The Darcy Myth - A Rant Review

I hate this book so much, possibly even more than Prophet Song. Grab a beverage, find some snacks, and settle in for a LONG rant.
Subscribe to my weekly newsletter: nerdynursereads.substack.com/
My friend sells awesome book merch, get yourself a sweatshirt! (there's even a Hobb shirt!)
Girl Parts - girlparts.co/
#darcy #bookreview #rant #books #booktuber #JaneAusten #prideandprejudice
⋯ PATREON ⋯
www.patreon.com/NerdyNurseReads
⋯ SOCIALS ⋯
linktr.ee/NerdyNurseReadsAndW...
⋯ MUSIC ⋯
www.epidemicsound.com
⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯
📖 I've been unhauling books on PangoBooks! If you want to check out what's on my unhaul shelf: pangobooks.com/bookstore/nerd...
📖 Join me on storygraph! app.thestorygraph.com/profile...
📖 Want more? Listen to the podcast: www.tbrlowdown.com/show-notes and join our discord: disboard.org/server/823917426...
Thank you for watching!
- Alyssa ❤
Disclaimer:
Any video on my channel is reflective solely of my opinion and is for entertainment purposes only. Any copyrighted materials or excerpts are for "fair use" for such purposes as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. (Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976)E

[@rusted_ursa]

LYDIA 👏🏻 IS 👏🏻 A 👏🏻 CAUTIONARY 👏🏻 TALE 👏🏻 AGAINST 👏🏻 NEGLIGENT 👏🏻 PARENTING!

[@NerdyNurseReads]

THIS!!!!!!!

[@carriemoscoe3159]

And it says something about Wickham. Because Georgiana is waayyyy more timid and she was extremely guarded…and the fact she was a few steps before running off with Wickham before she found the guts to confess to her brother what had happened says how Wickham is able to manipulate young girls

[@stefannydvorak7919]

It's a cautionary tale against bad parenting and grown men who only go after teenaged girls.

[@bluequeen8022]

The fact that she thinks Bridgerton and Jane Austen are in the same genre says enough. Dont get me wrong I love Bridgerton (Polin season is coming yall) but it's really not the same, its a fantasy romanticization of regency england meanwhile Jane Austen writes quite literally the opposite, social satire. Like... gurl bffr

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Bridgerton isn't the worst offense. Some of the "Darcys" she lists out are truly preposterous comparisons. I'm not convinced she's read Pride & Prejudice! And yes, Regency Romances and books written in the Regency Period are not the same thing!

[@LeadrynMcKrotch]

Yeah I noticed that too. She talks about Darcy but then lists characters from books that weren't even written during the regency era. They are literally just fantasy novels written by authors who think that is sexy. You don't have to agree with them, that doesn't have to be your fantasy but like it is for others. People really need to stop getting upset when people don't like the same thing as them.

[@carriemoscoe3159]

If anyone fixes Mr. Darcy, it is Mr. Darcy himself! And Lizzy doesn't take his BS and rightfully holds him accountable for it! And then he learns and grows from it and makes amends for his mistakes- and never tells her or lets her know so that way, she doesn't have to feel indebted to marry him!

[@NerdyNurseReads]

HERE! HERE!!!

[@carriemoscoe3159]

Also-in regards to “tearing apart her sister and Bingley” Darcy genuinely thought Jane was not into Bingley and misread her and was trying to protect his friend from heartbreak. Poor Jane just guards her emotions in public enough that she didn’t let her adoration of Bingley show. Darcy had no idea he was splitting apart two people in love with each other! And when Lizzy tells him the truth he watches them and it’s implied he realizes she does love him-and HE encourages Bingley to get back with her and propose to her.

[@ElenaVarg]

Imagine if the author had written a book about ANY famous and adored men from Gothic romances. The Rochester Myth would’ve worked so much better: he literally locked up his ex IN THE ATTIC and tries to bigamy his way into the protagonist’s heart but our current romance genre still sees him as a hero!

[@NerdyNurseReads]

OMG This myth applied to Rochester could have worked! She just wanted to grab people's attention, so she went with Darcy. People love Darcy way more than Rochester (for good reason).

[@brookb5890]

This is what I've been thinking the whole time! The only reason Jane gets to be happy in the end is because he's been wholly incapacitated by the end. Now, he's the helpless, dependent spouse, and Jane holds all the power. It's been a while in the book but I'm pretty sure it ends with either Jane actively gaslighting him or implying that she does/can. Like, let's unpack the myth that their story is in any way enviable. Leave Fitz and Lizzie alone, ma'am.

[@thatpanfairy7176]

Mate the phantom myth would also have worked

[@jediping]

@@thatpanfairy7176Especially if you getting into the conflation of the Phantom and Christine’s father. 🤢 And yeah, this would have made more sense with so many other novels, but not those of Austen. The closest to the long-suffering heroine is Fanny Price, but she actively dislikes the rake and likes the younger brother/clergyman. She also, for all her dependent situation, refuses to cow to the pressure from her relatives to accept the rake. And she even gets blamed for his bad behavior after he finally goes off with the married woman he actually loves!

[@user-bn9kr6nz5h]

It's been a while since I've read "Jane Eyre" and I've had to refresh my memory by taking a gander at Wikipedia, but doesn't Mr. Rochester deserve some credit for keeping his first wife, Bertha Mason, under his own roof--literally--as opposed to sending her off to be locked up "someplace", as Norman Bates would have put it? Also, I like the fact that Mr. Rochester raises the little girl, Adele Varens, in his own home and hires Jane to be her governess, even though he's not sure that Adele is even his daughter. And Adele grows up to be a fine young woman and a companion to Jane.

[@CezzL]

I'm an English teacher and this entire book reminds me of the students who don't revise for the Lit exam and just try to wing it based on what they know in pop culture.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

THIS!!!

[@moustik31]

I'm already upset at the titles: NONE of Jane Austen's male love interests are monsters. They are flawed but they are not downright abusive and that's very refreshing compared to some more modern heroes. There is an argument to make about how romance tropes give us "unrealistic" expectations but I think, the issue is that those of us, who looked to books to learn about life were actually suffering from parental neglect. Jane Austen's job isnt to educate young ladies, her job is to entertain her readers, which she did admirably, maybe this author should take some notes.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Flaws do not a monster make!

[@myboatforacar]

1000% agreed

[@yundorphin]

... this sounds like she's working through some personal stuff. Not sure why she had to drag Jane Austen into it, though.

[@Sophia-ss8gr]

I got the same feeling

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Same! Some things can stay in drafts, it's ok.

[@jennicathlin]

Just a note to add that Darcy did actually try to get Lydia to leave Wickham before forcing Wickham to marry her. "His first object with her, he acknowledged, had been to persuade her to quit her present disgraceful situation, and return to her friends as soon as they could be prevailed on to receive her, offering his assistance as far as it would go. But he found Lydia absolutely resolved on remaining where she was." He's not a cad forcing a young girl to marry her predator. He gave her the choice, and she chose Wickham. But of course, as the author has apparently never read the source material to begin with, she can't be expected to know this.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Thank you for adding this!! I forgot this part in my raging!

[@kaah5823]

I'm honestly disappointed that this woman is an intellectual. I wouldn't call myself exceptionally bright. I'm just a regular woman I agree with you in all the points you made. It does seem like she hasn't read the novel, because if she did, how did she get this so wrong!

[@sophieelsa7469]

@@kaah5823 as a university student studying to be a professor, i can 100% say that most intellectuals are not particularly smart.

[@souleylove]

I really, honestly think Rachel never actually read the book. It's like she has a bone to pick with the enemies to lovers trope, someone told her it started with Pride and Prejudice, she believed it, and then just ran with it.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

She should have stuck with a discussion on romance novels instead of trying to force this myth narrative. I wonder if she'll change her tune on this when (if) she ever does read P&P.

