A couple of questions, please:-
- I aren't understanding why Pemberley should be at all affected by this murder??
- Is Col. Fitzwilliam's elder brother dead now, then? Is his father, the Earl, still alive? Has the Earl got plenty of money and an estate?
- why does Georgiana feel she has a duty to marry Col. Fitz? Why does Darcy want her to?
Sorry, I seem to be quite lost
Reputation was one of the most important characteristics you could have at the time, arguably above money and rank. Any hint of scandal would have far reaching consequences. Women were supposed to be 'pure', unsullied souls, 'untouched' when they married to equally respectable men. That was why it was so important for Lydia to marry Wickham, because otherwise she'd have been the shameless hussy who bedded a man without marriage and it would effect how the rest of the family were seen. Were Lizzy, Jane Mary and Kitty like her, and bring further shame? It would effect who they could marry, and certainly not the good, rich matches that Mrs Bennets demands for them.
Georgiana is the same - except her situation was able to be buried, because she didn't run off to London where she could be seen by all and sundry. Outside Fitzwilliam and Darcy, only Lizzy knows of Georgiana's near-error.
If you imagine that she had, it would effect Darcy directly. He has the estate, yes, but I guess a lot of outside business interests that came about due to who he was. Derbyshire, so likely cotton mills, though he'd never be classed as a tradesman. Money from that business that supports Pemberley the household, but you have the towns, villages, workers on the estate. People would be put off from doing business with him, if they heard that Georgiana nearly ran off with some army rascal.
Regards Colonel Fitzwilliam, we know his father is the Earl of ___, Lady Catherine de Bourgh's and Darcy's mother's brother, and he was at the time the second son. Heir and spare. It's not implicitly mentioned, but Earls tend to have big estates inherited for hundreds of years, just like Darcy, but I suspect on a larger, grander scale. We have no idea of the financial health of said estate. If it wasn't doing as well as Pemberley, clearing at least 10,000 a year, it would make sense that the Fitzwilliams could do with Georgiana's 30k dowry. Also, that kind of fortune is always handy, whether needed or not. Buys land, property, investments, an provides for Georgiana and offspring should hubby die.
Edit -I remembered we see Georgiana showing Alveston a picture of Fitzwilliam's castle by the sea. That'll either be his own, or his family estate.
Georgiana marrying Alveston is below her station. Unlike Darcy, she doesn't have the luxury of being in control over her own money, as the dowry goes straight to hubby, hence Wickham's previous interest in her. Fitzwilliam brings property, and presumably money to the marriage. It's purely a business decision to secure the future of the estate and the Fitzwilliam line.
A lot of that is guessing, assumptions and educated guesses of what I know of the period, and Pride and Prejudice so it may not be entirely accurate, but I don't believe I'm far off the mark.
It's fine. I was fairly sure others would have noticed. ;-)
That said, for all it's niggles, I'm thoroughly enjoying it and am trying to not to overthink it as I watch.
A classic case of great minds think alike.
I'm also enjoying it a lot. Under close inspection it has a lot of issues, which I have posted about before. But I can put them to one side, and enjoy it for what it is. It's nice to see the characters again even if it isn't written by Jane Austen.
But unfortunately, as you say, Haphash, it is this very essence that has been lost and completely ignored in this adapted 'sequel'. Some posters have said that perhaps running Pemberley and having and raising a child will take its toil on Elizabeth. Yes, perhaps it will. But then you look to the Jane Bingley casting, she blows that theory out of the water. Even if running a huge household like Pemberley (which is far bigger and larger than Netherfield Park) and becoming a mother took its toil on Elizabeth's looks, I doubt it would not have taken such a toil on her spirits. Unless, of course, we are saying that being married to Darcy has been such hard work she has lost all her vitality?
Though I think it's a miscast (not so much about physical beauty, but I think - and I hate to write this because I feel it's rude and disrespectful to the actress - AMM is too "old" looking to play a 26/27 year old, even if life at Pemberley was taking its toil and it is the adaptation's objective to present this to the viewer), I now don't care how Elizabeth looks in this particular re-imagining of the P&P aftermath. What I do care, however, is that the very thing that attracted me as reader to Elizabeth - her lively-spirit - has essentially been done away with.
