#i also disagree about misreading darcy being 'as much' about elizabeth as darcy

[anghraine]

firawren replied to this post:

I mean I basically did vote most annoying crossed with most prevalent. But I also always argue that misreading Darcy's character hurts Elizabeth's character just as much, because while she is very wrong about him, she's not "needlessly mean to a poor little shy/autistic man" wrong.

I'm just going to be very straightforward with this one. I didn't reply because a) I had an important project due and had only slept for three hours, and relatedly, b) I wanted to make sure this response seemed as insulting on nine hours of sleep as it had on three.

I've now gotten a full night's sleep and yes, this comment still strikes me as deeply offensive, both in itself and in the specific context of a conversation in which nobody was talking about autism anyway. I drafted a fairly long explanation of why I found it so offensive, but I suspect it's rather tedious, so here's a short version:

Shyness and autism can overlap, but are very different things that should not be conflated as you're doing here.

Telling an autistic person that headcanoning a character as autistic makes him into a "poor little man" is extremely gross.

The implication that, if Darcy were autistic, Elizabeth's overreactions to his very real faults would automatically become about him being autistic (indeed, a poor little autistic man!), as if autistic people definitionally cannot be moral agents capable of ethical missteps and cannot be criticized (fairly or unfairly) for other reasons than autism? Also really unpleasant.

The sleep was worth it, though, because it jogged my memory enough to make this also slightly funny. This all felt familiar and I remember now: you're the person who informed me on this post that "no one" was suggesting that Darcy having genuine social problems (from any origin) would prevent him from separately being flawed and arrogant.

The more things change, etc.

[amarguerite]

Hi hello, every time i re-read Pride & Prejudice (like once a week lmao) i think about what could Darcy have possibly been thinking throughout his and Elizabeth's acquaintance. Especially at Rosings, where, iirc, they're walking through the orchard and talking about the manor and he implies that Elizabeth will be staying there when she visits in the future. And Elizabeth thinks that he must be implying her marrying Col. Fitzwilliam, bc who the fuck else could he possibly be referring to??, but in hindsight he meant bc she would marry Darcy himself. Which I find very odd, bc to us the readers it seems like they havent really spoken much and Elizabeth def doesnt like him at all at this point. He says later in the book that he thought she was expecting his proposal even. It really astounds me the level of cognitive dissonance they both had going on during this time. I also think of the scene from An Ever-Fixed Mark where Lizzy and Fitzwilliam are walking outside the park at Rosings, after they agree to become engaged iirc, when Darcy finds them. That scene is so hilarious and also kind of heartbreaking bc Darcy is folding up the letter that we as the reader know to be his explanation from the book, but in this version he loses his chance to give it to Elizabeth, at least in his mind. Of course, this leads me to remember the several other scenes throughout the Ever-Fixed series where Darcy and Elizabeth are having a conversation where each is misinterpreting the other, leading to all sorts of confusion. Towards the end of Dalliance with a Duke, one such conversation leads to their years'-long estrangement, mostly bc Darcy can't/won't/doesn't know how to express his feelings.

Anyway! this is all to say that I love love love your work, the Ever-Fixed series in particular, and all your Austen content!! <3 :)

Wow, thanks so much for this! <3 <3 <3 I'm delighted to hear I successfully kept up the level of cognitive dissonance because one of my I-will-die-on-this-hill interpretations of Pride and Prejudice is that the vast majority of characters truly and honestly do not know that Darcy is into Elizabeth until the very end of the novel. I have several issues with The Lizzy Bennet Diaries, but one of my chief ones is that everyone is so certain that Darcy is into Lizzy and Lizzy's protesting too much about how he doesn't like her, which is in my view a fundamental misreading of their dynamic. In the novel, even JANE is shocked that Lizzy and Darcy are engaged and can't believe what Lizzy's telling her. I think it makes Lizzy looks stupid and misunderstands her character-- she's not being stubborn about Darcy because she's being willfully blind-- everyone else around her also dislikes the guy, which bolsters her sense of her first impression being right, and her being cleverer than most people because she realized it immediately whereas everyone else took the full assembly at Meryton to realize he's proud and disagreeable.

