That said, the Atlanta Opera isn’t just “any art.” It’s a serious, renowned company. I attended it for the first time during their ground-breaking Big Tent Series. During COVID, they erected a large tent at Oglethorpe University and performed using masks and plastic dividers to keep everyone distanced. I recommend researching this series because the performances were creative while honoring their original stagings.

Their recent run of Turandot was my first time back in a while, and I definitely intend to come back more often—if only for the level of talent they attract.

Turandot

The Atlanta Opera staging opens on the city square of fantasy-Peking, China. (I call it “fantasy-Peking” because the story is set out of time and place. There was a fad for Asian aestheticism in the 1920s, which influenced Turandot’s development. You could set it almost anywhere, and the story would still make sense.)

It is evening, and the people of Peking are preparing to see an execution. Their Princess Turandot has refused to ever marry, unless her suitor can answer three riddles. The latest suitor has failed and been sentenced to death.

In the tumultuous crowd, an old man is knocked down and helped up by his slave girl, Liù. When she cries for help, a younger man emerges from the crowd. We learn that he is Calaf, the long-lost prince of Tartary, and the old man is his father, King Timur. Their nation was recently conquered by the Chinese, so they live in hiding.

Meanwhile, the condemned suitor is walked into the square. He is so young and handsome, the crowd begs their princess to free him. Calaf says how cruel and awful the princess must be to allow such a thing. Then, Princess Turandot appears at the window, and with one gesture of her arm, she rejects their pleas and commands the execution to continue.

In that brief moment, Calaf sees the princess’s beauty and is overcome with longing for her. He rushes forward to strike the gong that indicates someone has accepted Princess Turandot’s challenge. Before he can reach it, though, he is stopped by the court ministers, Ping, Pang, and Pong. They, his father, and Liù attempt to dissuade him, but the prince won’t heed them. He asks Liù to care for his father in the case of his death and rings the gong.

In an interlude, the three ministers bemoan the state of their court. Once, they oversaw grand rituals, but now they just lead young men to the executioner. After joking that one of them will prepare for a wedding, while another prepares for a funeral, they reminisce about their homes away from the palace. Then, a palace trumpet calls them to greet the emperor.

Prince Calaf is brought forward, and the emperor asks him to withdraw his challenge. He, too, is tired of his daughter’s murderous game. Calaf refuses, and Princess Turandot fully enters for the first time.

She presents her riddles: “What is born each night and dies each dawn?”, “What flickers red and warm like a flame, but is not fire?”, and “What is ice which gives you fire and which your fire freezes still more?” Calaf correctly answers, “hope,” “blood,” and “Turandot.”

In a fury, the princess refuses to accept the result and begs her father to reject the foreign prince. The emperor, however, is pleased with the result and says that oaths must be honored.

Seeing Princess Turandot’s distress, bordering on panic, Prince Calaf issues a riddle of his own. No one in the city knows his name, and if Turandot can guess it by dawn, he will withdraw his claim and allow her to kill him, like her other suitors. Turandot accepts and commands that no one will sleep until someone discovers the foreigner’s secret.

While wandering the city and pondering his imminent victory, Prince Calaf is approached by the three ministers. They offer him women, riches, and a way out of the city, if he agrees to stop pursuing Princess Turandot, who is torturing her citizens to discover his name. He refuses, and they drag in Liù and King Timur.

The ministers summon Princess Turandot and say they saw the foreigner speaking with this girl and old man earlier that day. Turandot commands they be tortured, if they won’t give the information willing. Liù jumps forward, saying she alone knows the mysterious man’s name, so there is no reason to ask the frail older man.

The guards torture Liù, who refuses to give up Prince Calaf’s name. She tells the princess that she can withstand any torment because she is in love with the prince. When Turandot pushes her with further torture, the slave girl counters by saying that Turandot will also discover the wonderful power of love if she marries Calaf.

Fearing that she will eventually break under the torture, Liù reveals a hidden pistol and shoots herself before she can say anything else. Everyone is stunned, and King Timur rushes to Liù’s side, mourning his companion. He curses the kingdom, saying that Liù will come to haunt them for her unjust death before departing with a retinue carrying her corpse.

Princess Turandot and Prince Calaf are left alone, too astonished to speak. The princess finally reveals why she refuses to marry: Long ago, her ancestor ruled China in peace, but she was conquered by neighboring Tartary. The conquering king kidnapped, raped, and murdered her. Now, Turandot feels her ancestor’s spirit has been reborn in her, so she can never allow herself to be conquered by man.

However, her confidence was shaken by Liù’s declaration of love, and she gives Calaf another chance to leave, unharmed. But Calaf will not leave and tells her his name. Her father enters, and Turandot tells him she knows the foreigner’s name. It is “love.”

The Tomer Zvulun Production

Tomer Zvulun is the Atlanta Opera’s General & Artistic Director. He and Erhard Rom, the scenic designer, developed this new version of the opera. See: the plot synopsis above is not usually how Turandot is performed. Puccini died without finishing the opera, so there is no official conclusion to the story.

Usually, after Liù’s death, Calaf forces Turandot to kiss him, and she succumbs in spite of herself. In some productions, they simply stop the opera after Liù dies, since that’s where Puccini stopped writing the score.

According to Rom, “In the play by Schiller (which was Puccini’s reference), Turandot feels an immediate, conflicting attraction to Calaf during the riddle scene and in the final moments of the play, when she is desperately trying to turn him away, he attempts to commit suicide out of despair,” but she breaks down and stops him.

Many productions follow a version written by Franco Alfano, in which Calaf forces Turandot to kiss him. She is disgusted at first but, in the end, cannot resist him.

I have never seen any other production of Turandot, but based on this and other descriptions I’ve read, I much prefer Zvulun and Rom’s version. They moved Turandot’s show-stopping aria—in which she describes her ancestor’s fate—from her introduction scene to after Liù’s death. This change makes total sense to me. Now that she’s seen the pain caused by her obsession firsthand, she attempts to explain why she’s done it. Finding that inadequate, she’s forced to admit that she’s been attracted to Calaf all along and wants to experience love for herself.

Turandot’s story is controversial in the opera world. Some see it as a flawed masterpiece, others just find it disappointing, especially the character swings in the ending. I would recommend more companies attempt stagings like this one. I had no trouble following the story, and I found the ending moving, if still slightly abrupt.

The Experience

I’m torn on this show. I both loved it and wish they had done many things differently.

The Orchestra

The orchestra was great. They blended beautifully with the singers and delivered a stellar performance. Unfortunately, the better an orchestra is, the less I notice them, so they did their jobs incredibly well, and I don’t have much else to say about it.

The Sets

The set design really let this show down. Because the design team was worried about replicating Chinese stereotypes from earlier productions, they decided to remove any Chinese aesthetics from the set. Unfortunately, this means that the show felt like it wasn’t set anywhere.

They had the clever idea to design a set inspired by the Rubiks’ Cube, with lots of modern lines, and pieces that moved around each other to create new spaces. Theoretically I like this because it makes the whole story a puzzle: the characters are navigating a physical puzzle, while Prince Calaf solves the princess’s riddles. In practice, however, this design was confusing and bland. They didn’t incorporate any color into the set, it was just whites, grays, and blacks and entirely dependent on the lighting design. And almost every set was made from the same movable staircases as in every other scene, so the audience never knew if we were in the same place or a different one at any given time.

It’s a little silly to be scared of using Chinese-inspired sets when the opera is constantly reminding you that it’s set in Peking. The lyrics frequently mention it, the ministers speak of their rural Chinese homes, and the score incorporates actual Chinese folk tunes. Not setting Turandot in China is like not setting Wicked in Oz. It’s gonna be real weird when Elphaba and Glinda are singing about the Emerald City, but nothing’s emerald, and the city is just two movable staircases.

The Costumes

The costumes suffered almost the same fate as the set, but instead of replacing Chinese influence with monotones, they replaced it with everything and the kitchen sink.

The Mandarin is dressed as a giant chess board knight. I have no idea why. No one else is dressed like chessmen.

Prince Calaf is dressed like Indiana Jones. I have no idea why. No one else is dressed like they’re from a 1940s serial.

King Timur is dressed like a Chinese man. I have no idea why. No one else is dressed like they’re Chinese.

Princess Turandot is at least dressed like a princess. I can say that much!

The best costumes were the three ministers, each of whom were given the same design in a different bright color (orange, blue, and green). This design separated them from the rest of the cast while showing that they are a set, one never without the others.

The other interesting part of the costumes is seen in Turandot and her ladies in waiting. All of their costumes ombre from white to blood red. It’s not a subtle design theme (innocent white transitioning to dirt and gore as Turandot walks her bloody path), but at least it makes more sense than putting your Mandarin in giant horse mask.

The Performers

The Mandarin - Kyle White

Liù - Juliana Grigoryan

Prince Calaf - Jonathan Burton

Timur - Peixin Chen

Ping - Eleomar Cuello

Pang - Wayd Odle

Pong - Terrence Chin-Loy

Emperor Altoum - Steven Cole

Princess Turandot - Angela Meade

The Mandarin really got screwed by that mask, by the way. I’d be livid if I were him. The mask was absolutely gorgeous, and the poor man could not be heard in it. The builders attempted to make it breathable, but its weight combined with his position on the stage made it impossible to hear him.

