"Emma" is Jane Austen's final gift to the world before she was claimed by her "last illness" at the age of forty. Altough serious matters are raised in the book, it remains comic and light-hearted- which tells us something about the author and her determination to look at life as if it were a big grotesque performance, where every character (especially Emma) has to be intensified to the point of absurd. Some say Jane Austen wrote for "adolescent girls." Not true. Her novels, just like Shakespeare's comedies, can be read at any age. As a literature student I greatly admire Austen's style and her unique characterization. It is certainly her best. Read and enjoy!

Though not her favorite novel, Austen's Emma shines as one of her most beloved. The character of Emma is both believable and lovable. This particular edition is a great keepsake, one you can pass down to your own daughter.

Emma is basically a darling snob. She has a kind, loving heart, and really wants to do good, but makes a tangle of everybody's lives, including her own. I'm sick of flawless, shallow, empty heroines, so Emma's faults and conquering of faults endear her. The unabridged book is slightly complicated (such as old-fashioned language) but if you savor it slowly it is well worth it. The plot is clever, sweet, funny and leaves a satisfied, warm kind of glow in the pit of your stomach. The perfect ending makes you want to cry. Don't spoil THIS novel with any trashy sequels.

TRY WATCHING the Gwyneth Paltrow and Jeremy Northam "Emma."

Primary sources are always the best in understanding the mindset of a period. Here we have a thick collection of Jane Austen's letters, which have been very well annotated by the editor. The contrast between the Memoirs of Harriette Wilson (who lived in the same period, published by the famous courtesan in 1825) are hilarious. Witty but staidly Anglican Jane at one point savagely attacks the very high aristocrats romping their scandalous way through Harriette's world, that "race of Pagets". Jane Austen's letters let us have a glimpses of what daily life in the English gentry and aristocratic class was like in Regency England; seeemingly trivial details such as the buying of Wedgwood china with the personal crest, buying the breakfast set separate to the other china sets (longing to see what a Regency breakfast set looked like! The breakfast set is mentioned in Sense and Sensibility) are actually very difficult to find out about, it is not something historians generally write about. The notes by the editor are fascinating and could lead to further research, for example how did one lord prove his title after being a Dublin potboy? And the gentleman who divorced his wife after the proper lady decided to become a professional actress...usually it was the other way around, the actress became a proper lady! The biographical details added by the editor on various gentry/aristocratic families mentioned in Jane Austen's letters are very tantalising.

This collection of Jane Austens letters is a must for all fans who would like a peek inside the mind of the author. It is the most extensive collection to date and Le Faye has done quite a lot to make it as accessible as possible. It features all of the surviving letters from Jane Austen to her sister Cassandra plus some letters to some of her brothers, a niece, etc. It also includes three letters from Cassandra to various relatives from the time immediately after Jane Austens death and so also shows Jane Austen from another persons perspective. The only drawback of this book is that all the notes are in the back, arranged by the number of each letter, and so you find yourself flipping back and forth quite a lot but it is an annoyance well worth putting up with.

I have read quite a few bibliographies on Jane Austen but there is no competing with her own words. If you have any kind of interest in Jane Austen as a person then you should definitely get this book.

Proving that Austen was as fun and readable in her everyday letters as she was in her novels. These letters (about 160 of them) are great fun to read. The biting wit of her novels is clearly evident here.

As pretty much most people know Jane Austen was incredibly close to her sister Cassandra and most of these letters are from Jane to Cassandra while they were separated. After Jane's death Cassandra destroyed goodness knows how many of Jane's letters and all of her own - so this small collection is all that is left - along with some to her neices and other family members.

The collection was first put together in the 1930's by Chapman, but Le Faye has uncovered a few more since then (as I understand it).

The book is great value for money. Le Faye has done a phenomemal job in providing all the support information you will need to read and understand any aspect of the letters. They are footnoted clearly. There is a biographical and Topographical index in here - along with a chronology of Jane's life, and a chronology of the letters themselves - and if all else fails there is a comprehensive index.

