mrdarcysdadbod:

icanlistennolongerinsilence:

morepopcornplease:

if you dont like P&P 2005, fine, everyones allowed to have their own wrong opinions…

but i feel like the the historical Austenites who object to Mr Darcy showing up unprompted and unkempt like this:

because it was highly scandalous to dress in such a manner in that time period

are completely missing the point that this scene is a direct parallel to this scene in the beginning:

whatever you may think of historical accuracy, this specific visual cue has narrative and thematic purpose, and is satisfying beyond just a “his shirt is unbuttoned” thing (hell, i’m lesbian)

incidentally, isn’t arguing that this manner of dress was ~scandalous~ and would never have been societally acceptable in Austen’s time a bit like arguing that Lydia would never have run away with Mr Wickham because it was ~scandalous~ and would never have been socially acceptable in Austen’s time ?

just let my kids enjoy their horny morning walks

now i love p&p 2005 more than anything, but it is completely valid to criticize it for elizabeth and darcy not following social etiquette in these two scenes. the point isnt just that its improper for the time period. the point is that both elizabeth and darcy are mindful of proper etiquette, so appearing with her hair down or half dressed is out of character for them.

elizabeth is highly conscious of social norms. she notices when her family acts against these customs and is deeply embarrassed by it. sure she doesnt follow them as strictly as other do, which is shown when she walks 3 miles to netherfield (although not completely improper, it definitely wasn’t the norm), but she still minds the rules of etiquette and understands their importance. darcy is even more aware of social etiquette, being from a wealthier family, to the point where he brings up the bennets’ disregard of manners when he freaking proposes (in a very insulting and rude and attractive way ofc, which shows hypocrisy on his end, but his value of etiquette still stands).

lydia doesn’t care about manners or propriety at all, shown by her flirtations with the militia, so it is perfectly in character for her to run off with wickham. lydia is selfish; she acts impulsively without considering the impact her decisions have on her own family due to the social customs of the time period. wickham is an asshole who pursues girls younger than him for his own pleasure. both lydia and wickham’s disregard for etiquette is held in contempt by everyone around them.

having darcy and elizabeth act like this without considering etiquette goes against what austen is trying to say about manners in p&p. she isn’t against etiquette; in fact, she’s careful that most of her characters abide by it, and those that don’t are viewed as wrong. it seems like a small thing to modern audiences, after all its just loose hair and an unbuttoned shirt, but these actions would be completely shocking in the regency era. the second proposal scene in particular would be potentially reputation ruining — two unmarried young adults in their pajamas meeting at dawn? in this time period, you needed a chaperone to take a walk, fully clothed, in daylight. this meeting would be considering genuinely scandalous at the time, and its completely out of character for either darcy or elizabeth to risk their reputation in such a way.

again, i love p&p 2005 to death, and these historical/character inaccuracies don’t prevent me from enjoying it. but i don’t want to defend it against its inaccuracies either. i can enjoy something and admit that its flawed. also no hate to you op!! this is meant in good faith ofc :-)

So, because this is pulling on strands of precisely why I like the 2005 bestest, the thing both of y'all are hitting on is (imo) one of the most successful aspects of the 2005 as an adaptation, which is that it walks the fine line between accuracy and accessibility VERY well.

What I mean by that is, yes it’s correct that the hair down/open cravat looks are DEEPLY scandalous in terms of actual historical accuracy. At the same time, the average audience member isn’t necessarily going to know that (as we can see by the number of people who watched S*nditon and were like “yeah this is cool no issues” even tho main girl’s hair was down and loose 2/3 of the time).

And OP is right in pointing out that the two scenes parallel each other, but behind that is also the fact that this is really the only time Elizabeth’s hair is down in the whole movie. It sticks out visually, and even an audience member who might hear “she walked three miles” or “her hem six inches deep in mud” and think “ok? So what?” is going to see Elizabeth, flushed and sweaty, hair down, among the prim and put-together Bingleys, and is going to clue in that Oh Okay so she’s being Inappropriate. And then the same thing later on with the ending- Darcy has never looked this disheveled, it’s visually extremely salient, and it’s communicating what it needs to.

It’s clear that these moments were deliberate choices because, as a rule, the film is very much aware that Lizzie and Darcy are extremely preoccupied with social propriety. Lizzie is constantly reining in her family and being embarrassed and judging people. It’s not like the film suddenly forgot that for this one scene, it’s just that it took a liberty in order to emphasize the shocking nature of her behavior without having to have everyone sit around expositing about how Scandalous and Uncouth Lizzie was being.

I went back to the book and it takes, eh, probably a page of back and forth between Mrs. Hurst and Caroline to express how shocking Lizzie was, and it’s focused mostly on the mud and her being alone (although they also comment on her hair being “blowsy” and “untidy”!) A page of back and forth is, like, a LOT in terms of movie time, when the same thing could be expressed in a second just with the somewhat jarring visual of Lizzie, hair down and wild, obviously not Being Proper.

(I could honestly write another essay entirely on how the second proposal is less of a “these are events that took place” and more of a dreamy metaphorical Coalescence of their relationship and understanding, and how that kind of plays against/is paralleled to their not sharing any dialogue while he’s at Longbourn getting her father’s consent but I DIGRESS)

Anyway I guess what I’m getting at is, like. When you have an adaptation, especially across mediums and a significant period of time from the source text, the language has to be different in order to communicate the message, and I think it’s unfair to characterize it as a “flaw” that the film leans into historical inaccuracy, momentarily, for the sake of efficiency and effectiveness, especially since it doesn’t habitually engage with that historical inaccuracy. It would be one thing if characters had their hair down all the time, but they don’t! With the exception of Georgiana, who isn’t out, and maaaybe Lydia, who is inappropriate and probably shouldn’t be out, I can’t recall another character who ever has her hair down in public. And the closest otherwise we get to a man unbuttoned is when Darcy is delivering the letter to Elizabeth at Hunsford (which, again, is kind of that dreamy intimate liminal space that’s not quite reality so like…. Is he even Actually present being underdressed or is it just that he is metaphorically underdressed in the sense that he’s baring his soul and being honest in a very vulnerable and risky way? Again I digress.)

Anyway the point is: the Very Educated Austenite viewer is going to see Lizzie with her hair down and be like, damn shouldn’t this be rated R for Reputation-Ruining? But the average audience member is going to see Lizzie with her hair down (for the only time in the film, juxtaposed against Bingley and Caroline and Darcy all looking very polished and breakfast) and be like, wow I guess Lizzie is kind of a free spirit compared to these people. Which is ultimately what the scene is about, is showing that Lizzie values propriety, but she loves people more than she values propriety, and she does have a certain way of being that doesn’t always line up perfectly with what’s expected of her, and that’s precisely in character.