And Then There Were Two

In class, it was expressed to me that my third "option" for a paper was too broad, which would result in an overly long essay. Therefore, the resulting number of options left equals to two. Oh my. What will I do? I cannot make up my mind. I am really interested in my second topic, where I would use textual evidence to show the process in which Elizabeth falls in love with Bingley. However, I also want to show to the world (class) that Jane is not a simple minded creature! Or, that she is shallow. She really is just as intense and inteligent as Elizabeth!

Therefore, I am left with a dilemma about which to write. After pondering this tough decision, I will decide. And then, will most likely switch to the other one.

Narrowing It Down and Sorting It Out

Alright. Well, I have narrowed my topic options down. Here are my top three:

1. Defend Jane's position
2. Show how Elizabeth falls in love with Darcy
3. The role of women in Pride and Prejudice society

For number one, I would use different quotes from the book to support the theory that there is more to Jane than appears. I would show that she is intelligent, and stands apart from the rest of her female group in the book.

For number two, I would also use quotes from the book to show the process in which Elizabeth fell in love with Darcy. Throughout the essay, it would become clear that she really was in love with him, and that it happened over time, and not over night.

For number three, it would be a little more complex to sort through the information. I would need different examples of women (i.e. Elizabeth, Charlotte Lucas, Miss Bingley, Miss Darcy, and the maid of the Bennet house etc.), and their characters shown throughout the novel. Not only that, but I would need to compare, contrast, and finally come up with a conclusion with the newly found evidence that would be provided in my essay. I am contemplating on crossing this option out, merely because it would need so much information, and more than five pages of evidence.

All of these topics really interest me. This is probably because I really love the book, so really, any topic concerning it would draw me to write about it. Oh boy, this is going to be a tough decision. Maybe I could write all three essays, and pick the one that turned out the best to turn in... who knows.

My favorite characters are, of course, the main characters. Elizabeth, Darcy, Bingley, Jane, Charlotte Lucas, and Mr. Bennet. Their characters are all complimentary to the book, and are interesting in their own ways. My least favorite characters are the annoying Mr. Collins and Lady de Bourgh, along with Whickam and Lydia.

Scenes of importance are the different meetings of Darcy and Elizabeth, and the conversations that they share, conversations between only women, and the possible thoughts of the characters as they have different conversations.

This isn't very important, but I am just trying to sort through all of the ideas and comments in my head.

Papers Papers Papers

I love literature. Well, types, I guess. Okay, maybe just novels particularly - the ones that are happy. Okay, I love a limited part of literature. That is more precise.

I love our literature class. Well, parts, I guess. Okay, maybe just particular moments - the ones that dwell on happy novels. Okay, I also love our literature class limitedly. That is correct.

This is all getting to one thing - our papers. Yepp, this week we have to find a topic. I wish that papers weren't a part of this class.

So, I am avoiding the point. Right now I am supposed to pick a topic. Well, actually, I am supposed to explore the possibilities for a topic. The problem is, I don' know what to explore.

Here are some... options/things to think about:

1. Defend Jane's position. That is, show her character, etc.
2. Couples and their marriages? (too broad though)
3. Love at first sight (Darcy and Elizabeth didn't have it vs. Bingley and Jane did/sort of did)
4. How social class affects...everything (too broad)
5. The role of women in Pride and Prejudice
6. Elizabeths personality vs. Lydia's
7. The wide wants and needs of the different characters (too broad)
8. Why/how does Elizabeth fall in love with Mr. Darcy at the end of the novel? ****
9. Why does Darcy fall in love with Elizabeth?
10. What is wrong with Mrs. Bennet, Mr. Collins, and Lady de Bourgh? ( haha, just kidding)

**** This topic really interests me. Okay, well, I did just think of the question, but honestly, why DOES she fall in love with him at the end of the book?

Anyway, those are some of my options. I have three more blogs to do this week, so I will most likely narrow it down, and eventually chose one. (Probably to just second guess my choice, and chose something else, but oh well.)

Growing

"Elizabeth made no attempt to reason with her mother" (p. 258).

Although Elizabeth is a "very headstrong" (p. 84) girl according to her mother, she does not "attempt to reason with her." What could be the meaning of this? If Elizabeth never tries to speak to her mother about her own opinion, how does her mother think she is headstrong and foolish?

However, that description, given by her mother in the beginning of the book, was a long time ago. Now, after many chapters, Elizabeth has experienced new things and discovered new ways of dealing with situations. She has grown as a character to be more careful in her words and how she responds to the actions of her relatives.

