I’ve just finished Pride and Prejudice

Submitted by illuminatijaguar t3_z7vh1z in books

I love this story, but I can now safely say I prefer the movie to the book. Austen’s writing (this may be according to her time) is the epitome of “telling” instead of “showing”, most of the times she recites a list of adjectives as characterization, and even though I can’t accuse her of not demonstrating what she claims a character to be (I had a lot of fun reading all of Mr Collins’ silly letters and pieces of dialogue), the lack of description is really detrimental to such a good story. Some story beats lacked the drama of revelation due to this, which I believe the movie to have shown in its full potential.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_iy9bjwq wrote

Concepts like "telling not showing" , "story beats" and "good story" are pretty modern and really don't hold up well when dealing with literary classics from previous centuries.

42

illuminatijaguar OP t1_iyalhci wrote

well, considering I’m judging an old book according to my modern judgement, that’s how I’m able to describe how I felt reading it! I understand most of the strangeness comes from the book being from a different period, but still, do you understand what I mean?

−22

kicia-kocia t1_iy9qdu6 wrote

There is so much more in the book than in the movies. The movies focus on the romance but most of them miss the subtle satire that is to me one of the best parts of Austen's books.

31

kqtey t1_iy8zug6 wrote

Can’t relate, I was super impressed with Austen’s writing style, once I got used to it. But I do adore the 2005 movie, so I can’t blame you there.

26

boxer_dogs_dance t1_iy8kbnl wrote

Any book from that time period has long descriptions. The only visual art they had was painting and sculpture. Readers had time on their hands.

Glad you enjoyed the story.

22

illuminatijaguar OP t1_iy8p6rn wrote

my problem isn’t with excessive descriptions, I wish she had spent more time showing the readers through dialogue and character building how Elizabeth is spirited and smart, how Jane is easy-going and benevolent, how Darcy is serious but also shy and socially awkward, how Bingley is animated and good-humored, instead of simply (mostly) telling us those things. I wish she described more how Elizabeth physically felt, how her blood boiled at Darcy’s proposal etc, how people and places looked and such

−19

poetrynati t1_iycvmmb wrote

She does all of that, but through show not tell and much more appropriately (aka discreetly) for the time period than the movie does. Remember she isn't a modern YA author.

If you want to check a version that's more book accurate and see more clearly what I'm talking about, the BBC adaptation is a great place to start.

9

illuminatijaguar OP t1_iyetw5v wrote

I’ve watched the BBC series and I quite liked it, but thank you for the recommendation

0

ill_chameleon t1_iyaqrs6 wrote

The movie was a cute romance story for me, but the book was a whole profile of the 19th century english society, it had so many nuances and subtleties regarding human interaction and hierarchy. And the way Austen presents that is so well done, exactly because she "tells" and doesn't "show". She passes the norms and customs to you subtly and conditions your mind to perceive things from the perspective of the people living in that era.

20

jaisaiquai t1_iy8j99v wrote

There's a couple of movies, which are you talking about? Also books don't fulfill the same role as movies in human imagination, so "telling" and "showing" are naturally delivered differently.

15

illuminatijaguar OP t1_iy8mqf2 wrote

The 2005 Joe Wright movie

1

Previous_Injury_8664 t1_iy9uxog wrote

Oh gosh. If you think the 2005 version is amazing, it’s no wonder you didn’t like the book.

16

illuminatijaguar OP t1_iyak3fd wrote

oh, I really do like it! and I didn’t say I disliked the book, I liked it a lot. but I live for dramatic moments and when it comes to that, the movie is more appealing to my tastes

1

mzjolynecujoh t1_iyasp1r wrote

i think a big appeal of jane austen is that they aren't only to tell a story, it is her author's voice, bc they're also social commentary.

like in one of ur comments u said "I wish she had spent more time showing the readers through dialogue and character building [...] I wish she described more how Elizabeth physically felt [...] how people and places looked and such." but like that might be better and more descriptive for telling a story, but i feel like austen isn't just telling a story, but she's kind of analyzing the behavior of the characters.

like pride and prejudice is a great story and a great romance. but one of the main goals of pride and prejudice isn't just like telling that story. it's discussing what makes a good marriage, the different kinds of relationships, social class, everything. ellie dashwood has extremely good analyses of her work, this is an amazing vid i watched recently that really made me think abt p&p.

i think a really good example of this style is northanger abbey. like in this book she totally gets off of the plot and just talks about stuff, like how novels and female authors deserve respect (bc at the time fiction novels were mostly read by women and seen as stupid). and the characters are kind of vehicles of this, by having the main lead as this female quixote type character obsessed w gothic horror novels, who uses them to navigate her life, and the male lead as the voice of reason, also a big fan of novels but in a rational way.

like in the same way as austen very clearly uses the cast to discuss novels in northanger, she does the same with the characters in p&p. you get all these different types of marriages w/ the bennets, darcy and elizabeth, collins and charlotte, jane and bingley, wickham and lydia, and she like analyzes them and everything. i can't explain it but the ellie dashwood vid i linked rlly explains it super well!

14

bridgebetweenh t1_iybumku wrote

It's hard for me to imagine judging a book by a sublime author like Jane Austen as to whether it "tells" more than it "shows". I think you should consider not opening a great book again until you are really ready to start from scratch, without judgement.

7

illuminatijaguar OP t1_iyeutyu wrote

oh no, I intend on opening (and giving my opinion on) many more great books in my future, thank you very much!

1

bofh000 t1_iyc7hso wrote

Then stick to 21st century snappy plot driven stories. The 2005 movie isn’t even the best adaptation.

7

Sensitive_Tension_23 t1_iyc0m4n wrote

I first read Pride and Prejudice when I was in high school and did not like it at all. Despite being "advanced" in reading and vocabulary, I did not understand the social mores of that time period, nor did I get all the amazing humour in Austen's writing, until I read it again in my early 20s. Now I consider it one of the most clever novels ever written.

3

illuminatijaguar OP t1_iyev2ji wrote

a similar thing happened to me, I truly didn’t get it at all when I read it at 16, and my experience reading it now was vastly superior

2

alexadesigner t1_iy8w36g wrote

The same thing happened to me. But I love that story :)

1