Goodreads | Sense and Sensibility

topics	replies	views	last activity
Elinor stands for sense and Marianne represents sensibility. How far do you agree with this assesment of the novel?	8	17	06/02/2008 08:18PM

Steven rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

04/07/08

bookshelves: 1001, womenareamystery

Read in April, 2008

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

I was able to read this, my third Jane Austen novel, in advance of the PBS Masterpiece presentation during the past two Sunday evenings. While I enjoyed the novel (I had bigger problems with the BBC adaptation), it is, in my view, a bit more difficult than Pride and Prejudice or Emma. It is still quite enjoyable, though, and there are many moments (like in all good Austen) that make you laugh and make you go awww in their romantic sentimentality. Despite all that, the plot is a bit busy.

T...more I was able to read this, my third Jane Austen novel, in advance of the PBS Masterpiece presentation during the past two Sunday evenings. While I enjoyed the novel (I had bigger problems with the BBC adaptation), it is, in my view, a bit more difficult than Pride and Prejudice or Emma. It is still quite enjoyable, though, and there are many moments (like in all good Austen) that make you laugh and make you go awww in their romantic sentimentality. Despite all that, the plot is a bit busy.

The Dashwood women (Mrs. Dashwood is the mom; Elinor is the sensible older one; Marianne is the romantic, yet sorta flighty one; Margaret is the little girl who really isn’t at all important to the story) live at beautiful Norland. Unfortunately, Mr. Dashwood dies and the estate passes to his son, John. John is convinced by his wife Fanny, whom Austen is clearly not a big fan, that the Dashwood girls should not be provided for quite as generously as might have been intended. Just as an aside, Austen doesn’t really create a lot of moral ambiguity in her characters - there are really not a lot of layers in characters like Fanny Dashwood and Austen lets you know what she thinks of these people in no uncertain terms.

Anyway, while at Norland, Fanny’s brother Edward Ferrars comes to visit and he and Elinor seem a bit smitten with one another. We as readers know almost immediately that we will see more of Edward Ferrars because he is good and decent and he has humble dreams about being a pastor in a little church. Plus, he is nice to little sister, Margaret. Unfortunately, he is supposed to marry a woman of wealth or position, preferably both, and Elinor is neither of those.

The Dashwood ladies then move from Norland to a small cottage in Devonshire that is owned by a distant cousin. Living in the same vicinity with the Dashwoods is Colonel Brandon who sees Marianne and is immediately smitten. Marianne, 17, thinks Colonel Brandon, 35, is way too old. We readers, though, know he will play a more important role because he is very mysterious and his mystery no doubt stems from the fact that he is very honorable. Marianne is out for a stroll and falls and is rescued by the charming and handsome Willoughby. She falls madly in love and it seems like Willoughby does too. We know their will be problems, however, because Willoughby is too showy and tries to buy Marianne a horse - a definite no no for Austen men.

Willoughby must go to London and Marianne is very sad.
Soon, we meet the Steele’s who arrive to visit the Devonshire area. Lucy Steele admits to Elinor that she has been secretly engaged to Edward Ferrars for a long time. Elinor is hurt, but she is the sensible one and as such hides her disappointment.

The Dashwood sisters travel to London and during a dance, which is required of every Austen novel, I guess, Marianne discovers that Willoughby is engaged to someone else who is very wealthy. She is heartbroken and spends the vast majority of the remaining half of the novel being very heartbroken and very dramatic about it. Poor girl, will she ever attract a husband? Colonel Brandon tells Elinor that Willoughby really is quite the jerk and Marianne should just forget about that playa.

Edwards keeps his engagement with Lucy Steele and his mother disinherits him for it, but he is very honorable and he intends to keep his promise. His little brother Robert will get all the money. Colonel Brandon offers Edward the ability to live off the parish of Delaford. On the return trip home, Marianne is still being a drama queen and she gets very sick.