[@user-bn9kr6nz5h]

I don’t think Professor Feder appreciates how low George Wickham has sunk, and how much he’s been declawed and neutered by the end of “Pride and Prejudice”. Any pretensions he had to being a gentleman have been totally obliterated. His debts have been paid off by the very man he traduced in his conversations with Elizabeth Bennet and others. He’s lost his independence and is now Mr. Darcy’s kept man, who he knows holds him in the meanest contempt and could utterly destroy him in the eyes of society if he wished to. Wickham’s rakish fortune-hunting days are over now that he’s married to Lydia Bennet, who’s a far cry from the wealthy woman of fashion he once imagined himself squiring around town. Worst of all, he learns from the Gardiners of their visit to Pemberley with Elizabeth Bennet, and the conversations they enjoyed with Mr. Darcy. He then seeks out Elizabeth at Longbourn, only to hear her drop the heaviest of hints that she knows from Darcy exactly what sort of a liar and a scoundrel he really is. Despite this, Elizabeth calls Wickham “brother” and holds out her hand for him to kiss. Nothing could better illustrate how useless his charm and good looks are to him now, and how immune to them Elizabeth has become. Wickham is now like a spider in a bottle that Elizabeth can handle and examine without any fear of harm.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Wickham has been socially castrated by the novel's end, and I love it!

[@kimberlylopez3230]

Damaged by Darcy here!!! I'm still waiting on someone to say they love me most ardently and it hasn't happened yet!!! 😄

[@NerdyNurseReads]

It hasn't happened to me either 😭😭😭😭

[@chazhoosier2478]

I am not sure modern readers quite appreciate what crass freaks the people of Meryton in general and the Bennetts in particular are being at the assembly that Mr. Darcy attends.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

THIS!!!! Many modern readers see the Meryton assemblies and the ball at Netherfield as the same when they couldn't be more different. Meryton is a backwater, and the assemblies can get quite rowdy. I feel like the Kiera Knightly version does a good job of showing how out of hand these things can get. Compare that to the Netherfield ball, where everyone is prim and proper. I think it's quite clear why Darcy is so damn uncomfortable when we first meet him.

[@Chociewitka]

and Charlotte Lucas is also a self-declared "aromantic" - which does make her both very self-aware and quite modern

[@NerdyNurseReads]

The older I get, the more I love Charlotte.

[@user-bn9kr6nz5h]

@@NerdyNurseReads I like the fact that the estrangement Elizabeth feels towards Charlotte after she learns her friend has accepted Mr. Collins’ proposal of marriage is only temporary. When Elizabeth later visits the Collins’ at Hunsford, she observes that Charlotte has to some extent managed to create a separate life for herself under the same roof as her husband. And when at the end of the novel Elizabeth learns that Charlotte and Mr. Collins are coming to Lucas Lodge for a visit, we read that, “the arrival of her friend was a sincere pleasure to Elizabeth”. So, it seems that the rift in the relationship between the two longtime friends has been mended. It’s also worth noting that Elizabeth initially feels that Charlotte’s decision to marry Mr. Collins is wrong, because her friend has “sacrificed every better feeling to worldly advantage.” But as you say, Charlotte is the most intelligent person in the novel, and Elizabeth is forgetting that better feelings won’t keep your belly filled when your parents are no longer around to support you. Ironically, Elizabeth finds her own thoughts straying in the direction of worldly advantage the first time she visits Pemberley. Thoughts of Darcy are never far from her mind; after all, he has proposed to her a couple months earlier and she turned him down. Now she has her first sight of the extensive grounds of his estate-“Elizabeth was delighted”-and the thought occurs to her “that to be the mistress of Pemberley might be something!” Charlotte couldn’t have said it better.

[@Emelia39]

Thanks for the rant- my thoughts so far- 1. As someone who teaches writing, I hate this idea that English professor’s job is to ruin books. I try to teach my students to appreciate things even in books they don’t like. I think books can and should be critiqued but the idea of doing it through modern values (in these terms) feels ludicrous and in this case isn’t even an interesting conversation. 2. I’m not a huge Austen fan ( I don’t dislike her, the books just aren’t the genre I read that much), but the interesting feminist conversation around Austen is how she represents women who are very much confined by societal restrictions and still shows them as complex human beings. All the women in Pride and Prejudice have their own agency despite living in a socially conservative time and place where a woman’s reputation means everything (and even then Lizzie sticks up for herself). I think that’s far more interesting than however this author would like to see the book play out.

[@Emelia39]

After finishing the video (great work btw) it also really bothers me that the author thinks women are this stupid. I agree that the media does both shape and reflect our values but Pride and Prejudice is an extremely popular book/movie/tv series and people who don’t have English or history degrees picked up very easily on the historical implications of Lidia running away with Mr Wickham. I think most people even children can pick up on the fact that events in books are not real or necessarily ideal. The idea that reading one book would turn a woman into believing she should be in an abusive relationship is bordering on…ironically, regency level attitudes about the dangers of women reading

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I also really hated this "I'm going to ruin P&P" BS. I think she likes to be contrary. It's giving "I'm not like other English Professors" and I hate it.

[@Robi-Chaud]

One thing that really gets me is that examining older books through a modern lens can be fascinating and extremely useful in illustrating all the ways, small and large, society has changed. Wuthering Heights is especially good for this, and she apparently specializes in Gothic literature. So why not examine the extremely different attitudes to Wuthering Heights throughout different periods? She picked a book and an author that she clearly doesn't understand. And then she applied a modern lens without understanding that that's not the lens Austen was using.

[@yundorphin]

Thanks for mentioning Darcy's neurodivergence btw. XD I think it is kind of funny how Darcy and Collins both read as incredibly autistic to me, and both have the worst proposals.

[@CatHasOpinions734]

I have always read Darcy as neurodivergent, and given that most of what he does "wrong" makes sense in that context and are similar mistakes to what I and a few of my family members have done (not out of malice, just because reading people and knowing the right thing to say is hard and it's difficult not to get impatient with people when everything's too much and you just desperately need somewhere quiet and familiar)... given all that, her calling him a monster over and over feels an awful lot like ableism. I don't want to be hyperbolic, honestly I suspect she doesn't really consider his behavior monstrous because she doesn't seem to have an accurate understanding of what his behavior even is, but still, it stings.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I feel like she was going for shock value to grab our attention. Unfortunately, she's grabbed the wrong kind of attention. Darcy reads very neurodivergent to me and I also hated how that seemed to equate to monster in the author's eyes.

[@rusted_ursa]

If she wanted a Jane Austen Gothic, I mean, Northanger Abbey is RIGHT there.

[@rusted_ursa]

"Worst proposal ever." 😒

[@kendrajanelle1996]

I remember hearing the concept of this book a while back and thinking "that's an argument that makes zero sense based upon Darcy and Elizabeth's character arcs" but hearing you describe it is worse than I could have imagined! Professor Feder really put in effort because I don't think I've ever seen someone so thoroughly and brazenly misread/misinterpret a text before. Darcy is not a monster, neither outright nor in the shadows, and Elizabeth barely wants anything to do with him until she realizes that she was wrong and sees his personal growth and his kindness in action. She also doesn't "fix" or "change" him; I'd argue that Darcy never changes substantially, particularly not in the sense that Feder insists has spawned her "myth". The novel gives several examples that Darcy was an honorable, goodhearted, and generous man long before he met Elizabeth. Sure he has flaws and does make some adjustments, as does Elizabeth, but he doesn't fundamentally "change" or transform as a person and that distinction is important. Now back to this book, I think a snippet of one of the later quotes explains how it came to be: "Mr. Darcy...one of the most famous romantic interests in the history of Western literature...". It seems to me Feder had this idea of wanting to analyze how media often romanticizes women pursuing, forming relationships with, and trying to "fix" less than stellar (and sometimes truly awful) men, but she needed an immediately recognizable leading man to draw eyes to the work and Darcy is who she settled on. Unfortunately for her (and anyone who reads this book), Darcy in no way fits that archetype so it turns the whole premise and thesis into a farce. It's also unfortunate from another perspective, because I think the media which do fit that premise are worth discussing, and that discussing them could be beneficial especially for young girls still in their formative years who are fantasizing about and in some ways are looking for examples of aspirational love. People, especially kids and teens, could do with more literary analysis and instruction on media literacy. The theme of the bad love interest could have been an interesting vehicle for that, but instead this book hinged itself on Darcy and failed in seemingly every way possible.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

She could have talked about romantic heros and how they're often problematic without using this outrageous "myth" to do it!

