Rating: 
Summary: Don't read this if you want the book to be a surprise***
Review: real-time Jane Austen style. scary. I think a lot of other people have put more eloquently every little thing that is wrong and right about the novel but I would just like to add that to me there is a lesson to learn about Fanny Price; and she was a disappointment to me. I have to admit, I wanted her to fall in love with Crawford. I'm sorry if I let out the big endings but being Edmund's distant second best is not thrilling to me, not even lukewarm. I was hoping that in all of his confidings to her there would be a brush of the hand or starring into the eyes, you know, some moment of early unknown passion, SOMETHING to assert why he chooses her. But the cruel fact remains that good girl and good boy marry and what is so interesting about that?? This book is most likely a social metaphor meant by Austen but once Henry Crawford's gone, so is the book's draw. At one point in picking up Fanny and her sister at PTMTH he holds her to his heart and I'm thinking "big moment, forgetting themselves, a spark will be released, but Austen falls short. This book is too slow for me, and too long to be so slow. If you are writing a paper fo rthis book, it won't be difficult for you have a wealth of topics to grab onto, but pleasure reading is nice just once and never EVER again.
Rating: 
Summary: My 4rth Austen book...disappointed....
Review: This is by far the worst of Jane Austen's novels. I haven't yet finished Persuasions, but I already know which of her books I like least. Mansfield is long, drawn-out, with a one-sided love story that is wrapped up in the last chapter, and a pathetic, wimpy, milksop of a heroine with a doofus name: Fanny. I don't mind passive heroines; they are the ones that are calm, pure and very loveable. For example, Jane Eyre (one of my favorite classical characters) is a lot like Fanny in some respects; she is religious, with plain features and a quiet, somewhat passive nature. However, she is passionate about what she thinks is right or wrong, and never fears to speak her mind. She does what's right because she wants to and believes in what she does, and you never get the impression from her, as you do from Fanny, that she does the good thing simply because she's too weak to do otherwise. Fanny, though it's true she is the most morally correct character in the story, cannot even stand up for her own principles. Any opposition brings her either to tears or the point of fainting.
Making a passive character that is still strong and admirable is a hard thing to do. Unfortunately, it either isn't one of Austen's capabilities or she just didn't wish to make Fanny admirable in that way. If she was trying to make a point I the novel, it didn't come through to me; you come only to despise Fanny's whining self-pity that plays throughout the novel. A lot of the story isn't even told through Fanny's point of view, but through other characters. It seems even Austen was bored of her own character and didn't have the interest to write the book through her eyes.
Don't let the reviews that say, "Though adultery isn't a common Austen theme..." fool you, because the book has nothing to do with adultery. A married woman, in the last chapter, is mentioned to have run off with a man. Her husband divorces her. It doesn't really have much of an effect on the household or Fanny, but merely adds the last plot twist. I read the whole book waiting for the shocking adulterous act to be committed and nothing ever really happened. DO NOT buy this book if you are just starting to read Jane Austen's novels. It will turn you off immediately. Please start with either Pride and Prejudice or Northanger Abbey as they are the shorter, funnier and lighter stories. And much more romantic. For any Austen or Classics fan in general, buy the book if you want, but don't expect to get much enjoyment from it.
Rating: 
Summary: Censorious heroine and plot, less fun than usual
Review: It's hard to review this book in the way that I prefer to: subjectively and unselfconsciously. I don't want to be particularly conscious of the fact that I'll be reviewing a book while I'm reading it - the reading should be for its own sake. Moreover since I'm not writing under any commission or compunction I should be unconcerned about reactions. I don't have the time for lots of rewrites, and if most of the point of the exercise is personal pleasure it's absurd if I'm writing as a chore.
However ... I can't shake the knowledge of approaching Austen as part of the canon of English Literature. Her sacrosanct words have been praised and pored over unreservedly for centuries and her fans are legion (a sister of mine could virtually site you chapter and verse of any sentence you read her). Offering an opinion of anything she's written places you in the sights of a whole genre - as opposed to, say, mentioning that you didn't enjoy the last Clancy thriller. It's like that old line about responding to a da Vinci: it's not the painting that's being judged.
So with all that baggage, onto the review.
It was refreshing to spend some time in a book so different to most others I read. Once you've got your 19th century language `sea-legs' (something that generally settles after a few chapters) the novelty is no longer an obstacle to enjoyment - quite the opposite. Moreover the structure of the book felt different: Austen has no problem having major characters suddenly virtually disappear, as with the Miss Bertrams. Also there's the usual pleasure of stepping outside the assumed values of your own century - there's nothing that quite highlights your own assumptions as reading those contrary ones of different times.
That being said, this book is quite didactic, stiflingly so in the first half where I was growing weary of the sheer volume of gratification I was supposed to gather by the constant belabouring of Mrs Norris' abundant shortcomings - or rather of her single, if major, shortcoming. I wasn't at all clear on whether we were meant to wryly smile at (the now unfortunately named) Fanny's naïve blanket moral condemnations of just about everyone except Edmund, or rather to similarly look down upon the characters with the assured condescension of the author herself. Did Austen so blithely judge, rank and dismiss those of her own acquaintance with the regal arrogance she did with these fictional characters? The right way to interact with society it appears is to almost instantly decide the quality of the character of the person you meet, and to not be swayed from your initial assessment: Fanny's severe and almost universal moral condemnations are utterly vindicated at the novel's unambiguous conclusion.
