Discussion: THE FLIGHT OF GEMMA HARDY by Margot Livesey

Today I'm discussing The Flight of Gemma Hardy by Margot Livesey with Colette from A Buckeye Girl Reads. This is part two. To read part one, please head over to Colette's blog, then come back! :)

Did you notice that whenever someone drove Gemma around, they braked for small animals?

Tasha: Yes. This book was filled so many random details. Maybe it's a symbol of something, but if so, I don't know what.

Colette: You are right, they always did break for small animals. I'm sure it was a metaphor for something. However when I read I don't look for metaphors, so when used in books they are always lost on me unless it's super obvious. There were a lot of random details in this book, and I'm sure they all were connected in some way that we are missing.

Tasha: I do read for metaphors and symbolism, and if the details represented anything, I think it was an unwillingness on Livesey's part to kill her "darlings." Perhaps she added extraneous detail because she wanted the novel to sound "Victorian" and didn't understand that the detail was there to make a point? I did like her writing style, but this book needed a lot more work and a heartless editor.


Birds are mentioned a lot throughout the book, what do you think they were trying to symbolize?

Colette: At first I thought the bird thing was there just to connect us to the original story of Jane Eyre. Now, though I'm thinking that it could have been a metaphor for how much Gemma changes... and the different birds mentioned show her changing from someone with little confidence to someone who is sure of herself. I thought birds were an odd hobby for a young girl to have in the era this book was in.

Tasha: I thought the birds were a symbol of Gemma's longing to be independent and an adult. That's probably why she and Sinclair reunited on the plane.


Why did you keep reading?

Tasha: lol Well, when I was in the first part, I was holding out hope the second part would be better, even though you warned me it wasn't. And at first I did really like second part, with the description of the Orkney's; but then it started to feel like it wasn't flowing naturally and things were just happening because they happened in the original Jane Eyre, you know what I mean? By then I wanted to finish it just so I could whinge about it, haha. ;)

Colette: I did love the Orkneys landscape. The descriptions were beautiful. I think you are right, the problem with the second half is that things were happening with the original version, only updated to match the time period of this book.


What did you think of the ending when Gemma goes to Iceland to reconnect with her mother's family?

Colette: I hated the ending. I liked her going to Iceland, but unlike in Jane Eyre, I didn't understand why her family couldn't contact her after her uncle died. Why not hire someone to do it? Why do think they had Gemma be from Iceland instead of England? I couldn't figure that out... except to have it be a reason for her aunt not liking her.

Tasha: The whole Iceland thing did seem pointless. For one, she was doing fine without her family, I didn't get why finding them was such a pressing issue she HAD TO STEAL MONEY FROM HER FRIENDS to go there (again, unlike Jane, Gemma's actions strike one as selfish at best and amoral at worst). For another, that wasn't much of a family; and even if she did find them, who cares? They live in frigging Iceland! This isn't going to make a significant difference to her life. Good luck making international calls, Miss I-don't-know-how-to-use-a-phone.


What did you think of the book overall?

Colette: This is one of those books that when reading reviews on GoodReads on I felt like I read a completely different book then everyone else did. I can't help but wonder if it's because I was expecting a little romance and didn't feel like that part of the book came through very well at all. Do you think that is why we, as romance lovers had such a hard time with this book?

Tasha: I think it's reasonable to expect some romance in a novel that advertises itself as a Jane Eyre adaptation, but the main reason I didn't like it was because of Gemma. Jane Eyre is about a woman who never compromises her ideals to make her life easier, but still gets what she wants. Gemma is like the female version of Meursault from The Stranger. She doesn't have ideals, she's just out to get everything she can for herself... and also the characterization was really weak.

Although Colette and I didn't hate The Flight of Gemma Hardy, it definitely didn't get better as it went on, and the ending was horrible. You'd be better served to spend your time reading or rereading Jane Eyre over this trying-too-hard-but-still-not-getting-it adaptation. We would like to thank the publisher for providing us with copies for review, though!

Jane Eyre Approximately

There haven't been a lot of Jane Eyre adaptations (thank god) when compared to other classic novels like Pride & Prejudice; but there are a few! Here are some I've personally come across:


Jenna Starborn by Sharon Shinn
Sharon Shinn is one of my favorite authors, and Jane Eyre is one of my favorite books, so you can imagine my excitement when I heard about this novel. If you just read the summary and not the book itself, it might seem like Shinn did a good job of adapting Jane Eyre to a sci-fi setting; but in practice I didn't see what the point of Jenna Starborn was, because it was so similar to the original.


