#Brides of Pemberley

[ardentlyinlovedarcy]

[princesssarisa]

Pride and Prejudice adaptations with a modern setting – e.g. The Lizzie Bennet Diaries, Bride and Prejudice, Pride and Prejudice: A Latter-Day Comedy, Fire Island – seem to almost always save Lydia from Wickham in the end. Either Darcy stops the elopement, or the elopement is replaced with an online sex tape which is taken down. Wickham is either arrested or at least left behind permanently, and Lydia learns a lesson and gets a happy ending. Neither she nor the other characters have to live with her mistake for the rest of their lives the way they do in the original.

I've just been rereading several people's posts on this subject, and about Lydia's portrayal in general, which show some very different opinions about it all.

Of course, part of the issue is that in a modern setting, it's much easier to save Lydia. In most of the modern Western world, a teenage girl running off with a 30-year-old man would result in the man being arrested, not in their needing to get married to save both the girl's reputation and her whole family's. And even if they did get married, divorce is an option.

But I suspect the bigger issue is that Austen's original ending is considered cruel, unfair, and a product of outdated morals.

People view Austen as punishing Lydia for being a "bad girl" by leaving her trapped in a loveless marriage to a worthless man and always living on the edge of poverty, when by modern standards, she's guilty only of teenage foolishness. They accuse Austen of "making an example" of Lydia to teach young female readers how to behave, in contrast to the virtuous, well-behaved Elizabeth and Jane with their happy endings, and they call it anti-feminist.

Not only is Lydia's marriage bleak for her, it slightly mars Elizabeth and Darcy's happy ending too, as well as Jane and Bingley's. It means Wickham will always be a part of their lives, and for Lydia's sake, they're forced to treat him as a family member. Darcy is forced to financially assist his worst enemy – though at least he draws the line by not letting Wickham visit Pemberley – and even Jane and Bingley's patience is worn thin by the long periods of time Wickham and Lydia stay with them.

By modern standards of romantic comedy, this isn't normal. The heroine, the hero, and all their family and friends are expected to live entirely "happily ever after," while the antagonist – especially if he's a womanizer who preys on teenage girls – is expected to be punished, then never heard from again.

But of course, Austen didn't write simple romantic comedy. Her work was social commentary. Lydia's ending arguably isn't a punishment, but simply the only way her story could end without disgracing her or killing her off, and it arguably it serves less to condemn Lydia herself than to condemn the society that lets men like Wickham get away with preying on naïve young girls and forces their victims to marry them or else be disgraced forever. It also condemns the type of bad parenting that leads to Lydia's mistake. Lydia is the product of her upbringing, after all: between Mrs. Bennet's spoiling and Mr. Bennet's neglect, she's never had any decent parental guidance or protection. And our heroines, Elizabeth and Jane, both pity their sister and regret that marriage to Wickham is the only way to save her honor. No sympathetic character ever says she deserves it.

The fact that Lydia is trapped in a bad marriage, and that Wickham does go unpunished and the other characters will always have to tolerate him and even cater to him for Lydia's sake, arguably drives home Austen's social criticism. The fact that it adds bittersweetness to the otherwise blissfully happy ending is arguably part of the point. If we change it just to create a happier ending, or in the name of "feminism" and "justice for Lydia," doesn't that dilute the message?

Then there's the fact that by the standards of Austen's era, Lydia's ending is remarkably happy. She doesn't die, or end up abandoned and forced into sex work or a life of seclusion. Nor, despite Mr. Collins' recommendation, does her family cut ties with her: the ending reveals that Jane and Elizabeth regularly welcome her into their homes, and Elizabeth "frequently" sends her money. Other authors would have punished her much more severely.

But of course, that was a different time. While in Austen's original context, Lydia's fate might seem fairly happy and lenient, by modern standards it seems more cruel. And since most of the modern retellings that change her fate are screen adaptations, not books, maybe the difference in art form further justifies the change. I'm thinking of that post I recently reblogged, which argued that some of Austen's more "merciless" plot points would seem darker on film than in print, and therefore tend to be softened in adaptations.

So how should a modernized adaptation handle Lydia's ending? Is it better and more progressive when they save her from Wickham? Or for the sake of social commentary and retaining Austen's sharp edges, should the writers follow the book and find a way (not necessarily marriage to Wickham, but some modern equivalent) for her mistake to leave her trapped in a less-than-happy life, and add a slight bittersweet note to the other characters' endings too?

I think a case can be made for both choices and I'd like to know other people's viewpoints.

[bethanydelleman]

Wow, I really enjoyed your Darcy list. Can you do a Lizzy list too?

If I must. Darcy List.

To be honest, I think Elizabeth has been portrayed a bit better than Mr. Darcy. I find that different adaptations play up different but often not incorrect aspects of her character. However, unsurprisingly, my favourite is:

#1. Celia Bannerman, 1967 BBC miniseries. The thing that totally sold me on her is when she says the line about understanding Bingley perfectly, she does this very cute wink. I think they really captured the playfullness of her manners. She was also 23 years old, which is very close to Elizabeth's real age.

#2. Elizabeth Garvie, 1980 BBC miniseries. This one also struck my with Elizabeth's joyfulness. Also, she's less hot than Jane, which is very important to me.

#3. Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Bride & Prejudice film. I love the way she's not afraid of Darcy, the way she supports Jane, she also seems joyful, and her embarrassment with her family is also good. I think they might play up a kind of activist rage that isn't so much in line with Book!Elizabeth but it makes sense in a modern context.

#4. Greer Garson in the 1940 film. The way the women float in this adaptation! We do not walk like that anymore! This adaptation played up the witty banter aspect and Elizabeth's ability to make very subtle insults. She was also so graceful.

#5. Jennifer Ehle, 1995 BBC miniseries. I find her too serious for the role to be honest, but I think they capture her thoughtfulness well. I don't get that "easy playfullness" from her which is, in my opinion, Elizabeth's most captivating feature.