ETA: Apologises for the lenghty reply. It's the only thing I shall apologise for!:);-) But you did make a very good point about Elizabeth, so I blame you!:D
Thank you for your considered reply - I totally agree with you. In fact my concerns about this Lizzie are less based on the looks of the actress than on her personality. If she still had the spark and life of the original creation I wouldn't be too bothered. After all many women who might not be conventionally beautiful can appear very attractive due to the force of their personalities but this Lizzie seems to have all the life of a worn out dishrag.
My apologies to posters I replied to earlier. I did not mean to give away any of the plot.
I am enjoying this adaptation far more than I enjoyed the book and I might try reading it again to see if it improves on a second reading.
A couple of questions, please:-
- I aren't understanding why Pemberley should be at all affected by this murder??
- Is Col. Fitzwilliam's elder brother dead now, then? Is his father, the Earl, still alive? Has the Earl got plenty of money and an estate?
- why does Georgiana feel she has a duty to marry Col. Fitz? Why does Darcy want her to?
Sorry, I seem to be quite lost
Why Pemberley should be at all affected by this murder??... Why does Georgiana feel she has a duty to marry Col. Fitz? Why does Darcy want her to?
Ah, don't underestimate how damaging a scandal can be back in those days, lol. Even our own Nigella Lawson knows what that feels like 200 years later.
The very idea of Lydia eloping with Wickham spun the heads of the Bennet family back in P&P, so much so that it dared to ruin the marriage prospects of Jane, Lizzy, Mary and the other daugther whose name I forget. It is not so much the danger to Pemberley that is the problem; it is what the scandal would do to the family name and all the stuff that follows from that (including how it will affect the Pemberley Estate).
If the family name is ruined (i.e. one of their own (Wickham) is convicted of murder), Georgiana will be ruined by mere association of being related to Wickham. No half-decent man would want to attach his name to a Darcy. By the same token, the martial propects of Darcy's son would be ruined as well. And if his son's name becomes ruined by association, so too would Pemberley. No marriage; no heir; no way the Darcy line will continue and Pemberley will fall into ruin as well. There's all that, plus the added fact that Darcy married outside his class anyway.
Wickham's character - who he is, what he is like - will most likely be brought up during the trail, if only to give the jury an idea of what kind of man would resort to murder. As a result, there is a danger that Georgiana's involvement with Wickham (her near-elopement with Wickham) will come out in the trial, even though very few people know about it. I think Georgiana feels she has a duty to marry Col Fitz for all sorts of reasons:
1. A sense of guilt. Remember the conversation she had with Lizzy. Georgiana thinks Darcy believed she was in love with Wickham, hence her seeming willingness to run off with him. On reflection, she knows she was never in love with Wickham but doesn't feel or think Darcy believes this. So out of a sense of guilt, she is willing to show to Darcy that she was never in love with Wickham by defering to his judgement.
2. A sense of duty. Following on from the above, she also feels a sense of duty to the 'right' thing - i.e. marry within her class. With her near-elopement, she nearly brought a huge scandal upon her family's head. She nearly made a wrong decision concerning young, though it wasn't entirely her fault; she clearly doesn't want to make another.
3. A sense of guilt and duty. Through his gambling and loose living, her great-grandfather is a reminder of what happens when a person goes rogue. Her grandfather and father struggled to repair the Darcy family name and save the Pemberley estate from gambling debts. To marry Alverston is to marry outside her social class and brings with it all manner of risk to her family. Darcy and Elizabeth managed to overcome it, but her guilt over Wickham (especially with Wickham accused of murder) plays a much greater role in Georgiana's mind at the moment. As for Darcy wanting Georgiana marrying Fitz, I think he just wants to protect her and secure her future, whether that's from any fallout from the Wickham scandal (murder and the elopement if it ever became public) or from Alveston not being able to provide for her financially. Lawyers weren't rich men and he doesn't own landed property which was the main source of major wealth in those days.
Is Col. Fitzwilliam's elder brother dead now, then? Is his father, the Earl, still alive? Has the Earl got plenty of money and an estate?
As for Col. Fitz and his inherited wealth, I don't know. There is a dastardly air about him that makes me think that perhaps his estate isn;t as rich as we are made to believe and perhaps needs Georgiana's inheirtance to shore it up a little, I haven't a clue.
