Fanny Price & Henry Crawford
Mansfield Park (1999)
(via janeaustenland)
Fanny Price & Henry Crawford
Mansfield Park (1999)
(via janeaustenland)
Asked by: litlass
Yes indeed! You can read it here:
http://independent.academia.edu/EmilySnow/Papers/1337864/_Is_she_queer_Fanny_Prices_Protest_Against_Sublime_and_Beautiful_Heteronormativity
Hope you enjoy! And that it fucks your shit up. :)
when my academia.edu notifications make life worth living
The ladies at Hellogiggles, Zooey Deschanel’s site, wrote modern characterizations of Jane Austen’s heroines. Which one do you resemble most? I think in manner, I am most like Fanny Price and Anne Elliot here, and most like Elizabeth Bennet in my beliefs.
You are quiet and unassuming. You’re more of a watcher than a go-getter. In fact, your observational skills are quite keen. You don’t feel the need to say every single thing that pops into your head. You choose your words carefully. You really resent being labeled as mousy because you’re not an attention whore. But you do privately think that attention whore is the perfect word to describe some of the people you know and that says something about you, too. When you fall for someone, you fall hard and long. You are loyal, you have convictions. You prefer the term ‘conservative’ [EW! except not!] to describe your nature but you know others that think you’re uptight and a prude (namely the attention whores.) But you are sweet and even gentle. It’s just that more often than not, you are overlooked. Sometimes you wish that actually, you weren’t so smart and observant so that at least you wouldn’t notice when people fail to notice you. Oh well. You are Fanny Price.
They dumb our heroines down a bit (especially Marianne, who I consider intellectual), but it’s worth a read! :)
don’t know who the dude is but AGREE.
lol, what the fuck is this meme? “Old White Dude reads Jane”? also, disagree, haha.
One of my women’s studies professors told our class on multiple occasions that telling women’s stories was the first and one of the most fundamental parts of feminism. That women have been erased from the narrative for so long, the first step to equality is simply to tell women’s stories. Whether they are the stories of women speaking out, women fighting back, women rejecting convention or simply the stories of women living lives, women in domesticity, women in the quiet background of history, we need to tell their stories. I would add to this queer people, trans* people, people of color, everyone whose story is never told — the silent majority, if you will. The first step to fighting back is simply telling our story, saying out loud, “We are here.”
This same professor hates Jane Austen. Like really, really hates her and her books. And she was so disappointed by the fact that I love Austen, I actually felt a bit guilty about it. But then I thought, aha, watch me use your own argument against you, Irlene! And so now I am.
Because see, Austen was all about telling women’s stories. Yes, she was writing about a very small socioeconomic niche in society — the landed gentry somewhere between the nobility and the professional classes. So, yes, a bunch of privileged white British women. And yes, the stories are just these tedious little snapshots of the day to day, and they are all romances in the end, but don’t you see how the tedium is important? The stories are small because real women in their situation lived small lives. But that doesn’t mean they’re not important; it doesn’t mean they aren’t stories worth telling.
Lizze Bennet, who rejected two perfectly good offers of marriage, knowing full well she was expected to accept whatever was offered and consider herself lucky, knowing she could die an impoverished old maid. Elinor Dashwood, emotionally supporting her whole family and putting her own suffering to the side because she loves them and they need her to protect them from the cruelties of society. Emma Woodhouse, running this show and talking too much, and laughing at the world that seeks to silence her. Fanny Price, who steadfastly refused to give in, no matter that she was threatened with rejection, poverty, and the disapproval of the only family she’d ever known.
Read these books and tell me these women aren’t strong. Tell me they’re not fighting the society they’re trapped in. Hell, for their time in place, the idea of marrying for love rather than social politics and money was absurd and nearly revolutionary. And here was Austen, writing them the ending she never had, writing them the endings society at the time could never truly allow, writing the little lives of the women she knew, telling their stories, because they were important, because they were there.
and also because you can’t handle non-run on sentences and that is horrible and go away.
(Source: austenconfessions)
Why do we have to ‘LIKE’ characters in order to enjoy a novel? Jane Austen was perfectly capable of creating heroines and heroes who are generally liked by most people. Ever think that she made Fanny and Edmund harder to like for a reason? Perhaps she was writing her most powerful satire against 18th/19th-century conservative agenda?
Seriously, like Prudie says in The Jane Austen Book Club, we’re not voting for prom queen here.
(Source: austenconfessions)



aka STOP LOOKING AT ME, YA CREEPS.