Discussing Mansfield Park with Nick

#JaneAustenJuly
In which Nick and I discuss Mansfield Park . . .
Our video on Pride and Prejudice: • Video
Mansfield Park: tinyurl.com/yawvjetp
 
--General links--
My website: www.katielumsden.co.uk
Facebook: / justbooksandthings
Twitter: / katiejlumsden
Instragram: / katiejlumsden
Goodreads: / katie-lumsden
NaNoWriMo: nanowrimo.org/participants/kat...
Foyles Affiliate link: www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmi...
Email: [e-mail]

[@evelinmenezes9313]

Amazing discussion! I think I am one of the few people who really sees Henry Crawford as a malicious and immoral person through the novel. Improving a man is not a woman's job. See, that's why Pride and Prejudice is so satisfying, because Lizzy and Darcy have improved and are inspired by each other, however, they are doing it themselves.They have always been decent people. No one is changing just for someone else. So, I admire that Austen didn't make Fanny marry Henry. I love Fanny, she is a very resilient character.

[@katiejlumsden]

That's true; I like that Lizzy and Darcy improve each other, and Fanny needs no improving! I love her as a character.

[@MothGirl007]

Totally agree about Henry - he is awful, imho.

[@kevinrussell1144]

She is a drab character but she DOES have character. Henry Crawford is a snake. She would not be tempted by that forbidden fruit.

[@katebuckfield7736]

Henry would have had Fanny booked as the safe faithfully wife and a safe base from which he could have numerous affairs. Bit like Prince Charles.

[@aikikaname6508]

I absolutely agree. Henry Crawford was a charismatic and brilliantly drawn character, but a rake with bad intent not unlike Wickham. Realistically, he wouldn’t have been improved by Fanny for more than at best a few years, before going back to his old ways. I’m glad she didn’t go for that and doesn’t glamourise the bad boys generally, as Austen romantic leads tend to be characterised by intelligence and great moral character

[@hanng1242]

The book is two centuries old. I feel confident that the spoiler period has passed.

[@ivonaivona668]

Still, a lot of people haven't read it yet

[@Toastwig]

For me Henry is attracted to whatever new shiny experience is directly in front of him. In Portsmouth it’s sincerity that is the new exciting thing for himself. He doesn’t realise it’s not genuine because it feels so real even to himself (he’s well established as a terrific actor, so good he believes himself). But then as soon as he leaves and Maria presents a new experience he forgets it. Like when babies have no object permanence, Henry has no emotional permanence. And while I agree Edmund isn’t the most amazing suitor, I love Fanny so much, I want her to be with him because he’s who she wants to be with (cousins aside). Also lol at 24:15 Mansfield park may be my favourite Austen. Loved this discussion!

[@paladin1726]

I think Henry is a lot more complicated than you give him credit for. He never had designs on Julia or Maria. And it was evident by their personality that they were a dime a dozen and typical. You can say that Henry fell in love because she was the shiny new toy or because she was a challenge or not like the others, etc…but then you’re ignoring chapter 30 of the book. Like Darcy with Elizabeth, she was a fairly pretty face of a woman rejected by other men. Until he noticed her beyond the prettiness. And as he got to know Lizzie, he fell madly in love. Henry was legitimately blown away by her qualities that literally nobody else noticed. He even respected and understood her reasons for her rejection. Henry was who he was in part because he dumbed down to the easy women who wanted his attention. Then he met the one woman who was his true ideal. His character couldn’t live up to it. Would he have cheated on Fanny? I think you have to explore why he needs to satiate his vanity, and would he still need to do so once he’s married, or is that child’s toy no longer of interest for him? He’s a complicated character. And I think that’s why there’s so much of him in this book. They’re all superb characters except for the plastic sisters and the invisible Grants.

[@catrionahall8435]

Mansfield Park is a superbly crafted novel which yields more with every rereading

[@marianne218]

Wonderful discussion, thanks! Although I agree that Mansfield Park is not directly about the slave trade, it can’t be a coincidence that Lord Mansfield was a key player in abolishing the slave trade and that a man named Norris was an infamous slave trader. I think Jane Austen just wanted to hint at her opinions, without perhaps being too direct.

[@katiejlumsden]

That is true. And I was thinking when I read some Cowper poetry in July that it's no coincidence that Fanny's favourite poet was a well known anti-abolitionist.

[@asdabir]

Books and Things I think you mean abolitionist or anti slavery:)

[@kevinrussell1144]

@@asdabir We have the same thing over here....people keeping their aunties, antes, and antis in order (not to mention undies). Gone With the Wind is an ante-bellum novel with anti-Yankee themes and considerable scoffing about abolition, with casual mention of maiden Aunties in Atlanta. Merritt Garland and Joe ordered raids on Mar-a-Lago so Joe could have access to Melania's undies. Life is complicated. :)

[@cminmd0041]

@@katiejlumsden Yes, I think since both her rich relations and the likely audience for her book were profiting from the slave trade she had to be circumspect!

