{"id":3,"date":"2007-02-04T19:39:31","date_gmt":"2007-02-05T02:39:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/2007\/02\/04\/piracy-is-our-only-option\/"},"modified":"2007-02-04T19:39:31","modified_gmt":"2007-02-05T02:39:31","slug":"piracy-is-our-only-option","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/2007\/02\/04\/piracy-is-our-only-option\/","title":{"rendered":"“Piracy Is Our Only Option”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Samuelian, Kristin Flieger. “‘Piracy Is Our Only Option’: Postfeminist Intervention in Sense and Sensibility.” pp. 148-58. Troost, Linda (ed. and introd.)Sayre Greenfield. Jane Austen in Hollywood. Lexington, KY: UP of Kentucky, 1998. 202.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0<\/font><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>In her article, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Piracy Is Our Only Option: Postfeminist Intervention in Sense and Sensibility,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/em> Kristen Flieger Samuelian argues that Emma Thompson\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s film adaptation of Sense and Sensibility is untrue to Jane Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s novel of the same name.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>This is because, as Samuelian writes, Thompson\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s 1995 version \u00e2\u20ac\u0153is more in line with postfeminism and effectively erases the implicit feminism of Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s novel\u00e2\u20ac\u009d (Samuelian 148).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Instead of keeping with Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s infamous implicit wit and satire on her contemporary social conditions, Thompson decides to explicitly reference late twentieth-century postfeminist social concerns which stress that women can be both married and autonomous simultaneously.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>The end result, according to Samuelian, is an artistic statement on women and their society entirely disparate from Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Samuelian argues that Thompson explicitly references feminism in her adaptation by using dialogue; for example, Elinor tells Edward that she has no power in creating her future (Samuelian 148).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>In doing so, Thompson destroys the subtleness with which Austen stresses the powerlessness of women through plot.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Samuelian writes that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Thompson injects what appears to be an explicit feminist rhetoric into the work of an author more often celebrated for the implicitness of her critiques of the customs and institutions that support patriarchy\u00e2\u20ac\u009d (Samuelian 148).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Samuelian argues that Thompson does this overtly through Margaret\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s character (who the 1981 BBC version omits) (Samuelian 149).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>In her tree-house to protest Mr. and Mrs. John Dashwood coming to Norland, Margaret seems to innocently misunderstand social custom.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>In an effort to clarify to Margaret why they must leave Norland, Elinor tells Margaret that it is the law that their brother and his wife must take the house.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>However, according to Samuelian, Thompson is mistaken, as \u00e2\u20ac\u0153custom is redefined as law\u00e2\u20ac\u009d (Samuelian 156).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>In her most pivotal example in her argument against Thompson\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s adaptation, Samuelian writes that<\/font><\/p>\n

Explicit protest is most thoroughly articulated in the film through the youngest Dashwood sister, Margaret.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Transformed by Thompson from a plot device to an integral character, Margaret serves both to voice reasonable dissent and to exhort unpalatable truths from the mouths of her more restrained and practical-minded elders\u00e2\u20ac\u00a6Elinor\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s closing emphasis on \u00e2\u20ac\u0153law\u00e2\u20ac\u009d simplifies to the point of obliterating the complicated history of the disposition of the Norland estate given in the first two pages of Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s novel (Samuelian 149).<\/font><\/p>\n

Furthermore, Thompson uses Margaret to make both Edward and Col. Brandon more attractive, as they easily play with the eleven-year-old.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Indeed, in his dialogue with Margaret in Thompson\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s version, Edward ascertains that Margaret wishes to be a pirate, a vocation which both the modern audience and actors know is impossible.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Samuelian argues that Thompson\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s reference to piracy in the dialogue between Edward and Elinor in her adaptation is a way to explain to modern audiences that Edward is sympathetic to Elinor\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s plight (Samuelian 150).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Samuelian writes that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153piracy\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthe appropriation and adaptation for profit of Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s courtship novel\u00e2\u20ac\u201dis for Thompson a way of deflecting what is unanswerable in the eighteenth-century ideology the novel depicts\u00e2\u20ac\u009d (Samuelian 150).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Instead, Samuelian explicitly interposes late 20th<\/sup> century postfeminism in Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s story.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>In Thompson\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s version, Elinor marries a handsome Edward in a Pastoral setting.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Samuelian argues that Thompson imbues in both Edward and Brandon the very characteristics which Austen portrays as dangerous in
\nWilloughby (Samuelian 152).\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>In doing so, Thompson again destroys Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s implicit feminist critique of her contemporary society.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Because I read Samuelian\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s article before I watched Thompson\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s Sense and Sensibility<\/em> for this project, I was very aware of the acute ways in which Thompson has appropriated Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s eighteenth-century narrative and transformed it into that of the twentieth-century.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>I am not sure if this is indeed a bad thing, as I think Samuelian argues.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>Thompson adapted Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s novel for a late twentieth-century audience\u00e2\u20ac\u201dwhy is it so terrible that this adaptation should differ from the original eighteenth-century narrative?\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>However, I do think that because Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s novel still appeals to modern audiences, implicitness and all, Thompson should have been more aware of what has drawn readers to the story for centuries. \u00c2\u00a0<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span>I might use this article for my paper, as I am interested in studying how Austen\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s novels are transformed in the age of film, and how modern political concerns are imbued in these films.\u00c2\u00a0 <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Samuelian, Kristin Flieger. “‘Piracy Is Our Only Option’: Postfeminist Intervention in Sense and Sensibility.” pp. 148-58. Troost, Linda (ed. and introd.)Sayre Greenfield. Jane Austen in Hollywood. Lexington, KY: UP of Kentucky, 1998. 202. \u00c2\u00a0 \u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 In her article, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Piracy Is Our Only Option: Postfeminist Intervention in Sense and Sensibility,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Kristen Flieger Samuelian argues that Emma […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":45,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/45"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.elsweb.org\/janeaustenfilm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}