For the history buff there is a great amount of really useful everyday infomration - for instance in 1813 apples were scarce in the country and cost 1 pound 5 shillings a sack. And insight into Jane herself - in April 1811 she is searching for a novel called 'Self Control' but says "I am always afraid of finding a clever novel too clever." Perhaps something that guided her own writing.

Over 600 pages of great value reading, pure pleasure and wealth of information.

I have always loved the style and social politics of the Regency period (the time of Jane Austen.) But when I read "Sense and Sensibility" in 7th grade I found the first few chapters lifeless, dull and hard to read. Two years later I was encouraged by a friend to give "Pride and Prejudice" a try. I did and have since become a complete Janeite. I am now able to peruse joyfully through "Sense and Sensibility" with a new understanding and appreciation of Jane Austen. The reason? "Pride and Prejudice" is fresh, witty and is a great introduction to Jane Austen's writing style without the formality of some of her other novels (unlike S&S and Persuasion Austen does not give us a 10 page history of each family and their fortune.) If you have never read Jane Austen or have read her other novels and found them boring, read Pride and Prejudice. The characters, and the situations Austen presents to them, are hysterical and reveal a lot about Regency society and morality. This book perfectly compliments a great writer like Jane Austen and is essential to every reader's library. The Penguin Edition of the book is stellar and I personally recommend it not only for the in-depth and indispensable footnotes, but also for the cover that is non-suggestive of any of the characters' appearances. In summary "Pride and Prejudice" is a great book for beginner Austen readers and seasoned fans, and Penguin Classics is a great edition for fully enjoying and understanding the book.

Pride And Prejudice, written by Jane Austen, is an amazing work on the nature of love. Austen uses beautiful language and intriguing characters to tell this story of courtship in a time when reputation was everything. The main character, Elizabeth Bennet, is a clever-witted woman who manages to gracefully glide through the lines set up by society. Although she does not always come off as lady-like, her charm and confidence demand the reader's respect. She is surrounded by a cast of diverse characters, creating a riveting plotline. Her mother is a rather quirky character who wants nothing more than to see her daughters wed. Her father, on the other hand, is a sarcastic and intelligent man who favors Elizabeth for her wit. These characters are brought together with the Bingley's when Elizabeth's older sister, Jane, falls for Mr. Bingley. Here, we are introduced to the stubborn and proud character of Mr. Darcy. He seems to be above everyone else and completely opposed to the idea of love.
When Elizabeth Bennet catches Darcy's eye, however, a battle between the mind and the heart begins. These two chracters are faced with the obstacles set up by a strict, Victorian society. Their largest obstacle, however, will be to overcome their own pride and prejudice, and discover their love for one another. Is this a battle that the heart can win?

It is unfortunate that most first time readers of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE see it merely as one more book to be endured in 11th grade English. However, most soon enough catch the magic of an author (Jane Austen) who can weave a spellbinding tale of love, romance, satire, and passion while all the while poking a not so gentle thrust at the social mores of the early 19th century. This book is no frilly ancestor of a Harlequin romance, even if it shares with the dim-witted heroines of Harlequin a time-honored plot of lovers who meet and find an instant dislike that later morphs into enduring love. PRIDE AND PREJUDICE starts off with that basic premise, but what sets it off as classic is what goes on behind the lovers, Elizabeth Bennet and Fitzwilliam Darcy. A careful reader usually notes the society in which Elizabeth and Darcy play out their little games of cross-purpose verbal repartee. The world of Austen's PRIDE AND PREJUDICE is a society ruled by conniving and single-minded women who see men only in terms of the size of their wallets. Whenever a new bachelor appears on the scene, the women of the novel (with the exception of Elizabeth, of course) immediately try to guess his income so that they can decide if one wishes to marry him. His age, his looks, his habits are much less significant than his income. A fat purse compensates for a fat head.

