Andrew Davies: putting the sex back in Sense and Sensibility
Well, this oughta blow up the Jane Austen Internets for a couple of days. 
Andrew Davies told the Western Mail that he plans to add to Willoughby’s backstory–particularly, it seems, to the Eliza Williams story.
And he is also returning to Jane Austen with a version of Sense and Sensibility.
Admitting that there is always more material in an Austen novel he added that there was a certain back story he wanted to add to.
He said, ‘I want to do justice to the back story, the one about Willoughby in particular, which is quite interesting and steamy stuff like a lot of underage sex that goes on and is just talked about. I want to put it on the screen.’
Though Davies joked about his reputation, he added that side of storytelling is something that is often neglected and shied away from. Whether he is writing about heterosexual or homosexual relationships the key for him, he said, was writing about love.
‘I think a lot of people are a bit scared of it and just think to themselves that it’s not important, which it always is,’ he added.
We are of the opinion that such “explorations” belong more properly to the realm of fan fiction and scholarly papers than to film adaptations, which tend to leave out important stuff in favor of this sort of useless crap anyway. Jane Austen most likely made it backstory for a reason. Mr. Davies, here’s a free clue, fortunately for you introduced without the application of the Cluebat of Janeite Righteousness: you are the only one who wants to see Willougby getting it on with a bratty teenager. Seriously. Good job getting yourself some attention, though.
May 29th, 2006 at 12:24 pm
Now, now. Let’s give the man the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he merely intends to give a bit of depth and perspective; not necessarily add a skin-fest. If he louses it up, by all means let him have it. But at least wait and see first.
Excellent point about attention. As the saying goes: there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
Side note: is it just me or has Mr. Davies gotten more into this aspect of screen adaptation as he’s gotten older?
May 29th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Ina, are you implying that AD is a dirty old man?
I don’t know how long he’ll have to unwind; I get the impression that they’re giving him at least two two-hour episodes, but no news on that yet. I don’t know that he’ll get five hours like with P&P2. When he has lots of time, I don’t mind him poking his head into some back alleys, but if it takes away from the main plot I will be excessively put out.
I seem to recall similar dark hints dropped during the filming of P&P2 so there you go. A wet shirt, a few searing glances, so much for teh big sexay. I do know he put a lot of puerile wink-wink nudge-nudge humor in his NA script, and left out important stuff like the trip to Woodston. I’d rather see Henry watching Catherine looking round the parsonage and you know that she’s imagining herself there and he’s imagining her there than adolescent giggling over S-E-X.
May 29th, 2006 at 1:28 pm
I guess he thinks to himself that he’s great for uniting the ‘best of borth worlds’: Such a household name as Jane Austen which is sure to bring Janeites all over the world flocking by and sex which is sure to bring hoards of people as well.
I wonder if he would take such an interest in that backstory if it belonged to an obscure 19th century book by an unknown writer.
May 29th, 2006 at 4:53 pm
which is sure to bring Janeites all over the world flocking by and sex which is sure to bring hoards of people as well.
(Sorry, couldn’t resist!)
And here I thought Janeites were people!
Sex or no, having read S&S for the first time only recently (inspired by a beautiful S&S fanfiction btw) I am looking very much forward to that!
May 29th, 2006 at 6:34 pm
Perhaps he’ll do the same sort of thing he did in P&P2, showing pictures while someone is telling a story (as in Darcy’s letter, shots of Wickham and Georgiana translate that to Col. Brandon’s testimony to Elinor, shots of Willoughby and Eliza). My only fear is that he reveals too much of Willoughby and Brandon’s pasts during the begining of the film which will make Brnadon’s talk with Elinor less shocking as he reveals the secrets of both!
I’m really hoping for something fairly short and sweet with this but yet keeping in parts like Willoughby’s explination of his conduct to Elinor, Mrs. Ferrars, Edward’s first visit to Barton Cottage, and Lady Middleton. Too much to ask I guess!
