![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
booksomewenchSo, apparently this week was "Read Really Bad P&P Sequels" week. I wish I'd known that ahead of time. Of course, to be fair, these two books could have been part of a contest; a "Who Can Write the Most OOC Fitzwilliam Darcy EVAR." If that's true...then I'm kinda at a loss at judging who won. On the one hand, Altman had Darcy doing several completely outrageous things; her Darcy's actions were far more unbelievable. On the other hand, Lathan's Darcy was more consistently OOC, throughout the book.
Let's just dive right in, shall we?
The Darcys and the Bingleys, Marsha Altman
I had read this on the ride home from Lunacon, hoping it would serve as a palate cleanser for Twilight. While it was certainly funny in a way Twilight could never be (ie deliberately), with a few genuine laugh-out-loud moments, I was fairly disappointed.
This book starts several days before the Bennet sisters' double-wedding. Usually, the P&P sequels start the day of or the day after the wedding, and only show the days leading up to the ceremony as a reminiscence if they're shown at all. However, the chapter opens with Bingley trying to ask Darcy for advice--which, on its own, is not terribly surprising. However, what Bingley's looking for is advice about sex, as he doesn't want to disappoint Jane. While I thought Darcy's initial reaction was fairly apt (ignoring the moderately unlikely premise that Bingley would ask him about that in the first place) with him getting all stuffy, his secondary reaction fell a little short of the mark. He races off to London to purchase Charles a copy of the Kama Sutra.
Yeah, you read that right.
Of course, my first thought was: she's set this book in 1803. The Kama Sutra wasn't translated until 1883. (You need not ask how I know that off the top of my head.) When I got home, I googled both the year and the translator she listed, but couldn't get a hit. Quite shoddily done, I say. Of course, Darcy inherited his copy from his father, making it that much more anachronistic. The Ananga Ranga makes an appearance later on, which, of course, won't be translated and printed until '85.
So Darcy's a time-traveler who uses his Regency-Era TARDIS to get sexual how-to guides. Whatever. It gets better from there.
Chapter One ends with Bingley getting ready to tell a story about a party he and Darcy attended back when they went to Cambridge together. However, instead of just telling the story, Chapter Two opens with the date: 1795. I can't explain how much that annoyed me. It's like on fanfiction.net when people use ==Darcy's POV== to indicate a point of view switch (which, I was not-entirely-surprised to discover was a more apt comparison than I'd assumed at the time, but I'll get to that). If I can't tell that you've switched POV's without you announcing it and interrupting the flow of your story, YOU HAVE PROBLEMS. SRSLY. And I felt that the entire sequence was clumsily handled. At other points, she has characters remembering things they had done previously without too much of a problem; but then other times she'd feel the need to cut to a flashback. In this flashback, we see what will be a common theme throughout the book: Darcy's inability to handle alcohol. Just for ha-ha's, I started keeping track of how many times Darcy was depicted as drunk. I gave up after five, cause I just didn't want to know any more.It was like trying to count the number of times 'perfect,' 'angel[ic],' or 'dazzling' was used in Sorry, forgot, saving my snark for my review of that book--although I bet you could guess what book I was gonna say, couldn't you?
After that flashback, we skip forward to page 93 and Darcy pitching Wickham out a second story window into a pile of manure (why there was a manure pile up next to the manor is beyond my guess). And all this before the wedding!
I could go on and on, but there are a few things that Altman got right, and I feel she deserves credit for them. As OOC as she had Darcy acting, she certainly got his voice down. Elizabeth's, too, as well as the tenor of their relationship. Oh, and also Mr. Bennet's. Basically, she made sure there was enough Austen-ian wit in there to keep me amused. As I said, there were some perfectly lovely lines in the book:
[After Darcy has related a story about (drunkenly!) punching Wickham in the face in university over a nickname]: "So, you are saying that if I call you 'Fitzers,' you will strike you wife?"
