Posts

The VERY* Official Netflix Persuasion Survey. *Not actually a true random sample or statistically viable, but fun. 12 friends in Michigan watched the film Persuasion. Their ages spanned 6 decades. Afterwards, they rated the film. Average rating on a scale of 1-5: 4.33. Everyone either "liked it" or "loved it".

Review of Netflix’s Persuasion (with Survey Data)

I love adaptations, and I love Jane Austen. So I had to watch Netflix’s new adaptation of Persuasion, starring Dakota Johnson, Cosmo Jarvis, and Henry Golding. I decided to make a movie night of it and invited a bunch of friends over. We watched the film. There was much laughter. The credits rolled. And then I handed out surveys.

Yes, surveys.

You come to a girls night at my house, and you may end up taking a survey.

What was most interesting to me was actually the qualitative results–what people liked and disliked from a film standpoint–but first, let’s look at overall impressions.

Overall Impressions/Quantitative Results: Enjoyment Factor

The VERY* Official Netflix Persuasion Survey. *Not actually a true random sample or statistically viable, but fun. 12 friends in Michigan watched the film Persuasion. Their ages spanned 6 decades. Afterwards, they rated the film. Average rating on a scale of 1-5: 4.33. Everyone either "liked it" or "loved it".

I minored in film in college, and I did a masters in English. I love movies, and I love books. And I feel like they’re very different things. But in terms of a movie that’s worth watching, you need to know if it’s enjoyable or not. That’s a fundamental part of the film viewing experience.

I gave everyone a scale of 1 to 5 and asked them how much they enjoyed the film.

ENTERTAINMENT VALUE On a scale of 1-5, how entertaining did you find the film? 1 (It was terrible & I can’t believe Kathy convinced me to watch this) 2 (disliked) 3 (it was fine) 4 (I liked it) 5 (I loved it)

And as you saw from the first graphic in this post, people liked the movie. We had an average of 4.33 stars. And everyone either liked it or loved it.

I also wanted to see whether or not someone’s enjoyment of the film was influenced by how much they feel like a Jane Austen fan. Now, there is no official rubric for what makes someone a true Jane Austen fan (though a rather hilarious character in the film Austenland attempts to define a true fan). So I simply let people judge for themselves.

Would you consider yourself a Jane Austen fan?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Sort of

Note that I included a “sort of” category. To me, I see people who rated themselves as “sort of” Jane Austen fans as casual fans or those who might have engaged with mostly 1 or 2 of her books. But I didn’t put a description–I wanted people to put themselves wherever they felt most comfortable.

And here’s the results, with the averages of how they rated the film:

Enjoyment of film vs. whether or not a Jane Austen Fan. All 12 people answered the question, "Would you consider yourself a Jane Austen fan?" Not a fan (2 people): 4. Sort of a fan (5 people): 4.4. Austen fan (5 people): 4.4.

In general, those that either consider themselves Jane Austen fans, or “sort of” Jane Austen fans, rated the movie higher than those who didn’t.

One lady loves Jane Austen, and Persuasion is her favorite novel. She has watched (and owns) other adaptations. And she gave the film 5 stars.

The Qualitative Results: Filmic Choices

Then came the qualitative questions. I asked what, from a film technique standpoint, people thought worked well, and what didn’t work as well for them.

Survey Results: What Worked Well in Netflix’s Persuasion

There was a wide range of responses. One person, a self-professed Jane Austen fan, wrote:

“I felt like the breaking of the fourth wall was a wink and a nod to the humor of the author herself.”

Several other people also commented on how they liked the breaking the fourth wall and Anne’s direct dialogue with the camera/viewer.

The cliffs scene was a favorite, someone else really liked the dialogue, and people generally liked the emotions that were conveyed:

“I thought it captured well [the] regret, sorrow, and second chances.”

There were people who mentioned really liking:

  • The music
  • The costumes
  • The dialogue
  • That the storyline was clear
  • Mary’s character/the humor she added to the story

One person, a Jane Austen fan, wrote:

“The Elliots were all true to Austen’s characters.”

I felt the same. Mary, Elizabeth, Sir Walter, the Musgroves–they managed to capture some of the essence of Austen’s characters.