As Marianne is recovering, Willoughby comes back and tells Elinor that he was disinherited and poor him, now he doesn’t have either money or love. Marianne gets better and resolves to stop pining after this guy and to be much more sensible, like her big sister.

We learn that Lucy Stelle married a Mr. Ferrars and Elinor is very upset, but still sensibly so. Edward arrives the next day and says that it was his brother and not him that did the marrying, oh crazy mix-up. Edward asks Elinor to marry him and his mom gives him some money for his troubles, even though she still loves Edward and Lucy more.

Finally, and in my opinion rather suddenly and inexplicably, Marianne realizes she loves Colonel Brandon and truly loves him. As a reader, we are to ignore the hundreds of pages of her being upset about Willoughby and instead focus of the 5 or so pages where she has changed her mind. All live close enough and visit often and things end happily ever after.

I am really not ashamed to say that I read chick lit and that Austen’s influence over that genre is still tremendous and to some extent, underrated. Perhaps some of the flaws of this novel can be forgiven a bit because it was her first, but I found it to be a little bit formulaic. Plus, I really don’t know whether I was happy about the ending. On some level, one reads Austen because we want the romantic and sugary sweet ending. No doubt the obstacles were conquered and Elinor and Edward found a way to be together, but I remain less that convinced that Marianne truly found the person she most wanted to be with. One could argue that it is an essential plot twist in chick lit where the heroine falls in love with the guy that turns out to be more right for her and she realizes she loved him all along, but I don’t know if that was the case here, and if it was, it was a little rushed. For these reasons, the book gets only 4 and not 5 stars.

...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Akemi rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

06/15/08

Read in June, 2008

Despite the fact that I spent the last semester reading Victorian novels, I somehow felt the compulsion to finish this. I started it in January, but it got pushed aside for schoolwork.

I enjoyed it, but I don't think I'd rank it up there with Emma or Pride and Prejudice. Though, I haven't read P&P very recently, so I guess I'd have to re-read that to really compare. The storyline is ...more Despite the fact that I spent the last semester reading Victorian novels, I somehow felt the compulsion to finish this. I started it in January, but it got pushed aside for schoolwork.

I enjoyed it, but I don't think I'd rank it up there with Emma or Pride and Prejudice. Though, I haven't read P&P very recently, so I guess I'd have to re-read that to really compare. The storyline is rather similar, so it would be interesting to have a direct comparison. My experience with S&S might also have been marred by the fact that I read it over such a long period of time. I can't quite identify what makes Emma better than this. The quality of the prose in Emma just seemed better; I found myself becoming bored in parts of S&S and had trouble following which middle-aged interfering rich lady was which, while every character in Emma is immediately identifiable and hilarious. The secondary characters are definitely way inferior to those in Emma. As I said, I had trouble differentiating Lady Middleton from Mrs. Jennings from whomever else, whereas I will (hopefully) always remember Miss Bates or Mr. Collins.

There is plenty of Austen's typical biting sarcasm, which I enjoyed thoroughly:

"Elinor agreed to it all, for she did not think he deserved the compliment of rational opposition."

Can't find anymore at the moment, but it's pretty much everywhere.

I guess my boredom arose from lack of juice behind the individual characters, other than...Elinor. Marianne is more dramatic, but doesn't really have much of a (believable) personality behind the drama- I mean, seriously, would she really have settled for Colonel Brandon? Alan Rickman, perhaps, but not Austen's Colonel Brandon. There's even a section Elinor speculates as to why Marianne would fall for him- it was almost as if Austen was mocking her own conclusion, acknowledging that she was just trying to tie up loose ends even if they didn't make sense.

Oh, one more thing: I thought Austen's lack of sympathy is an amusing contrast to Eliot's in Middlemarch. Eliot always relates to her own characters and tries to at least prevent the reader from judging them, whereas Austen purposefully punishes her evil characters and rewards the good ones. Willoughby never reforms his ways and is represented to the end as a cad, while Lucy Steele and the Ferrars (other than Edward) suffer a similar fate:

"They (Lucy and Robert Ferrars) settled in town, received very liberal assistance from Mrs. Ferrars, were on the best terms imaginable with the Dashwoods; and setting aside the jealousies and ill will continually subsisting between Fanny and Lucy, in which their husbands of course took a part, as well as the frequent domestic disagreements between Robert and Lucy themselves, nothing could exceed the harmony in which they all lived together."

