As probably everyone here knows, I am a literature nerd at heart and by trade with BA in English Literature. So I was naturally intrigued with Seth Grahame-Smith came out with Pride and Prejudice and Zombies in 2009. There was a lot of hype about it. He's taken Jane Austen's original work, spliced some out, added some of his own, maintained the original plot, but added zombies.
Moreover, Grahame-Smith, in an effort to modernize the story slightly, adds some foul word-play between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy. This is not okay. Let me clarify that this word-play is at a 9th grade level; used throughout the book is a double-entendre for "balls" and if you can't figure out where this is going, good for you, because it heartily upsets the reader to have Mr. Darcy making comments about balls which cause Elizabeth to blush. Not to mention it's totally out of character.
And my final issue with this book is that it is not executed. I see where Grahame-Smith was going with it and what he tried to do. However, his attempt to change the characters to fit into this zombie filled world cannot be carried throughout the work. Elizabeth Bennet cannot be portrayed as a slaughterer of zombies, a Chinese instructed warrior, and protector of Hertfordshire, (who also wants to slit Darcy's throat 3 pages after meeting him) and then transform in to a distressed love-stricken girl at the end of the book. The two realms do not meld just as Pride and Prejudice does not meld with zombies.
Needless to say, I will not be reading Sense and Sensibility and Sea-Monsters or Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Slayer.

5 comments:
So sad you didn't like this book! I'm an Austen fan too (and have a particular affection for the classic version of Pride and Prejudice), but I found it very tongue-in-cheek, clever and really fun to read!
Hope you're doing well and enjoying Cali, Annie!
I heard an interview with this author and he said it would be his last book of this sort. (Hasn't he done two now? I don't pay a lot of attention). Anyway, thanks for your well-written discussion on what's wrong with publishing this sort of work. Classic literature should remain unassailable, I think. Especially when the revamped version is written to make a quick buck....Right on, Annie!
Agreed, Annie. I love Pride and Prejudice and I actually thought I might like this, but I definitely did not. It was okay at first, but he clearly struggled to see it through. Additionally, his parts were very poorly written and his characterization was awful. I think that you can do some fun things like this in terms of adding to classic literature, but this was not a good attempt. Hope you're doing well!! -Ashleigh
I'm glad I was able to facilitate your literary inquiries and discussion. Although I agree with your conclusions I am very saddenned to know I have darkened your world with such a written abomination. Please accept my apologies. That said you've got to admit, you would fit the mold of Lizzy with her unquestioned command of the "Deadly Arts" and would if need be, probably dispatch with the unmentionables rather quickly ;-)
I agree with Ashleigh that the author had to struggle at times to make this believable but my biggest enjoyment had to do with how tongue-in-cheek this was written. Overall a 4 out of 10 but a nice distraction for a chapter or two
Post a Comment