The free website to help new writers to develop, and to help talented writers get noticed and published Books
   
Jane Austen - Mansfield Park << Return To Main Site

 Welcome to the YouWriteOn Forum

**2012 News Random House & Orion Editors to continue free reviews of YouWriteOn Top Ten Writers each month  - publishers of many of the world's bestselling authors 

YouWriteOn Authors' Hall of Fame Congratulations to our many authors achieving sales and signings successes through  Waterstones, WHSmith and others! View Hall of Fame
     

YouWriteOn Message Board > Literary Forums > NEW - YWO Members Recommend Help Search Recent Posts
Jane Austen - Mansfield Park
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Last : 6 > Start New Topic Reply To Topic
DaiBach
 29 Sep 2011, 16:20 #131127 Reply To Post
I read this a long time ago and thought it was great, but now I have started to re-read it, after several years on YWO, and I realise how bad it it.

Unsteady POV, huge clusters of 'Information Dump', unwieldy dialogue, masses of telling not showing.

Even bad spelling.

Altogether a disaster.

It would get slaughtered on YWO.

And I used to like it, thank God I have learned to regard it differently.

Next week, George Orwell
Joe 90
 29 Sep 2011, 19:47 #131146 Reply To Post
Quote: DaiBach, Thursday, 29 Sep 2011 16:20
I read this a long time ago and thought it was great, but now I have started to re-read it, after several years on YWO, and I realise how bad it it.

Unsteady POV, huge clusters of 'Information Dump', unwieldy dialogue, masses of telling not showing.

Even bad spelling.

Altogether a disaster.

It would get slaughtered on YWO.

And I used to like it, thank God I have learned to regard it differently.

Next week, George Orwell


He's or well and good, or so I've heard. 1984 was a damp squib though, not a telescreen in sight. But now there's facebook....
my website
Peridote
 29 Sep 2011, 23:31 #131163 Reply To Post
Quote: DaiBach, Thursday, 29 Sep 2011 16:20
I read this a long time ago and thought it was great, but now I have started to re-read it, after several years on YWO, and I realise how bad it it.

Unsteady POV, huge clusters of 'Information Dump', unwieldy dialogue, masses of telling not showing.

Even bad spelling.

Altogether a disaster.

It would get slaughtered on YWO.

And I used to like it, thank God I have learned to regard it differently.

Next week, George Orwell


Undoubtedly it is the pretty cover art work which has kept it in print since 1814.



Don't worry if the world's coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia ...
Lin Lee Liu
 30 Sep 2011, 08:13 #131178 Reply To Post
Hang on hang on hang on... Today it would be marketed as 'women's fiction' so it's likely you'd never have read it. That'd be the main problem.

Aside from that,

'Unsteady point of view'?

Can you give us some examples?
Athene
 30 Sep 2011, 09:08 #131185 Reply To Post
The voice of the narrator is very strong throughout, but apart from the explanatory opening section I don't remember a single scene that doesn't have Fanny in it, and that isn't seen from her pov.

I suppose these days the book would jump straight in with Fanny arriving at Mansfield, and then all the stuff about the sisters and their very different life-paths would be inserted later in dribs and drabs. I prefer the existing structure, but I doubt it would get past a modern editor.

Btw, nice to see you back, LLL.
This post was last edited by Athene, 30 Sep 2011, 09:09


Scias te fortasse Romanum esse si animal convivialissimum arbitreris esse caprum
(Henricus Barbatus)


my website
Joe 90
 30 Sep 2011, 10:59 #131189 Reply To Post
Quote: Athene, Friday, 30 Sep 2011 09:08
The voice of the narrator is very strong throughout, but apart from the explanatory opening section I don't remember a single scene that doesn't have Fanny in it, and that isn't seen from her pov.

I suppose these days the book would jump straight in with Fanny arriving at Mansfield, and then all the stuff about the sisters and their very different life-paths would be inserted later in dribs and drabs. I prefer the existing structure, but I doubt it would get past a modern editor.

Btw, nice to see you back, LLL.


Just seen the new film of Jane Eyre. Worth watching though not up to the standard of the longer version done by the Beeb.

