Why Are Lydia, Kitty, And Mary Portrayed So Negatively?
The five sisters of my mother and the three sisters of my late stepfather were/are the pride and joy of my late grandparents.😊
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
Interesting question. I think it comes out as worse on film, because you actually hear them giggling and see them spinning and jumping. If you were reading it, then it might not be so annoying, but I think it shows Austen's view of the ideal woman. She had a quick mind, like Lizzie, but perhaps aspired to have some of Jane's qualities. We know she dislikes haughty, vain women like Bingley's sister and even her own Emma.
My guess is that Austen regarded the silliness of Lydia and Kitty as useless qualities, and the somber attitude of Mary as depressing and possibly boring. However, I think we are meant to see Lizzie as a loving sister (look how she argues with her father about the dangers of Lydia going to Brighton), even if she does want them to settle down in temperament.
I followed all the rules...and you followed none of them. And they all loved you more.
Leonard was certainly very considerate when he provided a happy ending where all five sisters get a husband. A question about Mary: why is she always depicted with glasses?; the novel does not mention her wearing glasses.
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
You referred to "The Leonard version" in another thread. Which one is that?
I'm not sure why Mary has glasses. It reminds me of those 1940's films like "The Big Sleep", in which the supposedly mousy or homely librarian takes off her glasses, undoes her up-swept hair and becomes gorgeous! :o Glasses are used to make pretty women look plain, I guess.
How do all five sisters get a husband? I hope they don't do it like Lydia did in the 2005 version!
I followed all the rules...and you followed none of them. And they all loved you more.
WHICH ONE IS THAT?
The Robert Z Leonard version, which stars Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier, big stars of 1940.
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
I guess you like that version...a bit? ;-P Sorry, I've never seen it. It is the same with the version of "Little Women" with Katherine Hepburn. The main reason for not viewing those adaptations is that I'm a huge stickler for historic accuracy in costumes. Nothing infuriates me more than a 1940's silhouette on a Victorian or Regency (or any other) character! Same with hair styles.
I remember watching the 1960's film "The Go-Between" with such a great cast (Julie Chritie, Alan Bates) and flipping out when Julie's character (around the turn-of-the-century) emerges from a shrubbery after her liaison, a bit disheveled...and you clearly see her bra through the Edwardian blouse! Arrrgh!
It's one of the reason I love Merchant-Ivory films so much. Their attention to period detail is amazing. I will even watch a mediocre or awful film, just for the costumes. Titanic is a good example (sorry if you liked it but the dialogue, acting and general story all left me cold...yikes!...that wasn't a conscious pun).
I followed all the rules...and you followed none of them. And they all loved you more.
Ever notice how, in the Hammer movies of the 1960s, the women frequently wear eye shadow, artificial eyelashes, and particularly the high hairdos that were so popular in that decade, and which Scorsese loves to spoof in movies like GOODFELLAS and CASINO?
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
I love those two films! The thing with Scorsese is that when he gets a certain "look" (early-mid 60's) he tends to stay with it, even as the story progresses into later decades, with a few exceptions, like Sharon Stone's "shag" hair-do and later, her punk-style. And those god-awful houses with the foil-print wallpaper and giant gold statues. Heh-heh...total excess!
I actually thought Sharon looked great in that style, with her slender figure and sharp (though beautiful) features--that teased, long blonde hair and gold, sequined dress when Ace first sees her.
Have you ever seen "Age of Innocence" with Michelle Pfeiffer and Daniel Day Lewis? It's set in 1870's New York and is flawless in terms of costume, decor and pretty much everything else.
I followed all the rules...and you followed none of them. And they all loved you more.
AGE OF INNOCENCE--imagine that: an Scorsese movie in which the characters do NOT punctuate every sentence they say with F and S bombs.😊
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
It's pretty weird...but refreshing! I still remember my reaction to Joe Pesci getting Best Supporting Actor for "Goodfellas": "What?! All he did was say F this and F that The WHOLE movie!" I sill liked it though.
In Age of Innocence, the nastiness is much subtler--well, not always--and the sort of backhanded sniping we usually think of as women's tactics are used by most of the men as well: gossiping, hinting at impropriety, guessing who will end up with whom and not because they approve. There's a great line about how people's lives could be "shattered by a whisper" or something to that effect. Simply having everyone band together to snub someone's invite to a dinner party could literally ruin a person's life, unless she is saved by the social power couple, an old
And at the end, the character of Newland (Daniel Day Lewis) [Semi Spoiler!]...considers himself "at the center of an armed camp of conspirators", all protecting his wife and bent on undoing his affair with her cousin, whom he really loves. There is much nastiness and sense of ownership. At least the mobsters and Vegas types were honest about it!
In the case of this story, Scorsese was not "reaching", as many have accused, but simply turning Edith Wharton's picture of shallow, often vicious, New York society into an analogy for organized crime. Brilliant
I followed all the rules...and you followed none of them. And they all loved you more.
High society behaving like what the Victorian Era called the criminal classes: that IS funny.
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
It's funny to us now but when you imagine living that way, it's really tragic. The thing that gets me is that the people are either mean, or weak (the ones they prey on). And those who rebel get squashed anyway. In another story by Wharton, the heroine ends up overdosing on chloral hydrate after losing her place in society and all her friends! It really IS like being in a gang--you can't leave.
I followed all the rules...and you followed none of them. And they all loved you more.
And nobody realizes the brutality in all those Scorsese movies because the viewer is seduced by the beauty of the gowns, the hairdos, the jewels, and the décor.
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
That film is such a feast for the eyes. I remember spending hours at Borders Books a few days after seeing the film for the second time. I pouring over the pages of the gorgeous companion book for the film. I couldn’t afford the price tag: $75-$80 (cannot recall precisely) so I sat in a chair for hours so I could enjoy it. That had to have been in 1993. A few years later, after discovering the wonders of purchasing used books online, I bought myself a copy for under $10, including shipping charges.
It’s a giant, clothbound hardcover with a thick, shiny plastic dust jacket. It’s printed on high quality thick, shiny paper. The end pages have a beautiful print, probably historically accurate to the 1870s. There are oodles of high resolution close-up photos of everything in the film: fabrics, upholstery, lace, silverware, glassware, jewelry, furniture, etc. And loads of details about all of it. There’s also an appendix in which Scorsese explores all of the classic films that inspired his choices in The Age of Innocence.
I think you're exactly right. That in the book it doesn't seem as bad because you can't hear them giggling or see Mrs. Bennett spilling stuff on a man's jacket. But they're definitely portrayed as silly in the book.
share