Good point about whether his father is dead. His elder brother is dead for sure. So either way, the earldom will pass on to him.
As for Col. Fitz and his inherited wealth, I don't know. There is a dastardly air about him that makes me think that perhaps his estate isn;t as rich as we are made to believe and perhaps needs Georgiana's inheirtance to shore it up a little, I haven't a clue.
Good point about whether his father is dead. His elder brother is dead for sure. So either way, the earldom will pass on to him.
if Colonel Fitzwilliam's father was dead wouldn't he be referred to as Lord Soandso ?
ETA like some others i don't like this Col Fitzwilliam he was lovely in P&P and is rather unpleasant in this....can't decide whether it is the actor or not....
I think she was 24/25 depending on filming. Born 1969.
24/25, eh? Just goes to show that it is perhaps Elizabeth's vivality that most people miss as opposed to her looks. Certainly the looks helped, but if a personality so compelling and commanding I think most people can overlook the so-called physical imperfections!:D
I watched the last recent adaptation of Jane Eyre on TV during the hols, the one starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender. Goodness knows, I've read the book and seen so many Jane Eyre adaptations (Fontaine/Welles, the Kay Mellor re-make; the Franco Zeffirelli/Hurt/Gainsborough) and each one brings a new take on the story. But I've to admit I really loved Mia's Jane the most, even if the Welles/Fontaine seems to be judged the best in many critical polls.
ETA: Completely agree with your post to BusStop above as well!:D
Reputation was one of the most important characteristics you could have at the time, arguably above money and rank. Any hint of scandal would have far reaching consequences. Women were supposed to be 'pure', unsullied souls, 'untouched' when they married to equally respectable men. That was why it was so important for Lydia to marry Wickham, because otherwise she'd have been the shameless hussy who bedded a man without marriage and it would effect how the rest of the family were seen. Were Lizzy, Jane Mary and Kitty like her, and bring further shame? It would effect who they could marry, and certainly not the good, rich matches that Mrs Bennets demands for them.
Georgiana is the same - except her situation was able to be buried, because she didn't run off to London where she could be seen by all and sundry. Outside Fitzwilliam and Darcy, only Lizzy knows of Georgiana's near-error.
If you imagine that she had, it would effect Darcy directly. He has the estate, yes, but I guess a lot of outside business interests that came about due to who he was. Derbyshire, so likely cotton mills, though he'd never be classed as a tradesman. Money from that business that supports Pemberley the household, but you have the towns, villages, workers on the estate. People would be put off from doing business with him, if they heard that Georgiana nearly ran off with some army rascal.
Regards Colonel Fitzwilliam, we know his father is the Earl of ___, Lady Catherine de Bourgh's and Darcy's mother's brother, and he was at the time the second son. Heir and spare. It's not implicitly mentioned, but Earls tend to have big estates inherited for hundreds of years, just like Darcy, but I suspect on a larger, grander scale. We have no idea of the financial health of said estate. If it wasn't doing as well as Pemberley, clearing at least 10,000 a year, it would make sense that the Fitzwilliams could do with Georgiana's 30k dowry. Also, that kind of fortune is always handy, whether needed or not. Buys land, property, investments, an provides for Georgiana and offspring should hubby die.
Edit -I remembered we see Georgiana showing Alveston a picture of Fitzwilliam's castle by the sea. That'll either be his own, or his family estate.
Georgiana marrying Alveston is below her station. Unlike Darcy, she doesn't have the luxury of being in control over her own money, as the dowry goes straight to hubby, hence Wickham's previous interest in her. Fitzwilliam brings property, and presumably money to the marriage. It's purely a business decision to secure the future of the estate and the Fitzwilliam line.
A lot of that is guessing, assumptions and educated guesses of what I know of the period, and Pride and Prejudice so it may not be entirely accurate, but I don't believe I'm far off the mark.
Thank you for such a detailed reply. I think I must have overplayed my confusion a bit, because I certainly understand the P&P story well enough, having read it, and other Austen novels, many times
I just aren't too sure that something like this would be as scandalous as all that; certainly not to Darcy and Pemberley - I thought that then, like now, a certain amount of wealth and status put one above such things. Which is exactly why Darcy was able to marry someone as lowly as Lizzie.
For the same reason, I'd think that Georgiana's income was enough to get by on if she were to marry Alveston. Georgina's income was sufficient to make her quite a catch, and I'd expect Darcy to be relieved if someone like Alveston, who's in a good profession and clearly adores Georgiana, came along.
In P&P Wickham stated that, as the younger son, he didn't have the luxury of being able to marry who he wanted. So, yes, it would make sense that Georgiana's income would be perfect. But to see it as Georgiana's duty to marry him, and for Darcy and Georgiana to see it that way too, seems out of character to me.
As you say though - its not Jane Austen, and it doesn't need to make sense.
24/25, eh? Just goes to show that it is perhaps Elizabeth's vivality that most people miss as opposed to her looks. Certainly the looks helped, but if a personality so compelling and commanding I think most people can overlook the so-called physical imperfections!:D
I watched the last recent adaptation of Jane Eyre on TV during the hols, the one starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender. Goodness knows, I've read the book and seen so many Jane Eyre adaptations (Fontaine/Welles, the Kay Mellor re-make; the Franco Zeffirelli/Hurt/Gainsborough) and each one brings a new take on the story. But I've to admit I really loved Mia's Jane the most, even if the Welles/Fontaine seems to be judged the best in many critical polls.
ETA: Completely agree with your post to BusStop above as well!:D
I loved Mia Wasikowskas performance also. She is a very talented actress. Fassbenders performance not so much.
if Colonel Fitzwilliam's father was dead wouldn't he be referred to as Lord Soandso ?
ETA like some others i don't like this Col Fitzwilliam he was lovely in P&P and is rather unpleasant in this....can't decide whether it is the actor or not....
Or even his brother's title, if one existed, Viscount Someplace, or such.
I think it's how his character was written in the book. I honestly can't remember, but I can't recall if he was this shifty or not.
if Colonel Fitzwilliam's father was dead wouldn't he be referred to as Lord Soandso ?
ETA like some others i don't like this Col Fitzwilliam he was lovely in P&P and is rather unpleasant in this....can't decide whether it is the actor or not....
I think he has to resign his commission as an army officer before he can take up the title (i.e. be called Lord Whatshisname SoandSo)
Or even his brother's title, if one existed, Viscount Someplace, or such.
I think it's how his character was written in the book. I honestly can't remember, but I can't recall if he was this shifty or not.
As someone said above, his character is shifty as it is a murder mystery story in order to make him seem like he is a suspect. Everyone else was at Pemberly together and he was the only one who rode off into the night by himself. If he was a lovely kind non suspicious character, it wouldn't be much of a murder mystery with only one suspect.
I loved Mia Wasikowskas performance also. She is a very talented actress. Fassbenders performance not so much.
It was the first time I've watched it. I initally avoided it when it first came out, thinking 'oh dear, not another Jane Eyre film!' Goes to show what I know, haha! But for Mia's performance, I think Fassbender might have struggled with the role. I think he wisely fed off what Mia gave to him as I don't think Rochester is an easy character to play anyway. He wasn't as brooding as I expected. I think Orson Welles overbrood to my taste that I felt he could've eaten dainty, flighty Fontaine if he wanted to!
As someone said above, his character is shifty as it is a murder mystery story in order to make him seem like he is a suspect. Everyone else was at Pemberly together and he was the only one who rode off into the night by himself. If he was a lovely kind non suspicious character, it wouldn't be much of a murder mystery with only one suspect.
Ah, don't underestimate how damaging a scandal can be back in those days, lol. Even our own Nigella Lawson knows what that feels like 200 years later.
The very idea of Lydia eloping with Wickham spun the heads of the Bennet family back in P&P, so much so that it dared to ruin the marriage prospects of Jane, Lizzy, Mary and the other daugther whose name I forget. It is not so much the danger to Pemberley that is the problem; it is what the scandal would do to the family name and all the stuff that follows from that (including how it will affect the Pemberley Estate).
If the family name is ruined (i.e. one of their own (Wickham) is convicted of murder), Georgiana will be ruined by mere association of being related to Wickham. No half-decent man would want to attach his name to a Darcy. By the same token, the martial propects of Darcy's son would be ruined as well. And if his son's name becomes ruined by association, so too would Pemberley. No marriage; no heir; no way the Darcy line will continue and Pemberley will fall into ruin as well. There's all that, plus the added fact that Darcy married outside his class anyway.