But here's a case in point. This masterpiece simply could not be written today. Rochester would have had Bertha sedated and she would have been discovered by a Sun reporter and told her sorry tale. Jane would have thrown scruples to the winds and shacked up with Rochester for a few years before divorcing him on the grounds of mental cruelty.
I much prefer the dilemma posed by the morality of the day.
my website
DaiBach
 30 Sep 2011, 14:18 #131213 Reply To Post
Quote: Athene, Friday, 30 Sep 2011 09:08
The voice of the narrator is very strong throughout, but apart from the explanatory opening section I don't remember a single scene that doesn't have Fanny in it, and that isn't seen from her pov.

I suppose these days the book would jump straight in with Fanny arriving at Mansfield, and then all the stuff about the sisters and their very different life-paths would be inserted later in dribs and drabs. I prefer the existing structure, but I doubt it would get past a modern editor.

Btw, nice to see you back, LLL.


And nice to be back

However, and to the point, yes the very first chapter consists entirely of conversation between Sir Thomas, Mrs. Norris and Lady Thomas.

That's OK I guess, although there is no single POV.

But in Chapter 8, there is a long discussion between members of the family as to whether Fanny should go on the 'trip' with them. It ends when we read :- 'Fanny's gratitude when she heard the plan, was in fact much greater then her pleasure.' (What a wonderful line!)


Then the discussion about the theatre when John Yates turns up goes on for three pages before we are told that Fanny comes to hear of it the following evening.

But the point of this thread is not to denigrate Jane Austen, whose writing I love, but to point out that there are some great novels which do not follow the (relatively new?) 'rules' of creative writing.

Which, to be honest, get up my nose a bit
Joe 90
 30 Sep 2011, 15:09 #131221 Reply To Post
Quote: DaiBach, Friday, 30 Sep 2011 14:18
Quote: Athene, Friday, 30 Sep 2011 09:08
The voice of the narrator is very strong throughout, but apart from the explanatory opening section I don't remember a single scene that doesn't have Fanny in it, and that isn't seen from her pov.

I suppose these days the book would jump straight in with Fanny arriving at Mansfield, and then all the stuff about the sisters and their very different life-paths would be inserted later in dribs and drabs. I prefer the existing structure, but I doubt it would get past a modern editor.

Btw, nice to see you back, LLL.


And nice to be back

However, and to the point, yes the very first chapter consists entirely of conversation between Sir Thomas, Mrs. Norris and Lady Thomas.

That's OK I guess, although there is no single POV.

But in Chapter 8, there is a long discussion between members of the family as to whether Fanny should go on the 'trip' with them. It ends when we read :- 'Fanny's gratitude when she heard the plan, was in fact much greater then her pleasure.' (What a wonderful line!)


Then the discussion about the theatre when John Yates turns up goes on for three pages before we are told that Fanny comes to hear of it the following evening.

But the point of this thread is not to denigrate Jane Austen, whose writing I love, but to point out that there are some great novels which do not follow the (relatively new?) 'rules' of creative writing.

Which, to be honest, get up my nose a bit


How many of these rules are designed for the 'attention deficient' generation? Unless you hook their meagre interest immediately and then clobber their consciousness with regular body blows of 'drama' then they dismiss the writing as 'Booooring' and go back to Facebook.
my website
Lin Lee Liu
 01 Oct 2011, 00:01 #131249 Reply To Post
Wish I could 'like' posts. I must've spent too much time on Facebook.

I thought I detected irony, David. But with this being the internet, I wasn't 100 percent sure.

There's a tendency among certain members of writing groups to assume that any sort of shifting POV is an incomprehensible mess, when it isn't. That can easily lead to a writing group culture in which writers who make use of multiple viewpoints get told in every second review that they're head hopping.

That can get annoying.

Edit: I think you're being a little harsh on the younger generation, Joe. I don't mind generalisations - if they're true - but I don't actually think that's true. The younger generation are no more attention deficient than older generations.
This post was last edited by Lin Lee Liu, 01 Oct 2011, 00:26
Palache
 01 Oct 2011, 03:30 #131251 Reply To Post
If ACDC is a genital - oops, I mean genetic - thing, then 3L is right. If it's a social algorithm, then Joe may be right (or wrong, depending on which algorithm you use). How Jayne Mansfield's Austin Park fits into the equation I'm not sure, having never read it.
This post was last edited by Palache, 01 Oct 2011, 03:33
my website
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Last : 6 > Add To My Topic Watch List Start New Topic Reply To Topic
Server Time: 22 May 2012, 21:56

Powered by Zarr Forums

5 Database Read(s) - 0.250 seconds

 

Adverts provided by Google and not endorsed by YouWriteOn.com.