Nine Coaches Waiting by Mary Stewart
This is probably one of the best adaptations I've read, although it still falls short of the original. One of the reasons it's good is that Stewart is a neogothic writer, so her writing style is already perfectly suited to an adaptation of Jane Eyre. Another point in her favor is that she definitely puts her own spin on the story and adapts it to a contemporary (at the time) setting.


Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier
Du Maurier is another neogothic suspense novelist whose style is perfectly suited to putting her own twist on Jane Eyre. Rebecca is more of an "inspired by" than "copied after" adaptation. Like Stewart, du Maurier lets her own characters and setting move the story, not the original Jane Eyre.


Jane by April Lindner (review here)
In this version, Mr. Rochester is a rock star. It's very Jane Eyre-lite, but was enjoyable, if totally ridiculous.


Jane Slayre by Sherri Browning Erwin
I've seen this book around and have managed to avoid it. I suppose I could be persuaded to try it if someone told me it was good, but I haven't seen any reviews of it.


The Flight of Gemma Hardy by Margot Livesey
This is another novel where I'm not really sure what the point of writing it was. It's very similar to Jane Eyre in the plotting, but with none of the great characters and emotions that come with the original.



Have you read any adaptations of Jane Eyre?

Movie Review: JANE EYRE

Originally released: 2011
Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Judi Dench
Directed by: Cary Joji Fukunaga
Based on: The classic novel of the same name by Charlotte Brontë, of course.

Since 1996, there have been four movie adaptations of Jane Eyre. FOUR. Why so many? I have noooo idea. Granted, two of those adaptations were for television (and both were better than this piece of crap), but it's not as if Jane Eyre lends itself to the screen. I love the book--it's my favorite novel ever--but when I think about it, stunning visuals don't exactly leap to mind. Obviously I'm not a director, but as a reader I can tell the biggest problem with adapting Jane Eyre to film is that it's all about what's not happening--what isn't seen, what's not being said, the fact that you can never know what someone else is thinking. It makes for great reading, but can lead to a pretty boring movie.


One of these two people needs more sleep.

Something every Jane Eyre adaptation I've ever seen has in common is that they all start with scenes from Jane's childhood and then her going to that depressing school. WHY. WHY. WHY. WHY? Yeah, I like part of the book, too, but it doesn't really have that much to do with the main story, and Jane's a sympathetic enough character without it. Just throw Jane into Thornfield and let's get this party started, okay? But this version has a twist (exclamation mark). It combines the boring childhood scenes with the boring scenes when Jane stays with the Rivers family, together into one incomprehensible block! Making it... twice as boring! At the start of the movie! GREAT idea.

I really wanted to fast forward through that section because I felt like I was watching paint dry, but I didn't. My bad. Then we finally get to Thornfield and I'm all like, "Yay!" and "Judi Dench is Mrs. Fairfax!" and "Oh good, that Fassbender person is here, maybe this movie will at last start to get interesting." But because we've spent a good half hour reprising stuff no one cares about, that apparently means the things I do care about--i.e., the developing relationship between Jane and Rochester--needs to be slashed to pieces and my favorite scenes in the book have to be messed with. OH NO YOU DIDN'T.

 
"This is one of my three expressions. Get used to it."

I guess the movie still could have been saved from being horrible if it wasn't for Fassbender. I know everyone is in love with him, but I have to be honest and say I do not get the attraction of this guy at all. First of all, his face is seriously weird. It reminds me of Gumby. But he's Rochester, so it's not as if he has to be attractive or anything; that's in the book. Second, and more importantly, he cannot act to save his life!! He wasn't even trying, I swear to god. Whenever there was a romantic scene in the movie, he sounded like he was reading directions from a teleprompter. "Jane... veer left, then proceed onto the motorway. Will you marry me?" I felt like he decided the flowery language was ridiculous so he wasn't even going to attempt to say the words as if he actually meant them. WHAT A DICK. And don't even get me started on the creepazoid factor. Who does he think he is, Rat's Nest RPatt? Stop watching that woman who's, like, twenty years younger than you sleep, sleazebag! Instead of finding him attractive, I was grossed out. Even Jane knows enough not to let him loan her money.

There's also this weird BDSM thing going on in the movie. Fassbender is literally strangling Jane at one point when he's trying to get her to do what he wants, the psycho. And don't even get me started on St. John and his untoward interest in Jane's education being juxtaposed with scenes of a schoolgirl being caned. I was like, what the fridge? Jane's also super-fascinated with a picture of a nude woman writhing in the grass (Roll, roll! Roll in zee hay! Spoiler alert, Jane does this at one point) with her wrists restrained. I get that we're trying to sex it up, but Jane as a submissive is a little trite and obvious, dontcha think?

