anghraine: vader extending his lightsaber; text: and now for the airing of grievances! (Default)
winterwindows asked:

okay i'm really curious what are your exact issues w/ the AD northanger abbey? i love the book & i thought felicity and JJ were pretty perfect, but something felt off that i couldn't put my finger on. the only specific example i can think of is when they drive to the abbey and it IS gloomy and haunted-looking (where in the book that was just how catherine imagined it might be) anyways i love & trust your takes on austen so if you have time i'd love to hear more!

I replied:

I loved Felicity and JJ to pieces in their roles, but I had monumental reservations about how it engaged with the theme of women and novels, which is the core of the story in many ways. I screamed about it this morning on Dreamwidth here.

[ETA 2/24/2022: The circle is now complete!]

anghraine: vader extending his lightsaber; text: and now for the airing of grievances! (anakin [grievances])
While most of my bottomless annoyance at Andrew Davies is directed at his P&P, let's not forget his NA, which has a really excellent cast (Felicity Jones in particular is perfect as Catherine IMO) AND which overlays Catherine's preoccupations with female novelists with the male fantasies in Matthew Lewis's The Monk.

In NA-the-book, Austen only references The Monk once, as John Thorpe's preferred reading material in his denunciation of Frances Burney. It's an alarm bell ringing over his head (it's hard to summarize The Monk but it involves incest and rape among many other things). Austen loved Burney! She specifically mentions Burney in her defense of the novel in this same book! Like, who thinks "hmm, let's use this quasi-pornographic male text held up as superior by a self-absorbed asshole as a significant component of the film"? I think there's plenty of evidence in his P&P that Davies's priorities are skewed towards amplifying conventional masculinity, but it goes to a whole new level in NA.

And yes, approach to the source text is not the sole metric by which an adaptation should be judged, but I think that the ways adaptations engage with their sources (what they change/don't change/mix up) are suggestive about their aims and priorities as well as influential in popularizing conceptions about the source text. The aims and priorities of Davies's take on NA are just ... what the fuck.
anghraine: watercolour of jane austen; text: intj (jane austen (was an intj))
Sanditon looks like a trash fire, which I should have expected, but … /sigh. If any of Austen's work did not need Andrew Davies-isms, it's Sanditon.

(In the interests of full disclosure: I hate the '95 P&P and bitterly resent the waste of perfect casting in NA.)

Profile

anghraine: vader extending his lightsaber; text: and now for the airing of grievances! (Default)
Anghraine

June 2025

S M T W T F S
12345 67
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 13th, 2025 01:44 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios