It's been a long time since I've read any Austen except Emma (which I would change just about nothing about, as sometimes uncomfortable as it makes me), like high school long. So I'll focus on screenplays instead, okay?
What I hate most about the screenplays and the public's perceptions of these stories is that so many of them treat them as straight-up romance where the conflict arises from whether the leads will get together. Whereas in most of her books (Emma aside), the conflict is IF I DON'T GET MARRIED MY FAMILY WILL STARVE. Like, actually be poor. Sure, it's great that the ladies end up with guys they love. But there's some dark undercurrents in these books, that looming poverty lurking in the future, the constant awareness that these women have no control over their lives, have no options. It's heartbreaking. And I feel like so often people gloss over that and treat them just like a lighthearted romantic romp.
no subject
It's been a long time since I've read any Austen except Emma (which I would change just about nothing about, as sometimes uncomfortable as it makes me), like high school long. So I'll focus on screenplays instead, okay?
What I hate most about the screenplays and the public's perceptions of these stories is that so many of them treat them as straight-up romance where the conflict arises from whether the leads will get together. Whereas in most of her books (Emma aside), the conflict is IF I DON'T GET MARRIED MY FAMILY WILL STARVE. Like, actually be poor. Sure, it's great that the ladies end up with guys they love. But there's some dark undercurrents in these books, that looming poverty lurking in the future, the constant awareness that these women have no control over their lives, have no options. It's heartbreaking. And I feel like so often people gloss over that and treat them just like a lighthearted romantic romp.