Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.69 AVERAGE
3.69 AVERAGE
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Maybe it's possible to read too many Jane Austen novels in a row, but they have become quite predictable. And they can't all be Pride and Prejudice!
Reread 2025 after talking with a friend who is an Austen expert about the novel. I have to say, that I did like it better this time. Fanny seemed more steadfast and less wimpy, though there is an awful lot of self-denigration. I do like the way Austen handled the very last chapter. A little Shakesperean, in that a lot if big events are given us by report, instead of live, as it were. Raised my rating from 3 to 4.
Reread 2025 after talking with a friend who is an Austen expert about the novel. I have to say, that I did like it better this time. Fanny seemed more steadfast and less wimpy, though there is an awful lot of self-denigration. I do like the way Austen handled the very last chapter. A little Shakesperean, in that a lot if big events are given us by report, instead of live, as it were. Raised my rating from 3 to 4.
honestly three stars feels generous, which is a crazy thing for me to say about something Austen wrote. I just despise Edmund and his lack of a backbone, and while Fanny’s backbone about her convictions is perhaps her only admirable quality, she just lets people walk all over her and her infatuation with Edmund does not make me a fan. I find Mary detestable (but a little interesting) and Henry by far the most interesting (if also detestable) character in the whole novel.
There is really not a single likable character in this book, which I can get down with if the main character wasn’t so boring… I’m still giving this three starts tho cause the tea was hot in this book.
don't know man didn't click with me at all. it meanders and the characters didn't stand out to me and the abundance of humor and charm that I found in pride and prejudice was barely present here. really struggled with this and had to leave it after i was halfway through.
will give it a shot again after some time has passed.
but for now it's a decent 5 for me
will give it a shot again after some time has passed.
but for now it's a decent 5 for me
hopeful
lighthearted
relaxing
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Mansfield Park felt to me like an ode to the unjust entitlement of men - and the faith we women should have in our own intuition.
I gather Fanny Price is a bit of a contentious character, but honestly, I adored her. I liked her journey from timid mouse to strong minded woman. She knew her own mind and she wouldn't be pushed into a situation she didn't want to be in. That's something plenty of us struggle with even today, so I found her to be a rather admirable character.
All in all, this was a lovely example of Austen's writing. It wasn't my favourite, but it wasn't my least favourite either. I'm looking forward to watching some adaptations soon.
I gather Fanny Price is a bit of a contentious character, but honestly, I adored her. I liked her journey from timid mouse to strong minded woman. She knew her own mind and she wouldn't be pushed into a situation she didn't want to be in. That's something plenty of us struggle with even today, so I found her to be a rather admirable character.
All in all, this was a lovely example of Austen's writing. It wasn't my favourite, but it wasn't my least favourite either. I'm looking forward to watching some adaptations soon.
You can’t really rate a classic (in my opinion) as it’s already proved itself on the bookshelves of a hundred years. However, I love Jane Austen & although this isn’t my favourite of hers it definitely never disappoints.
"His happiness in knowing himself to have been so long the beloved of such a a heart must have been great enough to warrant any strength of language in which he could clothe it to her or to himself it must have been a delightful happiness."
This book was a lovely read, and by far the fastest read of the Jane Austen's I have yet read. Truly a gift.
I'll expand my review at a later time when I have more time
This book was a lovely read, and by far the fastest read of the Jane Austen's I have yet read. Truly a gift.
I'll expand my review at a later time when I have more time
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Reading Mansfield Park was an interesting Jane Austen experience for me because it's the book I know the least. This is my first time reading it, I've watched only one adaptation (in high school, so not recently), and I've never read a retelling that I know of. I also feel it's just not talked about very much. So while I have a general picture of Emma and Persuasion despite not having read them (not yet, anyway-- my adventure will continue), Mansfield Park is a bit of a mystery. It was like picking up any other new book for the first time.
Fanny Price makes for an uncommon heroine because of her circumstances. She's been taken in by an aunt and uncle as an act of charity. After that traumatic parting from her parents and many siblings, she grew up among a family that was largely determined to care for her but also never forget her inferior status. Expected always to be grateful for her new family's magnanimity in taking her off her poor mother's hands, she is nevertheless given less opportunity, thought, and consideration than her cousins. These cousins, in turn, find her timidity and "stupidity" from lacking education hilarious. The exception is Edmund. He goes out of his way to look out for Fanny when no one else considers her frail constitution or asks her for her thoughts. He helps her get in touch with her brother and argues on her behalf when his aunt and mother make decisions with no interest in Fanny's well-being or desires.
