I'm not ignoring you...

... I've just been very very busy. Deadlines for my history project are pressing and I'm being squeezed trying to keep up. Lately, my typical day is: get up, work on my book most of the day, take care of dinner, and then, if I'm not going to an evening rehearsal or meeting, read research books at night. I try to squeeze in some exercise here and there, as well as my regular teaching, volunteer, and household obligations. The time I would usually spend writing a blog entry—sitting in front of the TV at night—I'm catching up on the books I need to review to write the next day's section. So although I've read/watched a couple of Emmas, and there's a huge stack of Boy's college letters I'd like to plow through, and there may even be pictures from some cookies I made last month (or was it February?), I just haven't found the time to sit and write for fun. Next week, I promise.

Photo of the Week--4/11/11

Here's something architecturally interesting ... a tower with no stairs! The Rundetarn in Copenhagen, Denmark, was built in the 17th century as an astronomical tower. I don't know why they built a spiral ramp instead of stairs—perhaps to make it easier to deliver the telescope—but it made for a fun trip upstairs, especially with little hidey-holes along the way, perfectly sized for a Boy to jump out and scare people.

Photo of the Week--4/4/11

Now, I'm not a huge fan of climbing things—my knees are too troublesome to enjoy it for long—but I do love a good aerial shot. This is of the Stadhuis (Town Hall) in Delft, the Netherlands. I'm guessing it's taken from the vantage of the top of the Nieuwe Kirk ("New Church"), "new" being a relative term as the building was finished in the late 15th century. The building is a hodgepodge of styles, as it was built and rebuilt over the years. I like the contrasting colors in the shot—the orange and grey roofs, the red shutters on the stone building. It makes for a nice pop of color on an otherwise colorless day, something you learn to appreciate after enough winters in Michigan.

2011 Book Report: First Quarter

New year, new book count. Will I be able to hit that magic 100-book count this year (last year I read 104 books), or will I be swallowed up by research for the book I'm writing? Will I read more books on my new e-reader, or will paper still rule? Let's check my first-quarter progress.

Key: C: Children's; F: Fantasy; H: Historical; Hr: Horror; M: Mystery; MG: Middle Grade (ages 8-12); NF: Nonfiction; P: Poetry; SF: Science Fiction; SS: Short Stories; V: Verse novel; YA: Young Adult (age 13+); *not in the last ten years at least; ^for work; #e-book.

01/02/11: E. Lockhart, The Disreputable History of Frankie Landau-Banks (YA,1)
01/07/11: Margo Lanahan, Tender Morsels (YA, F, 1)
01/08/11: Matthew Josephson, The Robber Barons^ (NF, 1)
01/12/11: Robert W. Cherny, American Politics in the Gilded Age^ (NF, 1)
01/13/11: Terry Pratchett, Nation (YA, H/SF, 1)
01/16/11: Melina Marchetta, Jellicoe Road (YA, 1)
01/19/11: Sean Dennis Cashman, America in the Gilded Age^ (NF, 1)
01/22/11: David Weber, The Short Victorious War# (SF, 5?)
01/24/11: Alan Trachtenburg, The Incorporation of America^ (NF, 1)
01/29/11: Adam Rapp, Punkzilla (YA, 1)
01/29/11: Mark Wahlgren Summers, The Gilded Age, or, The Hazard of New Functions^ (NF, 1)
02/01/11: Deborah Heiligman, Charles and Emma: The Darwins' Leap of Faith (NF, YA, 1)
02/06/11: James T. Wall, Wall Street and the Fruited Plain^ (NF, 1)
02/09/11: Charles. W. Calhoun, From Bloody Shirt to Full Dinner Pail^ (NF, 1)
02/11/11: Rick Yancey, The Monstrumologist (YA, Hr, 1)
02/13/11: Calhoun, editor, The Gilded Age^ (NF, 1)
02/15/11: Libba Bray, Going Bovine# (YA, 1)
02/20/11: Jack Beatty, Age of Betrayal^ (NF, 1)
02/22/11: John Barnes, Tales of the Madmen Underground (YA, 1)
02/23/11: Elmus Wicker, Banking Panics of the Gilded Age^ (NF, 1)
02/28/11: T. J. Stiles, editor, Robber Barons and Radicals^ (NF, 1)
03/02/11: Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner, The Gilded Age^# (classic, 1)
03/11/11: William C. Davis, The American Frontier^ (NF, 1)
03/15/11: Jane Austen, Emma# (classic, 6-7?)
03/28/11: Stephen Ambrose, Nothing Like It in the World^ (NF, 1)
03/29/11: Andrew Carnegie, The Autobiography of Andrew Carnegie^# (NF, 1)
03/30/11: M. John Lubetkin, Jay Cooke's Gamble^ (NF, 1)
03/31/11: Roy Morris, Jr., Fraud of the Century^ (NF, 1)

That's a whopping total of 28 books read this quarter ... and if I was adding up half a book here and there, it would be more. I thought that might be cheating, though, so I only counted the 17 books I read cover to cover for my current project.

