it is too obvious how he feels about her in this version, but I think it is totally sweet. I actually liked the Mr. Knightley in the 2009 version, but he can't hold a candle to Jeremy Northam. I think Miss Bates and Mr. and Mrs. Elton are perfect in this version, and of course I like Ewan MacGregor as Frank. I think Harriet could have been cast better, but Toni Colette doesn't bother me enough to make me stop watching this version.
***
"You're awfully smug for a man in a paper coat!"
reply
share
KatharineFanatic
14 years ago
classycassie, your impression of this film is just like mine! It was my introduction to the story at about fourteen years of age, and I LOVED IT. Jeremy Northam is still my favorite Mr. Knightley (no one else even comes close), and I thought Gwyneth was magnificent also. I watched the VHS so much I wore the tape out, and now my DVD is starting to fade, since I have watched it several hundred times.
Brilliant movie. Love it. It has a few problems, yes, but who cares?
reply
share