One person who was not a Jane Austen fan wrote:

“I liked that I could understand it all. Older English mixed with modern. Some other movies I get lost sometimes cause of the language.”

For her, the modern references and metaphors (“I can never trust a 10”) really helped make the film more accessible.

I’ll close with one last positive comment:

“I loved all of it.”

Survey Results: What Didn’t Work a Well in Netflix’s Persuasion

First, I went to film school. What “doesn’t work” is a very subjective thing. And it’s almost more useful to consider what the goals of the film were and how well it achieved those goals.

However, I decided to spare my guests a 30-minute lecture on how to judge a film’s merit, and instead just asked on the survey “What didn’t work as well for you?”

Here were a few of the responses:

“I thought Anne drank too much.”

This is a definite shift to a book. Anne may or may not be an alcoholic in the movie.

Another person comment on the modern references:

“The modern language/references were occasionally jarring against the 1800s visuals.”

This is interesting because I only had two people comment on the modern languages/references. One person positively, and one person semi-negatively.

I’m someone who loves historical things. I put hundreds of hours into making my Jane Austen-inspired novels historically accurate, and I tried to make the language match Austen’s. But I thought this film was cohesive in being a bit ahistoric–not completely accurate costumes, some modern languages and references, the very uncomfortable octopus sucking scene, the frowny face drawn by Mary on her forlorn note. So even though it’s not how I’ve approached my own Austen adaptations, the modern languages/references worked.

Most people didn’t have any complaints. I got a lot of no responses on this final question, and several that read:

“No major criticisms.”

And

“Nothing, it was fun.”

Some Positive Results

One person commented on her survey:

“Now I want to read it.”

There were several other people who verbally expressed the same sentiment. And if a film makes you want to read Jane Austen, I always see that as a good thing.

Several other people (including people who had given the film a “4: I liked it”) plan to rewatch it, some of them with their husbands.

My Own Personal Thoughts

I thoroughly enjoyed myself.

I love the original novel. I love Jane Austen’s use of language. I love the nuance. I love the friendship with Mrs. Smith and that entire subplot (which was not included in the film). I like Jane Austen’s subtle commentaries on the war, on politics, on rhetoric, on education, on the role of the social sphere in a woman’s life. And these are all good, beautiful things that were not in the film.

But I thought it was a really good adaptation.

Fresh? Yes.

Interpreting characters a little differently? For sure.

Taking a new vision to Austen? Yes.

I think it’s useful to note that the director, Carrie Cracknell, is largely a theatre director. I feel like theatre-goers expect a wider range of adaptations than film-viewers, and so this adaptation may surprise some viewers. But generally, I think people will enjoy it.

Hardcore Jane Austen fandom does have a solid contingent of purists that can be rather judgmental on anything that does not fit their conceptions of what a Jane Austen adaptation should look like.  If you’re looking for complete accuracy for the novel, you’re going to be disappointed. However, that’s not what makes an adaptation interesting to me.

There’s a great film theory article by Richard Stam called “Beyond Fidelity: The Dialogics of Adaptation.”  He talks about how “fidelity” and the moral language we use to judge film adaptations can actually get in our way as film viewers. He posits that a film may be choosing an essence of the original and putting that into a new genre. But an adaptation is not pure transference–Stam talks about how an adaptation can be:

  • Translation
  • Reading
  • Dialogization
  • Cannibalization
  • Transmutation
  • Transfiguration
  • Signifying

He spends a great number of pages going into each of these things–so if you want to read about how an adaptation can be a dialogue with the original, or a transmutation, check out his article.

(I do want to point out that there have also been some very racist critiques of Persuasion. Which is honestly very sad to me. I personally think color blind cast is amazing. Also, despite the white-ness of many Austen adaptations, Regency England was actually quite a diverse place, and that were people of many races at all levels of society.)

Netflix’s Persuasion is a film that I plan to rewatch. Despite loving the novel Persuasion, I’ve never actually seen the other film adaptations, and now I’m interested in watching them–broadening my horizons and such.

Now Go Forth and Watch!

Despite my survey being so VERY official (and not statistically significant), I think it’s fair to recommend that you go watch Netflix’s Persuasion and judge the film for yourself.