So what was my favorite book of the quarter? I bet you were thinking I'd choose something exciting like Banking Panics of the Gilded Age, but the one I really enjoyed was the first of the year: E. Lockhart's The Disreputable History of Frankie Landau-Banks. It some ways it was a typical funny school story of relationships and hijinks, but it also had interesting things to say about friends and gender roles. It was both a lot of fun and thought-provoking, something I always enjoy in my reading.

I'm going to be provoking lots more thoughts next quarter; I still have a stack of 9 books for work to browse through, with more to keep coming. Will I have much time for anything else? Check back in three months and see.

Janespotting: Emma (1972 miniseries)

As one of Austen's most popular novels, Emma has been adapted for film and television multiple times, including twice in 1996 alone. I doubt I'll be able to view all of these adaptations, considering the earliest was in 1948, but I'm going to do my best. I'm particularly wanting to get the 1960 BBC miniseries with David McCallum, currently playing "Ducky" on NCIS, as Frank Churchill, but since I can't find it on DVD/tape anywhere, I'm starting with a later BBC version.

The 1972 BBC miniseries of Emma—amazingly, available at my library—is six 42-minute episodes. At nearly 4½ hours, that's long enough to be extremely faithful ... or extremely boring. You never know what to expect with some of these older adaptations, which can be overly formal, strangely decorated, or otherwise not suitable for modern tastes. This one was a pleasant surprise. The sets and costumes were appropriate, the direction was paced well and didn't call attention to itself, and the acting was, for the most part, restrained.

I did have some quibbles with the acting/casting choices, however. While the actress playing the title role was the right age for the part, she played Emma with a certain smugness I found off-putting. Her verbal sparring matches with Mr. Knightley were playful, but there was an unpleasant edge to them, like Emma cared more about winning the argument than listening to her friend. 

There were also some particularly weird changes concerning Jane Fairfax. First, on the occasion in the book that Emma and Harriet visit Miss Bates and end up hearing a letter from Jane Fairfax, instead she actually is in residence. Instead of the Dixons being the daughter and son-in-law of the Campbells, the family who took Jane in, they are a couple Jane meets on holiday who have offered her a position as governess. And when Miss Bates reveals that the Dixons have made such an offer, Jane Fairfax becomes upset that Miss Bates has revealed anything—to the point where she objects furiously, something out of character for someone who is supposed to be so reserved.

Why vary from the story, if not for time considerations? After watching for a while, it seemed as if the writer wanted the viewers to understand what was going on before Emma does. So we see Jane Fairfax clearly upset and hiding something, where in the book it's unclear why she is waiting to get a governess position. We get a new scene showing Harriet the day after the dance with Mr. Knightley, swooning over the chance to go to Donwell; in the book we are surprised along with Emma to learn that Harriet considers this dance a big service, not Frank Churchill saving her from gypsies.

Strangest of all, the writer removed both Mr. Elton and Jane Fairfax from the outing on Box Hill. Presumably getting rid of Elton was to emphasize that Mrs. Elton was taking liberties with leadership of Mr. Knightley's party, but that was already shown in the strawberry picking party. But by removing Jane as a witness to Frank and Emma's flirtation, there's no reason for her to suddenly accept a governess position and reject Emma's advances of friendship. After making Jane's discomfort so obvious before, that seems a strange choice.

Lastly, the ending had the characters seeming oddly direct for circumspect Austen characters. Emma never directly apologized to Miss Bates for insulting her in the book, but that awkward scene is in the film. In the book Mr. Wodehouse never says no to Emma's match with Mr. Knightley, although "he tried earnestly to dissuade her from it," but in the film he forbids it, briefly, before the report of hen thieves changes his mind.

