But what do we think of the film?!

Conversation, octopus dreams, and zany sexy Musgroves. #Persuasion2022 is here.

Thanks for visiting! This is the Austen Connection newsletter. You can see all of the Austen Connection conversations including the podcast here. If you are not signed up yet you can take a few seconds to sign up for free, or support at any level - below - and get all of the conversations dropped right into your inbox. 

Hello dear ones,

You’re doing alright now. Keep going. 

That little film with the little trailer dropped on Netflix, many of us are watching it, so here come all the I-dreamed-an-octupus-ate-my-face memes, bringing us joy.

So first off, what do you think?! 

The latest full-feature Jane Austen adaptation has dropped. ‘Persuasion’, directed by British theatre director Carrie Cracknell, and starring Dakota Johnson, Cosmo Jarvis, and Henry Golding, appeared on Netflix Friday.

The comment line is open. Let us know, here.

So what do we think of the film?

Immediate take: And for those catching up, this is about the latest Jane Austen full-feature screen adaptation to drop on Netflix, Persuasion, by director Carrie Cracknell, and one immediate thought is that this film belongs in a rather short lineup of costume dramas that emphasize the irreverent, the whimsical, the satire of their source material. 

And perhaps there aren’t as many of these as you’d think given that Austen was irreverent, and given that irreverence - not to mention humor - is entertaining. 

But humor or satire is perhaps harder to do than swelling emo piano chords accompanying an anguished man walking toward you over rolling English hills. (Looking at you, Joe Wright with your Mathew Macfadyen and Pride and Prejudice 2005). 

Writers and directors and actors seem to always say funny is actually harder than dramatic, than earnestness, and we can believe it. Just ask Jane Austen. 

So what films would be in this irreverent/whimsical/satirical brigade: Whit Stillman’s Love & Friendship, Gwyneth Hughes’s 2018 Vanity Fair, Autumn de Wilde’s 2020 EMMA., and now, Carrie Cracknell’s Persuasion.

You could expand this further to include Sofia Coppola’s Marie Antoinette, and before that Stanley Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon, and throw in Yorgos Lanthimos’s more recent The Favourite, which we found brilliant but nauseating. (Let us know other irreverent costume dramas you think of!) 

Anyway, what this lineup has in common is that they’re all costume dramas that are full of very rude people in very polite settings. Which is … well, which is very Jane Austen. 

So let’s look at the conversation surrounding this film - if we dare:

Maybe the most cogent take-down of the film comes from the writer Brandon Taylor in his sweater weather Substack newsletter, which we adore and highly recommend. But wow the comment section of his post on Persuasion - “persuasion (2022) is a hate crime” - became downright hazardous to your health. (Let’s all go over there and just say some nice things to Brandon.) 

Or is criticizing the film actually not allowed? Another point of view, that the haters are hateful and also racist - is perhaps best put forward by culture writer Amanda-Rae Prescott, who wrote about the film here. (*Correction: This previously linked to the wrong article - it now links to the article by Amanda-Rae Prescott, apologies! for confusion)

Why is criticizing the film not allowed? It is, of course. But while art is something that can and should always be debated, the fact is that there are Jane Austen adaptation watchers who will predictably come out loudly to say that artistic renderings of a classic story, including diverse casting, is “not historic.” (And Prescott backs this up with plenty of examples - as seen in Sanditon’s pineapple controversy, Bridgerton, and many other adaptations with diverse casting.) 

Nevermind that we had this conversation with Hamilton, and Hamilton won. 

Nevermind that our view of history itself is inaccurate, partly because of overly (and not even very realistic) white casting in costume dramas. 

Nevermind that almost nothing Jane Austen is doing is straightforwardly historic: She wrote contemporary stories and innovated in her time.

Nevermind that Austen was furthermore an artist who was writing fiction. And when she went full-tilt history, friends, she wrote it as parody, calling her teen-self a “partial, prejudiced & ignorant historian.”

So let’s believe Jane Austen and not look to her for history! 

And, looking at this film as a piece of art, as a story on its own, and leaving out “history” - because this has everything to do with art and nearly nothing to do with history - what do you think of the film?

But what do we think of the film?

We’ll go first: We liked it. 

Because here’s what you’ve got: You’ve got beautiful music. You’ve got beautiful scenery. You’ve got some good acting, some excellent casting - Richard E. Grant? (If we wandered on to the set of Persuasion, this is the actor we’d be watching!) You’ve got Ben Bailey Smith as the sexiest Charles Musgrove in history, and his empathetic wife played by Mia McKenna-Bruce as history’s zaniest Mary. 

You’ve got beautiful music. You’ve got beautiful scenery. You’ve got some good acting, some excellent casting - Richard E. Grant? (If we wandered on to the set of Persuasion, this is the actor we’d be watching!) You’ve got Ben Bailey-Smith as the sexiest Charles Musgrove in history, and his empathetic wife as the zaniest Mary. 

You’ve got a woman-identifying director, who joins Autumn de Wilde (EMMA., 2020) and Patricia Rozema (the 1999 Mansfield Park) in this small lineup of women directing Austen adaptations. (You can also include of course Amy Heckerling’s Clueless, and yes let’s.) 

And this film achieves emotional resonance. We are with Anne, just like we are in the book: That’s a hard thing to achieve, and hard to pin down how it happens, but most importantly we feel in this film it does happen, and if we know Austen fandom we know we’ll be unpacking how for decades. 