"No, of course not. I will politely say in a very respectful and quiet voice, 'Dearest Lizzy, love of my life, if you call me that again, I will have no recourse but to annul our marriage and send you to a nunnery in Ireland.'"
and: "I say, my daughters seem to be in some kind of competition. The first husband I must pay; the second I have no obligations to; and the third pays me. Mary, if this pattern is to continue, I will consent to you marrying a man of no less than twenty thousand pounds a year. And Kitty, nothing less than royalty will do. I perhaps will settle for Scottish royalty, but only if he truly loves you."
She also has Elizabeth continue to call her husband 'Darcy' after the wedding. This is purely a personal thing, but I prefer 'Darcy' to 'Fitzwilliam.' Fitzwilliam is just too long, doesn't break down into nicknames very well, and lacks the feeling of romance. I mean, it's easy to say, "Oh, Darcy." But, "Oh, Fitzwilliam"? I don't think so. Go ahead, say it. Okay, now try it again without Fitzwilliam sounding stupid. Ha! I told you.
The second quarter of the book passes fairly uneventfully (wedded bliss, believable voice, Darcy gets drunk, Jane and Lizzy breed, etc etc), until Charles is called away to give his consent to Caroline's soon-to-be-fiance. Uneasy with the man and unsure why, Bingley sends for Darcy, and they play private eye in London. Grumpy about being left out of the action, Lizzy convinces her father to go on an excursion to Scotland (the prospective groom's homeland) to do a little digging of her own. Of course, the man turns out to be a blackguard; there's a thrilling scene where Darcy is nearly murdered, saved at the last minute by Bingley and Elizabeth who somehow manage to sneak into the guy's lodgings, I don't even know anymore; and Caroline Bingley ends up marrying a doctor--the same doctor who has been called in to treat Mr. Hurst's gout.
Caroline Bingley marries a man in trade. True, he was born into a respectable family, but his elder brother wasted the estate on gambling and drink (Darcy, are you paying attention?!) and so now he has to work to support himself. Clearly, Darcy isn't the only one who got tapped by the OOC-fairy. And, it turns out, underneath her cold and bitchy exterior, is the heart of a warm and kind woman. Or something.
And then everyone gets locked into their rooms at Pemberley while the blackguard and the doctor's brother team up to exact revenge, and the book ends with Darcy getting drunk.
The end.
All that nonsense aside, this book is actually going to get a decent grade. It amused me, which was its main purpose, and, like I said, Altman somehow manages to get the characters completely right even as she gets them completely wrong. It's a fast read, and would be an decent book with (some better editing) and her own Regency characters. I do find it telling that this book has its origins on fanfiction.net (talk about "Fandom as a Job!"), which I discovered at the end of the book. I'm not saying that to be impugn it or the author (hell, I'm on ff.net), but it clarified why I had certain problems with the book. She makes a lot of the same mistakes that fanfic authors often do (painful transitions, inserting drama for drama's own sake, OOC characters...).
2.5 stars (Mostly cause I LOL'd a few times.)
Of the two, that was the better book.
I don't know if I even have the energy for this one, but I'll try. Mr. and Mrs. Fitzwilliam Darcy: Two Shall Become One, Sharon Lathan.
The title should have warned me.
Anyway, this Darcy (or William, as Elizabeth almost always calls him, which caused me to shudder every time I saw it) doesn't do anything wildly OOC. There's no excessive drinking, no tossing people out the window, no giving anyone "The Idiot's Guide to Sex." No, for the most part, he rides around, oversees his estate, and spends tons of time making passionate love to Elizabeth.
This is like a very poor version of Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife (which, I know a number of folks on my f-list hate, but I think is wonderful.) The similarities are staggering: for one, it's published by the same company and even has the same jacket design, down to the font; Darcy and Elizabeth can't keep their hands off of each other and have to have sex several times every day; general opinion is against Elizabeth until there is a party where she can charm everyone with her wit and humor; she nearly gets sexually assaulted and gets hurt badly; Darcy is forced to Take Violent Action...it's like Lathan read Berdoll, and then wrote poorly-imitated fanfiction about it. And all this in 5 and a half months of marriage! Berdoll's book at least spanned years! Five years, actually, if I'm remembering correctly...
