TheBar Sinister, Pride and Prejudice Continues by Linda Berdoll Paperback - 467 pages - 1999 Well, There It is Publishers; ISBN 0-9674817-0-8 amazon.com amazon.co.uk amazon.ca

NOTE: The Bar Sinister has been re-released as Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife

Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife: Pride and Prejudice Continues by Linda Berdoll Paperback - 476 pages - May 2004 Landmark; ISBN 1402202733 amazon.com amazon.co.uk amazon.ca

I will start with the cons:

• This book is X-rated for sexual content. Without the explicit descriptions, the first volume would have less than half the number of pages. And, there is also a fair amount of violence.
• It is poorly edited. There are sentences, too numerous to point out, where words are missing.  Within four paragraphs, a character's name goes from Alexander to Richard to Alexander to Richard and finally back to Alexander.
• Names and relationships are unnecessarily changed: Thaddeus Collins (Mr. Bennet's nephew; son of his sister), Lady Elinor Darcy, Lady Anne DeBourgh. etc.  And, there are also several characters of questionable paternity.
• Then there are the misspellings, Elisabeth and Pemberly, among others.
• The writing style is tortuous although I found it less so as the book progressed.  I think that I just got used to it.
• Besides explicit descriptions of the Darcys' marital activities, there is also murder and mayhem.

• The behavior of the characters is not inconsistent with those that JA created.  Mr. Darcy is unfailingly honest and honorable, taciturn and reticent; almost always in control.  Elizabeth is playful and witty. Both have a strong sense of propriety and are very passionate. They are both good and likable characters.  Their marriage is just what many of JA's fans would envision.  I wish, however, that I could have imagined their connubial bliss, rather than having it described so explicitly in black and white.  It was often hard to overlook.
• There is irony and wit, although it does not begin to compare with Austen's, of course.
• While there are 93 chapters; they are short and easy to read. The story is well told.  It held my interest throughout. Early in the book, I turned pages quickly to get past the X-rated portions. Later on, I was anxious to find out what would happen next.  While JA would never have written about murder and the atrocities of war, this author makes those things plausible, if not pleasant.

Volume 2 was better (like you, I got used to the typos, etc.) and the story moved forward at a better pace.

I'm now in Volume 3  and, I hope, I'll finish it soon. I would not recommend this book -- my rating is better than Tennant (what isn't?) but not as good as the fan fiction on BOI.

• Jane Austen's characters from Pride and Prejudice have been used but they are portrayed in quite different and highly exaggerated ways to those in the original well-loved novel. There is an underlying story but it is somewhat weak.
• The inclusion of so much graphic sex, violence and personal matters is not only offensive to the reader and completely unnecessary, it is untrue to the period and to the characters as we know them.
• The language used in the book is strange. Many long words are included which jar the reader. There are in every case simpler, more readily understood and more true to the period alternatives.
• There is a lack of continuity both between this novel and Pride and Prejudice and also within the book itself. Elizabeth and Pemberley are, for instance, misspelled as Elisabeth and Pemberly. At one stage the author forgets that the Bingleys have moved and they are visited at Netherfield. There are countless other examples of this.

Also, I find that the writer uses a LOT of words I have never heard of before, presumably for the effect of making the language sound like Austen's, but it doesn't really come off that way to me.

That said, I am about a third of the way through the book and I find the story interesting so far. She seems to be weaving a lot of threads into this story. For those who haven't seen the book yet, it is huge. Thick and oversize pages with small print, so content wise I'd say it must have at least double any other Austen sequel I have seen.

The main thing it needs is a good editor, both to correct the voluminous spelling and grammatical errors as well as to hone and focus the rather rambling plot. Pride and Prejudice is a rather long book and only covers a time period of a little more than a year; The Bar Sinister covers five or six years, taking us from Darcy and "Elisabeth's" (grrr) wedding night through the Hundred Days. I don't doubt that Jane Austen could have written such an epic, had she wished; one can only imagine that she had a good reason for not doing so. Which brings me to another troubling point of this novel: the authoress' complete ignorance of story details given plainly by Jane Austen in Pride and Prejudice. Her research in other areas is seemingly so complete (including an encyclopedic but rather disturbing knowledge of the details and slang surrounding the prostitution trade) that her ignorance of such obvious things as Mr. Collins' first name is truly annoying to someone who has even a passing familiarity with the novel.

