Posted by Kali on April 30, 1997 at 00:16:37:
In reply to Re: Austen and the anti-heroine? Or, just a different heroine? posted by kathleen (elder) on April 29, 1997 at 21:30:32
] ] If this is in any way what Austen was trying to achieve in creating Fanny--that is creating a heroine who we would love despite her lack of traditional heroine qualities--I don't think she succeeded with Fanny.
] But she did succeed with some of us. P&P was my first Austen novel -- and it (as well as Lizzy) will always be my favorite. But I have come to regard MP & Emma as the two best written novels. And I appreciate Fanny more and more with every reading.
] Austen's heroines are each unique, different from the others (and from other novelists'). I like the challenge in not finding the same story in a different setting. While I know that some readers do not like Fanny, I hope most can appreciate the novel.
The more I look at MP, the less successful it seems in terms of exalting Fanny and her morality. I don't dislike fanny - I just don't think it was very well-conceived or well-written when viewed in the conventional manner.
I agree that Anne fits the antiheroine heroine better than Fanny. Anne is open-minded, kind, capable, loving, and well-meaning. She may be quiet, simple-hearted, and often unappreciated (I think that the Eliots and Lady Russell are just as stilting as the Bertrams and Aunt Norris), but she has a true strength and fertility of mind which allows her to amend her own notions of "right" without letting prejudice get in the way. In spite of all that has happened, she doesn't bear any ill-will towards her family, Lady Russell, Captain Wentworth, or Louisa. There is no stiflingly crusty morality in Anne, though Anne IS a very moral, good person. And therein lies the rub...
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.