Subscribe for book news, events, fun writing tidbits, and other updates from Katherine Cowley!

* indicates required



Which newsletter(s) would you like to receive?

Jane Austen Writing Lessons. #59: Internal Dialogue (Dialogue for One Person/Character)

#59: Internal Dialogue (Dialogue for One Person/Character)

Jane Austen Writing Lessons. #59: Internal Dialogue (Dialogue for One Person/Character)

The very roots of the term dialogue imply that it requires more than one person for there to be a dialogue. According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, dialogue comes from the word dia, meaning “across, between,” and legien, meaning “to speak.” In other words, speech is occurring between people.

Yet there are times in fiction when we use dialogue for only one person—when we type something as dialogue, despite there being only one character, or the speech being entirely internal.

In this post I’ll talk about different forms of internal dialogue, including:

  • Soliloquys
  • Monologues (the cousin of a soliloquy–but not truly internal)
  • Other types of dialogue with oneself
Soliloquys and Monologues (Jane Austen Writing Lessons)

The Theatre Tradition of Speech for One Person

In theater, there are two terms that stand in contrast to dialogue, that represent speech for only one person: soliloquy and monologue.

Soliloquys (One person, with themselves)

A soliloquy is when a character speaks their thoughts aloud. In other words, they are talking to themselves. In a novel, a character can also speak their thoughts aloud—or, if the narrator is providing a close point of view, then a character can talk to themselves entirely in their heads. (In theatre, these thoughts must be spoken aloud, or the audience has no access to them.)

In the novel Persuasion, Jane Austen employs soliloquy when Anne enters her family’s rented house in Bath for the first time:

Anne entered it with a sinking heart, anticipating an imprisonment of many months, and anxiously saying to herself, “Oh! When shall I leave you again!”

Many of the most famous theatre soliloquys are longer passages which reveal much about the characters, their emotions, and their thought processes. Jane Austen incorporates this sort of soliloquy in her novel as well, though most of the time it is not set apart in quotation marks. Instead, she uses an extended passage of free indirect speech (slipping into the character’s thoughts while still using third person) to create longer character soliloquys.

An example of this can be found in the novel Emma, immediately after Emma has found out the truth about the affections of Frank Churchill, Jane Fairfax, and Harriet. This passage would be very easy to rewrite as a spoken Shakespearean soliloquy in a play:

Emma’s eyes were instantly withdrawn; and she sat silently meditating, in a fixed attitude, for a few minutes. A few minutes were sufficient for making her acquainted with her own heart. A mind like hers, once opening to suspicion, made rapid progress. She touched—she admitted—she acknowledged the whole truth. Why was it so much worse that Harriet should be in love with Mr. Knightley, than with Frank Churchill? Why was the evil so dreadfully increased by Harriet’s having some hope of a return? It darted through her, with the speed of an arrow, that Mr. Knightley must marry no one but herself!

Her own conduct, as well as her own heart, was before her in the same few minutes. She saw it all with a clearness which had never blessed her before. How improperly had she been acting by Harriet! How inconsiderate, how indelicate, how irrational, how unfeeling had been her conduct! What blindness, what madness, had led her on! It struck her with dreadful force, and she was ready to give it every bad name in the world. Some portion of respect for herself, however, in spite of all these demerits—some concern for her own appearance, and a strong sense of justice by Harriet—(there would be no need of compassion to the girl who believed herself loved by Mr. Knightley—but justice required that she should not be made unhappy by any coldness now,) gave Emma the resolution to sit and endure farther with calmness, with even apparent kindness.—For her own advantage indeed, it was fit that the utmost extent of Harriet’s hopes should be enquired into; and Harriet had done nothing to forfeit the regard and interest which had been so voluntarily formed and maintained—or to deserve to be slighted by the person, whose counsels had never led her right.

In you are writing a novel or short story in third person, a short soliloquy can be incorporated through either quotation marks around the thought, or by putting the thought in italics. A longer soliloquy will often be through indirect speech. If you are writing in first person, a soliloquy can be marked by quotes or italics, but often is just incorporated naturally into the narrative.

Monologues (One person, with an audience)

A monologue is when a character gives a longer speech aloud to other characters or with a perceived audience. Sometimes this is an entire scene. In Jane Austen’s novels, many characters give monologues intended for an audience to hear (think Mr. Collins).

