The Very Secret Diary of Henry Tilney
(with apologies to Cassandra Clare for borrowing her schtick)
Day 1: Rode to Bath. Found lodgings. Went to Lower Rooms. Danced with Miss Morland. Pretty girl, suspect she might have misunderstood the muslin bit. Oh well, it’s not like I’m going to marry her or anything.
Day 2: Rode back to Northanger. Staked two undead in garden after tea. I really am sick and tired of all these vampyres. Totally out of holy water. What kind of Abbey do we live in, anyway, with no secret stash of holy water?
Day 3: Howling ghost kept whole castle up all night. Father sneered at breakfast, “Can’t you do a simple exorcism, Henry? What good has that expensive Oxford education or cushy living I set up done for you? Frederick hasn’t cost me a cent since I bought his commission, except those bills for Madam Dominatra’s House of Lacy Unmentionables. The boy must be keeping half a dozen mistresses by the size of them. That’s my boy!” Mistresses! Ha! That’s what he thinks.
Day 4: Bloody hell. Vampyre hiding behind tapestry, in sliding panel. Staked him, but that was a sneaky one. Might be losing my touch. Perhaps should move to Woodston permanently. Leave for Bath tomorrow. Not a moment too soon.
Day 5: Went to Rooms, saw Miss Morland. Asked her to dance. She said she was engaged, but didn’t dance with anyone until the next dance, when she accepted a troglodyte out of obvious desperation. Looked like an ugly customer I staked in the hermitage walk last year. So did the girl I ended up dancing with, come to think of it. Miss M. definitely misunderstood the muslin bit. Oh well, it’s not like I’m going to marry her or anything.
Day 6: Eleanor came home from Pump Room and teased me about acquiring an admirer. She meant Miss Morland. Hmm. Perhaps she understood the muslin bit after all.
So, Gentle Readers, what did you think of the new film?
ETA: This blog post was made possible by a generous contribution from Period Film Pedants International, who remind you that while Miss Morland would no doubt be delighted to ride in a curricle with Mr. Tilney…THAT WASN’T A CURRICLE.
Screencap for macro ganked from Solitary Elegance, we hope with Heather’s forgiveness if not permission
>You certainly have put in a lot of effort in that post to explain yourself. As for my efforts – I owe it to NA being my favourite and all that.
Yes, I put a lot of effort into it for precisely the same reason. I’m very passionate about NA and I’ve spent a great deal of time studying it and thinking it over. I find it very rewarding to discuss it pleasantly with those who share my interest. I’m sure we can agree the it doesn’t often get the attention it deserves.
What Miss Otis said. Very well said, too!
After mulling a bit, I think the heart of my enjoyment is found in two things: 1) I resonated powerfully with the performances of the actors; 2) Henry’s affirmation of Catherine’s instinct is a major part of my personal interpretation of the book. Because of those two elements, I am willing to forgive the admitted flaws of this film.;;
I’ve said before that I am not a purist, but I really resented the implication that Catherine spent most of her time having sexual fantasies. I agree with PaddyDog’s husband, who thought it appeared that Catherine was masturbating in at least one scene. In the first fantasy, her nightgown looked like it was falling off her shoulders and she was leaning back against the tree, looking as if she were having an orgasm. This is just too much. Catherine is a totally innocent, sheltered young girl and I was, frankly, appalled at these scenes.
Yes, there was sex in Austen’s day. And yes, there was passion in Austen’s day. But these very 21st century scenes were gratuitous and added merely to titillate. They do not add anything to the story. This is, as we should all know by now, Andrew Davies’ modus operandi. These books have been loved for 200 years without gratuitous sex and I’m not sure why they won’t be loved for 200 more years without gratuitious sex. Otherwise, it’s all fanfic.
I enjoyed the film. I think it was successful on three fronts: It was funny, it didn’t play the parody straight, and I liked Henry’s wide smile. Okay, four; my husband stayed awake for the whole thing.
Why AD largely switched the book to the Monk I can’t say, but rare is the person these days, I believe, who has read the Mysteries of Udolpho well enough to spot each parallel to NA. The point is that Catherine hoodwinked herself by letting her imagination run wild in the realm of fiction. I think the Udolpho book and plot itself, for the casual viewer/reader, is relatively unimportant.
In the film General T’s nefariousness was foreshadowed for Cathy while they were all still in Bath by Henry and Eleanor sharing multiple dark looks at his friendliness to her.