Modern readers typically call such schemers 'golddiggers,' and according to modern values, perhaps they are, but these readers ought to judge the book's morality against the age in which it was written. Austen (1775 - 1817) lived in an England that prized manners and breeding over all else. It is no surprise, then, that since the reclusive author felt most comfortable only in the company of women, that she would limit her book only to the thoughts, feelings, emotions, and habits of women. In PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, men are never permitted to occupy center stage, nor are they shown interacting independently with other men. If a man is present in any scene, so must a woman to control and observe his actions. Men--even the eventually triumphant Darcy--are generally portrayed as vain, sycophantic, sarcastic, and totally aware that they they are prized only for their money.

The world of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, especially if one has seen the fine film version starring Greer Garson, is one that seems to have been built for women to inhabit. All the women wear flouncy, bouncy dresses with huge flowered hats that Scarlet O'Hara might have worn in GONE WITH THE WIND. Even those ladies that complain of poverty never lack the funds to afford those outrageous outfits. Further, Miss Austen stages a ball in just about every third chapter that permits single women to size up eligible men. As these dandefied women and uniformed men speak to each other, the modern reader probably will be surprised at the excessive politeness and deference tossed unerringly about. This strict adherence to a surface morality ought not to fool the reader into assuming that the characters are as inwardly noble as they are outwardly polite. In fact, behind this massive wall of formal phrasing and good manners lies the same fears, jealousies, and general backstabbing that pervade a modern disco. What gives PRIDE AND PREJUDICE its perpetual charm is the biting irony that causes the reader to wonder: 'Did that character say what I think he (or she) just said?' The modern reader can best appreciate Austen's wit if she can read between the lines to sense the tone of the moment. If such a reader can see that this book is a polite if powerful indictment of a way of life that even Austen wished to poke fun of, then perhaps this reader can appreciate the charm of a book that grows with each successive reading.

Typically, I have a bias against abridged editions of literary works. Nevertheless, prudent editing and abridgement enhances the casual reader's appreciation of this literary tome. Undergraduates working a required reading list for English Lit classes are on their own. Anyway, Samuel Johnson was a noted author and editor of the 18th century English literary scene. Instead of an exhaustive study of Johnson's life as author and editor, biographer Boswell compiled a series of anecdotes, quotations, and correspondence that is held together by his friendship with Johnson. Boswell's purpose was to capture the essence of the man. Johnson was adept at articulating pithy remarks with surgical precision. For example, "...a woman's preaching is like a dog's walking on his hinder legs. It is not done well; but you are surprized to find it done at all." The 18th century spellings, etc. remain intact. We have Johnson to thank for the familiar "...hell is paved with good intentions," and "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Boswell takes care to portray Johnson as sexually moral. After the death of his wife, Johnson (according to Boswell) was apparently celibate. Johnson rebuffed "women of the town," and said he wasn't interested in their carnal delights. Johnson told David Garrick, the actor, that he would not go backstage at the theater because "the white bubbies and silk stockings of your Actresses excite my genitals." As an interesting aside, the editor's introduction speculates that Johnson's relationship with the widow Thrale may have been sexual, with bondage overtones. Who knows? The description of London coffeehouses, theaters, and gathering places are heavy with 18th century atmosphere. Bottom line, reading this book is interesting as a curiosity. Its relevance for 21st century readers may seem limited, but don't let that stop you from sampling the fare. ;-)

Needless to say, Boswell's LIFE OF JOHNSON is one of the preeminent works of biography and should be read by anyone interested in Johnson or the genre. It is a great book (also great is W. Jackson Bate's SAMUEL JOHNSON [1st published 1975]which is a MUST for anyone interested in Johnson). But although I love the Everyman's Library, I do not recommend this edition of Boswell. Unlike the usual quality of the Everyman's Library, its Boswell is rife with typographical errors (there's even missing text!). Though it's the only edition of Boswell I've read, I regret that a correct edition is not on my bookshelf. That being said, if this is the only affordable hardcover version you can find -- and you buy only hardcovers -- go ahead and purchase the Everyman's despite the numerous and distracting errors.

