Take a photo of a barcode or cover
estanceveyrac 's review for:
A Wife for Mr. Darcy
by Mary Lydon Simonsen
Dammit, I had to start it for a second time because it was quiet dull the first time around.
This is a "what if" story with no trigger. Whe are led to believe Darcy would choose to apologize for his words after the assembly in Meyrton, without any circomstances being otherwise altered, the action resulting not only in a close relationship from the start but also to his approval of Bingley proposing to Jane.
Proposteous! No indication is given as to why he would alter his behaviour such & in regard to Bingley, things are kept vague beyond the acceptable.
The timeline is different, but it's too close to be radically different whilst nonsensical is the differences. Georgiana is very OCC, we barely see Collins, that entire arc, including Rosing Park is completely skipped.
And, finally, we come to my foremost grievance. The wanton behavior shown through a book that is not labeled as such.
Darcy is said to have had a mistress up until recently. He was also on the cusp of a courtship with a woman he admits to finding dull.
Our Darcy???
Darcy is a man guided in all regards by a high moral standard, having placed exceedingly high expectations of behavior & correctness upon himself : HE WOULD NEVER HAVE A MISTRESS.
All P&P retellings saying otherwise are portraying an OCC Darcy.
This are a few of my comments upon reading :
-Darcy "grateful he was wearing a long coat". What??? Even were he to have a boner in public (a gentleman of eight and twenty!!!!), he would not make any mention of it, even in his inner dialogue.
Or more to the point, this phrase doesn't belong in a P&P adaption which is not signaled as a wanton edition. I read Regency because I do not like crude talk. I wish I could be spared such nonesense.
-Archaeologists??? Really? Do your research!!!!
-"Taking her by her hand"??? I can hardly be supposed to condone such debauchy!
I will finish this book, for I am not one to withdraw from a challenge.
I had to switch my soundtrack from Rachmaninov to Brahms to bear this dreadful experience. It was too light & the occasion deserves some austerity."
-I'll give credit when it is due. "Get thee to a nunnery" was clumsily used, but I still relish when hearing a good Bard's quote.
- The decadence. Elizabeth, putting her cheek to Darcy's while not only are they not married, or even engaged, but she has knowledge that he is in a courtship with another women?
Wanton, foolish & brazen, the lot of them...
No sense in propriety whatsoever.
- A man & a woman who are not related or married do not go unchaperoned. Ever. Ever.
And now Darcy has compromized Elizabeth. The rogue kissed her while they were alone at night in a room without any chaperone.
This is completely unaccepable. I shall endure, but it pains me to say, I do not like this one bit.
- They are not engaged. Darcy has no licence to call Elizabeth by a Christian name, nor to engage in a correspondance with her, which he could not entrust another man, an unrealiable character at that, to rely a letter in so direct a manner.
- There is no end to the wanton behavior. Even Jane seems fine to hear about her sister's actions...
- Darcy's name is not Will. It's Fitzwilliam, or William, not Will. Mister Fitzwilliam Darcy of Pemberley being called Will doesn't ring true in any context, in any country, in any century.
At this point, it feels silly to point out all the inaccuracies & breach in propriety, but I fear I cannot abide to read this sad tale & remain silent.
The politics were inaccurate, the travel time was incorrectly too short, it seemed the author had gotten the memo about wedding dresses when Charlotte got married in yellow, but then she went & had Jane & Elizabeth marry in white, the special licence marriage was complete fantasy (would never happen in such a country society), I mentioned the archaelogy, the book actually talks about the meaning of prehistoric paintings according to the scientics at Cambridge, the letter writing etiquette was a mess, there are several instances of hand holding...
Lastly, I deplore the fact that despite the length of the novel, we do not get any character developement. From anyone. The human nature is not observed & commented on. The book was very superficial, as in, it only scratched the surface of what took place, which makes it very common place, unlike Jane Austen & quite dull.
Retellings of P&P are beloved because we imagine what lies between the lines, what was left unsaid but not unfelt. Deprived of that, any story lacks spark & wit.
