B+
Genre: Historical: European, Romance
Mansfield Park is my least favorite of Jane Austen’s novels. For me, the story is overly moralistic and doesn’t necessarily translate well to a modern reader.
But when I saw that the BBC had done a radio drama of the novel featuring Benedict Cumberbatch and David Tennant in the cast, I knew I had to listen. Those men have two of the sexist voices in media, and I’d listen to them read the phone book. Or Pounded by the Gay Color Changing Dress. No question, I’d secretly love that.
Strangely, when the novel was abbreviated into the radio drama, it worked better for me than the book itself.
Felicity Jones plays Fanny Price, a poor young girl who goes to live with her much wealthier relations at Mansfield Park. Tennant–regrettably not Scottish in this–is her lazy, gambling cousin Tom while Cumberbatch plays her more staid cousin, Edmund, who is destined for the church.
Fanny isn’t treated fantastically by her relatives; verbally cut down by Aunt Norris (made wonderfully shrill by Julia McKenzie), largely ignored by Lady and Sir Thomas Bertram, her only real friend is Edmund. As they grow up Fanny starts to fall in with Edmund, but her heart is broken when the attractive Crawford siblings move into the neighborhood.
In the novel, I felt that the Crawfords were more morally ambiguous than outright villainous. To a modern reader though, things like flirtation for the sake of flirtation and infidelity aren’t as scandalous as they once were. I’d classify Henry as more of a douche than a monster–and his plan to make Fanny fall in love with him for amusement’s sake is straight out of the romance novel hero playbook. I think what the novel sorely lacks is the more inspired sexual politics of Pride and Prejudice or Sense and Sensibility. There is no spark between Fanny and Edmund the way there is between Lizzie and Darcy. Their love is less aching and poignant than Edward and Elinor’s.
Most importantly, no one really changes for the better in Mansfield Park (except Tom, kinda). Fanny wins the day in the end for being morally steadfast, and to me the book has always read as a morality play–the good girl will be made happy in the end, her value will be realized by those around her, even if she suffers poverty, verbal abuse and humiliation in order to get there. It’s not a very attractive plot because Fanny doesn’t do anything. She maintains her resolve and waits for others to see that she was was right all along. She has no agency, and it’s immanently unsatisfying.
But that’s the book, and the radio drama is a little different. While Fanny is still a little bit boring, in my opinion, the Crawford siblings are painted in a more cruel light for the sake of brevity. Henry’s discarding of Fanny’s cousin Maria, and then his plans to make Fanny fall in love with him for amusement’s sake, seem less the actions of a callous and immature man, but rather someone who is almost pathologically mean. Similarly, Mary Crawford is by turns kind (to Fanny), but reverts to a more vicious nature when the presence of her brother. There’s a sense of conniving, of “let’s fuck with these people and giggle about it,” that I didn’t get from the book.
Even though Fanny still doesn’t really overcome anything, it makes them more appealing villains and therefore Fanny a more appealing heroine.
The voice acting is really what sells this though. Tennant is brilliant, filled with frenetic, roguish energy. Jones has a soft, melodic voice that’s just a joy to listen to. I want her to read me things. All the things. Cumberbatch does his best, but quite frankly Edmund is a hard character to make lovable. He’s the vanilla pudding of the Austen heroes. He’s strictly “okay,” but nothing to write home about. There is a scene where Edmund reads some lines from a play to Mary that are quite romantic, and there Cumberbatch seals the deal with whispered pleas of longing.
The radio drama is just over two hours long, so that’s not a ton of action for your Audible credit or dollars. I found it worth the price as it kept me amused on my commute, and odds are I’d listen to it again. Even if you were ‘meh’ on Mansfield Park in the past, you might want to try this out.
I’m keeping my fingers crossed that they do Pride and Prejudice with Cumberbatch as Darcy because Sweet Jesus on a Pogostick would that be fantastic.
This book is available from:
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
We also may use affiliate links in our posts, as well. Thanks!
“the Crawford siblings are painted in a more cruel light for the sake of brevity.”
I’ve noticed this approach to Austen adaptations. Where the good guys stay pretty much the same, but the antagonistic characters keep having the dials turned up.
During the last round of Austen movies/TV movies, for example:
Pride & Prejudice (the Keira Knightley one) there’s a bit right at the end where Wickham manhandles Lydia, and on the commentary track the director says ‘I wanted to hint at spousal abuse.’
And in Persuasion (2007) it isn’t Young Mr. Elliot that comes off as the villain (helped by Tobias Menzies’ Elliot was way better than Samuel West’s IMO), but Papa Elliot as played by Anthony Head. He’s just so menacing, like he should be locking people in dark closets and beating them with horse whips [NOTE not a thing that actually happens during the movie].
And then it’s like that line is carried through into the 2013 book For Darkness Shows the Stars by Diana Peterfreund, where Papa Elliot does in fact kill people and is 100% abusive.
Both of which are in really sharp contrast to the 1995 one where all the Elliots who aren’t Anne just come off as kinda petulant.
