What makes Jane Austen different than the other authors we have read?
The other novels are different than Pride and Prejudice. What is the difference? Is it Austen's lack of "artistry?" Does she lack "artistry?" If not, where can it be found?
What about the ending of the story; is it a different ending than other things we have read? How?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
First off, I do believe Austen did not lack artistry when she wrote this novel, because I think that not only does the story flow very nicely with the dialogue Austen provides us with, but I also think some imagery can be found in the book that can help us imagine the sights, such as Pemberley, Darcy's home. That being said, I think what makes Austen different is the way that she is able to present her characters. To me, her characters are so lifelike and believable that it really helps make the story that much better. In regards to the ending, I think it is somewhat similar to Crime and Punishment's ending, in that, despite what looked to be a bad situation, the ending actually contains a lot of love and happiness.
ReplyDeleteI think people may see Austen's Pride and Prejudice as less artistic because it's a basic story. It's a love story, which are common in literature, and things go wrong in it, there are many misconceptions between the characters, which are also common in literature's love stories.
ReplyDeleteI, however, think that Austen is very creative, she managed to write about a women's role in society, a traditional marriage, doing what is best for you, parent's expectations, and many other important issues in one story.
Austen showed up different sides through many different characters, we learned Mrs.Bennet's crazy reasons for wanting traditional marriages for her daughters and their reasons for wanting marriage their way.
Well, our collective readings have all ended on a sour note: King Lear, the daughter dies; Lord of the Flies, the boys almost kill Ralph; Invisible Man ends with the narrator hiding from society in a hole; Beowulf, well that's all about death and destruction, and results in Beowulf’s death; Things Fall Apart, Okonkwo's spirit is broken and he kills himself; Crime and Punishment, well he committed a crime and was punished (though he could have gotten away with it!)...In all, the novels and epic poems we've read in class have captured the darker sides of life, love, success, passion etc. Jane Austin's Pride and Prejudice lacks intense depth and devastation in comparison to the others. This doesn't mean it lacks artistry, for that lies within the eye of the beholder; rather it means the contrast is extreme because the content in Pride and Prejudice is more practical and simple. Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful love story, and for some, the trial of getting over previous assumptions and pride is just as hard as slaying a dragon or surviving on a deserted island. However, Jane Austin's novel supplied us with a lighter load of controversy and strife. The story was creative and beautifully written, but it's well received because the story is easily identified with; the damages of pride and prejudice still occur today. Our other stories were much more multifaceted and extravagant.
ReplyDeleteOh, and the ending of Pride and Prejudice is much more successful than that of the other stories we've read. :)
ReplyDeleteFirst off, like everything else in the world, whether something does or does not lack “artistry” is up to opinion. My perception of “artistry” may be different from someone else’s. I feel that Austen doesn’t lack artistry so much as she doesn’t us excessive, flowery language when describing things. The overuse of adjectives does not equate artistry imo. Where as in Nathaniel Hawthorn’s Scarlet Letter, there were whole paragraphs dedicated to the setting of the scene, Austen gets right to the characters, their dialogue, and their reactions. Everything she wrote had a purpose. I mean, the fabrication of her characters and their interactions, were definitely “artistic”, it’s just that Austen was more minimalistic when concerned with description than lacking anything.
ReplyDeletePride and Prejudice is different from the other novels we read because it presents an ideal situation. A character suffers trials and tribulations, but in the end lives happily ever after. So far, we've pretty much been reading novels where the characters suffer, struggle, then still wind up either dead or in greater trouble than they were at the start of the novel.
ReplyDeleteI think what sets Pride and Prejudice apart from most other novels is also where her artistry lies- the characters. At the start of the novel, the characters seem extreme and for the most part, single traited. As the novel progresses, however, we are able to witness the character's underlying traits and understand the complexity of each character, and as a result the character's become highly relateble.
I found Pride and Prejudice to be different from those novels we have read previously in this class because its story was not ridiculous. Many of the pieces we have read thus far have been unbelievable, for example Beowulf, Oedipus Rex, and Frankenstein. Although the pieces have had themes and underlying messages that can be applied to reality, their happenings cannot relate to one’s life. Pride and Prejudice has neither a far fetched theme nor plot.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe Austen lacks artistry; perhaps it is not visible on the surface. Austen allows her reader to search for the ways in which her novel is artistic. Artistry is exhibited in her creation of Darcy’s character. It is difficult to claim Austen lacks artistry with the complexity of his character. In the novel’s beginning, Darcy is too proud to act against the prejudice of his class. However, his growth through the novel’s body is immense. Darcy proposes to Elizabeth after feeling, in the piece’s beginning, she was “tolerable, but not handsome enough to tempt” him. The growth of Darcy’s character is a prime example of Austen’s artistry.
