Caitlyn Marie Leonard

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

@rebmajw For lack of a better term, their relationship in the novel seems more "business-like," and her relationship with William is more loving. Do you think this was done simply because the film is shorter, or were there other intentions? Why combine attributes of both?

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

@rebmajw I also wrote about William's absence and the subsequent "replacement" with Susie. I agree that the film fostered a sense of "sisterly love" (1:06:14 Susie comforts Fanny) more than the novel, in which both the character of Susie and William were seemingly combined into one.

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

@maddyy_rose1123 self-assured character. Consequently, Fanny's arc in the film adaptation is not as grand.

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

@maddyy_rose1123 I was wondering about this, too. Unlike the novel, the film also starts with Fanny, not the Bertrams (0:02:15). Maybe Fanny speaking directly to the audience and her placement before the Bertrams allow Fanny to no longer be an outsider to her own story. Unlike the novel, the

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

@maddyy_rose1123 film adaptation gives Fanny more of a voice (empowerment). This choice seems to resonate more with a modern audience, in which a quiet heroine isn't as likable, although the entire point of MP was to show a larger character arc from her quiet, unheroic-like stature to a more

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

slavery (tying together Cowper’s themes of nature and the lack of morality with domination).

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

1:33:02: The changes at Sotherton are mentioned. However, there is zero mention of the power of nature, the Bertram family’s attitude toward it, or Fanny’s love of it. The discussion of nature is HUGE in the novel; why does the film omit any mention of its significance? The

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

immorality (showing, not telling). The film openly talks about slavery, and Cowper wrote abolitionist poetry; most modern movie-watchers probably aren’t mega-Austen fans who know her biography, but it would’ve been a nice touch considering the film takes a firm stance against

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

(those in power stay in power). Although the film utilizes a convenient ending, it was not done in Austen fashion.

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

(1:47:24): Sir Thomas abandoned his Antigua pursuits. I find this unbelievable; why give him some sort of redemption if Austen was critiquing their lack of morality? Although Austen’s ending was rushed (on purpose), it showed the corrosive nature of greed, slavery,

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

and superficiality, and how it perpetuates. On the other hand, the film’s ending was rushed in a different way and almost lighthearted. Maria and Mrs. Norris seemed to get what they deserved (justice); therefore, it went against Austen’s intentions to show the reality

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

that disrupt Austen’s intentions…

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

The film 100% played more into the romantic elements. It was clear that Edmund’s feelings were developing throughout. He did take a liking to Mary Crawford, but he didn’t abandon Fanny as much in the film as in the novel. Edmund was more consistent, so there was zero

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

rejects him in the novel. Susy/Susan is also Fanny’s “clutch,” as the film starts with her and Fanny, and she consistently writes to her (0:12:34). Why does the film highlight the relationship with Susan so heavily? There are significant deviations

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

looking for his character arc as well, considering Fanny is already closer to virtue? Has fortune blinded him and he is unable to grasp his ignorance?

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

Edmund condemns Mrs. Fraser for "marry[ing] entirely from convenience" (421). This sentence is so ironic! Sir Thomas did not believe that Lady Bertram could hold down the fort when she went to Antigua. He does not see her as an loving equal partner, showing that their marriage

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

is also based on convenience. Why is Edward so blind? Is this a way for Austen to show that Fanny will become his moral compass, (clarity, integrity, sticking to her principles) flipping that narrative that the man is supposed to cultivate the woman ("The Garden")? Are we

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

and "life training." There is also peace. But, Fanny is treated as inferior, so why would she want Susan to succumb to the same fate for some benefit? Mansfield also might seem better considering Fanny believes that her current situation is worse. Does Fanny belong anywhere?

[Caitlyn Marie Leonard @CaitlynL0906]

"Were she likely to have a home to invite her to, what a blessing it would be!" (418). For the most part, Fanny was miserable at Mansfield, because of her lower station compared to the Bertrams. However, she receives education, food, associations to a higher society,