Wickham's character - who he is, what he is like - will most likely be brought up during the trail, if only to give the jury an idea of what kind of man would resort to murder. As a result, there is a danger that Georgiana's involvement with Wickham (her near-elopement with Wickham) will come out in the trial, even though very few people know about it. I think Georgiana feels she has a duty to marry Col Fitz for all sorts of reasons:
1. A sense of guilt. Remember the conversation she had with Lizzy. Georgiana thinks Darcy believed she was in love with Wickham, hence her seeming willingness to run off with him. On reflection, she knows she was never in love with Wickham but doesn't feel or think Darcy believes this. So out of a sense of guilt, she is willing to show to Darcy that she was never in love with Wickham by defering to his judgement.
2. A sense of duty. Following on from the above, she also feels a sense of duty to the 'right' thing - i.e. marry within her class. With her near-elopement, she nearly brought a huge scandal upon her family's head. She nearly made a wrong decision concerning young, though it wasn't entirely her fault; she clearly doesn't want to make another.
3. A sense of guilt and duty. Through his gambling and loose living, her great-grandfather is a reminder of what happens when a person goes rogue. Her grandfather and father struggled to repair the Darcy family name and save the Pemberley estate from gambling debts. To marry Alverston is to marry outside her social class and brings with it all manner of risk to her family. Darcy and Elizabeth managed to overcome it, but her guilt over Wickham (especially with Wickham accused of murder) plays a much greater role in Georgiana's mind at the moment. As for Darcy wanting Georgiana marrying Fitz, I think he just wants to protect her and secure her future, whether that's from any fallout from the Wickham scandal (murder and the elopement if it ever became public) or from Alveston not being able to provide for her financially. Lawyers weren't rich men and he doesn't own landed property which was the main source of major wealth in those days.
As for Col. Fitz and his inherited wealth, I don't know. There is a dastardly air about him that makes me think that perhaps his estate isn;t as rich as we are made to believe and perhaps needs Georgiana's inheirtance to shore it up a little, I haven't a clue.
Good point about whether his father is dead. His elder brother is dead for sure. So either way, the earldom will pass on to him.
Thank you for writing such a detailed reply. You make some very good points about the previous near-misses involving Wickham making everyone very cautious about what they do in the future, and also about Wickham's history coming out in a trial.
I hadn't taken on board the issues about the grandfather nearly bringing the family to ruin either!
If Col.Fitzwilliam's elder brother has died, then at least he's going to be an Earl. Perhaps Georgiana fancies the title
It was the first time I've watched it. I initally avoided it when it first came out, thinking 'oh dear, not another Jane Eyre film!' Goes to show what I know, haha! But for Mia's performance, I think Fassbender might have struggled with the role. I think he wisely fed off what Mia gave to him as I don't think Rochester is an easy character to play anyway. He wasn't as brooding as I expected. I think Orson Welles overbrood to my taste that I felt he could've eaten dainty, flighty Fontaine if he wanted to!
I thought Fassbender was far too sinister and vicious looking all the time. Pretty one dimensional. His accent was all over the place. I haven't seen the TV version with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson either. I might check it out now and compare them.
24/25, eh? Just goes to show that it is perhaps Elizabeth's vivality that most people miss as opposed to her looks. Certainly the looks helped, but if a personality so compelling and commanding I think most people can overlook the so-called physical imperfections!:D
I've just been reading a load of reviews of the PD James book, and its interesting that one of the most frequent complaints about it is that Elizabeth's character had disappeared; and to some extent Darcy's too. You'd think that the tv adaptation would have been a good opportunity to rectify that.
I thought Fassbender was far too sinister and vicious looking all the time. His accent was all over the place. I haven't seen the TV version with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson either. I might check it out now and compare them.
I seemed to be in a Jane Eyre mood yesterday. I recently watched the one with Mia Wasikowska version, which I enjoyed. I saw the Ciaran Hinds/ Samantha Morton. Didn't like that one. Hinds' Rochester was too aggressive and Morton too smiley (I sound like Darcy, ha!) and now halfway through the Timothy Dalton one. The latter is vastly superior.