I mean, was I the only one who read that and thought of some kind of creepy alien creature? Pride and Predator, anyone? What's wrong with "water broke"?
Moving on. What really killed this book for me was the dialogue. It sounds ridiculous. You can tell when an author hasn't checked to make sure that what her characters are saying sounds natural. This book is full of flagrant abuse of both adjectives and exclamation points. Talk about overwrought; I feel like she was trying to get the nineteenth century formality of expression down, but only by using big words. I was somewhat at a loss--which means I have to share some of the 'choicest' bits with you, my discerning reader:
"My wife...my precious wife. Shall I chronicle how resplendent your face is in your rapture? Your are luminous: your eyes shining with devotion and excitement, your lips swollen and ruddy from my kisses, a light sheen of perspiration gracing your perfect brow, your cheeks sanguine with desire..."
"We are one, my beloved. Joined together. Hearts and bodies bound now and forever. Oh, lord, Elizabeth! How I love you! You are mine and I am yours for all eternity. Release your tension, precious love. I will be gentle." If you need to inform your wife on your wedding night that you "are one. Joined together." then you're prolly DOIN' IT WRONG.
Of course, we can't blame Darcy for being unsure. He is, after all, a virgin:
"I was a young man with longings that I wished to gratify, but I refused to selfishly slake my appetites in such a demeaning manner....My dearest, precious Elizabeth, I have saved myself for you, even before I knew who you were.As trite as that sounds, it is the truth, and I do not merely mean in the intimate realm of our relationship. My principles, my pride, perhaps, would not allow me to consider giving myself to anyone less than the woman I would love and marry. Even in my despair of ever finding you, I still clung to the idea that you existed. You had to exist!...Call me a hopeless romantic!" However, he still manages to rock her socks off--he also has a collection of "Idiot's Guide to Sex" manuals, even if he never loans them to anyone.
They also refer to each other as "my lover." All the time. Never mind that it sounds idiotic when using it as an endearment, but it just goes on and on and on:
"Elizabeth my love... my light... my heart... my pearl... my lover... my Lizzy."
"My heart is bursting with love for you my husband my darling my lover and my soul."
"As you wished for, my lover. Open your eyes. ..."
"I render this allegation yet wish to assure you, my lover, that I harbor no anguish or repulsion at the idea..."
"You render me breathless with desire, my lover."
"Fitzwilliam, my lover, I adore you more than life."
"My Lizzy, my lover!"
I just wish I had a nickle for every time "my lover," "beautiful face," or "precious love" was used. And her descriptions are as painful as the dialogue. Darcy's voice is "lush" (also, in true Gary Stu fashion, his eyes turn indigo sometimes), not being able to kiss Elizabeth is "exquisite torture" and, of course, birth sacs.
Not only could I not believe that Darcy and Elizabeth were talking this way, I couldn't believe anyone would! And she didn't even have Altman's saving grace of being funny! It was just pages of purple prose and treacly sentimentality, with pages and pages of (boring) sex thrown in to "spice things up." I just kept skipping those scenes, because that was where the dialogue was at its most...turgid.
To be honest, it was sheer stubbornness that kept me reading until the end.I think the two crowning touches were a) discovering that her inspiration for the book was based on the Keira Knightly movie (not even the BBC miniseries, GAWD), which explains some inconsistencies with Austen's novel (though she does claim to have read it), and b) all the Biblical and religious references "scattered" were put in there deliberately. Sweetheart, if you want to honor Jesus, your Rock and Creator, do it with fewer subtle-as-a-brick-in-the-face allusions, and with more instances of better writing. I would put this book above The Blonde Geisha and Mad Kestrel, but not by much.
Forgive me for including lots of quotes and not much analysis, but I have learned that there are times when it's best to let the evidence do the talking for you.
1 star by virtue of me being able to finish it.