I think I would have gotten on better with Austen than Eliot, though I love both their writing....less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Lillafiore rated it:

(review of isbn 0192804782)

05/13/08

bookshelves: classics

This is one book where female superiority reigned. It reigned over men, and over situations. All the women were powerful and in control at all times. Austen likes her heroines to be strong and unique and clever, with the exception of Fanny Price. I have developed an appreciation for Fanny as I read more of Austen’s works. As shy and timid as she is, she is a breath of fresh air, a change of pace from the usual characteristics Austen bestows on the female gender.

The thing that got to me, wa...more This is one book where female superiority reigned. It reigned over men, and over situations. All the women were powerful and in control at all times. Austen likes her heroines to be strong and unique and clever, with the exception of Fanny Price. I have developed an appreciation for Fanny as I read more of Austen’s works. As shy and timid as she is, she is a breath of fresh air, a change of pace from the usual characteristics Austen bestows on the female gender.

The thing that got to me, was how timid and hollow the men were in this novel. Usually there are one or two strong male characters that you use as a standard to judge all other men by. Not in this novel. The men were weak, easily manipulated and indecisive. The women made all the decisions through every step of the novel.

The Dashwoods are an interesting blend. Fanny Dashwood, sister in law to the Dashwood sisters Elinor and Marianne, is selfish, spoiled and manipulative. Every time her husband tries to do something nice for his sisters, she manages to talk him out of it. This dynamic is apparent with all the relationships in the novel, as the women control all the decisions of the men through some kind of flowery verbiage.

Elinor Dashwood is the most sensible of all the characters, leaving her sister to be the most emotional extrovert of all the characters. Other than Fanny Price, there was no single villian in the form of an elder, rich and much doted upon respected woman. There is Mrs. Ferrars, Edward’s and Fanny’s mother, but she only appears once, and is only lighted talked about elsewhere in the novel.

Throughout the entire novel, Elinor and Marianne’s mother is nowhere to be found, as the daughters have left to go visit family friends for the duration of the novel. Its a testament to the girl’s intellect and emotional strength to be able to go through so many emotional rollar-coasters with only themselves for support. The bond between sisters is extremely potent in this novel, as they are in all of Austen’s works. Sisterhood is the high revered form of relationship, then followed with the bonds of family and lastly by the bonds of marriage.

I feel like my common complaint with Austen’s novels is that they are always about 10 chapters longer than necessary. The first half of the book lacks in dialog and is filled with very lengthy paragraphs of description interspersed with shorter paragraphs of description. This one, being only 50 chapters, is a quick read, and if you can get past the first half with mild interest in the characters, then your patience will be well rewarded....less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Holly rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

05/31/08

Read in January, 2000

I also re-read this for Professor Miller's Faking It class. Spoiler-esque?

“But I thought it was right, Elinor … to be guided wholly by the opinion of other people. I thought our judgments were given us merely to be subservient to those of our neighbors. This has always been your doctrine, I am sure” (92). As Elinor, in her perfectly sisterly-sharp voice, explains to Marianne, her advice has always been about modifying exterior behavior to smooth over social situations, never about ...more I also re-read this for Professor Miller's Faking It class. Spoiler-esque?