From memory the Ruth Wilson/Toby Stephens version isn't too bad. I think I liked Ruth, but not overly convinced with Toby Stephens.
I seemed to be in a Jane Eyre mood yesterday. I recently watched the one with Mia Wasikowska version, which I enjoyed. I saw the Ciaran Hinds/ Samantha Morton. Didn't like that one. Hinds' Rochester was too aggressive and Morton too smiley (I sound like Darcy, ha!) and now halfway through the Timothy Dalton one. The latter is vastly superior.
From memory the Ruth Wilson/Toby Stephens version isn't too bad. I think I liked Ruth, but not overly convinced with Toby Stephens.
Yes he tends be be too sinister looking also. Ruth Wilson would have been a good Elizabeth in this drama also.
I seemed to be in a Jane Eyre mood yesterday. I recently watched the one with Mia Wasikowska version, which I enjoyed. I saw the Ciaran Hinds/ Samantha Morton. Didn't like that one. Hinds' Rochester was too aggressive and Morton too smiley (I sound like Darcy, ha!) and now halfway through the Timothy Dalton one. The latter is vastly superior.
From memory the Ruth Wilson/Toby Stephens version isn't too bad. I think I liked Ruth, but not overly convinced with Toby Stephens.
yes i liked that version.....i also remember the george c scott and susanna york version he was good but she was terrible....Toby Stephens is always a bit too cardboardy for my taste...but Mia was a very good Jane Eyre
It was the first time I've watched it. I initally avoided it when it first came out, thinking 'oh dear, not another Jane Eyre film!' Goes to show what I know, haha! But for Mia's performance, I think Fassbender might have struggled with the role. I think he wisely fed off what Mia gave to him as I don't think Rochester is an easy character to play anyway. He wasn't as brooding as I expected. I think Orson Welles overbrood to my taste that I felt he could've eaten dainty, flighty Fontaine if he wanted to!
I really like this version too, sorry if this lowers the tone, but I have to say, Michael Fassbender looked phenomenal in those trousers!
Comments
Reputation was one of the most important characteristics you could have at the time, arguably above money and rank. Any hint of scandal would have far reaching consequences. Women were supposed to be 'pure', unsullied souls, 'untouched' when they married to equally respectable men. That was why it was so important for Lydia to marry Wickham, because otherwise she'd have been the shameless hussy who bedded a man without marriage and it would effect how the rest of the family were seen. Were Lizzy, Jane Mary and Kitty like her, and bring further shame? It would effect who they could marry, and certainly not the good, rich matches that Mrs Bennets demands for them.
Georgiana is the same - except her situation was able to be buried, because she didn't run off to London where she could be seen by all and sundry. Outside Fitzwilliam and Darcy, only Lizzy knows of Georgiana's near-error.
If you imagine that she had, it would effect Darcy directly. He has the estate, yes, but I guess a lot of outside business interests that came about due to who he was. Derbyshire, so likely cotton mills, though he'd never be classed as a tradesman. Money from that business that supports Pemberley the household, but you have the towns, villages, workers on the estate. People would be put off from doing business with him, if they heard that Georgiana nearly ran off with some army rascal.
Regards Colonel Fitzwilliam, we know his father is the Earl of ___, Lady Catherine de Bourgh's and Darcy's mother's brother, and he was at the time the second son. Heir and spare. It's not implicitly mentioned, but Earls tend to have big estates inherited for hundreds of years, just like Darcy, but I suspect on a larger, grander scale. We have no idea of the financial health of said estate. If it wasn't doing as well as Pemberley, clearing at least 10,000 a year, it would make sense that the Fitzwilliams could do with Georgiana's 30k dowry. Also, that kind of fortune is always handy, whether needed or not. Buys land, property, investments, an provides for Georgiana and offspring should hubby die.
Edit -I remembered we see Georgiana showing Alveston a picture of Fitzwilliam's castle by the sea. That'll either be his own, or his family estate.
Georgiana marrying Alveston is below her station. Unlike Darcy, she doesn't have the luxury of being in control over her own money, as the dowry goes straight to hubby, hence Wickham's previous interest in her. Fitzwilliam brings property, and presumably money to the marriage. It's purely a business decision to secure the future of the estate and the Fitzwilliam line.