In terms of Darcy-- Elizabeth does make a point of valuing courtesy and social conventions. She gets mislead by Wickham because he was flattering and charming. Because Elizabeth is a very kind person (her inner monologue during her initial refusals of Mr. Collins are so kind!! she's trying so hard to be nice when turning him down!) and she's a very witty conversationalist, I think Darcy was misreading her wit as attempts at flirtation instead of a desire to gently needle him because she is annoyed by him and his attitude. And, given his own background and prejudices-- his sense of being a Darcy of Pemberley, who anyone would want to marry-- I think he just assumes that any woman would want his proposals if he deigned to offer them.

I think both Lizzy and Darcy had ideas of the other that they were carrying around in their heads the whole time, and only when they speak plainly to each other do they realize that they were wrong, and can actually understand the others' true character. Once they've gotten over those initial prejudices, things go much better for them. (not plot-wise thanks to Lydia, but in terms of personal interactions). They are actually really well-suited, when they're engaging with each other and not the ideas they have of who the other person is. 

[iamthenightcolormeblack]

My Thoughts on Pride & Prejudice 2005: Style over Substance

Kicking off my Pride and Prejudice adaptation review series with the most popular of all the adaptations: the 2005 movie. This film stars Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet and Matthew Macfadyen as Mr. Darcy.

1. GENERAL THINGS I LIKED

The cinematography and the soundtrack. Every shot is a painting, especially with the gorgeous landscape scenery. The music is beautiful and dreamy; I have listened to the soundtrack more times than I've watched the film. Both the cinematography and the soundtrack effectively transport the viewer back to the film's romanticized version of "the past," when life was simpler and people lived slower lives, waiting for their Mr. Darcy to sweep them off their feet.

Originality. The film takes a unique approach to the story by focusing mainly on the romance between Darcy and Elizabeth and emphasizing how the natural surroundings reflect the characters' mental state/emotions (pouring rain during the first proposal and stormy skies when Elizabeth hurries home after Lydia runs away). Though one can disagree with the creative changes made, I like how this film isn't just a remake of what came before it.

Elizabeth's walks through the countryside. The film expresses her desire for freedom through her countryside walks. For instance, the Netherfield walk is shocking to Caroline Bingley because it demonstrates Elizabeth's independence.

The comedic parts are great thanks to the creative additions made. For example, the "excellent boiled potatoes" joke isn't in the book, but it perfectly exemplifies Mr. Collins' poor social skills and pretentiousness, as he tries to make an overly formal comment about an otherwise mundane dish.

2. THE CASTING

The acting is good, although I don't always agree with how the characters are portrayed.

Keira Knightley. I like how she's the right age for Elizabeth, who is around 20-21 years old; Knightley was around 19-20 when she played Elizabeth, plus she has gorgeous eyes. She perfectly conveys the pride, confidence, and biting wit of Elizabeth, as she holds her head high in an imperious manner and has a direct, piercing gaze. However, I don't like how this version chooses to simplify Elizabeth's character into that of "free-spirited nonconformist tomboy," who is a nature-lover and runs to the countryside to console herself when things get tough (ex. running to the lake after rejecting Mr. Collins). This is a contrast to the Elizabeth Bennet as presented to us in the book, who acts like a typical "lady" for the sake of her social reputation; she mostly keeps her thoughts to herself except when talking to Jane or Darcy. Elizabeth is powerful not because she rejects society outright; it is because she does not submit to societal pressure to marry and makes her own choices (ex. rejecting Mr. Collins).

Matthew Macfadyen. His Darcy is cold, aloof, and remote, yet shows signs of a rich inner life and unrequited yearning for Elizabeth as a soulmate. I like how this version shows Elizabeth peeling away his cold exterior like the layers of an onion, until his heart of gold is revealed. While I think Macfadyen is a good actor, I disagree with the interpretation of Darcy solely being a lonely introvert, as it neglects his primary character flaw of pride.

Tom Hollander's Mr. Collins. Probably the best casting, as he perfectly portrays the bumbling awkwardness of the character and is more sympathetic than the gross Mr. Collins in the 1995 BBC miniseries. He is short, has a nasally voice and officious manner that makes him annoying yet fun to watch.

Simon Woods as Mr. Bingley. He's so friendly and eager to please, like the character is in the book.

Rosamund Pike's Jane Bennet. Utterly angelic and motherly, need I say more? The perfect antidote to Elizabeth's savagery.