I chose the 1,000 or so page Wordsworth Classics paperback edition of The Life Of Johnson (ISBN 1 85326 797 x) and was very pleased I did. The book had a nice heft to it, and the print was large enough for a comfortable read. My only major beef with this edition is that Boswell's text is replete with quotations from a variety of languages including Latin, Greek, French, Italian and others, and very few of them are translated into English. Whether the editor assumed that the average modern reader is a polyglot, or was unable to provide the translations for some other reason, I feel deprived at not having had access to this portion of the book's material, particularly as the quotes are most often used to gild the lily of one of Johnson's witticisms. Nevertheless, the book rewards the diligent reader with a wealth of intellectual stimulation, and offers a fascinating look into the England of the period including: polite London society, Oxford University, and jaunts around the British and Scottish countryside. Johnson's somewhat eccentric life and personal habits are lovingly and affectionately relayed by his close friend Boswell, who somehow managed to preserve a vast amount of Johnson's conversation without the aid of a tape recorder. With everyday life as a backdrop, we see how Johnson, a self-described lazy man, managed to produce such an abundant literary legacy, not the least of which was his groundbreaking dictionary. I recommend this book highly to people with an interest in 18th century England, the literary society of the period, or who simply love a great biography.

This book explains very good the theory behind the different protocols, but it is a little too much like a C programming book.

I'm using the book at work to write network applications. Unlike some books, this book does not spoon feed you. You have to get your hands dirty and actually write programs yourself. I've found that to get the best out of the book, you have to read a chapter, study the code, then try and write the thing yourself. My only gripe is that some of the authors programs on my disk don't work, ie FTP Client in chapter 8. So what, it forced me to write my own. Love it!

I've been using this book for 8 months. I don't use the winsock code because there are higher level OCX controls to do the job. The real value of this book is in the theory. Don't go searching for those long RFCs. Appendix A and B has become my bible for the SMTP and NNTP protocols. The scenarios presented in the examples throughout the book, helped me understand the stages of a session between the server and client. You won't get too much Delphi-specific info but as long as the various TCP/IP protocols are in use, this book is a classic

Northanger Abbey was a very entertaining novel. The heroine, Catherine Morland, is a very mediocre but charming girl whose only wish in life is to have an exciting Gothic adventure, which of course will end up with herself saving the day. Like Austen's other work, it is entertainingly ironic, mainly due to the idea that throughout the entire story, Catherine creates the most Gothic of Gothic mysteries out of a situation that is completely normal. Catherine's innocence and amiability are completely captivating, proving that a good heroine need not be particularly witty or mysterious or in any way alluring. It is, on the whole, a very light, entertaining novel.
Persuasion is also very entertaining, but it has a more solid conflict. The heroine, Anne Elliot, is a really wonderful person, which irritatingly is only apparent to the reader and one or two other characters. Anne faces a dreadful situation when she is confronted by her former fiance, whom she chucked on the mistaken advice of her best friend, but still loves deeply. Personally, I was really in suspense nearly the entire time as to how it would turn out, because the entrance of Anne's cousin, Mr. Elliot, hints at an attachment with him. It' s a well-written and of course ironic and well worth reading if you remotely enjoy Austen's style.

This being my first experience with reading a series of actual letters, I found that I had to keep reminding myself to stop waiting for a plot, or character building, or any of the usual things one finds in a novel. Also, the book contains only selected letters, leaving a sense of large gaps of time. These things made it difficult for me to get really involved in the reading of this book; however, the editor gives very helpful tidbits at the beginning of each section: where and with whom Jane was staying, and to whom various references were made. Extensive footnotes also help with the latter. If the best mark of a book is that it makes the reader want more, then by all means this collection has done it's work: I definitely plan on learning more about Jane Austen's life and times.

Like all devoted lovers of Jane Austen, I have long pondered why she chose to write this, of all books, at time she was experiencing the intoxicating success of Pride and Prejudice.