Ms. Berdoll was clearly inspired by the 1995 miniseries rather than the actual novel, which is fine (I have found the sight of Colin Firth in a wet shirt somewhat inspiring myself), but it would have behooved her to have read a good annotated edition of the novel before she started writing. It would have saved her from some of her worst plot decisions, not to mention from some general bonehead mistakes such as calling the Darcy estate "Pemberly" (grrr) or giving Darcy's mother's name as Mrs. Elinor Darcy. An artist cannot be slovenly, Ms. Berdoll. Next time, read the book first, or at least get a beta reader who has done so.

The authoress' style becomes irritating after a time. One sometimes suspects that English is not her mother tongue. Presumably she is trying to imitate Jane Austen's style, but the attempt is clumsy and artificial. A piece of advice for the authoress from my fiction writing professor: never use a five-dollar word where a fifty-cent one will do. I assure you that Jane Austen never did.

As others have stated, The Bar Sinister is sexually graphic. That sort of thing doesn't bother me; in fact, I was intrigued at the thought of the Darcys being so obviously happy in their marriage that they can't keep away from each other, as other sequel writers seem to have a burning psychological need to bring down pain and unhappiness upon them. However, the constant references to the Darcys' bedroom antics have nothing to do with their relative happiness. They do it when they're happy, they do it when they're angry, they do it when they're in mourning, they do it when they're traumatized, they just do it all the time except when physically separated. Frankly, after a while it becomes rather tiresome. It struck me as a convenient excuse to avoid character or story development; if all else fails, send them back to bed. Or the floor. Or under the wardrobe.

The book definitely has its moments, some laugh-out-loud funny (and some at which I snickered, not sure if the authoress intended them to be funny). Darcy and Lizzy at least stay mostly true to the characters that Jane Austen created (although I doubt JA's Darcy would have found it necessary or even desirable to "christen" all the beds in Pemberley). The story itself is quite interesting but, as I said, could have been pared down considerably. The ambiguous ending seems to lend itself to a sequel of the sequel; I am not sure that I would read it. I must confess that the main emotion raised by this book is an overriding desire to take a red pen to it. I am sorry to pain you, but there it is.

The author's characterization of Lizzy and Darcy don't match Austen's very much, and I really hated what she did to Jane and Bingley. Sweet, loving, loyal Jane Bennet, frigid? Gentlemanly Charles Bingley, a philanderer? It is not to be borne!

And then there's the plot. Oh yeah, the plot. It is, in a word, a mess. It got so convoluted that I skipped over pages at a time, trying to get to a part that made sense.

My advice? Don't waste your money. This book is nothing more than poorly written soft-core pornography.

I am half way through The Bar Sinister and I have not found the characteristics of Elizabeth and Darcy to have changed from what they should be. The only thing that has changed about them is they are now free to express their love and desire fully to each other...which they constantly do!

However, I do think that the character outcomes are not farfetched. Furthermore, I really enjoyed following through their relationship as a newly married couple.

Although it is somewhat explicit, I don't think it unseemly. Given that they are a married couple, of course there will be references to their intimate nature. Furthermore, there have been many great authors in the past who may have been considered risque (ie Chaucer, Shakespeare...)

If one is easily offended, I probably wouldn't recommend them to read such a book. In fact, I think the book has a note in the end that recommends "Reader's Discretion Advised". I am always amused at any reference to intimate passages is always considered pornographic without looking at the context and richness of the characters and plot developments.

One wish was for more references to their relationships with Mr & Mrs Gardiner, as Ms. Austen did mention  in the end, the strong attachment between Mr & Mrs Gardiner and the Darcys.

I was a little surprised about the violence, but at the same time, that was the reality then, there were possibilities of highwaymen and robberies.

All in all I felt that the author was fairly successful in interpreting the continuation of the characters introduced by Jane Austen. Some may say that Linda Berdoll is not Jane Austen...they are right, she's not, no one could be Jane Austen except Jane Austen. Linda Berdoll gave us her interpretation of the continued lives of Darcy and Elizabeth, and I felt even more closer to Darcy and Elizabeth after reading this sequel.

It made me nearly scream to see so many mistakes in a book! Gee, she didn't even use Austen's spelling (or the right names, for that matter! Elisabeth ...   THADDEUS Collins?!?) and there was obviously no editing at all.

 The plot was rather weak and she SLANDERED poor Mr Bingley!!!

Ack!!! Poor Jane Austen ...

The thing that bugged me to NO end, was the way she spelled Elizabeth. I am glad to see others are peeved as well. to quote Lady C, "not so hasty if you please!" sounds like the publisher was not 'wasting' any time for the editor to do his job on this little ditty. Personally, I would rather wait for a better printing than rather read it as it is now.