Rupert Friend's Mr. Wickham. Handsome and dashing in a red soldier's uniform. It's easy to see how a girl would fall for him and ignore his debauchery, but also obvious that he is deceptive. For instance, he keeps claiming that he is insignificant and unnoticed, when he basks in the attention of Elizabeth, Kitty and Lydia.

3. OVERALL CHARACTER AND PLOT DEVELOPMENT

Since this is a movie, character development is a challenge, and the film relies on changes of outward appearance/dialogue to show character growth. For instance, we get to see Darcy's change from cold and remote into warm and loving, while Elizabeth admits that "she was wrong" about Darcy and slowly comes to respect him.

The first half (beginning to Darcy's proposal) is great because it effectively introduces the audience to the cast of characters (the family, Darcy, Bingley, Caroline, Wickham, and Mr. Collins). It also contains all the comedic parts and sets up the conflicts that drive the story. Overall, this half is more faithful to the novel because it has the social satire aspects of the story and sticks to the key plot points while developing the characters.

The second half is rather lackluster compared to the first because it focuses solely on resolving the plot points introduced in the first half. This part of the book contains important events for Elizabeth's character development (getting the letter, visiting Pemberley, dealing with the fallout from Lydia's elopement), but the film rushes through them to get Elizabeth and Darcy married. Instead of focusing on how Elizabeth overcomes her prejudice of Darcy and starts to love him, the film relies on aesthetic shots of flickering candles/landscapes to serve as quick transitions between the scenes. Though we have plenty of evidence that Darcy loves Elizabeth, we don't see much evidence that the love is mutual until the second proposal, only that Elizabeth starts to see him as a friend.

Another reason I don't like the second half of the film as much as the first half is the reduced dialogue. This second half has a lot of quiet moments devoted to nature scenery/Elizabeth staring in the mirror. Reducing the dialogue, with the exception of the letter scene, doesn't make sense because the plot/action of Pride and Prejudice is furthered through the conversations the characters have (after all, wealthy Regency women likely spent much time indoors/making social calls). While one can argue that the reduced dialogue is meant to show that Elizabeth is reflecting on her mistaken prejudice, without access to Elizabeth's interior thoughts, the audience doesn't get to see Elizabeth actively confronting her false assumptions about Darcy, unlike in the book, where she says out loud to herself: "Until this moment, I never knew myself."

Notable Scenes From the First Half of the Film:

The opening scene. It sets the tone for the whole movie with the beginning shot of a field at dawn, which ties in nicely with the second proposal scene near the end. By presenting Elizabeth by herself reading a book, it communicates to the audience that Elizabeth is "not like other girls," and it shows the imperfect, yet loving family dynamics of the Bennet household.

Elizabeth roasting Darcy after he dismisses her as "tolerable, but not handsome enough to tempt me." During a conversation the Bennet family has with Darcy and Bingley, Mrs. Bennet commits a social gaffe when talking about Jane's many admirers and how one sent her poetry. Elizabeth saves the situation by commenting that bad poetry can kill love, and Darcy comments that he regards poetry as "the food of love" and asks how to "encourage affection." I like that the film included this little exchange from the book (although it takes place while Elizabeth is visiting a sick Jane at Netherfield, and not during the first ball), since it was skipped over in the 1995 miniseries. The best part is Elizabeth's sick burn: "Dancing. Even if one's partner is barely tolerable," which is made even better when she walks away from him with a triumphant smile on her face.

The famous Hand Flex. After Darcy helps Elizabeth into the carriage (by holding her hand) so she and Jane can head back home, he glances longingly at her before wringing the hand with which he touched hers. It's an important hint of his growing love for her, as well as his struggle to repress those feelings. This is a wonderful bit of character development as it reveals that Darcy has a heart.

Mr. Collins having a meal with the Bennet family. The awkwardness is palpable as Mr. Collins tries to show off his social skills and give pro tips on charming ladies. This is all topped off with this amazing comedic joke: "These are excellent boiled potatoes. Many years since I've had such an exemplary vegetable." Another brilliant bit: after Lydia cannot contain her laughter, Lizzy, after giving her father a mischievous side-eye, slaps Lydia on the back to hide her laughter. Best line besides the excellent boiled potatoes: "Believe me, no one would suspect your manners to be rehearsed."