I could keep going, but it was just a thing I’ve noticed.
My dream Pride & Prejudice audio cast? Richard Armitage as Darcy and Hayley Atwell as Lizzy. Mmhmm.
Well, for all the Benedict Cumberbatch lovers out there, if you want to hear how he does in a comedic role, then you have to listen to the wonderful Cabin Pressure.
And the best part of this is, you not only get Mr C.You get Roger Allan, Stephanie Cole & John Finnemore, in the finest comedy never to make it to a TV screen.(warning, you’ll also have a totally new obsession, loads of new one liners, & find yourself crying with laughter in inappropriate places)
Fellow Bitches, .. the lemon is in play !
I thought you’d just made up Pounded by the Gay Color-Changing Dress. I should have known better.
I suggest we write a petition to David Tennant asking him to make an audio version of it. Then our lives will be complete.
When I first read the Austen canon (in my teens and twenties), Mansfield Park was by far my least favorite of the novels. It lack a lot of the wit and charm of the other Austen novels. But as I’ve gotten older, I’ve come to appreciate Fanny more. (Much like the characters in the novel, I suppose.) Now it’s my 2nd favorite of the novels, following only “Persuasion”. Fanny APPEARS to be weak and meek, yet she is the only person who actually completely sticks to what she believes in when faced with unpleasant consequences. Everybody else takes the easy road, even Edmund, briefly. There are a lot of layers in that book, and it’s fascinating. Nobody is truly a bad guy, though Henry is the closest, just spoiled to varying degrees.
My favorite adaptation is the 1984 BBC production (Sylvestra LeTouzel nailed Fanny, IMO) but I’ll have to try and give this radio version a listen.
At some point, current romance authors wrote forwards for Austen re-issues. I remember Julia Quinn wrote one for Mansfield Park that basically started with “Yes, this is everyone’s least favorite Austen.”
But Tennant? Cumberbatch? I’m in.
When we did Austen on the podcast I co-host with SBTB’s own Redheadedgirl, I was very open with just how much I dislike Mansfield Park, and I’ve posted that opinion elsewhere as well, and you know what – it honestly surprised me how many people came out to defend it.
I don’t get it, Fanny is just so *boring*. Anne has strength, Lizzy has sparkle, Emma has will, Elinor has grace. Fanny is such a pathetic non-entity. Is Fanny what happens when an Austen heroine is cut off from her family from childhood (because that seems to be the one difference between her and all the others)? I wish the novel was about her sister Susan, who seemed so much more interesting in just the couple of paragraphs she was in.
Consequently, Edmund is also the least interesting hero. Jonny Lee Miller was wasted on Edmund. Cumberbatch is blandly perfect for it.
I actually think the book to compare MP to isn’t another Austen book, it’s Jane Eyre. Staying true to your principals in the face of tempting but ultimately unhealthy and possibly self-destructive lust? It’s even got similar poor orphan with rich relatives themes. And it does it all much better, with a heroine that has a personality.
My theory of Mansfield Park is that the very fact that people dislike Fanny makes her a subversive character. She’s the model of feminine propriety as defined by her contemporary culture, and readers find her insipid and unappealing. Whereas Elizabeth Bennet was maybe a little too spirited to be considered strictly proper, yet she is undeniably an engaging character.
@Dread Pirate Rachel, if Lizze and Emma were our only other Austen protagonists I could see your point, but what about Anne and Elinor? What about them doesn’t fit the model of feminine propriety in Regency England? Jane Austen can write protagonists who are not arch, free-spirited, or snarky, and they can be interesting and likable to us today.
Mansfield Park isn’t my favorite Austen either — I have never quite figured out what the problem is with the family theatricals (too much intermingling of the sexes? too frivolous? IDK), and there are very few characters who I like and admire — but it does some pretty subversive things. Fanny’s anxiety disorder makes her hard to warm up to; Sir Thomas Bertram’s West Indies investment, which keeps him away for most of the book, is a reminder of how much of the wealth and security the characters enjoy is based on slave labor; and Austen refuses to let Fanny redeem Henry, instead pairing her with Edmund. It’s not as much fun to read as some of her other novels, but it’s also less sugarcoated.
@Alina, my argument is not that Austen’s heroines must be improper to be engaging, but that Fanny can be read as something of a cautionary tale of extreme adherence to propriety. My comment regarding Lizzie was merely to provide contrast. Nevertheless, I do have thoughts about Elinor and Anne (who are my two favorite Austen heroines, and I will defend them forever).
Elinor and Anne aren’t the same as Fanny. It seems to me that the moral code to which Fanny so strictly adheres has its foundations in Georgian ideals of femininity. She follows it because she believes in it–not because of social pressure to conform to it (in her case, peer pressure is encouraging her to do the opposite).
Meanwhile, Anne Eliot allowed social custom (specifically the imperative to marry for money and social standing) to dictate her behavior as a young woman and found only heartbreak. In order to find happiness, she has to reject the pressure of her family and Lady Russell to conform to their wishes and ideas of how a woman like her should behave.
