Mrs G’s Rewrites
Yesterday’s Profile, on Elizabeth Gaskell:
Not word one about North & South
Telegraph - People not having sex. Whatever next? By A.N. Wilson
The BBC costume drama Cranford bore almost no resemblance to the book. …
Why so many changes?
The script is a clear case of funk. The BBC were afraid of the book’s treatment of sex and class.
It is OK to have plays in which everyone is having sex, but not OK to have a drama about two dignified people coming to terms with not having it. And the humour of Mrs Gaskell, which depends upon mild snobbery and class distinctions, was presumably deemed in a favourite BBC word, “unacceptable”.
Hm. Why do the book at all, then?
The Times‘ profile makes a big deal (as does everyone else) what a feminist pioneer Mrs G was, and how she was the first author who could simultaneously talk about the wealthy, the poor, and women. But maybe that’s precisely why she isn’t as famous now as the “fluffier” (to paraphrase everyone) Jane Austen. Because 18th century attitudes towards class, no matter how noble or pioneering they are in context, still date themselves. Better to focus on a story with more timeless themes, even if it is stiflingly middle class.
December 4th, 2007 at 3:49 am
“Cranford” was the first classic novel I ever read and I retain the most enormous affection for it - re-read it last year. It has to be said though that MrsG just ain’t in the same league as a writer, Miss A is so much more accurate, concise and penetrating. Were she not, she’d just be a sort of costume drama queen, whereas the fact is she can be read over and over again for pleasure and profit. Not that I in fact do - given the choice, I prefer something a bit more kinetic. Though I did read “Emma” in a single day, once. Bet not many people here have done that.
December 4th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
I’m working my way through Emma at the moment, at a slightly more stately pace.
December 5th, 2007 at 1:32 am
It makes a lot of sense to do it that way, Brett!!!