Pride and Prejudice
discussion
Jane Sucks...
Colleen wrote: "If Jane is so dumb, how come she questions Wickham's story while Lizzie swallows it whole?"Totally agree.
If Jane Bennet was dumb, how come when everybody condemned Mr Darcy as the worst of men, while she was the only creature who could suppose there might be any extenuating circumstances unknown to the society of Herfordshire?
I like what she said "It is very often nothing but our own vanity that deceives us. Women fancy admiration means more than it does."
In Mansfield Park the heroine, Fanny Price, is a lot like Jane but far less confident. Fanny is actually my favorite character of Austin's because I feel like I relate to her the best. I'm not very outspoken, and I want to be kinder and think the best of people (albeit, I don't want to blindly think the best).I think we need characters like Jane, Fanny, and Melanie because they challenge us to be kinder people, rather than justifying unkindness for the sake of having a "spicier" personality. I think our culture tends to encourage the latter and sometimes we need to step into a different time/culture and see the value of a calm and kind person. Not that everyone has to be calm, but everyone doesn't have to be spicy either.
Jennifer wrote: "In Mansfield Park the heroine, Fanny Price, is a lot like Jane but far less confident. Fanny is actually my favorite character of Austin's because I feel like I relate to her the best. I'm not very..."Good point, dear!
And actually, as was mentioned above Jane didn't blindly think the best of everyone either, as the Wickham example shows.
But that's THE thing with Jane Austen's characters. Most of them are so shallow! And it's just lovely that they are :)
I think that Jane had a very important function in the novel as perhaps the one person in the (fictional) world that Elizabeth truly looked up to. Yes Lizzy teased her older sister about always seeking to see events and people in their best light. But Elizabeth knew that Jane was very intelligent, and that Jane's general willingness to grant others the 'benefit of the doubt' would eventually yield to acknowledging faults that were found clearly to be the case. Jane was not a stubborn idealist insisting on undeserved appraisals of others, but more a good-hearted person who wanted to give others every chance to be worthy of basic regard, while being very careful about jumping to quick conclusions when different interpretations of things seemed possible. She was not judgmental, and made allowances for others when she could. Lizzy recognized the genuineness of her good-heartedness, and both appreciated and admired her for it.
I don't think Jane was lame... she was the one who thought that Wickham's story was suspicious, while Elizabeth believed it. She might be likened to Pollyana, but she isn't really that naive. I agree with the comment above mine--that Jane was someone Elizabeth looked up to. I liked how she saw through Darcy's aloofness and Wickham's dashing exterior.
Jane does not suck, she is portrayed as a kind girl (er.. woman??) But she is not my type of person.
I'm a huge fan of the Jane Austen's book...I love Mansfield Park and Pride and Prejudice I think a read it like fifty times...
Elizabeth wrote: "I read the review about Jane being lame and it made me laugh. She IS kind of the Pollyanna of the book. What did you guys think? "The people that do not like her or her books do not understand the times she and her characters lived in.
Do they like Downton Abbey, Up Stairs Downstairs and Brideshead Revisted?
Maricela wrote: "I am a big fan of Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte!!! I have to say that Pride and Prejudice is my top rated book!!!"Mine too
Jane's character (or a variation of Jane's character) can be found in many of Jane Austen's book. In the end - these "Jane" characters always get their man and HEA.In Persuasion "Jane" is the protagonist. Persuasion is Jane Austen's more serious novel - and the "Jane" type character is portrayed really well. (P&P is more chick lit).
Goddess wrote: "Jane's character (or a variation of Jane's character) can be found in many of Jane Austen's book. In the end - these "Jane" characters always get their man and HEA.In Persuasion "Jane" is the pr..."
Agree
Mickey wrote: "A few days ago, I was skimming through Gone with the Wind and I was struck by the similarities between Jane Bennett and Melanie Wilkes. Both had the traditional feminine virtues: mildness of temper..."Agree, the similarities between the characters of Jane and Melanie always registered with me. I feel both are women who appear on the surface to be meek but are actually quite steely & both characters actually get what they want. They are in a way the inverse of Jane & Scarlett both are upfront fighters (if you like) but Jane and Melanie are more subtle but no less fighters too.
I think jane is in her role onthe nature of the good.this book is practice to read.i like it
I think jane is in her role onthe nature of the good.this book is practice to read.i like it
I made Jane a character in my erotic take on Emma Emma - also her sister Cassandra who I made more outgoing while Jane was definitely in the background, observing - I had fun writing this book.
What I absolutely love about Jane Austen's novels is that she takes a hard look at the way society in her time expected women to behave. She presents it as a "virtue" for the characters who behave that way in her books, but then has these wonderfully rebellious women as a counterpoint to the societal standards. I think she despised the way women were treated and expected to behave and wished they had more freedoms. Hence her adorable, whimsical characters we love.
At the same time, she points out the individuality and lovability of the girls who are quite in line with societal expectations. I think Jane Bennett is so strong and sweet and loving and subtle. I find a certain beauty to a woman that can endure crazy expectations with such grace, even while cheering on the one that is more aligned with our modern views on women.
Mickey wrote: "I think how a modern audience reacts to characters like Jane Bennett (as someone who embodies the virtues of a different era) illustrates how the characteristics of the "ideal woman" have changed o..."Great comment. Perhaps, since Jane was the ideal woman of that time, she also didn't need as much description to paint her character...
Jane isn't lame, she's a plot device. She's supposed to be even tempered and sweet so we want to ride along with Lizzie's light heart and biting criticism of others. But I won't go as far as to call her flat. She does offer the contrasting insight into Wickham, and then points out that Charlotte Lucas made a decision, and while Lizzie may not like it, she should respect it as not everyone is the same. Lizzie does make the mistake of judging everyone by her own self-made ruler "I would/wouldn't do that and therefor they should follow suit." I believe that Jane is there to help Lizzie see that doing this is wrong.
I'd like to R&R this. stacy.whitehead@ymail.com
Personally, I think Jane is awesome. She is the kind of person I would greatly respect if I knew her in real life. She is kind, caring, and always sees the best in everything. I think it takes an extremely strong person to choose to always overlook others' flaws and focus only on their good points. I disagree with those who said that she wasn't very bright. She did tell Lizzie not to trust in Wickham so implicitly and not to be hasty to judge Darcy. In the end, she was right. Her philosophy on people seemed to be innocent (or good) until proven guilty(bad) beyond a shadow of a doubt. I think that is why she chose to believe that Caroline was good. She knew there was a possibility that Caroline did not have good intentions but chose to give her the benefit of the doubt. When Caroline was rude to her in London, she admitted that Elizabeth had been correct. I wouldn't consider her naive, because when she was presented with indisputable facts, she accepted them. She also had a huge influence on Elizabeth. She kept her balanced. If it wasn't for Jane I think Lizzie would have easily become cynical.I've known people like her in real life and they have this addictive effect on you. You want to be around them because they are so positive, it makes you happy. People tend to be drawn to them. I've always wished that I could be that kind of person.
Emma wrote: "Personally, I think Jane is awesome. She is the kind of person I would greatly respect if I knew her in real life. She is kind, caring, and always sees the best in everything. I think it takes an e..."Well said. I wish I could be that positive, as well.
I don't think Jane was lame she was more a product of her time where you were raised to marry. Her mother had push her beauty for all her life and thought this is what would make her good marriage material. In a family with all girls they were not set to inherit the family property so you worked with what you had. Their mother saw this even though her actions were pretty outlandish. Lizzie was just the opposite and pretty much was her father's 'boy' for all her out spoken opinions and actions.
My two cents are that Jane was a pretty shallow character. We never learned much..."I agree that Jane was underdeveloped, to say the least. I had the impression she was a convenient plot device, only placed there to make things happen between Darcy and Elizabeth, the real main characters.
Joy wrote: "Characters like Jane show up in Austen's other works. There's a similar character in Emma and in Persuasion."There's Elinor in P&P. In Bitch in a Bonnet Robert Rodi, the author, notes that Elinor stands for Reason and Marianne for Emotion, and he says that versions of Elinor are all over Austen's books. He names Fanny at Mansfield Park and another one who I don't recall at the moment. He also says they are projections of the author, which makes total sense. As a writer I am always including a character who's sort of me, only she's a little bit better, much nicer and smarter than the real me. I wouldn't name Jane Bennet as Austen, though; I tend to think of Lizzie as the one who stands in for our author here.
Marcy wrote: "He also says they are projections of the author, which makes total sense. As a writer I am always including a character who's sort of me, only she's a little bit better, much nicer and smarter than the real me. I wouldn't name Jane Bennet as Austen, though; I tend to think of Lizzie as the one who stands in for our author here."Actually I've read (forget where) that Austen's family said that she was most like Mr. Bennet of all her characters. She sat on the sidelines and observed people. She found great amusement in ridiculous people and the silly things they did.
