I read the afterword going "Ha! Yes! Exactly! I don't doubt it!" because yes, I'm that incoherent even in my own head. Basically the afterword was about the fact that many people read the book and don't get half of what it's really about - social expectations of people's behaviors. And then they mentioned that Mr. Darcy is considered by many to be the epitome of the brooding, romantic male. I can hardly believe it. To me he wasn't 'brooding' at all; he was shy, frustrated with people who are shallow and who's brains don't work as fast as his own, and not interested in people's opinions of him. Or, in other words, a geek. Exactly the sort I like. But, damn, that's a difficult character to portay from the outside view. My hat's definetly off to Austen, even I did think she had to stretch things a bit here and there to make it work out for her two main characters.
On the strength of this book alone, having not even finished with it, I had the temerity to list Austen as a favorite author on my NaNo profile.
I desperately wish I had the brain to retain everything I should really have learned from that book, not only about people but about how to write people, because I know it's all slipping away. Although, she had an advantage, because back then it was apparently allowed to summarize what people say and just give the general gist of it, rather than detailing it. This would have been a tremendously longer book if she'd had to go into every line of dialogue from every conversation. I might try to get away with that, although I expect I'll get people hounding me that it's 'boooooring.' (Yes I DID get that response about
"Ennui", because there wasn't enough action and dialogue. Someday perhaps I'll go back and re-write it so it's not so incredibly dull.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