In many ways, these monologues act like dialogue–there is an audience that is perceived by the character. Yet unlike in dialogue, the character is less likely to be interrupted. As a result, the speech is less of an active conversation with the characters around them.

Monologues take into account persuasive dialogue techniques, and are often meant to stir, change, or impress an audience.

Monologues reflect a character’s internal dialogue, but because they are performative, because they are for in audience, internal thoughts, emotions, and reasoning are filtered through a public, outside intent.

dialogue for one person / dialogue with oneself (Jane Austen Writing Lessons)

Dialogue for One Person/Dialogue With Oneself

At other times, Jane Austen uses dialogue with only one person, and with no audience, that is not a true soliloquy.

At times, this is because the character is having a sort of conversation with herself. These lines of dialogue can serve a similar role as if someone besides herself had spoken them. Just as in a conversation between two or more people, this internal dialogue with oneself can help the character consider or change her perspective.

In Persuasion, Anne reflects on the fact that her family no longer lives in their ancestral home, Kellynch-hall, and that it is now occupied by the Crofts:

She could not but in conscience feel that they were gone who deserved not to stay, and that Kellynch-hall had passed into better hands than its owners….

In such moments Anne had no power of saying to herself, “These rooms ought to belong only to us. Oh, how fallen in their destination! How unworthily occupied! An ancient family to be so driven away! Strangers filling their place!” No, except when she thought of her mother, and remembered where she had been used to sit and preside, she had no sigh of that description to heave.

In this passage, Anne does not say this dialogue to herself—or at least not unless she is thinking of her mother. But by considering that she could say this to herself, she is presenting a counterargument to her actual views, a perspective that is she is consciously setting aside and not incorporating into her being.

Austen uses many other innovative approaches to internal dialogue, but we are just going to consider one more. In some passages, dialogue that was spoken is then internally repeated as the character attempts to process it or deal with the words.

In Persuasion, after the first time in which Anne and Captain Wentworth meet in the present day, Mary informs Anne what Captain Wentworth thought of her:

“Captain Wentworth…said, ‘You were so altered he should not have known you again.’”

This leads to a flurry of emotions for Anne. She ends up repeating variations of this line of dialogue twice in her mind:

“Altered beyond his knowledge!” Anne fully submitted, in silent, deep mortification. Doubtless it was so; and she could take no revenge, for he was not altered, or not for the worse. She had already acknowledge it to herself, and she could not think differently, let him think of her as he would. No; the years which had destroyed her youth and bloom had only given him a more glowing, manly, open look, in no respect lessening his personal advantages. She had seen the same Frederick Wentworth.

“So altered he should not have known her again!” These were words which could not but dwell with her. Yet she soon began to rejoice that she had heard them. They were of sobering tendency; they allayed agitation; they composed, and consequently must make her happier.

While dialogue traditionally requires at least two people, soliloquys and other types of internal dialogue can be used to great effect, especially as a character looks deeply at themselves, reflects on their life, or decides to move in a new direction.

Writing Exercises - Jane Austen Writing Lessons

Exercise 1: Write a soliloquy for one of your characters at a key point in the story, as if they were performing this soliloquy on a stage.

What does this soliloquy teach you about your character? Should parts of it be incorporated into your story, either through internal dialogue or free indirect speech?

Exercise 2: The next time you read a novel, pay close attention to the dialogue. How often does the writer use two people in a scene of dialogue? Three people? Four people? A larger group? Are there any monologues? Are there any moments where the writer uses soliloquy or other sorts of internal dialogue? What is the effect of each different type of dialogue on the character and on the plot?

Exercise 3: Write a short scene which takes an innovative approach to internal dialogue or dialogue with only one character. A few ideas for the type of internal dialogue that you could use:

  • A conversation (or argument) with oneself
  • Theoretical dialogue that did not or could not occur
  • Imagining what another character might say
  • Repeated line of dialogue, with or without variation (either the character’s own dialogue, or something someone else said to them or about them)
  • Recollection of a series of different things that have been said to the character (by an individual or a group of people)

Don’t Miss a Lesson: Subscribe to Updates and Giveaways from katherinecowley.com

* indicates required



Which newsletter(s) would you like to receive?