Emma wrote: "Personally, I think Jane is awesome. She is the kind of person I would greatly respect if I knew her in real life. She is kind, caring, and always sees the best in everything. I think it takes an e..."Great comment. That's exactly how I feel about Jane. And the topic of this discussion just made me sad. That's all that can be said about Jane? That she "sucks"? Wow. . . she is a strong character and the shining light in many of the darker moments her loved ones experience. She was there for Lizzy as her confidante and comforter. That makes her a flat character? I think not. She wasn't the main character but was important to the story and its plot. Every character is important in one way or another in any story. :)
I did not think of Jane as lame. She was certainly a counterpoint to Elizabeth and her personality, but in context of the time, she is a kind, reserved lady. As I look at her sisters, I find her personality to be a good counterpoint, and not surprising in how it would develop. As the first child, she was quickly supplanted with younger sisters who would take a greater share of her mother's attention, which I'm sure would lead her to become more self-sufficient and contained as there was no governess either. We know very little of her thoughts, but the story itself highlights that despite her reserve, she has far greater depth of feeling and emotion that what others may perceive. I do not think being quiet and restrained makes her lame or weak, just less intriguing than Elizabeth.
Compared to the younger sisters? No, not lame at all.
Melanie wrote: "I did not think of Jane as lame. She was certainly a counterpoint to Elizabeth and her personality, but in context of the time, she is a kind, reserved lady. As I look at her sisters, I find her ..."My feelings exactly.
Marla, you said that as the focus was on Lizzie that all the others sisters (and characters) were not as strong and mght be perceived as shallow; i don´t think that Jane is shallow or weak - she is the exact counter-point to her sister - while she suffers quietly, Lizzie fights and kicks, at least with her mouth.I see Jane as a depiction of the ideal woman of the Regency era: demure, obedient, pretty, smart but not over the top, agreable conversation and some house-managing skills.
When you compare her with the other sisters, you can't say she's lame. It's just that she's too nice, she can never see the wrong in people and she's too naive.
Jane is so-called lame because she is overrated...everybody makes such a big deal of the fact that she is beautiful, but that is her only outstanding quality...she has wife-material, but she's not a character that little girls read about and say "i want to be just like her"...Elizabeth is that kind of woman, she's very inspirational and awesome, she's both witty, pretty and feisty, unlike Jane, whose qualities wouldn't help her survive without a man
Yeah, I agree with the rest of the world when I say that Jane is too perfect. Or at least the part of her that we see is too perfect. She seems to be there for the sake of the plot; otherwise Mr.Darcy wouldn't have been rejected. She's probably the least developed character in the book. Ironic, since Elizabeth adores her sister (almost to the point of worship). Elizabeth may have criticized every other character in the series, but her love and affection for her older sister stops her from doing the same to Jane. In this way Jane exists to develop her siter's character more strongly. She proves the point that Elizabeth is capable of being blind to people's follies (and in Darcy's case- virtues).
I believe Jane has qualities that would help her survive without a man. She might not be out there fighting like Elizabeth, but she would make it in today's world. Although I don't think one should look at the world through rose-colored glasses (as Jane was wont to do), her positive and optimistic manner would help her to cope. Naive? A bit. Incapable of being her own woman? Not so. We don't see all of Jane like we do Elizabeth. Because Elizabeth is the main female protagonist and Jane is a supporting character, we don't learn much about her. At least, not as much as we do about Elizabeth. We hear of Jane from Elizabeth. It is through her we get to know Jane. But that is secondhand. And as we all know, secondhand information is never enough.
Jane was not a weak woman. Even with her heart broken she had the strength to keep a positive attitude. She also single-handedly kept the household going after the Lydia disaster. Actually, in a way she was more qualified than Lizzie to take care of herself without a man. She had qualities that would have made an excellent governess, one of the few jobs that a "respectable" woman could have in that time period. She proved that by how well she cared for her cousins. I think Lizzie could have made her own living, but certain aspects of her personality would have made it more difficult than it would have been for Jane. Also, with how admired and respected Jane was by everyone that knew her, she could have easily married anyone, if all she wanted was a man. She waited until she fell in love, same as Lizzie, even though she had more pressure to marry than any of her sisters, since she was the oldest.I don't understand why some people see kindness and optimism as a weakness. In my opinion it takes an extremely strong person to try to see the best in others. Lizzie tended to be cynical, which I am also prone to, and I assure you it takes far more effort to be positive.
During the 2 times that I've read the book, I've never fail to note the naive, even shallow, personality that Jane has. Now, I don't mean to say that Jane is boring, or that she wasn't even needed in the book, I feel as if Jane's character was there to balance Elizabeth's personality. Some people think that the only reason Jane was even in the book was for the sake of the plot, to make sure that Elizabeth had a more concrete argument when she and Mr. Darcy where arguing, or whatever the case, but really, she wrote the whole book to accommodate the plot of the story. If George W. had not been in the book, the plot would have very likely been different. If Lydia had not eloped with him (George), I feel that the marriage would never have happened, she (Lizzy) never would have seen the good in him (Mr. Darcy) and the relationship would not have bloomed at all. Janes character, although too naive and shallow for my taste, I do think that she was an important character in the story. Sure, she was portrayed as the picture perfect lady for that time and seemed to not have any flaws at all-which I think was a mistake on the authors part. I personally think that her character was not very well developed, but important part of the story all the same.