In truth, whenever I re-read this I just skip the pages I don't like and it works out. 

I hated some of the long introduction to some of the new characters. I think CH5 describes Juliette Clossion  (I'm at work don't have the book here) that was too much. Especially being her role in the book was minor if not there at all.

I must admit that Wickham turns out as I expected him to do and many other of the characters such as Lydia and Mrs Bennet are just as stupid as I expected them to be. I have recommended this book to many of my friends here in Derbyshire who think like my self it is an excellent read. 

The scene where Charlotte's letter describes Mr. Collins' death by bee venom/drowning is particularly outrageous.

I don't like the fact that she changed his name to Thaddeus, but at least she didn't change Darcy's name to William or Fitz.

On the whole, this is best of the book sequels I've read, but none of them come close to JA. I'll also add that I think much of the writing on the BOI is better than any of the sequel books and The Bar Sinister. 

        Written by Faith R (8/30/2003 8:15 a.m.)
I have read it several times I shamefully admit! There are many things wrong with it! Editing, some downright silliness, too much graphic sex, an irritating attempt at writing in the style of the period but widely missing the mark! But at the same time, I thought the author really caught the passion between Darcy and Elizabeth. I think she really understood the way their personalities would interplay. And there are some very funny scenes in it. The dialogue is very good, not wooden like some of the sequels.

I have read three sequels now and it is my "favorite". Really, they are just a cheap way to indulge an addiction! 

She stayed fairly true to the characters, but did end up making them more her own (several times I found myself shaking my head and thinking so-and-so would never do/say that!). A lot of times it ends up feeling like a harlequin novel and can be overly dramatic, but if you don't mind that you should enjoy it. I found the story intriguing and definitely wanted to find out what happened in the end.

I wouldn't recommend buying it unless you absolutely cannot get it through interlibrary loan though. 

There have been some qualms about Linda Berdoll spelling Lizzy's name with an S instead of a Z. It was longer than most and relied a lot on the Mr. Darcy of P&P2, but what doesn't nowadays? I liked it, but it doesn't take much to please me when it comes to books.

Hope this helped.

Bar Sinister- every feeling revolts! I realize this book has already been reviewed, but I must contribute my opinion. This book constituted the first and only time I have ever returned a book to amazon.com. Forgive me for being a prude, but it was nothing but pornography. I thought it might eventually get better, but when I randomly opened the book to several spots, guess what I found EVERY time? That's right - sex! I believe the author had a real problem that should be treated by a well-trained professional. I felt it was a true affront to JA literature.

 The book is good IMO. At first the intimate ahem scenes surprised me but I seen worst in romance novels. We are not used to this in Miss Austen's work. But it is not that explicit, in fact some of the intimate scenes are funny. The story at times is just heartbreaking...but the love between the Darcy's is everything I hoped it would be; strong and passionate. And the ending???.....Wow!!

Disliked The Bar Sinister (spoiler). Definitely too graphic for me and I really disliked the storyline about Georgiana and Colonel Fitzwilliam. I've seen them paired up in other sequels and I just don't buy it. He is, after all, her guardian with Darcy and he is her cousin. It's just too weird for me that they would get together.

 I couldn't get past 40 pages.  I think it borders on the pornographic. And the writing style is truly odd : archaic vocabulary within strange syntax.

Yes, the editing is appalling and it does border pornography, but I actually thought Linda Berdoll did an excellent job of showing how sexual passion and love can and do exist together. So much media separates the two. Ok, will stop with that as it will probably need to be on another thread. :)

But on the whole, I enjoyed it (once I got past the style and editing mistakes). Ok, once I got past some of the things certain characters did. But if you're reading for Darcy and Lizzy, their story is great, imo.

My 2 cents...(spoilers).  I thought Bingley's storyline was outrageous, although I agree with the portrayal of Jane...she surely would have forgiven even such a discretion.

Col. Fitzwilliam...no, I didn't buy his consuming love for Elizabeth. He might have been fond of her, but I can't see him jeopardizing her respect or Darcy's good opinion. He seems too honorable to declare himself to his cousin's wife, even in a moment of unguardedness.

The whole Georgiana/Col. Fitzwilliam thing at the end...I mean, PLEASE! And for Darcy to be forgiving of such an indiscretion...well, I can't see it. It seemed completely out of character for all 3 of them.

I REALLY disliked the entire "Darcy in France" thing. However, I GREATLY enjoyed the "Darcy to the rescue of Elizabeth" at the wayside inn. That incident alone was worth the price of the book, IMO. Over the top? Yes, absolutely. But I enjoyed it and I'm not ashamed to admit it.