The Netherfield Ball dance between Darcy and Elizabeth. It is staged like a clash of personalities in the beginning, while the creative filming technique of separating the couple apart from the crowd of dancers foreshadows the budding relationship between them. I also like how sarcastic the dialogue is--Elizabeth is trying to win a battle of wits with Darcy but he successfully avoids her traps while reminding her that she doesn't truly know him and cannot make judgements about his personality.

Mr. Collins trying to introduce himself to Darcy. It's so comical because of the significant height difference between Mr. Collins and Mr. Darcy (Collins is dwarfed by Darcy). The height difference effectively represents the significant difference in social status between the two men and makes Collins, with his pomposity, look ridiculous as he fancies himself part of the nobility but cannot properly introduce himself.

Mr. Collins' proposal--one of the funniest scenes in the movie. Mr. Collins clumsily tries to flatter Elizabeth with a tiny flower, and it gets even funnier when he so obviously misreads Elizabeth's disinterest and outright exasperation (he doesn't understand that no means no!). After Mr. Collins bends down on one knee to propose to Elizabeth, the film emphasizes Elizabeth's towering presence over Collins to show that the two are a mismatch. The fact that the proposal takes place in the messy dining room reflects Collins' view of marriage as a business matter that he wants to get done with quickly, since the location of the proposal is not very romantic.

Elizabeth roasting Darcy yet again at Rosings Park. Elizabeth eagerly recounts to Colonel Fitzwilliam Darcy's impolite manners at the first ball; Darcy confesses that "I do not have the talent of conversing easily with people I have never met before." I like how the nervous and quiet delivery of that line shows to the audience that Darcy is an introvert, and it shows that he's an honest person, since he abhors "disguise of every sort." The scene effectively highlights Elizabeth's prejudice towards Darcy as the audience feels pity for him when Elizabeth tells him to practice.

"This is a charming house." During this scene, Darcy visits Elizabeth while she is alone and awkwardly attempts to make conversation with her. Macfadyen is a master of body language; Darcy says little but expresses a lot (ex. the nervous fiddling with his gloves). He tries to express his feelings for Elizabeth but gives up and abruptly walks out of the room.

The first proposal. What a climactic scene (but not very faithful to the book)! The music, thunder, and rain perfectly complement the volcano of emotions that erupts when Darcy cannot repress his feelings any longer. This scene has some of the best sexual tension ever; the two get closer to each other until they almost kiss. While this scene is great to an objective viewer, I don't like that the modified dialogue changes the original meaning of this scene (more about this later).

The letter. Elizabeth has a moment of introspection when she is forced to question her judgment, and Darcy delivers his letter. I like the shot of Darcy riding farther and farther away from Elizabeth, signaling that he is becoming increasingly out of her reach.

Notable Scenes from the Second Half of the Film:

Aunt and Uncle Gardiner arrive right after Elizabeth comes back from Rosings and they take her away to a vacation. I didn't like how they were introduced too quickly; I was thinking to myself "how did they get there and where did they come from?" Luckily we are treated to more glorious shots of the English countryside (the one with them under a large oak tree is my favorite).

Visiting Pemberley. I was puzzled by why Elizabeth laughs as soon as she sees Pemberley for the first time because in the book she was in complete awe of it. Also it doesn't make sense why she would touch his expensive stuff it's not her house...or is it? The good thing is that the embarrassment the two have upon meeting each other again is definitely palpable. Georgiana is sweet, but a little less shy than she was in the book.

Darcy smiles! After introducing Georgiana to Elizabeth, he smiles for a brief time at Elizabeth, and she smiles back. It's a great moment showing how Elizabeth has drawn out his goodness, and indicates that Darcy has transformed for Elizabeth. She also starts seeing him as a friend and her prejudice against him seems to have reversed in this moment of mutual recognition.

Lydia's elopement. Keira Knightley's fake cry was off-putting. Then Darcy only talks to her for a little bit and doesn't help her much (unlike in the book, where he asked her to sit down and got her some wine to make her feel better). I don't know why the aunt and uncle are in this scene because it's very important in developing Darcy and Elizabeth's relationship. In the book, the two are alone, and Elizabeth choosing to tell Darcy about Lydia's elopement is a sign that she trusts him, while Darcy's concern for Elizabeth further confirms that he still loves her. This extremely brief scene flickers quickly, and it takes only a few seconds before Elizabeth is crying in her carriage, while the sky is dark and ominous.

Bingley rehearsing his proposal with Darcy. This added scene, which is not in the book, is so funny because of how Darcy roleplays Jane, while Bingley has so much anxiety about her not accepting him. It's a nice glimpse into their friendship and it's also funny because Bingley is getting proposal advice from someone who failed very miserably at proposing.

Sunrise on the Moors. Another objectively beautiful and romantic scene that is definitely not faithful to the book. The two meet each other in a field in their nightgowns and profess their love to each other while blessed by the rising sun.

4. MAJOR FLAWS; OR, HOW THE FILM DIVERGES FROM THE BOOK

In earlier book adaptation reviews, I stated that I welcomed creative changes as long as they reflected what was already in the book (ex. literary elements and character development) or the author's intent, since film and books are different mediums and some storytelling techniques that work in books may not work on film. This movie is undoubtedly well-known for its creative changes, especially in terms of historical setting and dialogue. While these creative changes entertain the audience, I feel that they change the meaning of the story as presented by the book.

Here's the biggest issue I have with the movie: Darcy has no pride. The film interprets his "pride" as a misconception strangers get from Darcy's cold manner and inconsiderate remarks, but in the book he is an arrogant person who views his social inferiors as beneath him and treats them poorly. In the movie, his whole character is fashioned in the modern image of the "sensitive man," who is kind and considerate if only the outside world would appreciate his uniqueness. Thus, Elizabeth's prejudice against him is entirely without merit. While making Darcy a more sympathetic person highlights how wrong Elizabeth's prejudice is, the fact is that both of them have "pride and prejudice." Some fans have commented that Darcy is like a sad puppy at times. It's hard to see how he's a good match for this Elizabeth's fiery spirit, only that he wouldn't infringe upon her freedom to roam. A lot of YouTube comments I read were people expressing their desire to "hug Darcy" or console him after Elizabeth rejects him; this doesn't make sense because Darcy is an unsympathetic character until he is forced to change in order to earn Elizabeth's love. Apart from becoming kinder to Elizabeth and the Gardiners, Darcy never really changes in the movie; he still remains a socially awkward introvert.

The re-interpretation of Pride and Prejudice as purely a romantic novel: The emphasis on romance means that the other elements of the book--the social criticism, secondary characters and the dialogue--are de-emphasized for the sake of the romance between Elizabeth and Darcy.

The film's approach to the story echoes Charlotte Bronte's criticism of the novel: "And what did I find [in Pride and Prejudice]? ... a carefully fenced, highly cultivated garden, with neat borders and delicate flowers; but no glance of a bright, vivid physiognomy, no open country, no fresh air, no blue hill, no bonny beck. I should hardly like to live with her ladies and gentlemen, in their elegant but confined homes." This version of Pride and Prejudice utilizes Romantic elements not in the book (ex. the storms, the landscapes) to increase the passion that the characters feel but cannot express.

Pride and Prejudice is perceived as a "boring" book because much of the drama takes place indoors (ex. Darcy's first proposal is in Mr. Collin's home), whereas in the film, there is greater emphasis on the natural scenery in keeping with its Romantic interpretation (lots of the "open country" that Charlotte Bronte desired). While the landscape scenes are beautiful, locating the action indoors, in the grand houses of the nobility, emphasizes the repressive, tradition-based nature of Regency Era society that Austen criticized (in a subtle way). These houses reinforce social hierarchy, for instance; the interior of Rosings Park is showy and stifling because it it represents Lady Catherine De Bourgh's wealth and power over those around her. Locating most of the scenes indoors visually represents the "confined and unvarying" lives of Regency era women and makes Elizabeth Bennet's independent streak much more significant.

Some of the social constraints that Elizabeth and Darcy face are removed. For example, Elizabeth is much more direct in her criticisms of others (ex. the "barely tolerable" insult), whereas in the book she largely confines these criticisms to her intimate friends such as Jane and Charlotte Lucas. While this effectively shows how badass she is, Elizabeth likely would not have taunted Darcy in such a direct way, as it would have been considered impolite and likely harmed her social reputation in a society governed by rigid adherence to social etiquette. And of course, Darcy likely would not have been walking around the English countryside in an open-chested shirt although we may have Colin Firth's wet shirt to blame for that. The importance of following etiquette rules is shown when Darcy offends the whole village by refusing to dance with anyone during the first ball. As a woman in a patriarchal society, it would have been even more important for Elizabeth to follow the rules, as her social reputation was important to her chances of making a good marriage. By de-emphasizing the rigid social norms that govern the characters, the obstacles to Elizabeth and Darcy's marriage are less significant, and it seems that the only thing standing in the way of their being together is Elizabeth's unreasonable hatred of Darcy.

