Wat is er mis met Vlaamse comedy?

Naar aanleiding van het vertrek van FC De Kampioenen, is er een debat losgebarsten over wat er nu voor in de plaats moet komen. In De Standaard, zei een journalist het vandaag zo: “Met De boerenkrijg wilde men een onderwerp uit de vaderlandse geschiedenis nemen, als een soort Vlaamse tegenhanger van 'Allo 'Allo, maar dan koos men een periode waar bijna niemand nog iets over weet. 'Black Adder daarentegen grijpt terug naar de grote periodes in de Britse geschiedenis, die nagenoeg elke Brit nog kent', stelt Thielemans.” Wat is er nu zo goed aan Britse comedy dat we missen in Vlaamse comedy?

In mijn idee is het niet zozeer herkenning dat een rol speelt. Het onderwerp van The Black Adder is dan weliswaar een man in een historische periode, maar dat is niet zozeer van belang. Een tweede zoon van een kroonprins die de nek van de koning, per ongeluk, omwringt was nog maar het uitgangspunt. De rest van de serie concentreerde zich rond het feit dat Prince Edmund zichzelf vooral koning wilde zien. Iets dat natuurlijk zijn vader, noch zijn broer, noch zijn moeder een normaliteit vonden. De serie op zichzelf was erg gebaseerd op Shakespeares toneelstukken. De naam van Edmund alleen al roept referenties op van King Lear. Maar Macbeth bijvoorbeeld zit er ook in, en niet alleen in de zin van de “rise to power”, maar ook in concrete situaties zoals de drie heksen. The Black Adder was vooral grappig omdat de prins zelf een looser was en zijn hulpjes eigenlijk nog de slimste waren.

Blackadder II ging dan over edelman Edmund Blackadder en maakte een breuk met The Black Adder in de zin dat Blackadder zelf nu duidelijk de meest intelligente was. Het was een verandering die noodzakelijk was voor de comedy-waarde, zo beslisten de schrijvers. De Shakespeariaanse referenties gaan verder met zinnen als “hey, nonny nonny” en personages als Bob die een meisje in jongensvermomming is, een knipoog naar de vrouwelijke rollen in Elizabethaans toneel die werden gespeeld door onvolwassen jongens. Maar het is niet alleen de legendarische domheid van Baldrick en de naïviteit van Lord Percy Percy die een rol spelen als schril contrast tegen de superieure intelligentie van Edmund, het is het continue belang dat Edmund Balckadder heeft bij het tevreden stellen van Elizabeth I die nog een tienermeisje blijkt te zijn en die nogal snel iemands hoofd eraf wil zien. Ze beledigt ongestoord de mensen, verlangt dat ze kruipen omdat zij nu eenmaal de koningin is, verwacht dat ze haar bezighouden met interessante verhalen, gaat zelfs zo ver van weddenschappen af te sluiten en dan Blackadder er te laten voor betalen. Als ze haar zin niet krijgt, dreigt ze er steevast mee hun hoofd te laten afhakken. Voor een edelman is het belangrijk dat hij goed staat aan het hof. Vandaar dus het tegenstrijdige belang voor Blackadder van als een marionet voor de koningin te dansen, die hij in het geheim minacht. Niet minder zielig en belachelijk is Stephen Frye in zijn rol als Melchett of “Melchy” zoals Elizabeth hem noemt. Hij kruipt voor zijn koningin, of is misschien al even weinig ontwikkeld als zijzelf.

Blackadder III zet Backadder in een nog meer ondergeschikte positie tot een nog ergere sukkel: butler bij Prince Regent George. De zoon van een gekke vader, moet ook wel gek zijn, zo zullen de scenaristen gedacht hebben. Ze maakten hem een ultradomme man die alleen feest en sokken koopt omdat ze continu verdwijnen. Blackadder, daarentegen, doet toch zijn voordeel als elke butler en drijft een handeltje in diezelfde sokken en laat ook graag zijn minachting blijken, dan vooral in de keuken. De Shakespeariaanse referenties zijn hier ook al niet ver te zoeken met de vloek rond Macbeth. Maar het is niet dat wat zo direct het comedy-element is. Het is de zieligheid van gefrustreerde Blackadder die uit die ondergeschikte situatie wil. Hij gebruikt nu voor het eerst de riemen die hij heeft om te roeien: troggelt zijn baas geld af, keert zelfs één keer de rollen om, manipuleert zijn baas en maakt hem continu belachelijk, iets waar Prince George duidelijk geen last van heeft want hij merkt het niet. Toch wil Blackadder heel graag uit die situatie, maar dat lukt hem niet. Het is dezelfde uitzichtloze situatie waarin Basil Fawlty zich bevindt. In een aantal historische situaties wordt dat concept uitgespeeld.

Blackadder goes forth is de ultieme comedy: een onveranderde situatie in elke keer dezelfde set. De serie speelt grotendeels in de loopgraven. Eén keer gaat ze weg naar het ziekenhuis, maar daar blijft de situatie ook hetzelfde. Altijd dezelfde vijf personages in twee groepen: drie in de loopgraven (Captain Balckadder, Lieutenant George en Private Baldrick) en twee in een kasteel comfortabel achter de frontlinie (Captain Darling en zijn baas General Melchett). De eerste episodes concentreren zich vooral in de loopgraven en geven de verveling weer van zulk leven en vooral de wens van Blackadder, een doorgewinterd soldaat, om eruit te raken. Hij probeert alles, maar het gaat verkeerd. Niet alleen dit concept, de frustratie van Edmund, maakt de serie zo leuk, maar ook de woordspelingen en onverwachte uitbreidingen waarop dit soort comedy zich vooral baseert. Bij gebrek aan leuke situaties zoals ze zich voordoen in ‘Allo ‘Allo! moet er iets anders in de plaats komen. Baldrick die zijn naam op een kogel probeert te kerven “omdat er ergens wel een kogel is met je naam op” (de kogel die je dood betekent m.a.w.). "Rat sauté"/"Rat fricassé"/"Rat au van” zijn goede voorbeelden van hoe een historisch gegeven (het eten van ratten in dit geval) wordt uitgebreid naar een grap (“rat run over by a van”). Of het concept koffie dat werd uitgebreid tot het bedienen van Captain Darling met koffie gemaakt van modder met suiker van haarschilfertjes, melk van kattenkots, schuim van speeksel en misschien nog cacao? Verder gaat de plot ook over het vermijden van de Big Push (de grote aanval) die Blackadder koste wat het kost wil vermijden. Hier ook weer het tegenstrijdig belang: Blackadder commanding officer is totaal niet van plan zijn orders uit te voeren en maakt geen geheim van zijn minachting voor Veldmaarschalk Haig die zveel mannen nutteloos de dood heeft ingejaagd. Daarenboven is slimme en sarcastische Blackadder nog eens 24u/24 opgezadeld met twee naïevelingen die de echtedraagwijdte van de oorlog en hun eigen lot niet schijnen door te hebben, en is hij jaloers op Darling die een comfortabele bureaujob heeft alhoewel hij hem niet daarvoor zo minacht (alleen cissy in het leger doet zulk een job).

Voor zover ik mij herinner ging De Boerenkrijg helemaal niet zo ver. Het is niet zozeer dat de mensen niet meer weten wanneer die Boerenkrijg zich afspeelde (1798), zeker niet als er Napoleontische soldaten op de scene zijn, het is eerder dat het potentiële comedy-element van Franse soldaten die gewoon rust willen en geen last, de hoogste officier die daar anders over denkt, de boerenbevolking die natuurlijk achter de vadsige Franse soldaten staat maar stiekem toch niet, de boerenmeisjes die noodzakelijkerwijs mooie Fransmannen zien, de plaatselijke adel die zich bedreigd voelt enz. niet uitgewerkt is. Het is het gebrek aan intrige en snelheid dat zulk een serie de das omdoet. Als er geen ontwikkeling is van in het begin (de komst van de Fransen) dan is er ook geen interessante wijdere plot die het initiële comedy-niveau van een lachwekkende situatie overstijgt.

‘Allo ‘Allo! heeft dat wel. Er was een duidelijke ontwikkeling van de eerste aflevering tot de laatste. Terwijl de plot van een aflevering draait om het laten ontsnappen van de British Airmen, zoals een aflevering van FC De Kampioenen draait rond een misverstand of iedereen tegen DDT, weet elke kijker dat het weer verkeerd zal gaan, zoals elke FC De Kampioenen-kijker weet dat DDT het onderspit zal delven of dat Carmen het weer verkeerd heeft begrepen. Waar het bij De Kampioenen stopt, gaat het echter verder bij ‘Allo ‘Allo!. De steevaste cock-up van het verzet is nooit de enige mop. Geleidelijk aan wordt de wijdere plot afgewikkeld: “The Fallen Madonna (with the big Boobies) by Van Klomp” heeft eerst twee kandidaat-eigenaars. Renée die het wil om te verkopen en de Duitsers die het hebben in beslag genomen en die het zelf willen voor na de oorlog. Als Hitler er lucht van krijgt, wil hij het ook hebben en stuurt de Gestapo (Herr Flick) om het te bemachtigen. Herr Flick wil het natuurlijk voor zichzelf houden en beslist van Hitler te bedriegen en hem een vervalsing te sturen. Bovendien wil het verzet ook een deel van het geld. Om te vermijden dat René er het leven bij inschiet en niets van het geld ziet, wordt er van in het begin een plan bedacht: één vervalsing en één echt schilderij. Van het moment dat Herr Flick ook interesse toont, komen er dus nog twee vervalsingen bij. Uiteindelijk zullen er vijf vervalsingen zijn en 1 echt schilderij. Het feit dat het verzet René onder druk zet en Gruber een oogje heeft op René maken de zaak er niet simpeler op, want iedereen heeft wel een belang dat niet strookt met de plannen van General von Klinkerhoffen of van de Gestapo, of van het verzet. Iedereen werkt dus uiteindelijk elkaar tegen en raakt verstrikt in een web van problemen zodat op een gegeven moment ze dingen moeten doen waardoor ze eigenlijk hun eigen kamp gaan tegenwerken (zoals het verzet dat de Duitsers uit een krijgsgevangenenkamp voor Britten gaat bevrijden omdat ze er anders mee dreigen René te arresteren, of de Duitsers die Renés escapades over het hoofd zien omdat ze graag in Renés café komen).

De situaties in ‘Allo ‘Allo! zijn ook zeer erg doorgedreven, zoals in Fawlty Towers. Niets is te gek. Moest het verzet zo te werk zijn gegaan, het Duitse leger had hen snel ontdenkt. Moest een hoteleigenaar zo te werk gaan, zijn hotel zou snel leeglopen (alhoewel de serie wel gebaseerd was op een hotel aan de Engelse kust), maar dat is nu net wat het minder realistisch en grappiger maakt.