While overall this was a fairly faithful adaptation of the novel, the changes they did make seemed to underestimate the viewers' intelligence, and also undermine Emma's character. When you read the book, Emma seems charming in her conviction, and we are just as surprised as she is when her matchmaking comes back to haunt her. In the film version, Emma seems a little snotty, even more so as we see how wrong she is while she continues in her mistakes. So while this was a very watchable version of Emma, it wasn't entirely satisfactory. Next time we'll see what differences condensing the story into a feature-length film can make.

Photo of the Week--3/28/11

I love to get up high to take a picture of a city. Luckily, there are many such Alcazars (high towers) you can climb in Spanish cities. This one was in Jerez, a lovely city even before you go on the sherry tour. We had another beautiful Mediterranean sky, and I'd really love to be somewhere with palm trees right about now!

Janespotting: Emma (Austen's original)

Emma was my first exposure to Austen, back in college, and at the time it didn't strike me as particularly wondrous. Sure, it had wit, but it didn't make me want to go out and read everything else Austen ever wrote. Maybe that was because I read it for a class—it's hard to really enjoy a book when you're taking notes and on a deadline—or maybe it's because I didn't fall in love with the heroine, as so many other people have. Austen sums her up in the first sentence: "Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition, seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence; and had lived nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her."

Unlike Austen's other heroines, Emma does not need to worry about money or marriage, and so she occupies much of her time with matchmaking and other amusements. As the novel opens she is celebrating the marriage of her former governess to a neighboring gentlemen, although the family's close friend (and Emma's brother-in-law), Mr. Knightley, says Emma made a lucky guess, not the actual match. Undeterred, Emma tries to pair her new friend, the lovely but dubiously born Harriet Smith, with the local minister, Mr. Elton. This turns out disastrously when she discovers Mr. Elton has been wooing her, not her friend, and poor Harriet is left disappointed and distressed.

Emma spirits are only temporarily dampened; when Frank Churchill visits the neighborhood, she is ready to flirt with him and promote a match between him and Harriet. In particular, Emma enjoys speculating with Frank about the lovely Jane Fairfax, the niece of their impoverished neighbor Miss Bates; Jane is destined to support herself as a governess. Jane is lovely and musically talented (annoying Emma, who doesn't apply herself and suffers in comparison), and her reserved manner perversely inspires Emma to imagine something inappropriate behind a gift piano. Emma's behavior becomes another point of contention with Mr. Knightley, who has long been accustomed to instructing her. They both enjoy their verbal sparring matches, although Emma is put out when Mr. Knightley tells her she is spoiling Harriet.

Emma's unrestrained pursuit of amusement comes to a head one afternoon when, encouraged by Frank Churchill's flattery, she cruelly insults Miss Bates. She is crushed to see Mr. Knightley's disappointment in her, and determines to apologize and also make up her lack of attention to Jane Fairfax, whom she has come to pity. Not long after she discovers that Harriet is not aspiring to Frank Churchill, but Mr. Knightley—and that she believes he returns her affection. Emma is shocked, for she hadn't realized before that she is the only one for Mr. Knightley. One final surprise remains: after Frank Churchill's aunt dies, leaving him her fortune, it is revealed that he and Jane Fairfax have been secretly engaged. Mr. Knightley and Emma reveal their feelings to each other, and even silly Harriet ends up engaged, to the young farmer whom Emma originally thought beneath her friend's notice.

I can see why Emma is many readers' favorite Austen book. It is light-hearted and playful, like its heroine, who never has the threat of poverty or loneliness hanging over her head. Early on Emma reveals her intention never to marry, noting that "a single woman, of good fortune, is always respectable, and may be as sensible and pleasant as any body else." When you think about it, Jane Fairfax, not Emma, is more like the typical Austen heroine in situation: potentially consigned to poverty and facing many obstacles on her road to romance and happiness. I guess that's why Emma isn't one of my favorite heroines: yes, she's charming and kind, but she's also rather shallow, at least until the end of the novel. On the other hand, the secondary characters are some of Austen's best, between the over-talkative Miss Bates, the enigmatic Jane Fairfax, the obsequious grasper Mr. Elton, and his vulgar, pretentious new bride.

So for me Emma ranks somewhere in the middle of Austen's novels: I don't love it like I do Pride and Prejudice, but I'd much rather read it than Mansfield Park. Actually, how I feel about Emma depends on whether I'm feeling indulgent and playful or not. I'll be considering that playful edge more as I begin exploring all the film version of Austen's classic. Stay tuned.