Also, in many of Austen's novels, the hometowns of her heroines and its inhabitants are their own characters; the power of gossip in determining one's social reputation for the "marriage market" is de-emphasized in the film. In Pride and Prejudice, a major reason Elizabeth doesn't discover Wickham's bad character at first is because of the "general approbation of the neighborhood" and social popularity he has in Hertfordshire. After Lydia elopes, the family is in a bad situation with regards to marriage prospects because the village had "generally proved [the Bennets] to be marked out for misfortune." In the film, the role of the village is relegated to that of a place for entertainment and nothing more.

Others have noted that the film also exaggerates the social divide between Elizabeth and Darcy by turning the Bennet family into peasant farm-owners who have messy hair and wear plain, homespun clothing. This justifies Darcy's social prejudice against the Bennets, which undercuts Austen's message of morals, actions, and treatment of others being a better indicator of character than class rank (the rich people in this book, with the exception of Darcy, Georgiana and Bingley, are shown to be lazy or plain ridiculous). While Darcy may be richer than Elizabeth, and have better connections, they are both members of the gentry--after all, they do not have to work to maintain their lifestyles. Instead, we are presented with a conventional rags-to-riches story, where our poor but virtuous heroine is rewarded with a rich Prince Charming who takes her away from the squalor of her home to his great big palace.

Ultimately, the story is changed into an argument for love, specifically the passionate kind, triumphing over all; Elizabeth overcomes her hatred of men as "humorless poppycocks" to be with Darcy. Near the end, Mary reads out of a book claiming that a lady should give in to her passions and surrender to love, which doesn't make sense as the marriage based entirely on passion (Lydia and Wickham) is shown to be less than ideal.

While Austen does believe in following one's heart (ex. Persuasion, where Anne Elliot regrets rejecting Captain Wentworth because of his lower social status), others have commented that she presents the ideal relationship as a balance between mind and heart. Charlotte's practical marriage to Mr. Collins represents the traditional view of marriage as an "economic proposition," it is entirely logical and calculated, whereas Lydia and Wickham's marriage is the other emotional extreme, motivated entirely by sexual infatuation. Before Elizabeth acknowledges her love for Darcy, she must respect him as her intellectual equal. Here's the passage from the book where Elizabeth realizes she loves Darcy: "She now began to comprehend that he was exactly the man, who in disposition and talents, would most suit her. His understanding and temper, though unlike her own, would have answered all her wishes. It was an union that must have been to the advantage of both; by her ease and liveliness, his mind might have been softened, his manners improved, and from his judgment, information, and knowledge of the world, she must have received benefit of greater importance." Elizabeth's decision to marry Darcy is not only a result of her heart's desire, but it comes after she does some thinking and concludes they are compatible and would be able to live with each other on a day-to-day basis.

Something else I find ironic is the director's (Joe Wright's) claim that he aimed for realism in the film, given that Austen already depicted Regency era life realistically by focusing on social norms, class, and wealth:

The director, in his quest for "realism," features the messy environment of the Bennet household, which doesn't make sense given that they are still relatively wealthy (when defending herself, Elizabeth tells Lady Catherine that she is "a gentleman's daughter"). Also, they have servants to clean things up, so why would the house be in a constant state of disarray?

Lastly, how is the second proposal scene is "realistic?" It is a moment of "psychic communication" between Darcy and Elizabeth which is out of character for the book. They both "can't sleep" and walked, in the words of Wikipedia, "across the moors" to see each other ok this seriously reminds me of Wuthering Heights. The scene is powerful because every woman wants to be told that "you have bewitched me body and soul" but "realistically," this doesn't happen (and this line isn't in the book either).

"REALISM" IS THE REASON WHY WE FUSS OVER HISTORICAL ACCURACY!!! HISTORICAL ACCURACY ALLOWS PERIOD DRAMAS TO BE REALISTIC!!!!

If the characters wore historically accurate clothing (different from the loosely inspired, modernized dresses/hair in the film), it would have emphasized the lack of freedom women had in Regency Era society and reinforced the importance of following social norms to succeed in a patriarchal society.