A lot of that is guessing, assumptions and educated guesses of what I know of the period, and Pride and Prejudice so it may not be entirely accurate, but I don't believe I'm far off the mark.
A classic case of great minds think alike.
I'm also enjoying it a lot. Under close inspection it has a lot of issues, which I have posted about before. But I can put them to one side, and enjoy it for what it is. It's nice to see the characters again even if it isn't written by Jane Austen.
Thank you for your considered reply - I totally agree with you. In fact my concerns about this Lizzie are less based on the looks of the actress than on her personality. If she still had the spark and life of the original creation I wouldn't be too bothered. After all many women who might not be conventionally beautiful can appear very attractive due to the force of their personalities but this Lizzie seems to have all the life of a worn out dishrag.
My apologies to posters I replied to earlier. I did not mean to give away any of the plot.
I am enjoying this adaptation far more than I enjoyed the book and I might try reading it again to see if it improves on a second reading.
Ah, don't underestimate how damaging a scandal can be back in those days, lol. Even our own Nigella Lawson knows what that feels like 200 years later.
The very idea of Lydia eloping with Wickham spun the heads of the Bennet family back in P&P, so much so that it dared to ruin the marriage prospects of Jane, Lizzy, Mary and the other daugther whose name I forget. It is not so much the danger to Pemberley that is the problem; it is what the scandal would do to the family name and all the stuff that follows from that (including how it will affect the Pemberley Estate).
If the family name is ruined (i.e. one of their own (Wickham) is convicted of murder), Georgiana will be ruined by mere association of being related to Wickham. No half-decent man would want to attach his name to a Darcy. By the same token, the martial propects of Darcy's son would be ruined as well. And if his son's name becomes ruined by association, so too would Pemberley. No marriage; no heir; no way the Darcy line will continue and Pemberley will fall into ruin as well. There's all that, plus the added fact that Darcy married outside his class anyway.
Wickham's character - who he is, what he is like - will most likely be brought up during the trail, if only to give the jury an idea of what kind of man would resort to murder. As a result, there is a danger that Georgiana's involvement with Wickham (her near-elopement with Wickham) will come out in the trial, even though very few people know about it. I think Georgiana feels she has a duty to marry Col Fitz for all sorts of reasons:
1. A sense of guilt. Remember the conversation she had with Lizzy. Georgiana thinks Darcy believed she was in love with Wickham, hence her seeming willingness to run off with him. On reflection, she knows she was never in love with Wickham but doesn't feel or think Darcy believes this. So out of a sense of guilt, she is willing to show to Darcy that she was never in love with Wickham by defering to his judgement.
2. A sense of duty. Following on from the above, she also feels a sense of duty to the 'right' thing - i.e. marry within her class. With her near-elopement, she nearly brought a huge scandal upon her family's head. She nearly made a wrong decision concerning young, though it wasn't entirely her fault; she clearly doesn't want to make another.
3. A sense of guilt and duty. Through his gambling and loose living, her great-grandfather is a reminder of what happens when a person goes rogue. Her grandfather and father struggled to repair the Darcy family name and save the Pemberley estate from gambling debts. To marry Alverston is to marry outside her social class and brings with it all manner of risk to her family. Darcy and Elizabeth managed to overcome it, but her guilt over Wickham (especially with Wickham accused of murder) plays a much greater role in Georgiana's mind at the moment. As for Darcy wanting Georgiana marrying Fitz, I think he just wants to protect her and secure her future, whether that's from any fallout from the Wickham scandal (murder and the elopement if it ever became public) or from Alveston not being able to provide for her financially. Lawyers weren't rich men and he doesn't own landed property which was the main source of major wealth in those days.
As for Col. Fitz and his inherited wealth, I don't know. There is a dastardly air about him that makes me think that perhaps his estate isn;t as rich as we are made to believe and perhaps needs Georgiana's inheirtance to shore it up a little, I haven't a clue.
Good point about whether his father is dead. His elder brother is dead for sure. So either way, the earldom will pass on to him.
if Colonel Fitzwilliam's father was dead wouldn't he be referred to as Lord Soandso ?
ETA like some others i don't like this Col Fitzwilliam he was lovely in P&P and is rather unpleasant in this....can't decide whether it is the actor or not....