And the rose petals on the bed (twice)...that was a very nice touch.

        Written by Kim in AK (4/29/2004 11:04 p.m.)
One more...(more spoilers)  
Even Wickham seemed too brazen to me. He strikes me as more of a coward--I can't imagine him showing up at Pemberley.

Honestly, there is SO much wrong with this book. Yet I still enjoyed it, in spite of its many glaring faults.

On the other hand, I think her characterization of a lot of the characters was pretty dead on - Elizabeth, Darcy (except when dealing w/ Georgiana in the end), Jane, Mr and Mrs Bennet...

I too just loved the inn rescue, melodramatic as it may be! ;-) And the rose petals...*sigh* LOL

Mr Darcy Takes a Wife is The Bar Sinister which as been re released under it's original name it has been edited and had new bits to it. Linda Birdoll has been answering questions about this book at firthness.com if you are a member their go to the forums under Adaptions and Sequels and you will see a discussion about The Bar Sinister being re-released under a different name. Later on this month their is to be another question and answer with Linda on this subject.

Ms Birdoll did not at first want to release it under its original title as she felt people would feel cheated as they had bought the original she has added to this new book and it has been edited and all the spelling mistakes corrected. The new publishes insisted that she publish the book under this name and so if you buy it, it is essentially the same book but I think she said with a few chapters added (unsure about this) so that if anyone bought it that had the original The Bar Sinister they would not feel cheated. Also later on there is to be a sequel to this book and we have been having a laugh as to what to call it over at firthness should she call it Mr Darcy takes his wife again and again and again lol

 I've been reading it. Not having read the book in its self-published form, I don't know what's new and what's not and I can attest that the editor did an excellent job in cleaning up the inconsistencies that others have reported.

It's fairly inventive in taking Austen's characters and answers a few questions that I had about P&P. Having read a few modern romances, it's pretty tame in the sensual department -- though if published in Austen's time, it would have been too risque for public viewing and would have been a private press release for gentlemen with "low taste".

However, as a modern book, it's pretty good for a first novel. She does her best to explain the attitudes and habits of the Austen times and she does a great job of weaving in minor stories that further along an understanding of the times...She reminds me a bit of Lois McMaster Bujold in that she doesn't introduce characters and incidents frivolously: each character and incident has its purpose. She does seem to be way too caught up with the bedroom antics and I hope she gets over that with her "sequel to the sequel" that's promised.

All in all, I would hesitantly recommend it to those that are casual Austen fans, but I would think that the sensibilities of "hard-core" fans would be offended by the scenes of sensuality (no matter how couched they are in terms).

        Written by Sharondio (5/18/2004 10:02 a.m.)
It's a decent read...(spoilers enclosed)  

If you accept that JA is gone and realize that any sequel will be an interpretation with which you may or may not agree, then it's a rousing good time. Berdoll's Lizzie has a bit more spark than a lot of sequels give her, and I sort of liked a glimpse into the passionate side of the relationship.

I also enjoyed exploring the much discussed possibility that Wickham is actually Darcy's illegitimate brother.

I found the whole infertility and miscarriages discussion particularly touching as I've experienced both as well.

All in all, I liked "An Assembly Such as This" better, but this book was a good read and I was a little sad when it ended.

        Written by Natalie-Marie (5/28/2004 3:50 p.m.) 

I have read The Bar Sinister and hardly know what to make of it! the plot is good but it definatly gave us too much detail! what do you all think?

I also found the language very contorted and often wished I could have $1 for every time the author used the word "hence" or threw in words like "mayhap" in an attempt to sound more authentically 'Regency'.

The plot was fairly interesting, but it was very hard to get past the other things, IMO. However, if you read the reviews here, you will find that there are others who quite liked it.

As for the language--yes, the author did try to find words that were from that era, but she heaped them on to such a degree that, to me, the effect was someone trying much too hard (and not really succeeding) rather than authenticity. For example, does an expression like "tardy of the brouhaha" sound more like real Regency-speak or thesaurus abuse?? ;-)

I don't think it's a terrible stretch to have them be so passionate. It's the logical following to the very sexual beings created in P&P2. As for the servants, living as they did, they were much used to servants being almost completely a part of their lives. Their valet and lady's maid would know all the intimate details of their life, regardless. Along with the upstairs maids who changed the linens and the footmen waiting in the halls.

That said, I think the writer went a little too far in her bawdy exploration of marital bliss. But once I stopped thinking about it as a sequel, and just decided to accept it on its own merits, it improved considerably.