Bad Script Changes:

This film is known for its modernized script, which makes it easier for a mainstream audience to watch the movie. However, it also changes depictions of the characters in ways that undercut the meaning of the book.

Elizabeth Bennet, man-hater:

"Oh, they [men] are far too easy to judge. Humorless poppycocks, in my limited experience."

"And which of the painted peacocks is Mr. Bingley?"

"Men are either eaten up with arrogance or stupidity. And if they're amiable they're so easily led that they have no minds of their own whatsoever...No, they bring nothing but heartache."

I know these snarky comments are fun and reinforce the modern perception of Elizabeth Bennet as a feminist heroine. However, book Elizabeth doesn't rail against men as a whole; she just wants to find love rather than be forced into an advantageous marriage. Her idea that marriage should be based on love and respect, along with her unwillingness to compromise on that ideal, is what makes her revolutionary, not her complete apathy towards the opposite sex.

"Don't you dare judge me!" While it foreshadows Elizabeth's flawed judgment, this outburst is out of character for Charlotte Lucas, who in the book is level-headed and makes practical decisions. As with the majority of the bad script changes, it is too modern and doesn't fit with the 19th century style language used elsewhere in the script.

Darcy's lack of pride is shown in the modified lines of the first proposal (which were hard to catch because they were spoken super fast):

"I can bear it no longer. The past months have been a torment. I came to Rosings with the single object of seeing you. I had to see you. I've fought against my better judgment, my family's expectation, the inferiority of your birth, my rank and circumstance, all those things, but I'm willing to put them aside and ask you to end my agony. I love you. Most ardently."

These lines completely change the meaning of the first proposal. Apart from the famous opening lines ("In vain I have struggled. It will not do. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you"), Austen makes clear that Darcy still regards his higher social position and Elizabeth's inferior connections as obstacles to their marriage. His first proposal to Elizabeth is a means of getting rid of the suffering that his unrequited love has forced upon him; he still does not accept Elizabeth as his equal, which is why she rejects him in the first place. Clearly he is not "willing to put [social norms] aside" when it comes to "his sense of her inferiority." The modified lines also make Darcy much more romantic by having him state that he came to Rosings to see Elizabeth; the book does not specify that this is the case; he just came on a routine visit to see his aunt and Elizabeth happened to be there. As I said earlier, Elizabeth in the book rejects Darcy because of his lack of respect for her, but in the film, he seems to show nothing but respect for her. They even have an almost-kiss, which doesn't make sense given that she hates him so intensely at this point in the novel.

"He's so, he's so...rich." Elizabeth utters these when trying and failing to find a reason not to visit Pemberley. This declaration does not make sense because Elizabeth has formed in the very least a grudging respect for Mr. Darcy; without access to her internal thoughts, one might take this line as evidence that she still hates Mr. Darcy.

“Just leave me alone!!!” After confronting Lady Catherine, Elizabeth flees to her room to find some alone time. This doesn’t suit Elizabeth’s character because 1) she acts like a temperamental teenager and 2) she is estranged from her family. In the book she gets closer to her family after Darcy’s first proposal, not the other way round. In some JASNA (Jane Austen Society of North America) articles I read about Pride and Prejudice, the authors observed that Elizabeth isn’t concerned about her family early in the novel; her motivations are largely self-centered, she keeps her head above their foolishness and doesn’t have intimate relationships with anyone in her family with the exception of her father and Jane. Only after she receives the criticisms of her family’s behavior from Mr. Darcy does she look out for her family; for example, by advising her father not to let Lydia go to Brighton (and she becomes right about it harming her family’s reputation). The film also makes Elizabeth even more isolated from her family by omitting the fact that she tells Jane about what happened between her and Darcy. Elizabeth learning to care for her family is an important part of her growth which the film omits.

5. CONCLUSION

I still think this film is worth watching, even though as a purist I disagree with the creative changes made, namely the emphasis on the romance over the social comedy. It is obvious that the screenwriter/director didn't strive to replicate the book exactly and aimed for a romantic re-interpretation.

The film has had a positive impact since it introduced a lot of people to Jane Austen, including me.

Here’s my story: when the movie aired on TV, my mother, who is a 1995 die-hard, started ranting about her hate for this version, so I picked up the book so that I could watch and compare.