Let's just dive right in, shall we?
The Darcys and the Bingleys, Marsha Altman
I had read this on the ride home from Lunacon, hoping it would serve as a palate cleanser for Twilight. While it was certainly funny in a way Twilight could never be (ie deliberately), with a few genuine laugh-out-loud moments, I was fairly disappointed.
This book starts several days before the Bennet sisters' double-wedding. Usually, the P&P sequels start the day of or the day after the wedding, and only show the days leading up to the ceremony as a reminiscence if they're shown at all. However, the chapter opens with Bingley trying to ask Darcy for advice--which, on its own, is not terribly surprising. However, what Bingley's looking for is advice about sex, as he doesn't want to disappoint Jane. While I thought Darcy's initial reaction was fairly apt (ignoring the moderately unlikely premise that Bingley would ask him about that in the first place) with him getting all stuffy, his secondary reaction fell a little short of the mark. He races off to London to purchase Charles a copy of the Kama Sutra.
Yeah, you read that right.
Of course, my first thought was: she's set this book in 1803. The Kama Sutra wasn't translated until 1883. (You need not ask how I know that off the top of my head.) When I got home, I googled both the year and the translator she listed, but couldn't get a hit. Quite shoddily done, I say. Of course, Darcy inherited his copy from his father, making it that much more anachronistic. The Ananga Ranga makes an appearance later on, which, of course, won't be translated and printed until '85.
So Darcy's a time-traveler who uses his Regency-Era TARDIS to get sexual how-to guides. Whatever. It gets better from there.
Chapter One ends with Bingley getting ready to tell a story about a party he and Darcy attended back when they went to Cambridge together. However, instead of just telling the story, Chapter Two opens with the date: 1795. I can't explain how much that annoyed me. It's like on fanfiction.net when people use ==Darcy's POV== to indicate a point of view switch (which, I was not-entirely-surprised to discover was a more apt comparison than I'd assumed at the time, but I'll get to that). If I can't tell that you've switched POV's without you announcing it and interrupting the flow of your story, YOU HAVE PROBLEMS. SRSLY. And I felt that the entire sequence was clumsily handled. At other points, she has characters remembering things they had done previously without too much of a problem; but then other times she'd feel the need to cut to a flashback. In this flashback, we see what will be a common theme throughout the book: Darcy's inability to handle alcohol. Just for ha-ha's, I started keeping track of how many times Darcy was depicted as drunk. I gave up after five, cause I just didn't want to know any more.
After that flashback, we skip forward to page 93 and Darcy pitching Wickham out a second story window into a pile of manure (why there was a manure pile up next to the manor is beyond my guess). And all this before the wedding!
I could go on and on, but there are a few things that Altman got right, and I feel she deserves credit for them. As OOC as she had Darcy acting, she certainly got his voice down. Elizabeth's, too, as well as the tenor of their relationship. Oh, and also Mr. Bennet's. Basically, she made sure there was enough Austen-ian wit in there to keep me amused. As I said, there were some perfectly lovely lines in the book:
[After Darcy has related a story about (drunkenly!) punching Wickham in the face in university over a nickname]: "So, you are saying that if I call you 'Fitzers,' you will strike you wife?"
"No, of course not. I will politely say in a very respectful and quiet voice, 'Dearest Lizzy, love of my life, if you call me that again, I will have no recourse but to annul our marriage and send you to a nunnery in Ireland.'"
and: "I say, my daughters seem to be in some kind of competition. The first husband I must pay; the second I have no obligations to; and the third pays me. Mary, if this pattern is to continue, I will consent to you marrying a man of no less than twenty thousand pounds a year. And Kitty, nothing less than royalty will do. I perhaps will settle for Scottish royalty, but only if he truly loves you."
She also has Elizabeth continue to call her husband 'Darcy' after the wedding. This is purely a personal thing, but I prefer 'Darcy' to 'Fitzwilliam.' Fitzwilliam is just too long, doesn't break down into nicknames very well, and lacks the feeling of romance. I mean, it's easy to say, "Oh, Darcy." But, "Oh, Fitzwilliam"? I don't think so. Go ahead, say it. Okay, now try it again without Fitzwilliam sounding stupid. Ha! I told you.