“But I thought it was right, Elinor … to be guided wholly by the opinion of other people. I thought our judgments were given us merely to be subservient to those of our neighbors. This has always been your doctrine, I am sure” (92). As Elinor, in her perfectly sisterly-sharp voice, explains to Marianne, her advice has always been about modifying exterior behavior to smooth over social situations, never about altering the interior. One of the reasons Elinor has less to learn is because she already knows that there is an interior and exterior to everyone, and that pretending there isn’t is self-deluded hypocrisy. Marianne wants to believe that everyone is a unified being – the exterior is a reflection of the interior being and thus there is no difference between them. Altering external behavior means altering one’s internal self and thus suppressing or destroying whatever unique self exists. According to this theory, wit, a clever method of establishing distance and distracting people from inner depths, would therefore reflect a mocking, cold, distant, ruthless and fake inner being. On the contrary, sharing and dramatizing all of one’s problems does not create deeper, truer relationships, as evidenced by Marianne. The love of her life loves money more than he loves her, and was admittedly faking he loved her when they first met. Her constant emoting keeps people at a distance, and Marianne can’t see her own sister’s suffering because she’s consumed with her own.

Maybe there is no unique inner self; it’s all just behavior. If there is a core being, it’s a selfish neurotic paranoid creature, and only our outward behavioral choices make any difference. This is why Edward has to do the right thing, so he won’t be Willoughby. It’s also why Austen has to make him poor and contrive the bizarre Lucy and Robert ending. Elinor can’t have him if he leaves Lucy in ‘the wrong way,’ because then she will be Lucy. Miss Lucy Steele is poor, smart, desperate and single. She’s the money-grabbing seductress Edward’s family has accused Elinor of being. Lucy’s vindictive cruelty, biting wit and direct opposition to Elinor (and Austen’s cleverness in describing their encounters) result in few people ever truly seeing how they are both, at core, desperate terrified women trying to survive their performances.
...less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Kelly rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

06/12/07

bookshelves: brit-lit, favorites, fiction

Read in January, 2001

recommends it for: Austen fans, women

Ah, the third member of the Holy Trinity of Austen. Also deservedly so. This is my intellectual favorite of the Austens. By that, I'm not calling it "intellectual" I'm just saying that taking emotional attachment to other books out of it, this is my objective favorite Austen. I actually believe that the story of the women is better than Pride and Prejudice. Go on, shoot me for that one. I've taken it before for that. The romance might be better, more tight, more like one would idealist...more Ah, the third member of the Holy Trinity of Austen. Also deservedly so. This is my intellectual favorite of the Austens. By that, I'm not calling it "intellectual" I'm just saying that taking emotional attachment to other books out of it, this is my objective favorite Austen. I actually believe that the story of the women is better than Pride and Prejudice. Go on, shoot me for that one. I've taken it before for that. The romance might be better, more tight, more like one would idealistically want in Pride and Prejudice, but the ones here are more realistic and would have a better chance of lasting in real life. Colonel Brandon and Marianne are one of my favorite flawed couples of any piece of literature. This book finds faith in romances that are less than perfect, heroes who don't act like heroes (Colonel Brandon wins over the romantic figure of Willoughby in the end), and heroines who are at times geniunely ridiculous in the things they choose to do. Not because Austen writes them ridiculously. All women do things like that, and these girls find their way to love anyway. And not with the people conventional plotlines or even gothic strangeness would normally put them with either. By all rights, Eleanor and Colonel Brandon should make a quietly sensible couple, if one thinks about it. But that's not how this ends. There's enough romance left in it for some poetry to how the story ends. None of the men are one or even two dimensional, either. They don't merely serve as the means to the narcissitic heroine's end. No cardboard Prince Charmings with one ridiculous flaw here. They're very believable. I've always thought one of the strengths of Austen is that she writes novels that are undoubtably marketed to women, but men can still see themselves in her heroes if they read them.