The protagonist is a loathesome little priss. Austen herself says so in her letters. Fanny Price is neurotic and oversensitive where Austen's other heroines are brash and healthy. Even Austen's own family found the ending as odd and disappointing as do subsequent generations of readers.

So there's a puzzle to be solved here. The answer may lie in the fact that this book was written when, after a lifetime of obscurity, Austen found herself, briefly, a huge success. As is so often the case with writers, the success of her earlier book may have given her the courage to decided write about something that REALLY mattered to her--and what that was was her own very complex feelings about the intensely sexual appeal of a morally unworthy person.

This topic, the charm of the scoundrel, is one that flirts through all her other books, usually in a side plot. However, the constraints of Austen's day made it impossible for her to write the story of a woman who falls for a scoundrel with a sympathetic viewpoint character.

So what I think Austen may have decided to do was to write this story using Edmund--a male--as the sympathetic character who experiences the devastating sexual love of someone unworthy. Then, through a strange slight of hand, she gives us a decoy protagonist--Fanny Price, who if she is anything, is really the judgemental, punishing Joy Defeating inner voice--the inner voice that probably kept Jane from indulging her own very obvious interest in scoundrels in real life!

In defense of this theory, consider these points:

1. Jane herself loved family theatricals. Fanny's horror of them and of the flirting that took place is the sort of thing she made fun of in others. Jane also loved her cousin, Eliza, a married woman of the scoundrelly type, who flirted outrageously with Jane's brother Henry when Jane was young--very much like Mary Crawford. The fact is, and this bleeds through the book continuously, Austen doesn't at all like Fanny Price!

To make it more complex, Fanny's relationship with Henry Crawford is an echo of the Edmund-Mary theme, but Austen makes Henry so appealing that few readers have forgiven Austen for not letting Fanny liven up a little and marry him! No. Austen is trying to make a case for resisting temptation, but in this book she most egregiously fails.

2. Austen is famous for never showing us a scene or dialogue which she hadn't personally observed in real life, hence the off-stage proposals in her other books.

Does this not make it all the more curious that the final scene between Edmund and Mary Crawford in which he suffers his final disillusionment and realizes the depths of her moral decay comes to us with some very convincing dialogue? Is it possible that Jane lived out just such a scene herself? That she too was forced by her inner knowlege of what was right to turn away from a sexually appealing scoundrel of her own?

3. Fanny gets Edmund in the end, but it is a joyless ending for most readers because it is so clear that he is in love with Mary. Can it be that Austen here was suggesting the grim fate that awaits those who do turn away from temptations--a lifetime of listening to that dull, upstanding, morally correct but oh so joyless voice of reason?

We'll never know. Cassandra Austen burnt several years' worth of her sister's letters--letters written in the years before she prematurely donned her spinster's cap and gave up all thoughts of finding love herself. Her secrets whatever they were, were kept within the family.

But one has to wonder about what was really going on inside the curious teenaged girl who loved Samual Richardson's rape saga and wrote the sexually explicit oddity that comes to us as Lady Susan. Perhaps in Mansfield Park we get a dim echo of the trauma that turned the joyous outrageous rebel who penned Pride and Prejudice in her late teens into the staid, sad woman when she was dying wrote Persuasion--a novel about a recaptured young love.

So with that in mind, why not go and have another look at Mansfield Park!

I don't know what book the other reviewer read, but it couldn't have been "Mansfield Park." "Mansfield Park" is a political satire according to some, and I think there's reason to believe this assessment. According to Jane Austen, "Mansfield Park" is about ordination (some dispute here, but she wrote it in a letter). Ordination comes from the word "order" and given the events in Europe at the time order was a major issue.

Jane Austen's father had 'interests' in the West Indies from which he derived income, and he was very pleased the British Government (Tories) defended these colonies and kept them from joining in the American Revolotion. Jane Austen had two naval brothers who served as part of the effort to keep the English interests en tact. In "Persuasion" a discussion at dinner one evening centers around the West Indies--and the talk is not about slavery. Like it or not, Jane Austen's conscience about slavery did become manifest until she wrote "Emma" and even then she barely touched on the subject. Jane Austen's main concerns involved the lives of women and their place in society. And we have no right to judge her from our perspective 200 years later.