The second quarter of the book passes fairly uneventfully (wedded bliss, believable voice, Darcy gets drunk, Jane and Lizzy breed, etc etc), until Charles is called away to give his consent to Caroline's soon-to-be-fiance. Uneasy with the man and unsure why, Bingley sends for Darcy, and they play private eye in London. Grumpy about being left out of the action, Lizzy convinces her father to go on an excursion to Scotland (the prospective groom's homeland) to do a little digging of her own. Of course, the man turns out to be a blackguard; there's a thrilling scene where Darcy is nearly murdered, saved at the last minute by Bingley and Elizabeth who somehow manage to sneak into the guy's lodgings, I don't even know anymore; and Caroline Bingley ends up marrying a doctor--the same doctor who has been called in to treat Mr. Hurst's gout.
Caroline Bingley marries a man in trade. True, he was born into a respectable family, but his elder brother wasted the estate on gambling and drink (Darcy, are you paying attention?!) and so now he has to work to support himself. Clearly, Darcy isn't the only one who got tapped by the OOC-fairy. And, it turns out, underneath her cold and bitchy exterior, is the heart of a warm and kind woman. Or something.
And then everyone gets locked into their rooms at Pemberley while the blackguard and the doctor's brother team up to exact revenge, and the book ends with Darcy getting drunk.
The end.
All that nonsense aside, this book is actually going to get a decent grade. It amused me, which was its main purpose, and, like I said, Altman somehow manages to get the characters completely right even as she gets them completely wrong. It's a fast read, and would be an decent book with (some better editing) and her own Regency characters. I do find it telling that this book has its origins on fanfiction.net (talk about "Fandom as a Job!"), which I discovered at the end of the book. I'm not saying that to be impugn it or the author (hell, I'm on ff.net), but it clarified why I had certain problems with the book. She makes a lot of the same mistakes that fanfic authors often do (painful transitions, inserting drama for drama's own sake, OOC characters...).
2.5 stars (Mostly cause I LOL'd a few times.)
Of the two, that was the better book.
I don't know if I even have the energy for this one, but I'll try. Mr. and Mrs. Fitzwilliam Darcy: Two Shall Become One, Sharon Lathan.
The title should have warned me.
Anyway, this Darcy (or William, as Elizabeth almost always calls him, which caused me to shudder every time I saw it) doesn't do anything wildly OOC. There's no excessive drinking, no tossing people out the window, no giving anyone "The Idiot's Guide to Sex." No, for the most part, he rides around, oversees his estate, and spends tons of time making passionate love to Elizabeth.
This is like a very poor version of Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife (which, I know a number of folks on my f-list hate, but I think is wonderful.) The similarities are staggering: for one, it's published by the same company and even has the same jacket design, down to the font; Darcy and Elizabeth can't keep their hands off of each other and have to have sex several times every day; general opinion is against Elizabeth until there is a party where she can charm everyone with her wit and humor; she nearly gets sexually assaulted and gets hurt badly; Darcy is forced to Take Violent Action...it's like Lathan read Berdoll, and then wrote poorly-imitated fanfiction about it. And all this in 5 and a half months of marriage! Berdoll's book at least spanned years! Five years, actually, if I'm remembering correctly...
I mean, was I the only one who read that and thought of some kind of creepy alien creature? Pride and Predator, anyone? What's wrong with "water broke"?
Moving on. What really killed this book for me was the dialogue. It sounds ridiculous. You can tell when an author hasn't checked to make sure that what her characters are saying sounds natural. This book is full of flagrant abuse of both adjectives and exclamation points. Talk about overwrought; I feel like she was trying to get the nineteenth century formality of expression down, but only by using big words. I was somewhat at a loss--which means I have to share some of the 'choicest' bits with you, my discerning reader:
"My wife...my precious wife. Shall I chronicle how resplendent your face is in your rapture? Your are luminous: your eyes shining with devotion and excitement, your lips swollen and ruddy from my kisses, a light sheen of perspiration gracing your perfect brow, your cheeks sanguine with desire..."
