Emma - The Finale
I was so taken with the audio book of Emma that I'd borrowed from the library for my long commute to OTIS College, that I decided I wanted to actually "read-read" the rest of this book. Having finally completed it only yesterday, I was pulled in even closer by the experience that Austen creates.
I think the analysis of a person's work has so many levels to it, that we don't properly discuss in all areas, due to how appropriate or inappropriate the tone of your thesis might feel towards your specific environment. The academic discussion of a person's work has certain rules to it, (as I learned while at Pratt and OTIS) based on "what we like to hear ourselves talk about, and what worldview we are trying to assert over the community as being the more sophisticated, polished off, thorough and nuanced worldview." Therefore, certain interpretations, of an artist's intent, specific to this individual might get (unfairly) left off the table in favor of more general observations deemed more acceptable by the present company, due to the intellectual giddiness they get to feel jolt through them at its mention. There are certain veins of conversation that people prefer, and those they don't. But what people prefer seldom has anything to do with the truth of the matter.
I can't help but get a kick out of Austen's writing in how it was nowhere near what I expected it to be. The comments and praises you hear about how profound a writer she is, all come from a very small think tank, in a very sequestered area of society, who only pick up on what they want to hear themselves say. (Which is usually what determines whatever a person talks about. I am certainly no exception)
This observation technique of hers, what she chooses to illuminate with the "author's flashlight" giving me only the bits and pieces, not so much of the setting, but the dynamics between people, their interactions, how they relate both in dialogue and behavior, and the overall sense of dramatic tension, the "what's at stake here" that justifies their inhabiting the same story; all of that she does, not with a high minded, analytical psychoanalysis PhD type of mindset, which would be dreadfully boring, and useless, but rather, with a sense of child like curiosity, observational skills, (that is to say, not being lost in oneself and one's own life drama, but rather, paying attention to the people around you) and overall, a sense of love for these kooky, clumsy people stumbling through their relationships.
It's remarkable how she is talking about a specific class of society that she herself either had many interactions with throughout the course of her life, or at the very least, took a great interest in those people and how courtship and family structure worked for them. It's not a very difficult or obscure subject matter, not one that requires precise calculation, scientific theory, or mathematical formula. Austen just bothered to notice the types of mishaps that occur with that part of our lives as people, and what types of moods it brings out in people, and how we might rub each other the wrong way, or step on each other's toes with it. There isn't just an analysis, or an explanation, there is clearly a compassion for this in her storytelling. The position of Emma Woodhouse in the community,
threatened by Jane Fairfax, and her "relationship" with Mr. Knightley turning out to inhabit a different spot within her heart than she'd originally believed, once her position with him was threatened. (Looks like she'd formerly taken him for granted. Hah)
All of these dynamics between people that just require witnessing them in action over the course of a lifetime, and taking an interest in what this reveals to us about human nature, and having compassion enough towards it to construct a story arc around it. Her tone is almost, though not quite, actually making fun of these people for their pettiness, but more in the style of good natured ribbing, more so than outright lambasting.
You might think "Well Royce, isn't that just writing in general?"
Not when most people do it, no. Not on this deep a level, anyhow. There is more to this than highly exciting content. Flashy events and dreary, soppy passages about how a character "feels" are not the same as letting the dramatic tension bubble its own way up to the surface with minimal effort on the part of the storyteller. I find that you don't need to find an excuse to shine the flashlight on as much of the scenario as you can get away with, but rather, as little as you need to, illuminating just the right details to give us a sense of the whole thing in our head.
And what Austen reassures in me, is that it doesn't matter what type of life experience you have, and certainly not what sort of education you can afford. What matters most is how much attention you are paying to the world around you, and how much compassion you have for the way people interact with each other, and respond to the dramatic tension. Whether it's nineteenth century upper class English ladies trying to get hitched, or middle school kids on a playground, or people working in cubicles in an office, anywhere people are interacting, there are dynamics, the trick is to get them to show themselves without pointing directly at them, and you as the author have to actually CARE about the people you're writing about. You don't have to like them, but you do have to care what's going on with them.