Woordspelingen zijn hier ook niet ver af. Arthur Bostrom in zijn rol als Secret Agent Crabtree is een mooi staaltje dubbelzinnige woordspeling. Zijn zogezegd slechte Frans verschuilt een schat aan dubbelzinnigheden. “Good moaning” is niet alleen een verbasterd “Good morning” (met een gevocaliseerde r “mo-ning”), maar verschuilt ook het woord moaning als “zeuren”. Regelmatig spreekt hij van “pissing” (i.p.v. “passing”) wat refereert naar urineren. “I pissed your ciffy”. "I heard a shat" verschuilt "shat" als de OVT van het werkwoord "shit" dat niet alleen een "onbeleefd" woord is, maar dat ook nog eens zoiets al "kakken" betekent. Dit is een concept dat totaal los staat van de situatie, maar dat op zich fantastisch grappig is. Het is an sich niet grappig dat hij elke keer “good moaning” zegt als hij binnenkomt, maar het maakt de weg vrij voor zijn optreden en bereidt de kijker voor op weer een dubbelzinnigheid. De kijker lacht al bij de gedachte alleen en dat is waarom al na zijn eerste optreden, iedereen de volgende morgen op het bureau aankwam en “good moaning” wenste aan iedereen.

Maar de woordspelingen beperken zich niet tot Crabtree alleen. Ze bevinden zich ook, dan meer van seksuele aard, in andere situaties. Als Herr Flick in seizoen zes in zijn ondergoed, na een mislukt complot waarbij hij zich had vermomd, bij Helga binnenwandelt met een grote bal om zijn enkel in afwachting van een ondervraging door Colonel von Strohm, vraagt Helga hem: “Would you like to rest it on the desk?” (“Zou u het graag op het bureau laten rusten?”) De it heeft duidelijk voor het publiek niet alleen een praktische connotatie als verwijzend naar de bal om Flicks enkel, maar ook een seksuele connotatie vermits Herr Flick en Helga ooit een koppel zijn geweest. De grap wordt afgerond met Van Smallhausen die binnenwandelt met een kleine kogel aan zijn enkel en de vraag: “Why does he have a small one?” (“Waarom heeft hij een kleintje?”) Zo is er ook Bertorelli die op een bepaald moment een cadeautje voor Helga bij zich heeft. Hij heeft een gedichtje gemaakt en impliceert een rijm met titties (tietjes), naar Helga’s boezem kijkend. Alhoewel hij dit niet expliciet zegt (wat te vulgair is voor de BBC), heeft het publiek dit duidelijk door en maakt Helga hem duidelijk dat hij daar niet aan moet denken. Niet dat dat in zijn gedichtje stond, natuurlijk, maar ondertussen heeft iedereen er wel aan gedacht. Ook “the back passage” van René is erg populair.

Fawlty Towers is dan van een totaal andere orde. Er is niet zozeer sprake van referenties, intrige of woordspeling, nee, gewoon situationele comedy gone mad. In John Cleese eigen woorden was de zieligheid van Basil Fawlty de grootste verdienste van de serie. Humor en verdriet liggen erg dicht bij elkaar en de situaties waarin Basil verzeild zijn voor hemzelf vrij pijnlijk te noemen, maar voor het publiek grappig omdat ze anders afgebeeld worden. De situaties die zich afspelen in dat hotel zijn niet meer realistisch, maar daarom zijn ze net zo grappig. De uitgangssituaties zijn doorgaans gewoon, maar het is de overdreven reactie van Basil die de situatie meestal nodeloos verergerd. De legendarische uitspraak “Don’t mention the war” ("Spreek niet over de oorlog.") als er Duitsers op komst zijn, start een situatie waarin de vooroordelen van Fawlty naar Duitsers duidelijk op de voorgrond komen. Als hij denkt dat er een ongetrouwd koppel samen een kamer heeft, bespioneert hij ze enz.

Het is dus niet wat er aan het begin van een serie is (de uitgangssituatie) die belang heeft. Herkenning… Blackadder herkent niemand, want het is een totaal fictief personage, alhoewel zijn frustratie wel medelijden opwekt. Elizabeth I is nooit zo afgebeeld. Ze werd eerder afgebeeld als een sterke vrouw, maar haar rol als “vervelende tiener die alles te zeggen heeft” (of de onrechtvaardigheid ervan) werkt wel verrassend. Ditzelfde thema herhaalt zich in de derde serie waar Prince George een groot Baldrick-gehalte heeft. Enig verschil is natuurlijk, dat Baldrick mag worden afgeblaft van tijd tot tijd, maar dat dat bij een prins natuurlijk niet past... Alleen als de rollen omgedraaid zijn. In die zin werkt FC De Kampioen misschien wel herkennend, maar meelijwekkend? Nee. De enige die nog medelijden opeiste was Oscar: hij had een vrouw en een dochter die niet naar hem luisterden en een voetbalploeg al van hetzelfde en hij wilde het toch zo graag zo goed doen… Toen hij vertrok was er geen enkele figuur in de serie meer die sympathie opwekte bij de kijker. DDT, Bernard T Waterslaeghers en Fernand wekken niet genoeg medelijden op en zijn eerder de vijand. Een potentieel zeer goed comedy-personage zoals DDT met een tirannieke moeder en een spraakgebrek die koste wat het kst beter wil worden dan Van Roost, maa die jammer genoeg er de kenis net voor heeft, wordt gebombardeerd tot vijand waardoor hij de helft van zijn comedy-waarde verliest. Het probleem is ook grotendeels dat er in de serie geen enkel hoofdpersonage is. Alle personages zijn even belangrijk, waardoor een groot potentieel verloren gaat. Toegeven, ‘Allo ‘Allo! had een grote cast, maar het grootste deel daarvan had maar één of twee verschijningen in een aflevering. René begon altijd een aflevering met een samenvatting van wat er gebeurd was en daarna begon het verhaal, Crabtree kwam één keer iets zeggen, Michelle kwam ook één/twee keer, Edith moest één keer zingen en voor de rest werd het verhaal afgewikkeld, met de moeder die één keer moest roepen: “Will nobody ‘ear ze cries of an old woman!” ("Hoort hier niemand het geschreeuw van een arme oude vrouw?!") en René die één keer moest Ivette omhelzen en moest ontdenkt worden door Edith. René was hier weldegelijk duidelijk de hoofdfiguur. De plot draaide immers rond hem en zijn café alleen. In FC De Kampioenen draait de plot eigenlijk om wat? Niet om DDT of zijn opvolgers, niet om Pascal en haar café, niet om Pol en Doortje, niet om Boma. De reeks hoofdfiguren is te groot. De plot draait om een (slechte) voetbalploeg, maar de uitgangssituatie is na twintig jaar nog altijd dezelfde: een slechte voetbalploeg bestaande uit mensen, die een sjacheraar in de buurt hebben… In zekere zin is de serie vergelijkbaar met Oh! Doctor Beeching waarin het personeel van een Noord-Engels station in de jaren zestig een nieuwe stationschef Cecil Parkin krijgt, die het station a.h.w. moet redden van sluiting nu Doctor Beeching (legendarisch voor het dramatisch inperken van het steengoede openbaar vervoer in England) een studie maakt. Aanvankelijk wordt het iedereen tegen Parkin, maar geleidelijk aan wordt het Parkin en iedereen tegen Doctor Beeching. Alhoewel de serie nu niet zulk een groot succes was, mede door het feit dat er weinig mogelijke situaties waren waardoor de plot snel uitgeput was (zoals bij FC De Kampioenen), stond het in de traditie van klassieke Britse Comedy in de zin dat woordspelingen en geheimen weer een grote rol speelden. Maar zelfs hier was er een verdoken hoofdpersonage: Parkin zelf. Een man die van bescheiden komaf is, die opgeklommen is tot onderstationschef en die nu, in dit afgelegen station waar hij promotie moet maken, zijn oude liefde tegenkomt van tijdens de oorlog (May). De liefde laait weer op, maar zij is getrouwd en blijkt een dochter te hebben die moet verwekt zijn rond de tijd dat Parkin vertrok… Het is die dynamiek die de serie drijft. Iedereen tegen Parkin vergt dat May, nu serveuse van het stationsbuffet) ook hieraan meedoet, maar zij kan dit niet omdat ze medelijden heeft met Parkin en verdedigd hem contant tot grote verbazing van de anderen. Parkin denkt dat hij de vader van haar dochter is (wat uiteindelijk niet blijkt waar te zijn) en mede daardoor wordt hij opnieuw verliefd op May, met alle gevolgen van dien voor Mays man Jack die ziekelijk jaloers is (waarschijnlijk uit onzekerheid). Jack is stationschef ad interim geweest en voelt zich nu op twee fronten bedreigd door Parkin. Parkin wordt bovendien geminacht door iedereen voor zijn posh-heid en May heeft haar geheim nooit aan iemand verteld.

Fawlty Towers had ook een duidelijk hoofdpersonage, zoals Blackadder. En allemaal hebben ze een duidelijk kleinere cast, of een kleinere regelmatige cast. ‘Allo ‘Allo! heeft dan wel een cast van minstens twintig acteurs, maar gebruikt er maar echt 8 en de rest van de cast vervuld zijn rol als “middel om”: de British Airmen zeggen 1 keer “hello!” en komen eventueel eens terug in een situatie die hen past (oefenen voor het ontsnappen), Michelle komt 1 keer haar plan uit de doeken doen, Crabtree komt 1 keer een “message” geven van Michelle, Mr Alfonse komt ook eens zijn plicht doen, Herr Flick komt onder de duiven van de anderen schieten. Soms hebben ze een grotere rol, soms een kleinere, maar ze zijn “middel om” en verschaffen de kern René, Edith, Ivette en Mimi aan de ene kant, en Colonel von Strohm, Gruber, Bertorelli en Helga aan de andere kant een excuus voor hun bestaan en René in het bijzonder een probleem. Geleidelijk aan wordt de rol van Herr Flick wel groter, maar alleen na een lange tijd als we hem kennen. Hij zal echter nooit zelf een hoofdrol krijgen. In Fawlty Towers zijn het de gasten die de cast een reden van bestaan geven met de problemen die aan hen vasthangen. In Blackadder zijn het niet zozeer gastpersonages die het verhaal maken, maar historische gebeurtenissen (het eerste woordenboek, de vloek rond Macbeth, de verkiezing van William Pitt jr) of grote problemen van alledag (geen geld, verliefdheid op een jongen, spionage). Niets van dit alles speelt bij FC De Kampioenen. Er is niets dat de cast een reden van bestaan geeft, behalve hun eigen misverstanden en wens om hun “vijand” eronder te krijgen.

Het Eiland had ook twee duidelijke personages die medelijden opwekten: Alain en Guido Pallemans en daarna Michel Drets. Alle drie zijn ze meelijwekkend. Maar wat daar dan weer misliep was het feit dat het impliciete conflict dat gecreëerd wordt door het benoemen van een dienstlid tot manager van dezelfde dienst, niet ver genoeg werd uitgebouwd. Het personage van Lydia Protut was dan wel potentieel heel grappig (men vraagt zich af hoe ze ooit zo ver is gekomen), er was nog een ander sterker personage à la Bucky nodig om Pallemans helemaal de gordijnen in te jagen. Als Bucky dan eindelijk op het toneel komt, heeft hij te maken met een Michel Drets die zich makkelijk laat manipuleren en niet genoeg comedy-waarde heeft omdat hij te rustig is. Daardoor werd het einde eerder een drama dan een comedy.
Wat is er dus nodig voor goede Vlaamse comedy?

1 Als een mens drie keer kan kijken en het nog altijd hilarisch kan vinden, dan is het goed. Elke serie die alleen gedragen wordt door de situatie is niet meer leuk eenmaal de kijker weet wat er komt. Woordspeling en dubbelzinnigheid, daarentegen, blijven grappig.

2 Zorg voor een robuste basis met een hoofdpersonage en een aantal sidekicks. Te veel hoofdpersonages scheppen verwarring in het scenario.

3 Wees niet bang voor personages die komen en gaan. Gastpersonages zijn een grote vernieuwer en moeten niet altijd dezelfde zijn.

4 Zorg voor verrassing. De clou is geweest? Niets is minder waar, maak er nog een onverwacht staartje aan, desnoods later in de aflevering, of drijf een uitdrukking in een andere richting waarover de kijker nog niet gedacht had, laat een personage iets onverwachts doen, etc.

5 Zorg voor snelheid. Het probleem vooral met Vlaamse series, of het nu telenovelles zijn of komedies, is dat ze steevast te traag zijn. De spanning van het plan moet er nog zijn op het moment dat het plan in werking treedt. De spanning van het misverstand moet nog vers in het eheugen zitten als de clou eraan komt. Aan het einde van de aflevering mag het begin niet voelen alsof het een halfuur geleden plaats had, het moet maar vijf minuten geleden gebeurd zijn.

6 One-liners zijn goed, maar de comedy mag er niet op steunen.

7 Als er parodieën gemaakt worden, maak ze dan op zichzelf. 'Allo 'Allo! was een parodie op Secret Army, dat in samenweking met de BRT was gemaakt, maar steunt volledig op zichzelf. De kijker moet Secret Army niet gezien hebben om 'Allo 'Allo! te kunnen smaken.

8 Wees niet bang voor serieuze thema’s. Yes (Prime) Minister heeft geen andere plot dan een minister met veel illusies die hervormingen wil doorvoeren en een permanent secretary die die hervormingen niet wil… Maar drie personages: de minister Jim Hacker, Sir Humphry Appleby (permanent secretary) en de ietwat pedante private secretary Bernard Woolley. Thatcher zelf vond de serie zo grappig dat ze de Downing Street-kat die zomaar kwam opdagen op een dag, Humphry heeft genoemd.

9 Niet elk jaar moet een serie hebben en niet elk seizoen moet van dezelfde lengte zijn.

10 Ga vooral niet te lang door, al zijn de kijkcijfers goed. Er is niets zo erg als roemloos ten onder gaan. Er moet altijd nog materiaal over zijn als men stopt. Fawlty Towers heeft twee seizoenen van zes afleveringen gehad, Blackadder vier seizoenen over 9 jaar van zes afleveringen, Yes (Prime) Minister 5, Extras twee, The Office ook twee, Oh! Doctor Beeching ook twee, You rang M’Lord ook twee en Keeping up Appearances 5. ‘Allo ‘Allo! is een uitzondering met zijn 9 seizoenen over tien jaar. Twintig jaar, zoals FC De Kampioenen is dus zeker niet de norm.

11 Ga vooral niet voor een publiekspleaser, of toch niet wat men denkt dat dat is. Compromissen zijn op de BBC nooit gesloten. Wie niet graag kijkt, zet de tv af. Een beetje controverse kan nooit kwaad. Niets is te gek. Goede dingen worden meestal niet door iedereen gesmaakt.

12 Herhaal niet eindeloos. Een herhaling plannen na 2 jaar is veel te vroeg. De mensen moeten de serie vergeten zijn om weer te willen kijken. Herhaal dan ook niet elke zomer. Maak liever iets nieuws.

13 Wees niet bang voor overdreven gekheid. Comedy moet niet realistisch zijn, het moet leuk zijn. Een grap gedaan? Niets is minder waar. Drijf de grap door tot een nog hoger niveau., dat werkt verrassend en men ligt ermee in een deuk.

14 Wees ook niet bang voor parodie en satire. Lach vooral met uzelf. Laat vooral de politiek niet afschrikken, er is daar veel voer voor mooi materiaal en intelligente comedy. Als mensen niet graag intelligente comedy zien, dan zetten ze maar af, er zijn genoeg dvd’s van Gaston en Leo. De tijd van hen is voorbij, laten we nu meer iets maken dat aanleunt bij de moderne generatie die graag naar Fawlty Towers, ‘Allo ‘Allo! en dat soort dingen kijkt.

De Vlaamse comedy is volgens mij blijven hangen bij André Van Duijn en Gaston en Leo. Niets tegen die mensen, maar Gaston en Leo gaan al mee sinds de jaren… zestig (?) en André Van Duijn al sinds de jaren zeventig. Vernieuwing is een must.

Het Eiland was een goede poging, maar was nog niet gek genoeg. De serie had gebrek aan dynamiek omdat er niet genoeg comedy-personages waren. Liesje en Free hadden niet genoeg van dat zielige om goede comedy-personages te zijn. Waarom zitten ze er dan tussen? Ze zouden er moeten tussen gezeten hebben om sympathie op te wekken à la Guido Pallemans (de normalen tussen de gekken), maar dat was niet het geval. Waarom dan zulke personages erbij hebben? Vervang ze door beklaagbare desnoods herkenbare mensen en ziedaar, eureka. The Office waarop Het Eiland duidelijk geïnspireerd was, was veel grappiger omdat alles draaide rond de zielige manager die duidelijk geen erg had in wat er allemaal gebeurde achter zijn rug.

Onthou het VRT: vernedering of beklagenswaardigheid is alles. Als er vernederd wordt of in een moeilijke situatie gebracht wordt, wordt er gelachen. Basil Fawlty wordt vernederd, Blackadder wordt vernederd, René Artois wordt vernederd, Hyacinth Bucket wordt vernederd of vernedert zichzelf, Jim Hacker wordt steevast vernederd door Humphry. Extras was meestal zelfs teenkrullend van de vernedering. Allemaal zijn ze te beklagen. Hoe erger hun zieligheid, hoe erger het publiek lacht. Schadenfreude is nu eenmaal erg aanstekelijk, hoe erg dat ook mag zijn. Gebruik dat, VRT, en maak eens iets goeds.

And the millionth English Word is...

Author: Dorien Knockaert

Language – Brussels – English daily acquires fifteen new words. That is what Global Language Monitor (an American technology-company) has calculated. According to its statistics, tomorrow the language will acquire its millionth word, while Dutch dictionary Van Dale not even counts 300,000 words…

From our editor

Will it be ‘de-friend’, ‘Mobama’ or ‘financial tsunami’? Global Language Monitor (GLM) that specialises in language trends, is eager to increase tension by Wednesday afternoon. Then it will finally announce what is, according to its measuring-system, the millionth English word. With its campaign, GLM wants to draw attention to the increasing growth of English and plans to proclaim it ‘the first real world-language’. ‘In 1960, 250 million people spoke English, mainly in the ex-colonies of the United Kingdom. Today, 1.53 billion people use English as their mother-tongue, their second or work-language,’ GLM says on its website.

Paul JJ Payack, the man behind GLM – not a linguist, but technology-expert – says he is totally sure that his software only counts words that are used a lot or that carry a lot of weight within their meaning. So for example names of unknown chemicals it does not take into consideration. The reason for his list being so enormous is simply the phenomenal growth of the English language, he says. ‘Daily 14.7 words enter the language.’

A million is so spectacularly much that the number encounters a lot of doubt, certainly among linguists. Also the fact that GLM’s system and aims keep on being quite vague, does not contribute to its trustworthiness. And whoever compares the number to leading dictionaries of English, sees a very big discrepancy. Merriam-Webster’s Third New International Dictionary has 476,000 words in it, Dutch dictionary Van Dale round about 268,000.

Although, dictionary-writers do not put all words they encounter in their dictionary. ‘It is totally wrong to presume that a word does not exist if it is not in a dictionary,’ says Ruud Hendricks, head editor of Van Dale. ‘We only put a word in the paper-edition of our dictionary if it has been in regular use for a number of years in newspapers and the like. And in order to avoid making the dictionary uselessly thick, we also take words out. For the electronic yearbooks we publish, we are less complacent: in there we will signal a new term much faster. This year, new terms will include a lot of expressions that popped up in the reporting on the financial crisis. Some, though, will disappear fairly quickly again.’

A language is uncountable for various reasons. Linguists know that. ‘Vocabulary is something infinite: one can always make new composites. We do not put all those into a dictionary as the meaning of most is instantly clear.’

It is right to say, however, that English is a very big and flexibly growing language, confirms Hendrickx. ‘The grammar imposes fewer limitations on word-use than in Dutch and the vocabulary is since the early days rich and divers: the basic material of English is Germanic, but because of the Normans, a lot of Latin words came into it and the Vikings added some Scandinavian ones. It is because of that that the English can say ‘pig’ to a pig that is alive, and ‘pork’ to a dead one. They have a treasure of language-material at their disposal.’

The nominees:

Financial Tsunami: the worldwide financial restructuring which made in a few months’ time collapse gigantic capitals and financial institutions.

Zombie banks: banks that would not exist anymore if they hadn’t been saved with public money.

Jai Ho: a Hindi expression that means as much as ‘halleluja’ and that became popular in English through the hit-film Slumdog Millionnaire.

Chiconomics: the art of looking chic and stylish despite the economic crisis.

Mobama: the style of the new American First Lady

Octomom: a mother of octuplets.

Green-washing: like one white-washes money, one can green-wash a piece of old rubbish: upgrading through presenting it as an environmentally friendly recycled product.

Slow Food: the opposite of fast-food: healthy, locally produced food.

De-friend: scrapping a ‘friend’ from your contacts list on a social networking site.

(the two articles were translated from De Standaard)

What Hendrickx forgets to say, however, is that the Taalunie (the Language Union between the Netherlands and Flanders (yes, we speak the same language!)) makes a sport of it to prohibit expressions, grammar-constructions and what-not because they are ‘false’… Despite the fact that they have been used by the great majority of people mostly in one part of the Union for years. If the construction is too French, it is called a Gallicism, too English equals an Anglicism, a second word for an old one (like the case ‘umbrella’ and ‘rain-screen’, but there are more ridiculous cases than that) is called a Purism, too old is an Archaism. What he also does not mention, and I suppose that is because he is now head editor of Van Dale (the leading dictionary in the Dutch language, like the Oxford English Dictionary in English), is that Flemish words (regionally used in Flanders mostly) are labeled in the dictionary ‘Southern Dutch’ while really Dutch words (from the Netherlands), known by Flemish people but never used because they are Dutch, are not labeled at all. True, we speak the same language, but it is a case like American and British English, with the same spelling. British English is not worth more than American English... British spelling is not worth more than American spelling. They are equally right, in their context. Therefore they are labeled the same...

Actually, let’s be frank, Dutch is a very pedantic language and English is not. English is free and just because of that it is used all over the world by people who add their own words to it… English would never have become a world language, if it had had the same approach as Dutch (‘no, that is not right, you have to say it like this.’). Jai Ho would just never have entered the Dutch list because it means the same as ‘halleluja’ and we already have that and so it is a Purism, probably. So would be the lot of ‘green-washing’ as that is a euphemism for ‘recycle’ and ‘chiconomics’ would not stand a chance because no-one would think about it.

Lost in Austen, an analysis (4/4)

Episode 4 starts with the acknowledgement of Amanda, that never seeing Darcy again is the worst she will have to endure. Like she thought, and like it was clear to everyone, Darcy asks Caroline’s hand in marriage, although not without regret judging by his look… At this time, though, the most interesting part starts, both of the book and 1995 adaptation: Lydia runs off. This time not with Wickham (because he is an honourable guy now…) but with Bingley, who is sick of society. The two have learned a great deal of Miss Price and desire to get away from it all to go and learn in her place of abode: Hammersmith. Of course, not realising that the Hammersmith Amanda comes from is not the Hammersmith that they will go to…

Here for a first time we see discontent from Jane’s side about her father for whom ‘‘tis time he rose from his chair to do something for the good of the family’. Darcy is shocked, and obviously feels guilty, despite the fact that he does not want to tell Amanda that. But she sums it up for him: ‘You do whatever the hell you want, and afterwards call it principle.’ And she reproaches him that he and Caroline are made for each other… It was also no doubt principle from Caroline’s side to break his engagement up?

So, Mrs Bennet and Amanda return to Longbourn and meet Mr Collins’s three brothers: Probity, Elysium and Tinkler or Cymbal. Probity meaning integrity, Elysium being the place where the virtuous and heroes go after death, and Cymbal/Tinkler being derived from St Pauls first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 13, verse 1 (Love, the best way for all): ‘I may speak in tongues of men or of angels, but if I am without love, I am a sounding gong or a clanging cymbal.’ Or so at least it is according to Mr Collins. Although, with later Tinky Winky from the Teletubbies popping up, and Tinkler amusing himself with his trousers, we might be more inclined to think that Tinkler is a reference to something more concealed in the days of Austen… But more on that later… The allusion to St Paul’s letter is not so very far-fetched though as it is a text about the use of love: that one can surely do everything right, but that one is nothing without love; although one has money, belief and what-not, one is nothing without love. The three greatest things are faith, hope and love and the most important of the three is love. This is what Amanda is continuously searching for and what the others miss. Indeed, they live according to the principles evoked in the three brothers: Integrity (Probity), the after-life (Elysium) and without love (Cymbal), integrity being the most important. However, the three brothers are at the same time ridiculous (as in Austen’s satire), as Probity is sleeping, Elysium is drugged and Cymbal, as said before, amuses himself with his trousers. Integrity is indeed not real integrity if one is forced to be a certain way because of others, thus real integrity could be called asleep. Elysium is not a place where virtuous and heroes go if virtuousness and heroism are forced upon them. Cymbal, as it is used in 1 Corinthians 13:1 is not at all positive, but rather negative. As such, Andrews certainly gives a message in the three brothers.

After a little pause in which Mr Bennet decides to read a book instead of wanting to go and look for Lydia, Amanda can still persuade him to do something about Lydia’s honour and all three (Mr and Mrs Bennet and Amanda) leave for Hammersmith, where Bingley and Lydia have gone. There, they find not Amanda’s place as that is locked up because her parents Reginald and Nora have gone to Bath (something that Wickham has invented as an excuse), but Lydia and Bingley in the Jerusalem Inn… As they find them, they find Bingley making a spear like the ‘noble savage’ of Rousseau (this erroneously though), the fundamentally good person that has been corrupted by society and lost his skills because of it . Lydia, on the other hand is ‘bored’, by the lack of society as it seems… Darcy then turns up, making an excuse to save his friend, but Bingley protests it. Mr Bennet now challenges Bingley to a duel, Bingley who notably defends himself with his spear instead of a sword. Mr Bennet ends up hitting his head on the mantelpiece with great bleeding as a consequence. Despite Darcy sending for his physician ‘who will be [t]here within the hour’, Wickham saves the day with a woman who stitches Mr Bennet up.

Amanda now feels an urge to see Elizabeth, and passes through the door of the Jerusalem Inn through the door of a mobile toilet on a building site into modern day Hammersmith again. Her need now opened the door again. We might think she would feel at ease, but oddly enough she looks puzzled and does not know what to do. People are so touched by it, they hand her money as if she were begging and destitute. Nevertheless, she takes up the thread again and goes to her apartment, where she finds Michael who asks her where she has been, has apparently sent 75 texts and spoken 1,5 hours of voicemail so far. We could say that at last now she knows he cares… He has also sold his Bughatti to procure a holiday to Barbados, which was originally meant to be a honeymoon (aaah), but which will now serve as a normal holiday, as marriage seems out of the question. On his new motorcycle they decide to go and see Elizabeth who has become a nanny to the children of Dr and Mr Rosenberg. When Amanda and her boyfriend are sitting on the bike, she suddenly sees a very strange tableau In the modern streets of Hammersmith: on the side of the road, at the traffic lights, she sees Darcy she thought she had just left in the Jerusalem Inn; she sees a man, looking a little like her before: scared, lost and totally unaware of where he is, destitute; a man in need of help. She orders Michael to stop and runs to him, and it is then that he admits his mistake:

Amanda: You followed me?
Darcy: Are my wits disordered by opium? What is this dreadful place?
A: This is London, my London.
D: I will tell you this Miss Price, and it is true: the assembly rooms at Meryton. I danced with you, not in order to spare my friend, because I wanted to dance with you. Our entire acquaintance has been informed by my refusal to acknowledge this. But I have been blinded by pride. Charles, Georgiana, Wickham, you. I was calamitously mistaken in my judgment of you all. A fellow less big-headed would have realised from the start that what I felt for you was… What I felt for you was… love. I love you. I followed you to this infernal place because I would follow you anywhere. I would hallow hell to be with you.
A: What about Caroline?
D: I do not care enough to marry Caroline Bingley.
A: Do not tell me she is not a maid.
D: Of course she is a maid. I cannot marry her because I do not love her. I love you.
A: Ok, before we go any further there is someone you have to meet… right now, take my hand.

This dialogue stands on the same level as the dialogue in the original and the 1995 adaptation where Darcy proposes for the second time and pours his heart out. Cowan’s Darcy now admits to his pride, which provoked bad judgment and professes to love Amanda finally. Thus, he throws his buttresses off and like Firth’s Darcy, has swum in his pond. He has now washed himself of pride and prejudice, unlike what we were inclined to believe when he went literally into the pond according to the wishes of Amanda, swimming in the modern world, via the door that ‘[his] need’ obviously opens. He needs to become helpless, destitute with no buttresses or references at all in order to acknowledge that he loves Amanda.

Together Darcy and Amanda cross London on the bus to go and see Elizabeth. It is here that Tinky Winky from the Teletubbies comes into play: on the bus, there is a child reading a book Tinky Winky Counts. When they turn up at Elizabeth’s place (or the Rosenbergs’ place) Darcy looks to the side, to a pile of rubbish at the door (which was obviously Elizabeth’s doing) and says: ‘The gentleman on the Bath chair, I have seen his likeness’, he picks up the Teletubby and says: ‘Tinky Winky’. Very funny, certainly when we see the controversy about Tinky Winky a few years ago: Tinky Winky had been found gay by an American minister because of the red magic bag that looks like a woman’s handbag (purple boy + handbag + reversed triangle = gay). The controversy went so far that children’s psychologists were needed to calm the people down about possible subliminal messages about homosexuality in the Teletubbies. The fact that Tinky Winky is professed to sit on a Bath chair by Darcy, could be called an indication of Andrews about the restraint of Regency Society: a Bath chair namely looks the same as a three-wheel buggy, and that was obviously what stood at the door of the Rosenbergs (Elizabeth not knowing what the hell to do with it), but the thing was not used for babies in those days, the thing was used to bring invalids to the baths in Bath (hence its name Bath chair, maybe also given due to its shape as old-fashioned bathtub). As Tinky Winky is sitting on a Bath chair, might we suppose that ‘he couldn’t’, like Caroline professes that she will marry Darcy despite not wanting men in her life emotionally at all, she ‘can’t’ be lesbian ? Mr Collins’s brother Tinkler might also be a reference to Tinky Winky. He at least amuses himself with his trousers, as does his brother by the way, who has notably a very clear red handkerchief that could refer to Tinky Winky’s red magic bag... Why, is the question. However, the verb ‘tinkle’ can also mean ‘urinate’, so the connection between the male part and Collins might be the reason why Lydia bursts out laughing at the name when it is first introduced. But, nonetheless Tinky Winky on the Bath chair highlights a certain problem as to love referenced in St Paul’s letter to the Corinthians: ‘I am nothing without love’, yet for lesbians, gays and cross-class couples, there was no possibility to love, because it was inappropriate. They were invalids, as they were not allowed to love. The controversy with Tinky Winky being gay highlighted the fact that our society is not yet freed from gay-fear and is more restrained in that respect than we’d like to admit. However, gays are certainly better off now than then. Furthermore, the Teletubbies live in an ideal world where everything just seems to happen: they get ‘Tubby Custard’ from a mysterious machine. Where actually the custard is made is the question. In the real world, babies also get fed custard, made by their mummy. Whether they know that, is the question. They are also ordered to go to sleep, which they do nicely. In a certain sense, Darcy’s and the rest’s existence is also a little mysterious. Maybe even more so than ours, as they did not know about evolution, and their existence as rich people was given by God (‘there is no accident in birth’). Essentially they also live in a world ‘where everything just happens’. However, Amanda just might have perceived it as a little too ideal a world, where we like to escape. Not a real world, where people lived and had their own worries. In that, the Teletubby-land that she had in her head, does not really exist and Darcy calls it ‘a pretty drear thing’. Naturally, as one is always observed by servants, one does not have a private life… Nor can he occupy himself with anything at all. It is not the land of Milk and Honey, apparently, but so is neither Amanda’s own land (Hammersmith) of which Bingley and Lydia thought the same.