But, as my Substack sister Abby Gardner says, We Have Notes.

And if anyone were asking us, here are some notes:

More overhearing and less talking

It seems like a simple way to let the viewer into Anne’s consciousness, and to help us experience her pain, is the technique Austen herself used: We, with Anne, overhear so much that is painful, and heightens her and our sense of being not-seen and marginalized, as we have discussed before.

In the first part of the book, Anne is constantly overhearing conversations about Wentworth and also by Wentworth. Then, in the last part of the book, a corner is turned and Wentworth is forced to listen, and to overhear village ladies discuss Anne’s beauty and popularity, and to overhear Anne’s climactic speech about women loving longest. 

[T]his film achieves emotional resonance. We are with Anne, just like we are in the book: That’s a hard thing to achieve, and hard to pin down how it happens, but most importantly we feel in this film it does happen, and if we know Austen fandom we know we’ll be unpacking how for decades. 

This initial overhearing by Anne heightens the sense of Anne’s loneliness, her invisibility, her painful exclusion by those around her - and it would seem to be the sort of dramatic stuff made for film. But little of it is used for this film. 

What we do have is a lot of talking by Anne. 

Boy, is this Anne a talker. And basically she says a lot that doesn't need to be said because we’re not reading, we’re watching; so we can see what she’s doing, what she’s feeling, she doesn't need to always tell us directly. 

Boy, is this Anne a talker. And basically she says a lot that doesn't need to be said because we’re not reading, we’re watching; so we can see what she’s doing, what she’s feeling, she doesn't need to always tell us directly. 

And we can also hear the music which is telling us how we feel. That’s basically what music - in film and in radio - does in a story.

Some of that talking is a lot of fun - the direct address and the asides and the weird octopus dream download. All good.

This is director Carrie Cracknell just using Jane Austen’s scaffolding to hang her own artistic stuff on. Love it. Let’s have more of it. 

But if anyone were asking for notes, the note would be to take out about one-third of Anne’s narration. Everyone knows by now that over-use of a voice-over is something to be avoided, so do that.

So that’s our take in one phrase: less talking, more over-hearing.

So what do we love?

Aside from that, we’re finding a lot to love in Persuasion 2022.

The settings, the cinematography, some truly beautiful moments, a diverse cast, emotional resonance, with a beautiful score, absurd octopus dreams, Ben Bailey Smith as the sexiest Charles Musgrove in history, Mia McKenna-Bruce as the zaniest Mary Musgrove in history - really, advancing the conversation on these characters in a way that the best retellings and fanfic do - and Richard E. Grant. 

The settings, the cinematography, some truly beautiful moments, a diverse cast, emotional resonance, with a beautiful score, absurd octopus dreams, Ben Bailey Smith as the sexiest Charles Musgrove in history, Mia McKenna-Bruce as the zaniest Mary Musgrove in history - really, advancing the conversation on these characters in a way that the best retellings and fanfic does - and Richard E. Grant. 

On the downside, we have less Badass Sophy Croft than in other film versions - and that seems a wasted opportunity. But we can’t have everything, and there’s always 1995 Persuasion’s Fiona Shaw, who makes you want to be Sophy Croft’s sister-in-law more than anything in the world. 

Yes, Jane Austen is here in this adaptation, friends. And we imagine she’s all for your triumph or your train wreck of a film, either way.

And especially all for it if it inflames passions, creates conversation about story and history, and gives us some moments of art and joy.

Go forth and enjoy!

Your friend,

Plain Jane 

But what do you think of the film? Let us know right here!

Links and Community

• If you want more conversation about this story, check out our four Persuasion posts that went deep into the themes of this story: Anne Elliot and the Conversation, Badass Sophy Croft, The Choice, and Being Anne Elliot. 

• And now for VirtualJaneCon - it’s happening now, friends! Radically inclusive Jane Austen scholars, friends, and fandom! See you there! 

  Here’s the program: https://virtualjanecon.com/virtualjanecon-2022/

  Here’s the YouTube channel, where the videos are premiering.

  Here’s Amanda-Rae Prescott’s VirtualJaneCon presentation on racism and Regency history

• Here’s Jane Austen educator Damianne Scott on Sanditon’s pineapple controversy. Damianne also runs the Faceboook group Black Girl Loves Jane

• Persuasion playwright Sarah Rose Kearns will be in conversation with astrologer Anne Ortelee who will “read Jane," through the actor Laura Rocklyn — who has performed in Kearns’ play Manydown and in her solo show Who Dares to Be an Authoress. Tix are $26, with proceeds supporting an upcoming workshop of Persuasion at The Holy Theatre. Here’s where you can sign up. 

• Wall Street Journal on Persuasion 2022

• New York Times on Persuasion 2022 - Yes, Jane Austen will be fine and so will Director Carrie Cracknell.

• And for something totally totally different: 10 early vampire tales by Dr. Sam Hirst, who tweets fun, erudite context on gothic literature

• Mr. Malcolm’s List - who’s seen it? Let us know your take! Here’s an informative, contextual review from Amanda-Rae Prescott

• Brandon Taylor’s “persuasion is a hate crime” - enjoy:

persuasion (2022) is a hate crime

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to share it!