I don’t know if it was the set or the stage, but there were some positions, especially standing high on the stairs, where the men could not project their voices. When Prince Calaf sang his famous aria, Nessun Dorma, he walked down one of those bloody staircases, turned a corner halfway, and it was like his voice was suddenly twice as loud. He didn’t go from facing away from the audience to toward it or anything, just something about the combination of height and stage position in that movement completely changed the acoustics. It’s like they never did a sound check before opening night. Someone should have caught these muffling effects and dealt with them!

Still, none of the performers were disappointing. Even when the entire audience was holding its breath, straining to hear the poor Mandarin, you could tell he has a beautiful baritone voice. The leads were stellar. Prince Calaf was the weakest of the big three, but once you’ve heard Pavarotti, any other tenor singing Nessun Dorma is going to have an uphill battle. Especially when the director makes the poor tenor sing it while walking down two flights of stairs.

It’s almost a toss up for me between Liù and Princess Turandot, but Turandot ekes out a win as my favorite performer of the night. Both women have incredibly powerful arias and delivered brilliant performances. Liù was astounding in her control of piano high notes, while even the orchestra had trouble keeping up with Turandot’s powerful vocals. Two incredible women with vastly different voices, whom I’d happily watch in any performance.

If you haven’t seen Turandot, and you’re interested, I definitely recommend seeing it live when you can. The story is moving, and with the right cast, the music is unbelievable. Not even weird sets and costumes can detract from this beautiful opera.

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

The 2021 film Agnes was too weird for me.

I literally finished watching it 5 minutes ago, and I had to come sit down and process it. So, that goes in its plus column: it’s so weird I have to talk about it.

But.

I didn’t have a good time.

I didn’t enjoy watching it. I almost gave up.

Another point in its plus column: it kept me from giving up on it.

But then it ended. And I wish I had given up on it.

I feel like I wasted my precious movie-watching time on waiting for Agnes to fulfill its potential.

You see in that poster? How the blood tear looks like it was drawn on? It doesn’t actually connect to her tear duct? That’s the movie.

Subscribe now

Agnes is about Mary

Spoilers ahead, but don’t worry, I don’t recommend watching this movie.

The movie opens in a secluded convent, where a young nun, the titular Agnes, begins lashing out, violently. Desperate, the nuns call in reinforcements to perform an exorcism. They arrive in the form of a disaffected priest and his former pupil, an innocent soon-to-be-priest.

Everything starts pretty normal; only a couple of unexpected filmmaking choices hint that things are going to get weird.

The pair of almost priests arrive at the convent, where they are reluctantly allowed in. Some of the sisters think the priests are attractive, while the Mother Superior almost doesn’t let the un-ordained man stay because he could be a temptation for the sisters.

Soon enough, they take on the demon. In the background, Sister Mary is fulfilling her cleaning duties, while poltergeist-like events happen around her (cups falling, doors opening and closing, etc.). Such events are usually associated with the possessed, confusing whether Mary is actually carrying the demon or maybe both girls are.

All goes well until the next morning when the not-actually-recovered Sister Agnes bites off a chunk of the priest’s nose. Feeling trapped, he calls in another exorcism expert: an excommunicated priest who claims to have grown up with a demon-possessed sister.

Meanwhile, Sister Mary is assigned the duty of nursing Sister Agnes. The two are close, and Agnes convinces Mary to remove her wimple, so she can be comfortable. They share secrets: Mary, that she had an underage pregnancy and lost her son; Agnes, that she fell in love with her teacher and then left him. Later, when Mary asks the Mother Superior to see how recovered Agnes is, the older woman calls Mary a slut for being undressed with men in the house.

This new “priest” arrives to take on the demon, and Sister Agnes kills him. The Mother Superior also seems to die of a heart attack during the murder. Mary leaves the convent.

Here, the movie takes a turn. Mary is living in a run-down apartment and working at a drab grocery store. As she goes about her life, we see characters that appeared to her as visions during Agnes’s possession.

She struggles to pay rent, takes on multiple shifts and multiple jobs, while avoiding advances from her manager. One night after work, she spots a sign promoting a comedian: Sister Agnes’s former lover.

Mary sees the show and can’t stop laughing the next day. Later, the comedian, Paul, asks Mary on a date. The two connect, and back at his apartment they start kissing, which ends abruptly when Mary bites a hole in his cheek—echoing Agnes’s attack on the priest.

Fearful, Mary asks the church to help her get in touch with the priests from Agnes’s exorcism. She meets with the now-ordained young priest and asks him how she can connect with God on Earth. Not through scripture or teachings, but true “connection,” she says while holding her hands together.

The priest explains that life is like the sandwich he’s eating. There’s stale bread and flavorless tomatoes and limp lettuce, but inside is what you’re really there for: the meat. Because the meat exists, you can make your way through the lackluster toppings, and you can imagine a better sandwich.

And that’s…basically where the movie ends. There are a few more lines of dialogue, but that’s it. The final scene of the movie is a priest likening Jesus to deli meat while a former nun looks on, unimpressed.

The problem is my words have to make sense

When I write it out like that, it kind of sounds like this movie has a story. But it doesn’t, really. Yes, those events happen in that order, but the movie never feels like it has a plot. It’s just a series of scenes. Unfortunately, in order to convey the film to you, I have to use English words and sentences that convey meaning. The film did not have such constraints.

The best way I can evoke the feeling of watching this movie is to imagine one of those 3D eye books or a watercolor kaleidoscope. The shapes and colors swirl, occasionally forming something that might be an image. And then, just as you’re sure it’s about to snap into clarity, the lights go out. That’s watching this movie.

I think there’s something here. I think the writer/director wanted to say something, he just forgot to actually say it.

Now, movies don’t have to speak their themes. And, like I said, I like weird movies. I have weird movie chops. I loved Saint Maud. I enjoyed I’m Thinking of Ending Things and I Saw the TV Glow. I was too emotionally affected by Melancholia to finish watching it.

What I’m trying to say is: don’t @ me, nerds. I understand weird art films.

But those movies had clear themes, even if I didn’t always understand them. Saint Maud’s theme clicks into place in the literal last second of film. And yet, you can follow the movie and its ideas all the way through.

I didn’t get I’m Thinking of Ending Things until maaaybe the final 10 minutes, and even then, I understood it better after listening to a review. I still enjoyed watching it and picking up on the clues and motifs the director wove throughout the “story.” (I believe that movie doesn’t actually have a narrative, but you can still intuit what’s going on. Movies don’t have to have a straight A to B to C story to be invigorating.)

I Saw the TV Glow has a masterful blend of allegory and real story. The film has a basic plot for you to follow, but the real meat is in the metaphorical layer that’s draped over the narrative’s bones.

What I’m saying is, movies don’t have to be straightforward to make sense. They can have a very clear plot or basically no plot and still convey a message and/or evoke feelings in their audience.

Agnes doesn’t do that. The feeling it evokes in me is disappointment and regret.

And I hate saying that. I hate feeling like I’m being mean to an artist because I recognize and value all of the hard work that clearly went into this film. But it just did not reach its goal. It’s like the film was trying too hard. It so desperately wanted to say something important that it focused too much on the art house razzle dazzle and forgot to make sure that the meaning was clear.

I will add: I think if I was Christian, especially Catholic, this movie’s meaning may have been more clear. (However, if the message is meant to be universal, then you can’t require homework.)

Like, the point of view character is a young woman named Mary whose son died. Surely that means something, but I don’t know what. Did Mother Mary not understand why Jesus died? Did she lose faith because of it? My—again, inexperienced—understanding is that losing her son was a big part of what bolstered her faith.

It turns out Agnes isn’t even in the Bible, she’s a Roman saint known for refusing marriage and taking a vow of chastity to serve the church. At age 12 or 13, she was killed by the Romans after being reported as a Christian. She is associated with purity and innocence, represented by lambs.

In the film, Agnes rejects her lover Paul to pursue her faith, which he didn’t respect, and comes to regret it.

Paul is the apostle and saint who converted to Christianity after Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus. Following the pattern of Mary and Agnes, perhaps in the film he represents someone who had the opportunity to find faith and failed to pursue it.

I can’t really get much from the other names in the limited cast.

One of the sisters is named Sister Honey…? Maybe it’s a joke because honey is mentioned in the bible and therefore an acceptable biblical name?

In conclusion?

I’m so mad. I could have spent those 90 minutes playing a video game or watching the new season of One Piece. Instead, I’m sitting here stream-of-consciousness blathering about a movie that I don’t recommend anyone watch.

There isn’t even much I can praise about the film. The cast was weird. The budget was clearly $500. (Just kidding, I don’t know what the budget was. But the movie only brought in about $5,000, so for their sake I hope the budget was $500.) It was kind of cool to see Sean Gunn outside of a green screen suit. The lighting and cinematography were used effectively to illuminate unspoken hierarchies and interests. (“Illuminate” pun 100% intended.)

This movie had something to say, and I wish I could tell you what it was.

Here’s my best shot: The film mentions “purity” and “faith through loss” more than once. Agnes, whose name evokes a symbol of virginity, preserved her purity but regretted the loss of love. When possessed, she calls everyone around her “cocksuckers” and “sluts.” Mary, in a vision, weeps tears of blood while Agnes is crucified, marking Agnes as a martyr who taught Mary a truth too painful to witness.

Mary claims not to remember her son’s father or his conception. But when she had him, he was her connection to God. She loved him with “everything she had.” When he died, she says God stopped answering her, and there was nothing to fill that void. She tried to pursue God into the convent, but he never answered her there, either.