"We are one, my beloved. Joined together. Hearts and bodies bound now and forever. Oh, lord, Elizabeth! How I love you! You are mine and I am yours for all eternity. Release your tension, precious love. I will be gentle." If you need to inform your wife on your wedding night that you "are one. Joined together." then you're prolly DOIN' IT WRONG.
Of course, we can't blame Darcy for being unsure. He is, after all, a virgin:
"I was a young man with longings that I wished to gratify, but I refused to selfishly slake my appetites in such a demeaning manner....My dearest, precious Elizabeth, I have saved myself for you, even before I knew who you were.As trite as that sounds, it is the truth, and I do not merely mean in the intimate realm of our relationship. My principles, my pride, perhaps, would not allow me to consider giving myself to anyone less than the woman I would love and marry. Even in my despair of ever finding you, I still clung to the idea that you existed. You had to exist!...Call me a hopeless romantic!" However, he still manages to rock her socks off--he also has a collection of "Idiot's Guide to Sex" manuals, even if he never loans them to anyone.
They also refer to each other as "my lover." All the time. Never mind that it sounds idiotic when using it as an endearment, but it just goes on and on and on:
"Elizabeth my love... my light... my heart... my pearl... my lover... my Lizzy."
"My heart is bursting with love for you my husband my darling my lover and my soul."
"As you wished for, my lover. Open your eyes. ..."
"I render this allegation yet wish to assure you, my lover, that I harbor no anguish or repulsion at the idea..."
"You render me breathless with desire, my lover."
"Fitzwilliam, my lover, I adore you more than life."
"My Lizzy, my lover!"
I just wish I had a nickle for every time "my lover," "beautiful face," or "precious love" was used. And her descriptions are as painful as the dialogue. Darcy's voice is "lush" (also, in true Gary Stu fashion, his eyes turn indigo sometimes), not being able to kiss Elizabeth is "exquisite torture" and, of course, birth sacs.
Not only could I not believe that Darcy and Elizabeth were talking this way, I couldn't believe anyone would! And she didn't even have Altman's saving grace of being funny! It was just pages of purple prose and treacly sentimentality, with pages and pages of (boring) sex thrown in to "spice things up." I just kept skipping those scenes, because that was where the dialogue was at its most...turgid.
To be honest, it was sheer stubbornness that kept me reading until the end.I think the two crowning touches were a) discovering that her inspiration for the book was based on the Keira Knightly movie (not even the BBC miniseries, GAWD), which explains some inconsistencies with Austen's novel (though she does claim to have read it), and b) all the Biblical and religious references "scattered" were put in there deliberately. Sweetheart, if you want to honor Jesus, your Rock and Creator, do it with fewer subtle-as-a-brick-in-the-face allusions, and with more instances of better writing. I would put this book above The Blonde Geisha and Mad Kestrel, but not by much.
Forgive me for including lots of quotes and not much analysis, but I have learned that there are times when it's best to let the evidence do the talking for you.
1 star by virtue of me being able to finish it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-28 04:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-28 04:42 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-28 04:57 am (UTC)I wanted to pull a Blind Mag when reading that dialogue!
(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-28 03:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-28 03:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-28 05:24 pm (UTC)Also I refuse to believe that virgins ever have awesome sex, except by the standard that they have nothing else to compare it to. Nobody's gets the perfect dismount the first time they hit the parallel bars.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-31 04:25 am (UTC)I absolutely love this line. LOVE it.