I like how Austen does this. It makes it similar to real life. In real life, we learn, grow, and respond to our life in a progressive way. When an event takes place, we learn from it, and take a different course of action the next time a similar situation presents itself - as long as the results from the first time weren't very desireable.

For example, if you crossed the street one day without looking both ways, and a car hit you, the next time you went to cross a street, you would definitely look both ways before stepping out.

Elizabeth learned that trying to talk her mother out of her ridiculous ways does not work. Therefore she takes a new way of responding to this situation...by not "attempt[ing] to reason with her mother."

(Follow this link to see a tulip grow in fast forward...just because.)

Jane

I just realized something. Jane Bennet and Jane Austen share the first same name. Woah!

Did Jane Austen do this because she really like her name? Does she think that she is most like Jane Bennet? And therefore decided to christen her with her own very amazing name?

Personally, I thought that Jane Austen would be alot like Elizabeth Bennet.

Who knows...

But then that led me to google Jane Austen - again - just to see what I could find.

According to wikipedia, she was educated by her father and brothers, and never married. She was part of a very closely knit family, her sister Cassandra was her best friend.

Maybe she based Elizabeth's and Jane's relationship on her relationship with her sister.

Although Jane Austen never married (which is very interesting, seeing as Pride and Prejudice is quite focused on the whole marriage thing) she did have a certain somebody, who was later sent away by her family.

Her other book, Persuasion has a part where the main character loves someone who is not approved of.

This then got me to wonder, does Jane Austen hide bits and pieces of her life in each book she writes?

I am going to try to read every single book that she ever wrote (or at least the ones that she published) and compare them to what biographies say about her.

Then, maybe, when I am old, I can write a book about it all, and title it Decoding Jane Austen, or something awesome like that.

Lydia Brings Whickam Home

Quite the scandal, Lydia runs off with Mr. Whickam, and they are not even married! Her parents were obviously not expecting this. Their reaction thereof was sort of - concerned, frightened, dissapointed?

But after, when Lydia returns with Mr. Whickam - a patched up marriage and not the least bit embarassed - her parents seem not the least bit upset. Okay, let me rephrase that, Mrs. Bennett seems not the least bit upset, while Mr. Bennett hides his frustration inside.

"Her mother stepped forwards, embraced her, nad welcomed her with rapture; gave her hand with an affectionate smile to Wickham [...]" I guffawed (great word, right?) at this, his her mother insane???? "[...] wished them both joy, with an alacrity which showed no doubt to their happiness" (p. 234).

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat!? Just minutes ago, her mother was complaining of her "nerves" and sitting in her room moaning and crying about the situation.

Her father's reaction is a bit better, but not what I would expect from a father who's daughter was just married after a bit of a scandalous situation. "Their reception from Mr. Bennet, to whom they then turned, was not quite so cordial. His countenance rather gained in austerity; and he scarcely opened his lips" (p.234).

If I came home like Lydia did, my dad would be waiting with a gun, a spanking spoon, and my mother with a jar full of Holy Water - make that a bucket. My dad, even though from New York, and not Texas or some other Southern State, would have blasted Mr. Whickam to pieces, and then beaten me severly upside the...rear end. My mother would have sat down and prayed the rosary a gazillion times for everyone's souls.

So, why do Mr. and Mrs. Bennett not seem (or show) a bit of concern? I have no idea. At least Elizabeth and Jane's reactions are somewhat normal for the situation, "Elizabeth was disgusted and even Miss Bennet (Jane) was shocked" (p. 234).

Does Jane Austen have Mrs. Bennet react in this way to purely show her bipolar temperment? That was a bit of an exxageration, but Mrs. Bennet really does frustrate me sometimes. How can she be so absurd? Her daughter's husband just caused so much stress, and then she welcomes them back like they were the perfect couple ever.

Argh! And Whickam enfuriates me to no end. "Whickam was not at all more distressed than herself [the little pedifile, seriously, how old is he, twentyish? And he runs off with a 16 year old! Blach!] but his manners were always so pleasing [humph, yeah right! The little suck up!] that had his character and his marriage been exactly as they ought, his smiles and his easy address, while he claimed their relationship, would have delighted them all" (p. 235).

Well, at least the last bit of "would have" was stuck in there, or else I would have just been absolutely disgusted that his "manners" had made them all forget his actions.

How absurd that their family can actually stand to have the couple back at the house, at most, only Lydia should have visited without the companionment of Mr. Whickam.

