I finished Mansfield Park today and it was a little shit. ¿The other books of Austen are worth read or them all are shit?
emma seems really neat to me, but my mom who is all-in on jane is mostly about pride and prejudice and sense and sensibility.
i've picked up mansfield park and persuasion at different times and i can only imagine i went the wrong way with austen at the start
Austen's works are good examples of false classics. They are inoffensive, have decent but perfectly standard prose, feature a decent vocabulary, and deal with simple themes - perfect for school curricula. So people read them in school and think they must be some of the greatest works of all time, while they actually have little value outside of raising standardized testing scores. They aren't bad, but if you didn't like one, you aren't missing anything by not reading the rest.
Austen is important for this reason: She pioneered free indirect discourse in literature.
If you're reading Austen for the plot, maybe you should reconsider why you read in the first place. She is valuable because of her social critiques and her trailblazing method of narrative, not because of her immaculate plotlines.
These people know nothing about literature, but because they are so ignorant, they fail to realize it. Offer not curses but pity.
She's good if you're looking for some heartwarming romance stories, with the odd moment of sterling prose. I'm afraid most of her critiques and satirizations go over my head, though.
>>7650706 gets it