amazon.com Paperback - 288 pages (August 15, 2006) Harper Paperbacks; ISBN: 0061148709

amazon.co.uk Paperback - 240 pages (September 3, 1999) Copperfield Books; ISBN: 0952821036

amazon.ca Paperback - 288 pages (August 3, 2006) Harper Collins Canada; ISBN: 0061148709

I have to say that so far one of my favorites passages is when Mr. Bennet tells Darcy that he wants to repay him for his involvement in bringing about Lydia's marriage. Darcy's replies the following: "I have, as I believe you know, Sir, more than sufficient means, so that the expenditure is of little concern to me.  But even if I had been in a different situation, I would have done everything just the same, for Elizabeth's peace of mind.  In all that I had to do, to bring the marriage about, she was always in my thoughts.  I did nothing without her being foremost in mind.  And without her beside me, there can be no happiness for me in the future.  So let there be no more talk of repayment, I beg of you.  Your consent to our marriage is more than enough compensation for me."

Thank you Janet Aylmer for giving Darcy, our hero, a romantic voice and for letting his side of the story be heard.

But I do have a caveat - a good proof-reader could have done wonders!! There are inconsistencies in a place name and at least one word is quoted wrong. But a pencil while reading helps in such cases as these!!;-)

The story begins the summer before Darcy and the Bingleys go the Netherfield, when the near elopement of Georgiana and Wickham almost happens. The author does give a little more background (her view) of Darcy's family.  But actually, this author does not go much deeper into what is going on from Darcy's view than Jane Austen did from Elizabeth's point of view.  In other words, there is still plenty of room for our speculation.  There may be some points, though, in which any one of us may not agree with the way Janet Aylmer has taken some things, but it doesn't spoil the other aspects of the book, and that just leaves us more to debate about.  Then she writes just a little more detail at the end of the story which Jane Austen just touched over.

        Posted by Ann on May 11, 1997 at 15:26:21: I would say that Aylmer did a passable job, not a great one. We have some stories on the Guild that are much better.

        Posted by Arami on May 11, 1997 at 16:43:09:
I must agree with this view. Aylmer simply re-worked the book from Darcy's point of view adding very few original or indeed revealing passages. I felt irritated and rather cheated reading it.

        Posted by Michele on May 11, 1997 at 21:22:00:
I agree with the above opinions. I read Darcy's Story and also thought it was just okay. I especially didn't like the way she directly paraphrased some of the original Austen dialogue, in particular when Lady Catherine related the details of her conversation with Elizabeth to Darcy. Very awkwardly handled, I thought. I also feel that the stories in Fan Fiction were superior to Darcy's Story; in fact, they were what inspired me to write my own stories. They had been in my head for a long time, but I feared they were too soppy! But after reading the other stories, I realized there was an audience for them here.

        Posted by JacqueJ on May 12, 1997 at 22:09:59:
I, too, was disappointed in Aylmer's book. I thought she had some good ideas, a well thought out structure, and a sound approach -- it didn't bother me that she folded in Austen's dialogue. Where I think she failed was in the execution. I found the book very dry and clinical, much as if it had been written by Darcy's caseworker. She did not really examine the transitions and turning points in his life

in any sort of depth -- and those are the bits that are the most interesting. (There were one or two points I particularly disagreed with, but I think that would happen no matter who was writing and who was reading -- as I'm sure it does in The Guild. We all have opinions about Austen's characters and there will always be differences of opinion).

In Janet Aylmer's defense, she was working within a limited schedule and a limited number of pages, while trying to tell a whole story that can conceivably stand on its own. (Though I expect that everyone who reads it will have read P&P). Those of us writing in the Guild have the luxury of only writing the bits we want, without working within the practical limits of x number of pages and a publication date. We are limited only by our imaginations and the time we have to devote to writing.

I would further add that her book was unsatisfying enough that it challenged me to carve out some time to do some writing of my own -- something that I had been wanting to do for some time. I'm afraid it is a back-handed compliment, but I thank her for that!

        Posted by Ann on May 12, 1997 at 20:45:38:
In reply to review Darcy's Story by Anna-Karin on May 12, 1997

I agree that Aylmer copped out on a lot of stuff. All she did was rewrite the story from Darcy's perspective. She never went beyond what was in the Austen. The only exception is the way Darcy confided in Georgiana. Aylmer seemed to actively be avoiding making any choices about what he would be thinking or doing when not around Lizzy, and avoided examining his passion for EB. I was very disappointed, and thought she added nothing new to the story. And one more thing: Hunston??!

] All she did was rewrite the story from Darcy's perspective.
But that is all that she claims to do.

] And one more thing: Hunston??!
The editorial errors and typos did bother me a lot, though.