I have read Udolpho, though only once and about 10 years ago. I think NA the book is hilarious. Mr. Tilney is my favorite hero; so much so that my husband named our dog Henry so I would not pine after the fictional paragon. I purposely have not re-read NA since a year or two ago so that I could enjoy the movie without feeling the urge to nitpick.
The discrepancies I noted on my own were chiefly that Thorpe was not a buffoon but rather creepy, and that Henry likes Cathy more intensely more immediately. Reading the comments here and remembering now more of the differences, I am still sufficiently removed to be able to find the film charming in its way.
I think Andrew Davies may have stumbled onto a successful anniversary greeting card idea. “I’ve drained the life out of you for 25 years. Sorry.” Accompanied by roses ranging in color from blood red to deathly pale.
@ Miss Otis
>I’m having a hard time not finding that really insulting.
Why should you find that insulting. It wasn’t personal.
You just have to visit the old posts over here and other sites to discover the truth of my statement
Thanks for the html suggestion. I didn’t realise I could use it here.
And with your permission
I’d love to continue my NA207 bashing 
because I feel it should be. 
You and those who like it can continue praising it.
And thanks a lot to Mags for letting us all express our opinion.
I was pleasantly surprised by 90% of NA; I enjoyed nearly ALL of the acting (even Mr. Thorpe’s “over the top sledgehammer” portrayal) and thought everything worked together very nicely, although I found it a little perplexing that a wits-about-her schemer such as Isabella should be shown as a foolish innocent in succumbing to Captain Tilney. The “are we engaged?” scene rang very false to me. But that was small, given that everything else seemed to work (although it felt rushed, but how can it not in 90 minutes?).
There was, of course, much more “story” in the book, but on its own merits, NA came off very well. It was certainly superior to Persuasion in every way, IMHO.
(I’m pleased to see I was not the only one who liked it. I was a bit concerned that my Janeite credentials were going to be questioned, given how much I enjoyed it.)
As NA is a story about reading books, people and experiences; I didn’t like how novels were trashed !
So, The Monk appears an odd choice for any NA adpatation.
In NA, Henry & Eleanor also read and discuss Udolpho, and JA intentionally made Henry an unabashed Radcliffe fan.
I don’t see anyone arguing a JA adpatation must clone the book; yet the plot and dialogue can at least be recognizable and JA-friendly, imo.
Oh, @ for Julia-
JA may’ve read Lord Byron’s ‘The Giaour’; yet it was not published till 1813. NA is set in 1798. My real point is there wasn’t a body of English literture re: vampiric folklore and JA deliberately chose books such as Udolpho, etc known to the English reading public. I find the idea of vampires too vague and I don’t expect too theorize over such difficulties in any film’s logic. If you read NA, you’ll see Henry is intended to be an agent of Catherine’s gothic unillusionment; he doesn’t talk of stories based in supernatural. I hope you enjoy NA.
If filmakers had to change Catherine’s book; it may’ve been more relevent to use e.g Castle Wolfensbach or Clermont which are books of the NA Canon, rather than the Monk.
>I didn’t get the impression that he’d promised her anything’
Oh ? Where does Isabella get the impression Capt. Tilney is honourable enough to marry her ?
Isabella Thorpe is more worldly than Catherine. NA mentions she’s visited such fashionable places as London and Tunbridge Wells. Quite likely, she’s aware of the difficulties of girls in society and knew genteel girls were commonly seduced and abandoned, esp. if they were dowerless.
More likely, Isabella as a money grubber, would sue for damages if she had any complaint against Capt. Tilney.
I am not prepared to say something is there without evidence from JA’s text.
JA wasn’t shy when she wanted to make any sexual encounter clear-In S&S, Willoughby’s seduction of Eliza and her baby; In P&P, Lydia & Wickham lived together for 2 weeks in London. In MP, Maria ran off with Henry C. and is divorced…. I doubt JA made an exception for NA.
It seems so pointless !
@ Paddydog, I’m another who so agree with your comment re: Catherine’s fantasies.
Yes, I’d say NA2 is a valid candidate for fanfiction.;-)
Wow I opened the blog and it was like my Jane obsession and LOLcat obsession were meeting in some strange dimension!
I liked the new NA. Henry was great. Everyone was cast well and I think someone watching who hadn’t read the book could follow everything. My only complaint is it not being as comical as it should be. The narrator’s voice was not quite right. The book is hilarious.