[@brookb5890]

Crazy that she went for Darcy when Rochester was right there.

[@jediping]

I totally agree that she picked Darcy for what she’s probably call his “brand.” He is more popular and easily recognizable than Rochester (hmm wonder why…) And I agree that we need to talk about romance in literature and how to recognize monsters. But yeah, P&P is NOT one of the perpetrators of the problem. But I guess calling it the “Edward Cullen Myth” isn’t classical literature enough, and she couldn’t trust that enough people would recognize Heathcliff or Rochester compared to Darcy.

[@CatHasOpinions734]

I'm sorry, only 6 minutes in, I think I'm the second sentence you've read from this, I cannot take this book seriously. Lizzie Bennet is many things, but "docile" and "conciliatory" are rarely on that list. "Patient" is something she manages for close friends and family members, but she has no patience to spare for Darcy, especially not early on. Unless she's describing Jane, I don't have high hopes for her comprehension of this book.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

It doesn't get better.

[@Sophia-ss8gr]

I'll babble some more about Sense and Sensibility and why Marianne is most definitely not pregnant. What happens to the two Eliza's is, again, the typical plot beats of a gothic novel. Women having sex and being punished by death, pregnancy and isolation. In a gothic book Marianne would have been another Eliza. But what Jane Austen clearly says again is that her book is not a gothic novel. Marianne has extremely loyal friends and family. Society doesn't ostracize her, they ostracize Willoughby. She is heartbroken, gets sick but doesn't lose her right to a happy ending.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

THANK YOU! I couldn't believe it when she threw out that little gem. I'm very worried about someone with her level of reading comprehension teaching college kids...or any kids!

[@sarahpowell6617]

I remember hearing about this book on a podcast and from the description alone, I was like "the very basis of this thesis is just willfully wrong!" Ended up on a Reddit thread in which many people pointed out that the entire book is rife with errors. How embarrassing.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

So embarrassing! I don't understand how this was published!

[@Lokster71]

Well, Byron was the model for Lord Ruthven in The Vampyre so if you think Byron is a Darcy then the vampire link makes sense but Byron is not a Darcy. Byron is a shit. A gloriously talented shit but a shit nonetheless - except that he is one of the few men who is nice to Mary Shelley after Shelley dies. But this is a great video. It does sound like she's never actually read the book. Also Darcy is NEVER A RAKE. "He proposes to her. Twice. Some people can't even get a text." 🤣🤣🤣

[@NerdyNurseReads]

This is like someone saying Doctor Who is actually a Dalek!!!

[@lizard_the_queen]

It feels like something me and my friends would have written in middle school as a joke and then been like "omg, were we so deep right now? are we geniuses?" But really, the brand line felt like a punch in the gut, it was so bad. And for a moment, when she mentioned bad rumors and locking Lydia(?) up, I kept thinking if she had gotten Darcy mixed up with Rochester. Also how dare you say Wickham The Trustworthy is not the best judge of character😂

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Rochester would have been a better option. And she's supposed to be the expert on the Gothic

[@lesyablackbird]

this whole thing feels like Lizzy GUESSED Darcy was the one from the start, and then had to hang around to see if she was right XD and that's not the book. really feels like someone had the story poorly explained to them and then watched pretty clips from the movie. and not even the good one but the resent one. i think the worst thing about this so called book is this idea that we should look at men or 'the one' or even Darcy as strange alien concepts that we want something out of, instead of as a whole person, with faults, drives and internal worlds of their own. i think reading anything like this will result in harm. anyway, even a monster should be understood, because that gives you more power and ability to not be blinded when encountering one. the way Charlotte Lucas was suspicious of Wickham spilling the beans all too eagerly.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I love this! I agree we need to look at people as people! If they're monstrous, we should understand what makes them a monster. I think that's called empathy, something that seems to be in ever shorter supply.

[@BookishTexan]

Greatest literature related rant in the history of BookTube.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

lol that's seriously too kind

[@daydreamfighter961]

Lovely rant. It is painfully clear that the author has not read Pride and Prejudice or anything academic writing from Austen researcher that would have supported these claims. It is like having a hypothesis and building the study/article without the research or the evidence.

[@heartshapedbox3529]

I think that people don't really understand Darcy's and Lizzie's personalities, people misinterpret them ALL LOT! Like, I've seen no many memes about Darcy where he's basically reduced to a rich asshole that falls in love with a poor woman and later buy her affections but that's not it at all??? I know it's a joke but it's absolutely not them, i don't know where they took this interpretation, maybe this is why there's so many of the rich asshole archetype that people somehow think it fits the enemies to lovers category (it doesn't, usually the dynamics are totally off and the characters' personalities are shallow/awful), and that somehow this is a Mr. Darcy situation (nevermind that there's no enemies to lovers going on in Pride Prejudice, just dislike to learning how to deal with people better). Honestly i think the author didn't really read Pride and Prejudice, actually I don't think she's really an academic at all. Anyways thank you for the video, I'm so sorry you had to read this LOL

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I am also sorry I read this lol I don't mind the "rich asshole" trope, but I don't think I'd equate every rich asshole with Darcy. Darcy is rich and maybe not the best in social situations, but he's definitely not an asshole.

[@seeyouspacecowboyx]

Can a PhD be revoked?

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Is it like Survivor? Can we vote?

[@skullfullofbooks7398]

I didnt realize it was going to be an hour long rant but let's go!

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Snacks are required...I should have said that at the start of the video lol

[@Sophia-ss8gr]

The thesis of this book is even more ridiculous since one reading of Jane Austen's books is in fact a critique of the gothic novel. In Northanger Abbey, Catherine Morland is a response to that perfectly beautiful, perfectly virtuous, perfectly smart and perfectly kind type of gothic heroine that was rather famous in her time period. Sense and Sensibility and to a point Pride and Prejudice hit upon a common plot of the gothic novel: the young women from a good family who has premarital sex and is being punished either by dying, either by living in exile or becoming a sex worker. In Pride and Prejudice, there is that paragraph where it says how for the Meryton gossip it would have been better (in the sense of more gossip) if Lydia "came upon town" which is an euphemism for prostitution or had she been sent to live on a farm but they would have to be content with gossiping about Wickham's gambling debts. It can be read as Jane Austen speaking to the reader and saying, in this book we are not going to punish the women's mistake with death or total destruction. (Same with Mr. Collins letter where he wrote it would have been better if Lydia died. She doesn't give this vile opinion to a respected character.) I would also say that it would have been more gothic if Darcy would have forcefully removed Lydia from Wickham's company and found her a random husband. It is after all a gothic trope to be forcefully wedded to someone the woman doesn't know or like. While Lydia's choice of a husband is horrible, is nonetheless her choice. At the end of the novel we don't see a sad, pathetic Lydia who regrets her choice.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏

[@WonkyWonko]

Did she actually read P&P? lol

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Did she even watch a movie???

[@OcarinaSapphr-]

I clicked on this video by chance- & found myself hitting like within 5 minutes. Your analysis was fantastic -- truth is, there are *a lot* of nuances & critiques of subject matter that Jane Austen addresses or even just implies within her writing, that the average person does not even *_know_* to look for, let alone would take the time to really look at- let alone critique accurately (as in, with knowledge of the facts- critique is obviously individual). There are phrases & descriptions within, that people just don't look at- they go over their heads entirely. And looking at an early-mid 19th century novel with 20th/ 21st century eyes, *without* also understanding or knowing about those, is a bit like getting a poorly abridged version - you might get an idea of the overall story, something of a sense of the characters & events- but you'll never 'get' the deeper understanding of not just the story, but also the world, & mindsets that the story is existing within. This will always be **the** problem of looking at older works, in English or not- a work being in your common language is _the least_ of the issues that comes with analysing & discussing literature, especially Classic Literature. I watched Dr Octavia Cox's video: 'What did Meryton want to Happen to Lydia?' - it starts with one sentence, & is about all of a paragraph in the novel - & when I tell you it was eye-opening... I've read P&P more times than I can count, but it's only been in recent years that I've _really_ looked at smaller constituent parts of the novels, characters, & events - I think my mother's exploration of our genealogy, & learning we're descendants of one of Jane Austen's brothers is part of what has pushed me to that- as well as my own long-standing interest in writing, as an aspiring novelist...