Aside from the terrible acting, the movie's "artistic interpretation" of the book is soooo graduate film school. At one point, instead of actually witnessing Jane and Rochester's relationship develop, I had to sit through one of those love montages where they frolic amid nature with flowers and a gentle breeze. Are you freaking kidding me?!? What is this, the 1960s? Look at your life, look at your choices! As for the one part of the book where things have the potential to be visually interesting--the burning of Thornfield--do you think we get to see that? No, Jane and Mrs. Fairfax literally stand on screen and tell us about it. With their words. They don't even use hand gestures! I do believe that's the very definition of "pictures of people talking."

This is honestly the worst film adaptation of Jane Eyre I've ever seen IN MY ENTIRE LIFE. It's boring as heck, the acting is pretty bad (except for Judi Dench, and you can tell even she gives up at some point), and it's clear the director had no idea how to tell this story in a cinematic way. The William Hurt and Ciaran Hinds versions were pretty boring, too, but at least they made an effort to tell the story, and Ciaran Hinds emoted nicely. Compared to the Toby Stephens version, though, this one is just a sad mess. You can slap the word artistic on a donkey's ass but that's not going to make me think it's a masterpiece. Maybe next time we should try focusing on the script instead of the lens filters? Just an idea.

Jane by April Lindner

What if Mr. Rochester was a rock star?

Indeed.  What if.  What if Jane Eyre was never written?  Where would we go to for our innocent-jeune-fille-makes-rich-grizzled-old-guy-fall-in-love-with-her plots?

Jane is an adaptation of Jane Eyre set in the modern-day, with Mr. Rochester played by been-there-done-that rock star, Nico Rathburn.  Orphan Jane Moore is forced to drop out of Sarah Lawrence after her parents die, and lands a pretty posh job as a nanny to Rathburn's daughter.  I won't summarize the book any further, because if you're at all familiar with Jane Eyre, there's no need.  You already know what happens.

I've read a few adaptations of Jane Eyre that tried to be more original--Jenna Starborn by Sharon Shinn leaps immediately to mind.  That novel was set in the future, and Rochester's secret in the attic was much more creatively adapted to the setting.  Another adaptation that was pretty good was Mary Stewart's Nine Coaches Waiting, which was less literal and had the heroine falling in love with the mysterious son of the grizzled estate owner.  But even though Jenna Starborn and Nine Coaches might have been more clever, as a piece of pure romantic escapism I didn't enjoy them a quarter as much as I enjoyed Jane.

The novel is distilled into highlights of Jane Eyre, like a movie (in fact, I kept thinking it would make a better movie than a book), and moves along pretty quickly.  The estate is still called Thornfield, there's still a nice housekeeper and a suspicious resident of the uppermost floor, and the whole book feels a little anachronistic.  There may be cell phones and the internet, but there are no TVs and the internets is used just a time or two.  Jane herself doesn't feel like a modern teenager, and it's easy to forget that's what she is--especially the teenager part.  She hasn't heard of a major rock star and only listens to classical music?  I don't listen to hip-hop, but I still know who Jay-Z and Timbaland are, you know what I'm saying?  Plus she doesn't believably think or behave like a nineteen-year-old, even a mature one; she's got way too much perspective.

As for Nico Rathburn, he's not a carbon copy of the original Mr. Rochester.  He's much nicer and laid back, and pretty much an all-around good guy.  His "temper" is occasionally mentioned, but I didn't see much evidence of it in the story.  As I wrote in my musical notes for this book, as a musician I imagine he's based off Bruce Springsteen: there's a quote from "Factory" on the dedication page, and Nico's songs, like Springsteen's, have a lot of references to streets and night and the kind of workingman's romanticism you find the Boss' songs.  Personality-wise, however, he's nothing like Springsteen (or any other great musician I've ever heard of), which is probably all for the best--Springsteen's old as dirt, not to mention a pretty weird dude.  Nor could I imagine Nico as a serious drug addict, although that was supposed to be the awful thing in his past that made him all broody.  Again, for the purposes of the book, this was probably for the best: a realistic crazy ex-coke head musician would be a hard sell as a romantic hero (although potentially awesome!).

And don't even get me started on the hit-you-over-the-head nature->sex metaphors.  Lordy lordy.

That being said, I did wildly enjoy this book.  Maybe I'm just a sucker for these types of plots, but I thought Jane and Nico had a lot of chemistry, and the way Nico comes to rely on Jane as not only a girlfriend but a true friend was a little obvious but sweet. 