With this in mind, if I had to reach for a theme, it would be that the Christian Church promotes faith through loss, and that one can only truly know faith after loss, and the filmmaker says, “hey, go f- yourself.” Not a single character in the film improves because of their loss. They pray, and they suffer, and they do what their told, and they suffer, and they pray, and they suffer. I will put my flag in the ground and say that the film’s theme is that suffering doesn’t actually make you a better or worse person. You just suffer and try to live your life knowing that the pain will always be with you.

If you made it to the end, power to you. Thanks for reading!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was NOT created with the assistance of an AI because, good God, what could an AI even do with this.

• The Scarlet Letter

• Bring Her Back

• Fallout

• Baldur’s Gate 3

• Crossroad of Ravens

• Misery

Thanks for listening!

Not ready to commit to a subscription? You can buy me a coffee!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

Read more

At the start, I’m going to be a bit more open about my sins than Hester was. I didn’t read the preface to The Scarlet Letter. I started to! Then I realized it wasn’t going to get any more interesting, so I started to skim it.

I dipped in every once in a while, when it looked like Hawthorne was going to make some point or connect with the actual novel. I thoroughly read the part where he finds the scarlet letter “A” and reads the scant contemporaneous notes. And I thought it was real. Or at least partially real. Finding the embroidered letter, if not the names.

So, your guide in this read along did not read the entire beginning and thought the fictional framing device was literal…. Here we go!

Chapters 1 and 2

The novel proper starts outside of the prison house, with an iconic focus on the rosebush stubbornly growing nearby. Our protagonist, Hester Prynne, emerges from the prison, carrying a baby in front of her breast, hiding the mark forced upon her by the legal and religious leaders of her community.

Hester realizes there is no hiding the mark: a bold, scarlet letter A, embroidered to the breast of her simple black dress. Deciding to give the judgmental surrounding crowd the show they came for, she walks as proudly as she can manage toward the scaffold, where she will stand under public scrutiny for several hours—the second part of her punishment, after the “A” and her time in prison (not to mention the unexpected baby, but perhaps there’s a debate as to whether or not the child is a “punishment.”)

Upon the scaffold, Hester is confronted by men and women alike. The women—unsurprisingly to any woman in history—are more bloodthirsty than the men. Several wives huddle together, saying Hester should have had her forehead branded with the letter, if the law was too squeamish to kill her outright. They think their men are going soft, to allow this sinner something so movable as embroidery to mark her shame. A younger woman among them shyly begs them to be merciful, but the elders won’t hear of it.

Chapters 3 and 4

Our sinner takes her stand above the crowd, going in and out of memories as her mind tries to shield her from her neighbors’ righteous stares. As she returns to the present moment, she is stunned to see a man in the crowd, matching the description of one from her reverie. At the back of the crowd, this not-so-strange-stranger quizzes a local man about the proceedings, learning that Hester is a married woman whose husband vanished on the crossing from Amsterdam to New England. In his absence, she has borne this baby and won’t reveal the father’s name. Her punishment is to bear this public ridicule and to wear the embroidered letter “A” upon her breast for the rest of her life.

Before Hester can process this man’s presence in the crowd, her attention is called to the religious and public figures sitting above her scaffold. An elder of their church and her local priest—Dimmesdale—move to ask Hester again if she will not reveal her child’s father, so he can stand punishment on the scaffold with her. She refuses, saying neither the community nor her own daughter will ever learn the father’s name. Dimmesdale, whose reputation has been stained by this sinner’s existence in his flock, seems especially keen for her to give the name, saying, perhaps, that the man is too cowardly to reveal himself but would stand at her side if she named him. Hester refuses and stands silently on the scaffold until the guards return her and her infant to their cell.

Back inside, Hester succumbs to something like a panic attack, also agitating her daughter. The stranger she saw in the crowd—a doctor, being ransomed by the Native Americans who held him for the last few years—is also staying in the prison, since there is no hotel or inn for guests.

He visits their cell and offers medication for the shaky pair, but Hester is wary of his aid, wondering if he might not poison her and her daughter in revenge. For it turns out, this stranger is Hester’s long lost husband, returned under a pseudonym. He promises that he means her no harm. In fact, he laments marrying Hester at all, since he was so old and she so young, there was almost no chance of their union being a happy one.

After treating them, he implores Hester again to reveal her lover’s name. He does not want revenge on her—he releases her—but he will have retribution from the man who has stolen from him. Hester still refuses to speak, and her now former husband departs.

Side Note

I’m having trouble remembering any character’s name, other than Hester. If you’re with me, this might help:

• Hester Prynne: Our protagonist.

• Roger Chillingworth: The husband (The “Stranger/Doctor”). He chooses this pseudonym specifically to hide his identity.

• Arthur Dimmesdale: The young, revered minister (the one who was “especially keen” for her to name the father).

• Governor Bellingham: The community’s stiff political leader.

Not ready to commit to a subscription? You can buy me a coffee!

Read more

I was surprised how much I enjoyed seeing Golden performed live by HUNTR/X (the pop group formed of the films’ singers), and my appreciation for the music grew with my respect for the writer and performers. Then I learned that they perform with pitch correction.

For the uninitiated, pitch correction (often colloquially called Auto-Tune, though that’s like calling all tissues Kleenex) is software used to snap a pitch exactly where you want it. It’s usually associated with singers, who use the software to make it sound like they’re on pitch when they aren’t. (Note: this is a massive oversimplification, and this video does a good job of explaining it without getting too deep into the science).

The general theory goes that if you use pitch correction then you’re an untalented hack who has no right to be a professional musician. That might be more blunt than many people would actually say, but growing up in choirs and around musicians, I think that sentiment is pretty close to their true feelings.

Subscribe now

Visualizing the Lie: The Wings of Pegasus Analysis

I see your real face and it's ugly as sin

Time to put you in your place 'cause you're rotten within — "Takedown"

About a year ago, I started following the YouTube channel Wings of Pegasus. I enjoyed watching his analyses of vocal performances, determining which were pitch corrected, mimed, or otherwise altered. In this collection, he also highlights great performers, showing how the human voice can be beautiful without being perfectly “on pitch.”

As you may have seen in the Auto-Tune video above, voices make sound waves, which are inherently not flat (they go up and down, they don’t sit on a line). Add in vibrato, and the pitch can really get wild, and yet still be considered “in tune” because of how the human ear works. This is one of favorite videos for demonstrating how a pro can be “off pitch” but still sound great:

After I shared my KPop Demon Hunters review, I saw a Wings of Pegasus video go up, featuring the video I shared at the end of my article. I was disappointed because I had shared that video to celebrate their talent, only to find out the vocals are all being slammed onto perfect pitch by software in real-time.

Honestly, I can’t hear it. I’ve gotten pretty good at hearing pitch correction, but with this performance I couldn’t tell. I know it’s happening, I can see his pitch monitoring software, but without the visual, I wouldn’t have known. Part of me wants to believe that the performers are so close to being on pitch that the software doesn’t have much to do, but that’s probably wishful thinking.

Fil also mentions that “Golden” is obviously a challenging song to perform, live or not. It’s so difficult, it practically demands vocal tuning in order to sound good.

“Raw Vocals” and Other Myths

Oh you're the master of illusion

Don't try to fool me

Look at all the masses that you're foolin' — "Takedown"

EJAE did a long interview where she describes writing the songs for KPop Demon Hunters. She wasn’t the only writer, but her demos are credited as a large reason the movie looks, sounds, and feels the way it does.

Clearly, a lot of thought and care went into her writing. You can hear it in the way she inverts the “we are hunters” motif into the demonic “Your Idol” track. Or in the complex chords behind the lyrics “knocking you out like a lullaby / hear that sound ringing in your mind,” which create a genuinely hypnotic pull.

That’s why I can’t square the dissonance between this thoughtful songwriter and auto-tuned singer. In a later video, Fil demonstrates that EJAE’s demos are also pitch corrected. She refers to them as “raw vocals,” but they aren’t. They’re edited.

Does she prefer the sound of auto-tune? Because she came up through the KPop idol industry, is that how she’s used to hearing her own voice? Is she a liar? Did she misspeak? Or does she consider the edited demos to be “raw” because they hadn’t yet gone through the full orchestration and sound production?

Whether EJAE considers them raw or not, I’m curious what this means for the future of songwriting. Composers are constrained by physical limitations: The songs in The King and I were famously simplified to accommodate a lead actress with a limited vocal range. If she had had pitch correction software available to expand her abilities, what could those songs have sounded like?

This is where I become torn. As a singer, I pride myself on being able to find notes and stay on pitch. There are thousands of singers struggling to perfect their craft, only to be overshadowed by professionals using software instead of hard work. But… I like “Golden.” Does that make me a bad musician?

I don’t work in black and white, so the answer is obviously “no,” but how can I add to these song’s billions of streams while also saying I’m against using pitch correction?

Singing is really hard. I get not advertising that you are using help. No one is going to buy tickets to “SEE TAYLOR SWIFT PRETEND TO SING!” But don’t explicitly deny it, either. If you’re using tools, treat them like tools, not dirty secrets. Treat pitch correction like a guitar pedal or a backing track—part of the production, not a replacement for talent.1

The Hypocrisy of “My Voice Without the Lies”

So we were cowards, so we were liars

So we're not heroes, we're still survivors — "What It Sounds Like"

If you don’t know about KPop, there’s one thing you need to know about KPop: people are crazy about it. Fil seems to have learned that the hard way:

He talks about the cognitive dissonance people feel when they discover an artist hasn’t been upfront with them, but I think there’s more to it with HUNTR/X. This may be projection on my part, but I think people feel like Rumi, the movie character, lied to them.

