Comments on: REVIEW: The Three Weissmanns of Westport by Cathleen Schine

By: Mags

Mags — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 15:51:21 +0000

Mr Knightley – had he found himself in such a situation – would have done no less.

And Captain Wentworth was prepared to marry Louisa Musgrove once he realized he had raised her and her family’s expectations. And Henry Tilney felt he had raised Catherine Morland’s expectations sufficiently that honor would only be satisfied with him proposing to her (though he wanted to, anyway).

Duty Before Self explains a LOT in Jane Austen’s novels. It was important in her time, not only to her but to everyone. The characters really took duty to heart, especially duty to one’s parents and family.

By: Mari A.

Mari A. — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:47:29 +0000

I haven’t read this book, and don’t think I’m interested enough to try it, but I completely agree with your assessment of Edward Ferrars. I am often annoyed when people call him weak or a git, because that he is not. Yes, he made a mistake and hooked up with a total idiot when he was a teenager, but who has not done that? And Lucy probably manipulated him as best she could. Edward, however, faces his mistake with honour and integrity, and that’s what I find admirable. Mr Knightley – had he found himself in such a situation – would have done no less. Sorry, will step down from the soap-box now.

Plus, and I think I may be alone in the fandom, but I don’t think Col Brandon and Elinor would have suited at all. They are great as friends, and might have lived a very comfortable marriage of convenience, but I cannot see them as becoming lovers. Just my two cents

By: Kirsten

Kirsten — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 22:01:35 +0000

I read it, and I completely agree with you about everything. The flashes to the original characters and settings were well-done throughout. However, I didn’t much *like* these characters from a modern perspective – what is charming in a 16-year-old Marianne becomes less so in a grown, mature woman. And I thought the redone ending was *dreadful*.

By: Maria L

Maria L — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:13:57 +0000

I was on the fence about reading this and after Mags’ review, there I firmly remain.

I’m with Sandra, if I can borrow it, maybe. But I’ll save my money.

By: Laurel Ann

Laurel Ann — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 03:16:57 +0000

Yes, and from your unlove of this book it appears to be lacking in natural beauty too.

By: Sandra

Sandra — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 23:14:05 +0000

Aw, Jenny, the librarian is *never* responsible for the patron not liking a suggested read. Even the reader’s advisory lists say “If you liked X, you *may* enjoy Y.” A librarian myself and a former CT resident, the first couple of paragraphs of this entry intrigued me. However, if Mags was dissatisfied with it, I’m not laying out the cash. I always end up cravenly agreeing with her. I will borrow it from my local PL, of course.

By: Jenny

Jenny — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:00:38 +0000

As a librarian and JASNA member I was excited by the description of this book…b/c of the S & S retelling and the fact that the Elinor character was a library director. I liked how this showed that S & S is a timeless story. But I, too, had a problem with the ending. You can’t change the couples around. Also since the characters are older in this book I’d like to promote it to older library patrons but I hesitate to do so b/c of part of the ending. Older library patrons aren’t quite as “21st century” as something that happens in the end. I did actually mention it at a talk to some older ladies (the group is called O.W.L. Stands for Older Wiser Ladies) and almost all of them wrote the title down. I wanted to give a disclaimer “Don’t hold the librarian responsible if you don’t like the book. Read the original novel instead.” Basically the book left me wanting to re-read the original novel.

By: Mags

Mags — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:00:36 +0000

You know where the “awkward taste” quote comes from, don’t you? If not, perhaps the group read of P&P will remind you.

As far as fidelity to the original goes, I don’t mean to be doctrinaire or imply there is some kind of formula. But it seems logical to me that if one is following a story very closely, with every element of the plot and every character completely identifiable with the original, to completely change the ending is not a clever twist (especially since the original had a clever twist already–meaning Elinor finding out the truth about “Mrs. Edward Ferrars”) but a slap in the face of the original author. Now, since you didn’t like the original ending, your mileage may vary. If you didn’t read my spoilery comments, perhaps you should come back afterwards and read them and see what you think. But the ending put me over the edge from “sorta liked it and thought it was clever but won’t read again and just glad I had a coupon” to really disliking it.

As far as NA goes, one wonders if perhaps a young author paid more attention to a certain film than to the original novel? It is a novel which repays close study, and can change one’s mind about it.

By: Laurel Ann

Laurel Ann — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:41:32 +0000

LOLOLOL! “modern improvements were unfortunately counteracted by an awkward taste.” Best polite put down I ever encountered. Brava!

So Mags, do you think that if an author is bold enough to retell one of Austen’s novels they should stick to her plot line and characterizations religiously? I am battling this question in my mind as I read another novel that the publisher is calling a retelling of Northanger Abbey and not finding much Abbey in their Northanger. Maybe they too can use the “modern improvements” alibi?

I bought Three Weissmann’s three month’s ago and have not made it past page 55. Other distractions. I thought the concept clever and it peaked my interest enough to lay down cold hard cash like you. Now that you have mentioned that the ending is different than Austen’s (which I have only loved by half) without telling us how, I am compelled to take it up again and finish it. Thanks.