And while I am being furious at Lydia, I'll include this quote she states from page 246, "...you know marrie dwomen have never much time for writing. My sisters may write to me. They will have nothing else to do." Doesn't that just want you to blush for her? Or, the opposite, douse her with water, to see if she will come to her senses? Her "charming" (p. 236) husband whom her "sisters must all envy" (p. 236) was PAID to marry her by his most hated ex-brother-like-friend!

How dumb can someone get? It does not seem to be anyone's nature to clearly shut out everything that goes on arround them, and envolves them, but apparently that is what Lydia is doing! Argh! It just frustrates me to no end. Why doesn't anyone sit her down and discuss her situation with her? Well, maybe that wouldn't be the best idea... maybe it is better that she blindly enters into a marriage where her husband was paid to marry her, and only married her for the money.

But still... argh!

Mr. Darcy's First Name

In Pride and Prejudice, the culture expects for everyone to be a Miss, Mr. and Mrs. And the women - especially Lydia - seem quite thrilled when they can be called Mrs. (insert husband's name here).

So, what does Colombian culture think about that? Here, where we call everyone by their first name, or simply replace their name for Mr. (sir) or Mi(iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii)ss. (And believe me, this is actually a very contagious - and convenient - habit to replace someone's full name for a simple Mr./sir or Miss. especially when you cannot remember their last name!)

If we were to replace one of our students from CNG into Pride and Prejudice society, what would the characters' and student's reaction be? Most likely shock and horror at the opposing actions.

What a major difference between times.

Here, where we think getting married before college an 'Oh My - scandalous' situation, and calling adults by their first names, a norm.

I am not saying that either one of the cultures is right or wrong, but just very very very widely different.

So how did this happen? How do characteristics of a society evolve into something so completely different from what it began as? Was it simply time? Revolutionary ideas? An advancement - or the opposite, going downhill?

But, we still share common things with eachother. For example, no one says it straight out, but marrying into money is quite convenient. Balls - parties, are very fun. And lets face it, the personalities of the characters are still present to day. From Mr. Darcy's to Mrs. Bennets, yep, they are all here.

(Differences in lives shown in two pictures of parties)

Oh, and by the way, Mr. Darcy's first name is Fitzwilliam. Hm... I kind of like the ring to that.

Filming Words

Obviously, making a novel into a movie is hard work.
First of all, the director of a movie is usually not the author of the book, so his interpretation of the novel can be different from what the author had wanted to express through his work.

Secondly, novels are sometimes accompanied with long, vivid and expressive details of setting, personalities, and events, which are very hard to mimic with a single shot, or even multiple shots.

Thirdly, characters in a book are completely unique; their personalities, looks and actions are always different from reader to reader, as the reader gets to create their own version of the character with the outline that the author sets up. In movies, you do not get that liberty. The characters are chosen, and interpreted for you. The only choice you have in the matter, is how to understand their words and expressions. That, of course, is very limited. Therefore, if you have read a novel, have a certain character in mind, and then watch a movie based on the novel, that character can be erased and replaced by the chosen character in the movie.

Lastly, and definitely the worst, sometimes what you felt as one of the most important concepts, events, or feelings from the novel are completely erased or forgotten in the movie. I personally hate this. The director can simply chose to leave out scenes and phrases - what is with that?

In lunch the other day, I asked Laura if she had liked the movie Pride and Prejudice, which starred Keira Knightly as Elizabeth. She told me that her personal opinion was one of dissapointment. Mr. Bingley seemed unintelligent, characters were missing, and the feeling had changed. I understand where she is coming from. The four characteristics listed above of what can happen to a novel turned movie were all present in Laura's description.

Although I do love the movie, Pride and Prejudice (starring Keira Knightly), I have to agree with Laura. Why did they chose to not include Mrs. and Mr. Hurst? Why does Bingley seem sort of silly, when really he is supposed to just sound carefree and sweet? And Mr. Darcy is definitely supposed to have a more intense look than simply the lost puppy one he wears to the ball - plus more harshness. And Elizabeth is supposed to be slightly more carefree, too. Or, at least, this is my understanding of the characters...

I've Always Wanted To Relate Something In Literature To Elvis Presley

Mr. Darcy. Stuck up, snooty, rude, but oh so dreamy. He describes Elizabeth's "fine eyes" (throughout the book), and you can't help but get those little shivers of excitement (or, at least I can't).


On Sunday, I had to go to a lunch with my family and my dad. Because I knew that my parents would be involved with the other people who work with my Padre, I brought along Jane Austen, because I knew we would be there for quite some time - Air Force people have a way of relating to each other, and lets face it, Colombians and my mother like to talk, for a very long time. So, nerdy-like me brought along my school work.

