Pride and Prejudice, and Sense and Sensibility

[RJbibliophil]

Now, I have a copy of Pride and Prejudice, and a copy of Sense and Sensibility. I have read neither. I plan to read both. Which do you recommend reading first? :lol:

[ShoutGrace]

I chose to read S&S first because for some reason I thought that it came first chronologically . . . though sometimes it's hard to tell from Austen, if I remember correctly.

I was heartily disappointed in the ending of S&S, however.

[Kaltrina]

I recommend you read S&S first, because it's softer and slower regarding the events happening... and then read P&P because there is a lot of strong character there, it's more challenging, and it's definitely better to read it after S&S... :) Hope I helped a bit...

[ThruMyEyer73]

I've only read Pride and Prejudice but i recomend that first because the letters P&P come before S&S, thats the best reason i could think of :-D

[frankchurchill]

i'd recommend reading S&S first; so that you won't be disapointed when you've read P&P after.

[dramasnot6]

I think S&S is sweeter then P&P, although i actually prefer P&P. S&S will ease you into the Austen style better.

[Newcomer]

I would not recommend starting Austen with Sense and Sensibility. While it is chronologically her first published novel, it and Persuasion are the most unlike the following novels and most difficult of all. Start with Mansfield Park, then Pride and prejudice but leave Sense and Sensibility for last, when you have some understanding of her style and themes.
It is complex because we no longer have the innate understanding of the two terms of the title and in the novel Austen juxtaposes these two concepts in the characters of the two sisters and works the physiological implications of the their changing understanding of sense and of sensibility as leading to marriage, the quintessential Austen theme. However sense and of sensibility are not developed as exclusive traits of each sister but rather meld and change as their characters are sketched. Thematically Sense and Sensibility has themes, such as of loss of first love, loss of virginity and abandonment, emotionalism in it's most lurid type, themes that Austen attenuates or abandons in her latter works. The landscape of Sense and Sensibility is unlike anything in her latter works and I think that you have to know the latter novels to better appreciate Sense and Sensibility.

[Sir Bartholomew]

it's obvious that jane austen didn't know what she was doing in Sense and Sensibility. the book is plain dull. Elinor Dashwood is worse than Fanny Price when it comes to righteousness. and who can forget that sick ending, as if jane austen just simply wanted to end her project; obviously not satisfied with her work. as for the themes, yes, Sense and Sensibility has the nastiest set of antagonists, there are more money talk and cruel husband hunting. this is another reason why you should read Sense and Sensibility first: the motives of her characters are more apparent, while they are subtly hidden in her later works.

the truth is after reading all her six novels (excluding the minor works, of course) Sense and Sensibility comes as the worst of the bunch. except for that clumsy Mrs Jennings everybody here seems to be pathetically weeping and moaning and getting sick. perhaps the reason why jane austen abandoned this hyper emotionalism is that she knew, after conceiving it, that it's not within her limits, so after that she did better novels. it is of the same instance with Persuasion where somehow the author tried her flights of fancy and broke with her usual territory (although Persuasion is a more superior work. you see, Jane Austen had had her experiences when she wrote it).

it is better to follow the chronological order of the publication of her novels, but in my case I squeeze in Northanger Abbey along with the earlier novels. imagine that you're in the same era of the author's, you see her development, what she's heading in to, why she wrote this and that. here's my Austen marathon order: Sense and Sensibility / Pride and Prejudice / Northanger Abbey / Mansfield Park/ Emma / Persuasion.

well, its really up to you what you want to read first; you either read the least book first or the other way around. (but i assure you NOT to read Mansfield Park first) the result is that, by better judgment, you'll notice how Sense and Sensibility doesn't work. it simply fails in comparison with the others.

[Newcomer]

it's obvious that jane austen didn't know what she was doing in Sense and Sensibility. the book is plain dull.


It would seem so obvious as to be unnecessary repeating it: whether we like a work of art or not has no intrinsic value, it only reflects our ability to appreciate it. That does not mean that the work does not have an intrinsic value, only that a subjective judgment reveals more about the reader than of the work of art. The intrinsic value is a judgment of time and of people whose judgment has been proven in the realm of ideas. Historic time is of the essence. That is what is meant by a classic.
Taste is non debatable. I would suggest that you reread the book in 10 years and see what you think of it then.

