Austen paints a world of excess.

She’s just so fucking brilliant. That much so I found the need to swear. The sarcasm is just oozing out of her words. She doesn’t need to tell you her opinions of society: she shows them to you.

Simply put, Emma’s farther is a ridiculous prat. There’s no other word for it. He spends his day lounging around eating rich and expensive food and doesn’t bother to exercise his body or mental faculties. The thought of visiting his recently departed governess, a long-time family friend, is utterly deplorable. I mean, he can’t travel that far. She lives the great distance of half a mile away; thus, the only possibility is to hire a carriage. This is clearly the only feasible solution to the problem. He is self-indulgent and spoilt, and in this Austen ushers in the origins of her heroine.



Thankfully, Emma has a degree of sense. She is still a little spoilt; she still has a great deal to learn but she isn’t her farther. In addition, the departure of her governess is an agreeable experience. She has empathy. Whilst she misses her friend and her teacher, she is genuinely happy for her. Unlike her farther, seeing her friend enter a love filled marriage is an occasion for joy and celebration even if she dearly misses her company. So from very early on, Austen’s heroine is characterised as spoilt, her upbringing demands it so, but she is not without sense or a full awakening: she clearly has the capabilities of leading a successful life rather than one that resembles the useless vegetable state of her farther. She is a strong woman.

She spends her days helping her new friend Harriet; she endeavours to find her the perfect husband, and sets about trying to improve her character. But through this, and her own naivety, Emma never considers her own youth, and that she, too, is in need of some degree of improvement. Thus sweeps in the straight shooter, the frank speaking, Mr Knightley. Emma has many reading lists (who doesn’t?) but she never bothers to complete them; she never finishes her own schedule: her own plans. She considers herself a true authority on marriage, on matchmaking, but her experience, her credentials, come from one fluke partnership. Her young age breeds arrogant ignorance. Because she has created one healthy marriage, she immediately thinks she knows what love is about: she thinks she will succeed again. And as a result she makes a series of terrible mistakes. Ones Mr Knightley is only too generous to point out.

And this is Emma’s learning curve. Such irony!

“Were I to fall in love, indeed, it would be a different thing; but I have never been in love ; it is not my way, or my nature; and I do not think I ever shall.”



Through the course of the plot she truly discovers herself. Austen’s heroines are frequently deluded, and Emma is deluded by her own will. She has no idea what love is, and in her well-meant advice, she frequently mistakes simple things such as gratitude and simple kindness as romantic interest. Austen being the wonderfully comic writer that she is, exploits this silly little misconception for the entire plot. Emma does finally get over herself. By the end she understands the feelings that are ready to burst forth from her own chest. Emma’s excess is her indulgence in her own opinion; she naively believes herself experienced when in reality she is juvenile, arrogant, self-absorbed, but full of real potential as a human being: she can do some good in this world and live for others. What she needed to do, and what Mr Knightly so desperately wanted to see, was for her to grow up. And she does: happiness reigns supreme.

“Men of sense, whatever you may choose to say, do not want silly wives.”

I gave this five stars, but is it as enjoyable as other Austen’s?

Simply put, it’s not. This lacked a plot driver. This wasn’t heading towards a clear and well defined fulfilment or resolution. I would certainly, and whole-heartedly, only recommend reading this one if you already enjoy Austen’s style. Whilst this does display Austen’s rapier wit in full force, the lack of narrative progress will scare most readers away. This has a great deal going for it, though it is terribly slow at points. If you’re not already an Austen lover, you should go read something else. For me though, I’m going to finally being reading Pride and Prejudice soon. It will be very interesting to compare it to Persuasion and see which is the best.

RTC






In my Classic Literature era

I decided to just add books to an existing review. This new book of Emma is like the Pride and Prejudice. I’ll leave some pictures here and I have a big ole review below from back in the day when I wrote big ole reviews! 4.5 Stars ⭐️











Mel

n  It was a delightful visit—perfect, in being much too short.n

The first time I ever read a Jane Austen novel, I had no idea what I was getting into. The book was Sense and Sensibility, and I began it immediately after finishing Lolita. My dear reader, I hope you never suffer such a complete literary shock; it was like being pushed into a pool on a cold winter’s day. After such scandal, such literary rhapsody and tragedy, such depravity and bliss as found in dear Humbert’s tale, how could I get engrossed in the quiet lives of English gentlewomen trying to marry? I expected that I was in for a great bore of a book; but, strange to say, by the time I put that book down, I found myself rather engrossed. Though infinitely more quiet and tame than Nabokov, Austen’s book had worked its odd magic, and I was left with a pleasant aftertaste.
tt
It’s hard for me to say or write anything about Austen without feeling somehow indecent, boorish, crude, coarse. Writing a review of her books is like writing a review of a flower—the flower doesn’t care a whit, and neither would Austen. Austen would have done the same exact thing if she had read every negative review, had overheard every negative comment; like a flower, she simply was. Good thing, too, because she has been often maligned. Consider this famous quote from Emerson:

I am at a loss to understand why people hold Miss Austen’s novels at so high a rate, which seem to me vulgar in tone, sterile in artistic invention, imprisoned in their wretched conventions of English society, without genius, wit, or knowledge of the world. Never was life so pinched and narrow. . . . Suicide is more respectable.