[@katehowereads]

Katie, you're making me want to give Mansfield Park a second chance! Loved this discussion!

[@katiejlumsden]

I think you should :D

[@GunpowderFictionPlot]

I love videos with Nick, it's so much fun seeing other people film with their partners, especially when they clearly get along, like you and Nick. Also that cousin joke at the start with brilliant and hilarious. I think Nick would be one of my favourite Booktubers if he started his own channel. I read Mansfield Park this month. I never really enjoyed Austen before, actually I had written her off; but Mansfield Park has completely changed my mind. I loved Fanny, she was so well written, really reminded me of one of my sister's, so pliable when it didn't matter to her, so resolved when it did, so torn when she might upset, so happy for others. I was disappointed there wasn't more about the slave trade in this book, but overall I loved this book. I wouldn't have read this if you didn't run Jane Austen July, so thank you for encouraging us to read more Austen. I feel like she's finally clicked in my head and I know how to enjoy her. 🙂

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks! I love Mansfield Park, and I'm glad you did too - it's such an interesting novel, and Fanny Price is so fascinating.

[@psalmseasytoplayandsingfor3637]

I learned so much from Fannie. She stuck to her core and knew her heart when no one did.

[@katiejlumsden]

Yes!

[@paladin1726]

But like everyone else, she looked to compromise and settle, and conveniently look past shallowness for the sake of getting who she wants.

[@jm15xy]

In Edmund's defense, he has the disadvantage that all he did to make Fanny Price in love with him happened before the main action of the novel begins. Only general summary of what happened between him and Fanny between her arriving at Mansfield Park and the arrival of the Crawfords is provided, and only a few snippets of what their relationship was like are given in detail.

[@katiejlumsden]

That's true - I do think there are some nice moments between them and there are probably a lot more outside of the story.

[@paladin1726]

That was a great video by you two. You’re both very entertaining, talking passionately about a book worthy of that passion. Thank you!

[@Justme-wf5fv]

Best discussion I’ve seen of Mansfield Park. Insightful. Thanks.

[@tillysshelf]

What a great discussion. I didn't read MP this year though I did think about it a lot with reading Lovers' Vows and watching the 1983 adaptation, and I agree with you Katie that it is worth many a read. It had so much to offer for discussion. Regarding Fanny apparently considering accepting Henry Crawford in Portsmouth, I think it is supposed to mimic the point when she almost reads Cottager's Wife in the acting scenes. Austen was trying to show that despite her moral strength, she is not infallible and no one can stand up to that level of coercion forever (again pointing criticism at those who put pressure on Fanny). She would eventually have to cave and do something she knows she shouldn't, but fortunately in both cases she is rescued by external circumstances that prove she was right in the first place (Sir Thomas returning and Crawford/Maria). Crawford I would say is more similar to Willoughby than Wickham - nor entirely evil, but having a better self than it in conflict with lust and selfishness. Both men are acknowledged to be regretful of their actions at the end of the book, whereas Wickham never is. Mary Crawford's slip in her letter at the end does fit with her overall character because she does often say things (a bit like Emma) that she knows she probably shouldn't, because she sees them as amusing or witty ("of rears and vices I saw many, do not be suspecting me of a pun" and comments on religion), rather than because she was saying it seriously. Enjoyed this video a lot, would love to see more MP discussions!

[@katiejlumsden]

I'm so curious to read Lovers' Vows now. I definitely think Crawford is more of a Willoughby than a Wickham - complex and not all bad, unlike Wickham.

[@HeyAllyHey]

Katie! This is most intelligent, articulate, in depth review of Mansfield Park that I’ve found on Booktube so far. It was quite enjoyable. You two make a great team btw ✌️

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks :)

[@kellysanders3367]

I have always put a lot of meaning into the fact that the ending of Mansfield Park focuses on the relationship between Fanny and Sir Thomas. For me, the fact that Fanny's relationship with Edmond is pushed to the side implies that it's a happily ever after ending... but not between the actual couple.

[@marytumulty4257]

It’s always fun to hear you and Nick chat about your thoughts on various characters and their possible rationale for actions that move the story along.

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks!

[@mommy_is_reading7235]

I love your discussions with Nick. It is so great you can experience those things with him. 😊

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks!

[@sonitagovan]

Nick said everything I feel about this book. I think I told you before in a previous video that I just don't find Edmund compelling. I actually sat here talking back to my phone screen as nick was talking because he was articulating everything I have ever thought about this book so well.Loved this video. Its awesome to get a male perspective on this book as well. The first comment about Fanny trying to get together with her cousin made me laugh...such a guy thing to think of. Agree with you both the characterization in this book is brilliant. Thanks for this video it was awesome. I actually finished my last JA book today for Jane Austen July...just in the nick of time

[@katiejlumsden]

Glad you enjoyed the video!

[@Patricia-kk8tr]

it’s a tale about the female gaze, Fanny’s sexual desire for Edmund; Mary’s desire for Edmund; regardless of whether Henry is a suitable match, he is not Fanny’s object of desire. I love JA for giving Fanny who she wants, as she will have to live with his faults. But she gets to stay in Mansfield Park which may prove to be her deepest love.

