BORING

[Shell]

this book is truely boring! why do we have to read such old fashioned, out-dated books that have far out-lived their life-time! my entire english class just can't get into the story line and some have managed to read the 1st page and fell asleep when turning the next page! sorry jane, but really i do think this book is out-dated and reflects nothing (so far) on the modern world. sorry:)

[b e s t i e]

this book was like the bomb. it is really beautiful and made me think more about how to treat people. dont judge a book by its cover. give it a go and then i want to hear wat u thought..thanxs babe.

[Linda]

I think your problem is that it's a compulsory reading for you. I hated all the books we had to read for school. I ended up having a master in literature. Shell, what you called old-fashioned is called "style" of the book. Not all the books can be written in modern language and paradigms. THAT would be boring! And don't listen to what other people in your class say about it and make up your opinion. Heidi, I think you DID like the book. For me, this book has remained for many years in my top 5! It's one of the purest pieces of art I've seen. Perhaps one day you will appreciate more although obviously never as much as it truly deserves.

[Sheila]

There is a difference between not being able to get into a book and stating that it is truely boring. I have to admit that to apply it to modern day life requires thought and consideration but not that much since it's been adapted and made into the piece of cinematic genius that is 'Bridget Jone's Diary'. Think about it.

[heidi]

truthfully this book was so mentally torturing and i would never read it again.I must say i did fall inlove with darcy and i really liked elizabeth her standards are what every women out in this world should have..why settle for less when you know you deserve more hence the fact she refused to marry mr.Collins because of course she knew she deserved better than a man that cant see further than his own nose.It is in some ways an excellent book because it shows us what life was like in austens time and how social status, marriage, and money were such important factors at that time.Still thanks to this long dragging never ending book i have a 1500 word essay due in a few weeks and im not HAPPY,but by all means read it if you want to gain knowledge as it will help you but if you dont enjoy love stories and arent interested in contradictions and snobbery than dont waste your time.....:)

[Kaltrina]

Shell I don't agree with you about pride and prejudice but I do agree with others when they say you should really read it carefully and enjoy it because believe me once your into it it will never get out of you. pride and Prejudice is my favourite novel. It has to do with love, romance, money, women and their positions and a lot more, but what truly amazes me is darcy's and elisabeth's characters. darcy is so proud and bold, but in fact he is so sensitive that he can't let people know that, and elisabeth is so sweet and sensitive but when people touch her pride she becomes very powerful and fearless. she doesn't care about money or position she only cares about happines. Jane described very well that time, how people were full of prejudices and how they had to show what they were in order to be accepted by society, but darcy didn't care about that. he chose his society very carefully even though that brought many prejudices among people. oh I got carried away, but to tell u the truth I've read it four or five times and I am still willing to read it again. it's a beautiful novel.

[jakobin]

shell i really do suggest you read the whole novel.

when i first read it, it was also a compulsory read, for my IB english exams, and i hated it. i thought it was outdated, old fashioned and nothing to do with todays world.

then i read it through and i aced my exam on it because i got into it, tried to understand the characters, understood all the prejudices and little parts of the book that make it such a rich novel to read. it is this richness that lets you read it several times and never ever get bored of it, and almost be shocked over and over again by the events that conclude the book.

my favorite character is probably Mr Collins. he is just so perfectly annoying and disgusting. the way he is around the girls at first and then when he leaves and marries lizzie's friend, and the way he is around his 'boss' (all the names have abandoned me. the woman, mr collins boss person...) my favourite scene from the book (that is so well done in the first movie) is when mr collins gives his speech to the girls after kitty elopes.

anyone have any other opinions of fav characters and fav scenes??

[Maty]

I'm loving Pride and Prejudice, but I have time to really read and reread sections. And I am just reading it for fun. I want to finish it before I see any of the film adaptations.

School is an awful place to have to read good books. Everything is so rushed and it is as if you are doing something wrong if you are enjoying yourself. Just get through it and then save it to read later.

I loved the part where everybody kept showing up on Elizabeth's walks in the park. And then Mr. Darcy, proud Mr. Darcy, hands her a long, filled to overflowing letter to clear his name. I think if you can just think about the situation, rather then get hung up in the style of the writing, you can see how humorous the whole thing is.

I can't wait to see the part where Elizabeth relates to her friends how Mr. Darcy treated or spoke of her at the ball.

I think the dialogues are hard to follow, and the irony, (is that the right term (?)), but I intend to read it again after I see what the actors do with it.

[Maty]

Hey, you guys, does this site have spell-check? If not, I'm in serious trouble here. Tee hee.