What’s the message of KPop Demon Hunters? Be yourself, and your friends will love you, even if you’re not perfect. Using pitch correction is the opposite of “being yourself.” It’s lying. Ironically, the main verse of KPDH’s beautiful finale ends with the lines “my voice without the lies / this is what is sounds like.”

“My voice without the lies”? I can’t hear that line without smirking now. Because her voice does have lies. It’s pitch corrected. At the end of the movie, we don’t actually know what Rumi’s real voice sounds like because her performer uses Auto-Tune.

It’s like the Little Mermaid deciding to stay in the sea at the end of the movie. What was the point?

Turning Auto-Tune into Lore

Hear our voice unwaverin' 'till our song defeats the night

Makin' fear afraid to breathe 'till the dark meets the light — "How It's Done"

I’ve already said I think KPop Demon Hunters could have used some punching up in the story department. This pitch correction analysis gave me a whole new idea for their story: make the film a commentary on KPop.

Once upon a time… A trio of Korean women saved their village from demons by combining their voices into a powerful song. That song created the Honmoon: a magical barrier that slows demons in their attempts to wreak havoc on Earth.

Over the centuries, trios of women have kept the Honmoon strong by battling demons with song. Now, the Honmoon is almost at its strongest. The latest iteration of protectors is the KPop girl group HUNTR/X, but music isn’t what it used to be.

Instead of using their own voices to guide and inspire, the KPop industry forces them to go through infinite layers of software and correction, dulling their magic. They can’t even perform live without being weakened by Auto-Tune. Maybe the Auto-Tune is a tool co-opted by demons to limit the hunters’ abilities.

When demons pretend to be HUNTR/X and reveal Rumi’s secret demonic patterns, they cut off her pitch correction: showing her real voice. It’s nice, but it isn’t perfect. HUNTR/X’s popularity crumbles under the weight of the revelation that the girls weren’t truly singing with their own voices.

When Rumi comes to terms with her patterns and her voice, she rushes to save her friends from the demons’ influence. As she counters the demonic music, she doesn’t have any performance equipment with her, all she can use is her own natural voice. It’s shaky, and she might not have the range she reached in “Golden,” but her voice grows strong.

Her friends join her, and their grounding harmonies help her find the song’s key. Their voices grow more powerful and more beautiful as they get used to hearing them unaltered. Eventually, the surrounding people grow to prefer this authentic sound to the demons’ fake, perfect music, and they release themselves from the evil trap.

The Honmoon is sealed and stronger than ever, not because it’s “perfect,” but because it’s real and raw and human.

Does knowing an artist uses pitch correction ruin the magic for you, or is it just part of the modern industry? Let me know in the comments.

Thanks for reading! If you like what I’m doing, subscribe to see more reviews like this.

Not ready to commit to a subscription? You can buy me a coffee!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help edit the content.

Thursday Murder Club (2025)

Mean Girls (2024)

Death By Lightning (2025)

Don’t Worry Darling (2022)

Eden (2025)

Feria (2022)

Reptile (2023)

Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery (2025)

The Girl with All the Gifts (2016)

Fallout (2025)

Scrooge (1951)

Harry Potter (2025)

Read more

The Fellowship of the Films

At a friend’s wedding in October, another friend said, on his way out the door, “leave November 15th open.” I don’t make plans that far in advance, so I knew that wouldn’t be a problem. A couple of weeks later, a third friend told me what the plans for November 15th actually were: a Lord of the Rings-themed weekend!

So four friends and I planned to watch all three LOTR films (extended editions, of course) (excluding The Hobbit trilogy, of course) and enjoy hobbit meals throughout the day.

The Two Days

The original plan was to fit all of this into one long Saturday, but we ended up doing a sleepover across Saturday afternoon and into Sunday. For the uninitiated, each extended edition film is around 4 hours long, so don’t go into this sort of event without a schedule.

Our Plan

Each meal had a set time and owner. I’m pasting exactly what was in our Google Doc, so you can see the level of madness we’re working with. I recommend not getting too fixated on the timings, otherwise you’ll forget to have fun! We ended up switching to the next meal whenever we started to get hungry or antsy. Slow cookers were a key part of this menu, so we could make plenty of stuff ahead of time and have it ready whenever we wanted it.

Saturday

• 2:00 PM: Luncheon (Sebastien) - mini roasted potatoes, red cabbage and apples, bone in chicken thighs roasted and pan seared for a crispy skin served with a cranberry reduction sauce

• 4:00 PM: Afternoon Tea (Swinks) - Tea/Lembas Bread (lavender shortbread)

• 6:30 PM: Dinner (Bucky and Mallika) - Beef Bourguignon + homemade bread

• 8:30 PM: Dessert (Swinks) - Mordor lava cake

• 9 PM or whenever the scene comes in (Sebastien): Feast of Gondor - brats in beer and roasted tomatoes….all the tomatoes

Sunday

• 9 AM: COFFEEEEE. Breakfast (Karin) - Chia seed pudding? Fruit + tea/coffee - variety of wild berries, Greek yogurt, honey, nuts. Create your own hearty Greek yogurt berry nut bowl

• 10:30 AM: Second Breakfast (Bucky and Mallika) - Scones and tea and apple slices (bc it’s what Aragorn throws to Pippin when he asks about second breakfast)

• 11:45 AM: Elevensies (Bucky and Mallika) - All the charcuterie - cheese, pepperoni and meats, root vegetables, pickles

Subscribe now

The Outcome

The Return of the Plans

Before the weekend was over, our group had already agreed to make this an annual occurrence, and maybe add in other series weekends in the future (Harry Potter, anyone?). If this idea appeals to you, I strongly recommend setting it up with your friends! It’s a great way to blend spending time together, watching great films, and eating great food. And you will hear no judgment from me if you decide to cater or order-in instead—you may have noticed, I signed up to bring yoghurt and berries!

Next year, I also want to help everyone dress up, at least with Ranger cloaks, if not full costumes. There are so many opportunities for people to be creative with a weekend like this.

Would you want to have a LOTR weekend with your cohort? I recommend having a solid plan, but otherwise be totally creative and work with your group’s strengths. If you host one, I hope you’ll let me know how it goes!

Thanks for reading! If you like what I’m doing, subscribe to see more reviews like this.

Not ready to commit to a subscription? You can buy me a coffee!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

Like posts like this? Check out one of these:

I thought I was smarter than the teacher (and, heck, probably the entire class), and I decided the common reading of this classic novel was insufficient. When the question was inevitably asked—”who is the monster in Frankenstein”—a poor football player answered “Dr. Frankenstein,” to which I rolled my eyes and huffed.

Rightfully called out by the teacher, I clarified that I believed both Dr. Frankenstein and his creature were monsters. Of course, Frankenstein is monstrous for creating life and wantonly discarding it. But his creature is self-aware and becomes educated to the same morality as any man: he has no excuse to murder innocents in acts of misplaced revenge against his creator.

I don’t remember how that discussion ended, but the teenager in me likes to believe I left the class stunned with my brilliance, and my superiority was never again questioned. (In case you don’t know what my sarcasm sounds like, that was it, and I often think of that football player and hope he can forgive me for using him as my instrument to show off in front of a teacher I didn’t respect. It’s almost like I used another person as a tool to serve my pride, instead of respecting his feelings and opinions as worthy on their own merits. Almost like…Frankenstein!)

Reading Frankenstein

Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus is many things to many people, but it has mostly been ground down to this single, popular reading: “the man was the monster and the monster was the man.” An interpretation with all the heat and edge of a three-day old McDonald’s French fry.

While valid, this reading only touches on one of Shelley’s many themes. The brilliance of the book lies in how seamlessly it weaves together massive, weighty concepts—the sin of pride, the limits of science, the nature of fatherhood, and societal rejection—into a single narrative. The creature’s journey from infant philosopher to bitter murderer is the result of compounding failures, not just one single act of creation. It is this thematic density that makes the reading experience limitless, and it is precisely this complexity that makes the journey into watching the story on screen so often disappointing.

Subscribe now

Watching Frankenstein

Guillermo del Toro’s 2025 adaptation attempts to add more flesh to that bone but stumbles under the weight of its own ambition, offering us a beautiful visual cake that is mostly just icing.

The film’s visual trappings are stunning, to the point of distraction. The costumes and lighting are divine (sometimes literally). And the cinematography and direction are perfect. It’s worth watching for the aesthetics alone.

I loved the film’s focus on the extreme anatomical details. del Toro’s Frankenstein doesn’t just want the best body parts, he wants the best circuitry and vascular system. He takes a knee from one man, a nerve cluster from another, and on and on until he reaches true perfection. If you don’t like gore, this isn’t the movie for you, but the attention to detail is astounding.

The problem is that all this worldly detail is more exciting than the flat story. The mechanics and world design were much more interesting than the characters, so the mind lingers there instead: How do all of these veins line up? How do the muscle sizes match? Are they all the same blood type? These questions come up only when the story isn’t strong enough to hold your attention.

The Flat Performances

I am disappointed that del Toro would make a film that has nothing new to say. I could afford a decent lunch if I got a dollar for every time someone in this movie called Victor a “monster” to his face. That’s the level of writing we’re dealing with for two and a half hours. Maybe it’s Netflix’s fault—there are many think pieces out there covering the dumbing down of modern media, especially in the age of playing on your phone or laptop while watching TV. But whoever is to blame, it’s insulting and boring and, at times, derisible.

Like much of the writing, the main cast is about as sharp as a pool noodle. Except for Jacob Elordi (the creature) and Christoph Waltz (Herr Harlander). As the creature, Elordi shines. I had never seen him before this role, but apparently he got his start in a few Netflix young-adult kissy movies, so I am surprised by the depth of his performance. Through heavy prosthetics and make-up, Elordi’s Creature is emotive, moving, and deeply sympathetic.

Unfortunately, you can’t hide the fact that Elordi is a handsome young man, so it becomes a tad unbelievable that people would fear him without seeing his many scars first. It’s more like they’re afraid of anyone over 6’ tall than of his deformities.

Meanwhile, Mia Goth as Elizabeth has the charisma of a dead fish. (As does her fiancé William, who is less worthy of mention than his six-year-old book counterpart.) I don’t think the actress was given much to work with, as her character seemed to be a woman-shaped box, where you could insert a Marry Shelley stand-in or Feminist Talking Point as necessary.

Oscar Isaac’s Frankenstein (and I’d argue, his entire career) depends on his scene partner to bring out his best. With Elordi and Waltz, Frankenstein is bombastic, temperamental, and effusive. But the rest of the cast can’t get much out of him, and the movie drags whenever Elordi and Waltz aren’t on screen.

There is some great dialogue hiding amid the blunt story. The creature’s line,” Why do you only listen when I hurt you,” haunts me, especially within the father-son lens. But those stellar moments fail to make the movie greater than its parts.

Writing Frankenstein

Frankenstein (2025) is disappointing both in light of what Mary Shelley did write and what del Toro could write. Both are masters of their craft, and this film does not display either of them well.

The potential themes in Frankenstein seem limitless. You could follow a family angle (fatherhood, motherhood, legacy). You can go cultural (Elizabeth’s lack of autonomy, men’s failure to protect and provide). You could even gender-swap any or all characters in this story, and very little would have to change, but the themes would take on a drastically different meaning.

There is so much to do in Frankenstein. And del Toro did almost none of it because he chose to do all of it. He chose the family route, especially fatherhood. Not bad. But he also kept the classic sin of pride and monstrosity themes, and then threw in Prometheus, Adam and Eve, and some feminism for spice.

The problem is you don’t have to harp on themes already woven into the fabric of the story. They’re inextricably linked with the narrative because Shelley was a good writer. I wish del Toro had chosen to let those well-trodden themes exist on their own and narrowed in on the stuff he found interesting, like the fatherhood theme. Frankenstein: an exploration of a son’s attempt to live up to his father’s expectations while also clinging to his mother’s warmth: that’s a classic theme right there.

Instead, he wanted everything and the kitchen sink, which made the end of the movie almost distasteful. The creature forgives Frankenstein because… he asked him to? Literally nothing had changed between them, except that Frankenstein had heard the creature’s story. But nothing in that story contradicted Frankenstein’s biases. He was still a vain man who blamed others for his own failings. Earlier, he apologized to Elizabeth using almost the exact same words, and she called him a liar and slapped him in the face! What makes him a liar then and honest now?

I don’t mind the creature forgiving him, that’s a perfectly solid ending to a fatherhood exploration, but you have to earn it. The moment failed because del Toro had so much fun watching Frankenstein create and reject his creature that he forgot he had the whole back half of the story to write—the hard, messy, unglamorous work of change and accountability.

The Magic in Frankenstein

Sadly, this film will join the pile of others that attempted to do justice to a book that will outlive them all. It is absolutely gorgeous. A really wonderful visual cake to sink your teeth into. But it’s mostly just icing. Without the proven recipe of Shelley’s original, del Toro’s version would be little more than cotton candy. The magic of media is not in the visual splendor; it’s in the depth of the text that invites us back to read, watch, and write our own meanings, year after year.

Thanks for reading! If you like what I’m doing, subscribe to see more reviews like this.

Not ready to commit to a subscription? You can buy me a coffee!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help edit the content.

I’ve wanted to watch Cobweb since I first learned about it in this video. It seemed spooky and thoughtful, promising a depth that often feels missing in the modern horror genre’s reliance on brash jump scares. Two years later, it popped up in my Netflix feed, and I finally watched it.

And boy, am I glad I did!

Cobweb follows young Peter, the only son of two overprotective parents. He’s a lonely boy, bullied at school and isolated at home, except for the constant presence of his stay-at-home mother. The story begins when Peter starts hearing scratches and knocks against his empty bedroom wall, which his parents, of course, can’t hear. They tell him he’s imagining the noises and send him back to bed each night.

Then, Peter starts to hear a voice from the wall. It’s a young girl, offering him companionship, advice, and asking for his help. But her guidance leads Peter down a dark path of revenge, ultimately revealing more about his little world than he ever wanted to know.

If you’re into horror, I highly recommend checking out Cobweb! It’s delightfully spooky, with an exciting twist. The movie feels more like a scary fairytale than a straight-forward horror/thriller. And at only 90-odd minutes, it’s a perfect choice for a Halloween watch-a-thon.

Spoilers ahead.

I want to talk about more than just enjoying this movie. It’s great on its own, but it excels at leaving you with something important to think about long after the credits roll. If you’ve already seen it or don’t care about spoilers, read on.

Not ready to commit to a subscription? You can support me with coffee!

Buy me a coffee

Read more

If you have children or are under the age of 50, you’ve probably heard of “K-pop Demon Hunters,” the animated movie that surprised everyone—especially Netflix—by rocketing to the number one spot. And the movie isn’t the only thing that achieved great success: the soundtrack hit No. 1 on the Billboard charts, as did its lead single “Golden.”

But honestly, the movie isn’t all that impressive.

The story is mediocre—a coming-of-age tale that we’ve seen a hundred times before, without any special twist to make it stand out from the pack. Character designs are average, with your typical Sailor-Moon-style elongated legs and petite torsos, with different hair styles, so you can tell the characters apart.

As a children’s movie, you can’t be too hard on the story. It has to stay simple. But K-Pop Demon Hunters tries to weave in too many lore elements. Our lead character, Rumi, has a simple arc: learning that she is still lovable, although she has half-demonic heritage. But demons have been set up as the ultimate evil in this world. For centuries, three Korean songsters have protected the world from the demons’ influence. One side is good, and one side is bad. Very fairytale. Safe kids’ stuff. But K-Pop Demon Hunters wants its complexity, too.

The movie introduces Jinu, a human who gave up his soul in exchange for wealth and comfort. He teams up with other demons to create the Saja Boys, a boy-band rivaling the protagonists’ girl-band Huntr/x (pronounced like huntrix). He becomes Rumi’s love interest, convincing her that he gave up his humanity to save his family, making her question whether demons are irrevocably evil.

The Saja Boys are able to leach away Huntr/x’s fans because demons can blend in with humanity. Only if you are able to recognize the zigzagging patterns on their skin would you know that they aren’t human—and only the women who protect humanity can reveal these lines. And our lead singer Rumi has a secret: she was born with demon patterns, which have been spreading her entire life. Now, they’re interfering with her ability to sing, and only by singing can she elevate the magical barrier and cast out demons from our world forever.

In the end, Jinu reveals that he didn’t protect his family. In fact, he left them out in the cold while he sold his soul to the demon king. He says this as he dies protecting Rumi. The writers have given themselves a problem. Because in saying this, Jinu reveals that he can’t be redeemed. If he lived, and became Rumi’s boyfriend, she’d have to contend with the fact that he left his mother and young sibling to die of poverty. The only remedy for this in the limited timeframe of a movie is self-sacrifice.

So, Jinu was always bad (perhaps conflicted, but ultimately unreformed), and the rest of the Saja Boys are bad, and the rest of the demons are bad (except for Jinu’s adorable, merchandisable pets), but Rumi is…good?

This brings up questions that I will admit the target audience is too young for: who was Rumi’s father and how was she conceived? Her mother (who died shortly after Rumi’s birth) was also a hunter, sworn to protect humanity from demons. So how did she fall in love with one? Why didn’t she tell anyone what happened? Or that she was pregnant? Her husband (?) was presumably good, unless this story took a very dark turn in an earlier draft, so why is every other demon shown to be evil? How can Rumi banish all demons from Earth but get to live there herself, openly showing her demonic heritage?

I assume this story comes from the co-director Maggie Kang’s experiences as a Korean-Canadian woman. Despite improvements over time, many Asian cultures are still known to struggle with accepting foreigners and mixed-race citizens. And children in every society love to point out when someone is different from them. So Rumi’s story is universal…until they made half of her the literal definition of evil.

Standing on its own, K-Pop Demon Hunters isn’t West Side Story: demons are bad, and the hunters are good, and Rumi gets a bye.

I thought this was about the music? Yes. I’m getting there.

Since the muddled story and the bland characters aren’t what make the film good, the music is really all that’s left. And since the movie is massively popular, I’d argue the music is what made it that way.

When I see people talk about this movie, they don’t quote the characters or mimic scenes (except for Jinu’s “pet” tiger demon). What do people quote and mimic? The music.

Other than the Saja Boys’ Soda Pop, which we’ll get back to, the film’s most popular songs, Golden and How It’s Done, were co-written by South Korean and American singer/song-writer/producer Kim Eun-jae (known professionally as EJAE). Her performances and demos “helped get us the green light,” co-director Kang wrote on X. And for once, I don’t think that’s media bluster: I think this movie would not exist without Ejae.

As an aside, my personal favorite number from the show is What it Sounds Like, but the internet does not agree with my choice. Golden and Soda Pop are the two run-away hits, with “Golden [becoming] the first No. 1 by a female-led K-pop group,” according to grammy.com.

In case you weren’t aware, K-Pop has taken over the world, and this film succeeded by hiring actual K-Pop writers and stars. The songs are catchy because they’re written by people whose entire careers are predicated on being able to write catchy songs. Nothing is ever a guaranteed success, but hiring actual K-Pop writers to write a K-Pop soundtrack will get you pretty close.

The irony is that Soda Pop is the song I see most online. Now, algorithms play a hand in that. I like watching cute guys do the dance, so Instagram shows me more cute guys doing the dance. Still, I would argue in terms of videos, Soda Pop is the most popular song. And it’s the song that was supposed to be the most vapid.

Co-writer Danny Chung described it as “Cute, bubbly, intentionally annoyingly infectious. It’s absolutely an earworm, and that was the point.” And boy, is it ever an earworm. It’s stuck in my head all the time. Why else do you think I’m writing about a movie I didn’t like all that much? I can’t get the music out of my head.

I can barely remember any of the characters’ names. I had to look most of them up to write this. I can’t remember the costumes or the finer points of the plot. All I hear is “My little soda pop *kr-chhss*”. Kill me.

Just kidding. I like the music! It’s grown on me through forced repetition, and Ejae is an extremely talented singer. She (and the other songwriters) deserve all of the recognition they’re getting. If Netflix makes a sequel (which, c’mon, of course they will), I hope they keep the creative team. Also, if they focus more on making the lore logical and the characters interesting, I might actually enjoy watching it and not just listening to it.

Thanks for reading! If you like what I’m doing, subscribe to see more reviews like this.

Not ready to commit to a subscription? You can buy me a coffee!

Subscribe now

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help edit the content.

Well, hello there! I’ve been on a long and unplanned sabbatical. Life simply went full-throttle for a while, but I’m thrilled to finally be back and ready to talk books, screens, and everything in between.

The short version of where I’ve been: Between being only half-unpacked from my August move, picking up new responsibilities at work, navigating a friend’s bachelorette and upcoming wedding, and giving my cat his many old-man meds, the usual fun stuff got completely sidelined. For a few weeks, I didn’t even read or play games, which is practically unheard of!

But the break ends now! I love writing, and I’ve missed this space. So, to kick off, here’s a round-up of everything I did manage to watch last month. Bear with me as I pick up the pace, and let me know what you think!

The RWW 5-Star System

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ I loved this and want everyone to experience it and talk to me about it.

⭐⭐⭐⭐ I liked this a lot, and I think many other people would like it, too.

⭐⭐⭐ I liked this, but I’m not sure it’s a great recommendation for most people.

⭐⭐ I didn’t really like this, but I didn’t hate it, and some other people might like it.

⭐ I really did not enjoy this experience and do not recommend it.

What I Watched In September

Krampus (2015) ⭐⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: A boy who has a bad Christmas accidentally summons a festive demon to his family home. Quick review: This is a fun little horror movie! Great for people who don’t typically like horror or for horror fans looking for ways to ease their kids into the genre.

Starship Troopers (1997) ⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: Humans, in a fascist militaristic future, wage war with giant alien bugs. Quick review: I can kind of see why people didn’t get that this was satire, but I really enjoyed it. It’s not a bad adventure movie on its own, and the satire is rich if you’re the type to notice it.

Orphan Black: Season 1: Episodes 1 - 3 ⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: A streetwise hustler is pulled into a compelling conspiracy after witnessing the suicide of a girl who looks just like her. Quick review: I just didn’t get into this one. It’s been running for ages, so maybe it gets better later, but I was more interested in watching other things.

Inglorious Basterds (2009) ⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: In Nazi-occupied France during World War II, a plan to assassinate Nazi leaders by a group of Jewish U.S. soldiers coincides with a theatre owner’s vengeful plans for the same. Quick review: A really, really good movie that I didn’t enjoy very much. That’s my usual reaction to Tarantino films, and I’d like to write more about that soon!

Until Dawn (2025) ⭐⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: A group of friends trapped in a time loop, where mysterious foes chase and kill them in gruesome ways, must survive until dawn to escape it. Quick review: I really like this kind of fun horror movie, and I love the director. It’s just a fun movie—not earth-shattering, but a nice way to spend an evening.

Adolescence (2025) ⭐⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: When a 13-year-old is accused of the murder of a classmate, his family, therapist and the detective in charge are all left asking what really happened. Quick review: I can see why this made the rounds online. I really enjoyed it! But it is not a fun time.

Peacemaker: Season 1 - ⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: Picking up where The Suicide Squad (2021) left off, Peacemaker returns home after recovering from his encounter with Bloodsport - only to discover that his freedom comes at a price. Quick review: I watched the first season and started the second but kind of fell off in between the weekly episode release. The second season just hasn’t been as enticing for me, but it’s still fun.

Them: Season 1: Episodes 1 - 4 ⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: Anthology horror series with varying characters and locations by season, featuring different aspects of the horror genre. Quick review: The clash between the fictional horrors of a haunted house and the real-life horrors of racism made it difficult for me to enjoy this series. I want to write more about why this one constantly felt on the verge of being really good.

Harlan Coben’s Shelter (2023) ⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: Mickey lives with a mother in rehab, a dead father, an annoying aunt and a new school in New Jersey. When a creepy old woman tells him that his father isn’t dead, Mickey thinks he’s losing his mind. Quick review: I love a Harlan Coben series. This one is a weaker entry than many of the others, but you can’t go wrong with a Coben suburban mystery.

Death Becomes Her (1992) ⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: When a fading actress learns of an immortality treatment, she sees it as a way to outdo her long-time rival. Quick review: A little silly, but a fun movie. I watched it because I enjoyed the Broadway version’s soundtrack, and I think the (unseen by me) Broadway version is better.

Midsommar (2019) ⭐⭐⭐⭐ IMDB tagline: A couple travels to Northern Europe to visit a rural hometown’s fabled Swedish mid-summer festival. What begins as an idyllic retreat quickly devolves into an increasingly violent and bizarre competition at the hands of a pagan cult. Quick review: The movie that launched a thousand Florence Pugh frowny face memes. It’s an exciting thriller where you kind of know where it’s going the whole time, but it’s still great looking and interesting.

Thanks for catching up with me!

Which of these did you also watch? And more importantly: which of the future topics (Tarantino films or Them) should I tackle next? Let me know in the comments!

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help edit the content.

After weeks of immersing myself into 15th-century Bohemia, I'm excited to share my review of Kingdom Come: Deliverance II. This sequel has been one of my most anticipated releases, and it delivers a uniquely rich and meticulously detailed historical setting unmatched by other games of its scale.

While fantasy role-playing games (RPGs) like The Witcher or Skyrim allow us to explore fantastical medieval worlds, the Kingdom Come: Deliverance series carves its own path, laser-focused on a specific, often overlooked, point in history. It's a period that many, especially outside of Eastern Europe, might not know much about, and that's precisely part of its charm. Warhorse Studios' deep love for history and unwavering commitment to accuracy are palpable, evident from the architecture to the daily routines of non-player characters (NPCs). One of my absolute favorite features remains the in-game Codex, which is packed with fascinating historical notes, transforming gameplay into an engaging history lesson.

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II feels like a natural and compelling continuation of Henry's story. In the first game, we witnessed his humble beginnings, a young man starting from nothing, almost like an NPC thrust into a grand narrative. We spent hours developing him into a capable individual, perhaps even a knight in shining armor. Now, in the sequel, Henry is more experienced, more mature, and ready for further development, allowing players to focus on refining his skills rather than just teaching him how to function outside of his village.

My hope for this review is that readers will come away with a profound appreciation for the immense effort and artistry poured into Kingdom Come: Deliverance II, understanding its unique appeal even if they don't pick up a sword themselves. For those considering the plunge, I aim to help you decide if this epic journey is for you.

The Legacy & Evolution: How KCD2 Builds on the Original

For many, including myself, the original Kingdom Come: Deliverance was a challenging, yet ultimately rewarding, experience. I'll admit, my first attempt at KCD1 ended in a rage quit after a frustrating early fist fight, as I was convinced the game offered no clear tutorials, rendering it unplayable. It was only months later, after returning to it (and forgetting my previous attempt!), that I realized the struggle is the point of the game. It was refreshing to play a main character who isn't a power fantasy from the outset. Henry is barely an adult with no fight training, so you can't rush into every battle. Instead, you have to build him up bit by bit, making choices that shape him into the person you want him to be—whether a proud knight or a cruel robber baron. What truly made KCD1 beloved were its unparalleled historical details, memorable characters, sharp writing (especially the humor), and deep RPG mechanics that offered immense player choice.

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II feels less like a radical overhaul and more like a masterful refinement of the first game's mechanics. The core combat system, while still challenging, feels a bit smoother, making engagements more fluid while retaining the realistic weight of medieval combat. The reputation system remains as impactful as ever, ensuring your actions have tangible consequences within the living world. The writing, too, feels like a seamless transition; all the returning characters feel authentic and consistent with their previous portrayals.