[@katebuckfield7736]

The double review works.

[@HamsavahiniVajraasthra]

Namaste Katie & Nick 😊.Excellent video👍👍👍I completely agree with Nick on his views of Mansfield Park - and I'm still watching this video now, loved this discussion 😊💖💖💖👍👍👍👍

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks :)

[@katebuckfield7736]

Mrs Norris is the typical, “ Oh this problem needs to be addressed”. Addressed by anyone but me.

[@jennifer2161]

I did Mansfield Park for A level, which started a lifelong love of Jane Austen. I was tasked with analysing the character of Mrs Norris, a delightful assignment, as I discovered the masterly way JA creates a character. I still reread my old school copy, full of notes and underlinings about Mrs M.

[@paladin1726]

I’d love to hear some of it. I think Jane Austen is at her most hilarious when she’s describing the nonsense of Mrs. Norris. Though Henry teaching Lady Bertram whist was hilarious and Rushworth knocking Henry was as well

[@emily-katec2165]

This was so fun! Thanks ! I think all of the problems or all of the somewhat unsatisfactory elements could be done away with if you look at the book through one question: is Goodness, even goodness without anything more interesting or fascinating attached to it, worthy of reward?

[@caraxkins]

I don't think I appreciated Fanny until I put myself in her shoes in the conversation with her uncle turning down Henry. Like, could I do that? Could I have the courage of conviction to turn down so much wealth and comfort? And disappoint my family?

[@Cotictimmy]

Love this discussion. Have posted it on the Jane Austen Facebook Fan Club group for further discussion. 😃

[@launchedathousand]

Really enjoyed this discussion! You both had a lot of great points that I've wanted to articulate but couldn't quite find the correct way. For me Mansfield Park and Northanger Abbey are slightly tied for 3rd favourite Austen after P&P and Persuasion.

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks :)

[@danieljackson3367]

Great discussion - your analysis of Austen was fascinating as ever and it’s also always interesting to hear from someone who’s new to an Austen novel. Now I really want to know what Nick would make of the other four Austen novels! Perhaps we will find out in future Jane Austen Julys!

[@katiejlumsden]

Perhaps indeed!

[@eyrecester]

I read Mansfield Park earlier this year and I didn’t enjoy it as much as I’d wanted to. I really don’t know why, though I might have been unduly prejudiced against it (having previously heard negative or discouraging comments). That said, I already want to give it another try, as I somehow feel it has (subconsciously) grown on me and I would really appreciate it on a second read. This is also because I was quite enthralled by the section of the book which covers the Sotherton visit and I want to review and so further explore the book in light of it. We shall see... But anyway, thank you for this enjoyable discussion; this Jane Austen July has been a treat!

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks :) I do think it is a book that grows on you. The first time I read it it was my least favourite Austen, and it's just moved up and up the rankings.

[@MarilynMayaMendoza]

Mansfield Park is one of my favorite Jane Austen’s. So far it’s tied with persuasion.

[@jf8559]

Really enjoyed this discussion and watched the video without finishing the book yet which I started in #janeaustenjuly but won’t finish In time. I was not enjoying the book but you have inspired me to persevere. Thank you!

[@katiejlumsden]

I hope you enjoy it :)

[@robynfindley7623]

You always make the books you read sound good and I want to read and I still want to read Charles Dickens in the order that you read them. Emma is still my favorite Jane Austen but I have not read lady Susan but I have read the others.

[@katiejlumsden]

I highly recommend Lady Susan - it's great :)

[@AllenChibi]

i like Mansfield Park and i really enjoyed the book, i love Fanny as character, i'm just not in love with the ending, i prefer Henry to Edmund, i wish it didn't end like that, i wish Henry could improved more as a character and a Fanny's suitor if the whole Maria thing didn't happen,and i felt Henry's love for Fanny, it could be a great relationship. I feel Edmund only saw Fanny as sister thorough the book, i mean 80% of the book it tells about 'will he or won't he' with Mary Crawford. For me, Fanny deserves the best, and to be Edmund's second choice...not really. Both Henry and Edmund, they aren't perfect, but because i could feel Henry's love for Fanny, i choose him. I love Edmund as character, he's very kind to Fanny, he's the best (but the best as brother!) and i love Henry too. Again i really, really, really like and enjoyed the book, but because i'm not in love with the ending, it's not my most favourite Austen's novel.

[@katiejlumsden]

I love Fanny Price too; such an interesting character. I don't adore the ending, but I do love her.

[@jessica-fcm]

Yeah I found that Fanny was Edmunds "consolation prize"... It could at least have been more of a build up of Edmunds feelings for her so we were more convinced of his love for her. The finale's delivery was a bit rushed I guess.