May 29th, 2006 at 7:19 pm
Willoughby’s explination of his conduct to Elinor
The one thing left out of S&S2 that I thought should not have been cut.
May 29th, 2006 at 9:22 pm
Oh no, do filmmakers have to sex everything up! I really want to watch this, and I won’t if it’s got a sex scene!!
Perhaps he’ll do the same sort of thing he did in P&P2, showing pictures while someone is telling a story (as in Darcy’s letter, shots of Wickham and Georgiana translate that to Col. Brandon’s testimony to Elinor, shots of Willoughby and Eliza). My only fear is that he reveals too much of Willoughby and Brandon’s pasts during the begining of the film which will make Brandon’s talk with Elinor less shocking as he reveals the secrets of both! -Laurie
Hopefully they’ll do it the Georgie/Wickham way and leave out details (i.e. show them in bed together in the morning or something). That wouldn’t be too bad. I agree with Laurie about lessening the shock, and the suspense.
Hey, Mags, what do you make of this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5019566.stm? The title says “Davies to adapt Room with a View,” but then goes on to say something about Little Dorrit. Weird.
May 29th, 2006 at 9:25 pm
I was just rereading the BBC news article about S+S3 from last year. AD is quoted as saying, “I have a 10-year-old grandson who has read all the Harry Potter books and he goes to drama classes and there are loads of kids who can get into great classics.” Well, hopefully, if he’s trying to attract 10-year-olds, that means he’ll leave the details out of the Willoughby/Eliza storyline.
May 29th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
Hey, Mags, what do you make of this
Beats me. I guess he might be done with the S&S script by now. Wouldn’t you think?
May 30th, 2006 at 2:11 am
I’m sorry, I can’t help but confess that my first thought was of the 1995 S&S — “Greg Wise, naked! Hallelujah!”
They’d better get someone equally scrumptious if they go through with this.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:51 am
I’m a faithful reader of the Austenblog but I have been only a lurker until today. I almost always agree with everything Mags writes :-), so I thought I might give my opinion just this time. I think that AD always does the same: He talks about a story being sexy; full of young, beautiful and sexy characters; about sex and money being the driving forces… But then, if you watch his literary adaptations, they are really tame even as far as literary adaptations go. I have really enjoyed his adaptations of P&P, Emma, Middlemarch or Vanity Fair to name a few, and I don’t think there is anything alarming or obejctionable about them. Really, I can see more sexual scenes any afternoon on TV- and I think that at least Europeans would agree with me.
As already has been mentioned here, he knows something about marketing and given publicity to his projects. I would say that this is his main aim when making such statements. I am looking forward to his S+S very much. S+S2 was a great movie but only a so-so adaptation (IMHO), I much prefer S+S1 in that sense.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:53 am
I totally trust Andrew Davies when it comes to adapting a classic novel again! He always says such things in the press, and look how great his work always turns out.
Were there not also rumours of sex scenes in P&P? And I also read articles where the press thought there would be sex scenes in ‘Bleak House’, and that was also not true.
Jane Austen made it backstory indeed when she wrote it a long long time ago, but what if she lived today?
May 30th, 2006 at 9:46 am
Sylvia said: And here I thought Janeites were people! (Sorry, couldn’t resist!)
ROFL! No, but seriously - Janeites are a superior race that can’t be called just people
May 30th, 2006 at 10:18 am
Well, Cristina, what is a Janeite? Good question.
Choose the one correct choice in the checklist below, and you’re a Janeite!
You don’t need to know every line of Austen by heart or affect late 18th century manners or have been to Bath & back!
[b] “A Janeite…” (checklist) [/b]
[] is a great reader and takes pleasure in nothing else
[] remembers the past only as it gives her pleasure
[] is either an amnesiac or a voluptuary
[] is used to thinking poetry is the food of love
[] loves poundcake without rhyme (or reason)
(How can she promise to be wiser than her fellow creatures?)
[] only speaks if it is to amaze the room
[] is a mute or thinks herself Oscar Wilde in a bonnet
[] never atones for the rashness of her original intention by obstinately adhering to it
(A royal prerogative!)