The movie is my favorite Jane Austen movie, as a side note. And one of my favorites in general. I've been watching it since I was about 13. It's beautiful. So is the soundtrack. Emma Thompson's performance alone is worth the viewing. Ang Lee.. before he switched over to gay cowboys. Yes, he did period pieces. Who would have known, right?...less

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

13 comments

Michelle rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

06/27/08

bookshelves: favorites, i-own

Read in June, 2008

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

Ta-Da! I finished reading today, while my little daughter and her friends trashed the house and chased the two year old. So, okay, Sense and Sensibility is a great classic, so it deserves five stars, right? I'm thinking it should, but I keep holding these classics up to Jane Eyre and simply can't find a way to make Jane Austen measure up. I promise I'm not being a snob. Really. See, reading Austen is a bit of a letdown for me, in that having only read these two books of hers (Sense and Sens...more Ta-Da! I finished reading today, while my little daughter and her friends trashed the house and chased the two year old. So, okay, Sense and Sensibility is a great classic, so it deserves five stars, right? I'm thinking it should, but I keep holding these classics up to Jane Eyre and simply can't find a way to make Jane Austen measure up. I promise I'm not being a snob. Really. See, reading Austen is a bit of a letdown for me, in that having only read these two books of hers (Sense and Sensibility most recently, and last month Pride and Prejudice), I simply cannot relate to these characters as well as I want to. Yes, I understand that the furtherance of a woman's position was mostly attained by marrying upward and that Austen was spearing the practice, but I cannot forgive the device of tossing out someone's monetary worth every page. I sincerely got sickened every time I read of Edward being worth two thousand pounds and Elinor only one and how they couldn't possibly live on that interest plus the living endowed by Colonel Brandon. See what I mean, you just quit reading it too, before the end of the sentence!!!
I enjoyed the plot twists and turns. I enjoyed Marianne's sudden (and greatly anticipated) maturation. I really applauded the ending; the right finally came through; it's gratifying and refreshing after having read some real junk modern stuff where the bad guy wins. I was perplexed at the timing; perhaps my frequent interruptions in reading made me miss the time line, so forgive my idiocy. I would never let my teenage daughters go so far from me with a somewhat total stranger for 2 months, just so that I could redecorate their bedrooms in peace. Mrs. Jennings was justified in the end as a sweet and loving mother-type and yet I was siding with Marianne the entire time despising Mrs. Jennings' lack of tact and class.
Blech. I sound like a critic, which I find abhorrent. I gave it four stars because it really was well-played, it dug deep and exposed many different character types and lambasted social practices of the times. Perhaps it would've earned five stars if I hadn't actually been poor myself, which prejudiced me against the rich snobbery of the widow and her still rather rich girls....less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Erin rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

03/25/08

Read in March, 2008

When Ang Lee's version of the movie came out, which Emma Thompson wrote the screenplay for, I read that she said it was the most difficult Austen book to adapt. And I can see why. It was Austen's first book, and it's quite densely written. Not a lot of dialogue, so screenwriters had to make it up as they went along. Overall I liked it, but some things didn't work for me: Col. Brandon's young ward just HAPPENED to get knocked up by Willoughby of all people? Really?? And I've read that many ...more When Ang Lee's version of the movie came out, which Emma Thompson wrote the screenplay for, I read that she said it was the most difficult Austen book to adapt. And I can see why. It was Austen's first book, and it's quite densely written. Not a lot of dialogue, so screenwriters had to make it up as they went along. Overall I liked it, but some things didn't work for me: Col. Brandon's young ward just HAPPENED to get knocked up by Willoughby of all people? Really?? And I've read that many people had problems with Marianne marrying Brandon. I can see why Willoughby was a poor choice for her--he's a selfish bastard and they're a lot alike in their temperments--and I love Brandon probably because of the way Alan Rickman played him (I love me some Alan Rickman--the definition of an ugly-sexy man!), but to end a book where they get married on literally the last page because Marianne has toned herself down and has learned to "appreciate" Brandon, when she didn't really give a crap about him most of the book, merely seems like she's settling for him. Which to Austen I'm sure is a good trait, but to the reader...it sells Brandon short. But he loves her, so I guess everyone's happy. And it's too convenient that Lucy Steele just happened to flatter Robert Ferrars into marrying her when he didn't seem to even think she was attractive, but they're both so awesomely repulsive that I can let it fly. When Austen hates her characters (and there are many in this story she can barely tolerate), she REALLY hates them. It's so great! Pride and Prejudice was definitely an improvement, but you can see the budding talents of Austen from this.