...a sequel not written by the original author may (and can if the author so chooses) take certain liberties (ahem) with the characters and storyline.

I feel that Linda Berdoll takes the P&P2 *film* characters of Darcy and Lizzy (and with the respective actors in mind) to especially give aficionados of the film a continuation of the story portrayed. Therefore, this book cannot ever be held to compare to the standard of JA, IMHO (for that reason and about a zillion others). For what it is; however, I very much enjoyed Bar Sinister, as I have previously posted.

BTW, I *do* believe that the complex and mature relationship between Darcy and Elizabeth remains intact in this particular sequel, for the most part. (Ludicrous but enticing bedroom scenes and all)

I quite agree. While it is clear in the text that Darcy is enchanted by Lizzy's cleverness, one would be kidding themselves if they thought that they were not physically attracted to one another. The Bennet sisters' beauty is discussed from miles away; on top of constant references to Elizabeth's fine eyes.

In the second version of the Bar Sinister novel, it is stated that the author was inspired by P&P2 where sexual tension was abound! And I too could truly believe in several situations and actions of the characters.

       Written by Skylar B  (3/11/2005 12:05 p.m.) 

Was it meant to be? The euphemisms were so over the top (I only read about 30 pages) that I did wonder for a moment if it was meant to be funny, a sort of parody on the genre. But nothing else gave me the impression the author did not mean for her work to be taken seriously, so I wasn't sure.

       Written by Theodora  (3/11/2005 11:50 p.m.) 

I am not quite sure either I only know that I was laughing a lot---I think that the lol parts were meant to be somewhat droll, but the rest, probably not. I seem to be amongst the few here that actually enjoyed the book! Oh, well.

        Written by Linda  (3/9/2005 10:24 p.m.) 

You will find all the opinions you need there [here, the Austen Sequel Page]. All the conversations

My own opinion: when I was able to ignore all the soft pornography, I found it to be an entertaining story. However, IMHO, the characters bore almost no resemblance to Jane Austen's beloved originals.

I have only read The Bar Sinister as it was originally released. That one so full of editorial errors that it was painful. I understand that they have been cleaned up in the re-release as Mr. Darcy Takes A Wife. Although, I have heard no one say that the tortured language, also painful, was improved. I found it hard to pull the good from so much that was objectionable and even offensive, but I managed ;-)

I always think that each person should decide for themselves the merit of a novel.

      Written by BarbB  (3/10/2005 10:20 a.m.)

My opinion.  After reading about 80 pages of this book, it's NOT a good sequel of P&P, it's not even good writing. Ms. Berdoll attempts to disguise soft-porn as regency literature by swallowing a dictionary and then regurgitating every single word from it. She never uses a simple, concise word when a multi-syllabic one is available. In fact, I don’t think she ever uses a simple, concise word! As a result, the writing is cumbersome and difficult to read.

Although (or should I say “howbeit”) I am Austen fan, I would hardly say that I am an Austen-purist. Yet, it seems that after watching the BBC production (1995) of P&P, Ms. Berdoll decided to hitch her wagon to Jane Austen’s star. Here was an opportunity to write a novel without having to bother with character development (since Lizzy, Darcy et al are so well known). Perhaps she should have spent more time researching Austen’s writing style or regency life and times and less on researching euphemisms.

It is interesting to note that Ms. Berdoll's other books are about euphemisms. This is especially relevant because in the pages that I did read there were about 90 different euphemisms - most of them just plain ridiculous - for male organs (torch of love), female organs (womanly portal) and conjugal relations. Don’t waste your time or money!

        Written by Theodora
Actually, the euphemisms added to the hilarity...  

        Written by Skye (2/15/2006 12:06 p.m.)
I just finished reading Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife by Linda Berdoll and was greatly disappointing. I was heartbroken over poor Jane and Bingley. Surely Jane Austen never intended sweet Bingley to ever do such a thing!I was also completely frustrated by the graphic sex and violence. It wasn't needed and did not remain to true to the spirit of Austen. The grammatical and spelling errors were depressing (Elisabeth? Pemberly?) and she changed the names of several characters (Thaddeus Collins?). Though the story never bored me, the language sounded forced and unnatual. It is almost as if Berdoll went to a thesaurus for every other word in order to sound more like Jane Austen. Needless to say, she failed spectacularly. I was bored with her new characters, insulted by what she did to the old ones, and felt that it was, overall a waste of money and time. I am really forced to wonder if Berdoll actually read P&P. Surely I'm not alone in feeling this way?