PS: In my harsh critique, I mean not to dismiss the author, but rather to give a review for those who want more in a P&P adaptation than quick entertainement & endure anachronism without cringing in agony. My review only reflects my exceedingly high standards.
This is a "what if" story with no trigger. Whe are led to believe Darcy would choose to apologize for his words after the assembly in Meyrton, without any circomstances being otherwise altered, the action resulting not only in a close relationship from the start but also to his approval of Bingley proposing to Jane.
Proposteous! No indication is given as to why he would alter his behaviour such & in regard to Bingley, things are kept vague beyond the acceptable.
The timeline is different, but it's too close to be radically different whilst nonsensical is the differences. Georgiana is very OCC, we barely see Collins, that entire arc, including Rosing Park is completely skipped.
And, finally, we come to my foremost grievance. The wanton behavior shown through a book that is not labeled as such.
Darcy is said to have had a mistress up until recently. He was also on the cusp of a courtship with a woman he admits to finding dull.
Our Darcy???
Darcy is a man guided in all regards by a high moral standard, having placed exceedingly high expectations of behavior & correctness upon himself : HE WOULD NEVER HAVE A MISTRESS.
All P&P retellings saying otherwise are portraying an OCC Darcy.
This are a few of my comments upon reading :
-Darcy "grateful he was wearing a long coat". What??? Even were he to have a boner in public (a gentleman of eight and twenty!!!!), he would not make any mention of it, even in his inner dialogue.
Or more to the point, this phrase doesn't belong in a P&P adaption which is not signaled as a wanton edition. I read Regency because I do not like crude talk. I wish I could be spared such nonesense.
-Archaeologists??? Really? Do your research!!!!
-"Taking her by her hand"??? I can hardly be supposed to condone such debauchy!
I will finish this book, for I am not one to withdraw from a challenge.
I had to switch my soundtrack from Rachmaninov to Brahms to bear this dreadful experience. It was too light & the occasion deserves some austerity."
-I'll give credit when it is due. "Get thee to a nunnery" was clumsily used, but I still relish when hearing a good Bard's quote.
- The decadence. Elizabeth, putting her cheek to Darcy's while not only are they not married, or even engaged, but she has knowledge that he is in a courtship with another women?
Wanton, foolish & brazen, the lot of them...
No sense in propriety whatsoever.
- A man & a woman who are not related or married do not go unchaperoned. Ever. Ever.
And now Darcy has compromized Elizabeth. The rogue kissed her while they were alone at night in a room without any chaperone.
This is completely unaccepable. I shall endure, but it pains me to say, I do not like this one bit.
- They are not engaged. Darcy has no licence to call Elizabeth by a Christian name, nor to engage in a correspondance with her, which he could not entrust another man, an unrealiable character at that, to rely a letter in so direct a manner.
- There is no end to the wanton behavior. Even Jane seems fine to hear about her sister's actions...
- Darcy's name is not Will. It's Fitzwilliam, or William, not Will. Mister Fitzwilliam Darcy of Pemberley being called Will doesn't ring true in any context, in any country, in any century.
At this point, it feels silly to point out all the inaccuracies & breach in propriety, but I fear I cannot abide to read this sad tale & remain silent.
The politics were inaccurate, the travel time was incorrectly too short, it seemed the author had gotten the memo about wedding dresses when Charlotte got married in yellow, but then she went & had Jane & Elizabeth marry in white, the special licence marriage was complete fantasy (would never happen in such a country society), I mentioned the archaelogy, the book actually talks about the meaning of prehistoric paintings according to the scientics at Cambridge, the letter writing etiquette was a mess, there are several instances of hand holding...
Lastly, I deplore the fact that despite the length of the novel, we do not get any character developement. From anyone. The human nature is not observed & commented on. The book was very superficial, as in, it only scratched the surface of what took place, which makes it very common place, unlike Jane Austen & quite dull.
Retellings of P&P are beloved because we imagine what lies between the lines, what was left unsaid but not unfelt. Deprived of that, any story lacks spark & wit.
PS: In my harsh critique, I mean not to dismiss the author, but rather to give a review for those who want more in a P&P adaptation than quick entertainement & endure anachronism without cringing in agony. My review only reflects my exceedingly high standards.