I think the analysis of a person's work has so many levels to it, that we don't properly discuss in all areas, due to how appropriate or inappropriate the tone of your thesis might feel towards your specific environment. The academic discussion of a person's work has certain rules to it, (as I learned while at Pratt and OTIS) based on "what we like to hear ourselves talk about, and what worldview we are trying to assert over the community as being the more sophisticated, polished off, thorough and nuanced worldview." Therefore, certain interpretations, of an artist's intent, specific to this individual might get (unfairly) left off the table in favor of more general observations deemed more acceptable by the present company, due to the intellectual giddiness they get to feel jolt through them at its mention. There are certain veins of conversation that people prefer, and those they don't. But what people prefer seldom has anything to do with the truth of the matter.I can't help but get a kick out of Austen's writing in how it was nowhere near what I expected it to be. The comments and praises you hear about how profound a writer she is, all come from a very small think tank, in a very sequestered area of society, who only pick up on what they want to hear themselves say. (Which is usually what determines whatever a person talks about. I am certainly no exception)
This observation technique of hers, what she chooses to illuminate with the "author's flashlight" giving me only the bits and pieces, not so much of the setting, but the dynamics between people, their interactions, how they relate both in dialogue and behavior, and the overall sense of dramatic tension, the "what's at stake here" that justifies their inhabiting the same story; all of that she does, not with a high minded, analytical psychoanalysis PhD type of mindset, which would be dreadfully boring, and useless, but rather, with a sense of child like curiosity, observational skills, (that is to say, not being lost in oneself and one's own life drama, but rather, paying attention to the people around you) and overall, a sense of love for these kooky, clumsy people stumbling through their relationships.
It's remarkable how she is talking about a specific class of society that she herself either had many interactions with throughout the course of her life, or at the very least, took a great interest in those people and how courtship and family structure worked for them. It's not a very difficult or obscure subject matter, not one that requires precise calculation, scientific theory, or mathematical formula. Austen just bothered to notice the types of mishaps that occur with that part of our lives as people, and what types of moods it brings out in people, and how we might rub each other the wrong way, or step on each other's toes with it. There isn't just an analysis, or an explanation, there is clearly a compassion for this in her storytelling. The position of Emma Woodhouse in the community,
threatened by Jane Fairfax, and her "relationship" with Mr. Knightley turning out to inhabit a different spot within her heart than she'd originally believed, once her position with him was threatened. (Looks like she'd formerly taken him for granted. Hah)
All of these dynamics between people that just require witnessing them in action over the course of a lifetime, and taking an interest in what this reveals to us about human nature, and having compassion enough towards it to construct a story arc around it. Her tone is almost, though not quite, actually making fun of these people for their pettiness, but more in the style of good natured ribbing, more so than outright lambasting.
You might think "Well Royce, isn't that just writing in general?"
Not when most people do it, no. Not on this deep a level, anyhow. There is more to this than highly exciting content. Flashy events and dreary, soppy passages about how a character "feels" are not the same as letting the dramatic tension bubble its own way up to the surface with minimal effort on the part of the storyteller. I find that you don't need to find an excuse to shine the flashlight on as much of the scenario as you can get away with, but rather, as little as you need to, illuminating just the right details to give us a sense of the whole thing in our head.
And what Austen reassures in me, is that it doesn't matter what type of life experience you have, and certainly not what sort of education you can afford. What matters most is how much attention you are paying to the world around you, and how much compassion you have for the way people interact with each other, and respond to the dramatic tension. Whether it's nineteenth century upper class English ladies trying to get hitched, or middle school kids on a playground, or people working in cubicles in an office, anywhere people are interacting, there are dynamics, the trick is to get them to show themselves without pointing directly at them, and you as the author have to actually CARE about the people you're writing about. You don't have to like them, but you do have to care what's going on with them.