[@seilanna1]

I was just watching this on a lark but, for a scholar theres a SHOCKING lack of reading comprehension. Dont get me wrong I’m all here for “hear me out” theories on Jane Austen, but this is not one of them.

[@ArabellaTurner]

At 6:00 it's funny that's how she describes girls as trying to get Mr. Darcy's, because Elizabeth was none of those things. She also certainly wasn't trying to win him over or change him. Both Lizzie and Mr. Darcy have their flaws (although to different extents) and need to grow and change as the story goes on. And while they influence each other's journeys, ultimately each one is responsible for their own. Their romance by the end is the result of their growth, not the purpose of it. Edit: I paused to comment, but glad we agree on things!

[@GallifreyanOrphan]

I think she wanted to write a book about how women buy into the idea that men who are jerks to them are simply "socially awkward" or "misunderstood". She's not REALLY writing about Lizzie and Darcy. It's just a well-known name to splash on the cover of a book because Darcy is much more well-known than Simon Basset. Sure, there's something to be said (that has been said ad nauseum) about women falling for the idea of a man or his potential rather than the man himself and that we were raised on fairy tales where everyone lives happily ever after, but she's not bringing anything new to the table. She's just rolling out the same old thing we've been hearing for decades, just propping it up with Pride and Prejudice.

[@joyofcookies]

Her thesis is actually saying; “I fully project tropey literary characters onto everyone I date and am then shocked when they turn out to be an actual human with their own unique personality.” Or a shorter version “I only look at the surface level of everything and everyone” 🙄

[@rosesleeps]

"You cannot blame all of your problems on a fictional character" really needs to be something people hear more often. I need that embroidered on a pillow.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I would buy that pillow!

[@ingridelinstokke4737]

This is a truly amazing video, and even though I disagree on some small points, you present these arguments really well and your grounds for them are really well-established. Tbh my main concern with this narrative that this author is pushing is that someone who is socially awkward/displays any discomfort or awkwardness is automatically "monstrous" and does not deserve any sympathy. If we go with a reading that Darcy DOES have social anxiety, this author is essentially saying that people who struggle, people who need help and understanding, should not only be disregarded as potential partners, but that by BEING someone's partner, they are automatically evil - because THEY need to consider their own anxiety, their trauma or squicks, only in regard to how it affects others. Your issues aren't only issues that hurt you, your primarily concern should be how they hurt others, and you should adjust them accordingly - making the 'normal ones' as comfortable as possible with being around you, tolerating you, rather than caring for yourself. Especially I think this is important to consider with 'emotionally unavailable' men, who culturally have been told to not show emotion at all - who are not learned how to properly emotionally communicate

[@NerdyNurseReads]

It felt like she was blocking off any avenue for character development or for people to change. If you're an A-hole you'll always be an A-hole. There's nothing else that could be contributing to someone thinking you were an A-hole this one time when you first met them. Don't even bother trying to understand the "monster" MOVE ON LADIES! I hate it. Who hurt her?

[@user-pt1cg6en6z]

I haven't read 'The Darcy Myth' myself, but it does sound like drivel the way you described it! I have to say, if there was any regency man that Mr Darcy did NOT resemble, it's Lord Byron. Those two just couldn't be more different! I think they would have both hated the comparison and protested wildly against it 😀. And I think id you see Mr Darcy as an ideal, you've read him wrong - no main character, hero or heroine, in Austen's books are ideals, she lets them all have flaws, and many of them get to represent a particular fault that we all can have in our character (to greater or lesser degree), so that she can show us how ridiculous we are when we let that fault rule our behaviour unreigned. Mr Darcy represents our pride, our idea of somehow being better than others in certain respects and fifteen year-old me, when I met him for the first time, really needed to see how that pride made him both rude and insensitive to others and also quite silly. Of course I also fell in love with Mr Darcy to some extent because just like me or most of us he also has other sides, good ones that make him great company. Here's where I think that 'fix him' idea comes from: centuries of women having to adapt to unsuitable and sometimes downright dangerous men because they had no easy way of escaping. Some of those women will have been able to work changes and compromise and survived their situation that way, and I'm sure they will have passed this on to their daughters. In my most formative years, I was allowed to read anything I came across and I did. No one told me not to watch certain movies, and I watched whatever I wanted to see. I came out of it choosing romantic partners wisely, getting out of any relationships that seemed to restrict me too much or just feel wrong and I ended up learning to handle both my own and my husband's flaws once I met a man I actually wanted to marry. I think the author of 'the Darcy Myth' probably misunterstands how stories teach us things - we're not blank slates going into a story and we don't come away from the stories having learnt the same thing either. I think she also misunderstands relationship problems a bit. Even if I feel I was an idiot and I tried for too long to fix a man when in reality he was a monster all along and couldn't be fixed, that doesn't have to be the truth about that relationship. The truth could be that I was the monster and I just don't see it myself (maybe because I've read too little Lane Austen 😉), maybe we were netiher of us monsters but we were constantly misunderstanding eachother - or any other possible way of interpreting what went wrong in a relationship. I'm old enough to know that most of the time it's not about monsters. Sorry, this became a a bit of a rant too, and not half as interesting and entertaining as the one in the video!

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Thank you for this! Well said!! And I need a timeline where Mr. Darcy and Lord Byron could express their disgust at being compared to one another 😂 The issue of wanting to "fix" a man are deeply rooted and go way beyond Jane Austen (as you said). A book looking into this topic would be fascinating. Unfortunately for Feder, this is not that book. An important point you made and she missed is that we are all players in this game. We can both be monster and victim. We can both be right and wrong. In most cases a relationship isn't as black and white as Feder seems to suggest. One party isn't a monster needing fixing, and the other a virtuous, self-sacrificing creature willing to put in the work.

[@beckyginger3432]

We know what pnp as a horror novel would be, its pride and Prejudice and zombies! There was a movie and everything

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I LOVE THAT BOOK! Wickham really gets what he deserves too!

[@bibliosophie]

i can imagine this book being utterly infuriating. all the more so bc parts of the premise are true: women are absolutely taught/forced to tolerate intolerable behavior from men, and that's part of the pop culture we consume. but 1) the through-line between cultural consumption and behavior isn't so easily mapped -- women are also made to tolerate a lot of things by virtue of rules and laws. it's not just "damage" caused by problematic characters. and 2) of course, as you pretty deliciously dissect, this book seems to be founded on an utter (and i assume willful) misreading

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I feel like she wanted to dunk on romance but chose the wrong romance as her source material. It's incredibly frustrating because there is so much to unpack regarding what women are expected to "just accept" from our partners. Unfortunately for Feder, this didn't do what she wanted it to. It felt like she had a hypothesis and then attempted to bend everything she could to try to prove that hypothesis right.

[@aporajitabangali3827]

I am not a english professor but did she confuse the characters in Pride and Prejudice??… like thats the only explanation for this joke of a book. The whole book feels like being stuck in a party with the ‘illuminati enthusiasts’ and them vomiting their devotion onto you with even asking for it.

[@PoopHobbit]

I gotta be honest, that first bridgerton book should be slashed from the record. Daphne entraps Simon while he drunkenly cries underneath her as he realizes shes entrapping him. Its such a horrible momen. Book daphne and simon are the worst and i dont understand why Julia Quinn thought the plot was it

[@NerdyNurseReads]

She made choices 😬 with that first book, and I'm surprised we all loved it enough for there to be a whole series!!!

[@PoopHobbit]

@@NerdyNurseReads there is a blurb in the back of I think the 6th or 8th book where she goes into detail on her dad being immediately hooked by Lady Whistledown and that he told her it was a great mystery! So I gotta say, I think it was Lady Whistledown! Very Gossip Girl/PLL of her lol Edit:: she as in Julia Quinn!

[@AlmightyRawks]

I don't know this book but I'm agreeing with all your rants, they're great and it shows that you understand the novels very well! I hope you enjoy some of my rant-additions. I want to make a couple of points; firstly in the text of the book it mentions "his pride, her prejudice". I believe the entire point of the novel was that both Lizzy and Darcy had to overcome both P and P. Meaning, Darcy also was prejudiced against Lizzy and her family for not being as affluent or socially capable, while they were actually from the same class ("You are a gentleman, I am a gentleman's daughter; so far we are equal"). Meanwhile, Lizzy's pride is hurt through this first interaction and that starts her whole gripe with Darcy in the first place. She does have quite some pride, otherwise she could never reject Mr. Collins or stand up to Lady Catherine. Secondly, I'd like to point out that the marrying age for women throughout earlier centuries of Western society often gets set at like 12-15 or so. It's very important to note that this was ONLY ever done (occasionally!) by the upper classes. For average people they married around 20-25 because they were mature, independent and would more often make their own choices. The extremely young marriages were arranged by the young woman's (really, child's) parents and the suitor to secure finances, dowry, property rights, and to ensure to whatever husband that the children (definitely the first child) would be his. This point is just to emphasize that Lydia marrying at 15 -while not unheard of- was still REMARKABLY young, that's the entire point in the book ("She was then but fifteen", regarding Georgiana, is also mentioned as being REMARKABLE). So, NOT normal. Not JUST a modern concept. Still awkward in that age. Thirdly: Wickham was definitely a predator but ALSO conniving. He KNEW that he would be ruining a family and that he would have a chance of squeezing money out of it. Even while they were hiding (BBC 1995), he seemed more occupied with money than with predator behavior. He didn't JUST have a thing for 15-yo; he was interested in the money he could get out of getting those young women into trouble, KNOWING their families would respond. Austen never omitted ANYTHING of value. If Mary King had been 15, it would have been mentioned, which leads me to believe she was older. Her money was Wickham's primary interest. So was Georgiana's, and what he might squeeze out of the Bennetts (before realizing they had none). Fourth: Just like you, I also dislike the argument of tying Lydia to Wickham as a bad act. Yes, she would likely regret her own elopement later in life, but in the moment there was no dislodging her from this man. Lydia basically has made HER choice (we could call it agency, even if flawed :P). She would inevitably have gotten into a situation like this (even if there had been no Mr. Wickham, then with another man), because of negligent parenting (implicitly but clearly described in the book) and the type of personality she was born with. Tying her to whoever she would have run away with was probably the LEAST bad situation for her being able to see her family, and accepted in the society she loved, and with the money they now had, she might have a CHANCE of starting a household of her own. Oof we're just 15 minutes in... Fifth: I don't even understand why someone would pick and choose male heroes from So. Many. Different. Literary. Genres. Like I'm just missing Han Solo and Westley. All she's done is take some men who get some women by story's end. They're ALL different. They ALL have flaws. Newflash, so do most of the women in these novels. Perfect characters aren't interesting (possibly the fewest flaws ever are found with Fanny Price, but she's notorious for being a less than interesting main character, stuck in very interesting situations, and that dynamic MAKES her interesting again). But not all men in these stories are Darcys or Heathcliffs or Byrons. It almost feels like she didn't research these (real and fictional) individuals AT ALL. "A male character, while having some flaw, who reaches a romantic ending" is not enough to draw a comparison! (Even Byron isn't a Darcy! If you want modern terms, here have some: Byron was a neurodivergent bi disaster, probably best depicted by a possum. There, I said it.) Sixth: I love the audacity in the notion that for closing in on 200 years ALL OF US that live and have been alive have misunderstood the romance in Jane Austen, because in reality (says one person) it's gothic horror. Sure, that makes all the sense. Bonus point 6.1: It feels like all romance and human interactions need to be absolutely perfect to this author, lest they immediately get categorized as horror and monstrous. Fortunately, life and literature are a bit more complex than this, loads of imperfect bits of behavior can get ironed out through some mutual understanding - you know, like happens in P&P. Bonus point 6.2: I now want Pride & Prejudice as a Steampunk Murder Mystery! Saying that Marianne lost a pregnancy during her post-Willoughby recovery is missing the plot by more than 100%. The whole juxtaposition between the two sisters, with Marianne unable to withhold or contain any emotion AT ALL meant that her recovery had to be THAT dramatic. Besides, suggesting that Marianne would have behaved this way removes all her upbringing (from a GOOD mother this time, and supported by a GOOD sister), and isn't even remotely needed for the story to take place. Bonus point (6..... I lost count), you're right Elizabeth after marrying Darcy wouldn't be a Lady, because he wasn't a Lord! He was landed gentry. Still the best catch, like you said. Thanks for this awesome video, enjoyed the rants immensely.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

"(Even Byron isn't a Darcy! If you want modern terms, here have some: Byron was a neurodivergent bi disaster, probably best depicted by a possum. There, I said it.)" I'm dead 💀 😂 Thank you for ranting along with me!

[@user-bn9kr6nz5h]

I really enjoyed your extended comments! As far as literary Monsters go, is Rhett Butler a Monster? I don’t think so. But Scarlett O’Hara … I’m not so sure she’s not. And with regard to a “P&P” derived murder mystery, Alyssa is probably correct in calling Charlotte Lucas the smartest person in the book, and I can imagine her finding some fiendishly clever way of ridding herself of the tedious Mr. Collins before many years of their wedded bliss had passed. Perhaps some noxious substance discreetly added to her husband's soup over a period of days or weeks to give the appearance of his having fallen victim to some sort of wasting and ultimately fatal illness. Or she could find some way to do the job more quickly and blame her husband’s death on Lady Catherine de Bourgh’s French chef. The passing of poor Mr. Collins would likely not be regretted by anyone of his circle who happened to fall into his society for any length of time, and Charlotte could reasonably expect that the circumstances of his untimely death would not be looked into too closely. Poor Mr. Collins!

[@birdieandthebooksalicia94]

Watching this review makes me so happy that I rage quit the audiobook 2 1/2 hours in

[@NerdyNurseReads]

You were smarter than me

[@birdieandthebooksalicia94]

@@NerdyNurseReads it was narrated by the author which I feel like made it worse

[@ReadingIDEAS.-uz9xk]

Best wishes with your reading choices. I hope you get some great stories. Taking more than a month to read one. Currently at page 883 of the Count of Monte Cristo. Still got some way to go. Happy reading.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

The Count of Monte Cristo is my partner's favorite book. One day, I will have to read it so we can talk about it. I hope you're enjoying Monte Cristo more than I enjoyed this drivel.

[@PoopHobbit]

You're not even 10 minutes in and im already mad 😭

[@CH-sk7jr]

Living for this rant. This book is a perfect example of media illiteracy and of blaming spin-offs for problems that are *nowhere* present in the original. The great irony is that this book does make a compelling argument-about how *blatantly misreading* Darcy could lead women to love monsters. If you think the Darcy fantasy is “rich entitled jerk goes through enemies to lovers trope and then proposes to me”, then she’s right, you’re going to be in for a world of hurt. But the actual appeal of Darcy is an intellectual equal receiving your honest criticism and growing as a person because he values your opinion, and in turn his influence on your life causing you to recognize negative traits in yourself and similarly grow as a person. The appeal of Lizzie and Darcy’s story is deeply rooted in growing up-in maturing and experiencing a better, fuller life because you have a trustworthy partner who inspires you and gives you strength. But that’s absolutely not what this prof is arguing. I can’t get over it. Who allowed her to publish?? How did it make it through peer review?? Did she even read Pride and Prejudice?? Absolutely atrocious Edit to add: made it to the end and my favorite Austen love interest is Tilney. My favorite character overall changes depending on which story I’ve interacted with most recently. 😂 Elizabeth Bennet and Colonel Brandon often vie for favorite primary character, but some of the background characters are just as compelling, so it’s hard to narrow down.