And by the way...PBS has a new version of S&S starting this Sunday that i was able to...procure earlier (let's just leave it at that), and it's really great. More faithful to the book than the Ang Lee version, and well cast (although Willoughby looks like a snake in the grass from the moment you meet him, but that's alright with me).

Ok--this is my official break from the Jane Austen oeuvre!!...less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Sarah rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

03/28/08

Read in January, 2008

S and S was not as well written as Pride and Prejudice or Persuasion, nonetheless, Austen gives the reader much to think about. I was struck how Elinor epitomizes the ideal character of sense, wit, prudence, and reason of the Age of reason and how Marianne epitomizes the Romantic “Spontaneous overflow of emotion and celebration of nature.” It is as though Austen is looking backwards and forwards at the literary themes and ideals, portraying each, and evaluating each. Sense triumphs over sens...more S and S was not as well written as Pride and Prejudice or Persuasion, nonetheless, Austen gives the reader much to think about. I was struck how Elinor epitomizes the ideal character of sense, wit, prudence, and reason of the Age of reason and how Marianne epitomizes the Romantic “Spontaneous overflow of emotion and celebration of nature.” It is as though Austen is looking backwards and forwards at the literary themes and ideals, portraying each, and evaluating each. Sense triumphs over sensibility. And Marianne’s unrestrained overflow of emotion within a fallen world nearly drives her to an early grave. It is only as Marianne adopts some sensibility, moves beyond her own sorrow, admits Willoubey’s foibles, and considers other that she survives. I find Willoubey the most intriguing and fully fleshed of Austen’s young male characters. Who wouldn’t fall madly in love with him. I would. His spirit, love of literature and music, impulsiveness, hearty boyishness, not to mention handsome appearance make him sound like a timeless Don Juan Byronic hero. And like the Byronic hero he lacks a moral compass/ integrity, he fails to halter his passions and repent his wrongs. So Marianne realizes she could not truly be happy with him ultimately. Yet like Elinor, I found myself wishing things were not as they were when he passionately declares the love he had for Marianne and the regret he feels for his choices, yet sympathy only goes so far with his lack of full repentance. How a character responds to seeing their tragic flaw and whether they change or not seems to be a common theme of Austen’s. Willoubey and Miss Crawford (Mansfield Park) form two of Austen’s most charming characters, equal to Elizabeth Bennet, but unlike Elizabeth, W and Miss C. fail to repent. Marianne, to a lesser extent Edward Ferris, and of course Elizabeth, Darcy, Emma all face the horror of their flaw and endeavor to change. There is a sense of hope and Christian grace with their change. ...less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

1 comments

Ukrainer rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

04/04/08

Read in April, 2008

In anticipation of Masterpiece’s adaptation on Sunday, I reread Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility. I hadn’t read the book in over ten years and had forgotten many of the details, but I liked it as much today as I did then.

Elinor and Marianne Dashwood each deal with the joys and heartaches of young love: Elinor is the more sedate of the two sisters, and Marianne the more passionate. Naturally, as an emotionless automaton, I always relate more with Elinor who loves quietl...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

Eric rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

08/20/07

Has a copy to sell/swap — Read in August, 2007

Hmmm, how to critique one of the most revered writers of romance literature? Now, before all of your Jane-ites get on my case for being unromantic or whatever, let me say only that unfortuantely, I read "Persuasion," Austen's last novel, and found it to be one of the best books I've ever read. Now having read "Sense and Sensibility," I will say that it truly doese feel like a first novel, as if the author was still trying to find her voice. So I've done the bookends of Aus...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