Additionally, the ending of the story is different from those endings in novels we have previously read. It is a happy ending. I found this to be another realistic aspect of the piece. I believe all individuals experience happy endings; whether during life or after death.
Like ashley said, this really is the first book we've read that has had a happy ending. There are some troubles in the book, such as Bingley leaving, but in the end it all works out and everyone ends up happy. I dont think that Jane Austen lacks any artistry. The whole story is intriguing and interesting to see progress. The way that she wrote this novel is very artistic in this way. It is, in fact, a basic love story but the characters are all so complex. This makes the story so much more interesting as some characters defy the expectations of society and do things that you don't necessarily expect and as others do things very predictable. The story is also very reasonable and believable. It is something that very well could have happened during this time period. Austen has been praised for her novels which supports the idea that she has artistry in her writing.
ReplyDeleteI think its the tie of the title to the characters in the novel, without that tie, then there would almost be no point.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Portia's idea that it was set more on the characters than the setting. That may have separated the novel from other books.
The title connected to the characters is enough to prove Austen's artistry. In most works, a title may be only connected to one or two characters. This was connected to almost every single one. Very clever idea by Ms. Austen. Also, like Brigid said, if there wasn't such a deep tie, the story may have lost interest with readers
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kelly, i think this novel is different from the others we have read because it presents an ideal situation. Everyone can connect to a "happily ever after" story, its a type of story we have read our whole lives. The other novels we read did not have "happy endings."
ReplyDeleteI dont think Austen lacks artistry. The way she embeds the themes and motifs flawlessly into the story, the title being an example, is artistry in itself.
I think that Austen's Pride and Prejudice can be seen as having a lack of artistry, but personally I think that he contains much artistry. Yes, it is a love story and we all have heard many of those. This is such a complex and interesting love story that brings together so many different factors. No, they don't just meet fall in love and get married. They had to overcome many obstacles, including their own pride. They had to overcome the fact that two people from such two different classes didn't fall in love.
ReplyDeleteI think that this ending is somewhat similar to other novels that we have read, in that the characters "find themselves" and make a much needed change.
I feel that Pride and Prejudice has artistry, not ONLY becuase of the story, but because of the way Austen utilizes her writing techniques and uses her skills to portay a deeper meaning. There are some stories that are simple and straight to the point and some may find that in this story; however, to uncover meanings that are beyond the words, we have to dig deeper as readers and search for those meanings and representations Austen is trying to show. It's like reading a poem, sometimes we have to look beyond the words and find deeper truths; in this case, the motifs within the story. As Mr. Bruno said, there was one motif that was about the journey of love before marriage. Someone might not see something like that without either having read the story twice, or truly thinking about the relationships and occurances between the characters.
ReplyDeleteI feel that it is not a lack of artistry it has remained in exigency. Why do people keep reading it? Because it contains a deeper meaning. The novel is not just like every other sappy love story contains an actual meaning and is real classic literature. It is the relationship with the characters with the title of Pride and Prejudice. This book has its complexities with the type of characters and the changes that occur with them.
ReplyDeleteAusten is definitely different than authors of previous selections we have read...but still artistic. Maybe she doesn't have pages and pages of metaphors, imagery, symbolism, and stuff I can't understand until Mr. Bruno drops a bombshell on me, but she obviously picked the style and structure of the novel to suit its goal (or what I think the goal is anyway). I believe the goal is to show human interaction, especially in relation to marriage and societal expectations, and what better way to show people interacting and passing judgements than through dialogue!! It's almost like a play...but not. Also, there's obviously something that sets Jane Austen apart from the thousands of authors who have written about love/class/traditions. I think it's also neat how the characters lives all intertwine.
ReplyDeleteJane Austen is different from the authors we have read because I think we find it easier to relate to her work in the sense that her work's purpose demonstrates something that is visible to our everyday lives. Her writing centers around a moral that we can use, versus morals in some of the other books that are not necessarily as well understood because we can't apply it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as artistry goes, I think people are caught up in the idea of a typical love story. The book's purpose is not to say, "oh they fell in love, the end". That's not a novel! This is where I think people are misconceiving the true artistry. Also I think she proves that the novel does not have to be complex with figurative language and symbols to make a point. The artistry lies in the parallels between characters and how interwoven they all are. It also lies in the interaction of the characters as they work around each other to realize their own faults. Tying in society beliefs and customs help to understand the artistry of the novel.
And well endings, we knew what type of ending to expect here. It is happier than that of some of the other novels, and the moral is clearly presented.
I believe that many people think of it as less artistic, mainly because it's typical. It's something that you see throughout all media, especially in movies.
ReplyDeleteThe girl doesn't really like the guy, the guy doesn't think much of the girl. Then bam, it all clicks.
I could see that some might think of it as so, mainly because it's lovely dovey fluff.
However, there is more artistry in the title, being that it's uniquely double faced and can portray both sides.