[@gabrielcardoso8512]

Nice participation 😄

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks :)

[@jessica-fcm]

I was so curious I went and read Lover's Vows to see what the fuss was about. It's about a poor woman that falls pregnant to a rich powerful man out of wedlock and then in old age she becomes a sick beggar and all this time the rich man regrets having abandoned her and in the end he marries her and redeems himself, and and restores her honor. So there's a scandal (child out of wedlock), but it's not like the plot promotes it as normal or okay, it's literally about how much tragedy this "sin" has caused to all the characters, and in the end, there's "redemption" . So I don't know why it's considered so scandalous. It has a plot that involves a taboo, but the whole point is that the man disgraced the woman and in the end he makes it "right" by marrying her so... It kind of affirms the morality of the time in the end, in my opinion, instead of praising the "sin"... So I still don't get what the fuss was about, even considering the morals of the time...

[@rebeccaholcombe9043]

I think its the fact that it was mentioned at all. And that a bunch of unmarried young persons should be prancing around pretending to be an illegitimate person, a fallen woman and a debaucher of unmarried girls..(speaking in character not my own views)

[@catrionahall8435]

The choice of play in the context of the emotional sate of the Bertram’s at that time.

[@bobbiesuedavis5406]

I think, maybe, I've been too harsh of Fanny Price. I recently watched the BBC Miniseries from 1983 and I just loved it. Still think Edmond Bertram is a weak fool though.😆 How can he NOT see through Mary Crawford???🤔😆

[@katiejlumsden]

Haha Edmund is a bit weak. Do give Fanny Price another try!

[@bettyluna03]

I loved this discussion, because you focused on many different aspects and I could understand each of your arguments and feelings on the book. This video really changed how I think about Mansfield Park, because I didn´t really like before .The main reason for that was that I found it difficult to relate to Fanny, her strict moral compass and how introverted and quiet she was. And because of this she never really did anything about her situation which was extremly annoying to me and made her boring in my eyes, especially compared to other female protagonists in Austen novels (although I understand that she and her upbringing is also very different to other protagonists which could explain her personality and how she acts and my lack of knowledge of this era might play into this as well). But you two have such a different perspective on the book and interesting thoughts about many aspects of the book that I never consideratet that closely (like how good the characters are portraited, the criticism on clergymen, differences between the classes and so on) because I was distracted by the lovestory. Overall I agree more with Nick and I will probably never like this book as much as you do, but I will now read it again to understand your appreciation of it better. So thanks for this interesting video!

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks very much, glad the video was interesting for you :)

[@Maria_Efe]

Such an interesting video! I just finished rereading Mansfield Park and it remains my list favourite Austen book, though I still find it an interesting one! I think that out of Austen's books, this one has the least likeable cast of characters overall, and by far the least sympathetic male protagonist, so I struggle to connect emotionally to it. The narrator's voice in the last chapter was delightful though! 😊

[@katiejlumsden]

Thanks! It does have less likable characters, but I just find it so fascinating.

[@hamiltonpaul73]

You both make excellent points about 'Mansfield Park'. On the whole, I love 'Mansfield Park' even more than 'Pride and Prejudice'. Austen is so brilliant at framing subtle conflicts between people and developing them in unexpected and complex ways . . . I especially love the nuance in her portrayal of Mary Crawford and Henry Crawford, ostensibly "bad" characters, but who reveal unexpected depths (as you both point out) . . . Austen is a master. * Spoiler * My one criticism is similar to the objection Nick raises. The ending is not satisfying. For me, the reason is that Fanny is set up in a confrontation with the towering figure of her uncle, Sir Thomas, over whether she will comply with him to marry Henry Crawford. It gets so bad that Austen imagines Sir Thomas even approving of Fanny starving and sick in Portsmouth as a way to teach her a lesson about what she would be giving up if she refused Henry. But Austen rescues Fanny from this conflict by making Henry's own conduct so reprehensible that it "justifies" her in the eyes of Sir Thomas . . . and only the hideous Mrs Norris holds her rejection of Henry against her. I also find that Henry's lapse - while certainly plausible when you consider his past behavior - is not really consistent with the person he has become when he visits Fanny in Portsmouth . . . It feels forced . . . as if Austen intervened in order to secure the ending she needed. Austen hints that Fanny was breaking down under Henry's relentless courtship, but if Austen really wants to vindicate Fanny's judgment about Crawford, it seems to me that it would have been better if the novel ended more ambiguously with Henry simply losing interest and Fanny left with the consolation that she has not betrayed the sanctity of her own moral judgment. I don't think I would have felt satisfied with Henry actually marrying Fanny - as she is so, at her core, opposed to him . . . It may be that Austen simply could not end the novel with Fanny winning a standoff with her uncle, but it seems to me that is the direction her character and her uncle's character were taking the novel . . . and, as I said, I think Austen simply rescued her from that . . . so we were denied the ability to see Fanny's moral principles truly tested. * There is one other way I could imagine the novel ending. If Fanny married Henry, but the marriage was obviously coerced. That would give Austen a chance to follow through with her exploration of Fanny's moral judgment under strain. It is entirely plausible that Fanny would concede to Sir Thomas and Henry, but only with a deep inner conflict . . . and the development of that would have been quite interesting psychologically.