Jane Eyre is about a woman who becomes independent and socially mobile by remaining true to herself and defying expectations of what a woman should do or be.  Jane is a fairy tale about a girl who marries a prince that just happens to have a crazy woman living in his attic.  It's a quick read--I finished it in a day--that's perfect when you're craving Jane Eyre, but don't have the energy to get mired in the whole 19th-century rigmarole.  And it's way better than any movie adaptation I've seen so far.

So, I definitely recommended this book for Jane Eyre fans.  But if you haven't read Jane Eyre, please don't read Jane first--the original is still soooooo much better.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Books That Stick With You

From Booking Through Thursday:

This can be a quick one. Don’t take too long to think about it.
Fifteen books you’ve read that will always stick with you. First
fifteen you can recall in no more than 15 minutes.

Ready, set, go!

1. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte
2. The Ivy Tree by Mary Stewart
3. The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton
4. Bunnicula by James Howe
5. The Night Train to Memphis by Elizabeth Peters
6. The Ghost Wore Grey by Bruce Coville
7. The Vampire Diaries by L. J. Smith
8. Pride & Prejudice by Jane Austen (I can't believe it took me that long to think of it)
   
9. Stranger in my Arms by Lisa Kleypas (first romance novel ever ^_^)
10. Here Comes the Sun by Emily Loring
11. The Alligator Song by Robert Tallon
12. Archangel by Sharon Shinn
13. In Cold Blood by Truman Capote

Annnnd my time's up. 

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Eternal Sunshine of Spotless Reader's Mind?

Shop Indie Bookstores

From Booking Through Thursday:

What book would you love to be able to read again for the first time?

This seems like a very odd question to me, for some reason. Kind of like a virginity question--if you could get your virginity back, would you? Uh, no.

Why is reading a great book for the first time so special? I admit that I do have a strong attachment to the first books I read by certain authors; but since I so rarely re-read books (TBR Monster, om nom nom nom), I don't know... it just seems odd.

Nevertheless, I suppose there are some books I wouldn't mind reading over again as if it was the first time ("It feels like the first time, it feels like the very first time..." okay, I'll stop now). Jane Eyre, for example, so I could be re-surprised by the twist (actually, it took me about three re-reads to remember the twist; I always get so caught up in the story I forget it, and then I'm like, "Oh my god he has--wait, I remember that from last time" ^_^).


Shop Indie Bookstores

Another book I wouldn't mind re-virginizing myself for is Night Train to Memphis by Elizabeth Peters. I mentioned before that I have a fondness for the first book I read by certain authors--well, this was my first Peters book; and even though it's not her best book, it's my favorite because it got me totally hooked on her novels. I've read this book way too many times. This is also one of those books where I can clearly remember the time and place I was at when I was reading it, so it would be interesting to see if I would have the same reaction to it now as I did when I was, hmmm... thirteen-ish?


Shop Indie Bookstores

Some other books I wouldn't mind re-reading with fresh eyes would be The Ivy Tree by Mary Stewart (another book I've read way too many times) and The Secret Circle by L. J. Smith. But in my experience, a really good book gets better the more you read it--you notice new things about the characters and get more involved in the story. So I'm not sure that would erase a memory of reading a book, even if I could.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Book Zombie Quiz

Another reading meme from The Book Zombie:

1. What author do you own the most books by?
Well, I'm not going to count them.  But off the top of my head I'd say Christina Dodd and Lisa Kleypas, since I tend to read them obsessively and they've both written a lot of books.

2. What book do you own the most copies of?
I own three copies of Treasure Island.  Why, you ask?  I really have no idea.  I like the book, but I don't like it that much.  I also own 3 versions of the story on DVD.

3. Did it bother you that both those questions ended with prepositions?
The first one didn't bother me, but the second one really did.  That might be because I've just spent the last 5 hours grading essays, though.

4. What fictional character are you secretly in love with?
Haha, I have to pick one?  Hmm, Mr. Darcy is probably number one in my heart.  But there are really so many choices....

5. What book have you read the most times in your life?
Wellllll, I don't know.  It comes down to The Ivy Tree by Mary Stewart, Here Comes the Sun by Emilie Loring, and The Vampire Diaries by LJ Smith.  The one that I've read the most of all of those is probably Here Comes the Sun, since I've read it at least once a year since I was 7.  That book is crazy, y'all (not really).

6. What was your favorite book when you were ten years old?
I loved this book called The Ghost Wore Grey by Bruce Coville when I was younger (I've always had a thing for stories involving the supernatural).  It was about a ghost from the Civil War who recruits two pre-teen girls to help him do... something.  It had this great line in it:  "What a hunk!  Too bad he's dead."