For me, the biggest step forward in KCD2 lies in the additional crafting abilities. Henry can now smith his own weapons and materials, a feature I absolutely love. Alchemy efforts, too, are now more dependent on the player's attention to detail and ingredient sourcing, adding a layer of satisfying realism. While some might find this level of detail and 'tedium' off-putting, for fans of the series, it's precisely the point: it authentically reflects the challenges of the 1400s. The game doesn't hold your hand, and the reward for mastering these crafts feels earned.

Subscribe now

What I Loved: The Triumphs of Bohemia

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II truly shines in several key areas, making it an unforgettable experience that builds beautifully on its predecessor.

Exceptional Writing and Dialogue: The narrative and character interactions are, for me, absolute standouts. The game maintains a fantastic balance of humor and pathos, delivering both serious, impactful moments and genuinely laugh-out-loud exchanges. The dialogue feels natural, often blending historical context with a surprising, almost unscripted realism. This is particularly evident in the dynamic between Henry and Hans Capon. There's a minor, yet memorable, scene early on where Henry and Hans are confined in the town stocks, arguing like an old married couple. Hans tries to kick Henry, and after a few attempts, he finally connects, prompting Henry to yell, "Fuck off!" in a way that feels utterly authentic and spontaneous. These moments, combined with the overall narrative quality, truly bring the characters and the world to life.

Deep and Rewarding Crafting Systems: The expanded crafting mechanics are a huge win in KCD2. I love that Henry can now smith his own weapons and materials. This isn't just a simple menu interaction; it's a hands-on process that adds immense satisfaction and a layer of historical immersion.

Vast and Varied Side Quests: Beyond the compelling main story, KCD2 offers a rich tapestry of side quests that are far from generic fetch quests. They are deeply integrated into the world, often featuring complex narratives, memorable characters, and surprising outcomes. This variety ensures that exploration and engagement outside the main quest feel meaningful and contribute to the overall immersion.

Historical Accuracy as a Core Strength: The game's unwavering commitment to historical accuracy is not just a detail; it's a fundamental aspect that elevates the entire experience. It forces the player to genuinely learn about 15th-century Bohemia, including its social hierarchies and the very particular roles of men and women. This is beautifully exemplified in Henry's relationship with Hans. Despite their close friendship, the game subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) reminds you that Hans, as a noble, holds a higher station. As a player, you constantly navigate this dynamic, choosing whether to play into or resist the societal norms, which adds a layer of complexity to their bond. While not everything can be 100% accurate (and thankfully, the dialogue isn't in Old English or Czech!), the characters genuinely feel like they are living and breathing in the 1400s.

Rewarding Player Loyalty (A Small but Meaningful Detail): A small detail that really resonated with me, and might be a minor spoiler, is the "Good 'ol Pebbles" achievement. This is awarded for keeping your starting horse, Pebbles, with you for a long time. I earned it simply because I couldn't afford a new horse, but also because I would have felt genuinely bad selling her. It's a testament to the game designers' thoughtful approach, rewarding players who develop an emotional attachment to their loyal steed.

Impressive Character Animations: The attention to detail in character animations is wonderful. I assume the team utilized motion capture, as the movements feel fluid and realistic. Beyond the general fidelity, these animations contribute immensely to the expressiveness of the characters. The aforementioned scene with Henry and Hans in the stocks, where Hans struggles to kick Henry and Henry's exasperated "Fuck off!" feels so genuine, is a perfect example of how these animations enhance the humor and realism of the dialogue.

What I Didn't Love (or Hope for Improvement): The Stumbles in the Kingdom

While Kingdom Come: Deliverance II delivers an incredibly rich and immersive experience, there are a few areas where it stumbles or where I felt there was room for improvement.

Graphical Fidelity vs. Historical Detail: My primary frustration with KCD2 lies in its graphical appearance, which, at times, feels a step below other recent launches like Hogwarts Legacy or Baldur's Gate 3. While the cutscenes are often lovely, the overall in-game visuals can feel like a lower fidelity in comparison. I suspect the development team had to make a choice between pushing graphical boundaries and maintaining their unparalleled commitment to historical detail. I don't begrudge their choice, as the historical accuracy is a major draw for me, but I would be even more excited if both aspects were equally well-developed.

Inconsistent Historical Accuracy (Character Design & Narrative Choices): While the game generally excels in historical authenticity, there are moments where it slips, which can be jarring given the usual meticulousness. Katherine's character design, for instance, stands out. Her appearance is so strikingly different from almost every other female NPC, who are generally conservatively dressed, that it's jolting to see her so "out and about." What's even stranger is that NPCs in the game comment on everything from Henry's appearance to his horse's quality, yet there's no in-game commentary on Katherine's unique look.

Similarly, the inclusion and heavy focus on the Jewish Quarter in Kuttenberg—while interesting and providing compelling characters and stories—feels like a narrative compromise. The writers themselves admit that this portrayal isn't entirely accurate to the time period. While I enjoyed those characters and their narratives, this choice feels somewhat at odds with the series' core identity of historical adherence. It's not a serious problem, but it's a peculiar deviation.

Accessibility Challenges for New Players: Despite its refinements, Kingdom Come: Deliverance II isn't the easiest game for newcomers to jump into. The game features numerous references to its predecessor, which, while rewarding for veterans, might lessen the attachment for a player completely new to the series. More significantly, the combat system, while improved, is still hard and not fully explained early on. Unlike KCD1, which offered a basic introduction to its combat system within the first handful of side quests, KCD2 requires players to get through a significant portion of the early story before finding a trainer to properly explain the intricacies of fighting. This steep initial learning curve could be a barrier for those unfamiliar with the series' unique mechanics.

Missing Familiar Faces and Places: A personal disappointment for me was the absence of Theresa, the mill girl, and our familiar home of Rattay from the first game. While I understand the need for new settings, it was sad not to see her or our established base at all in KCD2. I'm holding out hope that she (and perhaps Rattay) will make an appearance in future downloadable content (DLC), but their current omission was a noticeable void.

Overall Verdict: Is Henry's Latest Adventure Worth It?

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II is a big game that is absolutely worth exploring. While it might not always reach the graphical fidelity of some of its contemporaries, its unique historical setting and deeply engaging gameplay mechanics are unparalleled and absolutely worth experiencing.

I wholeheartedly recommend this game to:

• Fans of the first Kingdom Come: Deliverance: You will find a refined and expanded experience that builds on what you loved.

• RPG enthusiasts: If you crave deep role-playing, meaningful choices, and a world that reacts to your actions, KCD2 delivers in spades.

• Players who want a challenging, first-person combat system: This game offers a rewarding and realistic combat experience that demands skill and patience.

Using the Read, Watch, Write star system, I give Kingdom Come: Deliverance II 4 out of 5 stars: "I liked this a lot, and I think many other people would like it, too."

Learn more about KDC2 on their website: kingdomcomerpg.com

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help organize and draft the content.

Missed last week? Catch up here:

Chapters 47-61: A Brief Recap

This final section of Pride and Prejudice begins with the desperate search for Lydia and Wickham. Elizabeth’s uncle, Mr. Gardiner, assists Mr. Bennet in London, but it is ultimately Mr. Darcy who secretly locates the couple and, at great personal expense and effort, persuades Wickham to marry Lydia. He settles Wickham’s debts and ensures a financial provision for Lydia, all while keeping his involvement a secret from Elizabeth and her family to spare them further humiliation.

Lydia and Wickham return to Longbourn as a married couple, much to the family's relief, though Lydia remains oblivious to the depth of the scandal she caused. During her visit, Lydia inadvertently reveals to Elizabeth that Darcy was present at her wedding, sparking Elizabeth's curiosity and suspicion. Mrs. Gardiner, in a subsequent letter, confirms Darcy's extensive and selfless involvement in securing Lydia's marriage, revealing the full extent of his generosity and true character. This revelation completely overturns Elizabeth's remaining prejudices against him.

Soon after, Mr. Bingley returns to Netherfield, accompanied by Darcy. His renewed courtship of Jane is swift and heartfelt, culminating in a joyful proposal, which she happily accepts.

The peace at Longbourn is dramatically interrupted by an unexpected visit from the formidable Lady Catherine de Bourgh. Having heard rumors of a potential engagement between Darcy and Elizabeth, she confronts Elizabeth, demanding she deny any such intention and promise never to marry Darcy. Elizabeth refuses to be intimidated, acknowledging that she and Darcy are not engaged but refusing to swear never to marry him. Lady Catherine leaves in a rage, but her visit inadvertently serves to reassure Darcy of Elizabeth's newfound affection.

Following Lady Catherine's departure, Mr. Darcy returns to Longbourn. In a much-changed demeanor from his first attempt, he makes a second, heartfelt proposal to Elizabeth, expressing his love and admiration. Elizabeth, her own feelings now transformed by his actions and revelations, joyfully accepts him. Their engagement is initially met with disbelief by Mr. Bennet, who cannot fathom Elizabeth loving Darcy, but upon learning the full truth of Darcy's intervention for Lydia, he gives his blessing. Mrs. Bennet, upon realizing the wealth and status Elizabeth will gain, is, of course, ecstatic.