On the other hand, the Teletubbies seem happy, despite the fact that they have to do certain things… But is that not the case because they do not ask themselves whether they want that ‘Tubby Custard’ or whether they want to sleep? Mrs Bennet was also ‘happy’ in her marriage, Mr Bennet was at ease in his library, Darcy was ‘what [he] [was]’ and Caroline did not at all seem to regret having to marry Darcy in spite of being a lesbian. It is only because they start asking themselves what they want and why they can’t get it (by admiring Amanda), that they start to be unhappy. So it was for Amanda, too, when she read Pride and Prejudice for the first time…

When Amanda and Darcy go into the Rosenbergs’ place, Elizabeth takes Tinky Winky from Darcy and they pass into the living room-kitchen, where all appliances are on: the stereo, the TV (without sound, Clementi on the background) with a music program on, the iron, the cooker, the hood above it, the laptop… (This ludicrous scene compels us to ask ourselves the question whether all those appliances are really needed… Whether it is not ‘skill that we have forfeited’ because of society. Certainly when we acknowledge that we are now obsessed with our foot-print) When Darcy is strangely interested in the iron, Amanda calls him by name to prevent him from burning himself and Elizabeth recognises the name. She shouts out: ‘You are my husband!’ Darcy is puzzled, but professes ‘not [to] recall marrying [her]’. She then proceeds looking it up on the laptop and accesses a page Collin Firth-Darcy, but the page above is titled ‘The Darcy-obsession’. Elizabeth and Darcy, in ‘a strange post-modern moment’ as it seems, stare together into the laptop, she strangely informing him about himself, and probably herself also taken in the meantime with the type of man Darcy is (‘The Darcy-obsession’), given that at the start she did not know of a man called Darcy. When she hears of her father, she orders a taxi by credit card and, when they are about to get into the taxi, Michael shows up. A modern duel breaks out between Darcy and Michael, the latter hitting him with his fist, clearly wanting to display his manhood, where Darcy equally gets angry at the sight of Michael ‘lay[ing] violent hands upon Miss Price’. After a separation by Amanda they all return to the door in the bathroom of her apartment. She orders Elizabeth to return to Regency England with Darcy, but the door does not ‘oblige’. When Amanda touches it, however, it does open, but slams shut at Elizabeth. So indeed, Amanda is more in need than Elizabeth to leave the modern world. Michael now threatens Amanda with leaving her if she goes through the door. This however, Amanda does not take and asks him to stop with the macho-behaviour. When he tells her again, she does go through the door, because Darcy ‘will be beaten up’ in modern day London.

When they pass through the door, Darcy professes an amazing urge to sleep and asks for a bed. Further on, Elizabeth and Amanda talk about Charlotte who has left for Africa after the proposal of Collins did not take place. She has also escaped to ‘downtown’ as it seems, or at least to a place where they would go ‘if life became irreparably miserable and lonely.’ That was at least what Charlotte and Elizabeth agreed when they were children…

During that night, Amanda slips into the room of Darcy and sees him holding a letter. He however does not want to loose possession of it and grabs it firmer in his hand when Amanda tries to take it. Instead, she kisses him. In the morning he asks to leave immediately as he had ‘a bad dream’. Elizabeth tells Amanda he is ‘insufferably rude’, but Amanda tells her it is her duty to try. That is not what Elizabeth meant, however, because ‘[she] [is] altered by what [she] ha[s] seen’. Amanda says that about Darcy as well, ‘but he does not remember’ in her view and puts it down to a bad dream. So Elizabeth and Darcy walk in the garden, while she explains the nature of St John’s wort (a means against depression) and tells him that ‘it is important to call the thing by its proper name, however fiendish’. Darcy professes to do his duty, although he does not know why it is his duty (in his own words) to love Elizabeth and invites her to Pemberley to explain the types of wort in his own meadows and to meet his sister.

Now, of course, Lady Catherine arrives to tell off someone… First she addresses Mrs Bennet who has done nothing to promote the matches between her daughters and Mr Collins’s brothers. This however Mrs Bennet does not buy and, while her husband is ‘dying’ in the couch, she says to Lady Catherine: ‘You are a prig, madam, a pander, a common bully. And you cheat at cards!’ She further threatens to scrape out the pigs trough with Lady Catherine. Mr Bennet, impressed at his wife, shouts out in utter amazement: ‘Tally ho, wife!’ and decides to sleep in the bedroom again. When Mr Collins tries to asks his wife Jane why her mother is speaking like that, she tells him off as well: ‘Oh, be quiet you silly man!’ Why would her sisters possibly marry his brothers if they have seen him? Lady Catherine now understands that there is only one person to blame for this rebellion: Amanda. And she speaks to her in the garden, wanting to make a bargain with her: Amanda will leave Regency society and what does she want for that? We all know what she wants: Jane and Collins’s marriage broken up so the first is free to marry Bingley. Lady Catherine then asks whether the marriage was consummated (an essential reason for annulment). Indeed, it was not consummated, because Mr Collins was going through ‘a period of abstinence’ (would this have anything to do with his trouser pocket and his red handkerchief?). And Lady Catherine professes to occupy herself with the annulment just for her own amusement… She further orders Darcy to leave.

Although we might now think that Jane will be over the moon, she again addresses the fact of society: ‘[she] will be despoiled’ and ‘will be the woman who couldn’t inspire her husband to consummate his marriage.’ That is sad in itself and Bingley will not want her. But here, Bingley professes to be ‘through with [society]’ and to want to take her to America. Whether that is really the continent America is doubtful in my opinion, as he there speaks a references to Elegy XIX of John Donne (our ‘new-found-land’ and ‘license my roving hands’ ‘and so forth’):

Elegy XIX

To his Mistress going to Bed

Come, Madam, come, all rest my powers defy,
Until I labour, I in labour lie.
The foe oft-times having the foe in sight,
Is tir'd with standing though he never fight.
Off with that girdle, like heaven's Zone glittering,
But a far fairer world encompassing.
Unpin that spangled breastplate which you wear,
That th'eyes of busy fools may be stopt there.
Unlace your self, for that harmonious chime,
Tells me from you, that now it is bed time.
Off with that happy busk, which I envie,
That still can be, and still can stand so nigh.
Your gown going off, such beautious state reveals,
As when from flow'ry meads th'hills shadow steals.
Off with that wiry Coronet and show
The hairy diadem which on you doth grow:
Now off with those shoes, and then softly tread
In this, love's hallow'd temple, this soft bed.
In such white robes, heaven's Angels us'd to be
Receiv'd by men: thou Angel bringst with thee?
A heaven like Mahomet's Paradice, and though
Ill spirits walk in white, we eas'ly know,
By this these Angels from an evil sprite,
Those set our hairs, but these our flesh upright.
License my roving hands, and let them go,
Behind, before, above, between, below.
O my America! my new-found-land,
My kingdom, safeliest when with one man man'd,
My mine of precious stones: my emperie,
How blest am I in this discovering thee!
To enter in these bonds, is to be free;
Then where my hand is set, my seal shall be.
Full nakedness! All joys are due to thee,
As souls unbodied, bodies uncloth'd must be,
To taste whole joyes. Gems which you women use
Are like Atlanta's balls, cast in mens views,
That when a fool's eye lighteth on a gem,
His earthly soul may covet theirs, not them:
Like pictures or like books gay coverings made
For lay-men, are all women thus array'd.
Themselves are mystick books, which only wee
(Whom their imputed grace will dignify)
Must see rever'd. Then since that I may know;
As liberally, as to a midwife show
Thyself: cast all, yea, this white linen hence,
There is no penance due to innocence.
To teach thee I am naked first; why than,
What needst thou have more covering then a man?

As much as this may be about America, it is certainly as much about the woman. Or as much as it is about the discovery of America, it is certainly as much about the discovery of Donne’s mistress in her naked state. For a poem of 1699, it is unbelievably erotic. In Bingley’s context, I don’t think the place where they are going is the continent America. Although, the idea would fit in the concept of a new society where people are freer and not judged by their acquaintance like in the home-country. Society changes people, and thus they will be much freer than when they stay in England. Free to ‘have 25 children’ and to ‘name them all Amanda, even the boys’. But it is doubtful that Andrews would have ended the story wrongly, as he is very respectful towards the original. His ‘other’ Elizabeth takes the place of Darcy’s wife and so the end of Pride and Prejudice stays upright. Essentially, letting Jane and Bingley go to America is a little far from the original end. As Jane goes from puzzling at America to laughing at the idea, we might just suppose she red the poem as well…

After this problem is solved, Amanda indeed withdraws from society: she will go back to modern Hammersmith. She opens the door, now free to go as she now knows what she wants, but a little letter falls from the latch: the metro-bus ticket Darcy had in his hand that night, with written on it at the back: ‘Not one heartbeat do I forget’. While Amanda drives in a carriage, Elizabeth asks her father what she has to do, stay or go back to Hammersmith. Her father admits to his childishness and tells her it is time he behaved as an adult in adult clothes and stopped clinging to his daughter. This seals obviously the deal: she will go back. There is only one place Amanda can be going now: she arrives at Pemberley where Darcy is looking over his grounds as a Darcy does.

Darcy: Miss Price.
Amanda: Yes. We should celebrate. You asked me a question, I answered it and we didn’t have an argument about it.
D: I did not ask you a question. I made an observation. ‘Miss Price’. The confirmation of your identity, was entirely superfluous. As a result we are now arguing about it. And therefore, you are wrong. (smiles)
A: That’s so sweet. You’re actually trying to make me laugh!
D: Yes. It shall not occur again. (smiles further)
A: And you’re smiling.
D: Nono. I only smile in private, when nobody is looking. (they kiss)

After his sleep, which we might define as a sleep of Sleeping Beauty (a transformation which requires so much energy as to offer no energy anymore for interaction, notably also kissed by his true love!), he acknowledges the unimportance of her non-virginity. When he took his plunge into the modern world, he saw a totally different society, where there is something as gay people, women with a career (Dr Rosenberg and her husband), where ‘negroes’ walk on busses, where women walk around less covered than in his idea, have short hair like men… Elizabeth was changed by that experience, but Darcy also as he has not forgotten or done it away as a bad dream. He does not forget a heartbeat and as such, was also changed by his plunge into the pool of modern society… Firth’s Darcy jumped in his pond to do away with his pride and to be able to respect his in-laws, Cowan’s Darcy jumps into the mobile toilet to do away also with that pride of his. Pride that did not allow him to acknowledge his love for Amanda, pride that did, after that, prevent him from marrying her because she was not a maid, pride that did not allow him to look further than the polished surface of human nature. He would have condemned himself to Caroline (a lesbian conniving bumface) because of that pride. He was also condemning Bingley and Wickham. By looking into his grounds, like Firth’s Darcy, he addresses his human nature, trying to find it back under the layer of society’s polish. Now, he can truly love Amanda. As Elizabeth’s understudy, she is swapped and takes her rightful place.

Amanda, after she leaves Pemberley the first time has succeeded in her struggle and knows what is the matter with her. She has indeed standards. Too bad if the rest of the world cannot have that. It is normal, it is what she wants.

Despite our rights, and our duties which rights imply, we as women have not changed. We still want love, as do men, because without love we are nothing as humans. We can now choose not to stay virgins, we can now choose to leave our husbands, but we can still not be happy without that love and we need it. Secretly we all dream of Darcy and why? Because he is caring, loving and lovely. It is not really ‘Collin Firth in clingy pants’ (the man will be happy to hear that), but it is the personality and mannerisms of Darcy we like. His struggle with himself to get the woman he loves.