It's no wonder, then, that as Fanny grows up, she falls a bit in love (I mean, it'd be pretty strange/questionable now, but we'll give history a break on this one). With a world so small and only one truly kind person in it, Fanny's happiness hinges on her champion's attention and time spent together. So it's unfortunate when the lively but self-important Miss Crawford moves into the neighborhood and captures Edmund's attention. It seems that to him, Fanny is still just his sweet, little cousin, so there's no reason not to find his affections engaged elsewhere. Meanwhile, Fanny suffers without his support as his family runs roughshod over her without his careful eye on everything.
I don't think it's surprising that I really felt for Fanny. In some ways, I imagine her life was worse for her adoption since she was held at arm's length by her relations and expected to thank them for her partial rise to affluence. Though she would have been living in relative poverty, otherwise, you can't help but wonder about the other trajectories her life could have taken-- not necessarily better ones, but maybe ones where she's not so starved for affection or left with such an uncertain, ignored future. It's not even clear to guests at Mansfield Park if Fanny is out in society because she doesn't act the part, hasn't been anywhere or done anything, and isn't being encouraged to find a match. It seems she is expected to be her aunt's companion indefinitely, at her beck and call, which in this case means never leaving home or participating in her cousins' frolicking around the neighborhood.
My first complaint about the book is that it's terribly slow-going. There's an aspect of that to all Austen's works if you're not used to it, but I think usually the shrewd assessments of everybody and the biting humor carry me through. The wait is part of the experience. In this case, I was merely waiting, confused about the end goal, for something momentous to occur.
We kind of get that when Fanny's fortunes take a turn, or so everyone else assumes. It's a horrible but real and still so relevant vibe seeing everyone try to convince Fanny that she should he grateful for Henry Crawford's attentions. And how despicable that everything about how she was raised prevents her from saying anything remotely negative without being labeled ungrateful and cold. Even the well-meaning Edmund assumes she would be happy with the match because of external markers (his wealth, handsomeness, displays of besottedness, etc.) rather than listening to her clear statements of dislike. It plays into some romance tropes in an interesting way because their presence feeds others' enthusiasm about the match but not Fanny's. It would be a rags-to-riches story about catching a rake and reforming him, an opposites attract story where he falls first. It's just that Fanny sees more clearly that it's all just window dressing. She doesn't believe in his supposed reform from self-centered rake to devoted romantic, in part because of her own rigid moral system but also because she's more discerning and watchful than her acquaintances.
It was such a relief to see Fanny dodge the man, though it, too, came to drag on too long. The next misfortune, in my view, is that Fanny ends up with a man equally horrible in different ways. Edmund's moral uprightness is contrasted against his more lackadaisical family members in a way I found more abrasive than other cautious, stoic Austen characters like Elinor or Darcy. His judgment of others carries the extra layer of one who takes his future career in the Church very seriously. And every time Fanny agreed with him, I was struck by how creepy it is that not only are the two related but he's had more than the usual say in shaping her opinions and outlook from youth. Beyond the literal incestuousness of our kissing cousins, their growing up together makes it worse (something the adults had hoped might prevent a match from the start, actually. More fool them). Edmund has essentially raised Fanny to be his ideal wife, and she's been so receptive to his worldview that she ends up meeting his every expectation, even when it doesn't catch his romantic attention at first.
Though I can understand as an adult that Austen's works aren't exactly the romances I remembered them to be from my first acquaintance with them in my youth, I still prefer to see a heroine end up with someone I don't find distasteful. After ignoring her and trampling over her with his own concerns, he does reach a point of contrition, but I don't think that means he's earned her affections. The thing is that I don't like where things wind up in general. Fanny ultimately decides that her time with her aunt and uncle was indeed the best path her life could have taken, her own family not living up to her rose-colored expectations on reintroduction. That's fair, but I also think her upbringing deserved more criticism. Where one aunt is universally disliked and gets her comeuppance, her uncle's blindness to her situation, for example, is swept under the rug once he realizes he's erred in maligning her character, re: the Henry Crawford situation. My issue is that I think he went wrong more broadly than that, and my vengeful nature wanted Fanny to be better appreciated in the end, and not just as a virtuous ideal.