24/25, eh? Just goes to show that it is perhaps Elizabeth's vivality that most people miss as opposed to her looks. Certainly the looks helped, but if a personality so compelling and commanding I think most people can overlook the so-called physical imperfections!:D
I watched the last recent adaptation of Jane Eyre on TV during the hols, the one starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender. Goodness knows, I've read the book and seen so many Jane Eyre adaptations (Fontaine/Welles, the Kay Mellor re-make; the Franco Zeffirelli/Hurt/Gainsborough) and each one brings a new take on the story. But I've to admit I really loved Mia's Jane the most, even if the Welles/Fontaine seems to be judged the best in many critical polls.
ETA: Completely agree with your post to BusStop above as well!:D
Thank you for such a detailed reply. I think I must have overplayed my confusion a bit, because I certainly understand the P&P story well enough, having read it, and other Austen novels, many times
I just aren't too sure that something like this would be as scandalous as all that; certainly not to Darcy and Pemberley - I thought that then, like now, a certain amount of wealth and status put one above such things. Which is exactly why Darcy was able to marry someone as lowly as Lizzie.
For the same reason, I'd think that Georgiana's income was enough to get by on if she were to marry Alveston. Georgina's income was sufficient to make her quite a catch, and I'd expect Darcy to be relieved if someone like Alveston, who's in a good profession and clearly adores Georgiana, came along.
In P&P Wickham stated that, as the younger son, he didn't have the luxury of being able to marry who he wanted. So, yes, it would make sense that Georgiana's income would be perfect. But to see it as Georgiana's duty to marry him, and for Darcy and Georgiana to see it that way too, seems out of character to me.
As you say though - its not Jane Austen, and it doesn't need to make sense.
I loved Mia Wasikowskas performance also. She is a very talented actress. Fassbenders performance not so much.
Or even his brother's title, if one existed, Viscount Someplace, or such.
I think he has to resign his commission as an army officer before he can take up the title (i.e. be called Lord Whatshisname SoandSo)
As someone said above, his character is shifty as it is a murder mystery story in order to make him seem like he is a suspect. Everyone else was at Pemberly together and he was the only one who rode off into the night by himself. If he was a lovely kind non suspicious character, it wouldn't be much of a murder mystery with only one suspect.
it's all so complicated.....i always go by Princess Planets it makes it easier that i was never in the army...:D
It was the first time I've watched it.
Fair point. ;-) Setting Wickham up.
Thank you for writing such a detailed reply. You make some very good points about the previous near-misses involving Wickham making everyone very cautious about what they do in the future, and also about Wickham's history coming out in a trial.
I hadn't taken on board the issues about the grandfather nearly bringing the family to ruin either!
If Col.Fitzwilliam's elder brother has died, then at least he's going to be an Earl. Perhaps Georgiana fancies the title
I thought Fassbender was far too sinister and vicious looking all the time. Pretty one dimensional. His accent was all over the place. I haven't seen the TV version with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson either. I might check it out now and compare them.
I've just been reading a load of reviews of the PD James book, and its interesting that one of the most frequent complaints about it is that Elizabeth's character had disappeared; and to some extent Darcy's too. You'd think that the tv adaptation would have been a good opportunity to rectify that.
I seemed to be in a Jane Eyre mood yesterday. I recently watched the one with Mia Wasikowska version, which I enjoyed. I saw the Ciaran Hinds/ Samantha Morton. Didn't like that one. Hinds' Rochester was too aggressive and Morton too smiley (I sound like Darcy, ha!) and now halfway through the Timothy Dalton one. The latter is vastly superior.
From memory the Ruth Wilson/Toby Stephens version isn't too bad. I think I liked Ruth, but not overly convinced with Toby Stephens.
Yes he tends be be too sinister looking also. Ruth Wilson would have been a good Elizabeth in this drama also.
yes i liked that version.....i also remember the george c scott and susanna york version he was good but she was terrible....Toby Stephens is always a bit too cardboardy for my taste...but Mia was a very good Jane Eyre
I really like this version too, sorry if this lowers the tone, but I have to say, Michael Fassbender looked phenomenal in those trousers!
lol
Yes, he did.
If you check out Shame you will see he looks even better without them.