It has been a while since I have read the book, but I am not sure I agree on all counts.
Camilla Send a noteboard - 29/09/2010 08:17:35 PM
I suppose some might find it absurd to post a review of a well-known book of very nearly two centuries of age, but in the end, why shouldn't I? I'm sure there will be people interested in discussing the book, and considering the mention of Austen in Rebekah's recent post asking people to have others recommend them something outside their usual genres, some people who haven't read the book yet might be interested as well.
Definitely. It is a good book. Not her best. I prefer Persuasion and Pride and Prejudice to this, and it is ranked about equally with Sense and Sensibility and Northanger Abbey. Mansfield Park and perhaps Lady Susan are the ones I rate below it. But it is a while since I have read the latter.
Emma is the longest of Jane Austen's published novels and, I believe, probably the third best-known, after Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility. It is a rather different book from those two, which are rather alike in many ways. In some regards, I think I might call it better, though it is not perhaps quite as polished.
The titular character, Emma Woodhouse, is a young, wealthy woman living with her old and infirm father and generally considering herself the queen of the neighbourhood. The rumours of the impending arrival of a well-off young man, Mr. Frank Churchill, are the start of a subtle and rather well-crafted plot, which leaves the reader with rather more to guess at and form theories about than either of the aforementioned novels does. Those were fairly straightforward; in this book, few things are entirely as they seem, though Austen does give amply sufficient hints for the reader to work out some of the twists beforehand.
I agree, it has both good plot and wit, and good characters.
The most important aspect in which I'd call this book superior to P&P and S&S, though, is that the heroine is a better and more interesting character - an independent-minded, strong-willed, opinionated young woman, who has obvious flaws and still has some things to learn. By being more obviously flawed and doing more objectionable things than either Elizabeth Bennet or Elinor Dashwood, she is in a way easier to sympathize with and her strengths shine the more for it. Several of the other characters have more depth and surprising sides to them than I'm used to seeing in Austen, as well. Her habit of putting a few people with particularly silly social behaviour in her books shows here, as well; the incessantly babbling old spinster is at times hilarious. Emma's father on the other hand raises whining to a form of art, and I must admit it became a bit grating at times.
I am not sure I find Emma more interesting than her other heroines. I'd have to re-read it (I am always most in sympathy with the latest heroine of Austen) to say for certain, though. I don't agree that Elizabeth does not have flaws. Quite the contrary. The book is half about her realising them, and quite a lot of emphasis in placed on it in the resolution.
The novel has other downsides as well, though nothing too serious. At a few points it drags somewhat, and it probably could have been a few dozen pages shorter than it is. The hidden storylines probably would've been more effective if they hadn't been explained in quite so much detail afterwards. And I still think a particular theory I formed while reading the book would've made for a more interesting happy end, but I suppose it would've been rather too shocking for Jane Austen's sensibilities.
What is the theory? I am intrigued.
Which brings me to another point, which I can't call a downside of the book per se, but might still detract from some people's enjoyment: Austen's views on society and the importance of rank are expressed more explicitly here, and on one or two occasions lead to statements or positions that modern readers would find rather offensive, unlike Austen's contemporary readers. One might argue that factor balances out Emma's greater independence and more "modern" character in terms of making the novel feel dated, compared to P&P and S&S.
I am not sure those are easily classifiable as "Austen's views". They are definitely Emma's views, but Emma's views are revised as the novel goes along, and the change points to her being wrong rather than right.
In short, I recommend this novel to everyone who enjoyed any of Austen's other books, and to anyone interested in reading a novel about a feisty young woman in Regency England, and who doesn't mind the slower pace and different views on society. I am not quite decided on where to rank this novel among those of Austen's that I've read (besides the aforementioned ones, Mansfield Park and Lady Susan), but rather highly, in any case.
*MySmiley*
structured procrastinator
structured procrastinator
Jane Austen - Emma
- 29/09/2010 06:37:01 PM
622 Views
It has been a while since I have read the book, but I am not sure I agree on all counts.
- 29/09/2010 08:17:35 PM
593 Views
All the better, it's so boring when everyone agrees. 
- 29/09/2010 09:01:09 PM
607 Views
- 29/09/2010 09:01:09 PM
607 Views
Re: All the better, it's so boring when everyone agrees.
- 29/09/2010 09:39:25 PM
586 Views
- 29/09/2010 09:39:25 PM
586 Views
Okay, fair enough, I'm talking about her view as appears in her books, there might be a difference.
- 29/09/2010 09:48:31 PM
547 Views
Pet peeve, sorry.
- 29/09/2010 10:19:03 PM
573 Views
Re: Pet peeve, sorry.
- 29/09/2010 11:24:21 PM
561 Views
Re: Pet peeve, sorry.
- 29/09/2010 11:32:50 PM
503 Views