I quite liked JJ Feild as Henry… Yet, am I alone in missing seeing Bath in the film ?
I tend to think of NA and Bath as inextricably linked; the Assembly Rooms where Jane danced and Cathrine visited, the Pump Room and cresent streets which made Bath the capital of Georgian England… I thought the theatre scene an interesting idea, not only is it in the book, but I don’t recall any other JA adaptation doing an actual theatre scene. However, I’m abit fazed…this theatre in Dublin was, I think, a proper Georgian era theatre but my impression is the Orchard Street theatre in Bath was or is, much smaller. Even in boxes, Henry and Catherine would’v been sitting much nearer one other ? At least we saw authentic touches of JA’s Bath in NA1.
I love JA and have never read nor seen NA, so this was a first for me. My sense was the story line held up sufficiently. But it was not compelling, nor were any of the characters, and as a result I have no strong desire to see this again. I felt like the story line was building up towards something when all of a sudden it ended. The actual turning point at Northanger Abbey didn’t seem like much because there wasn’t enough conflict or contrast that occurred before it. I think it was all just too subtle for someone unfamiliar with NA.
It did peak my interest in the book however, but only because I’d like to know what JA really intended.
As an aside… are there any men on this blog? (just wunderin’)
Ooo, Just thought of something… what about a Wiki-adaptation of JA works? Since our collective JA knowledge seems quite good, this might actually be pretty interesting.(”Wiki” as in the general public creates/owns something jointly – like Wikipedia)
Rebecca–do read the book! And let us know what you think! It’s really funny and fun.
And yes, there are men on the blog–ibmiller, for example, and there are others though they’ve been kind of quiet. With some of the net handles it can be hard to tell. Boys, out yourselves…
I am not prepared to say something is there without evidence from JA’s text. JA wasn’t shy when she wanted to make any sexual encounter clear
Oh, I don’t think that it happened in the text – I just think it’s a valid change. It wasn’t inconsistent for the adaptation, for one thing: Isabella really thought he was into her, and had no reason to think he did that sort of thing all the time. She could have sued for breach of promise, but he’s a lot richer than she is and would probably win, and then everyone would know she was disgraced in the bargain. Of course she knew about girls being seduced and abandoned, but one can know a lot of things and still think, “That won’t happen to me.” And I don’t see that book!Isabella was “too smart” for it – if Capt. Tilney had been just about any other guy, he would have married her. If Isabella is so clever, why would she think Capt. Tilney would ever marry her, period? Why give up James? Why believe that the Allens are going to leave their money to the Morlands?
She could have sued for breach of promise, but he’s alot richer than she is and would probably win.
Isabella is ambitious for a genteel, wealthy marriage; in JA’s era, her only dowry are her beauty and virginity. I doubt she’d throw them away before she had her wedding ring.
Look, I’d hardly call Isabella clever; the real point is the Thorpes could still create public scandel in the newspapers for an important family like the Tilneys. An enraged General would prefer to pay hush money than accept Isabella ! Do you believe Capt. Tilney would risk being disinherited for a night with Isabella Thorpe ?! That is my point on why Frederick would be more careful than to bed girls like Isabella.
However, I doubt Isabella is as naive and inexperienced as you make out. In NA, she expressed concern the Morlands wouldn’t accept her; so why didn’t she bed James ?
If Captatin Tilney had been any other guy, he would’ve married her.
Henry didn’t marry Maria nor Willoughby marry Eliza. Darcy had to literally buy Wickham for Lydia to marry. However, as you say- it didn’t happen in the text so it’s a silly non-issue.
The engagement idea was really from James. My impression from the book is Isabella was seen round Bath with Capt. Tilney and bragged to her friends; in a gossipy place like Bath, this gave rise engagement rumours ! When Capt. Tilney heard them, he got alarmed and quickly went to Anne Mitchell.
Yes, I’ve read these questions too- Isabella was disappointed in James’ expectations of 400 pounds a year. As the Allans were long time friends of the Morlands and childless, it was John who really hoped Catherine was an heiress. Isabella lines about hopes of Mr Allan are only in NA2. Sheesh ! Read the book.
Okay, everyone–deep cleansing breath. Let’s keep the discussion civil.