A final note I want to make has to do with a political reality just barely acknowledged. Jane Austen's works are as much products of their era as any other. Where I usually see that in the social customs of the elites she focuses on most, this book has a touch more. Fanny's uncle goes off to manage his lands in Antigua for over a year, and the subtext of slave labor shouldn't be ignored. It comes up directly when he returns, and we learn that Fanny asked him an insightful question about the slave trade, but the specifics are left to our imagination. The vagueness is a problem for me because the meaning behind it is left unsaid. What was Fanny's insight? What did the author intend by bringing it up in conversation? For the characters' part, the slave trade was a source of profit for the family, so we can surmise that they would have favored it. And though Fanny diverges from the rest on some matters of moral rectitude, I think if she had rocked the boat in her questioning, it wouldn't have been an aside but a whole scene. A theme of the book is that everyone mistreats her, and such a happening would have aligned with that message perfectly. Instead, we get a one-liner that points to a family blithely commenting on an economic reality that favors them. It ignores vast suffering and violence, sometimes directly at their hands, but an ocean away from the ladies, who don't have to face what that means. While I welcome reminders of the historical horrors that fueled this fictional family's wealth, a reflection of real families of the same circumstance, it's hard to see it through their eyes-- an unobjectionable, unremarkable source of comfort and affluence rather than the crime against humanity it was.
This is my least favorite Austen book so far, for the many reasons I've enumerated. From the pace to the supposed romance to Fanny's resolution to the brush with history, I was left unsatisfied. There was potential here, but I was disappointed with the execution.
Fanny Price makes for an uncommon heroine because of her circumstances. She's been taken in by an aunt and uncle as an act of charity. After that traumatic parting from her parents and many siblings, she grew up among a family that was largely determined to care for her but also never forget her inferior status. Expected always to be grateful for her new family's magnanimity in taking her off her poor mother's hands, she is nevertheless given less opportunity, thought, and consideration than her cousins. These cousins, in turn, find her timidity and "stupidity" from lacking education hilarious. The exception is Edmund. He goes out of his way to look out for Fanny when no one else considers her frail constitution or asks her for her thoughts. He helps her get in touch with her brother and argues on her behalf when his aunt and mother make decisions with no interest in Fanny's well-being or desires.
It's no wonder, then, that as Fanny grows up, she falls a bit in love (I mean, it'd be pretty strange/questionable now, but we'll give history a break on this one). With a world so small and only one truly kind person in it, Fanny's happiness hinges on her champion's attention and time spent together. So it's unfortunate when the lively but self-important Miss Crawford moves into the neighborhood and captures Edmund's attention. It seems that to him, Fanny is still just his sweet, little cousin, so there's no reason not to find his affections engaged elsewhere. Meanwhile, Fanny suffers without his support as his family runs roughshod over her without his careful eye on everything.
I don't think it's surprising that I really felt for Fanny. In some ways, I imagine her life was worse for her adoption since she was held at arm's length by her relations and expected to thank them for her partial rise to affluence. Though she would have been living in relative poverty, otherwise, you can't help but wonder about the other trajectories her life could have taken-- not necessarily better ones, but maybe ones where she's not so starved for affection or left with such an uncertain, ignored future. It's not even clear to guests at Mansfield Park if Fanny is out in society because she doesn't act the part, hasn't been anywhere or done anything, and isn't being encouraged to find a match. It seems she is expected to be her aunt's companion indefinitely, at her beck and call, which in this case means never leaving home or participating in her cousins' frolicking around the neighborhood.
My first complaint about the book is that it's terribly slow-going. There's an aspect of that to all Austen's works if you're not used to it, but I think usually the shrewd assessments of everybody and the biting humor carry me through. The wait is part of the experience. In this case, I was merely waiting, confused about the end goal, for something momentous to occur.
We kind of get that when Fanny's fortunes take a turn, or so everyone else assumes. It's a horrible but real and still so relevant vibe seeing everyone try to convince Fanny that she should he grateful for Henry Crawford's attentions. And how despicable that everything about how she was raised prevents her from saying anything remotely negative without being labeled ungrateful and cold. Even the well-meaning Edmund assumes she would be happy with the match because of external markers (his wealth, handsomeness, displays of besottedness, etc.) rather than listening to her clear statements of dislike. It plays into some romance tropes in an interesting way because their presence feeds others' enthusiasm about the match but not Fanny's. It would be a rags-to-riches story about catching a rake and reforming him, an opposites attract story where he falls first. It's just that Fanny sees more clearly that it's all just window dressing. She doesn't believe in his supposed reform from self-centered rake to devoted romantic, in part because of her own rigid moral system but also because she's more discerning and watchful than her acquaintances.
