I. With families there are the men and the women.
Women say in irritated voices "Dinner's in five minutes and I don't want any lollygagging" but not loud enough to be heared by the men, on another floor of the house. Then the women complain the men are late, that they're always late.
They call the men lazy when they won't take a minute out of the middle of their game to go downstairs and get a diaper.
They make cracks about the men being bad parents when they take away the pacifier in the middle of the day, after the mother made the rule pluggies were only for bedtime and then handed it over -- unbeknownst to the father -- at 1 p.m.
The men watch football while the women mash the potatoes and the men talk computers while the women load the dishwasher and the men go out shopping while the women change the diapers.
The men say "What are you making me for breakfast?" and the women smile and ask what they'd like to have.
The women nag and I pray that I will never be thought of as a nagging wife. Because the books say the men just want to be respected, and the women just want to be loved.
II. Someone somewhere thought there needed to be another version of "Pride and Prejudice." And regardless of whether they agreed all the women had to go see it, simply because it existed. Even if they despise scrawny, selfish Keira Knightley and believe they will marry Colin-Firth-Mr.-Darcy in another live. Even if the A&E version is already clearly the closest to perfection that humankind is capable of filming, barring the exhumation and directorship of Jane Austen herself.
And the women leave the men at home -- because there's nothing more irritating than having a man smirking while you're crying at a chickflick -- and crowd into the theaters. They don't know each other but they have a silent covenant to maintain silence and stillness in general. They whisper to their friends that Keira Knightley is so scrawny and she has no chest but what they wouldn't do for that collarbone. Jane was adequately beautiful and Judi Dench was the obvious choice for Lady Catherine. And even if they did slash a six hour story into two hours, they still almost cried when Mr. Darcy burst into the room dripping wet dissheveled simply because he did it and because he loved her so passionately and "persued" her. They're overjoyed and jealous.
Mr. Darcy would never be late for dinner. But Elizabeth would never nag him if he was.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
You speak truth, as always, Ariel. Glad to see I'm not the only one that noticed that a new Pride and Prejudice was rather unnecessary. Is the A&E version the one with Kate Winslet, because it was definitely well done (my mom and sister often get their way when choosing a family movie).
"A" family movie? That's more like six family movies.
I'm sorry, the A&E version is not the one with Kate Winslet. You are probably thinking of "Sense and Sensibility." The A&E version of "Pride and Prejudice" is six tapes long because it was originally a mini-series. It stars a bunch of British actors we have never seen the likes of otherwise, with the sole exception of Colin Firth.
Another version trying to stay accurate to the times and the book was not necessary, no. Versions attempting to tell the story in another era can be interesting but may not be vital, i.e. the Mormon version.
Ah, yes. Sorry, I got John Wiloughby confused with Mr. Darcy. I was indeed thinking of Sense and Sensibility.
I'm pretty sure I've seen Pride and Prejudice before. I dated a girl in high school who was very into Jane Austen, probably saw it then.
I've never been a fan of modernized tellings of classic stories, except, perhaps, 10 Things I Hate about You.
Post a Comment