Found in our site stats…a Polish language Jane Austen fan community.

The San Jose Repertory Theatre will put on a stage production of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE from November 30 through December 16. Tickets are available now.

(Via Mercury News)

<Theoden> And so it begins. </Theoden>

The president of the Jane Austen Society of North America, Joan Klingel Ray, has some harsh words for the new film adaptation of Pride and Prejudice.

Prof Klingel Ray thought that the film’s deviations from the 1813 novel were a step too far. She said the rustic look of the film and the obsession with pitting the action against the elements ensured that the film felt like an adaptation of a Brontë or Bridget Jones novel. “The film is full of sexual imagery which is totally inappropriate to Austen’s novel,” she said. “In one scene a wild boar, which I assume is supposed to represent Darcy, wobbles through a farm with its sexual equipment on show. Also much of the action takes place against tempestuous weather which simply isn’t in the novel. None of this is Jane Austen. The passion in Pride and Prejudice is more of a linguistic affair. I read an interview with the writer when she said she was trying to be honest but honest to whom. I feel the whole thing has been de-Austenised.”

Andrew Davies, screenwriter of P&P2, is loyal to his Darcy.

Andrew Davies, who wrote the screenplay for the renowned BBC adaptation, last night concurred with Jane Austen aficionados and said: “Matthew Macfadyen is a brilliant actor, but I cannot imagine him being as good as Colin Firth.”

Jennifer Ehle, however, summed it up quite well, we thought.

Ehle said: “I remember when we were about to make our version of Pride and Prejudice, there were so many letters to The Times and other newspapers saying how dare the BBC spend money on remaking this when the definitive film version already exists with Laurence Olivier and Greer Garson. So you never know. Nobody owns Pride and Prejudice. It’s out there in the public domain, and it’s good that people are taking a fresh look at it.”

We agree with Professor Ray’s take to the extent that if filmmakers and writers want angst and atmosphere, see the Brontës, not Austen. There is nothing wrong with taking a good critical look at the film (and it’s so good to finally see a review that isn’t enchanted with the freaking “gritty realism”), which after all is using Jane Austen’s popularity to sell the agendas of the writer and director, but we find the whole “competition” thing rather silly. No matter what any of us think of the film, we’ll still have the book, and that is the most important thing. However, we hate for those who will be introduced to Jane Austen through the film to be brought to expect something different from the “light, bright and sparkling” delight that Jane gave us.