As a romance movie it is excellent, because it has plenty of sexual tension and quotable romantic lines, along with a couple we can root for. The set design, music, and set design also make watching the movie an experience. It's very easy to love this movie just for the cottage core aesthetics (although aesthetics cannot cover up the flaws of this film).

On a side note, I find it funny that the Wikipedia article for this film states that it "failed to have the cultural influence" of the 1995 BBC miniseries. In fact, many people my age (17 or 18 years old) who have read the book consider this movie the definitive version of Pride and Prejudice and some don't even know that the 1995 miniseries exists!

Whether you love or hate this film, all I ask is that you don't call it Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice.

@colonelfitzwilliams @appleinducedsleep @obscurelittlebird @austengivesmeserotonin @princesssarisa @dahlia-coccinea @firawren @cobaltzosia

[anghraine]

I've been moving and navigating further departmental nonsense etc (my pseudo-dissertation got approved for defending, though! l o l). But it was interesting to see the Worst P&P Takes poll I reblogged accumulating more results and the general tenor of responses in the notes.

I mean, the results are definitely to be expected if you're familiar with the side of Austen fandom doing a lot of the reblogging etc. But still, interesting!

Many Tumblr polls specify that they're asking about personal preferences that may be irrational—favorite/least favorite, coolest/most annoying, or something like that. This one, though, asked for the worst interpretation of P&P, not the most annoying one—and the current leader is "Darcy is never really proud, he's just shy and probably has anxiety" against some very steep competition on the Bad Takes front.

I was thinking about why that seemed a kind of tediously predictable choice even though I agree that the take is wrong, and realized that while I do disagree with the shy Darcy interpretation and I particularly disagree with the specific formulation where he is never proud at all, it ultimately feels to me like a failure of nuance rather than just completely wrongheaded like some of the others. And this is probably my fundamental difference with a lot of Darcy takes I see!

In my opinion, a character who is introverted and who feels awkward in various social situations and who doesn't like common social activities and who has to work himself up to talking to his crush and who is repeatedly suggested to behave very differently in contexts where he's more comfortable being interpreted as shy and anxious is not that big of a leap.

Yes, it's important that he is actually fundamentally confident and haughty, that he makes his personal feelings of discomfort other people's problem, and that he thinks he's such a unique and special butterfly that he doesn't need to even put in an effort outside his personal social circle. But it's a misreading that is easy to follow (and long predates the 2005 P&P, as I've mentioned before!).

The additional misreading that a shy and anxious Darcy is also never proud at all is a much more drastic leap, and in my experience, condemnations of shy Darcy interpretations rarely differentiate between "Darcy is shy as well as arrogant" and "Darcy is shy rather than arrogant" as interpretations (although their basic arguments are quite different). But even that as the worst possible misreading of P&P when Darcy is not even the main character is ?????????

I mean, for one alternative (not even the one I voted for!), the idea that Elizabeth is an author avatar Mary Sue seems a far worse misreading of P&P than basically anything to do with Darcy at all. The center piece of the entire novel is Elizabeth's epiphany of self-knowledge about her own shortcomings that do not particularly resemble Austen's at all, but were ethically a concern for her, and she's a complex, interesting character in general whom Austen correctly regarded as a major achievement. Inverting that into Elizabeth as an improbably perfect, reality-warping self-insert is deeply wrong and frankly pretty misogynistic as well.

(ngl though, it's a little funny to see such a blatantly terrible reading of Elizabeth rank so far behind the shy Darcy votes. I've gotten "does anyone actually think/say that?" so many times on my posts about Austen fandom's prioritization of Darcy's character development over Elizabeth's and yet...)

And even just going with the Darcy-centric misreadings, the idea of Darcy as a "bad boy" seems easily the most absolutely wrong take on him. His pride is at least complicated and the finer points can be fairly debated and it's a quality that actually changes somewhat throughout the novel, and you can have discussion over what happened when, whose testimonies should be weighted more, etc. But there is no point at which "bad boy" isn't utterly wrong for him. However, there's definitely a tendency in some wings of the fandom to find the idea of Darcy being misread too favorably more objectionable than him being read too unfavorably, regardless of the particulars, so it's not a surprise.

I suppose you could argue about what "worst" means in the context of variously bad interpretations. Like, is an interpretation that is about a fairly trivial aspect of the book but extremely wrong about it "worse" than an interpretation that is pretty bad but at least comprehensibly so about something very important?