And kudos for reading through it all, even when it was more painful than... bursting birth sacs... Ew. Just ew.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-02 05:35 pm (UTC)The story with the Kama Sutra thing is that the book is not named in the book. It's just an Indian sex manual, translated, with a made-up translator. A lot of Indian literature was being translated in the early 1800's (many of those translations don't survive because they were incorrect). But Sourcebooks decided to slap "KAMA SUTRA" on the back cover and all promotional material to help it sell, and every single review has mentioned it since then. Though I must admit you're the only one who caught my Anana Ranga historical mulligan. Congrats! Good eye.
Even if you didn't agree with Darcy's antics, thank you for reading and giving your honest opinion of the book. Can I link to it on my website? I prefer people to know what they're getting. It makes for happier readers.
The first book was a bit sloppy and had a lot of introductions. Second book is tighter, but mainly because I wrote it later, and revised it later, and had a really terrific copyeditor. You get better as you go, for the most part, especially with historical fiction, because you've probably done more research.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-02 07:44 pm (UTC)But Sourcebooks decided to slap "KAMA SUTRA" on the back cover and all promotional material to help it sell, and every single review has mentioned it since then.
In that case, I do apologize for the snark there. I've heard some horror stories about things publishers have done to book jackets to make them more attractive--and that's not even counting front-cover illustrations and back-cover blurbs!
If you'd like to post the review (and you certainly may), you or I could edit out the part where I rant about the Kama Sutra publishing dates. It feels wrong to harangue you for a mistake you didn't actually make--going back, I see that you're right and you never list the title anywhere.
I would like to reiterate, I thought you captured the voices of Darcy and Elizabeth so well. I don't normally laugh out loud at books (unless they're what I call my 'giggle-books'), but The Darcys and the Bingleys caused me to do do several times. I believe a lot of my harshness stemmed from (what I saw as) the juxtaposition between their nigh-perfect voices and their OOC actions.
I think perhaps I will go look up the sequel. You make an excellent point about historical fiction getting better as you go.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-02 08:08 pm (UTC)Obviously I have my own interpretation of Darcy, who in the first section is more comic relief as the focus is on giving Bingley some attention, and that's going to trample some toes. If you're going to give Darcy any flare, people are going to disagree. It's a fact of life. The most popular sequels (which a few notable, smutty exceptions) are generally the ones that stick to the source material so closely they can be a very dull read, even if they are from Darcy's POV. When I read sequels, I award more points for creativity at this point, just because I've seen Darcy (and Elizabeth) done so many different ways.
The MOST important thing to me is that you got some enjoyment from the book, interpretations aside. I'm not doing my job perfectly, but at least I'm doing it. So far, no one's hated the book, though people have mixed feelings about the interpretation of Darcy and the discussion of sex (which isn't Austen-esque but is appropriate to the period, though Bingley still being a virgin at 23 isn't). When you put yourself out there as a writer, you have to stick to your guns. Slightly different aim is taken in the second book, and in all of the books that follow (book 3 is due out in February 2010, and if there's more published depends on sales of earlier books), but essentially I'm saying, "I'm not writing as Jane Austen; I'm doing what I want with her characters, if you want to come for the ride."
Any Austen-sequel author who says they're writing something other than fanfic doesn't understand what fanfic is. We're all writing fanfic. It just has a negative connotation when you say that, because it implies you threw some Ron/Harry mpreg slash in there or something.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-03 02:29 am (UTC)"Darcy...Fitzwilliam...I need your help."
Something in Bingley's voice--desperation perhaps--caused Darcy to look up from his book. Bingley stood in the doorway, face pale, hands hovering over him stomach. Darcy's attention gained, he tottered further into the library.
"Darcy," he said, voice thick with unshed tears, "I--I'm pregnant"
Darcy dropped his book.
"Oh God--is it true?" he asked, incredulous.
Bingley nodded miserably.
"And...is it mine?"
Bingley nodded again.
"Oh Charles!" Darcy cried, standing up and drawing a woebegone Bingley into his arms.
"Darcy..." Bingley breathed, turning his face upwards for a kiss.
"Charles." Darcy lowered his head, and pressed him lips to Bingley's.
No further words were heard from the library for several hours.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-03 02:56 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-03 03:17 am (UTC)Though I'll admit to an utter dearth of surprise.