I suppose I found the ubiquitous censure uncomfortable: Wodehouse could poke fun at languid, self-indulgent aristocrats without requiring our contempt. To relish this Austen I feel you have to relish your smug superiority over most everyone.
Yeah, I suppose it's the smugness that dilutes the pleasure of this highly developed morality tale. Along the way we get an ably narrated window on two lifestyles of the early 19th Century. For all of Austen's theme that virtue overrides wealth (and, indeed, that wealth and indolence are a great danger for the young), class is massive: probably the first thing you need to know about a person, even before you know their character, is what they're worth. Have we changed all that much since then? I suspect so: at least now it's somewhat bad form to inquire about and discuss the relative incomes of your friends and acquaintances - here it's the very first thing that must be established.
Interesting to have as your heroine a shy, relatively inarticulate girl whose only assets are her high moral standards and personal integrity (oh, and she looks OK - but by no means the belle). Others fall by the wayside who show much greater sparkle, wit, verve, passion, good humour, talent, beauty or wealth. Austen really hammers home the condemnation of shallow worldliness, the nominalism that plays at virtue as merely an aspect of social point scoring. That being said, there's no room for Scarlet Letter development of personality or awareness of hypocrisy: you make one mistake of a publicly sexual nature and you are rightly tagged for life; you maintain your marriage - on whatever terms - and you're essentially OK.
The conclusion of the novel felt pretty sudden, and I was surprised, along with the rest of the characters, to find that young uncompromising Fanny was right to dismiss the charming Mr Crawford all along (always an actor). It's a fairy tale for good girls, and she gets her man, despite all circumstances and the fact that she never had the pride to seriously hope for him. Holier-than-thou squares are more commonly a target for fiction, even if, as in other Austens, they may only be affectionately pilloried. Here we don't get to smirk at her unconscious jealousy of Miss Crawford: when it came down to it, Edmund was being a fool after all.
I did love the single sentence where Austen pops in personally, as authors were far more prone to do back then:
"Let other pens dwell on guilt an misery. I quit such odious subjects as soon as I can, impatient to restore everybody, not greatly in fault themselves, to tolerable comfort, and to have done with the rest."
It's like your little DVD extra, where the author explains their approach. Not to be overused, likewise I liked Lodge popping in just for a few words in 'How Far Can You Go'.
So, an interesting and non-formulaic read, but without a lot of the humour and wit that established Austen's popularity. Austen herself said of it:
"I hope on the credit of P. & P. [it] will sell well, tho' not half so entertaining."
My sister tells me that it's not the Austen she'd recommend anyone start with.
Rating: 
Summary: An enjoyable read
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed reading Jane Austen's Mansfield Park. While it may start out a bit slow, after the first few chapters the rest of the novel is captivating. It is hard to put down. It is the story of an interesting love triangle that takes place in Britain during the early nineteenth century. At this time in society, wealth, or the appearance of wealth, controlled people's lives. If you were not of high social background, you tried to appear that you were. This is the case of the main female character, Fanny. After being sent by her mother to live with her wealthy uncle, Fanny learns the ways of sophisticated, well-learned people. She becomes accustomed to their ways and is accepted, though not always treated equally. She and her cousin, Edmund, become very close until separated by an attractive family that joins the Mansfield Park community. As Fanny grows she becomes loved and even more beautiful. She is soon the object of many men's affections. However, Fanny is torn between living in the wealthy Mansfield Park and returning to her poor home in Portsmouth, which she thoroughly misses. Where does Fanny choose to live? Who does she choose as her husband? You must read this great novel to find out.
If you liked this book, you might try some of Austen's other novels: Sense and Sensibility, Emma, Pride and Prejudice...
Rating: 
Summary: Better In Comparison
Review: As soon as I finished reading Mansfield Park, I quickly had to see the movie, hoping that it would be as great as other Jane Austen movie adaptations. I was wrong! None of it compares to this wonderful book.I agree that Fanny Price is not as dynamic or bubbly or as engaging as other Austen heroines, but I do not think her weak or uninteresting. Why should all Austen heroines be the same? She has a quiet inner strenth and sensibility that plays off well to her vain aquaintances. All of her years at Mansfield Park only one person, Edmund, valued her for her true personality and qualities. Day after day she was made to feel inferior, unworthy and ungrateful by her relations, yet she was none of these things. I loved when other characters started to appreciate Fanny's good qualities and give her the praise she was due. The other character developments in this novel are wonderful, and I especially like the parts where Henry Crawford is changing and professing his love to Fanny. Although he is vain and has his faults, I agree with Edmund that it improves Crawford's character by the mere fact that he fell in love with Fanny of all people. I partly wished that Crawford would fall more into Fanny's good opinion and I regret his ruin in the end. If you are a fan of this book, do not watch the movie adaptation! Of course there is not enough time for all the great details in the book and it is terrible and completely distorts the story of Mansfield Park . Fanny is a completely different person in the movie, and it has made me appreciate the real Fanny in the novel even more. Don't bother with it because if you are a fan of the book the movie will make you angry with the liberties it took.
|