To a certain extent Cowan’s Darcy was a little realer than Firth’s Darcy, which Andrews implied in Darcy’s anger at Pride and Prejudice. As Amanda says it in the beginning: ‘they changed his head with make-up’. Firth’s Darcy was the Darcy from the original which everyone fell in love with, the tormented man who swims in his pond. But the man was also rather a type, not a real man, unlike Wentworth who could be called a Darcy more advanced in wholeness of character. Cowan’s Darcy did not need bushy hair, a black horse and dark clothing to be a whole tormented man. Like Wentworth, Cowan’s Darcy has more nuances to himself, giving himself a character buried under restraint fixed by society. It must be what normal people have, and what the man Darcy was inspired on would have had, but it is something missing in Pride and Prejudice. Naturally, because the novel expresses Elizabeth’s views and therefore does not give a full portrait of Darcy as he does not show himself as a whole at first. Wentworth in that respect is much more nuanced and as such ‘realer’ as a character, which Austen’s age when she created him could have to do something with. So was Cowan’s Darcy who is portrayed unsympathetically by modern standards at the start (not looking at the people he speaks to, never smiling, being rather abrupt) and whose frustration and interest is apparent from the start by facial expression. Firth’s Darcy also had facial expressions (that is why we love him), but he was a little softer of character and a little more vulnerable in a typically early romantic way. By giving Cowan’s Darcy a bigger role (more conversations with Amanda), he comes across as arrogant in the beginning (‘I am always stark with liars.’). It is arrogance, though, that is indispensible in the society he lives, but which is repelling to us now. Firth’s Darcy was very early romantic in nature (struggle on an individual level), where Cowan’s Darcy was a little more modern in theme (struggle with the big society in oneself). As such, Cowan is further from Austen’s original, but probably closer to the truth, like he intimates about the impossibility of the things that happen in Pride and Prejudice.

Essentially Andrews carried the satire of Austen through much further than maybe Austen herself had imagined possible. Even with respect to the story of Pride and Prejudice, he carried it to the full. Not only Amanda has a problem with herself that lies under the layer of society, also Darcy, Caroline, Mr and Mrs Bennet are restrained. Only, they don’t know it yet. Until of course, Amanda turns up, for them naturally not restrained which is definitely not true for herself. In a certain way, we could see Elizabeth who gets into the modern world because of ‘[Amanda’s] need’, as the other side of Amanda, the more traditional female side, eventually ending up as nanny (a typical mother-role); the side we admire in those female characters (we all wonder how it would be having Elizabeth’s life). Wickham seems to serve as the same kind of influence as Amanda. He is also one who is not viewed in an ideal light, but certainly has a heart. Although this is not true to the original, it is not impossible that all that happened how Andrews thought of it. Who says that Lydia did not offer herself to Wickham, or even Georgiana? It is because we presume that to be untrue that it is untrue, yet we don’t know. In that, Amanda and Wickham join forces to bring some life into society. It is a fact that Amanda, as she comes from another society, is still less restrained than Wickham. On the other hand Wickham knows much better ‘how things operate’ in the society Amanda has landed into, and so they are an ideal pair. The buttresses have gone from the mansion in the end. And Darcy? He has found nature: as he was before looking at his grounds from the front of his mansion, he is now looking at them from his terrace. He is slowly getting closer, although there is more work to be done apparently at his emotional restraint (‘You are smiling.’ ‘Nono, I only smile in private, when nobody is looking.’)

In carrying Austen’s satire through, Andrews also addressed modern society. Not only Regency society was restrained but today’s society is that too, despite the fact that we don’t notice it and consider ourselves lucky when we watch costume dramas. After all, Darcy professes, ‘this is a free society’. Indeed, he nor Amanda realise that they are subjected to certain influences; they find how they perceive their role in that society as normal. When Amanda reproaches Darcy to be of no use, to ‘have no purpose’, he counters that by saying that ‘[they] must be seen to be unoccupied’. In other words, they must be seen to be able to afford the state of not being occupied. That is why he considers ‘any type of sudden locomotion an example ill-breeding’ and that also includes dancing, shooting, walking, playing cards etc. etc. This could be called the handicap principle, which displays certain behaviour in order to display that one can afford to do that. Notably the peacock’s tail (the very bird that Mr Collins accidentally shot) is such an example: he displays his feathers, rendering himself vulnerable to predators, yet that very principle makes him respectful in the eyes of the peahens. In the meantime this theory in connection with peacocks has been argued against, but it still seems to be significant in Lost in Austen. The class of Darcy ‘must be seen to be unoccupied’ because then can be concluded that they can afford to do that. As a result, Mr Darcy’s life ‘is a pretty drear thing’. Of course, imagine having to do nothing all day, any sudden locomotion is out of the question and there you are, waiting for the day to end… On the other hand, we in our society, cannot be seen to be unoccupied. We must work. If we don’t, we are strange or we cheat the system. So, although we might smile at the idea that Darcy finds that he is living in a free society, we might also smile at our ‘free’ society, because that is not as free as it should be if it were ‘free’. There are certain musts, like in Darcy’s society. Even really rich people, like Darcy, must show their face in this day and age, because otherwise they ‘have no purpose’. Amanda’s reproach was embedded in our perception of use and obsoleteness. In his society, though, Darcy cannot occupy himself because of society, Amanda cannot unoccupy herself because of society… So both are as restrained as each other, although without realising it themselves… Also Michael with his Bughatti is subject to the handicap principle as it displays himself as being able to afford an expensive car, so he is ‘fit to be a mate’. The same as the peacock who shows his feathers: he has survived possible attacks and is more fit to be a mate.

The scene with the appliances is also very judging towards our society… Piranha later professes to be black and not to be able to live ‘without chocolate, electricity or bog paper’ (toilet role). Not the black bit is worrying, but the chocolate, electricity and bog paper are that certainly. Elizabeth who puts on all the appliances in the Rosenbergs’ house and does not seem to need them. She is just wondering at everything. Yet, she puts all appliances on, even the TV she does not care to hear, but likes to see the images… Yet, her employers ‘are anxious about their footprint’. Surely, the footprint of the Bennets was a lot less? But we cannot do without the cooker, TV, stereo, iron, hood, computer, mobile phone etc. etc. anymore although they do not seem to have a clear purpose in themselves… They represent skills that we have forfeited: the stereo and TV entertain us so we do not have to entertain ourselves (with playing music, playing cards, charades, reading etc. ourselves), the iron represents our desire to have something that is permanently hot and to have steam that makes it even easier to iron, the hood above the cooker so our house does not smell of food, the cooker we can regulate the temperature of so we can’t let things burn, light so we have strong light whatever point in the day, a laptop and mobile phone so we are permanently connected with the rest of the world. Like Piranha cannot do without ‘chocolate, electricity or bog paper’ anymore, ‘not even for 10 minutes’, Elizabeth needs to have the appliances on despite her not using them…

Lost in Austen is not only a brilliantly fun series, it is also well-founded and well-referenced with song, philosophy and even psychology. In that, it will hopefully go into television history as another triumph. And maybe, Firth and Cowan could share each other’s fame...

Lost in Austen, an analysis (3/4)

Episode 3 starts with a problem for Amanda: as Mrs Bennet has now had enough of Miss Price she has asked her to leave. But where must Amanda go? Back home! She tries to break the door open this time with a pickaxe, but even then the door does not want to budge. And Amanda, back in her modern day outfit roams through town and whom can she meet but Wickham who ‘see[s] the world the same way’ (episode 2): no care for society and the ways of it, without buttresses, a man on his own two feet. He decides to educate Amanda a little and goes to buy her a dress so she can make up with Jane, who is naturally unhappy about her marriage and the problem with Bingley. Wickham hands her the ‘acquaintance’ of Marie de Cerisay.

Making up with Jane, though, will bring Amanda in the neighbourhood of Rosings Park, the mansion of Darcy’s aunt, where she will naturally encounter Darcy again. Amanda does make up with Jane, and is duly invited to dine at Rosings as she has a message to deliver from Marie de Cerisay in Paris to Lady Catherine. The acquaintance proves more important than her fortune in trade… Then follows a very interesting conversation where Darcy does not seem to know who the de Cersisays are and Lady Catherine does seem to know and informs Darcy in public about the duck pond and the crocodiles (although it is puzzling how the ducks would be able to survive next to the crocodiles)… It seems as if the family they are speaking of is totally non-existent (hence the challenge of Mr Darcy where actually the ‘château’ of the Cesrisays is, in an attempt to disclose Amanda), but as Lady Catherine is desperate not to disappoint the rest of her public, she makes out to know them and makes up a story about a duck pond instead of looking ridiculous herself like Darcy at this point. Darcy is out to ridicule Amanda, but she has now obviously, with the help of Wickham, acquired the right manner of introducing herself and the right façade, as indicated by the fan in front of her face. It is then that the buttress comes into play. We see Caroline Bingley playing at the piano, but she is playing a very appropriate song of Mozart:

Lied der Freiheit (1785)

Wer unter eines Mädchens Hand
Sich als ein Sklave schmiegt,
Und, von der Liebe festgebannt,
In schnöden Fesseln liegt:
Weh dem! Der ist ein armer Wicht,
Er kennt die gold’ne Freiheit nicht.

Wer sich um Fürstengunst und Rang
Mit saurem Schweiß bemüht,
Und, eingespannt, sein Leben lang,
Am Pflug des Staates zieht:
Weh dem! Der ist ein armer Wicht,
er kennt die gold’ne Freiheit nicht.

Wer um ein schimmerndes Metall
Dem bösen Mannon dient,
Und seiner vollen Säcke Zahl
Nur zu vermehren sinnt:
Weh dem! Der ist ein armer Wicht,
Er kennt die gold’ne Freiheit nicht.

Doch wer dies alles leicht entbehrt,
Wonach der Thor nur strebt,
Und froh bei seinem eignen Herd
Nur sich, nicht Andern lebt:
Der ist’s allein der sagen kann,
Wohl mir! Ich bin ein freier Mann.

Song of Freedom (1785)

He, who under a girl's hand
nestles himelf as a slave
And who, fixed by love,
lies in disdainful chains:
Alas! He is a poor wretch,
He does not know golden Freedom.

He, who for king's favour and rank
Labours in sour sweat,
and his whole life long, fixedly,
pulls state's plough:
Alas! He is a poor wretch,
He does not know golden Freedom.

He who for glittering metal
serves the wicked Mammon
and only seeks
to increase the amount in his full bags:
Alas! He is a poor wretch,
He does not know golden Freedom.

But he who can easily do without all his,
for which only Thor strives,
and can sit happily by his own hearth,
living only for himself and not for others:
He it is alone who can say
Good on me! I am a free man.


It is interesting that we hear Caroline end the first verse (Weh dem! Der ist ein armer Wicht. Er kennt die gold’ne Freiheit nicht.) as it turns out, after which we hear her start the second verse about ‘king’s favour and rank’. The third verse about money oddly she skips, or maybe not so oddly, as money is not really there for Darcy to be increased as he has already enough. Society is mainly about marrying people of the same fortune and so of the same status. When Caroline starts the last verse, Darcy starts to speak about people out of society who repel him. When Caroline starts on the two last verses: Der ist’s allein der sagen kann, Wohl mir! Ich bin ein freier Mann, Amanda starts about the buttresses. Mr Collins had intimated that ‘Lady Catherine’s buttresses are the talk of the county‘ and Amanda now asks Darcy, stating that she is not experienced in architecture, but that… It is then that Darcy looses his temper and tells her in a fit of rage that ’[he] know[s] what buttresses are’. It is puzzling what is so bad about buttresses. But we can easily see what Andrews meant, combining the song with the buttresses. Indeed, the people in society are like a house with buttresses: they cannot stand on their own, they cannot have an occupation because ‘[they] must be seen to be unoccupied’, they need to be supported by the others in society to be in society. In other words, probably also figuratively, Lady Catherine’s buttresses might be the talk of the county as she is a reference in society, and her acquaintance is to be sought by everyone… Is it this what Darcy gets when he looses his temper? and is it that which fascinates him in Amanda? Her lack of understanding of society which renders her free to do and say what she wants (kicking Collins in the balls for saying that her society is revolting) without herself being aware of it in the least. With on the background the last two verses, we can certainly see that. He suddenly realises that he indeed is not a free man, despite the fact he professes it to be ‘free society’ in which Jane was not forced to marry Collins. He realises that he is too much ruled by this society and that that compelled him to make his friend unhappy and that society no doubt approved of a marriage to Collins, despite the unpleasantness of Mr Collins himself.