I was sitting there, waiting for my Vegetarian Spaghetti to arrive, while every five minutes looking up from my book to tell my siblings to please not try to knock over every waiter that comes by.


It was around that point when Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley ride up to say hello to the Bennett girls, while they are talking to their new acquaintance, Mr. Whickam. I love the line where Mr. Darcy "corroborated it [the greating] with a bow, and was beginning to determine not to fix his eyes on Enlizabeth..." (Page 55). I giggled to myself, and looked up to see my younger brother looking at me as if I was possesed, and then looked back down to keep reading, an I-have-been-reprimanded look on my face from my seven year old brother, who had been interrupted from his how-fast-can-I-shovel-my-food-into-my-face contest with my youngest brother. Sigh.


But honestly, this little romance that Mr. Darcy finds himself in is so romantic. It reminds me of the song from Elvis Presley (well, I am not positive if he came up with the lyrics, but he sings it) "Wise men say, only fools rush in, but I can't help, falling in love, with you!" This is such a sweet - and funny, interesting, amazing - book. I love it! It has the perfect balance between love, hate, sillyness, rudeness, and real-lifeness.


I love that Elizabeth doesn't even notice Mr. Darcy's affections, and is determined to hate him for the rest of her life. Ah, the beauty of literature.


And spaghetti with cheese, tomatoe, olive oil, and some seasoning that is grean. I love El Mar and Pride and Prejudice.

Major Character Flaws

Let me just say that there are two kinds of people in the world. Genuinely nice people, and then, the not so genuine. Now Jane, for example, is a genuinely nice person. Sweet and sincere, she always has nice things to say about everyone, she is "honestly blind to the follies and nonsense of others" (p.10 Pride and Prejudice). However, her companions are slightly otherwise. The two ladies who have found interest in Jane and are very sweet to her, do not express the same feelings to her sister, or her family for that matter. When Elizabeth enters the room, Mrs. Hurst, and Miss Bingley are all politeness and civilty, but when she leaves them to their selves, she leaves "her own and her relation's behaviour to the remarks of the two ladies" (p. 34). How disgusting. These two women really need to figure out how to be nice people.

And what is with Miss Bingley? She is throwing herself all over Mr. Darcy, and is completely blind to the fact that he obviously does not like her. A nuisance and slightly stupid (for lack of a better word) she has no other way of making conversation with Mr. Darcy but to tease him about his admiration for Elizabeth. You'd think that she would just give up already!

I love the part where he is trying to write a letter, and she persistentley interrupts him with comments like"Pray tell your sister that I long to see her" (p. 35) and his response is even more hilarious "I have already told her so once, by your desire." And her response gets even funnier, she switches the topic to tell him to let her fix his pen, because she "mend[s] pens remarkably well." I had to laugh out loud at all of this conversation. One of my least favorite characters in this book, she is a very stuck up lady who thinks very lowly of other people.

She reminds me of Regina from Mean Girls. Both think they are the best people ever, they talk about people behind their backs, and try to get the guy that likes someone else. Yep, girl "bad" has not changed over the years.

Jane Austen - Finally, a Female!

( The picture above is of an actress as Jane Austen from the movie "Becoming Jane" which creates a story from her life)

In AP Literature, we have mostly focused on novels that are, well, depressing. The Road, Hamlet, The Great Gatsby, and Coming Through Slaughter, all encorporated death into their corrupted society. Now, after much anticipation, we get to read a chick book! Yes!

Having already read Pride and Prejudice - just about a gazillion times - I opened the pages with a satisfaction of knowing what was to come. I was reaquainted with the characters, and welcomed them back into my thoughts as old friends.

Mrs. Bennet, who opens the book as the first character to speak, reminded me of just how annoying and dimwitted she actually was. Mr. Bennet, who is practically the complete opposite of Mrs. Bennet, made me laugh at his quick comments and sarcastic remarks. How these two possibly fell in love with eachother, I have no idea. Jane Austen created two opposite characters which contrast so effectively, that we are presented with a comedic duo who have an interesting way of getting on with eachother.

The first ball also introduces some other pretty important characters. Mr. Bingley, easily one of my favorites, is an easy going and open person, who all the mother's wish their daughters to be married to. It is the good luck, more like good looks and flattering character of Jane Bennet, who gives Mrs. Bennet the satisfaction of seeing one of her daughters favored by the wealthy and pleasing young man. However, another single man at the ball does not fall under the good graces of Mrs. Bennet. Mr. Darcy, with his scowl and stuck up nature, turns the world against himself as he puts himself above the rest. Jane Austen once again puts two very different characters together as companions. She very well might be interpreting the statement that opposites attract into many aspects of her book!