[The Unnamable]

Most of you appear to have no idea. ‘Boring’ is a heavy word lightly thrown by the clueless and unutterably tedious. The book is about, among other things, love, relationships, and upbringing - all relevant, surely, to our lives now? And anyone who can write the following deserves to be viewed with the sincerest admiration (or should I say ‘approval’? –“Fools admire, but men of sense approve.” Alexander Pope):

“Her father, captivated by youth and beauty, and that appearance of good humour which youth and beauty generally give, had married a woman whose weak understanding and illiberal mind had, very early in their marriage, put an end to all real affection for her. Respect, esteem, and confidence had vanished for ever; and all his views of domestic happiness were overthrown…To his wife he was very little otherwise indebted, than as her ignorance and folly had contributed to his amusement. This is not the sort of happiness which a man would in general wish to owe to his wife; but where other powers of entertainment are wanting, the true philosopher will derive benefit from such as are given.”

[Maty]

Sir, I do object. Please be so good as to read on:
"Elizabeth, however, had never been blind to the impropriety of her father's behaviour as a husband. She had always seen it with pain; but respecting his abilities, and grateful for his affectionate treatment of herself, she endeavoured to forget what she could not overlook, and to banish from her thoughts that continual breach of conjugal obligation and decorum which, in exposing his wife to the contempt of her own children, was so highly reprehensible. But she had never felt so strongly as now, the disadvantages which must attend the children of so unsuitable a marriage, nor ever been so fully aware of the evils arising from so ill-judged a direction of talents; talents which rightly used, might at least have preserved the respectability of his daughters, even if incapable of enlarging the mind of his wife." Your observations are well-taken, but your manner is not quite charitable, is it?

[The Unnamable]

I don’t need to read on. Don’t assume that I’m stupid. Do you think I am unaware of Austen’s disapproval of Mr.Bennet when she writes, “where other powers of entertainment are wanting, the true philosopher will derive benefit from such as are given.” She’s quite good with irony.

As for my non-charitable manner, it’s no more offensive than your patronising one. The difference, however, is that I am aware of it and see it as my choice.

“Frailty of understanding is in itself no proper target for scorn and mockery. But the unintelligent forfeit their claim to compassion when they begin to indulge in self-complacent airs, and to call themselves sane critics, meaning that they are mechanics. And when, relying on their numbers, they pass from self-complacency to insolence, and reprove their betters for using the brains which God has not denied them, they dry up the fount of pity.”
A E Houseman

[RobinHood3000]

Eeeeeasy now, there. Condescension will be tolerated only if in a good-spirited manner--and that applies to both of you.

[Maty]

So sorry to cause offense. It was meant to be in good spirits. Good day, gentlemen.

[Flora]

I really liked the book, and I dissagre that it doesnt reflect anything of the modren world - almost every book does. We can find similar society problems today, I suppose, or maybe a bit different.
I must say that I wasnt gripped after the first page, but later I gt really interested.

[Pensive]

I liked it a lot specially characters formation, story plot and writer's writing style. I agree that on some places it was a little boring but over-all it was a good book.

[Kaltrina]

This thread has been HiJaCKed and LOoTeD in the name of the Nameless Ship.

http://shirts-n-stuffcom.siteprotect.net/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/jack_rackham_pirate_flags.jpg

[Maty]

Take heart. Our ship is a sturdy old thing. And the treasure is not lost.

[Vedrana]

Yes, I know this website is devoted to books, but I recently saw the Keira Knightly film adaptation of PaP, and I was sort of left feeling it didn't do the book as much justice as it might have. Did anyone think the same way, by any chance?

I really liked the set design, that was well done, as was the music, but Mr Collins! Oh my God, it wasn't what I had expected at all. I prefer David Bamber's performance in the BBC version, it was funnier and really seemed more like the character. This one was just creepy.

I also wasn't sure I liked the way they changed the crucial moments in the book, like the visit to Pemberley,the proposal at Rosings, the letter from home about Lydia, and the final proposals. They sort of changed things that I thought were fine as they were in the book. Of course, seeing as the book is basis of the film. They didn't really delve into the character of Wickham much either, which I didn't like that much, because it sort of took away the whole point of Elizabeth liking him and him being deceptive and the whole thing with Mary King which shows how much of a mercenary he is.

Well, apart from that it wasn't as bad as I had imagined it would be, but I suppose that it was average at best. Obviously nothing really can replace the book, but I think that the bbc probably have done the most accurate one. (Despite the wet shirt scene...wherever that came from).