Such negative opinions are not confined to the past. One of my friends, an avid reader with normally excellent taste, absolutely refuses to open an Austen novel; he can’t be talked into it. Another friend, of similarly dependable taste, read Austen and hated it. I recently asked him why, to which he responded: “It’s like she thinks she’s so smart and so clever; as if she just writes about people to make fun of them, and thinks everyone she has ever met is an absolute dunce.”
tt
I think there is certainly some truth in that assessment. To be sure, there is something pinched, something condescending, something critical about her books. She was not a writer of great range, nor an artist of great depth; so it seems odd (to say the least) to place her name besides Tolstoy and Shakespeare, as a world-class author. How could she be? Yet this is her magic. So subtle is her greatness, that beside her, other authors seem a bit obvious, a tad clumsy. If all the great geniuses of the past were gathered in one room, some would be arguing, some laughing, some weeping; and Austen would be sitting in the corner, suppressing a smile.
tt
At her best, Austen is a paradox. She is intensely satirical; yet no satirist was ever more gentle, sympathetic, and kind. She is both engrossed and detached from her surroundings; she is able to offer a cultural critique, a comedy of manners, showing how narrow and superficial were the customs of her day, while still being open to the possibility that one could reach the highest happiness within the confines of those customs. She is painfully aware of the defects in people’s personalities, and yet can accept them with an almost saint-like readiness. All of her stories are tiny and tidy enough to take place on the head of a pin; yet this pin is pointed, like an arrow, towards the stars.
tt
This particular novel, however, is a bit of a departure for Miss Austen. Normally, Austen’s characters do not loom large; they are likable, but forgettable. The main interest comes, instead, from the anthropological detail, the wonderful wit, the driving logic of the story. This novel is different. Instead of being driven by the inexorable machinery of plot, it is driven forward by the titular character, Emma Woodhouse. Miss Woodhouse, “handsome, clever, and rich,” is a flesh-and-blood character; she has whims, aspirations, fancies, and moods. We spend an awful lot of time in her head, following the train of her thoughts; and when we are in society with her, we are her co-conspirators, scheming along.
tt
This is interesting, and Emma is good company. But Austen is not quite up to the task of a character study. For everything gained in depth, Austen must sacrifice crispness and cleverness. The novel is too diffuse and windy; it is not, like Pride and Prejudice, a polished gem, but an untidy portrait. There are two conflicting elements at play: the character-driven, and the plot-driven story. In the first half of the book, Emma is at the reigns; she directs the action, and we stand back and observe the farce. But in the second half, Austen resumes control, and the chaos of Emma’s schemes resolves itself into a neat picture. Well, not quite neat, as the resolutions are not as relieving or believable as in her other stories. It is almost as if Austen gave up on Miss Woodhouse somewhere near the end, exasperatedly shoving her out of the driver’s seat.
tt
Still, this is an excellent book, and I had a great time. After I finished reading, I watched the 1996 movie version with Gwyneth Paltrow (which was surprisingly good) with a friend of mine. Because my friend was unacquainted with the story, I had to keep pausing to explain the subtleties of what was going on—who was from what social class, who was trying to accomplish what end, who thought what of whom, and so on. And in the course of one of these clarifications, I realized how astoundingly rich this novel was, as are all Austen’s novels. Austen makes you feel like you’re back in high school, gossiping about crushes and drama, while simultaneously making you feel like you're infinitely above gossiping; and these two feelings, so apparently incompatible, are what make her so charming.

________________

By the way, for those interested, I recently read a great essay by the philosopher Gilbert Ryle on Jane Austen. Here it is:

http://www.logicmatters.net/resources...

After 100 slow pages in this was settled to be a 5 star, my second favourite so far after Northanger Abbey x Beautiful, I loved George Knightley

Ms Austen once said, she would create a heroine that no one would like but herself, I am not quite sure she had achieved it. Yes at first Emma's meddling ways really did get on my nerves but as I managed to get to the end I was thoroughly charmed by her.

As everyone most probably knows I am quite the Jane Austen fan and since recently have been re-reading most of her books to reignite my passion in classics (calling it classics is a long shot but I take it. Compared to the contemporary novels that are found now, it is indeed a classic but in my notion books of much older age can be considered classics too. This is a notion that I have constantly been making). Austen is one of my favorite authors when it comes to books of this era and Emma unfortunately had not taken a lot of my interest. With my recent exposure to the lovely latest adaption by Autumn de Wilde (my favorite so far. It was a pure joy watching it), my interest in the book was begun again and let me say that I enjoyed the book so much that I am willing to say I might even come close to liking it more than Pride and Prejudice (yes, the blasphemy on my part but I really loved reading Emma this time round).

While re-reading can i just stress on how much I loved the character of Mr. Knightley. In true honesty I would surmise that I loved each and every character more this time round. Emma too, as I mentioned earlier, I have found a lot of more joy in reading it all around.

It is Ms Austen, I could not say anything further than goodness for her. The manner in which she allows us to gaze through the window of past so seemingly natural even at this age is astonishing and further proof of how well she is as an author. Even though she had obstacles such as writing in secrecy at first, she manages to establish her career as an author with fervor and was loved at her time and loved even further now. It is in completely biased judgement that I put this forward. Many professional critiques around the world have found many flaws in Ms Austen's work, but me myself being her ardent fan am not gonna comment on that and stay true to the personal opinion of mine that she is without a doubt one of the best authors to walk the earth.

3.5 stars rounded up.

Emma, in my opinion, is one of Austen’s most polarising novels and it’s all because of Emma herself. Emma Woodhouse is a spoiled snob and a busybody. Even worse, a romantic busybody. She feels that she alone knowns the affairs of the heart, and sets herself the job of ‘matchmaking’ the poor unfortunate female creatures she finds herself associated with. The main attention for this project is Harriet. Poor, poor Harriet. Her friendship with Emma leads to a multitude of heartbreak when right from the start she could be settled with a man who loves her, but whom Emma feels is a member of the lower classes and far beneath her friend. Instead she sets her sights on Mr Elton, local vicar and social climber for her friend. The only one who dares challenge her plans is the wondrous Mr Knightley, her sister’s brother in law and a lifelong friend.

I loved the relationship between Emma and Mr Knightley. On numerous occasions he reprimands her behaviour and actions, challenging her true intentions towards Harriet, while also trying to open her eyes as to what is really going on between her friends and their supposed love interests. He encourages her to form a friendship with Jane Fairfax, a woman with societal misfortunes, but who Emma is immediately jealous of because of her delightful nature and intellect. This leads to anguish for both parties, when a friendship could have solved any number of future romantic entanglements. He’s kind, considerate and brings out the best in Emma’s personality. I think this is also the first Austen novel I’ve read where there isn’t a clear ‘villain’ of the piece (except for the odious and vulgar Augusta) which meant I had no real idea where the plot would go and aside from Emma I didn’t know who would end up with who.

As usual, the story is filled with the wit I’ve come to associate with Austen, and many times I laughed out loud at the various activities the characters go through which make them all immediately likeable and well known. Frank going all the way to London for a haircut and Emma calling him out on it, Harriet fainting after encountering a group of children and being rescued by Frank, Miss Bates getting over excited at seeing Emma...there’s just something so immediately comforting and wonderful in these novels. I will say that sometimes the plot wanders unnecessarily, and the familial dynamics are often convoluted and overly complicated with intermarrying but for me they’re a safe place and I honestly thoroughly enjoyed this.

Gossip and letters and parties and matchmaking and misunderstandings and rivalries - a literary soap opera!

I enjoyed Emma - I had been planning to read this for years and had been hoping to enjoy it more than I did. I think it was just a bit too repetitive for me at points. But, looking past the repetition I did enjoy the story of the endearingly silly Emma and her matchmaking exploits.

It is easy to tell why this story lends itself to modern day teen drama. It reads just like an episode (or season) of many of the modern day gossip/relationship based TV shows (don't ask me how I know this #guiltypleasure). And, going into this book knowing that the movie Clueless is based on this, I started noticing the similarities right away.

If you like the classics of Brontë (any of the sisters) and Austin, or you like the gossipy dramas on TV, you can't go wrong with Emma.

matchmaking has never been so fucking boring

emma is one of the most unique and unforgettable female characters in classic literature sorry but I love her her enjoyment of gossiping and matchmaking is very real. one thing I love about jane austen is she can write the most heartfelt declaration of love “if I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more” while also making sure women know their worth “if a woman doubts as to whether she should accept a man or not, she certainly ought to refuse him”

The world doesn’t need additional words from me piled on the heap of commentary about Jane Austen, so suffice it here just to say this is a marvellous novel, and a triumph with respect to voice, style, and narratorial complexity. In its relatively uneventful first and second volumes, it seems as if it will be principally focused on style and voice, and on character psychology rather than anything like narrative intrigue (which is fine—plenty that’s worthwhile and absorbing is even closer to plotless than these first two thirds), but in its third volume Emma also emerges as an extraordinary achievement in intricate, satisfying plotting and the philosophical pleasures of a kind of narrative meta-commentary. It can be hard to read books like these whose influence is so widespread that their innovations aren’t any longer seen as properly extraordinary. But this is like reading Flaubert: so much of what we expect out of modern fiction begins here that it starts to seem like something left behind by a pranking time traveller. I’m (almost totally) sure that’s not the reason Austen is one for the ages—but she’s certainly an all-timer for plenty of other good reasons.