Jane Austen Writing Lessons. #57: Character Dialogue as Persuasion

#57: Character Dialogue as Persuasion

Jane Austen Writing Lessons. #57: Character Dialogue as Persuasion

Characters speak because they want to create change—and speech is one of the only ways to change other people.

In lesson 55, we discussed when characters use dialogue as manipulation. Manipulation is the unhealthy cousin of a much more useful, overarching principle: persuasion.

Persuasion is when a speaker creates change in an audience—whether an individual or a group—by considering what matters to that audience. Persuasion requires using what matters to the audience to show how a change in thought or behavior would be beneficial.

Over two thousand years ago, Aristotle analyzed different elements of effective persuasion. In a given situation, he wrote that one must find “the available means of persuasion.”

Some characters knowingly draw on the available means of persuasion, consciously considering what would be effective for an audience. Other characters do so unknowingly or intuitively. Some characters are good judges of what would be persuasive for a given audience; other characters are poor judges of their audience.

Regardless of whether a character uses persuasion consciously or unconsciously, effectively or ineffectively, they are drawing upon what Aristotle categorized as the three major appeals we use in persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos.

Ethos Pathos and Logos in Dialogue (Jane Austen Writing Lessons)

Ethos: appeals to the authority of the speaker, or to others who the listener would find authoritative.

Pathos: appeals to emotion.

Logos: appeals to logic and reason.

In the novel Persuasion, Lady Russell draws upon ethos, pathos, and logos as she attempts to persuade Anne to consider Mr. Elliot as a possible marriage partner. She says:

“I only mean that if Mr. Elliot should some time hence pay his addresses to you, and if you should be disposed to accept him, I think there would be every possibility of your being happy together. A most suitable connection every body must consider it—but I think it might be a very happy one.”

Here, she draws upon pathos—appealing to emotion as she encourages Anne to consider her future happiness. She also draws upon ethos—everyone, including herself, would consider this a “most suitable connection.” It was Lady Russell who had originally encouraged Anne to break off her engagement with Captain Wentworth, and Lady Russell knows that she is an authority figure in Anne’s life, someone whose opinion and blessing matters to Anne.

Yet Anne is not convinced. She replies:

Mr. Elliot is an exceedingly agreeable man, and in many respects I think highly of him,” said Anne; “but we should not suit.”

Lady Russell is not persuasive because she assumes that Anne and Mr. Elliot are well suited, but Anne does not feel the same. In other words, they do not share an implicit assumption.

Implicit Assumptions in Dialogue (Jane Austen Writing Lessons)

Implicit assumptions are the underlying assumptions that undergird an argument and its appeals. These are things which must be accepted as true in order for the argument to work. Often, implicit assumptions tap into the way a character views the world, their philosophy towards life and people, and what matters to them. In order for an argument to be successful, the speaker and the listener must share at least one implicit assumption.

Lady Russell sees that her argument in not working, so she shifts her approach. Instead of making an argument about Mr. Elliot, which would be harder for her to win, she makes an argument which taps into Anne’s priorities for herself. She uses an implicit assumption that both she and Anne share: that Anne wants to be like her mother.

“I own that to be able to regard you as the future mistress of Kellynch, the future Lady Elliot—to look forward and see you occupying your dear mother’s place, succeeding to all her rights, and all her popularity, as well as to all her virtues, would be the highest possible gratification to me.—You are your mother’s self in countenance and disposition; and if I might be allowed to fancy you as she was, in situation, and name, and home, presiding and blessing in the same spot, and only superior to her in being more highly valued! My dearest Anne, it would give me more delight than is often felt at my time of life!”

Here, we have logos—logic and reasoning: Anne can have her lifelong home back if she marries Mr. Elliot. We have pathos—emotion—as memories of Anne’s mother are conjured. We have ethos—appeal to authority—as Lady Russell talks about the joy that this sort of decision would bring her. And because the implicit assumption underneath these appeals is shared, it’s quite an effective argument:

Anne was obliged to turn away, to rise, to walk to a distant table, and, leaning there to pretend employment, try to subdue the feelings this picture excited. For a few moments her imagination and her heart were bewitched. The idea of becoming what her mother had been; of having the precious name of “Lady Elliot” first revived in herself; of being restored to Kellynch, calling it her home again, her home for ever, was a charm which she could not immediately resist. Lady Russell said not another word, willing to leave the matter to its own operation.