[@FujoshiInRecovery]

If P&P is gothic, then isn't the throughline that literally any romance novel is gothic? On that note, I don't know why she decided to target P&D and Darcy specifically in this thesis when there have been much worse love interest both before and after. I think there is something to be said about much P&P has influenced romance genre after it's publication, and consequently, how little people still seem to grasp about what made Darcy in particular such a good character. Think of modern romances like Twilight which literally references P&P (as well as Wuthering Heights & Romeo and Juliet). Yet, is Edward anything like Darcy? No, he's a fucking asshole. (Maybe he's the vampire she's referring to?) Besides both being socially incompetent, they share no other traits. Like sometimes you will find a book were the author has been inspired by P&P, or even a straight adaption of P&P, and yet it will be clear that the author does not understand it's themes and it's characters beyond the surface. If I were her, I would've used Darcy as a tool of comparison to the modern male love interest that seemingly take their queue from him, but fail to live up to, exceed, or even subvert expectations.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I think she picked Darcy bc it's so popular, and her attempting to poke holes in It would piss people off. I think she hoped that anger would draw people (aka rage baiting).

[@cakt1991]

I heard about this book from (I think) the Austen blogger Bookhoarding…she hadn’t read it, it just looked interesting. I was more skeptical, but I figured it wasn’t the worst idea. But based on my misgivings on the blurb, I’m not shocked to hear that Rachel (she does not deserve to be called Dr.) missed the point of P&P entirely. I’m all for a discussion of toxic romantic leads, but Darcy was not the vehicle through which to do that. And the modern “hip” lingo like “brand?” This already feels like stale bread. Meanwhile, The Lizzie Bennet Diaries is celebrating its twelfth anniversary and still manages to feel relevant to the modern consumer and interpret P&P concepts in a way that the reader can understand.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

She could have done something interesting instead she made something cringe.

[@Gr8iemaja]

I think this conversation would be better suited for a different book. I am not touch, moved, or inspired by the relationships in 'Pride and Prejudice', however, the intention of this work does not meet the means of the sample Rachel Feder chose. Primarily in that she already stated that her viewpoint heavily focuses on the gothic horror genre. Which is where the connections are made easily. Something like 'The Tenant of Wildfell Hall'- Anne Bronte fits her talking points to a 'T'.(This is also a gothic horror book). The husband of this particular main character actually has Rachel Feder's talking points with the rumors and so on. The main character even says 'Love the sinner, but hate the sin' in relation to that. I agree that there are glorified toxic relationships in fiction. But even 'The Tenant of Wildfell Hall' explains that this mindset is toxic and shouldn't be glorified. (If you decide to read this book, please be aware of trigger warnings on domestic violence.) There are probably other books that are even better than what I suggested. Perhaps the reason that Mr. Darcy was chosen was because of the high amount of people that are interested in him ('Click Bait'). In an attempt to make a 'Moll Flanders' -Daniel Defoe inspired warning against unhealthy relationships (and how to avoid them); she minimized the voices of those that needed the warning.

[@joyofcookies]

I was gifted a book for my birthday as a teen when LotR movies were coming out. The book about “finding God in the Lord of the Rings” and was all about interpreting every bit of the books as Christian allegory. At the time I was very religious, but even I knew that Tolkien was well known for hating allegory and not putting subtext into his books. As well as this book kept using examples for talking points from the movies… I never finished reading that book. It’s amazing what gets published.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

That book sounds truly awful.

[@-lightswitch-2916]

Before watching the rest of this, my response to “Mr Darcy was an asshole” (the author’s argument): Darcy was not an asshole, I personally believe he was the depiction of an undiagnosed autistic man long before autism was recognized as a “real” diagnosis. He was what women like Austen saw when they saw these undiagnosed men in society, and how these men acted in society. He did not purposefully deny Elizabeth’s feelings, he simply didn’t understand how to communicate his own- so he didn’t. Which is actually very nice because now, instead of autistic men being seen as Darcy was at the start of the book (rude, mean, cold) neurotypical women go around telling them “you remind me of Mr Darcy!”- which translates to “you act like this fictional autistic man” but also means these women give these men a fair chance because, hey, their FAVORITE fictional man acted just like they do and Darcy ended up being perfect!

[@NerdyNurseReads]

The number of people in my comments saying Darcy is just autistic is giving me life!

[@michaelmasiello6752]

I made it to the end. This is a glorious rant. I’m in academia and see this kind of thing too often. With friends like Rach here, literature doesn’t need enemies.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

😂😂😂 well said!

[@tmtb80]

This lady missed the plot! I feel a little pity for her, that she has so publicly shown she simply "didn't get 'it'." What a loss for her. She has subjectified the story. Tsk tsk to whomever published her book. They should be ashamed.

[@ashleighcalvert8937]

Wild to take a book about “don’t judge a book by its cover” and judge it by its cover

[@NerdyNurseReads]

She might have judged it by the 2005 adaptation.

[@dakinayantv3245]

Academics are faced with the publish or perish dilemma. Thus they put out a stream of stupid papers and books.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Was this worth it? Maybe take more time before publishing.

[@veronicamaine3813]

Girl really never read northanger Abby- or she read it and hated that Jane Austen criticised the gothic for its lack of realism.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I couldn't believe how little she talked about Northanger in the section Austen and the Gothic. HOW???

[@Anne_Of_Green_Books]

Ooooh I'm so angry about this book and idek what I'm most angry about but I might be the most angry about her equating Darcy to a rake??!?

[@NerdyNurseReads]

She's equates him to LORD EFFING BYRON!

[@mariazendeh6644]

Love this video 🧡 my favorite must be Mr. Tillney. Also! Jane Austen wrote social commentary and COMEDY! Her books were mend to make people laugh… plus the whole thing of Darcy saving Lydia to marry Lizzy is ridiculous since he doesn’t propose to her UNTIL she hints that she might be interested. He actually stats that he would have not said a word because he was so hopeless… he did all of just out of kindness (and maybe so Bingley could still marry Jane)

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Oh Mr. Tillney 💜 I still think Darcy had Lizzy in mind when fixing things with Wickham. He still loves her ardently. I don't think he did it to win her back, though. He's not a schemer.

[@lindayhuang]

What if…the fault lies not just in the person with the byline, but also in the hands that hold the purse strings?! Because, speaking of “branding,” I suspect name dropping Darcy is so much more profitable, that the publishers might have some explaining to do too.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Excellent point! Several people read this and decided to publish it. Shame!

[@nettles1951]

Great rant! I'm a huge fan of romance media and have been hearing that all these stories will rot my brain and leave me ruined my whole life. Funny how these concerns always seem to exclusively focus on romance novels and not any of the other genres I read. Now, I think deeper examinations of the literature being created and consumed is both a necessity and, when in the presence of good company, a joy for sure, but the way many people frame romance literature critiques comes off as so misogynistic. How have these critics managed to blame men's abuse of women on other women writing books? And in the name of feminism, no less! It's so unnecessary. If they would just frame their critiques as "The tropes we see in this novel might be a side effect of the patriarchal standards enforced on the author." then I'd have far less of a problem. But no! They'd rather believe that Jane Austen and other female authors sat down one day and decided to indoctrinate all the women and create the patriarchy themselves. Even leaving the author out of it, I find it so insulting that people really believe that women are so vacant that simply reading a romance novel will forever mould our brains. Like we're so incapable of thinking for ourselves. Pride and Prejudice used to be my favorite novel so the butchering of the plot and themes does grate too. Although nowadays Persuasion is at the top of my list. The characters are just amazing, from our leads to the side characters. The Crofts are seriously an ideal couple that I think about way too often. It's too bad that the recent movie adaption went so far off the mark, because it's a truly amazing story. I'm actually shocked that nobody has made a shot at a Northanger Abbey movie, historical or otherwise. I feel like a modern adaption practically writes itself. Catherine as a horror or true crime aficionado, John Thrope as a guy a bit too into his car, etc.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I'm down for a modern adaptation of Northanger...who's going to write it???