#6. Keira Knightley 2005 film. This adaptation also plays up Elizabeth's rage, though she does have some fun light moments, but the biggest problem is her styling as a tomboy. This is not accurate at all. Also, Elizabeth Bennet would never wander randomly through Pemberley and peek through doorways, she felt so awkward being there in the first place!

Honourable Mention: Lily James in Pride & Prejudice & Zombies, look, whatever else you want to say about this Elizabeth, she should be able to sword fight Darcy during his horrible proposal. I thank the movie that gave us that.

(The Lost in Austen idiot doesn't count as Elizabeth, so she's not included.)

[lands-of-fantasy]

Pride and Prejudice

Classic and loose adaptions from 1940, 1967, 1980, 1995, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2016, 2018, 2019

The second of Jane Austen’s novels, first published in 1813, is the most often adapted, inspiring various different takes on it. The ones pictures above are detailed below:

Pride and Prejudice (1940 Film)

This black and white film departs from the original novel in some (or should I say many?) points

Written by Aldous Huxley and Jane Murfin, adapted from the stage adaptation by Helen Jerome; directed by Robert Z. Leonard

Starring Greer Garson as Elizabeth Bennet, Laurence Olivier as Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy, Edward Ashley Cooper as George Wickham, Maureen O'Sullivan as Jane Bennet, Bruce Lester as Mr. Charles Bingley, Ann Rutherford as Lydia Bennet, Melville Cooper as Mr. William Collins, among others.

Pride and Prejudice (1967 Miniseries)

6 episodes x 24min. Black and White footage Written by Nemone Lethbridge, directed by Joan Craft

Starring Celia Bannerman as Elizabeth Bennet, Lewis Fiander as Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy, Richard Hampton as George Wickham, Polly Adams as Jane Bennet, David Savile as Mr. Charles Bingley, Lucy Fleming as Lydia Bennet, Julian Curry as Mr. William Collins, among others.

Pride and Prejudice (1980 Miniseries)

5 episodes x 54 min Written by Fay Weldon, directed by Cyril Coke

Starring Elizabeth Garvie as Elizabeth Bennet, David Rintoul as Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy, Peter Settelen as George Wickham, Sabina Franklyn as Jane Bennet, Osmund Bullock as Mr. Charles Bingley, Natalie Ogle as Lydia Bennet, Malcolm Rennie as Mr. William Collins, among others.

Pride and Prejudice (1995 Miniseries)

6 episodes x 54 min Written by Andrew Davies, directed by Simon Langton

Starring Jennifer Ehle as Elizabeth Bennet, Colin Firth as Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy, Adrian Lukis as George Wickham, Susannah Harker as Jane Bennet, Crispin Bonham-Carter as Mr. Charles Bingley, Julia Sawalha as Lydia Bennet, David Bamber as Mr. William Collins, among others.

Pride and Prejudice (2003 Indie Film)

Loose adaption set in modern Utah, USA Written by Anne Black, Jason Faller, Katherine Swigert; directed by Andrew Black

Starring Kam Heskin as Elizabeth Bennet, Orlando Seale as Will Darcy, Henry Maguire as Jack Wickham, Lucila Sola as Jane Vasquez, Ben Gourley as Charles Bingley, Kelly Stables as Lydia Meryton, Hubbel Palmer as William Collins, among others.

Bride and Prejudice (2004 Film)

Bollywood-style Musical. Loose adaption set in modern India and England. Written by Paul Mayeda Berges, Gurinder Chadha; directed by Gurinder Chadha

Starring Aishwarya Rai as Lalita Bakshi (Elizabeth), Martin Henderson as William "Will" Darcy,  Daniel Gillies as Johnny Wickham, Namrata Shirodkar as Jaya Bakshi (Jane), Naveen Andrews as Mr Balraj Uppal (Bingley), Peeya Rai Chowdhary as Lakhi Bakshi (Lydia), Nitin Ganatra as Kohli Saab (Collins), among others.

Pride and Prejudice (2005 Film)

Written by Deborah Moggach, directed by Joe Wright

Starring Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet, Matthew Macfadyen as Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy, Rupert Friend as George Wickham, Rosamund Pike as Jane Bennet, Simon Woods as Mr. Charles Bingley, Jena Malone as Lydia Bennet, Claudie Blakley as Charlotte Lucas, Tom Hollander as Mr. Collins, Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennet, Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Bourgh, among others.

The Lizzie Bennet Diaries (2012–13 Webseries)

160 episodes x 2-8 min, available on Youtube Loose adaption set in modern US, told in a vlog format

Created by Hank Green and Bernie Su, from Pemberley Digital

Starring Ashley Clements as Elizabeth Bennet, Daniel Vincent Gordh as William Darcy, Wes Aderhold as George Wickham, Laura Spencer as Jane Bennet, Christopher Sean as Bing Lee, Mary Kate Wiles as Lydia Bennet, Julia Cho as Charlotte Lu, Maxwell Glick as Ricky Collins, among others.

Lizzie’s videos amount to 100 episodes + 10 Q&A, but shorter series enrich the story by offering other characters’ perspectives, most notably Lydia’s (and also Georgiana’s). A playlist at Pemberley Digital’s Youtube channel features them all in order.

The series has also been adapted into a book, The Secret Diary of Lizzie Bennet (2014), and spawned a sequel novel, The Epic Adventures of Lydia Bennet (2015).

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016 Film)

Loose adaption inspired by the 2009 novel of the same name by Seth Grahame-Smith, which adds zombies to Austen’s original story. The movie makes alterations from the zombie book as well.

Written and directed by Burr Steers

Starring Lily James as Elizabeth Bennet, Sam Riley as Colonel Fitzwilliam Darcy, Jack Huston as George Wickham, Bella Heathcote as Jane Bennet, Douglas Booth as Mr. Charles Bingley, Ellie Bamber as Lydia Bennet, Matt Smith as Parson William Collins, among others.

Orgulho e Paixão (Pride and Passion) (2018 Telenovela)

Brazilian telenovela in Brazilian-Portuguese

162 episodes x 30-40min (original version) Loose adaption set in 1910s São Paulo state, Brazil

Created by Marcos Bernstein, directed by Fred Mayrink

Starring Nathalia Dill as Elisabeta Benetido, Thiago Lacerda as Sr. Darcy Williamson, Pâmela Tomé as Jane Benedito, Maurício Destri as Camilo Bittencourt (Bingley), Bruna Giphao as Lídia Benedito, Bruno Gissoni as Diogo Uirapuru (Wickham/Willoughby), among others.

The story takes inspiration from all 6 of Austen’s major novels (plus Lady Susan), but mostly from Pride and Prejudice. Others stars include Chandelly Braz as Mariana Benedito (Marianne Dashwood) and Anajú Dorigon as Cecília Benedito (Catherine Morland).

Features 100 episodes in the International cut. The telenovela has been broadcast in other countries and languages (such as Spanish) but as far as I know, not in English.

Pride and Prejudice: Atlanta (2019 TV Film)

Loose adaption set in modern Atlanta, USA. All-black cast. Written by Tracy McMillan, directed by Rhonda Baraka

Starring Tiffany Hines as Elizabeth Bennet, Juan Antonio as Will Darcy, Raney Branch as Jane Bennet, Brad James as Charles Bingley, Reginae Carter as Lydia Bennet, Carl Anthony Payne as Rev. Collins, among others.

*****

Personal favorites: 2005, then 1995. But also: The Lizzie Bennet Diaries, Orgulho e Paixão

I also enjoyed Atlanta and, while it’s been a while since I’ve seen Bride and Prejudice, it’s got Indian musical numbers so c’mon, one gotta watch it.

Back to the closer adaptions, despite its age, 1980 is also good! 1940 is...very different, but fun in its own way.

In fact, while I find some of these versions weaker, I could find enjoyment in all of them - but maybe that’s cause I’m a sucker for P&P.

[pennyngram]

Every single Darcy ever.

1938, Andrew Osborn

1940, Lord Olivier

1952, Peter Cushing

1958, Alan Badel

1967, Lewis Fiander

1980, David Rintoul

1995, Colin Firth

2003, Orlando Seale (the one with the Mormons)

2004, Martin Henderson (Bride and Prejudice)

2005, Matthew MacFadyen

2008, Elliot Cowan (Lost in Austen)

2012, Daniel Vincent Gordh (The Lizzie Bennet Diaries)

2013, Matthew Rhys (Death comes to Pemberley)

2016, Sam Riley (Pride and Prejudice and Zombies)

2016, Chase Connor (Before the Fall, not featured as I wasn't able to find a decent picture)

2016 & 2018, Ryan Paevey (Unleashing Mr Darcy & Marrying Mr Darcy, not featured as I remembered these movies only after creating the infographic ops)

2022, Conrad Ricamora (Fire Island)

I'm not counting Bridget Jones since it doesn't market itself as having ties to P&P

[firthbetterorfirthworse]

Pride & Prejudice Master List

I've been watching all Pride & Prejudice screen adaptations in (mostly) chronological order, so here's a list of those posts.

I mostly pulled from a random IMDb list, but that list ended around 2016. Let me know if I missed any that you think should count!

Pride & Prejudice (1938)

Pride & Prejudice (1939)

Pride & Prejudice (1940) bonus

Pride & Prejudice (1952)

Pride & Prejudice (1957) - Italian

Pride & Prejudice (1958)

De Vier Dochtors Bennet (1961)

Pride & Prejudice (1967)

Pride & Prejudice (1980)

Pride & Prejudice (1995) In my defense, this is the intersection of both of my 2024 obsessions so posting got away from me just a little tiny bit

Furst Impressions - Wishbone (1995)

Pride & Extreme Prejudice (1999) (It's just a commercial but it's so unhinged I'm gonna include it here)

Bridget Jones Diary (2001)

Pride & Prejudice (2003)

Bride & Prejudice (2004)

Bridget Jones Edge of Reason (2004)

Pride & Prejudice (2005)

The Jane Austen Book Club (2007)

Lost in Austen (2008) Pt 1, Pt 2, Pt 3

A Modern Pride & Prejudice (2011)

The Lizzie Bennet Diaries (2012) Pt 1, Pt 2, Pt 3, Pt 4, bonus

Death Comes to Pemberley (2013)

Austenland (2013)

Pride & Prejudice (2014) - Kdrama, not affiliated

Pride & Prejudice (2014)

Prejudice & Pride (2014)

Darcy's Tales (2015)

Pride & Prejudice & Zombies (2016)

Bridget Jones' Baby (2016)

Before the Fall (2016)

Unleashing Mr. Darcy (2016)

Marrying Mr Darcy (2018)

Paging Mr Darcy (2018)

Pride, Prejudice, & Mistletoe (2018)

Christmas at Pemberley Manor (2018)

Becoming Ms. Bennet (2019)

Pride and Prejudice Atlanta (2019)

Pride & Prejudice Musical (2020)

Fire Island (2022)

Getting Dressed: Pride & Prejudice (2022)

An American in Austen (2024)

[dionysiaproductions]

I'm working on a Halloween drabble series for the month of October!! I picked Frankenstein because I wanted to do a bride-o-ween series, but I realized when I started working on it that it's also a regency era novel. So there will be a weird historical connection between The Bride of Frankenstein is My Monster-In-Law and Today at Pemberley.

[thatscarletflycatcher]

I asked you about Darcy, now it is fair to ask you about Lizzy:

[lothiriel84]

The Serenity of Her Countenance

Mr and Mrs Bingley visit Pemberley. The Darcys do their utmost to restore the happiness of a most beloved sister.

A Pride and Prejudice ficlet. Aroace spectrum!Darcy, alloromantic asexual!Jane.

Jane knew well enough they couldn’t defer their visit without causing her sister to worry; still, she held very little hope of said sister failing to notice the unprecedented awkwardness between husband and wife, regardless of their combined efforts to act as if nothing of importance had happened.

Therefore, she was not at all surprised when Elizabeth promptly stole her away with the excuse of showing her the newly refurbished nursery, and all but demanded to be told the exact nature of their disagreement.

“Oh, Lizzy,” she cried out, her hands instinctively cradling her belly full of child. “I have been such a fool, and I don’t have the slightest idea how to go about fixing my mistake.”

“Whatever it is, I am sure it cannot be all that bad,” her sister gently encouraged her, guiding her to sit on the nearest chair. “And I can scarcely credit you, of all people, for sharing all the blame in this matter.”

“You don’t know what I did!” she shook her head vehemently, feeling her agitation increasing by the moment. “Charles has been nothing but the kindest, most devoted of husbands, and it was unpardonable of me to give him reason to regret his choice of bride.”

Her sister frowned a little, searching her gaze for a long moment. “Jane, last time we visited you, even Fitzwilliam could not help but remark upon how much in love with one another you both looked. What could possibly have happened to change that in such a short period of time?”

Jane hid her face in her hands, and it took her a considerable effort to continue speaking. “I never meant to hurt Charles’ feelings, I swear it. Only, I didn’t consider how my words would affect him, and now he thinks me indifferent, when there is no one in this world I love more than him.”

She only realised she had started crying when she felt her sister’s arms around her, and she went willingly, burying her face into her shoulder. “Oh, Lizzy, if only I could make him understand!”

“Jane, dearest, I feel sure it is all a misunderstanding,” Elizabeth attempted to console her, her hand patting ineffectually at her back. “Though I wish you would tell me exactly what happened to cause such misery to you and your husband alike.”

Accepting her sister’s handkerchief, she went about drying her cheeks, and did her utmost to compose herself. “I’m sorry, I ought to have started from the beginning. You see, Charles was away on business for a fortnight last month, and upon his return – well, you know how it is – and I don’t know what possessed him to ask, afterwards, but I didn’t think too much of it, and I told him the truth – that is, I wouldn’t mind being prevented from sharing a bed with him, so long as I still had his company and his love, and – oh, Lizzy, I had never seen him so devastated in all the months of our acquaintance! He could scarcely bring himself to do so much as touch my hand after that, and there seems to be nothing I can say or do to put his mind to rest. You have no idea how much I wish those words unsaid, and I have been regretting my thoughtlessness ever since.”

Her sister pressed her hands to hers, and appeared to be struggling with her thoughts for a considerable amount of time. “Jane, is he – that is to say, did Charles ever – do something to you that you weren’t comfortable with?”

“No! How could you even entertain such a thought, Lizzie? He’s the gentlest of men, and always so considerate to my every wish.”

“But you do not enjoy his bed?”

Jane opened her mouth to reply, considered, then shook her head somewhat helplessly. “I do not not enjoy it, if that’s what you’re asking.”

“It is not, as I feel sure you know well enough.”

A rather uncomfortable thought started dawning on her, and while under any other circumstance she would have considered it the height of impropriety to even dare to think about asking, she could not see how to go about mending the rift between herself and her dearest husband without seeking some clarity on the entire issue in the first place. “Lizzy, I know it is not at all seemly, but – oh, I hardly know how to put it – I was led to believe that it was only natural for a lady to be reluctant when it came to fulfilling her marital duties, and that it was the husband’s lot to derive all the pleasure there was to be found in the marriage bed.”

“Oh, my dear Jane, let me assure you, that couldn’t be farther from the truth. I don’t wish to be indelicate, but – well, Charles might be inexperienced in such matters, but with the proper encouragement, I’m sure he will be more than willing to learn how best to please you.”

Jane felt herself blushing quite spectacularly, and the heat in the room felt almost intolerable all of a sudden. “I didn’t mean to say – oh, believe me, Lizzy, I do not wish for that at all. I am perfectly happy for him to seek my bed as often as he pleases, but if he were to stop altogether, I cannot see myself regretting his decision. I had no idea that other ladies could be – eager, I suppose, for their husband’s attentions; otherwise, I would have been more mindful of Charles’ expectations on the matter. My – indifference in regard to our marital duties has nothing to do with the love I feel for him, and I wish I knew how to let him see as much.”

Wrung out from the necessity to lay out her innermost feelings in such a way, she welcomed the comfort of her beloved sister’s embrace, and let herself be reassured that all manner of things would be well, eventually. Charles did love her, after all.

.

.

Fitzwilliam Darcy paused just outside the door to the library, and took a fortifying breath to steady his nerves. If he found himself unable to deny his wife anything as a rule, that was doubly true now that she was with child; still, he could not help but wish that his services weren’t needed on such a delicate matter, and one regarding both his closest friend and his wife’s most beloved sister on top of that.

Still, he was scarcely a man to put off an unpleasant duty, and he consciously straightened his posture as he stepped in and closed the door behind him.

“Mrs Bingley,” he acknowledged his sister-in-law with a slight bow, and moved to take the seat opposite hers. If anything, she looked even more acutely uncomfortable than he felt, which prompted him to overcome the worst of his embarrassment at broaching such a private topic with her. “I assure you I have no intention of further meddling with your – and my friend’s – happiness, but as Elizabeth appears to think I could be of some assistance in your current plight, I could hardly deny her the attempt.”

“Mr Darcy, I am so sorry that you felt compelled to – I told Lizzy this was anything but appropriate, but she simply wouldn’t listen. And I daresay Charles would be mortified if ever he were to learn of us discussing – oh, it doesn’t even bear thinking.”

“As a matter of fact, Mrs Bingley, he was the one who sought my confidence as soon as you and Elizabeth left the room the other day,” he gently interrupted her, his hand rising in a placating gesture. “And for all that I would never break his confidence, my wife seems to believe me the most qualified to offer you some – advice, on the matter.”

From what he could tell, his sister-in-law was all but praying the floor would open up and swallow her whole. He couldn’t say his own feelings at the moment were all that dissimilar from hers, either.

“Please, call me Jane,” she stated at length, her voice barely above a whisper. “We are brother and sister, after all. And I can assure I am not so much in want of advice as I am in need of a friend who might reassure Charles as to the depth of my love and devotion for him.”

“I will address you by your Christian name on the condition that you do the same for me. As for reassuring my friend of your continued devotion, I already attempted as much, but I’m inclined to agree with Elizabeth – he might better be persuaded if we were to clear up the exact nature of your own feelings first.”

He saw her blanch at that, and was powerless to do anything but lend her his arm as she struggled to her feet. “You still believe me indifferent to your friend?”

“Not at all, Mrs Bingley – Jane. I was merely attempting to indicate the way you feel about certain – um, activities – which are par for the course once one enters the married state.”

He felt sure that the high colour of his cheeks matched hers by now, yet did his best not to shrink away from her honest gaze. “Oh, I will never forgive myself for allowing my sister to put you in such an uncomfortable position, Sir. What she believed to achieve, I honestly have no idea.”

“I feel like I do,” he forced himself to reply, and was relieved when she allowed him to help her back to her chair. “You see, Elizabeth thinks you and I might have something in common, and from what little she was willing to share of your confidences, I feel inclined to believe her to be correct, on the whole.”

“Whatever can you mean, Mr Darcy,” she  paused, bit her lip, then added, “Fitzwilliam,” almost as an afterthought.

“I haven’t told anyone except Elizabeth – my family probably surmised something close to it, but most of them were wide off the mark – but the truth of the matter is, I had never experienced any desire for closeness or any sort of intimacy with a woman before meeting your sister. Nor have I experienced it ever since outside our marriage bed – if you pardon my indelicacy – and while I wish to flatter myself of it being a reflection of the rectitude of my character, I am given to believe that is not at all common among the gentlemen of my acquaintance.”

Jane was looking intently at him now, and seemed to be considering his words to the best of her understanding. “Do you mean to say you were never in love, or that you merely did not – oh, how is one to put it without offending – wish for their, well, favours, if I may?”

“Both. I had never once fancied myself in love before meeting your sister, and I found it most surprising when I first realised that not only I loved her, but I also – let me be frank for a moment here – desired her, as a man desires a woman.”

His sister-in-law sighed, and shook her head somewhat ruefully. “I am very grateful for your confidences, Mr – Fitzwilliam, I mean to say – but it pains me to admit that while I had in fact fancied myself in love once, long before meeting Charles, I never did experience the sort of – feelings that my sister assures me a wife is wont to feel in regard to her husband. And while I merely put it down to the difference of sensibilities between the sexes, I am now led to believe it to be a deficiency of my own character.”

“Mrs – Jane. Would you agree with my cousins’ belief that I was somewhat deficient for finding the mere thought of lying with a woman a most uncomfortable prospect?”

“Not at all, Sir!” she exclaimed. “I think it does you credit that you only wish to lie with your own wife, and I would still say that regardless of whether or not said wife was my own sister.”

“As I said, it is hardly to my own credit when I have never felt any desire to do otherwise. I would say there is much more honour for a man to resist any untoward desire he might feel for other women, out of love and respect for his own bride.”

Jane appeared lost in thought for a moment, her right hand resting protectively on her rounded stomach. “And where is the honour in a wife being remiss in the desire she ought to feel for her husband?”

“I wouldn’t say that has anything to do with honour. So long as both parties agree on,” he faltered momentarily, had to all but force himself to press on, “the degree of intimacy they are both comfortable with, and they are perhaps willing to meet each other halfway, I cannot see any reasonable obstacle to them having a long and happy marriage.”

“Oh, if only Charles could bring himself to see it this way!” she couldn’t seem to stop herself from crying out.

“Should you give me your permission, Madam, I shall endeavour to explain all of this to my friend presently,” he offered, prompted by a genuine desire to be of service to her – not only in deference to his wife’s affections for a most beloved sister, but as he was starting to see her as the closest thing to a kindred spirit he had ever had the good fortune of encountering.

His sister-in-law hesitated, her gaze suddenly drawn to a spot of the floor close to her feet. “I could never ask that of you, Sir.”

“You need not to. I am offering of my own free will. After all, I am still to pay my penance for the unpardonable way I separated you from my friend at the beginning of your acquaintance. This might go a small way towards atoning for my past sins.”

“Do not say so, Fitzwilliam! Didn’t Charles and I repeatedly tell you you’re forgiven, and you need not dwell upon it anymore?”

He smiled, and shook his head. “Nevertheless. Do I have your permission, Jane?”

“Only if you think you could bear it – I wouldn’t wish you to feel compelled to disclose your private feelings all over again, and before your friend of all people, just for my sake.”

“It is no trouble at all, Madam,” he promptly assured her, and stood to help her from her chair. His sister-in-law turned her once-more-serene gaze on him, and let him escort her back to the music room where both his and her sister were eagerly waiting for the benefit of her company.   