[motherhubbard]

Pride and Prejudice first, I think it is the better book and it is far more interesting and much less of a chore. I think that both books have the same bones, but P&P is hands down better.

[Sir Bartholomew]

It would seem so obvious as to be unnecessary repeating it: whether we like a work of art or not has no intrinsic value, it only reflects our ability to appreciate it. That does not mean that the work does not have an intrinsic value, only that a subjective judgment reveals more about the reader than of the work of art. The intrinsic value is a judgment of time and of people whose judgment has been proven in the realm of ideas. Historic time is of the essence. That is what is meant by a classic.
Taste is non debatable. I would suggest that you reread the book in 10 years and see what you think of it then.

I’m not saying that S&S doesn’t have what you call “intrinsic value”. I do appreciate it, in some way. What I’m saying is that it is the least of Jane Austen’s six novels and that the reader should check it out it first before plunging through Austen’s more complex novels. I have read it twice now (and, surely, there’s no doubt I’m to read it again later) and my opinion of it had depreciated, there’s a possibility that it might change so. Perhaps my taste has improved in between. And seeing to it that I have read all the six novels twice, I’m sure that my opinion of S&S is reasonable enough and valid.

Whether S&S was published a century ago or yesterday, the reader has every right to pass his judgment on it. Novels have wasted our money, time and aching arse and the best we can do is to put it under our scrutiny and call it which name we like. I call S&S a plain and dull book. Futile as it may sound our saving grace is only our taste, that, of course, we should try to develop by reading as much as we can.

[tinustijger]

I'd recommend reading P&P first, it quite simple if you compare it to S&S. P&P is funnier and easier to read. S&S is beautiful, it's a fuller story, so I'd recommend getting used to Austens style, yes, by reading P&P first!

[RJbibliophil]

Thank you for all the advice, although it is difficult to know which to take. Sadly, I have had to postpone my Austen till this summer, when I will have time to read at least one of them... I was thinking about P&P as I have yet to become acquainted with a broad range of authors.

I will be sure to let you know if I am pleased with my decision. ;)

[Tournesol]

i'd recommend reading S&S first; so that you won't be disapointed when you've read P&P after.


RJ, Frank is RIGHT!! I was going to say the very same thing!

You must read S&S first.

From the moment you read P&P, it will take precedence in your mind. You will develop a special respect for Jane Austen; and all other Austen's writings will be uninteresting and banal.

But let me warn you, when you do read P&P, you will feel empty and depressed for some time [it varies between days and weeks] However, at the same time, you'll feel a new fullness in your heart.

and that's just plain truth.

[RJbibliophil]

I'm going to put a poll on this thread.

[LadyWentworth]

I'd say read either one. If you want to read the best known of all her stories (and, I suppose, the most popular), then read Pride and Prejudice. For me, though, it wouldn't matter which one. I suppose that is because whenever I tell someone to read an Austen novel, I always suggest Persuasion. In my opinion, it is far superior to her other stories (though I enjoyed them all). Of course, I always follow the Persuasion comment with "read P&P if you want to read the popular one". :)

[Lioness_Heart]

Sense and Sensibility; P&P just really annoyed me right from the start, but I loved S&S. Although if it is a general Austen starting-point, I'd reccommend Northanger Abbey, because it's much shorter than either of those and really creates a Jane-Austeny tone right from the start.

[black butterffl]

But let me warn you, when you do read P&P, you will feel empty and depressed for some time [it varies between days and weeks] However, at the same time, you'll feel a new fullness in your heart.

and that's just plain truth.

ywah i know what you mean :P , but is it really for like days or weeks/??
like, woooooww!!!

[antonia1990]

I recommend starting with her Juvenilla. You can read the Watsons (so you can understand her work better), then you can move on to Northanher Abbey (because it is light and her first completed manuscript, even though it was published after she died). Then you can read P&P (it is a lot more fast paced than S&S).

[black butterffl]

what does juvinella talk about/?

[eyemaker]

I guess I have to post another (Jane Austen) thread..Hmm

[LadyCapulet]

I love Jane Austen, but I think the endings of both of these novels are too quick. She spend hundreds of pages detailing wonderful stories, and then BOOM: " and they lived happily ever after."