Emma wrote: "Jane was not a weak woman. Even with her heart broken she had the strength to keep a positive attitude. She also single-handedly kept the household going after the Lydia disaster. Actually, in a wa..."Very well put, Emma. :)
I don’t think that Jane is lame. If anything, I give her credit. The type of person Jane is you know that she helps the family any way she can. Jane suggested Lizzie not to be quick to believe Wickham who they just met. She held herself together after Bingley left. After news about Lydia, she handled taking care of the Gardner’s children and helping the family. The type of person that Jane is, if Bingley wasn’t in the picture, she would have married Mr. Collins. She wouldn’t have rejected him like Lizzie did. Instead of following her heart, she’d do it out of obligation for her family.
Maybe Jane was put in the book to help us understand better the true nature of Elisabeth, as the two of them are often compared, both from the perspective of looks and personalities. I don't think she is "shallow", that word could maybe describe better Lydia. Yet, Jane was not the focus of the book, so she couldn't have been a very complex character, as we can say none of them are, except the leading ones. All in all, I feel like Jane serves her purpose both in the story and in defining the leading lady.
Hi Everyone! I am not sure if I'm in the right spot. But, I followed the link to suggest a book and it brought me here.
So, here is my suggestion:
When Dreams are Calling
You can watch the video trailers on youtube:
• https://www.youtube.com/user/carolvor...
Book Description:
Inspired by a true story, When Dreams are Calling is a powerful mixture of adventure, travel and reflections that will redefine your idea of courage while making you laugh all the way.
The main character, Dora, is a witty young woman who chases her dreams across continents, from Europe to America, then to Asia, and finally, to the far away shores of Australia.
We see the changes she goes through, the price she pays for following her dreams, but also the rewards she gets on the way. Her life is a roller coaster and her plan is nothing more than the confidence that everything will work out for the best.
The story is filled with magical words of wisdom that will inspire and delight you, while making you reflect on the beauty of friendship, lust, love and kindness.
“Words have power, dreams have power, we have power” is the motif which echoes all through this enthralling novel that bursts with optimism.
Thank you
Carol
I suggest The Golden Apple of Discord. It's a quick read with a smart romance.
I'd like to suggest Adaline by yours truly.
It is a newly released sci-fi (September 2014) indie novel about a young boy who is raised by machines. He discovers that he has creative thought, can dream and draw and that is NOT OK with the system he lives in. He is chased by a mad scientist, is taken under the wing of an eccentric teacher, and struggles to find his place in a world overflowing with technology.
Adaline is like if Harry Potter grew up in the Matrix, and the whole thing was being monitored by iRobot. It is a great read for lovers of YA fiction, robotics and coming of age series.
Unique: A New Breed
~A Traversing Eternity Novel~
After five years in captivity as a blood slave to vampires, the girl named Jessica is no more. In her place stands a killer, driven by hate and seeking revenge for the scars she carries both inside and out. For nearly a decade she dedicated her life to ridding the world of the scourge known as vampires, placing her directly in the crosshairs of her enemy. Lilith, the Queen of Vampires, ordered her number-one assassin, Niten, to bring in the rogue vampire hunter, unharmed. With an offer from the queen, the hunter is given an opportunity to achieve the ultimate revenge on the vampire who destroyed her life. To do so, she will need to face her worst fears. As enemies become allies, she discovers that not all vampires are akin to the monsters from her past and Niten learns that there is nothing ordinary about this woman. She is completely... Unique
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Beyond the Edge of the Universe: A Steady Path of Mindfulness and Letting Go (other topics)
Unraveled (other topics)
Tales Of Fatala (other topics)
North! Or Be Eaten (other topics)
More...
Sarah J. Maas (other topics)
Truman Capote (other topics)
Stephenie Meyer (other topics)
Robert van Gulik (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Four Dead Queens (other topics)Beyond the Edge of the Universe: A Steady Path of Mindfulness and Letting Go (other topics)
Unraveled (other topics)
Tales Of Fatala (other topics)
North! Or Be Eaten (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Jensen PiperGrace Pittenger (other topics)Sarah J. Maas (other topics)
Truman Capote (other topics)
Stephenie Meyer (other topics)
Robert van Gulik (other topics)
More...
I agree with you. I definitely don't think she was dumb. She may have been naive and ver..."
completely agree with both of you!