It isn't just that
Posted by Mark on October 07, 1997 at 17:13:19:
In response to suffering sucatash, written by AnneM on October 07, 1997 at 16:37:05
] The protaganists in a romance novel must SUFFER before they can be happy. Little details like what we have been discussing just get in the way of their ennobling ordeal. Therefore they are unimportant and can safely be ignored.
] oh, they are not unimportant, or we would not be discussing, or enjoying anything Bronte. they are just a different method of delivering a message. Lizzie and Jane suffered also before the happy ending. Bronte is heavier handed in her shading, and more designing in the shape of the book, whereas in Austen, the story flows more lifelike. and perhaps more enjoyable?
] ] Any wonder why I we prefer Jane Austen to any other novelist?
] I wonder?
My main problem with most works of fiction is I tend to analyze things very minutely. I look for little inconsistancies. It helps me in my work as an engineer where I must look for faults. Miss Austen's "fine brush" with P&P has defied my best efforts of many years.
I could make a long list of problems I have had with "Jane Eyre". We have only discussed a few.
I did enjoy JE. It has a decent plot and believable protagonists, (though the supporting cast is another story). Purple prose is a taste that I've never acquired. (I had to read "The Pearl" in high school. Never have I despised a book so much. Sorry, all you English teachers!) But it isn't so heavy as to drown out the story.
My favorite scene is where Jane returns and takes the tray into Rochester. I can see two real people here acting out their parts in a realistic manner. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
So I can enjoy Charlotte Bronte's work. I will never enjoy her sister's "Wurthering Heights" though. Too, too much.
Thanks for a most interesting thread.
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.