As far as “why would Isabella give up James”–she didn’t. He gave her up, because he was humiliated by her attentions to Tibby. “…till the very last, if I reasoned with her, she declared herself as much attached to me as ever, and laughed at my fears.” James seemed to think Isabella and Tibby were engaged, but then he was as naive as his little sister, bless his pointy head, and had no Henry to lead him out of the weeds. I honestly don’t think Isabella WOULD voluntarily have given up James until she was very sure of Tibby–even Henry says so–but she didn’t really have a choice. If anything, she should have been more careful of Tibby at that point, if there was no definite engagement, because she didn’t have a fallback anymore, instead of making herself so vulnerable to him. Isabella’s in a very different position from Catherine. Catherine had a comfortable upbringing, so she can be philosophical about love and marriage, but Isabella has no father, no dowry, AND she’s the eldest daughter. She HAS to marry well to bring up the rest of her sisters and all those younger brothers at Merchant-Taylor’s and in the navy, etc. Rather like Jane Bennet. I really don’t see her taking such a chance. Too bad for her she has John the Idiotic for her brother.
And there’s no reason for Isabella to not believe John’s assertions about James and Catherine being heirs to the Allens. There was nothing to deny it–the childless Allens were kind to Catherine and took her about like a daughter. If anything, their behavior tended to confirm it.
Admittedly, all of this is rather complex to be squeezed into 86 minutes.
Going back to my assertion that the most fatal flaw of this film was the time limitation.
(And one thing I noticed for the first time on Sunday–the film was changed to make the Allens’ fortune from trade, rather than making Mr. Allen a “gentleman.” Hmm. Wonder why?)
Another thing that occurred to me–if word got out that Tibby was messing with a girl like Isabella, whose background is relatively genteel, could he have been kicked out of the army or been in trouble somehow? I’m not sure about that.
I guess I’ll make this my last reply in the post, as I’m apparently violating the Sacred Code by liking the movie and *gaspshockhorror* not having read the book in a bit. That’s the trouble with college (and especially being overseas) – you can’t do as much personal reading as you’d like. (I have read it though, dear Mandy.) So, yes, I forget which (very minor) bits are from the book and which the film. I thought the point of Janeism was having a passion for the books, and not being better-read-than-thou.
Any scandal the Thorpes created in the papers would look much, much worse for them. Literally everyone would have sided with the guy in such an event, because obviously a girl who would sleep with a man before the ring was on her finger and the dowry paid is a trollop &c. and they would have been untouchables. He’d just have to say that she was lying and he’d never slept with her, and he’d have been believed – it still happens today in rape cases, where a man says she came onto him. She didn’t have to bed James because he made it obvious that he wanted to marry her, and if the Morlands didn’t accept it – well, then they’d have to go off and be poor together, and I don’t think that’s what she wanted. Yes, there are many cads that seduce and abandon women in Austen – but only one per book, so Isabella would have been safe with a different choice. It was a calculated risk that went wrong, because it could have gotten her a marriage. Be as it may, she did accept James and then pull a Marianne and act like she was engaged to Capt. Tilney, which I read as dropping James because it’s so not done, even if she didn’t say to him, “It’s over.” If she had really wanted to keep that connection, she wouldn’t have gone around with Capt. Tilney at all – and, if she was stupid enough to think everything would be okay if she behaved like that, she wasn’t smart enough to realize he wouldn’t marry her.
Sorry for getting belligerent, Mags.
I don’t try to, really, but sometimes it seems like discussions of Austen movies (esp. new ones) turn into contests about how I read the books more times than this other person … and I don’t know, I’m a spaz.
Don’t worry Miss Otis. I take a whole lot of abuse around here for having the temerity to have liked P&P05.
Oh,I don’t think it happened in the text- I just think it’s a valid change.
Well, that’s alot of speculation for something ‘not in the text.’ Newspapers of JA’s day delighted in scandel pertaining to public figures like Gen. Tilney ; I doubt Thorpes need do anything. Frederick would be more careful of his inheritance. Also, Isabella as a calulating flirt in a vulnerable position won’t risk public censure. The precise reason she wants to marry is for security and respectablity; else she’d be content as the mistress of a rich man.
>I thought the point of Janeism was having a passion for the books and not being better-read-than -thou.
Some posters disparage NA as a ‘little book’ where nothing happens; maybe we can all agree NA is more complex and warrants it’s own mini-series. Let’s hope NA3 is not far away !
LOL! I think your’ve touched a theme of JA; Northanger Abbey is a text about reading, reading people, and reading situations.
…and no, I doubt anyone thinks your’e any spaz ! Or I wouldn’t bother to reply. That’s very negative, cheer up and enjoy a re-read of NA when you can.