While reading Pride and Prejudice I caught myself stumbling on words and phrases and getting lost in the language. The way Jane Austen writes is high class but drawn out. It seems like she aims to exhausts as much description and wordiness as possible at times. I personally do not dislike the story, but I am not fond of the way its is written, it is just not my style. While reading, I marked some times where this wordiness and excessive writing was portrayed, here is an example: "Her teeth are tolerable, but not out of the common way; and as for her eyes, which have sometimes been called so fine, I never could perceive any thing extraordinary in them." (Austen 184). I guess my main take-away or question from this observation is, do we think this story would hold the same value had it been written in a more simple/short style, or does the style of the writing have too much to do with the importance the novel has gained over the years since it was published? Thursday, March 26, 2020
Pish Posh, etc
While reading Pride and Prejudice I caught myself stumbling on words and phrases and getting lost in the language. The way Jane Austen writes is high class but drawn out. It seems like she aims to exhausts as much description and wordiness as possible at times. I personally do not dislike the story, but I am not fond of the way its is written, it is just not my style. While reading, I marked some times where this wordiness and excessive writing was portrayed, here is an example: "Her teeth are tolerable, but not out of the common way; and as for her eyes, which have sometimes been called so fine, I never could perceive any thing extraordinary in them." (Austen 184). I guess my main take-away or question from this observation is, do we think this story would hold the same value had it been written in a more simple/short style, or does the style of the writing have too much to do with the importance the novel has gained over the years since it was published? 
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have to agree with your sentiments about the style of writing. It is unbelievably frustrating to read in my opinion. I do think we need to consider the times when we consider the stylistic choices Austen made. Even if we consider the leisure activities in the box, they had more time for reading. Most of us were not reading this out of pleasure but on some sort of a time frame, so the overly detailed text is even more frustrating. I also believe it makes it hard to follow. Still it also gives the book a sense of class as you mentioned which I personally believe contributes to why it is noted as a "classic" today. There is definitely a status in reading the text.
ReplyDeleteIt's always interesting when we go back and read something from a different time period - her style is actually pretty chatty and informal compared to other authors of her day! But of course history and cultural context can so quickly change how language feels, right?
ReplyDeleteI have always loved Austen's prose because of the way it conveys actual people talking. The characters have different ways of expressing themselves and that tells us a lot about who they are. The way that Caroline Bingley speaks (as you point out above) comes across as ridiculous and unnecessarily fussy when you compare it to other characters, who are more straightforward.
For this reason, I think Austen's prose lends itself incredibly well to being read aloud. As we see in the novel, it's common for a family to sit together and have one person read to the others. And as Adam mentions in his comment, leisure time is structured in a very different way for Austen's original readers than for us. I always like to imagine that people who read this book aloud did the voices to go along with the dialogue, much like a good audiobook reader does today.
I agree completely about her writing style; I literally got a headache every time I sat down to read this novel, and it was extremely exhausting. With that being said, I do think the novel would not be the same without her writing style. I don't think she could convey the intricacies of human nature without her particular writing style. While i don't think her novel would lose 'value' if the style was different, I definitely think it would not reach the masses in the same way that it does now. I think the way she writes mirrors thought processes and that is why they are sometimes confusing or convoluted. While it is not really my cup of tea, I recognize and respect its merits.
ReplyDeleteIs this your first experience with Austen? The first time I read an Austen novel, I couldn't have agreed more with you. I constantly re-read chapters and had to look up some points on Spark Notes; however, the more you read Austen the more accustom you become to her writing and you realize, as Abbey and Dr. MB point out, that it's actually closer to the way we naturally think. I also recommend listening along as you read. Hearing the word's spoke (especially longer monologues or speeches) makes everything a bit clearer.
ReplyDeleteI struggled with the language as well. It did help, though, to think about how the language adds to the tone of the novel. So much of this story is based on people's opinions of each other, and the (in our opinion) overly flowery language adds to the gossipy effect. Imagine the characters sitting around drinking tea, wearing monocles, or doing whatever other British Things you can think of, and trashing one another's teeth as "tolerable". The language here may add to the triviality of their gossip.
ReplyDeleteI definitely struggled with the language, too, so you're not alone on that front! I think of it kind of in the same way that I think about Shakespeare--we can read a No Fear Shakespeare translation of it, but does that translation give us the same effect as reading the original? Certainly not. Following this logic, I think had Austen's novel been written in a more easily-read style, then it wouldn't have had the same effect. That being said, it would have definitely made for a more pleasurable reading expereince!
ReplyDeleteAs Abby kind of mentioned above, this post reminded of a conversation our class had when we read Romeo & Juliet--while we compared the original play to modern remakes of the text, do readers have a less "authentic" experience only seeing/reading a modern version, and not being exposed to the original/traditional language of the original text? I think there is definitely value to being exposed to language we're not comfortable with or as accustomed to with certain original texts--it makes us better readers, and better thinkers. It can definitely be uncomfortable at first, but as other people have said above, it definitely gets easier the more that you read Austen, or for the example, Shakespeare. And as many have said above, I love Austen's writing! It's so poetic while also chatty.
ReplyDeletePayton,
ReplyDeleteI think its interesting that you mention how we think. So often we as people take for granted how quickly we process and we very infrequently think about meta-cognition. Therefore I think it becomes frustrating to read something that is so similar to how we think. So detailed in what is being said. It is an overload. We have a tendency now to just want the reader to get to the point and its not always that way in classic novels. I can own my own faults here for sure.
I also struggled with the wordiness of the book, but I then reverted to reading along with an Audible book! It actually helped me get through some of the longer passages. I still found the entire narrative extremely complex! Between trying to figure out who each character was, where settings were located, and who is related to who, I became so confused at times! Thank goodness for Wikipedia!
ReplyDelete