[@katiejlumsden]

I do think it's a such an interesting book - I adore it, but yes, the ending can be a bit frustrating.

[@hamiltonpaul73]

Books and Things Yes, indeed!

[@paladin1726]

This is what I wanted to read. I was so upset that the Henry rumors ended up being true. I think Jane Austen explained it well, and at first I felt like “you gave zero time to the romance of Edmund, which was more like an epilogue”. But upon further reflection, I think this was entirely intentional. This wasn’t a romantic story between Edmund and the girl he considered his sister until the last several pages. I expected Edmund to be jealous at some point. Didn’t happen. I expected eye opening by Edmund when Henry was extolling her virtues. Didn’t happen. He still wanted the professed gold digger who insulted his profession and had nothing in common when it came to religion. He wanted her because she’s hot and she wanted him over Tom. And these were better qualities than anything little cousin/sister Fanny offered. And Fanny loved a guy she found to be rather shallow when it came to women….and one who didn’t value her nearly what Henry did.

[@ericaadams2183]

Interestingly, William is cut from the movie adaptation.

[@mothernyx4933]

What a great review! I agree with most of this. Mansfield park is my favorite Austin novel. Major adaptations of this novel aren’t good :( but it’s understandable. Edmond doesn’t think of Fanny romantically till page 491 out of 496 and so I agree that he really doesn’t deserve her. I knew it was coming and it was still bleh because I dislike Edmond. The good thing is they have lots of moments together that are good and positive to help with that abrupt change. I’m glad Fanny got with who she wanted but yes it is unsatisfactory. Great Darcy comparison, I felt that way too. I don’t think her thinking about warming up or marrying Crawford in Portsmouth is against what the book is saying about Fanny being steadfast. She wants to be moral, helpful, and grateful and her actions toward Crawford I think reflect it. I didn’t like Mary Crawford at all throughout the novel. I did warm up to Henry but he messed up. Overall I feel like the ending was a bit rushed. It is a large book and the change of pace and quick change of events is jarring and makes me wonder if there were other factors to create this ending.

[@einahsirro1488]

I feel like basically Edmund marries Fanny on the rebound.

[@jessica-fcm]

Personally, I wasn't too grossed out with the cousin thing, because I understand that was considered normal back then. What I did wonder was the "propriety" aspect from the time: single ladies and young gentlemen couldn't be alone together in the same room because it wasn't considered "proper". But Edmund and Fanny before they became a thing, were always together, and seemingly alone, in Fanny's room talking about stuff (unless I got that part wrong) . When it came out that they wanted to get married, wouldn't this fact (that they had been left alone with each other for so many years) be considered as an impropriety and therefore the marriage would be "scandalous" ?

[@sueh3426]

I recently read Mansfield Park for the first time during Jane Austen July. I did enjoy it much more than I had anticipated due to reading many negative reviews in regards to Fanny. I was, however, not a fan of Edmund.

[@katiejlumsden]

Edmund is not my favourite, but I do love Fanny Price.

[@jessica-fcm]

While I was happy that Fanny ended up with Edmund, I was frustrated at how the finale was delivered. I was expecting at least a dialogue between them with a little tension, a little passion, to disclose his new found feelings for her...I was expecting something more romantic, more exciting in Edmund's discovery of his own feelings for Fanny... Instead we got just a brief "so the time passed and gradually Edmund started liking Fanny, everyone approved, the end" - that's it. Kinda frustrating..

[@soniamoreira9034]

Edmund and Fanny are the kindest and most decent characters in Mansfield Park but Edmund is rather oblivious to reality all the time. Fanny deserves to have what she wants at least for once. Like in a fairy tale, a Cinderela story, she gets her prince in the end. Henry has no moral fibre to make Fanny happy. He is sly and she was just a challenge for him. The ending was perfect like the rest of the book.

[@charlesiragui2473]

Are the Prices really criticized for being middle class? More just JA honestly portraying the grinding life of a middle class family with 9 children. They're actually doing pretty well, with several sons rising in the navy, the eldest headed to heights. Whose children are turning out worse? The Bertrams best child, Fanny, isn't even their own.

[@thomashamilton8523]

The comment you made about Mary Crawford being closer to Jane Austen's other heroines is also how I very much feel about the dynamic Jane Fairfax and Emma Woodhouse as Jane Fairfax's character journey feels very much a halfway point between the Bennett's and the Dashwood sisters and Emma would be a Caroline Bingley type figure had Jane been the focus of the story

[@thomashamilton8523]

Also Mr and Mrs Price could also be viewed as what Anne Elliot was warned what could happen to her (The daughter from a relatively high ranking family marrying a man without money).

[@katiejlumsden]

I was thinking a lot this month about how similar Jane Fairfax and Fanny Price, and Emma and Mary Crawford are similar. I sort of feel like Henry Crawford and Fanny get another chance at being a couple in Emma in Frank and Jane. Definitely like the idea of connecting Mrs Price and Anne Elliot - I hadn't thought of that before!