[@RalucaAriadna]

The real monster here in the system itself. Within that system, Darcy is actually one of the types of partners that are the best of the best, an actual exception, because he's actually selfaware, does the work to be better for HIMSELF AS A PERSON, and by genuinely proposing to Lizzy a second time thereafter, he low key surbverts the system, in an objective way

[@ezzasyuhada]

Love your review and your rants. I agree with you on everything it does make me think did she pick up a dupe copy of pride and prejudice because where is she getting all these details from 😂😂

[@clpearson991]

Darcy is not a monster. He's not abusive in any sense. His worst flaw is that he grew up as a spoiled rich only child. He didn't treat his employees badly, he did his best to look after his sister and he always wanted to make sure she was comfortable and happy. He never led any woman on and managed to remain civil to Caroline Bingley, despite her throwing herself at him constantly. Lizzy and Darcy both made serious adjustments in their outlooks and attitudes despite thinking they would probably not ever see each other again. In fact, they both learned to be less prideful and less prejudiced. I personally really like the theory that Darcy was a bit of an introvert who didn't like all the big gatherings that Bingley did, but he endured them for his friend because Darcy actually really cares a lot about the people close to him and doesn't want his optimistic cheerful friend to make a huge mistake with his life and be unhappy forever.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I don't know if Darcy really is meant to be read as neurodivergent, introverted, or autistic, but that's how I feel about him. Seeing how many other people feel similarly about him has been interesting. It might not have been Austen's intention, but as an introvert with social anxiety, I find myself relating to him a bit too much at times.

[@RambleMaven]

Mr. Darcy isn’t an A**hole HE’S AUTISTIC! Ok 😂 I’m joking because I’m autistic and that’s my head cannon sorry! I’m only a few minutes in 😭 Edit: OH! OH! NOT YOU MENTIONING HIM BEING NEURODIVERGENT 21 MINUTES IN!! I’m glad I’m not the only one that reads him that way 😭💖😂

[@NerdyNurseReads]

You are certainly not!!!!!

[@cervanera2228]

Every time I hear someone say that Belle put in the work to change the beast a part of me dies. HE DID IT HIMSELF AND SHE ONLY STARTED TREATING HIM NICELY AFTER HE STARTED BEING NICE It is also part of his curse, he has to learn how to love and be loved. HE HAS TO DO IT HIMSELF. Pride and Predjudice and Beauty and the Beast are some of the most misunderstood stories of all time

[@NerdyNurseReads]

The Beast would have stayed a Beast if he didn't find a way to change himself. Belle definitely gave him a reason to change, but she can't change him. Honestly, why don't we spend more time on how all his poor servants are cursed with him. What did they do???

[@cervanera2228]

@@NerdyNurseReads I actually know the answer to the last question🤣 (sorry for the long answer, you were probably joking. I just know this fairytale too well) In the Disney movie, it's implied that they became objects cause they were acting like objects, aka they did nothing to help the poor woman or stop their king etc. Now, you can say this is a flawed logic and that they still didn't deserve it, but most people forget that the fairy at the start isn't exactly good. Like, in the folklore, fairies are terrible. So another "theory" of mine is that she just did it cause she was feeling like it. Instead in the original fairytale the servants aren't cursed by the first fairy, but are instead frozen in time by a second fairy so they won't go out of the castle and talk about the cursed prince (which could be another "good" reason to curse them to even in the movie, if you wanna see it that way).

[@brookb5890]

The real Darcy Myth is that he only has one facial expression. That man is always grinning stupidly at Lizzie. I'm convinced he thought they were flirting the whole time they were arguing, which is why her rejection of him comes as such a shock. Like, a no he could have handled, but the "no, you are not a gentleman" was a cold slap.

[@SamanthaLove78]

I *never* get sucked in by rant videos and I almost never like and leave comments - I'm usually a happy little lurker. But dear God, did this person write this book just to get a rise out of Austen fans? How could anyone read Pride & Prejudice so wrong? This is someone who has not at the very least seen the BBC adaptation, which I need to watch again right now just to rid this author's bs from brain. To reduce Lizzie to some simpering fool who sits around waiting for Darcy is criminal. Even when Jane gets ghosted by Bingley she's not looking to change him, she's just sad. Ugh. If this book is guilty of anything, it's introducing us to the Wickham's of this world, but it also shows you exactly what happens if you're going to entertain them. In that respect it completely nullifies the author's hypothesis. I'm irked. Nice rant though.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I think she wrote this just to get a rise out of people. Rage bating works but it can also backfire - HARD!

[@TrekBeatTK]

As soon as I saw the book’s title I knew it would be garbage. I am with you in tearing it down.

[@hannahgruendemann7405]

Watched the whole thing and thank you for convincing me not to read this! It’s giving me in the 9th grade, thinking shakespeare wasn’t a good writer because romeo and juliet make stupid decisions in the show

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Happy to help!

[@zachreads]

'Damaged by Mr. Darcy" does sound like a moderately alarming fanfic.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I want to read it

[@rusted_ursa]

Unironic favorite Austen character is probably Elinor. Ironic favorite is definitely Lady Susan.

[@RalucaAriadna]

Actually, the one that worked hard for the romance and was rewarded with their 'catch' was Darcy. The playing hard to get, through no fault of her own, since she wasn't into him like that for a long, LONG time, was Lizzy

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Exactly Darcy WORKS Lizzy plods along for more of the book until she's forced by circumstances to change.

[@amypattie7004]

What’s most frustrating about this is that she’s so close and misses the point entirely. She could have written a book about how the Darcy storyline has been misunderstood, and all the interpretations that miss the mark. It would have been great, but she takes it in a weird direction, misunderstands the text, and doesn’t define her terms as if she’s trying to confuse the reader into agreeing with her.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

There was so much potential and she blew it!

[@kaah5823]

I love Elinorecand Anne Elliot. Don't get me wrong, I do love the other heroines, especially Elizabeth. It's just that I really admire how those two handled certain situations. I also have a newfound appreciation for Emma Woodhouse. I don't think I understood her all that much. Now that I'm older, I think the reason why I didn't like her much before is because I didn't like many traits displayed by her, and found in myself

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I love Anne Elliot!!!

[@MemphisJones]

Sis, you ranted and raved so hard in this video, I had to subscribe to you😅

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Awww thank you!

[@wuttbruh]

I think we often forget that Mr. Darcy was already engaged to his cousin. Yes, that engagement was not for love and more for family ties and money, but it was considered an engagement nonetheless. I think perhaps this would be a part of why he is so stand offish at the beginning of the book, when readers and Lizzy are first meeting him. He *could* dance, he *could* chat, but he probably understands very well that every unmarried woman in that room is hoping that dance or small conversation will lead to marriage. And he understands that he is already engaged. Maybe it took falling in love with Lizzy to finally realize that he could have something else, that he was allowed to choose. Idk just something I've thought of recently.

[@kathrynmackin4461]

I totally get what you're trying to say but Darcy wasn't ever actually engaged to his cousin Anne. The person who was pushing this was his Aunt Catherine but Darcy never actually agreed to the engagement and it just spread as rumour from there (a lot in part due to Mr Collins the Lady Catherine sycophant and Wickham). I think it would be better to read it as Darcy using those rumours as an excuse not to engage in the social niceties of the marriage market that he clearly feels uncomfortable with. It's possible he would have ended up marrying Anne if he'd not fallen in love or found another suitable partner but I doubt it because Anne would have been very unsuitable as Mistress of Pemberley due to her illness. Darcy's first priority is to his sister and then to his estate and I can't see him throwing that away on an unsuitable wife.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Anne would have made a terrible Mrs. Darcy! Even Caroline would have been better!!

[@1c1pal]

Legendary review/rant.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

TY

[@TrekBeatTK]

You can just tell the first draft was written for a women’s studies class and her professor said “there’s a book in this!”

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Oh god you’re right

[@annarita333]

13:06 I would disagree, that Darcy has social anxiety; at the end of the book he acknowledges that he looked down on people and was snobbish. But I do agree with you that his comment was only meant to discourage Bingley

[@TheEverGrowingRosey-333]

The person who wrote this book is beyond arrogant, she clearly read P&P book once (if that) & did no research or fact checking in the process of writing her criticism of Mr. Darcy.

[@annarita333]

15:45 Lydia was NOT fit to marry; that's the whole point of her story. It is commented upon in the book, that Mrs Bennet is so desperate, that she let's her daughters out in society too young. So even in regency morality, everything about this marriage is disgusting and horrible.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

My point was less that Lydia is ready for marrying and more to point out that getting married at 15/16 was more acceptable then than it is now (not that it was common even back then).