7. What is the worst book you've read in the past year?
There are so many to choose from.  Probably Dark Thirst by Sara Reinke.  That was book was terrible.

8. What is the best book you've read in the past year?
Year as in since January?  Perfect Chemistry by Simone Elkeles has probably been my personal favorite so far.

9. If you could force everyone you tagged to read one book, what would it be?
Lord, I don't know.  In all honesty, I'd probably make them read Giorgio de Chirico's Hebdomeros, because I'm evil like that, and because I could use it to create my de Chirico zombie army.  Alternative reading assignment would Nadja by André Breton.

10. Who deserves to win the next Nobel Prize for literature?
When I start reading "literature," I'll let you know.

11. What book would you most like to see made into a movie?
Well, I'm reading Drood right now, and I think it would make a great movie!  But you never know with that.  I used to really wish The Vampire Diaries would be made into a TV show (head writer would be Joss Whedon, natch), and now they ARE making it into a TV series, and I'm completely convinced they're going to fuck it up.  I heard the other day that they're changing Stephen and Damon's last names from Salvatore to Witcombe, or something really dumb like that.  WTH?  Stephen and Damon are from Italy, why would you mess with that (very important, trust me) part of the plot unless you're a total d-bag?!?!  Anywayyyy, /rant.  People are trampling on my childhood memories yet again. *grumble grumble*

12. What book would you least like to see made into a movie?
Ha, just about any romance novel.  I really don't want to see most of that stuff on-screen.

13. Describe your weirdest dream involving a writer, book, or literary character.
No idea.  I can't remember stuff like that (at least, nothing's springing to mind at the moment), although I have dreamed about Giorgio de Chirico, who is technically a writer.

14. What is the most lowbrow book you've read as an adult?
Um, just about every book I pick up is considered "lowbrow" by some person.

15. What is the most difficult book you've ever read?
Difficult how?  I'd have to say trying to read Les Fleurs du Mal by Charles Baudelaire in the original French was pretty damn difficult.  I'm amazed I survived that semester, in all honesty.

16. Do you prefer the French or the Russians?
I've never read anything by a Russian author, so I guess the French win by default.  Yay for them.

17. Roth or Updike?
I'd rather gouge my eyes out than read Updike again.  As for Roth, I honestly have no idea who that is, unless you're talking about the lead singer for Van Halen.

18. David Sedaris or Dave Eggers?
I've heard of David Sedaris.  I think I might have read one of his books.  So I'm going to vote... Sedaris.

19. Shakespeare, Milton, or Chaucer?
Shakespeare FTW.

20. Austen or Eliot?
Austen, duh.

21. What is the biggest or most embarrassing gap in your reading?
I still have not read Tolkien.  And I have to admit I haven't read the entire Austen catalog, either.  I know; I feel bad about it.

22. What is your favorite novel?
Jane Eyre is my favorite novel of all time.

23. Play?
A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen--that play is amazingly good, full of drama and yet very insightful about gender roles and the way the sexes interact.  And the female lead has a great last scene.

24. Short story?
Don't have one.

25. Epic Poem?
Oh, yes, what is my favorite epic poem???  Well, I would say Childe Harold's Pilgrimage by Byron, but I never actually finished it.  Or The Odyssey, except I never actually read it, just watched the miniseries.  Or The Epic of Gilgamesh, except I have also not read that.  So I suppose one can conclude from this that I don't read epic poems.

26. Short(er) poem?

Strephon kissed me in the spring,

     Robin in the fall,

But Colin only looked at me

     And never kissed at all.

Strephon's kiss was lost in jest,

     Robin's lost in play,

But the kiss in Colin's eyes

     Haunts me night and day.

--Sara Teasdale, "The Look"

27. Work of non-fiction?
Hmm, I only read non-fiction for work.  I don't really have a favorite, since I don't read it for enjoyment.

28. Who is your favorite writer?
I really couldn't say.  I hate just about anyone's writing if I'm not in the mood for it.  LOL  Probably LJ Smith if I had to pick one writer.

29. Who is the most overrated writer alive today?
This question is funny to me, because I don't think there are many contemporary writers who are "rated" (by whom?) at the same level as Charles Dickens was in his lifetime--just to use an example.  I think Nora Roberts is really overrated, if you want to know the truth.  I have never seen the appeal of her books.

30. What is your desert island book?
Taking just one book to a desert island would be a torturous decision.  No matter what it was, I would get really tired of it.  I guess I'd pick Robinson Crusoe, because if you're ever going to connect with a guy who's stranded on a deserted island, it'd be then, amirite?

31. And ... what are you reading right now?
Drood by Dan Simmons

Powered by ScribeFire.