4 comments

Jenny rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

08/05/07

I love you Jane Austen! I issue the same warning that I did in my review of Pride and Prejudice: if you read this, you will write/talk in a pompous British old school style for about a week, saying things such as "this person has a strong constitution" and you will also want to speak in a British accent. That aside, Jane Austen is so funny. The several plotlines of this book complement each other really well, and the message - that people need to have a balance between (guess!) sens...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

1 comments

Elizabeth rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

04/04/08

bookshelves: austen-and-friends, classics-women, earlier, favorite-writers, nineteenth-century, reading-group

Read in January, 2006

Elinor Dashwood, like Fanny Price (Mansfield Park) and Anne Eliot (Persuasion), is too good for her own good. She loses the man she loves (for a while) and must support everyone else in their silliness, selfishness, illness, poverty, pettiness, and cowardly cruelty (I'm looking at you Mrs. John Dashwood). As much as I would like to be strong, calm, and able to handle all of that, I would probably have run screaming, or crying, long before the end of the book. But, Elinor, like Aust...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Louise rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

04/23/08

bookshelves: classics

Read in July, 1995

When I first read this book, I didn't find it as interesting as Pride and Prejudice or Persuasion. I do remember feeling surprised at how the couples were paired up at the end.

Then I watched Emma Thompson' LOVELY LOVELY film version of the novel. She was so brilliant, and so appealing, as the restrained elder sister Elinor. If I'd been a man at the time, I'd have married her for sure! Gorgeous, intelligent, poised, and with an enormous heart. What more could a man want?

Which brings m...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Kirsten rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

07/15/08

Read in July, 2008

I finally finished S&S! I started it waaay before my daughter was born and she's now 3 months old. I picked it up and put it down many times, which hurt my understanding of the book. But now that I've finished, I can finally watch the Masterpiece theater version that I DVR'd 4 months ago. This book was ridiculous, but I loved it for its ridiculousness. I'm still learning to read Austen, but one of the most enjoyable parts for me is sifting through the proper, mannered language and think...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Kanchan rated it:

(review of isbn 039397751X)

08/22/07

Read in June, 1996

Austen wrote the first draft of Elinor and Marianne (later retitled Sense and Sensibility) c. 1795, when she was about 19 years old. While she had written a great deal of short fiction in her teens, Elinor and Marianne was her first full-length novel. The plot revolves around a contrast between Elinor's sense and Marianne's emotionalism; the two sisters may have been loosely based on Jane and Cassandra Austen, with Austen casting Cassandra as the restrained and well-judging sister and herself as...more

Like this review? yes

1 comments

Sonia rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

08/05/08

Read in August, 2008

I much preferred this Austen to many of the others. I think I read the abridged version ten years ago but I had no recollection of the story.

The heroine in this novel are much more intrinsically strong and powerful than in other Austen novels (of course, besides p&p). I felt that they began strong and independent and grew individually, without the help of condescending men (as in northanger abbey etc etc). Elinor seemed an independent, powerful, moral, intellectual, discerning woman...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Abigail rated it:

(review of isbn 0141439661)

06/04/08

bookshelves: literature-classics

Read in January, 1996

recommends it for: Readers

I have always loved Sense and Sensibility best out of all of Jane Austen's novels, no doubt partly because it features the three Dashwood sisters (however invisible young Margaret may be), and I am one of three sisters myself. This tale of sensible Elinor and romantic Marianne, whose differing approaches to life and love are tested throughout the book, features the same sort of contest between desire and duty that gives Charlotte Brontë's Jane Eyre such power. It is a fitting trib...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Ian rated it:

(review of isbn 039397751X)

08/30/07

Read in January, 1998

Like so much of Austen, this book examines a profoundly modern struggle for mature ethical life relative to social structures. Marianne's confusions--of dramatic intensity with emotional integrity, of blind conformity with principled compromise--are still with us, and too often we view others and ourselves as aestheticized or politicized specimens rather than surprising creatures demanding both remonstration and humble love. Elinor’s impulses towards the world are, like Austen’s, refo

Sense and Sensibility

discuss this book

groups with this book

friend reviews (0)

lists with this book

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 26067)