I think of them like the Matrix series. The first was very innovative, with the second being still quite entertaining, but by the third it was just getting ridiculous.

N.geNuity

United States5112 Posts

January 30 2010 23:44 GMT

#22

On January 31 2010 08:39 zer0das wrote:
A bad one.

It's not that bad.

But real quickly, somebody mentioned 1984 and Brave New World. Most guys like 1984. Most girls will like Pride and prejudice. But girls will look at 1984 and say "meh/bad" and vis versa for guys with pride and prejudice.

writer22816

United States5775 Posts

January 30 2010 23:47 GMT

#23

lmao this is hilarious

Jibba

United States22883 Posts

January 30 2010 23:47 GMT

#24

On January 31 2010 08:15 Chef wrote:
It will help you understand one type of girl. I don't personally find that type of girl attractive, but I did watch the movie version with one of them who was a friend. Save your time unless you see the good in everything. It's not a guy movie.

I know quite a few types of girls who love the book, most of whom are not feeble or dependent or annoying. I do agree though that a lot of girls who love the book fit into an interesting category - they think they're Liz when they're really Lydia.

If you have a mind for literature, read it. The story telling is a bit meh but she's got some of the best conversational prose ever written. You're not going to figure out how girls think by reading it, but you'll get a general idea of some different thoughts, and at the very least you'll probably get a better understanding of how you think. It's even better if you can understand the context and how literature was in the early 19th century (it was a shitty time for literature), but a lot of the story can still hold up today.

I made fun of it specifically with that Twain quote before having read it, and I'm 95% sure the people trashing it in this thread are the in the same boat I was in. There's some problems with it, but it's a good piece of literature. If you can't see past the first level of the story, you'll probably think it's just a trashy love story, but it's really not. Jane Austen was a pretty smart lady.

Mortality

United States4790 Posts

January 30 2010 23:49 GMT

#25

If it were that easy to understand girls, then every guy out there would read Pride and Prejudice and every guy in the world would understand how girls think.

How many guys understand how girls think? Zero. Any man who claims to understand women is a liar.

Clearly your friend lied to you.

zer0das

United States8519 Posts

January 30 2010 23:49 GMT

#26

I'm pretty sure most of them have read it. I certainly have, and I certainly detest it. She might have been smart, but the book is awful.

Jibba

United States22883 Posts

January 31 2010 00:02 GMT

#27

On January 31 2010 08:49 zer0das wrote:
I'm pretty sure most of them have read it. I certainly have, and I certainly detest it. She might have been smart, but the book is awful.

All you do is say it's bad, but you're not actually making criticisms.

Inzek

Chile802 Posts

January 31 2010 00:07 GMT

#28

i loved that book...
movie is fine imo
im a guy btw

i think the book is well written and i like the history...
i love women so thinking a book can describe them all is against my thoughts, and i hope human being could never get that understood...

Spike

United States1392 Posts

January 31 2010 00:09 GMT

#29

What do people have against the book?
Like Jibba mentioned, I though it was pretty good considering it was published in the early 1800s.

Loanshark

China3094 Posts

January 31 2010 00:13 GMT

#30

Wuthering Heights is a much better book to read if you want to understand girls.

+ Show Spoiler +

or at least Twilight, but hey Wuthering Heights is mentioned in there too!

Always

United States376 Posts

January 31 2010 00:23 GMT

#31

lol i've read pride and prejudice twice, and I've seen all the movies.

unless you find it interesting for whatever reason, don't read it. it doesn't tell you anything about girls or their modern behavior.

if you want to score points, tell girls you prefer Darcy to Bingly, and that the p&p with Keira Knightly (2005) was good, but the one with Colin Firth (1995) as Darcy was unbeatable.

... i feel embarrassed.

N.geNuity

United States5112 Posts

January 31 2010 00:27 GMT

#32

On January 31 2010 09:09 Spike wrote:
What do people have against the book?
Like Jibba mentioned, I though it was pretty good considering it was published in the early 1800s.

The time is important too- I enjoy it more because of how it makes fun of the time it was published in. That's what Lydia is for.