[@TExplainsitAll]

Would you ever create a bookclub because I'd love to join? Have you read "Wuthering Heights" or "Nefertiti"?

[@katiejlumsden]

I don't run a regular bookclub but I do do readalongs sometimes. I have indeed read Wuthering Heights - it's one of my favourites!

[@jackiesliterarycorner]

The way you guys are discussing the novels makes me wish Fanny had chosen Henry Crawford. I like it because I relate to Fanny and I have a bias to friends falling in love despite, the fact they're cousins. I don't like Wickham and Caroline, but I'm intrigued by the Crawfords. Wasn't Austen's father a clergy man?

[@katiejlumsden]

Austen's father and her brother James were both clerygman (and her brother Henry, but possibly only after her death, I can't remember). And the Crawfords are so interesting!

[@user-ij3ti4kd7f]

In defense of Edmund. He saw it as a lesser of two evils and that bringing outside people into the fold was greater than participating himself. Of course many a man has fooled himself out of a desire for a woman, which in this case was satisfied by joining in.

[@trapdoor3461]

Do you have a favorite Wuthering Heights movie adaptation? I just saw the one from the 30's and I think it was fine...

[@katiejlumsden]

I've seen many Wuthering Heights adaptations . . . and none of them seemed quite right to me.

[@katebuckfield7736]

Fanny Price is a goody two shoes.

[@janetsmith8566]

Regarding your discussion of Henry versus Edmund and their feelings towards family and how they understood her: I disagree, respectfully, because in my own life I had two men Who loved me at different times, and I would say that one understood me phenomenally well and was romantic and responded enthusiastically to the things that I was interested in. The other one was more of a true love even though he was a bit clueless in terms of understanding me. So I think it's not fair to say that Edmund is less worthy as a suitor because he didn't seem to think about or understand Fanny as much as Henry. And also in my own life the romantic one was over the top like Henry. And like Fanny I have this weird deep down feeling somehow that it would not last and that he would not be the best choice. It was completely instinctual. So I can draw a lot of parallels there to my own experience. Hope that makes sense. So I

[@katiejlumsden]

Fanny definitely sticks to her instincts which I love!

[@bookmouse2719]

It's painful to watch as Mrs. Norris bashes Fanny throughout the book. Fanny is strong. Jane mentions the name in the character of Mrs. Norris ordering Fanny around (like a slave) and there was a historical figure at the time that modern readers don't know of, a Captain Norris that wrote of life of slaves aboard ships and the Liverpool slave market. So, she was being ironic.

[@davidwright7193]

Captain Norris may well have written about the Liverpool based slave trade but he didn’t write about a Liverpool slave market because such a thing did not exist. Liverpool did not handle slaves as goods and it would have been illegal for them to do so (see Lord Mansfield’s judgement on the matter). There were a few plantation owners who brought house slaves back to England but when they arrived they became household servants with the same rights as any others de jure. The extent to which the plantation owners acknowledged this or the people concerned were aware of there change in status is a matter for debate and of variance but the English courts would enforce the legal position if a case was bought before them. The British ports handled the export of British manufactured goods (cloth, tools, weapons, bulk metals) and the import of slave produced goods (sugar, tobacco, cotton etc). Slaves were carried on the middle passage from Africa to the Americas but by the time of this novel that trade has been outlawed and interdicted for 5 to 7 years. Sir Thomas may well be travelling to Antigua to resolve the problems created because he can no longer buy slaves from Africa and is limited to those he has and their “natural growth”.

[@catrionahall8435]

Norris is a reference to the slave trade

[@einahsirro1488]

I think the Prices are essentially judged for a different kind of excess: too many children. As for the theatrics, although JA never says it, I think the outrage is because the WOMEN will be acting. Had it just been the men acting out some scene from the Iliad, it would have been fine. But actresses were only a notch above prostitutes. And the danger was that women speaking lines of love to men they weren't close to could easily lead to actual flirtations (which is exactly what happens). Even today, we see modern day actors falling for their co-stars, and making for very public divorces (think Brad Pitt).

[@mrs.manrique7411]

Everything you guys wish had happened is partially what Austen wanted her readers to feel. She wrote people’s affected expectations (like Lord Bertram’s death) from the popular media of their day, and subverted those expectations. Lol

[@andrewsmith8454]

It is ironic that Mrs Norris is a benefactor of Fanny Price since it is Mrs Norris who instigates the plan of taking Fanny Price into Mansfield Park. I'm not sure about her motives for this. Maybe it was to have someone else around of a lower social status that she could boss about. However, Mrs Norris's action ultimately benefits Fanny despite the suffering she inflicts on her, and who can say what sort of a life she would have led if left in Portsmouth. Her character appears less well suited to the Portsmouth family than her sister Susan, who seems keen to get away from it towards the end of the book.

[@katiejlumsden]

I think Mrs Norris wants to be seen as good, even though she's not - and always wants to be not the lowest class person in the immediate family I guess!

[@katebuckfield7736]

Could Fanny almost be a pound shop Princess Diana.

