Back to Top

Monthly Archives: April 2011

Yikes, I’m late. It’s spring. I saw a bee today, the first one I’ve noticed, and I’ve been dealing with all sorts of vegetation problems outside, the result of several years’ neglect while I wrote, or, more likely, lurked around inside thinking about starting to write. But never mind all that.

I finally got to see Jane Eyre, weeks after everyone else, and I think it’s a good enough interpretation that it could stand a little more discussion. So I loved it, unreservedly, and reader, I would marry this movie given half the chance.

I believe–is this true?–that it’s the only film version that does not resort to a voiceover to link plot elements. Yet the director took some liberties with the timeline, beginning it as Jane flees Thornfield, and actually repeating about a minute of footage when the story catches up with itself. The whole Lowood part of the book (ooh, all that discipline!) is shortened, skimming over Helen Burns and ignoring the saintly Miss Temple. The Rochester-in-drag as a fortune-teller scene was wisely abandoned and if I had any complaint it was that Michael Fassbender was too hot (even in a silly nightie. Oooh). However, even that worked; at the end, he was frail and diminished and sporting a beard a woman could get lost in.

And Jane herself–well, I’ve never liked any of the others, such as the permanently cross and overbitten Ruth Wilson in the 2006 BBC version, the too-pretty Charlotte Gainsbourg (1996), and I thought at moments in the 1970 version with Susannah York that she almost got it. But Mia Wasikowska was amazing; she portrayed such a sense of inner passion behind the mask.

One scene that was omitted, which surprised me at first, was that in which Jane’s wedding veil is ripped in half by Bertha (uh, you do know she’s the mad wife in the attic, right? oops, spoiler). But it made sense in the understated interpretation, abandoning the more obviously gothic elements.

There were some lovely moments–the sexy, and again, understated scene after the fire when Jane and Rochester almost kiss (they rub noses. Aaaw); when Jane’s wedding gown drops around her feet, mirroring the earlier scene where her “fine clothes” are taken from her at Lowood.

The locations and lighting and soundtrack were incredible. Most of it was filmed in Derbyshire, and here are some of the locations. Haddon Hall, left, is Thornfield:

Have you seen the movie? What did you think? What was your favorite scene?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 12 Replies

Too Many Dukes? Or Not Enough to Go Around?

There’s this pernicious statement that keeps popping up among authors of historical romance to the effect that In Real Life there were only a very small number of dukes and that historical romance as a genre has more dukes than ever existed in the entire universe and isn’t that just completely unrealistic?

I get a little hot under the collar every time I hear (read) someone say that because it misses the ENTIRE POINT. Which I will get to after I point out a few things.

A population explosion

Every genre of fiction is over-populated with its principal archetypes. There sure are a lot of detectives in mysteries. And Romantic Suspense seems to be dealing with an absolute deluge of serial killers. Throw in Thrillers and maybe you should be wondering about your neighbors. Because if you aren’t the serial killer on your block, then sure as heck someone else is. Right? Is he REALLY just taking out the garbage or is that body parts? And dukes in historical romance! You can’t swing a dead cat in 1815 without hitting a duke.

Give ’em The Boot!

If we follow the logic of the argument against dukes in historical romance, then we should ask the other genres to stop with the detectives and sleuths and serial killers. And elves, let’s do something about them too, because you know what? There are too damn many elves in High Fantasy. Don’t get me started on the dragons. Those don’t even really exist and they’re all over the place. They should leave town with the hero raised in poverty who is actually the King’s long lost son AND HE CAN DO MAGIC!!!

A Book is An Island

Here’s my problem with statements like there are too many dukes. It conflates the world of a book with the world of every other similar book. But each book, each story, is a world unto itself. That story is an island unto itself and when the bell tolls, it’s only for that book. In this book in which the hero is a duke, it doesn’t matter if there is another fictional duke in another book. It just doesn’t.

It’s up to the author to make him real in the story in which he is the hero.



Let’s Keep our Arguments Straight
The argument against dukes in historical romance conflates cliche and familiar tropes with the fictional world of the book. Those are two separate problems. A reader might well decide she’s tired of dukes in stories and wish for a story without one. But that is not the same problem as pointing out there are more fictional dukes than there ever have been IRL. That last one, in my opinion, is a big so what?

A duke in a story is a cliche if and only if he is written badly and without care. A story that doesn’t somewhere in its guts think about why the hero is a duke and then use that in subtle and non-subtle ways is a book that will probably feel cliche. And it won’t be because the hero is a duke. It will be because the author was lazy,

It’s also not the same problem as wishing there were historical romances without dukes. And, I’m happy to say, there are.

What do you think? Are you tired of dukes?

Too Many Dukes? Or Not Enough to Go Around?

There’s this pernicious statement that keeps popping up among authors of historical romance to the effect that In Real Life there were only a very small number of dukes and that historical romance as a genre has more dukes than ever existed in the entire universe and isn’t that just completely unrealistic?

I get a little hot under the collar every time I hear (read) someone say that because it misses the ENTIRE POINT. Which I will get to after I point out a few things.

A population explosion

Every genre of fiction is over-populated with its principal archetypes. There sure are a lot of detectives in fiction.

Happy Tuesday, everyone! I finally got to catch the new Jane Eyre movie this weekend, after waiting weeks for it to open here, and I am so glad I did. I enjoyed it very much–despite the fact that many aspects of the story had to be cut (as they always do for feature-length films), I thought the atmosphere and complexity of the characters was still there, as well as the dark intensity. Highly recommended! (My favorite Jane Eyre is still the old Timothy Dalton version, but this might be a close second. I’ll need to see it again to make sure…)

It was also very timely for me, since I’m deep into the first book of a new Laurel McKee series, this one set in the early Victorian era (1840s) and centering around two families who are old enemies, one a ducal family and one a family with underworld connections (and having done quite a bit of research now on the Victorian underworld, I can only say–I thought the Elizabethans were naughty, but those Victorians were nasty. Maybe it’s the whole hidden/repressed thing the Victorians had going on, where the Elizabethans had it all out there for everyone to see. The contrast is fascinating). You’ll be hearing a lot more about my research on this period later (I’ve never done a Victorian setting before, and I’m really loving being immersed in this new world), but for now let’s do what I always like to do–look at some clothes!

One reason this story ended up being set in the early Victorian period rather than the later 1860s-70s-80s was the fashion. I love the gowns of this decade (and was inspired a lot by the costumes and general aesthetics of the movie Young Victoria–my heroine, Lily, looks a lot like Emily Blunt in my mind, and she also has a great wardrobe!), before things get a little high-Victorian excessive. But I have to remember in the love scenes that there are a lot more underclothes to deal with….

So let’s look at some of the images from my Victorian Research File. I especially love that red gown–my heroine is definitely going to wear that one!













Also this week, I’m enjoying watching the new Upstairs Downstairs (though I keep getting the naughty housemaid and the naughty younger sister mixed up–why do they look so much alike?) and reading Giles Tremlett’s new bio of Catherine of Aragon, as well as working on the WIP and getting ready to go to Kansas City in a couple of weeks to see a Princess Di fashion exhibit (as well as watching the new royal wedding?). What are you doing this week? What do you think of fashion, the Victorian era, Upstairs Downstairs, or anything else in the world??

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 9 Replies
Follow
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join millions of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com