It is also at this time that Mr Bennet decides to sleep in his library out of protest against Jane’s marriage. When Mrs Bennet says she will take Lydia ‘to observe a happy marriage’ at Rosings, he yells that ‘[he] will prance Lady Catherine’s drawing room naked’ if she can find one happy marriage there. And that is indeed what the case is: people who care too much about peripheral things will not be able to choose their partners rightly and according to their own tastes. Darcy is doomed to be unhappy, until he finally gives in to himself and leaves society for what it is. But there might be more in Mr Bennet’s rebellion: the first verse of Caroline’s song is about men who have themselves ruled by love, lowering themselves as slaves. In the second episode, Mr Bennet intimates to Amanda that he was married because of beauty. She asks him not to let Jane marry Collins, but he says that ‘as far as [he] can allow anything th[at] household’ he will do his best to prevent a marriage between Jane and Collins and have his daughters marry for love. In other words, the poor man is indeed ruled by his wife, and cannot even oppose a marriage he disapproves of. And it is probably the anger at himself that he projects on his wife, escaping into his library.

And then: the third dialogue between Darcy and Amanda. A dialogue of desperation from his side, as it will turn out. He comes to Mr Collins’s house to have a talk with Amanda (like the original man and Firth’s Darcys came for their first proposal):

Darcy: I am… concerned
Amanda: I don’t understand.
Darcy: You came to this house, knowing that you’d be brought to Lady Catherine’s, knowing I would be there, knowing full well the abysmal disregard in which I hold you. Why, if I am, as you insist, so relentlessly unpleasant to you, do you persist in seeking me out?
Amada: I didn’t… seek you out! You came to me.
Darcy: Why?
Amanda: I don’t know.
Darcy: You must know. I do not, and my lack of comprehension is dementing me. (turns away in total disgust/desperation)
Amanda: Mrs Collins needs me, good night.
Darcy: (takes her by the shoulders as if to kiss her)
Amanda: You’re quite sure this is what you mean to do?
Darcy: (looks totally puzzled for a few seconds and then runs out of the house)

It is here for the first time that he nearly gives in to his feelings. As Collin Firth’s Darcy, he has come to the house in total emotional chaos, and does not know half what he is going to do or is doing. Firth’s Darcy and the original Mr Darcy indeed came with a plan, but they were still not through with their contempt for Elizabeth’s connections who were ‘so decidedly below [their] own’. Cowan’s Darcy does not at all come with the plan of asking for Amanda’s hand in marriage but comes, ironically, to ask her why he is in love with her, why he could possibly love a savage like her, unpolished by society. It is that what puzzles him, and it is that what is ‘dementing’ him: his own self that he has no longer under control. It is the real him that Amanda could not get at, and that he did not believe he had, his own human nature that is the same as Amanda’s. However, she, like him, still protests her human nature that is secretly in love with Darcy (as all women are), but that does not want to be.

Amanda has now totally left the door alone, as she cannot get to it in the Bennets’ house. And she is about to accept her role In the story, and her own human nature, as will Darcy. But first, she will make out not to be as unpolished as he thought… During the card game, Bingley, who is in emotional turmoil because of Darcy essentially, bets his watch with a nave. Amanda, hesitating whether she should actually claim the watch, cannot take a decision as ruthless Lady Catherine rips the king out of her hand and claims the watch for her. There, Amanda takes a split-second decision and impresses Darcy with her ‘practice-game’, which essentially restores the watch to Bingley. In addition, Collins humours Lady Catherine and lets her win despite having a card that seems high enough to beat hers… And Lady Catherine cheats, looking into other people’s cards, as Mrs Bennet reproaches her afterwards in episode 4. But as she is high up in society, she does that without having reproaches come her way, because that would be offending her…
Lady Catherine then warns Amanda for wanting Darcy. She answers she does not want him, but ‘what [she] want[s] frightens [her] to death. That is why [she] fail[s] to comprehend [her]self.’ And that is indeed what is going on in both Darcy and Amanda’s heads: they are scared of what they want and do not have the strength to step out of their normality. That is why they both deny what they want to themselves, why they do not comprehend their on wishes and are continuously wondering at their own feelings.

It is also then that for the first time Bingley reproaches Darcy for thrashing his happiness and Jane’s. After this reproach from his own friend, Darcy admits being wrong about obstructing Jane and Bingley’s relationship and invites Amanda to Pemberley together with Mrs Bennet and Lydia. They go, and as in Austen’s original and the 1995 adaptation, Amanda gazes at Pemberley in wonder. Unlike Lady Catherine’s mansion, which has a gothic inside, and obviously a gothic outside too as it has buttresses, Darcy’s Pemberley stands on its own in a beautiful valley. As in both the 1995 adaptation and the original, this could also be a foreshadowing of what Darcy is now: a man who stands on his own, a man who knows what he wants.

It is at Pemberley that he will finally yield to his own feelings and where Amanda will also understand why ‘[her] need open[ed] the door’ as she meets him looking over a large lake:

Darcy: (takes Amanda by the shoulders) Amanda! That means ‘she who must be loved’.
Amanda: You must not… You must not.
D: Wherefore must I not? Who is to judge us? I laboured so long in the service of propriety!
A: Elizabeth! I am not Elizabeth! The entire world will hate me.
D: Were that true, Amanda, I’d fight the world. You are the one I love!
A: Will you do something for me?
D: (goes into the pond, similar to the 1995 adaptation)
A: I am having a bit of a strange post-modern moment here.
D: Is that agreeable?
A: Oh, yes! Yes!
D: (starts to get out of the pond)
A: Oh, please, please, stay there! If you touch me again, I will be completely unable to say what I want to say. You love me. Which one of me do you love? The one you first met when I was spiky, and vulgar and I argued with you all the time? But you looked at me and felt all that abysmal disregard? Or the one I’ve been recently? Simpering and fanning, and, trying so hard to fit in? Please, tell me you’ve noticed the difference!
D: I’ve found both incarnations of your character equally disagreeable and yet, I love you, Amanda Price. With all my heart.
(they hear a noise in the background)
A: Ignore that. Please.
D: I cannot. (gets out of the pond) When my duties are discharged, I shall find you, Amanda, for there is more to say. If only the same words over and again. (walks off)

A: (alone) I love him! I love Fitzwilliam Darcy! I love him! Maybe that’s what’s meant to happen. (looks over the lake) I am like an understudy: the star has failed to turn up, and I have to go on and do the show!

Darcy has now totally yielded to his feelings, although he still finds the ‘incarnations of [her] character disagreeable’ and yet, he does not seem to mind anymore because he has long enough ‘laboured in the service of propriety’. As it seems, this force, which is ironically symbolised in the ‘post-modern’ pond-scene, is not only taking place in the minds of Amanda and Darcy, but also in Mrs Bennet who is crying in the garden at both her and Jane’s marriage. Although she still professes that we have to endure our lives, she is already aware of the fact that neither her own marriage is a good one, nor Jane’s, although they were made ‘in service of propriety’. At the same time, Bingley is totally through with Darcy and is so angry with him, he hits him regretting it afterwards. As Mrs Bennet was angry with Amanda before, like Darcy was, we might presume that Bingley’s anger with Darcy stems from the same problem: his own failure to stand on his own two feet and to decide for himself. That is at least what he intimated in episode 2: ‘It is not that I am especially weak, but that my friend is strong. He construes truly where others faulter. I am a faulterer, I rely on his construction.’ Had Bingley not trusted Darcy so much, and looked for himself, he had married Jane. Therefore he now blames the wrong man, in an attempt not to have to blame himself.

But, clouds gather in the sky as ‘smirking, conniving bumface’ Caroline attempts to break Darcy’s engagement by advising him to get to know Amanda a little better. When it comes to maidenhood, of course, Amanda cannot beat Caroline. And so, indeed, Amanda has a talk with Darcy:

Darcy: (stands visibly emotional looking at his grounds, still the blood at his nose visible because of Bingley’s blow)
Amanda: What happened?
D: Mr Bingley and I have been chatting. Miss Price, my life… is a pretty drear thing. But, it is conducted for the greater part in public. It is a rare moment that I am not closely observed by servants. If one is to know the truth about Fitzwilliam Darcy, one need merely ask.
A: You worry that I have a past, that you don’t know about?
D: I embrace(d?) the truth. Pray, tell it me.
A: Ok, what I should do, my mother would certainly say I should do, if she were here, and thank God she isn’t, is keep my mouth shut. But, given that I’ve never been able to do that, and given that Caroline has almost certainly put it about that I am the great whore of Hammersmith… But you’d never listen to gossip, would you? I love you for that. And that’s the thing, I love you. I didn’t know that… I didn’t know that. It is clear to me now that I’ve always loved you. Every time I’ve fallen for a man, I’ve closed my eyes and it’s been you! Even Michael, and I’ve pretty much lived with him for a year! So yes… I have a past, but every instant in it contains you! Everything I am belongs to you.
D: (distraught) I cannot marry you. I am sorry for it. But a man like me cannot marry a woman like you.
A: A woman like me?
D: You are not a maid.
A: (cries)
D: I am sorry. (gives her a handkerchief still with his blood on it)
A: I’ve been incredibly stupid.
D: You told me the truth and I asked for it. For that courage, I shall admire you always.
A: But it has cost me everything!
D: It has cost that of us both.

Here, Caroline not only accomplishes her purpose (breaking up Darcy’s engagement), but Andrews also puts in the very essence of Amanda’s need: ‘Every time I’ve fallen for a man, I’ve closed my eyes and it’s been you! … I have a past, but every instant in it contains you! Everything I am belongs to you.’ Indeed, she has always been wanting Darcy, not another, like all women actually might not be in want of exactly Darcy, but with all the things Darcy is: a gentleman. Sadly, this section also highlights the fact that society has only been that much be thrown away. Ok, Darcy does not mind her unpolishedness, but not a maid, that is not… not possible. That idea has been rooted so deeply in him, that he cannot marry her. Despite the fact that we might presume that Amanda is more disappointed and sad than Darcy, he intimates that it costs him everything, like to Amanda. And indeed, it does cost him a great deal. Like Firth’s Darcy, Cowan’s Darcy gives up a great love for his principles, but is that the case? Firth’s Darcy took a plunge to clean himself of his prejudices; Cowan’s Darcy has already taken a plunge, surely, or has he? As Firth’s Darcy, Cowan’s Darcy has partly yielded to his feelings: he loves Amanda/Elizabeth and so be it, he will marry her, despite her unpolishedness/low connections, but there is still their pride to be conquered for both Darcys (for Firth’s Darcy relative to Elizabeth’s connections and for Cowan’s Darcy relative to Amanda’s maidenhood). So, although Cowan’s Darcy took a plunge, it was not really a plunge, and this first proposal stands on the same level as the first proposal in Collins house in both Pride and Prejudice the book and the 1995 adaptation. Darcy partly yields but not totally. There is still work to be done.