[@lizard_the_queen]

Actually wait, why does this feel like one of the books where in the end author goes "and it was all a dream"?

[@NerdyNurseReads]

It was a nightmare for me

[@FitchersLane]

There’s times when I feel like people get confused between Darcy and Heathcliff. Despite them being WORLDS apart, I keep seeing people -who likely have never read the books - describe Darcy as this asshole brooding obsessive love interest and that is totally not him! But it is Heathcliff! Heathcliff is the proto modern love interest in my mind. An obsessive and angry man who never learns and cannot be changed.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

How can anyone confuse Heathcliff and Darcy???? I hope she didn't do that.

[@kathrynmackin4461]

The author definitely never paid any attention to the actual story of pride and prejudice. Her saying that you have to assume the rumours about Darcy aren't true is ridiculous because the rumour is that he denied Wickham his inheritance WHICH ISN'T TRUE. And even if he hadn't offered Lydia a way out of marriage ti Wickham (which he did), he didn't set up the wedding and pay off Wickham's debts to get Lizzie back because he never wanted her to find out. Lydia was specifically told not to tell anyone about his involvement and if she hadn't spilled the beans because she can't keep her mouth shut for 2 seconds then Lizzie never would have known that Darcy went to all those lengths just to make sure she wouldn't be ruined without any compensation for himself. And another thing, she seems to fundamentally misunderstand that the same scene can be used to evoke different emotions depending on the context surrounding it. Yes both the moors of many a gothic novel and picturesque English countryside of Austen's novels are all beautiful but they are not being used in the same context. The landscapes of gothic novels are primarily meant to highlight the loneliness and isolation of the locations and the characters (especially the heroines who are trapped in those landscapes with the 'heros' who should rightly be called monsters). Whereas in the context of a scene like the one on the Darbyshire hills featured in the 1995 miniseries, the 2005 film and the novel, the reader/viewer is meant to feel a sense of wonder and freedom in the escape of nature, far from the constraints of society and everything that goes with it. Well that's my small rant over with 😂

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I'm starting to question her grasp of the Gothic. It's supposed to be her expertise, but the more I read through these comments, the more I'm side-eyeing that.

[@sappho4828]

this book is so frustrating because there is an actual point that she could be making (women are often conditioned into accepting poor treatment from male partners, and romantic fiction as a genre has bolstered this) and then desperately tries to link it back to one book written 200 years ago that has nothing to do with it ?? idk talk about mafia romance as a popular subgenre or about violence as a romantic gesture or degradation in sexual fantasy etc and how that represents modern ideas about romance or something but leave jane austen out of it ?? i also really don't understand the supposed argument that every romantic hero in any book since is just based on darcy because it fails to realise i guess that... men are real ?? jane austen was not the first person to consider that a wealthy & handsome man was a desirable partner ??

[@NerdyNurseReads]

There was definitely an opportunity to talk about romance and how women are conditioned to accept certain behaviors but she said "nah I'm gonna take some shots at Mr. Darcy!"

[@jessicasmith1766]

Is she confusing Darcy with Rochester? Cause “playing hard to get by insulting/tricking” her IS what Rochester does, but not Darcy! It makes me wonder if her original pitch was about Jane Eyre, Beauty and the Beast maps onto Jane Eyre MUCH better, but her publisher asked her to do P&P instead because it was more popular.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Rochester would have been a perfect archetype for her monster mythos.

[@AliceOfSherwood]

If she thinks Mr Darcy is a Monster, she clearly has never read The Tenant of Wildfell Hall

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Or Jane Eyre

[@bernadmanny]

I don't know how anyone can accuse the 2005 film adaption of P&P of being _Gothic_ it's clearly *_Romantic_* to the bone, especially the cliff scene.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I know one person who'd call it Gothic...

[@Robi-Chaud]

I'm convinced that she has never read Sally Rooney. I've seen some bad interpretations of Rooney, but this is "reading the Wikipedia synopsis is just as good as reading the book" levels bad

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Sally Rooney is an easy target. She's popular and woman like her books therefore people need to take shots at her books 🙄

[@jediping]

I don’t necessarily agree that Darcy is just socially awkward. I think he is kind of an asshole. He admits it himself. He never really thought about how he was perceived in large part because of the power structures that mean most people he’s around aren’t going to call him out on being a jerk. Lizzie has no qualms about doing so, which is part of what he liked about her initially, that she had no problem teasing him because she wasn’t afraid of him. And he takes her rebuke to heart even if he never imagines seeing her again. Also, he could easily have gotten Wickham blscklisted in society. He could have made his life pretty unbearable, so that he either only spent time with other dissolute people or left England to go try his charms somewhere else. It would have been well within expectations of what a person whose sister was so nearly wrecked by Wickham would do in response. He didn’t more out of “pride,” and I think while there may have been some selfishness there, it was also protecting his sister, because the gossips would say stuff like “Oooh, that Ms Darcy, she must have led that Wickham along” and other garbage like that. So he was in a tough spot there, and I don’t disagree with him taking either choice. My first thought on hearing that intro is “Who hurt you? And don’t say Darcy because clearly you’ve never met him, Rachel!”

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Oh, I don't think Austen meant Darcy to be socially awkward or introverted or anything like that; it's just how he appears to me. He's definitely proud, but I can't help projecting some of my own neurodivergence on him. Sadly, we will never find out who hurt Rachel.

[@cinnimonpannos4405]

I've always thought Darcy, at the beginning of the book, is still angry about what Wickham had almost managed to do to his "beloved" sister and how depressed she was over disappointing him. He took pride at the care he gave to his sister. Darcy felt that he was he was remembering his father's love for Wickham. and just couldn't take the plunge before Wickham's treatment to Georgiana.

[@tecc]

If she wanted to write about Jane Austin/Gothic Horror, she should have gone for Northanger Abbey tbh. Lost opportunity.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Northanger gets about 3 paragraphs worth of time. Totally missed opportunity.

[@junebugjo444]

she has like. an interesting thesis in the way we are influenced by romantic fiction in a negative way but choosing p&p as the prototype is so off the mark… there are so many terrible asshole man romantic interests to choose from who are ACTUALLY like that and not literally part of a story that shows you that hes a good person contrary to his initial impression. And Lizzie is exactly the opposite of her idea of a woman who pines and changes and kowtows to the male love interest. She should have just focused on her Gothic expertise because that is absolutely more where you will find horrible men that many people misinterpret as romantic. I cannot fathom this was published without at least one editor or someone being like…. this is a strange argument. Also the way its written feels very not academic and more like just a personal rant shes going on haha.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

Someone else brought up Rochester, she should have stuck with him and his fellow Gothic "heroes"

[@taintedbluet]

Barely 6minutes into this and all I can think of is: WHO HURT YOU???

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I thought the same.

[@SaudadeCB]

It is et cetera not exetera

[@sarahs.6838]

I deeply despise this genre of non-fiction with this "chatty" style that uses so many words to say nothing. And as a Ph.D. student, I can tell you all you need is resolve to survive the bureaucracy, it is not a signal of critical thinking beyond one, incredibly niche topic.

[@NerdyNurseReads]

It's so unnecessary. You don't need to dumb things down or make things hip. I hate it so much.

[@BrytteM]

Writing a whole diss book basing it on an EXTREMELY BAD READ of Pride and Prejudice is so funny-cringe. Like good gods, wtf was the woman even. Darcy, of ALL PEOPLE, does NOT fit the "secretly awful in some key manner" Gothic Romantic Deal. She clearly has this... flanderized fanon idea of Darcy who is not Darcy at all?

[@NerdyNurseReads]

I'm starting to wonder if this was just rage baiting that backfired.

[@morleywritesbooks]

idk what i stumbled into, but i'm kinda here for it

[@NerdyNurseReads]

welcome to the shitshow lol

[@morleywritesbooks]

@@NerdyNurseReads not sure i'd call it a shit show LOL, but maybe "a very enthusiastic, in depth, debunking"