[@Salamon2]

Ahh, the theatricals... there's three parts as to why the theatricals are a moral dilemma. A third of the reason that Lover's Vows is seen as "immoral" is because the subject of the play: it's about a woman who years ago was seduced and then abandoned by her lover the Baron--which led to her having a son out of wedlock. Meanwhile the Baron was "forced" to marry someone else respectable by his father (who has since had the good misfortune to die after leaving him a daughter who he mostly ignores). Years later after having gone to war, the son returns home to find his mother even more destitute than when he left, gets angry and vows to go and kill his birth father for the crime of having abandoned his mother before he was born (the plot has some elements of tragedy to it--which can be seen as a satire on those tragic elements--Mr. Yates like a true theatre kid loves the part for its tragic-like rantings--while completely missing that it's a satire of said tragic rantings). Meanwhile the Baron's legitimate daughter he had with his now dead wife is coquettishly seducing her minister teacher after finding the buffoonish Count her father has set her up with to be... well, lacking. And the minister teacher is young... and handsome... and she is undressing him with her eyes every time he walks into the room, kind of way, to the point where she can't focus on her lessons with him as her teacher because he's so hot. After some mishaps, in the end the Baron recognizes his former love and vows to right the wrong he did by her by marrying her and legitimizing his bastard son--thus resolving the whole his bastard son wants to kill him plot--while the half-sister succeeds in seducing her teacher/minister, and everything is all resolved with two marriages as the Count is too much a buffoon to have much resolved on his end. Another third is that the teens are basically occupying themselves with this performance while it's unknown whether Sir Thomas, while he's away, could live or die at sea. Occupying oneself with such frivolities was seen as rather callous to say the least (this is without getting into them going about altering his rooms without his permission). Granted nothing happens to Sir Thomas as Nick says in the video, but travel in the early 19th Century, while nowhere near as perilous as it had been previously, still wasn't the "sure thing" and no big deal we consider it to be now. Additionally, nowadays we are always looking for distraction during times of stress and high emotion--and Tom makes that argument in the book that the distraction would be good for his mother, rather than fretting over whether father will die at sea or not. Arguably the moral thing at the time would have been to give some consideration to the difficult journey their father was making at the time. The fact that his children don't speaks to how selfish and spoiled they mostly are, that they can be so inconsiderate of their own father's life--it speaks badly of Sir Thomas as a father and his parenting. There's also some moral questions about Maria, being an engaged woman, taking on the role of a "ruined woman" so to speak--in the view of the times, that's especially risque for an engaged woman--especially with how intimate the role gets with other male characters (Tom of course answers that criticism by saying that Mr. Rushworth doesn't see any problem with it, and is acting in the play himself--though of course he's acting in a part which has no interactions with his betrothed). And then there's the last third that most people today "get" and most adaptations of the book play up because most people can get it: that the play is objectionable because it gives the young adults permission to flirt and get rather "intimate" with one another in ways that they otherwise wouldn't be allowed to. After all, in the scene where the young man finds his destitute mother, he immediately hugs and kisses her--with Henry Crawford and Maria Bertram in those parts, well, they can just go about getting close to one another and have the pretty excuse to say "oh, we're just rehearsing our scene... it means absolutely nothing." Same thing with Mary Crawford playing Amelia (the Baron's legitimate daughter) against Edmund's Anhault (the minister), the coquettish flirtation is exactly what Mary wants to do with Edmund, because she's found his company agreeable over Tom's. In that sense, it's the whole "let me adopt this role to achieve my own ends" kind of pushing the envelope--the play becomes an excuse for everyone to flirt with whom they like and get closer to those people. This is why Julia gets so offended when Henry chooses to have Maria play the mother role instead of her--because it's the first time Henry is giving either sister and indication to whom his attentions, which he has been splitting equally up until this point, have as a preference. And there's the subtle indication that Julia was looking forward to skirting around the rules of propriety with Henry through the play, but he chose her sister over her. It's not so much that Austen is "anti-theatricals" as we know she participated and wrote some herself. The moral quandrey is about the intentions behind those theatricals, which is a more complex and complicated reasoning. If the Mansfield "players" were really just wanting to perform to pass away the time, then there's no harm in it, but the fact that it's done while Sir Thomas is away at sea, that the play has some questionable content in it with the players questionably cast in certain roles, and is being used as an excuse to circumvent codes of conduct--just comes down as "yeah, you're not really doing it at the right time with the right play for the right reasons" is more the takeaway from the whole theatrical plot line. It's more the exploration by how morals get "chipped away" at and eroded, not with big actions, but by little things which are seen as inoffensive in isolation, but add up over time until everyone's compromised themselves. It's actually a rather neat meditation on the idea of how such things occur.

[@Salamon2]

And then of course there's the foreshadowing going on: Maria & Julia both vie over the part of the "ruined woman"--both become "ruined women" by the end of the novel.

