Re: JA -- a romantic writer?
Posted by Cassia on September 17, 1997 at 18:45:05:
In response to JA -- a romantic writer?, written by kathleen (elder) on September 14, 1997 at 17:24:37
] Nora raised an interesting point in our discussion of JA's intentions (down the page a bit).
] Nora said:
A real romantic author should desire at least satisfaction once a reader is finished, instead of shock and disbelief of what happened in the last forty pages.[emphasis mine]
] . . . if JA was a 90's author she would have done something ....
] I have never considered JA as a romanitc writer. I do appreciate, however, the romantic quality of the endings, with each of the heroines married to a man with whom she shares a deep love.
] For me there is so much more in JA's novels than the romance, that I consider the romantic aspects to be secondary (or even tertiary !) to the main theme(s) of the books. Perhaps this difference in reader responses explains some of the differences in reader satisfaction levels with the endings of MP and/or S&S.
I must agree that romance was never JA's primary concern, she would have put in the kissing, ect if that was what she wished to accomplish. I think she chose courtship and marriage as her subject matter because this was the area where women of her time and class had the fewest contraints as lond as they played by the rules. A young lady was free to make her own acquaitences at a ball, she was free to choose beyand the boundaries of her nieighbourhood for the first time. As long as her partner was suitible, she could have her pick of beaus. As a child she was confined to the nursery, as a wife and mother she was confined by her duty. So a yound women, not out in society long enough to understand all of its complexities is the proper heroine for JA. The mirth! The absurdities to be exposed! How could she have possibly have resisted it?
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.