Many characters are not nearly as persuasive as Lady Russell—in the next lesson, I’ll discuss how Mr. Collins ineffectively appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos when he proposes to Elizabeth. Yet whether or not these tools of persuasion are used effectively, they are an integral part of the way in which characters speak.

Writing Exercises - Jane Austen Writing Lessons

Exercise 1: Using Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in Your Life

The next time you need to persuade someone of something, big or small, consciously use either ethos, pathos, or logos, or a combination of these appeals. Consider which appeals will be most effective for the situation and the person to whom you are speaking. Afterwards, reflect. Was the appeal effective? Was this a departure from how you would have normally approached the conversation? Would another appeal or approach to the conversation have been more effective?

Exercise 2: Persuasive Scene

Write a short scene between two characters, in which one character is attempting to persuade the other. Make the initial persuasion be ineffective, and then have the character use appeals and an implicit assumption that are more effective.

Exercise 3: Analysis

Analyze scenes of dialogue which you have written in which one character is attempting to persuade another characters or a group of characters. Which appeals does the character use? (Ethos, pathos, logos.) What do the appeals used say about the character attempting to persuade? Does the speaker share an implicit assumption with their audience?

Don’t Miss a Lesson: Subscribe to Updates and Giveaways from katherinecowley.com

* indicates required



Which newsletter(s) would you like to receive?

Jane Austen Writing Lessons. #52: Different Responses to Dialogue

#52: Different Responses to Dialogue

Jane Austen Writing Lessons. #52: Different Responses to Dialogue

One of the most useful practices when writing dialogue is to consider how different characters will respond to the same line of dialogue in different ways. Whenever, we have certain expectations for how we will be interpreted, for how we would like others to respond. Sometimes, they respond in the way we would expect; other times they respond differently. In a group dialogue, with three or more people, there can be—and often should be—a diverse range of responses to key lines of dialogue.

In Jane Austen’s novel Persuasion, Louisa Musgrove falls on a stone staircase and injures her head. Her illness and her recovery become a talking point in many social gatherings. Not long after the injury, Lady Russell and Anne Elliot call upon the Crofts. Jane Austen describes the conversation between Lady Russell, Anne, and Mrs. Croft, as Admiral Croft observes and then adds his perspective on the matter:

As to the sad catastrophe itself, it could be canvassed only in one style by a couple of steady, sensible women, whose judgments had to work on ascertained events; and it was perfectly decided that it had been the consequence of much thoughtfulness and much imprudence; that its effects were most alarming, and that it was frightful to think, how long Miss Musgrove’s recovery might yet be doubtful, and how liable she would still remain to suffer from the concussion hereafter!—The Admiral wound it all up summarily by exclaiming,

“Ay, a very bad business indeed.—A new sort of way this, for a young fellow to be making love, by breaking his mistress’s head!—is not it, Miss Elliot?—This is breaking a head and giving a plaister truly!”

Admiral Croft’s manners were not quite of the tone to suit Lady Russell, but they delighted Anne. His goodness of heart and simplicity of character were irresistible.

Lady Russell does not approve of Admiral Croft’s statement or the manner in which he has said it—to her, Louisa’s injury is not a laughing manner. This is not a formal, sophisticated way to speak of it. Yet we read that this response “delighted Anne.” It is not that Anne disregards propriety, but rather that she sees a place for levity, and that she understands his goodness and his character and how that informs his statement.

In a previous Jane Austen Writing Lesson, I discussed how groups of characters are not monoliths: even among very similar characters, there should be a range of perspectives and attributes.

The same is true with how characters respond to dialogue.