Amanda now looses it totally and tears her copy of Pride and Prejudice up, throws the pages in the air and prepares to leave. At this point Caroline intimates that she is also a lesbian and that everyone expects her to marry Darcy (including God) and that she will do that, but that the physical society of men does not excite her. She has heard of Amanda’s ‘secret’…This is not the only surprising twist from Andrews doing. Georgiana was also not seduced by Wickham! On the contrary, Georgiana’s nurse fell in love with him and arranged to meet him regularly. An action for which Georgiana served as cover. Every time her nurse had her back turned, she offered herself to Wickham, but he didn’t want to have any of it. To take revenge on him, Georgiana told her brother, Darcy, that Wickham had ‘ravished’ her (in other words, had sex with her). Obviously, Darcy cannot see that in his warped vision of society, which classes women as certainly not equal and would straight away blame the man for doing something like ravishing. That a woman would offer herself to a man is totally unthinkable. It is equally unthinkable that there were women who were lesbians, yet there must have been… But more on that later… At the same time, though, Georgiana is not cast off if Wickham keeps his mouth shut and that is what happens… As such, he suffers his honour and status to be reduced because he protects Georgiana…

When Darcy finds the copy of Pride and Prejudice in his fountain, he is disgusted to find himself in it and all kinds of ‘improbable’ things that happen in it. He now confuses Amanda with Austen, who she is definitely not, but what is definitely so is that he is too much busy with propriety instead of himself and what he wants. He wanted to marry Amanda, yet he decides not to, because she is not a maid. He decides to discourage Bingley’s affection for Jane because she has no money. It is confusing for him to have to do away with everything he has learned that is proper and so he goes forward in spurts and then goes back in his steps… He is clearly not yet rid of his prejudices, so he has not yet swum in his pond, unlike we are all inclined to think… Amanda says it in a very powerful way: ‘You’re so incandescent with integrity that you misjudge everyone. You misjudge me.’ Incandescent can also refer to being unbelievably angry, incandescent meaning shining with light. Indeed, Darcy desperately wants to shine with integrity, even to the point of being angry with himself, but does not understand that integrity can sometimes mean not to stay true to others, but rather trust oneself. And that is also what Amanda needs to do.

At least Amanda’s struggle is now over and she understands what the matter was with her: she has loved Darcy from the start and needs to find a man like that. That will be the only solution for her problem: to follow her standards. And this is where episode 3 concludes: Wickham redeemed, Caroline a lesbian, Bingley drunk, Georgiana a head-strong girl, Amanda and Darcy engaged and single again, Jane and Collins still married…

Lost in Austen, an analysis (2/4)

Episode 2 starts with Amanda arriving at Netherfield in the rain, having run after Jane to try to get her back as she is at risk of dying from croup. Mr Darcy, like in the original story and the adaptation of 1995, can be called intrigued by this soaking wet woman. While at Netherfield, Amanda is compelled to eat oysters and larks while sitting opposite Darcy, but there is more than that: she is challenged to play. Amanda, who cannot play the piano, a truly modern woman, in the end sings Petula Clark’s Downtown:

When you're alone and life is making you lonely
You can always go downtown
When you got worries, all the noise and the hurry
Seems to help, I know, downtown

Just listen to the music of the traffic in the city
[Lalalalalalala.. and] the neon signs are pretty
How can you lose?
The lights are much brighter there
You can forget all your troubles, forget all your cares

And go downtown
(Things'll be great when you're downtown
No finer place for sure, downtown)
Everything's waiting for you

That is indeed where Bingley and Lydia will go (just what he professed to do after Amanda had sung the song), or at least will attempt to go: Downtown to Hammersmith. That song also highlights the ability to escape to another environment when one feels alone. It is what Amanda tries to do in Pride and Prejudice. And it is, too, what Charlotte will do ‘when life bec[omes] irreparably’ boring and lonely for her; it is what she and Elizabeth agreed to do when they were children: to escape to Africa.

When Amanda is finally returned from Netherfield, after having saved Jane from an attack of croup with paracetamol and having told Bingley that she is a lesbian (out of need to make him fall in love with Jane instead), she returns to the door in the Bennets’ attic to tell Elizabeth about Collins who has just arrived, but as before, the door nor Elizabeth budge. Things now go totally wrong, as he proposes to Jane. Just in time, Amanda turns up with Charlotte Lucas, but Collins presumes it is Amanda who’d like to get married to him. In favour of her, he abandons Jane, but Amanda has not a mind to get married, although she is now engaged to him… In the meantime Bingley is ‘bewitched’ by Jane and Darcy starts his role as buttress, we will later see what significance the word has...

It is altogether strange when Wickham comes on the scene: when Mrs Bennet, cured Jane, Kitty, Mary and Amanda return from Netherfield: the wheel of their carriage breaks and Wickham arrives as the hero to lend them his carriage. As it will turn out, he will gain a greater role that is less villainous than in Austen’s original. He gives a first indication towards the theme for Amanda when he says to her: ‘You fascinate me. I confess it, you have endured great hardships in your life, as have I.’ This Amanda, nor other readers of Pride and Prejudice, believe, but it will turn out to be true when the real circumstances of Georgiana’s so-called elopement are revealed. Darcy still does not want to know him, but so he does not want to know Amanda and there is a strangely common theme in that…

In an attempt to have Jane and Bingley still bond, now she has unwillingly high-jacked Collins, Amanda sends the two off into the garden to look for voles and tells them to sing ‘when they find anything’. The fact that they are going to look for voles is not surprising as it is an animal which is monogamous, knows ‘dating sites’ in nature, and as it is a species where males help to care for the little ones. It is at this point, that Darcy for the first time really speaks to Amanda, unlike the time they danced at the ball in Meryton, because he wanted to save the honour of his friend Bingley: ‘What advise you to sing, Miss Price? Because I have found something of interest.’ Amanda is stupid enough to ask what that is, and he answers: ‘You. You are not what you seem.’ And the two continue:

Amanda: I can’t disagree with that. Look, I know you have a very poor opinion of me. That’s the way you are at the moment, and that’s ok. But one day, Mr Darcy, you will thank me.
Darcy: In the meantime, Miss Price, you must content yourself with a warning. If you wound Bingley, you will find my displeasure painful and entirely unrelenting, for my…
Amanda: …opinion once lost, is lost forever. Yes, I know.
Darcy: (looks surprised at the expression)

What the two say here, especially Darcy, is striking. It is a first glimpse at his struggle. Wickham will turn out to be totally innocent and Darcy will end up fighting for his buttresses and he himself as a buttress, not knowing what he should think of himself (as in the original and the 1995 adaptation). It is ironic that he here warns Amanda not to wound Bingley as he is doing it himself (in the original and in the adaptation of 1995) by not taking seriously Bingley’s feelings and preferring society above human wishes. But he himself now starts to see something in Amanda that is not what is on the surface. Indeed, she at that point is not polished as normal people in his acquaintance and in a certain way she could stand for ‘the noble savage’ erroneously identified with Rousseau (who is also referenced in episode 1 implicitly when Mr Bennet has lent Bingley a book on Rousseau, but also more explicitly in episode 4 by Bingley himself when making a spear). The theory of the noble savage professed that all people were good at heart and that society made them bad. Rousseau did not believe this so radically, but he did profess that foremost a good society was needed to make good men. Essentially, Darcy sees something good in Amanda that he is not supposed to see and cannot believe that he can see, as he himself relies on society to tell him what is good. Amanda is clearly not of that society and is clearly an example therefore, of ill-breeding. Why does she fascinate him?

When the ball at Netherfield comes along, Wickham spreads rumours about the origins of Miss Price’s income of a staggering £27000 a year (compare Darcy’s income of £10000 a year! The 27000 was of course the wages of Amanda in modern day Hammersmith, which is a normal wage in modern day London ): her father is a fish monger. A fortune in trade was not the best you could get, and naturally, Collins does not want to marry Amanda anymore as he cannot have an income from trade if he is to become a bishop… He does not only withdraw his offer of marriage on that basis, but also advises her that wanting the society of Mr Darcy would now be a total impertinence. She, who does not care as a modern woman, can just not contain herself and kicks him in the balls. Although Darcy shows her the door politely, he is intrigued by this unpolished kind of person. And probably even more intrigued at his interest in that unpolished person…

The second episode then concludes with Jane marrying Collins, as he is now free from Amanda, and Charlotte’s decision t go to Africa. Although there is also another dialogue of Amanda and Darcy:

Amanda: You are better than this. I know you are, Fitzwilliam Darcy, because I’ve had you in my head since I was 12 years old. So, why are you behaving like such a total… git? Jane has no money, so what? Bingley’s got stacks. What right do you have to thrash their love because of an accident of birth?
Darcy: There is no accident in birth.
A: Do you know why I am so angry?
D: You were born thus.
A: I’ve been in love with your life for 14 years. Cut my heart out, Darcy, its-‘s your name written on it with Elizabeth’s. God almighty! Here, you are… one half… the greatest love story ever told. You. And you know what? You don’t deserve her.
D: Is this interview concluded? It is so difficult to tell.
A: You are such a disappointment, I can hardly bear to look at you.
D: A deprivation I shall endure as stoically as I can.
A: You’re so relentlessly unpleasant! I just can’t get at the real you!
D: (until now he has been staring out of the window, now he turns to Amanda:)
Madam! Behold, Fitzwilliam Darcy! I am what I am! If you find yourself unable to get at an alternative version I must turn to being glad. I despise the intrusions of a woman so singularly dedicated to mendacity, disorder and lewdness. They repel me. You repel me. You are an abomination, Madam! Good afternoon to you. (Leaves the room).

From intrigue and fascination, in one go Darcy has gone to total disgust. As in 1995, he addresses nature for help through the window, his own human nature that is strangely attracted to Amanda/Elizabeth, but a nature which his society so much has polished that he cannot find it, like Amanda. As such, he is troubled when he finds himself strangely liking this ‘savage’. Their two views on societal structures also differ: Darcy, having been born before the times of Darwin believes that society’s structure us given by God, so ‘there is no accident in birth’ and as he says in his very first scene: ‘God loves a gentleman, it is the gentleman’s duty to return the compliment.’ God loves a gentleman, because He has given him great wealth and power (to certain extent) unlike to the poor, so he must do his duty and do what God expects from him (i.e. go to church, marry the one God would approve (as Caroline Bingley puts it the end). Amanda, on the other hand, is born in a time where birth and status is not God-given and so indeed calls his status an ‘accident of birth’, which it is to her. Hardship and poverty are no longer at courtesy of God, but are one’s own responsibility. And so, he can change his views/behaviour, in opposition her who ‘was born thus’. He believes her to be born thus, so he himself is also born thus. There are not two Darcys within the one, or are there?