However, in view of my continued love of Miss Austin’s works, opening this book is like hearing Mozart’s elegant and beautiful music, and I am still willing to watch all the versions of film and television works adapted from this book. And make shallow comments.
Let me talk about this movie first.
The film was shot in the 1940s. It is a typical Hollywood-style melodrama. It is fancy, playful, and humorous, but it is too frivolous and lacks the elegance and restraint of the original. However, due to the joining of two great British actors, the original An American commercial film that is not outstanding has become a classic old film that is worth remembering.
The great Lawrence Oliver.
It seems a bit of a conspiracy to have such a great Shakespeare actor play the popular lover Darcy.
I think that Mr. Darcy in the book is certainly a wealthy son, but he is not a knight in a romantic novel after all. Mr. Darcy is not an Evanher or a true prince charming, he is a businessman.
Therefore, in him, the so-called aristocratic style is not first reflected in him. Since Austin is an anti-gothic novel, then it must not be the kind of woman who is fascinated by Romans. She wrote about a wealthy squire, a middle-income man. Pastors, retired soldiers, the first thing is to have rich capital. Her ideal man is not a loitering young master, but a landlord who is good at business.
Mr. Darcy's arrogance does not come from his origin, but from his property.
In this marriage game, Mr. Darcy's request for a spouse is a boss's request for the future boss wife.
That is to say, the practical and neutral standards for women in Protestant countries.
Since the European bourgeoisie stepped onto the stage of history, it is no longer the knight who sings the serenade under the princess balcony holding the guitar to occupy the leading role of the literary and artistic works. It is not the Isolde and Tristan in the medieval love legend, but the wealthy. Bourgeois men and women.
That is, love itself is no longer important, and money has become the first choice.
For men, whether they are rich or not becomes the only sign of success. For women, it is necessary to have some money and, more importantly, whether they have the means to make money or manage money.
In the aristocratic Middle Ages, women must be gentle, beautiful, and loyal, and emphasize their subordination to the male role. Although it is a hierarchical society, there are also a lot of Sindra-like adventures. In the asset society, everything is based on property. Women are required to have a certain amount of property, be well-educated, that is, be able to write and count, and become a business assistant. Therefore, more emphasis is placed on women’s origins and talents. In fact, the Protestant country’s requirements for women are the requirements of being merchant women, but they are only ambiguous with some terms of equality and freedom.
Bourgeois men no longer want their wives to be a princess in the courtyard, who only knows the tears of the flowers. Yes, after a tiring day in the shop, what you need is not talking about romantic poetry with a beautiful woman, but a cup of relief Hot tea, and then talk about business matters, so the target is different, and the woman in need is also different.
If this woman has enough talents, she can still help see the shop.
Is it not?
Therefore, the first requirement of a bourgeois man is that women must have a certain level of brains--commercially, for example, they must be able to do marriage arithmetic like Miss Austin, and they must abandon Marianne, who was abandoned by men, and women who were also abandoned by women. Brandon match, so it's cost-effective.
So it is not difficult for us to explain why Mr. Darcy chose Lizzy who is not very beautiful or gentle, but very independent.
Just like modern men, they don’t like women too much---too beautiful can't afford to support, too ugly can't be taken on stage, it is best to be medium,
and then have knowledge. Of course, it is not to listen to Wagner's knowledge, but to make a living The ability to repay the loan together and raise the family together is plain and boring, but after all, it is a good deal and economical. Women’s charm and tenderness should go to the side, it’s nonsense that they can’t be spent as money.
So if I choose a woman who can best represent the Protestant countries and women in English-speaking countries, I will definitely choose SJP, a woman who is not beautiful but talented and funny.
Of course, you can say that this is a nonsense that men no longer pay attention to the external progress of women, but I never believe it-say a woman, you are really smart, or you have a good temperament.
Women have only beauty and ugliness, and men are of two kinds, the ones who are capable and the ones who are not---the rich and the not rich.
At least this is my standard.
And I have always regarded women as the greatest mockery or even insult to women because I don’t believe that men really like two things about women—thoughts and personality. All they want are practical things, as women’s. Reproductive and mating instincts, and then its attached property and the ability to manage wealth.
Why should I deceive myself, turning a blind eye to real human nature.
Generally speaking, Austin's works are a kind of emerging bourgeois novels. It is a secular novel. There is absolutely no romance in it. Her works are just numbers and reasonable allocation of human resources. It is no different from a shrewd female shopkeeper, but what attracts me to me is the overall classical charm of her works. , Not a secular marriage.
A woman with good taste---taste, temperament, this is really a typical bourgeois accent, the real meaning of which is that it is worthwhile. Everything is a little bit, and everything can be handled by yourself.
The self-reliance of a woman, to put it bluntly, is to let you support yourself without spending my money.
Everything is money.
I have always wondered why all the movies and televisions adapted from Austen’s works so far have portrayed their heroines as so-called high-class noble ladies. In fact, she wrote about middle-class women. In the bones, it is very practical, but on the surface with a little nobility, in fact, it is an authentic bourgeois woman. Therefore, Mrs. Griergar's temperament is better than petty bourgeoisie, and she seems too old-fashioned. Oliver is really not suitable to interpret such a popular lover, he is too melancholy and aristocratic. People like him are either Hickcliffe or Prince, or they are not suitable for Bourgeois man.
Austin's work cannot be too gorgeous and romantic.
The title of this article is to recall seeing a still picture of this film in "Popular Movies" in the early years. This film was originally called by this name when it was first introduced to China.
View more about Pride and Prejudice reviews