GGQ

Canada2653 Posts

January 31 2010 00:34 GMT

#33

There is no one secret to understanding girls, and if there was, it wouldn't be Pride and Prejudice. Depending on what you like to get out of reading, you might enjoy it. As Jibba said, it's a very intelligent book with highly entertaining prose. Try to keep your mind open when you read it and appreciate it, and you'll probably come out of it with a better understanding of girls, if only marginally.

Biff The Understudy

France8115 Posts

January 31 2010 00:40 GMT

#34

I liked Pride and Prejudice. I didn't take it very seriously, I didn't expect some amazing huge litterature, but I liked it. It's an awesome well-behaved Victorian novel.

Victorian litterature is what it is, but Jane Austen is a very good novelist. If you want to know a bit about England in XIX century, that really is a book you need to read, you won't find better. Jane Austen is also a good psychologist imo.

So yes, read it if you have time. That's not Dostoievsky, that's not Celine or Shakespeare, but it is entertaining and is a must known for a cultivated person.

I love the fact that she always starts by introducing character with 1) how much they earn 2) what kind of inheritance they can hope 3) what is their social status, money apart. That's soooo Victorian, it's hilarious.

Oh... And I was forgetting. Believe me, it's harder to understand yourself than others, girls included. That's where I would start if I were you. Just my two cents.

Jibba

United States22883 Posts

January 31 2010 00:45 GMT

#35

On January 31 2010 09:23 Always wrote:
it doesn't tell you anything about girls or their modern behavior.

I think the one dimensional sisters were created on purpose so that they'd be only one aspect of a real person. Taken together, and in competition with each other, you get a fuller picture of how a real person thinks.

I really like Inzek's post though.

hellokitty[hk]

United States1309 Posts

January 31 2010 01:04 GMT

#36

No but pretending to like pride and prejudice might get you more girls.

Pyrrhuloxia

United States6700 Posts

January 31 2010 01:24 GMT

#37

Pride and Prejudice is the one where the girl doesn't like the guy until she sees how rich he is right? There are certainly a lot of women like that. And that part is not satirical at all. Even if you think it is a bad book (art-wise) it certainly offers a window into the average female psyche. Twilight does the same thing. It's probably much worse artistically than Pride and Prejudice but also much more up to date.

vRoOk

United States1024 Posts

January 31 2010 01:48 GMT

#38

On January 31 2010 09:13 Loanshark wrote:
Wuthering Heights is a much better book to read if you want to understand girls.

+ Show Spoiler +

or at least Twilight, but hey Wuthering Heights is mentioned in there too!

Wuthering heights is better

MoltkeWarding

5195 Posts

January 31 2010 01:51 GMT

#39

Austen isn't Victorian but regency. In her social attitude she is closer to the early Augustan novelists than the Romantics. Had he lived long enough, Johnson would have recognized her as his protege. I think it was Emile Bronte who saw no value in her books, she was wrong. Austen was better than Bronte, and came closer to portraying how people actually think than any other novelist I know.

The matter with Elizabeth (and this is also true of Emma and Elinore) is that she is such a rational and likable person, that she transmits her prejudices to you. The realistic portrayal of Austenian heroines naturally tends toward reader identification whereby the reader grows and matures with the protagonist.

Although P&P is wonderful, my favourite will always be Emma, partially because I identify with the heroine's hyperactive intuitive urges.

I've been around the Republic of Pemberly long enough to see that a small fraction of humanity does aspire toward Austenian social norms. If you are fortunate enough to find such a one, by all means exploit your special insights.

Wuthering Heights is a much better book to read if you want to understand girls.

Wuthering Heights has no relevance to understanding anyone, the book intentionally mystifies its characters to effect whatever odd sublimity it achieves.

Jibba

United States22883 Posts

January 31 2010 01:55 GMT

#40

On January 31 2010 10:24 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
Pride and Prejudice is the one where the girl doesn't like the guy until she sees how rich he is right?

Nope, his cashmoney is known from the beginning. Seeing the property helps, but it's more about seeing his environment.