The book added little to Jane Austen's depiction of Mr. Darcy.  At least 70% of the book was directly lifted or paraphrased from P&P.  I don't understand why Janet Aylmer has not since been charged with plagiarism.  The few deviations from the original that were attempts to "illustrate" Mr. Darcy's character were contrived, affected, and poorly written. I would not recommend this book to any Austen fan.

I'm "sorry to be so hard on one of my sex but..."

Thanks for listening!

After hearing so much about this novel, I was a little disappointed when I read it. Janet Aylmer is definitely very faithful in her account of Darcy's side of the story. The dialogue is exactly the same and much of Jane Austen's commentary is also taken directly from Pride and Prejudice. However, Darcy's Story is definitely a companion novel to Pride and Prejudice. I do not think that it can stand on its own. If I was not an avid fan of Pride and Prejudice, I doubt I would have appreciated the significance of the Elizabeth and Darcy's relationship.

From reading Darcy's Story alone, it is difficult to understand why Elizabeth would refuse to marry Mr. Darcy after his first proposal. Darcy's character before "the transformation", as portrayed by Janet Aylmer, is actually quite agreeable. His pride and arrogance are not really evident. Since all his actions are explained logically, they seem sensible. As a result, the reader is often left unaware that Elizabeth, who is unable to read Darcy's thoughts, would see his actions as unreasonable.

I found that there was too much narration in Darcy's Story. Perhaps Janet Aylmer went a little overboard in trying to explain Pride and Prejudice from Darcy's point of view. She spends a lot of time stating and describing his feelings instead of showing us his emotions by his actions. For instance, just before the Hunsford proposal, Darcy slips out of Rosings to go and look for Elizabeth:

His feelings of anxiety as he slipped out of the house that afternoon were not based on any apprehensions that his application to Miss Bennet might be rejected.

They related, first, to the fact that she might not be well enough to receive him.

(Darcy's Story, Aylmer, p. 94)

The same criticism applies to the dialogue, which is sometimes also a bit lacking. Again, I would have preferred to hear Darcy's comments directly instead of reading an account of the contents of his speeches. A good opportunity arose during the Hunsford proposal scene:

...he considered her silence sufficient encouragement to continue, and went on to avow all the affection and attachment in his heart, which he had long felt for her.

However, in fairness to himself, he went on to add his sense of her inferiority, of its being a degradation, of the family obstacles that his judgment had always opposed to inclination.

He concluded with representing to her the strength of that attachment that, in spite of all his endeavours, he had found impossible to conquer; and with expressing his hope that it would now be rewarded by her acceptance of his hand.

(Darcy's Story, Aylmer, p. 95-96)

This he considered sufficient encouragement; and the avowal of all that he felt, and had long felt for her, immediately followed. He spoke well; but there were feelings besides those of the heart to be detailed, and he was not more eloquent on the subject of tenderness than of pride. His sense of her inferiority - of its being a degradation - of the family obstacles which judgment had always opposed to inclination, were dwelt on with a warmth which seemed due to the consequence he was wounding, but was very unlikely to recommend his suit.

(Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen, Chap. 34)

Despite my criticisms of Darcy's Story, it is still an interesting read for enthusiastic fans of Pride and Prejudice. Janet Aylmer is very faithful to the spirit and all the details of Jane Austen's popular novel. However, the novel often goes a little overboard in its faithfulness and becomes too similar to Pride and Prejudice. The result is that without a thorough knowledge of the original novel, Darcy's Story is really only half a story.

Instead, we are given nearly all the text, verbatim, from the original novel with a few editorial comments on what Darcy was thinking. Nothing significant about his life outside of Pride and Prejudice. Nothing about his past, his childhood, his friends, his experiences that made him the man Elizabeth met at the Assembly Ball. Almost nothing about the torment he must have felt after his first proposal was refused. Nothing about the tremendous changes he went through to make himself into the man Elizabeth could admire. No passion! No creativity!

Here's an example: Can you imagine the conversation Lady Catherine has with Darcy after she visits Elizabeth at Longbourn? The way Aylmer depicts it, Lady Catherine simply shows up and repeats, word-for-word, every piece of dialog between her and Elizabeth. "Then she said..." (Austen's text). "Then I said..." (Austen's text). "Then she said..." (Austen's text again). This is a sad, sad effort and a terrible waste of a great idea!

To paraphrase a Janeite of my acquaintance, it's difficult to imagine anyone making P&P boring. Aylmer, however, managed to do just that, despite the fact that she lifted entire passages from P&P for her book. There was simply too much of such "lifting" for my taste. As a result, there is so little that is original in this book that there is no opportunity for us to learn anything new about Darcy.