And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 02:41 am (UTC)And, of course, my favorite sequel thus far is Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife which I'll be the first to admit is smutty, melodramatic, and downright trashy at point, so I don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes to generalized arguments of Darcy's character.
As for fanfiction, I completely agree with you. Sequels to famous novels and media tie-ins are fanfiction--you're writing characters that were created by others. That doesn't make what you're doing any less "literary" or "writerly" and I wish people would get over that idea (and occasionally themselves). Sure, lots of fanfiction is laughably bad (see my story, above), but so is a lot of original fiction. Fanfiction doesn't somehow equal a paucity of skill.
By the way, I do hope that you know I wasn't ragging on you being on FF.net--like I said, I'm on there, too. I was noting a trend in your writing style that I see in fanfics a lot, not saying something like "God, you can tell she started off writing fanfiction." I very much want you to be aware of that distinction. I mean, if nothing else, I'd be a GIANT hypocrite if I started talking smack about people who "only" write fanfiction.
Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:01 am (UTC)Personally I had no plans to publish my series and was working on my non-fanfic for publication purposes when someone said around story 4, "Hey, you should publish this" and so I pitched it to an editor, who immediately bought it. FFnet is a great place for a first draft. I get a lot of helpful comments and historical corrections, and generally get to test out plot twists on a large group of readers.
Sharon Lathan's book was also fanfic, though it was hosted on her own site (Darcysaga.net or something like that). I was reading it there when she decided to self-publish and removed the story, which annoyed me because she did it without warning and didn't give me a chance to download the story first. Then her self-published book was picked up by Sourcebooks. I've never taken my fanfic down and won't unless Sourcebooks demands it (and they can do that because they bought the copyright from me int he contract) because I believe fanfic should be free. I never asked my readers to buy my book, but thank them if they do. They know they're getting the same story.
Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:24 am (UTC)Awesome. Honestly, the more we chat, the more respect I have for you.
May I ask, what did you think of Mr. and Mrs. Fitzwilliam Darcy: Two Shall Become One?
Interesting...I was looking at your LJ user page. One of your friends (lj user="taranhero") happens to be friends with my husband and several other LJ/RL friends of mine.
I believe this is when we cue up "It's a Small World After All"
Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:27 am (UTC)Take from that what you will.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-03 03:38 am (UTC)Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:29 am (UTC)Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:41 am (UTC)We see him sometimes, because we live about 45 minutes away in Worcester.
Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:43 am (UTC)Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:48 am (UTC)(Actually, I expect the answer to that is yes, which isn't fair because you went to Brown. By the way, I promise I'm NOT a creepy internet stalker--I just know where
What's really funny is listening to the people who live in Cambridge explain how it's not actually Boston.
By the way, do you write genre/go to genre conventions? This question isn't as completely out of the blue as it sounds. I do programming for a convention in New York.
Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 03:56 am (UTC)I write sci-fi and urban fantasy, though none of it's been published yet. My agent's working on that, but honestly sci-fi is a really hard genre to break into and romantic/historical fiction is an easy one, so that's where I got my first big break even though it's not reflective of most of the material I've written all my life. The last convention I think I went to was Worldcon 2004 when it was in Boston, because my friends talked me into it, but I generally stay away from conventions. Have had some negative experiences. Plus when I think ICon I think ICon in Israel, which is the big sci-fi convention over Succos where I heard Orson Scott Card speak, not the ICon in New York. During Pesach there's Dragoncon, but that was much smaller.
Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 04:03 am (UTC)I program for Lunacon, actually. Fun con, about 1000-1500 people. I've been involved for...six years now actually.
I'm a little disconcerted about Card speaking at an Israeli convention--mostly because while I love his (early) work, his behavior as a person generally leaves much to be desired.
And for round two of "It's a Small World," my old roommate's girlfriend used to go to ICon when she lived in Israel.
Re: And now, in all seriousness....
Date: 2009-04-03 04:05 am (UTC)