I look forward to the next two weeks of reading. A flowery and funny novel, it is so nice to finally read something in class which I can really look forward to.

Lion King is based on Hamlet!!!

The Lion King is based on Hamlet! That is so crazy! I just now figured it out. Of course, it is a kid version, where not everyone dies, but the basic principles are there!

1. The Uncle kills the father (Scar kills Mufasa)

2. The son leaves the kingdom (the hyenas chase Simaba out of Pride Rock)

3. The son receives a message from the ghost of his father (Before Simba is visited by Rafiki, those huge clouds roll in, and Simba sees his dad, Mufasa, and Mufasa talks to him)

4. The son goes back to the kingdom, and kills the uncle (Simba goes back to Pride Rock, to save everyone, and the Hyenas kill Scar, and then Simba lives happily ever after with Nala.)

That is so cool! I never knew that The Lion King was based on Hamlet, but now that I actually know what goes on in Hamlet, it makes sense that it would be. I wonder what other disney movies are based on famous pieces of Literature...?

Shakespeare's End, And Pardon

After Ophelia dies, I kind of guessed that Hamlet wouldn't really want to live anymore. And what more would there be for Laertes, once his father and sister died? And, if those two were going to die, then why not the queen as well, since she really would otherwise live in darkness and depression for the rest of her life anyway. And, just because the bad guy can't go on living after causing the death of so many, he should probably die, too. Well, did that get everyone? I don't want to leave anyone out...

Shakespeare created such a twisted and complicated story, that the only resolution possible was to kill off all of the main characters involved in the corrupt plot. How could there be a happily ever after, after such a disgusting act as what Hamlet's Uncle did, killing his brother, and marrying his brother's wife, to become King. But was it really necessarry to kill off Laertes and Hamlet, too? Not to mention Ophelia, although it was probably better for her to die, seeing as she had resorted to singing about her problems, and most likely wouldn't have recovered from the traumatic experience of her father's death.


But, what was the whole point of Shakespeare's play, if everyone was just going to die in the end? Was it a fable, where a hidden lesson is tucked between the words of the characters? Could it have merely been a distraction for people back then? Were the audiences' lives so miserable that they needed to watch a play to forget about their own troubles? Maybe, but why do people find these plays so interesting now-a-days, then?


Obviously, our lives aren't that bad. We have a more substantial diet than just potatoes, work is generally possible to find, and we aren't exactly freezing to death. We pretty much have all of Asops' Fables now, (which, to tell you the truth, are much happier) so all of our moral lessons have already been taught. So, why does everyone still make a big deal about Shakespeare's plays?


I am guessing, just because it is old. Why wouldn't it be interesting? It is a way of going back in time, to read the words that were written so long ago. People actually gathered to hear those same exact words be performed that we can watch and/or read today. Thinking about it, it is actually super cool! Same goes for the Odyssey, Dante's Inferno, and Chauncery's Tales. All of those pieces of Literature that were parts of people's lives hundreds of years ago interest us today, because it allows us to grasp the concept of how they lived, and that they really did exist. Having pieces of the past makes the past more tangible. And that is why we find things like Hamlet interesting. Not because the plot is super genius, or the characters completely likeable, but because the fact that it was written long ago allows us a source to understand and experience the past.

So, I won't give Shakespeare too hard of a time for such a bad ending. After all, he is kind of famous for his tragedies. Through his plays, we can see that his life was most likely not all that happy, he was probably surrounded by alot of death, and didn't exactly get to experience the whole warm-and-fuzzy feeling all that often, seeing as he never really focuses on the relationships between people, but more on the conflicts. And that reflects on that time period, maybe people didn't really want to focus on the love that they felt for one another, because they were all going to die soon anyway (the life span wasn't exactly what we would call long). Maybe it was easier to dwell on what was bad, so that they wouldn't miss the good when it was gone.


That said, Hamlet has allowed me to experience a revelation consisting of three parts. One, I can appreciate Shakespeare now, not because I adore his plays, but it is a way of understanding history. Two, I now see that my life has so little drama, that it is pretty much boring compared to Shakespeare's works. And three, after looking Shakespeare up on wikipedia, I found out that he was married to a lady named Anne Hathaway, which now a days is the name of one of my favorite actresses! Woah.