Factors that influence how a character responds to dialogue:

  • Their personality

  • Their expectations

  • Their knowledge of, and relationship with, the speaker

  • Their understanding of the situation and topic

  • Their wants, needs, and goals

  • Their inherent biases

In Mansfield Park, a group of individuals, which includes most of the main characters, is given a tour of the Rushworth home by Mrs. Rushworth. Mrs. Rushworth show them the chapel—which disappoints Fanny for its lack of grandeur—and explains:

“It is a handsome chapel, and was formerly in constant use both morning and evening. Prayers were always read in it by the domestic chaplain, within the memory of many. But the late Mr. Rushworth left it off.”

Miss Crawford interprets this dialogue very differently than Fanny:

“Every generation has its improvements,” said Miss Crawford, with a smile, to Edmund….

“It is a pity,” cried Fanny, “that the custom should have been discontinued. It was a valuable part of former times. There is something in a chapel and chaplain so much in character with a great house, with one’s ideas of what such a household should be! A whole family assembling regularly for the purpose of prayer is fine!”

The differences in their reactions to Mrs. Rushworth’s dialogue reveal much about Miss Crawford and Fanny. Fanny is pious and has grand visions of morality, while Miss Crawford is more cynical.

Yet the dialogue does not stop there—each of the characters continue to bring themselves to the discussion. Fanny’s statement is immediately interpreted in two different ways:

“Very fine indeed!” said Miss Crawford, laughing. “It must do the heads of the family a great deal of good to force all the poor housemaids and footmen to leave business and pleasure, and say their prayers here twice a day, while they are inventing excuses themselves for staying away.”

That is hardly Fanny’s idea of a family assembling,” said Edmund. “If the master and mistress do not attend themselves, there must be more harm than good in the custom.”

Miss Crawford’s interpretation shows an awareness of class disparity and the way in which upper class people often force their morality on those in their employ while disregarding the same principles of morality for themselves. It’s both a clever and an insightful comment. And it also treats Fanny’s perspective as inadequate and uninformed.

Edmund’s response defends Fanny, in part because of the long-established relationship that he has with Fanny, and his understanding of her meaning. But his response also stems from the fact that he intends to become a clergyman and also sees value in religious practices.

Later on in the scene, Edmund’s sister Julia tells a joke about Maria and Mr. Rushworth being ready for marriage, and tells Edmund:

“My dear Edmund, if you were but in orders now, you might perform the ceremony directly.”

Miss Crawford is shocked by this new information:

“Ordained!” said Miss Crawford; “what, are you to be a clergyman?”

“Yes; I shall take orders soon after my father’s return—probably at Christmas.”

Miss Crawford, rallying her spirits, and recovering her complexion, replied only, “If I had known this before, I would have spoken of the cloth with more respect,” and turned the subject.

This new knowledge makes Miss Crawford wish that she had responded differently to the previous lines of dialogue. She was trying to impress Edmund with her insights and clever way of speaking, but was missing information that would have shifted her response.

In writing group dialogue, it is useful to consider that different characters will often respond to the same passage of dialogue in different ways. Incorporating these differences can richer dialogue with more tension and movement.

Writing Exercises - Jane Austen Writing Lessons
The Response Game

Exercise 1: The Response Game

Choose 5 characters. These could be characters you’ve already written, characters from one of your favorite books or films (for example, Mr. Darcy, Mr. Bingley, Miss Caroline Bingley, Elizabeth Bennet, and Jane Bennet), or characters that are inspired by people in your life.

Now watch a trailer for a new or upcoming movie. How would each of the five characters respond differently to this trailer?

Craft a 2-3 sentence response for each of the characters to this movie trailer.

Exercise 2: A Practice Scene

Write a brief scene with three characters. Have one of the characters say a line of dialogue which is interpreted differently by the characters. something, and then the other two characters respond in different manners. The responses can be largely internal or largely external; they can be in the form of dialogue, action, or introspection. The characters may also have the same external reaction or action, but for different reasons.

Exercise 3: Dialogue Analysis and Revision

Part 1: Analyze a passage of dialogue in a published short story or novel. The passage of dialogue should include at least three characters. Consider when characters respond differently to the same line of dialogue, and what motivates this response.

Part 2: Revise a scene you have written which includes dialogue between at least three characters. Are there places where you could strengthen the passage by having the characters respond differently to the dialogue?

Don’t Miss a Lesson: Subscribe to Updates and Giveaways from katherinecowley.com

* indicates required



Which newsletter(s) would you like to receive?