[] has, as in every disposition, a tendency to some particular evil–
her defect is a propensity for poundcake
[] ,selfish creature that she is, does not perform for strangers
[] is as delightful a creature as she imagines herself
[] always shows more affection than she feels
[] is a woman worth pleasing
[] in a world that knows no actual good of her submits a tax form that shows
more for charitable donations than they’re worth
[] loves a laugh
[] is not a person whose first object in life is a joke
[] does not attempt to laugh without a subject
[] is never frightened at the will of others
[] fails to soften the sensibilities of others–even as she wills them to eat cake
[] always chooses the wit over the heartthrob (Mirth over Firth)
[] believes that ’til this moment she never knew herself
May 30th, 2006 at 10:46 am
Elisabeth–I’m looking forward to it, too, actually. I always look forward to JA adaptations. I’m sometimes disappointed, but I always look forward to them.
Feel free to give your opinion anytime!
I do think this is a ploy for attention/publicity, but having read the NA script (which does have a lot of added prurient material), I think it doesn’t hurt to have these things said publicly.
Janeites are a superior race that can’t be called just people
<obligatory horror movie reference>
JANEITES ARE….PEOPLE!
</obligatory horror movie reference>
May 30th, 2006 at 2:16 pm
You actually read the NA script?! That’s so great! Not that I’m jealous………
About Andrew Davies: I totally trust him, he won’t make a mess of our beloved ‘Sense and Sensibility’!
I always love his work and there are always these kinds of rumours when he is writing something (same with P&P) and it always turns out to be a wonderful period drama.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
When Andrew Davies states that he wants to do the backstory justice, does he imply that Jane Austen did not do it justice? Ah, I love the smell of hubris at tea time!
May 30th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Thanks for the reassurance, Elisabeth. You’re probably right. *crosses fingers just in case*
May 30th, 2006 at 10:27 pm
I just thought of something…I wonder if he’ll include The Duel then? That might be kind of hot.
I keep saying I’m going to write that fan fiction and never get around to it. I have a file somewhere with the Code Duello in it.
May 31st, 2006 at 4:08 am
Oh, yes, he should include The Duel!!!
May 31st, 2006 at 11:26 am
You actually read the NA script?! That’s so great!
I didn’t like it very much, unfortunately. I’m hoping there was some rewriting before it is filmed.
I have to say I’ve been following the filming of the new JANE EYRE adaptation that the BBC is doing and if this new S&S is done with the same care, we’re in good shape.
May 31st, 2006 at 11:31 am
Aw, a pity you didn’t like it… I wonder why not?
May 31st, 2006 at 12:13 pm
He left out all of Henry’s best stuff!!! No trip to Woodston, either. And don’t give me “no time” because he made time for other stupid stuff that isn’t in the book.
June 1st, 2006 at 10:49 pm
i think this is really exciting news. perhaps not so much about Davies’ need to put a ton of sexual stuff into Sense and Sensibility, but he’s done great work over the past years and i doubt that this will be any exception! i really hope that this adaptation is great; i really didn’t care for the version with Kate Winslet. i felt like they managed to make a fantastic story sort of typical hollywood and mundane.
what’s this i hear about northanger abbey? AND JANE EYRE?
does anyone know the expected release dates for these three “films”??
June 1st, 2006 at 10:54 pm
p.s. i was reading what some people said and i do think that a.d. does play up the sex bit about many of his works. so for anyone whos worried about him butchering this beloved story with a load of sex & unneeded things, i wouldn’t trouble yourselfs. in that respect, he seems to be a great talker about things being much more promiscuous than they actually turn out to be!
June 2nd, 2006 at 7:42 pm
Davies would do that, wouldnt he? Oh well, I’ll watch it anyway.
June 8th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
Just found this blog - had to comment here and agree that AD definitely overrated P&P2 by talking about what a sexy story it was; apparently that comment got out of hand. I saw one cartoon, dating pre-P&P release that had Jane Austen about to “rip off her clothes.”