Pam Webb

a writer's journey as a reader

Archive for the tag “Mansfield Park”

Jane Austen: Smart Reading


If you are here it’s because the Jane Austen in the title tweaked your interest, right? Well, beyond being one of THE best writers in the literary canonical group of authors listed in the universal TBR list, she is actually a teacher. Actually, Stanford neurobiologists and English professor Natalie Phillips picked her book Mansfield Park to determine a connection between critical reading and brain activation patterns. (source: Luminosity)

Cover of "Mansfield Park (1999)"

Cover of Mansfield Park (1999)

The procedure went like this: an MRI scanned the brains of 18 participants as they read MP. These weren’t ordinary students, no struggling juniors or seniors assigned Janey as an honors read; no, these were PhD candidates. The reason being the researchers wanted to make sure close reading, the reading for analysis, was properly done. Going for a doctorate would probably ensure smarter reading practices. Participants read for “fun,” that is, casually read and then they were asked to close read.

Results: critical reading increased bloodflow throughout the brain, especially to the prefrontal cortex, which is considered to be the center of thoughts and actions and our social behavior.

Implications: close reading, the method of critically studying a text, indicates a connection between shaping and shifting cognition

My Understanding: Sheesh! I’ve been doing this for years. “Hey kids, read this and let’s figure out what it means.” Oh yea, this is what Common Core State Standards is all about–we give students higher level reading material and ask them to think about what they are reading. Like I said *I’ve been doing this for years*.

Okay, do I get my honorary PhD now?

Gently Persuaded


Raise your hand if you prefer Pride and Prejudice.

All right, now raise your hand for Emma.

How about Sense and Sensibility?

Mansfield Park? Okay.

Northhanger Abbey? Just asking.

And the rest of you? It’s got to be for Persuasion–right?

Well, Jane only wrote six novels; it’s got to be for one of them.

Hmm, I shall gently try to persuade you to cast your Austen vote for Persuasion.

Reason 1:

  • Pride and Prejudice gets much too much attention.  Jane has six literary children and P&P will become unbearably too spoiled with so much fuss. Look at all the celebratory brouhaha over the publishing of the novel! Goodness…

Reason 2:

  • Anne and Frederick don’t have to go through that messy “love me, love me not” business found in JA’s other plots; they already love each other.  Getting to the point where they re-realize it makes it so much more satisfying than the on/off dilemma.

Reason 3:

  • Persuasion has THE best love letter.  Here is a partial:

“I must go, uncertain of my fate; but I shall return hither, or follow your party, as soon as possible. A word, a look, will be enough to decide whether I enter your father’s house this evening or never.” 

Who could not met upon receiving this as an encouragement?

Reason 4:

  • Anne and Frederick are older and have been knocked around a bit in life and more truly represent the reality that love’s course is not perfect. In other words: their love is more relatable than the fairy-talish idea of sitting around and waiting for Mr or Ms Right to pop along when least expected (okay–Emma had a bit of that going on).

Reason 5:

  • the 1995 version with Ciaran Hinds and Amanda Root captures well the complicated tango of emotions these two separated lovers endure as they find their way back into each other’s hearts and arms.  Amanda Root’s transformation from wilted and worn down spinister-in-the-making to resolute refreshed woman is transfixing.

True love lingers and is not forgotten

So, five amazing reasons why Persuasion should become THE Jane Austen first mentioned in her stable of renowned novels.

Have I persuaded you?

English: Persuasion(ch. 9) Jane Austen: In ano...

English: Persuasion(ch. 9) Jane Austen: In another moment … someone was taking him from her. Français : Persuasion(ch. 9) Frederick libère Anne de son jeune neveu, qui l’étouffe. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Pride and Prejudice Bicentenary Challenge 2013

Egads, Those Cads of Literature


You know who they are.  Those bad boys who jilt the girl, cheat the honest friend, and play havoc with the plot.  They are the cads of literature.  Having finished Jane Austen’s Persuasion I have added Mr. Elliot to the list.  His subterfuge was most deplorable.  Then again, I do adore how she swiftly cast him aside for someone much more worthy of her devotion.  My favorite heroines have done just that–put those cads in their place.  Since I am on a Jane Austen revisiting read here are some cads that live in her books:

Henry Crawford (Mansfield Park)–I detected cad from the very start

Frank Churchill (Emma)–what a naughty game you played with so many hearts

Oh, Willoughby (Sense and Sensibility)–we wanted so much to like you

Elliot (Persuasion)–did you really think you could turn Anne’s head or her heart away from Wentworth?

Tsk tsk, Wickham (Pride and Prejudice)–your charm could not cover your secret faults

 

As to Northhanger Abbey, I haven’t decided who the cad truly is.  It’s up on my list to review.  As to other literary cads–any nominees?  Rhett Butler comes to mind, but then was he a cad or simply a foil for Scarlett?

Happy reading!

English: Engraving of Steventon rectory, home ...

English: Engraving of Steventon rectory, home of the Austen family during much of Jane Austen’s lifetime (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“Words, Words, Words” Hamlet Knew What He Was Talking About


I came across this information in one of my many literary newsletters, and couldn’t pass up the opportunity to share this profound trivia concerning some of the books I’ve read over the years.  The source is Publisher’s Weekly, with a nod to Amazon.

As an added bonus, if you click on the book title you will be rewarded with even more amazing stats.  You never know when book stats will come in handy.  I tend to either amaze or bore my students with my accrued literary triviarium (my own word–ahem: the collection of meaningless, yet seemingly important factuals, which would be a shame to delete, hence, they are kept and spouted at some random point in time) .  Click here for the entire article.

                                                                                                                Animal Farm

29,966 words (75% of books have more words)


Slaughterhouse-Five

47,192 words (64% of books have more words)


Lord of the Flies

62,481 words (51% of books have more words)

Brave New World

64,531 words (50% of books have more words)

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer

70,570 words (45% of books have more words)


Mansfield Park

159, 344 words (9% of books have more words)

                                                                                                              Moby-Dick

209,117 words (4% of books have more words)

East of Eden

226,741 words (3% of books have more words)


                                                                               Middlemarch

310,593 words (2% of books have more words)

War and Peace

544,406 words (0% of books have more words)

 

So why care how many words might be found in a book?  Maybe there is no reason.  Except it might give one pause if one is looking for a measure against what has held up over time in bookdom.  I dunno.  Maybe I just like books so much that I tend to grab onto anything booksy to store in my triviarium.  I wonder how Hamlet would have appreciated this info?

Happy Pages

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: