Jane Austen discussion
General Discussion
>
what should i read
date
newest »
newest »
Mary - good for Thomas Jefferson! Mind you, I do like the British tradition of wigs and so forth. In a way, I think they help make the courtroom a 'scary' place (hopefully only for the criminals!!!!). But on the other hand it might just make it look a bit 'theatrical' and 'unreal'?
I'm going out on a limb a bit here, but I think courtrooms in many European countries have 'formal wear' - think of the French courts with their (three?) judges in red robes and a little black hat.
Speaking of 'black' in association with headgear, I wonder what has happened to the dreaded 'black cap' which the judge would place on top of his periwig when sentencing someone to death. That was definitely scary....
I wonder if they are all in storage somewhere? (Or maybe museums)
It used to be a popular trick question in quizzes to ask 'What date did the UK abolish the death penalty?' - and the answer was 'not yet'. Because although the death penalty was abolished for murder, it was not for treason.
But, that said, I think treason is now not a capital offence either.
So, if the Brits and the French still have distinctive 'formal wear' for courts, which other European countries have them? I think Germany does, and possibly the Netherlands. Anywhere else?
Mary - seems such a shame to bury a beautiful wedding dress. I wonder, sadly, how many brides still fitted into their wedding dress (assuming they died in old age)I'd definitely never fit into mine any more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Maybe they undid the backs, and then just put the corpse's arms into the sleeves, and sort of draped the rest of the material around the body??)
Thinking about, of course clergymen (and women!) still wear 'long frocks' don't they. That must be more medieval than anything.
as far as I remember the British treator sthe cambridge 5 and their boss from M16 werent hung rather made it to the Ussr so what hapened to the haging of traiters there?
I can only suppose that it wasn't a mandatory death sentence? So maybe at the judges' discretion?Of course, it could be that it was 'sensible' not to hang them, but rather keep them in hand in case MI6 etc wanted to use them as a bargaining chip to exchange prisoners?
The very good film Bridge of Spies (not sure how accurate it is mind you!) makes that point, when the Russian spy in the USA is only imprisoned, so that he comes in useful later on for exchangign with shot-down airman Gary Powers (and another American imprisoned in East Germany for alleged spying.)
I'm not sure who the last 'traitor' was who was executed in the UK. 'Lord Haw Haw' who broadcast 'surrender propaganda' during WWII was, so I believe, shot after the war in the Tower of London. I'm not sure if any Cold War traitors were shot?
(The whole issue of treason is SO tricky - to whom does one owe loyalty? One's country or one's political ideals etc? Same problem applies to both 'terrorism' and 'rebellion'. Very contentious!)
I should like to rsccoment 2 more books The Hidden Jane Austen/John Wiltsure and Fathers in Jane Austen /I.P.Duckfield I have just reread them (being in lockdown has me rereading my "library")
Mrs, sorry - I've lost the reference! To what question is Wiltshire the answer? Apols!
Mrs wrote: "Iמ AD 's book JA uses the improvment of the estate as a metafore for the improvment of the socioty example Elizabeth by maring Darcy brings fresh energy and renewal to a warn out sociaty (lady c an..."Mrs.
I finally finished Alistair Duckworth's The Improvement of the Estate. It took a while, but I am glad I did it! And as you say the concept of the estate is a metaphor for many things; the character of the owner, the respect the owner pays to society and his family by doing his duty, and his adherence to tradition.
I can't possibly do a review on this book. I struggled through two introductions and a forward which were largely referencing other critical reviews of Austen that I have not yet read. But it is amazing and rather humbling to understand that in addition to conjuring up interesting characters, JA wove them into compelling plot lines, at the same time using symbolism to provide commentary on [then] modern social issues! And she did this without a word processor OR the internet! Just wow!
I will say that a portion of the book focuses on the concept of "improvement" distinguishing between tasteful/ useful improvement and ostentatious improvement. Mr. Rushworth was going to be a great improver. Henry Crawford's enthusiasm for improvement (especially getting other people to improve their own estates or house) was part of his dangerous allure. He not only wanted Rushworth to improve his estate, he wanted Edmund to improve his parsonage. General Tilney in Northanger Abbey is guilty of modern improvements for show. And Mr. John Dashwood in S&S is another man who falls prey to the temptation.
The other concept that is discussed extensively is the self/ individual versus the society/ the world/ tradition. Individualism shows up with Frank Churchill's duplicity and secrets; where he is acting a part and the deceiving the others. Individualism also is portrayed in the theatrical rehearsals of Mansfield Park. In Mansfield Park society and tradition win out because once Sir Thomas returns the house is put back to the way it was and eventually Fanny and Edmund marry. I wish I could do the subject more justice than this which it certainly deserves.
The book is fascinating and well worth the undeniable effort it takes to read it. I need to sit down and read it a second time as my notes and highlights are all in place! Thanks for the recommendation!
Thank you - I am definitely going to look out for it.Another example by the way is in Persuasion, where Austen talks about how the Musgraves are between the old and the new, and whether the latter 'improves' upon the old (ie, Charles and his sisters vs their old-fashioned parents.)
She also makes it adamantly clear in Persuasion that the 'old' by way of Walter Eliot, is effectively over and done with, and the 'new', ie, Wentworth (including presumably his 'new money' - the prize money that made his fortune) are what will carry England forward now. Sir Walter has had his day - and the fact that he can no longer afford to live on his own estate, because he's wasted so much of its resources, is another signfier I think.
But the underlying premise of the Duckworth book, that the 'estate' is a metaphor for 'the man' is brilliant. Love it!
May I add Mr. Charles Hayter from Persuasion? He is from the family of lower country cousins to the Musgroves. This idea of him being a cut above his family came from David M. Shapard. Charles Hayter is the eldest son, of course, and so he will inherit the estate at Winthrop, which has 250 acres. But he will also be the tenant of the farm near Taunton, which Charles Musgrove says is some of the best land in the country. Not to mention that Charles Hayter has gone to university and has become ordained. He is more gentlemanly than the rest of his family and is taking pains to cultivate some societal connections in order to find a living which will enable him to marry Henrietta Musgrove (if she'll still have him!). I like his story because he has thought this out and is making a concerted effort to lift himself up without taking it too far in one generation. His son will inherit whatever he can build Winthrop into and his daughters will attend finishing school like the Musgrove girls have and meet an entirely better class of people. I like his subtle ambition! And I also like the fact that Charles Musgrove is not too snobby to be unable to perceive this. He approves of the match with his sister. I can picture him continuing to help his brother-in-law enter London society after the wedding!