User talk:Giano/Rosings Park
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Rosings and the education of the reader
Mr Collins is as you say both amusing and irritating, but inside the novel, most people are prepared to take him at his own valuation. He's highly successful in impressing other (middle-class) people with his boasts about Rosings, as his snobbery strikes an answering chord in them. Thus, although his gracious comparison of Mrs Phillips' drawing room with the small summer breakfast parlour at Rosings "did not at first convey much gratification", yet when Mrs Phillips learns about the Rosings chimney-piece costing eight hundred punds, "she felt all the force of the compliment, and would hardly have resented a comparison with the housekeeper's room." Listening to Mr Collins, she "was resolving to retail it all among her neighbours as soon as she could." It is only Elizabeth (and possibly her sister Jane, who is too polite to say) who is critical of Mr Collins' pretensions. The reader is assumed to view character and society through Elizabeth's eyes, and thereby both Mr Collins' obnoxiousness, and Lady Catherine's rudeness and imperiousness, contribute to the (presumed middle-class) reader's education. The reader is taught to value Elizabeth's independence and proper pride, and even to value her resentment of Lady Catherine and her formal pile, over Mr Collins' obsequiousness and false humility and over Mrs Phillips' readiness to be impressed. And the reader is directed to prefer Pemberly to Rosings. Bishonen | talk 13:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC).
-
- Yes yes dear, but how does that help us identify Rosings? Giano | talk 15:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- Identify? I beg your pardon. As you were. Bishonen | talk 16:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC).
- We are trying to write an article on Rosings here, in order to identify exactly what it would have looked like, because it is very badly portrayed in films where casting directors have obviously never read the book. Millions of people (like myself) read Jane Austen to further their knowledge of architecture, and recent films do not help them much. The man who casted Burghley House for instance. This type of ignorance is very dangerous. As a 16 year old I attempted to pass an English lit. exam without bothering to read the book, but I had seem the film on TV - I failed miserably. I am attempting here to bring great works of literature to life through the great medium of architecture Giano | talk 17:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- To be fair to a director seeking out locations for a place like Rosings, it's probably going to be impossible to find an exact match and a "best fit" will have to do instead. In the case of the recent film (which I did not see) they went for utter, exaggerated grandeur, to the exclusion of other considerations. (Possibly an error, but I'm given to understand that other features of the book were exaggerated, such as the Bennett's poverty, possibly an artifact of trying to compress the story into a single 2-hour film.) For the 1995 BBC production it looks like they tried to select a house that more or less met the physical description in the book. Whether they even noticed it was almost 100 years too old is unanswerable, but even if a perfect match in all respects could be found, would it necessarily be available as a filming location?
- We are trying to write an article on Rosings here, in order to identify exactly what it would have looked like, because it is very badly portrayed in films where casting directors have obviously never read the book. Millions of people (like myself) read Jane Austen to further their knowledge of architecture, and recent films do not help them much. The man who casted Burghley House for instance. This type of ignorance is very dangerous. As a 16 year old I attempted to pass an English lit. exam without bothering to read the book, but I had seem the film on TV - I failed miserably. I am attempting here to bring great works of literature to life through the great medium of architecture Giano | talk 17:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- Identify? I beg your pardon. As you were. Bishonen | talk 16:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC).
- Yes yes dear, but how does that help us identify Rosings? Giano | talk 15:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Of course, the problem with casting such a "modern house" in the first place is that any house that might fit the description will in fact be over 200 years old, and look it! TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Google Books
Having scanned through Google Books, I list some other hints as to the identity of Rosings:
- Rosings is famous for its grand fenestration.
- The walls are more likely to have been painted than papered.
- its chimney piece cost more than twice the cost of a carved marble chimney piece typical for the period.
- Despite its costly decorations, Rosings was inferior to Pemberley.
- Critics believe that Rosings is shown to be florid and gaudy --Ghirla -трёп- 18:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Nice one Ghirla, I think Rosings will be cold and grand - I'm thinking Neo-classical, which is why I like Kedleston Hall but I think it is too big, Jane Austen and Mr Collins would have had to have raved even more about it. Giano | talk 21:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Godmersham Park?
Godmersham Park cannot be a very "dark horse". Jane Austen's brother Edward lived there, and Jane and Cassandra were often visitors. See Constance Hill, Jane Austen: Her Homes & Her Friends 1923, ch XVIIi.--Wetman 19:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