[@janetsmith8566]

Would either of you take on the challenge of researching the whole bias against theatre in this area? That would be so illuminating. I have made my own assumptions about it, but of course I could be wrong. I am guessing that because of the perceived general immorality of "theatre folk" and the often risque content of the popular plays that the every day Well bred, well mannered high principled person would be offended. Also within the book there are the indications of discomfort with exposing oneself whilst acting which also was looked down upon with horror. I wonder if I'm on track?

[@katiejlumsden]

I don't know /too/ much about it, but I think it's partly about the 18th and 19th century assumption that most actresses were prostitutes. Bit mad but basically for polite society acting was next to prostitution, and especially for women acting was considered quite immoral. The ideas that actors lived sort of Bohemian immoral lives outside of the rules of society was pretty common. I think there's a bit of taboo around acting as it being sort of close to lying/pretending as well.

[@freshparchment]

I agree with Katie, but I also think that it was the choice of Lover's Vows that was the truly poor choice in this case. The fact that an unwed mother lives openly as such and is redeemed by the end of the play and that Amelia seduces her teacher and owns her sexuality made the play racy enough to watch. To then act out these scenes with men to whom the ladies are not related and to whom they are sexually or romantically attracted is A) a danger to their reputations and B) a danger to their own morality in allowing themselves to act out their fantasies (and that applies to Maria, Julia, Mary, Henry, and Edmund). The fact that Austen was fond of both home theatricals and going to the theatre makes me think that playacting itself was not the moral issue she was pointing out in this novel.

[@janetsmith8566]

FreshParchment That is extremely helpful- thank you! I didn't really know what lovers vows even dealt with so that is extremely enlightening- thanks!!

[@freshparchment]

@@janetsmith8566 You're welcome! Glad my nerdiness can come in handy.

[@janetsmith8566]

FreshParchment but don't you think knowing that alters the perception of the whole story? My whole life I've wondered what the big deal was and thought Fanny was just being unnecessarily prudish. Huge insight!

[@davidwright7193]

I don’t agree with your analysis of Edmund. Much of the novel is about the evangelical reform movement taking hold in the church at that time (mid-1810’s). Large parts of the novel are focused on Edmund’s vocation in the church (and Dr Grant’s lack of one). That vocation is the source of conflict with Mary, the only reason they don’t marry and why he ends up with Fanny. Edmund is a man of principles but not inflexible in those principles, the key thing in the play is that he is prepared to comprises his principles to do good for others (or at least prevent an evil). It is also worth remembering that Fanny is on the point of taking part in the play when Sir Thomas returns. This is a book written at the very end of the long 18th century. Edmund and Fanny are really 19th century characters, if not quite Victorian in their morality, where as the Crawfords are very much fully 18th century people.

[@nancyabbott2660]

I don’t know why I liked Edmund but I did not like Henry at all. Edmund was the one who was kind toFanny from the beginning so I really liked him. I too thought Henry was just malicious and immoral . I think his interest in Fanny is only because Fanny is not interested and he sees her as a conquest so to speak…” I’m going to make Fanny love me”? Really?

[@kevinrussell1144]

Is there ANY clergy in any Jane Austen novel that comes across as a moral force? Some nice people, yes, but figures of true stature? I suspect that Jane was not that impressed by this segment of society.

[@MichaelaDrechselova]

Mansfield Park is my least favourite Austen novel. That’s because I don't find Fanny likeable at all. My dislike of her is certainly caused by my modern prejudice. I find her insufferably judgmental. More so than any other Austen’s character, as the others are pointedly not perfect (their story is, partially, about personal development). That is not the case for Fanny who is supposedly an angel. It seemed to me that Fanny doesn’t really like anyone other than Edmund. She tolerates them, she suffers them. She doesn’t really like them. What more, compared to other Austen’s heroines, she also seems quite simple of though. That might be the case for her being shy and quiet. There is one thing I like about her - she ends up with the most boring man of the family, who is quite a bit like her.

[@katiejlumsden]

I feel like Fanny is quite complex and interesting - I think she is shy and quiet, but I love her strength and sense of self. I also definitely don't blame her for not liking the characters around her when so many of them are awful XD

[@MichaelaDrechselova]

​@@katiejlumsden You are correct, I can't think of anyone among the people I know that would bear the people in the Mansfield Park as well as Fanny does. 😄 Maybe I do feel this way because of her lack of action actively leading towards change... which is caused by her debilitating shyness. That would make sense as Anne is surrounded by people just as awful at the beginning of Persuasion and she is one of my favourite heroines. Anne is patient and somewhat quiet, but she wishes to be of help in a way someone as shy as Fanny never could. The lack of character development in case of Fanny doesn't help either, I suppose. I feel that I was pushed to think that Fanny is perfect (except for her shyness) from the beginning which made her flaws (being judgmental) even more apparent to me. Poor girl, I should give her another chance one day. Preferably in the form of an audiobook. 😁

[@kevinrussell1144]

A BORING woman trying to figure out how to sleep with her cousin. I didn't like it much at all the one time I read it, but that was 10+ years ago. And yes, Fanny doesn't have proper character development, but most of the rest have NO character. It was a disappointment even compared to Sense and Sensibility.