All 2 entries tagged Review
April 06, 2009
I am very fond of the Regency period and looked forward to watching this film. I was aware of the deliberate link to the Diana back story – the tag line ‘there were three people in her marriage’ kind of gave that one away – which I assumed would be some sort of hook to the Diana-philes seeking confirmation of the injustice their Princess experienced. So I settled down to enjoy a bit of a period romp.
What I didn’t expect was for the story to be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. There is a very interesting story to be told about a woman enjoying Regency life here – especially as women enjoyed substantially greater freedoms in this period than they were to through the Victorian era – but, instead, the story chosen was one of male brutality and sexual repression, which is certainly not my understanding of the Duchess’s life.
She was certainly not the ingenue as portrayed by Keira Knightley. She was one of the most famous – if not the most famous – hostesses of the era as well as being a regular participant in society. She had two, not one, children out of wedlock with Earl Grey which makes a mockery of the denouement of the film and most likely also had an affair with the Prince Regent, amongst other eminent men. She also ran up enormous gambling debts (in today’s money of around £5 million) regularly which her husband happily paid off over and over again.
She was most certainly not the angel that the film made her out to be. As with most upper class women of the age, she provided the heir to the Duke of Devonshire and then proceeded to enjoy herself. In today’s terms, she would have been something of an It girl, though expected not to bare quite so much to the newspapers.
We often view the Regency era in modern terms instead of considering it in its own context. But to butcher it in order to make it conform to modern politically correct sensibilities is, in my view, a heinous crime.
June 07, 2006
It worries me that so many people rave about this book, but it didn't work for me…
Oh, don't get me wrong, Huxley clearly has an important message in mind and has constructed a narrative world as an allegory in order to communicate it to his reader. It's just that in this situation the story just doesn't work.
For me, it left too many unanswered questions and the style reminded me of the naive approach of science fiction writers such as Asimov and Clarke who came up with a neat idea and then attempted to hang a story off it, the problem being that the idea kept getting in the way.
To me Brave New World came across as cliched and contrived; better, in my opinion, that the author had put down his fears in the form of a straight–forward article and published it so that his argument had the opportunity of a clear exposition rather than having to be deconstructed from plot device and metaphor which just kept getting in the way.