[kamreadsandrecs]

Title: The Late Mrs. Willoughby (Mr. Darcy & Miss Tilney #2) Author: Claudia Gray Genre/s: historical, mystery, Jane Austen pastiche Content/Trigger Warning/s: murder Summary (from author's website): The suspenseful sequel to The Murder of Mr. Wickham, which sees Jonathan Darcy and Juliet Tilney reunited, and with another mystery to solve: the dreadful poisoning of the scoundrel Willoughby’s new wife. Catherine and Henry Tilney of Northanger Abbey are not entirely pleased to be sending their eligible young daughter Juliet out into the world again: the last house party she attended, at the home of the Knightleys, involved a murder—which Juliet helped solve. Particularly concerning is that she intends to visit her new friend Marianne Brandon, who’s returned home to Devonshire shrouded in fresh scandal—made more potent by the news that her former suitor, the rakish Mr. Willoughby, intends to take up residence at his local estate with his new bride. Elizabeth and Fitzwilliam Darcy of Pemberley are thrilled that their eldest son, Jonathan—who, like his father, has not always been the most socially adept—has been invited to stay with his former schoolmate, John Willoughby. Jonathan himself is decidedly less taken with the notion of having to spend extended time under the roof of his old bully, but that all changes when he finds himself reunited with his fellow amateur sleuth, the radiant Miss Tilney. And when shortly thereafter, Willoughby’s new wife—whom he married for her fortune—dies horribly at the party meant to welcome her to town. With rumors flying and Marianne—known to be both unstable and previously jilted by the dead woman’s newly made widower—under increased suspicion, Jonathan and Juliet must team up once more to uncover the murderer. But as they collect clues and close in on suspects, eerie incidents suggest that the killer may strike again, and that the pair are in far graver danger than they or their families could imagine. Buy Here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-late-mrs-willoughby-claudia-gray/18822240 Spoiler-Free Review: And yet another delight of a novel in this series! The mystery is a little less structured now because it's happening within the context of a small town instead of just one manor house, but it just opens up more opportunities for twists, and this book DEFINITELY takes advantage of that. The way rumors were used, in particular, was interesting: they opened up alternate ways of viewing the suspects, but also breathed life into the town, showed its dynamics: who was loyal to whom, and who was connected to whom. It also made the true culprit a bit less obvious, which is always fun. While the mystery at the heart of the plot is pretty fun, I was a lot more focused on the character dynamics this go-round. Marianne and Brandon were a delight to read about, especially after what happened in the previous novel, and it was just as lovely to see Elinor (Ferrars now, given that she's married), and to see the rest of the Dashwood clan. It was nice to read how Elinor and Marianne get on after their respective marriages, as well as to see how well Elinor and Edward have settled into married life. And of course, there's Jonathan Darcy and Juliet Tilney. As a second murder brings them together again, it becomes immensely clear to the reader that these two have Feelings for each other - but keep on being unable to express it. This can get a bit frustrating in a good way, especially because Jonathan and Juliet keep on making entirely mistaken assumptions about what the other is thinking or feeling. It's true they can read each other very well, often able to discern each other's intent from just a glance, but they are most definitely NOT mind-readers. Please note that all of this is a GOOD thing: I like me a slow-burn romance, and the kind of misunderstandings these two have about each other are pretty much par for the course of a Regency novel - and, given that Jonathan is neurodivergent, make sense.

Given how this book ended, of course, I'm fairly sure that there's going to be at least one more in the series, because the protagonists need to get together - and this time, hopefully, in matrimony.

Rating: five glasses of port

[listening-to-free-audiobooks]

A Forever Kind of Love: A Pride & Prejudice Novella

The best-laid plans of mice and men did NOT have a wife!

In this sweet Regency variation of Jane Austen’s Pride & Prejudice, Fitzwilliam Darcy’s eldest son sets out to seek a bride. Alexander Fitzwilliam Darcy is the spitting image of his father—in looks, temperament, and his inability to impress a woman not particularly wanting to be impressed.

Darcy, against the loving advice of his intelligent wife, decides to help his son along. In the process, the forever kind of love our dear couple has for each other is displayed as tenderness meets stubbornness and affection meets determination. Come along for the bumpy ride between Darcy & Elizabeth as love blooms at Pemberley—or does it?

A Forever Kind of Love is appropriate for all listeners.

[theadmiringbog]

I focused on work, motherhood, leadership, intimacy, and citizenship and suggested that adopting some socialist policies could more effectively promote women’s autonomy and happiness in the twenty-first century.

--

skeptics and haters have always scoffed at visions of a better world, especially if they might benefit women.

--

the “status quo bias.” People prefer things to stay the same so they don’t have to take responsibility for decisions that might potentially change things for the worse.

--

Patrilineality denotes a set of social customs that confer primacy on the father’s family line.

--

Patrilineality is why fathers still “give the bride away” to the bridegroom during the traditional Western wedding ceremony, and it’s why about 70 percent of American women in 2015 and 90 percent of British women in 2016 still took their husband’s name after tying the knot.

--

Patrilocality means that a new bride must leave her family and move into her husband’s household, usually with or near his family (think of Elizabeth Bennet moving from Longbourn to Pemberley in Pride and Prejudice).

--

our deeper history of patrilocality means that men are expected to be breadwinners because a patrilocal culture assumes that the father must be the head of the new household and therefore primarily responsible for its provisioning.

--

and passionate friendships,

--

the social psychologist Eli Finkel challenges the idea of the “all-or-nothing marriage,” highlighting the importance of having “other significant others” in our lives.

--

“Imagination is more important than knowledge,” said Albert Einstein in 1931. “For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution.”47

--

Instead of paying a premium for privacy, what would happen if we chose to reorganize our lives to maximize our social connectedness?

--

co-living keeps rents low by increasing shared livable space. Bedrooms and sometimes small bathrooms remain private, but living rooms and dining rooms are communal. Building one large kitchen costs less than building dozens of individual kitchens and these savings get (at least theoretically) passed on to residents.

--

in Paris, a group of twenty older women created a néo-béguinage called the Maison des Babayagas,

--

In general, American cohousing often retains a more explicit commitment to autonomous, owner-occupied households, with fewer obligations for collective labor, distinguishing itself from the much derided idea of “communes” or “cults” that populate the American imagination of cooperative living.77 As of 2017, more than a hundred and fifty cohousing communities flourished across the United States, many of them like the community at Two Echo in Maine, where people built their own homes on a property that they purchased in common with their neighbors.

--

Not everything was rosy; other kids who grew up in American cohousing communities complained about the lack of privacy, the constant gossip, as well as of the racial and economic homogeneity.

--

Imagine the advantage if those we lived near agreed beforehand on a set of protocols to handle any future conflicts. In a cohousing community, residents move in knowing the rules and come with a commitment to a more collective ideal of living together.

--

Some might find it easier to buy a shared house or property and live together with a group of close friends, Golden Girls style. In

--

pairs. A growing number of women now (anonymously) admit that they regret having kids, despite the social outrage they face for challenging pervasive stereotypes about motherhood.

--

By making early childcare a socially provided good, we can ensure that children born into all families—no matter what their economic situation—enjoy the education and the emotional attention necessary to build a more harmonious society.

--

In my earlier chapter on housing, I looked specifically at various utopian visions for cohabitation with nonconsanguineous others and how living together with larger groups of people can bind us in quasi-familial types of relationships, or what some people call “chosen families.”

--

While many of us freely join our finances and intermingle our possessions upon marriage or in order to demonstrate our status as domestic partners, this practice only rarely occurs with our friends, neighbors, classmates, or colleagues with whom we maintain clear boundaries.

--

If a wealthy firstborn son died without leaving a male heir, his money and properties automatically transferred to his younger brother, and thereby regularly to the Church. This led the historian Laura Betzig to propose that part of the reason the Catholic Church strictly enforced monogamous marriage was to further its own financial interests.

--

non-monogamy still

--

For millennia, women and girls—who are not the source of the problem—have been cut off from their kin networks; bartered, traded, or sold; rendered dependent on their fathers and husbands by legal codes and religious injunctions depriving them of opportunities to support themselves; and prevented from exercising basic control over their own bodies, so that one class of men can hoard resources that might otherwise be shared. Once these underlying dynamics are exposed, it is only reasonable to begin wondering whether there might be a better way of doing things. This is why utopians have long considered the nuclear family an important site for challenging the political and economic structures that produce status and resource hierarchies in the first place.

--

we have to ask ourselves some uncomfortable questions: Are we still perpetuating the monogamous nuclear family out of the illusion that biparental care is optimal, out of the fear of potential male violence or the perceived need for male resources, or because our religious traditions and state institutions define it as “normal”? Are we clinging to an outdated model of the family that served specific economic purposes because we are on autopilot? Or because we feel uncomfortable deviating from society’s expectations of how we should or shouldn’t arrange our most intimate lives? And what would a better kind of family look like anyway?

--

August Bebel, who also viewed the monogamous nuclear family as a prison that trapped women by making them economically dependent on fathers, husbands, or sons.

--

Rather than treating significant others as the sole source of affection, validation, emotional support, and sexual satisfaction, Kollontai hoped that young Soviets would collectively evolve beyond the need for socially imposed monogamy once they lived in a more equitable and cooperative society. Kollontai recognized the ubiquity of jealousy and possessiveness that people felt when they fell in love. Kollontai also accepted that infidelity, abandonment, and unrequited love caused people great emotional distress, and that passionate romantic love could drive people to do outrageous things. But she believed that people would be less wounded by betrayal or rejection if they received affection and support from a wider network of colleagues and friends.

--

Kollontai wanted the Soviet state to promote a culture of robust platonic relationships. “Friendship is a more sociable emotion than sexual love,” Kollontai once said. “You can have many friends at a time, because there are different strings which vibrate in contact with different people.”

--

In terms of our mating practices, we have a wide variety of potential models to choose from, models that all have long histories: including celibacy, serial monogamy, “complex marriage,” platonic pair bonding, polygamy, polyamory, and open non-monogamy.

consanguine and nonconsanguineous adults.

--

An increasing number of single parents are also co-parenting with non-romantic partners, a trend often referred to as “platonic parenting.” Like platonic marriages, platonic parenting can involve two or more adults who agree to legally commit to raise a child together. Co-parents

--

Daniela Cutas argues that platonic co-parenting or multi-parenting might actually be better for children because adults will tend to choose their potential co-parents more rationally than they choose their romantic partners.

--

Militant Optimism

--

“militant optimism,” a social and psychological commitment to imagining a better world and striving to make it real. Rather than thinking that historical processes lie beyond our control—that history happens to us—Bloch’s three-volume rumination on the politics of hope proposes that people actively produce history every day through the collective actions of those living through it as an ever-contingent present.

--

In a similar way to how we collectively believe in paper money, many of us also embrace the fiction that the way we organize our private lives is the only way available to us. Even if we understand in the abstract about the pressures parents face, the strain that child-rearing places on romantic relationships, the high divorce rate, the prevalence of child abuse and intimate partner violence, and the very real possibilities of our own or our partner’s long-term unemployment, disability, or death, we replicate the domestic form that makes us the most vulnerable to these problems because it is convenient and because that’s what everyone expects of us.

--

what matters most is taking the journey and considering the kinds of changes that might make our domestic lives less isolated, more flexible, and more ecologically sustainable: things like universal childcare, cooperative living, ethical education for self-reliance and critical thinking, shared property, and family expansionism. I’m not saying it’s easy to change these things, but the path to change lies in the continued struggle. As the Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano once explained: “Utopia is on the horizon. I move two steps closer; it moves two steps further away. I walk another ten steps and the horizon runs ten steps further away. As much as I may walk, I’ll never reach it. So what’s the point of utopia? The point is this: to keep walking.”

--

In terms of the architecture of our minds, hope is to the future what memory is to the past. If you have a good memory, you have the ability to remember specific details of events that occurred long ago.

--

Hope, on the other hand, is the mental ability to imagine the future; to project forward a perception of what might come to pass and to orient yourself to those contingent possibilities.

--

C. R. Snyder, one of the leading psychologists who did research in this area, proposed that “hope is defined as the perceived capability to derive pathways to desired goals, and motivate oneself via agency thinking to use those pathways.”

--

people who are good at hoping are those who can set clear goals, can ponder multiple ways of attaining those goals, and muster the willpower to pursue them in the face of obstacles or the specter of disappointment.

--

“hope training” can combat depression, anxiety, and stress.12 Most hope therapy originates from C. R. Snyder’s work and includes a variety of mental exercises such as hope mapping, guided daydreaming, hope journaling, and other techniques that allow people to clearly visualize specific goals (both great and small), to consider potential obstacles (both internal and external), and then unleash their imaginations to conjure up multiple pathways to how those obstacles might be overcome, not so different from the blue sky thinking that scientists do when faced with an intractable problem. One

--

Hope differs from optimism because the latter is just a belief that everything will work out well, whereas hope is an active thought process that affirms our ability to influence the future course our lives or societies will take.

--

This brings us to hope as an emotional state that exists on a spectrum from hopefulness to hopelessness. For Ernst Bloch, the opposites of hope are fear and anxiety.

--

How many people in unhappy relationships stay because they are afraid of being alone? The fear of not meeting someone else overrides the possibility of meeting someone who might make them happier. Similarly, hopes for changing the world for the better get clobbered by fears of potentially making it worse.

--

In a world of real or imagined scarcity, we arrange our domestic lives to protect ourselves against an uncertain future, hoarding as many resources and privileges as possible. In a society with less precarity and with resources more equitably distributed, we will worry less about hustling to make sure we have a bigger slice of the pie than those around us.

--

If we lived in wider networks of people who shared their resources, we would become less precarious. Both processes are interdependent. It may be that we will geoengineer our way out of the climate crisis, and that one day we will all share unlimited, free solar power; enjoy universal basic incomes funded by our collective ownership of the robots and algorithms that will do most necessary labor; and live in real democratic societies where “material needs no longer exist,” but none of that is possible without fundamentally rethinking the basis upon which we organize our intimate lives to free us from selfish individualism.41

--

This doesn’t mean that we will lose our individualism. It does mean that the ways we mark ourselves as different and interesting will be decoupled from how much those markers increase our value on competitive labor or marriage markets. Personal branding will be a thing of the past.

--

Each one of us, right now, has the power to start building a different world, beginning with our own families and communities. There are countless things you can do to cultivate change in your daily life as it is. If you are in a monogamous pair, try to spend more time with your non-couple friends and make sure your partner does the same. Nurture all sorts of lateral relationships by finding novel ways to share with your neighbors and colleagues. Get back in touch with old friends. Chat with people at the grocery store. Daydream.

--

If you have kids, let them spend more time with their grandparents, godparents, aunts, uncles, and family friends. Try to swap more childcare with other parents and create long-term parenting pods. Consider different housing arrangements or join a book club or some form of continuing adult education. And if you have the freedom and opportunity to do so, why not shake things up entirely? Start a free store or join an upcycling collective. Uproot and resettle in an intentional community or ecovillage. Explore different forms of cooperative living and working. Adopt a mononym. Try to meet new people way outside of your established circle of acquaintances. Make strangers into kin.

--

We must imagine the future that we want, to think of it as a concrete goal, and consider the different pathways available to realize that future, no matter how outlandish or impossible this future might seem to us now.

--

As the Dutch historian Rutger Bregman observes, embracing a positive vision for the future usually means “weathering a storm of ridicule. You’ll be called naive. Obtuse. Any weakness in your reasoning will be mercilessly exposed. Basically, it’s easier to be a cynic.”45 That is why we need to hope together: out loud, with each other, every day.

[winniecouturebg]

Compatible Wedding Gowns for a True Cancer Bride

Cancers are well-known for being fiercely protective of the people they love. This wedding dress SANTORINI is filled with brave and ethereal beauty when you wear it on your most momentous day, much like the bride that wears it. This elegant A-line shape with its flowery lace appliqués and removable cape sleeves is full of character and indeed evokes love.

Known for their emotional connections, Cancerians feel safe when they are with their loved ones. With PEMBERLEY's breathtaking lace sheath design, flowery lace appliques, sheer illusion bodice, and detachable draped lace straps, you may flaunt your true confidence on your wedding day and your loved ones will be by your side!

 Cancers have widespread admiration due to their loyalty and kindness. Which is why we highly recommend PRISCA for your wedding day. From its sweetheart neckline and tiered flowing skirt, this gown exudes loyalty and care when worn.

 Cancers adore looking good, thus GIUSTINA is a perfect match! Romantic and feminine, this gown features a sheer beaded lace bodice with lace cascading over the long, dramatic pleated tulle skirt and charming detachable off the shoulder tulle peasant sleeves. The moment is all yours with GIUSTINA, own it!

 Cancers are known for their daring and sentimental side. Meet DIONNE, a chic Mikado mermaid design with a sweetheart neckline and lovely tiered skirt. This gown is a charming mix of daring, bold, and sentimental.

To our dear Cancer brides, we celebrate you and welcome to visit our bridal boutique in atlanta, these styles and so many others at Winnie Couture Bridal.

 We at Winnie Couture will love you to the Moon and back.

[chocolatequeennk]

12 + 42 ; )

12. What book do you passionately hate?

Currently? The Rose novelisation.

I honestly don’t usually read novels I don’t like long enough for that to turn into hatred. If I’m not enjoying a book, I put it down. 

This one... I kept hoping would get better.

42. What is your favourite trilogy?

Ummmm... Let’s see. LOTR is not a trilogy, it’s one book. 

Okay, I scrolled through my Kindle library, and I can tell you three things:

1) I own way too many books I haven’t read yet.

2) My favourite trilogy is Girl of Fire and Thorns by Rae Carson.

3) I’ve written a trilogy. The Brides of Pemberley is a trilogy based on Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice.

Send me bookish asks!