Elinor Dashwood is, I think, distinct from both Fanny and Anne in that she is able to navigate the demands of society without alienating her peers, as Fanny does, or bending completely to their will, as Anne at first does. She always operates within the bounds of propriety, but she lacks Fanny’s judgmental attitude toward those like Marianne who are less concerned with it. Rather, while she may seek to temper Marianne’s excesses of sensibility, she reserves her true censure for those whose actions reveal them to be despicable or malicious.
To be honest, the closest parallel I can think of for Fanny is Mary Bennet. She’s as fleshed out as the other sisters in Pride & Prejudice, but I can see the similarities. Both are pious, slightly awkward girls who are overshadowed by the more vivacious women around them. I suspect that in Fanny’s reactions to Mary Crawford, we might see something of how Mary Bennet saw her sisters, had she been given a chance to share her point of view. There are, of course, differences–chief among them that Mary is quite ready to share her accomplishments with anyone who will listen, while Fanny is retiring to the extreme. Nevertheless, they both see themselves as models of virtue in contrast with their sisters/rivals. The phrase, “Not like other girls” comes to mind.
@DPR, ooooh, I disagree about Anne. It may be because I’m taking a lot of what she says in the book at face value, but I don’t have a reason to find her an unreliable narrator or prone to self-justification. She didn’t bend to social custom and its considerations of money and rank. She acquiesced to the will of her parent and her guardian, because at 18, she did not think it right to flout their opinion. I would say that kind of filial obedience was definitely a moral virtue, and it’s not like Lady Russell didn’t have a point. Is it really so wrong for an adult to assume that their 18-year-old ward’s somewhat hurried marriage to a man in precarious circumstances would turn out badly? Anne herself in the end of the book says that she still doesn’t that what she did was wrong: she still believes that up until a certain point, it’s right for children to listen to guardians whose opinion they respect.
What’s interesting is that Fanny’s virtuous behaviour is the exact opposite – she *doesn’t* marry as per wishes of her family, and it’s the one time she stands up to them. However, in this case, her family’s opinions are basically mercenary, they’re not truly thinking of Fanny’s best interests, they just want her married off to the first wealthy-enough man who asks. So she’s not wrong to either in not listening to them. Besides, unlike in Anne’s case, the decision to marry is a lot more permanent than the decision not to.
And they are both rewarded for their choices: they both eventually get to marry the men they love without it causing a rift between them and their families.
While I can’t really compare Catherine to either Anne or Fanny, Northanger Abbey is also about marriage and parental consent. Being an immature writer, Austen actually spells it out at the end of that one, she has that quote addressing the reader about whether or not the novel is recommending filial disobedience. That one is more along Persuasion’s route, is more about it being better to wait until your parents come around than breaking your ties with them.
This seems to have been a question that interested Austen a lot.
@Alina,
“She didn’t bend to social custom and its considerations of money and rank. She acquiesced to the will of her parent and her guardian, because at 18, she did not think it right to flout their opinion.”
True, but their objections were based on Wentworth’s lack of money and rank, so I stand by my assertion that Anne’s actions were influenced by those considerations.
“Is it really so wrong for an adult to assume that their 18-year-old ward’s somewhat hurried marriage to a man in precarious circumstances would turn out badly?”
I never said it was wrong, only that it led to Anne’s unhappiness. This is true regardless of the soundness of logic behind Lady Russell’s objections. And even Lady Russell admits that she was wrong about Wentworth by the end of the book. Furthermore, the text itself points out that Lady Russell’s initial opinion about Wentworth was clouded by their clashing personalities:
“She must learn to feel that she had been mistaken with regard to both; that she had been unfairly influenced by appearances in each; that because Captain Wentworth’s manners had not suited her own ideas, she had been too quick in suspecting them to indicate a character of dangerous impetuosity; and that because Mr Elliot’s manners had precisely pleased her in their propriety and correctness, their general politeness and suavity, she had been too quick in receiving them as the certain result of the most correct opinions and well-regulated mind.”
As luck would have it, BBC Radio 4 currently have an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice going and available to listen to (FOR FREE!) online. It’s about halfway through the story now, but you can still catch episodes 1 and 2. Elizabeth is voiced by Pippa Nixon, the Royal Shakespeare Company actress, and Mr Darcy is played by Jamie Parker.
I LOVE the BBC’s radio drama adaptations (did I mention they’re free to listen to?)- check them out if you haven’t already.
@Cate – I have all the Cabin Pressure episodes on all my iDevices so I can listen anywhere, anytime. Best comedy indeed. Too bad Zurich was the last episode.
I’d have to check out this radio drama just because BC’s in it. I’m not a real fan of Mansfield Park either, but with this version, I hope it would make me appreciate it as the book never did.
I’m all for BC as Mr. Darcy, but Tom Hiddleston would be great too (so BC would be less busy and have time for Sherlock)