It was such a relief to see Fanny dodge the man, though it, too, came to drag on too long. The next misfortune, in my view, is that Fanny ends up with a man equally horrible in different ways. Edmund's moral uprightness is contrasted against his more lackadaisical family members in a way I found more abrasive than other cautious, stoic Austen characters like Elinor or Darcy. His judgment of others carries the extra layer of one who takes his future career in the Church very seriously. And every time Fanny agreed with him, I was struck by how creepy it is that not only are the two related but he's had more than the usual say in shaping her opinions and outlook from youth. Beyond the literal incestuousness of our kissing cousins, their growing up together makes it worse (something the adults had hoped might prevent a match from the start, actually. More fool them). Edmund has essentially raised Fanny to be his ideal wife, and she's been so receptive to his worldview that she ends up meeting his every expectation, even when it doesn't catch his romantic attention at first.
Though I can understand as an adult that Austen's works aren't exactly the romances I remembered them to be from my first acquaintance with them in my youth, I still prefer to see a heroine end up with someone I don't find distasteful. After ignoring her and trampling over her with his own concerns, he does reach a point of contrition, but I don't think that means he's earned her affections. The thing is that I don't like where things wind up in general. Fanny ultimately decides that her time with her aunt and uncle was indeed the best path her life could have taken, her own family not living up to her rose-colored expectations on reintroduction. That's fair, but I also think her upbringing deserved more criticism. Where one aunt is universally disliked and gets her comeuppance, her uncle's blindness to her situation, for example, is swept under the rug once he realizes he's erred in maligning her character, re: the Henry Crawford situation. My issue is that I think he went wrong more broadly than that, and my vengeful nature wanted Fanny to be better appreciated in the end, and not just as a virtuous ideal.
A final note I want to make has to do with a political reality just barely acknowledged. Jane Austen's works are as much products of their era as any other. Where I usually see that in the social customs of the elites she focuses on most, this book has a touch more. Fanny's uncle goes off to manage his lands in Antigua for over a year, and the subtext of slave labor shouldn't be ignored. It comes up directly when he returns, and we learn that Fanny asked him an insightful question about the slave trade, but the specifics are left to our imagination. The vagueness is a problem for me because the meaning behind it is left unsaid. What was Fanny's insight? What did the author intend by bringing it up in conversation? For the characters' part, the slave trade was a source of profit for the family, so we can surmise that they would have favored it. And though Fanny diverges from the rest on some matters of moral rectitude, I think if she had rocked the boat in her questioning, it wouldn't have been an aside but a whole scene. A theme of the book is that everyone mistreats her, and such a happening would have aligned with that message perfectly. Instead, we get a one-liner that points to a family blithely commenting on an economic reality that favors them. It ignores vast suffering and violence, sometimes directly at their hands, but an ocean away from the ladies, who don't have to face what that means. While I welcome reminders of the historical horrors that fueled this fictional family's wealth, a reflection of real families of the same circumstance, it's hard to see it through their eyes-- an unobjectionable, unremarkable source of comfort and affluence rather than the crime against humanity it was.
This is my least favorite Austen book so far, for the many reasons I've enumerated. From the pace to the supposed romance to Fanny's resolution to the brush with history, I was left unsatisfied. There was potential here, but I was disappointed with the execution.
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I really loved this novel, and I thought it was totally brilliant. Unlike Pride and Prejudice , I knew virtually nothing about the plot of Mansfield Park as I read it. At the beginning I was very overwhelmed by the sheer amount of characters that are introduced, but this novel progresses so well and by the time I got to Part II, I was completely hooked. Jane Austen's full skill is on display here. All of these characters are masterfully written, and the Crawford siblings specifically are unbelievably compelling. The pacing of this novel is also extremely well-done, especially in Part III when the story slows down and information is released only through letters. Definitely also a step up from P&P in its thematic interests; the focus on virtue and ruin is super interesting, and of course there's been a ton of post-colonial scholarship on the novel's interest in the slave-trade. There are definitely some disconcerting elements, but I think that reading them in Austen's social context makes them understandable, even if it doesn't necessarily ameliorate them.