Jane Austen was a Tory at the time she wrote "Mansfield Park." The Tories were a conservative party that backed the English king and he had no interest in seeing English colonies in the West Indies--from which he derived income--disappear. The Tories were landed gentry (country aristocrats) and did not want their old agrarian way of life abolished. It was under threat from the Industrial Revolution, and other social change. The Tory opposition party was Whig. Whigs supported the American and French Revolutions, and wanted change (the Abolutionists were mostly Whig).

Jane Austen's "Mansfield Park" symbolizes the old agrarian landed gentry way of life. Portsmouth (where Fanny's mother lives) represents the chaos of the masses. London (home of the Crawfords) is an interesting but dangerous way of life.

Fanny is a very moral girl. My only complaint of Fanny is that I wanted her to stand up for herself--which she does. She always did, she just didn't do it the way we women who have been emancipated would. Critics from Lionel Trilling to Tony Tanner have defended Fanny's right to be Fanny--i.e. a moral and good girl of her times. We who are caught up in the modern world may not appreciate Fanny, but there she is--and who dares judge her?

Fanny holds the course (like the Tories). She is the voice of morality who objects to the London stage play the other youngsters at Mansfield Park stage in the absence of Mr. Bertram (the lord of the manor and the upholder of virtue). Fanny will not be coerced into violating her principles. She will not marry Mr. Crawford because she can see he is immoral. She chides Edmund to stay on the straight and narrow. She facilitates Edmund's remaining on the path to ordination. Say what you will, Fanny gets her man, and she gets him the way she wants him. Was Janie spoofing us all along? Was Fanny right?

As Jane Austen's most controversial novel, Mansfield Park continues to occupy an inveterate place in literature for its dark charm, its slow yet steady rhythm, its dry yet sharp and ironic humor, and of course fabulous charaterization built on extensive description all within a country challenged by progress.

Readers become acquainted with Fanny Price, a victorian era Cinderella so it appeared--plucked from her family in destitude to be allowed to blossom at her wealthy uncle's house, Mansfield Park. Of course being passive, steadfast, timid...certainlly lacking the very fierce which makes Emma and Marrianne among other Austen heroine memorable. Yet withstanding the seductive charm of fortune and of consequence, Fanny Price resists the wooing of a stranger Mr. CRawford who puzzles everyone with his light gallantry and dark desires. A soulmate since childhood, Fanny's cousin Edmund yields in to Miss Crawford, who is all but a nonessential part of Mr. Crawford's scheme of stolen pleasure. Henry Crawford, certainlly one of the darknest characters ever portrayed, more so then Willoughbe (excuse the sp.) is too caught up in the sensual delights of his incessant conquests (including Fanny's 2 pretty cousins) that even though he ackowledges the good influence Fanny's purity has on his heart, he is too deeply sunken in his web of "play" to rise and face truth of love. Yes, Henry Crawford did love Fanny with his heart, at least the pure part of it, unlike Edmund who loves Fanny only out of brotherly affection. But Fanny, whose steady character makes her an unlikely candidate to Crawford's actual reformation, refuses Crawford's sincerity and thus almost pushes him back into his bottomless hold of scheme. The storm thus takes place in the heart of London's upper society, casting its shadow on the peaceful Mansfield Park community and shattering everything Sir Thomas has persevered in building up--with fortune, and with consequence...a mention of slave trade as well.

Mary Crawford is a complex player, tainted by a society blindly wooing money and status, that even Edmund is not able to save the good side of her. Apart from Henry's scheme, Edmund is forced to refocus and, voila, there is Fanny (no matter how distasteful cousin-courtship is to many).

The movie adaptation of this tale certainlly emphasizes the fighting nature of Fanny which is rarely detected on pages. Yet what IS acknowledged and admired in the quiet little herione, is the perseverance so rare in a world on the verge of revolution.