The novel concludes with the marriages of Jane and Bingley, and Elizabeth and Darcy. We also get glimpses into their future lives: Jane and Bingley settle happily at Netherfield, while Elizabeth and Darcy live in bliss at Pemberley, where Elizabeth becomes a beloved mistress of the estate. The futures of the other characters, including Kitty, Mary, and the still-unreformed Lydia and Wickham, are also briefly touched upon, bringing the story to a satisfying close.

Subscribe now

My Impressions and Observations

These final chapters are incredibly satisfying, providing the resolutions we've been rooting for while also delivering powerful lessons in personal growth and the dismantling of prejudices.

The revelation of Darcy's selfless intervention in the Lydia/Wickham scandal is the ultimate turning point. It's a testament to his profound love for Elizabeth, driving him to act with immense generosity and humility, despite the personal cost. This act shatters Elizabeth's remaining prejudice, forcing her to see him not just as a proud gentleman, but as a man of true honor and deep affection. It beautifully illustrates how actions, rather than words or initial impressions, truly define one’s character.

Elizabeth's own growth is equally striking. Her fierce independence, which initially led her to misjudge Darcy, allows her to stand firm against Lady Catherine's bullying. This scene is a triumph of spirit, demonstrating that Elizabeth's strength of character is precisely what attracts Darcy and makes her a fitting partner for him. Her ability to admit her past errors in judgment regarding both Darcy and Wickham showcases a maturity and self-awareness that are central to her appeal.

The resolution of Jane and Bingley's relationship is a gentle counterpoint to Elizabeth and Darcy's more tumultuous path. It highlights a different kind of love story, one built on mutual affection and a simpler understanding, finally free from external interference.

Finally, the novel's ending reinforces the theme that true happiness in marriage stems from genuine affection, mutual respect, and a deep understanding of character, rather than solely from wealth or social standing. While wealth certainly plays a role in Austen's world, the ultimate triumph is the union of two individuals who have overcome their flaws and biases to truly see and appreciate each other. The contrast between the Darcys/Bingleys and the Bennets/Wickhams underscores the importance of character and responsible parenting.

Let's Discuss: Questions for Chapters 47-61

We've reached the end of our journey through Pride and Prejudice! What are your final thoughts on this beloved classic? Share your reflections in the comments below:

1. Darcy's Redemption: How does Darcy's secret intervention in the Lydia/Wickham affair redeem his character in Elizabeth's eyes, and perhaps in your own? What does this act reveal about his love for Elizabeth and his personal growth?

2. Elizabeth's Transformation: By the end of the novel, how has Elizabeth's character evolved from the witty but prejudiced young woman we met at the beginning? What key lessons has she learned, and how do her final interactions with Darcy and Lady Catherine demonstrate this growth?

3. The Nature of Happiness: Considering the various marriages (Bennet, Collins, Lydia/Wickham, Jane/Bingley, Elizabeth/Darcy), what message do you think Austen conveys about the ingredients for a truly happy and successful marriage in Regency society, and perhaps even today?

4. Final Impressions: What is your overall takeaway from Pride and Prejudice? Has your perception of any character changed significantly from beginning to end? What makes this novel endure as a classic?

Unveiling Austen's Magic: The Power of Punctuation

As we conclude our reading, let's take one last look at how Austen's masterful use of punctuation contributes to the novel's enduring charm and clarity.

Remember to pay attention to:

• The Dash (—): Mr. Darcy’s second proposal and Elizabeth’s acceptance are filled with emotion. How do dashes in their dialogue or the narration convey intensity, hesitation, or a rush of feeling in these climactic moments?

• The Semicolon (;): In these final chapters, Austen often uses semicolons to connect complex ideas or to list elements that are closely related, creating a sophisticated flow. Can you find an example where a semicolon helps to build a nuanced description or a chain of thought?

• Emphasis (Italics): Look for any final instances where Austen uses italics to emphasize a word or phrase. Does it highlight a character's particular tone, a crucial detail, or perhaps a moment of subtle irony in the resolution?

What other instances of Austen's punctuation or stylistic choices caught your eye in these concluding chapters, and what did they reveal to you?

Looking Ahead & Joining the Conversation!

From first impressions to shocking revelations and ultimately, the triumph of love and understanding, this novel truly stands the test of time. I've thoroughly enjoyed dissecting its layers with all of you.

Thank you for being such an engaged and thoughtful part of the Read, Watch, Write Book Club's discussion of Pride and Prejudice. Your insights have made this experience even richer.

Remember to share your final thoughts and answers to this week's discussion questions in the comments below. And don't forget our dedicated Pride and Prejudice Book Club: General Discussion thread for broader conversations and connecting with fellow readers.

As we close this chapter, I'm already excited about our next literary adventure! Keep an eye out for an announcement soon regarding our next book club pick.

Happy reading, and I look forward to our future discussions!

Leave a comment

Happy reading!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help organize and draft the content.

Missed last week? Catch up here:

Chapters 34-46: A Brief Recap

This section dramatically opens with Mr. Darcy's unexpected and condescending marriage proposal to Elizabeth Bennet. Elizabeth vehemently rejects him, citing his patronizing tone, his interference with her sister’s relationship, and his past cruelty toward her friend Mr. Wickham.

The next day, Darcy delivers a lengthy letter to Elizabeth. This letter serves as a crucial turning point in Elizabeth’s life. It reveals his true motives behind separating Bingley and Jane (believing Jane indifferent and the Bennet family socially unsuitable) and exposing the full, scandalous truth behind Mr. Wickham's nature and his nefarious dealings with the Darcy family. Elizabeth initially rejects the letter's claims, but with careful re-reading and reflection on her own experiences, she reluctantly begins to accept its difficult truths. She discovers inconsistencies in Wickham’s stories, such as how he claimed he would never expose Darcy’s bad character, but it was widely known immediately after the gentleman had left Netherfield. As she recognizes the truth in Darcy’s claims about Wickham, Elizabeth is forced to confront her own family’s flaws. She also acknowledges Charlotte's earlier insights regarding Jane’s reserved demeanor towards Bingley.

Elizabeth soon returns home, where she finds Lydia increasingly infatuated with the militia, especially now that the regiment is set to move to Brighton. Before the regiment's departure, Wickham attempts to renew his acquaintance with Elizabeth, but she rebuffs him with pointed praise for Mr. Darcy and Colonel Fitzwilliam. Lydia receives an invitation from the Forster family—new friends, also close with the regimental officers—and Mr. Bennet allows her to accept. Despite Elizabeth's warnings about the potential risks of Lydia’s unrestrained behavior, Mr. Bennet, preferring to avoid her summer-long complaints, allows her to accept, believing she'll soon be chastened by experience.

A few weeks later, Elizabeth embarks on her long-anticipated tour with her Aunt and Uncle Gardiner, eventually stopping near Pemberley, Mr. Darcy's magnificent estate. Assured that the family is away, Elizabeth agrees to tour the grounds. To her astonishment, the housekeeper and servants speak glowingly of Darcy's generosity and character. During their tour, Elizabeth is stunned when Mr. Darcy himself unexpectedly appears, having returned home early. His demeanor is remarkably altered: he is polite, attentive, and surprisingly cordial to the Gardiners, subverting Elizabeth's expectations of his disdain for her connections.

Subscribe now

The following morning, Darcy, accompanied by his shy sister Georgiana and a hesitant Mr. Bingley, makes an early visit to the Gardiners. Bingley's obvious discomfort hints to Elizabeth of his lingering feelings for Jane. Elizabeth and her aunt agree to wait on Miss Darcy at Pemberley, where Miss Bingley and Mrs. Hurst are also staying. Caroline's jealousy becomes palpable as she attempts to needle Elizabeth with thinly veiled allusions to Wickham and the militia. However, later, Darcy unequivocally defends Elizabeth, openly praising her beauty and refusing to feign indifference any longer.

The idyllic interlude at Pemberley is shattered by two frantic letters from Jane, revealing a catastrophic family scandal: Lydia has eloped with Mr. Wickham from Brighton. The initial desperate hope for a Scottish marriage quickly dissipates as Jane's second letter confirms they are in London with no intention of marrying, threatening permanent ruin for Lydia and the entire Bennet family.

When Darcy arrives to invite Elizabeth and the Gardiners back to Pemberley, he finds her distraught. Elizabeth, in her panic, openly confesses Lydia's disgrace. Darcy, visibly shocked and distressed, offers what comfort he can before departing abruptly. Elizabeth is convinced this scandal has irrevocably shattered any rekindled attachment on Darcy’s side. The Gardiners, equally horrified, immediately rush Elizabeth home. Mr. Gardiner vows to join Mr. Bennet in the desperate search for the vanished couple in London.

My Impressions and Observations

These chapters were incredibly revealing, stripping away facades and bringing characters' true traits—and flaws—to the forefront.

A dominant theme this week was the unveiling of prejudice and blind spots. We see Darcy admit that he desired Jane to be indifferent to Bingley, and—though he denies it—he may have sought evidence to suit his bias. Similarly, Elizabeth is forced to confront how Wickham's charming exterior and good looks completely obscured his villainous interior, causing her to ignore his inconsistencies. Even Jane, ever the optimist, observes this dichotomy, noting, "'There certainly was some great mismanagement in the education of those two young men. One has got all the goodness, and the other all the appearance of it.'" It's a harsh but accurate assessment that applies broadly to how we judge others based on initial impressions. The irony that Elizabeth truly begins to appreciate Darcy for his genuine generosity and kindness only after her family's scandal seems to make a match with him impossible is particularly poignant.

This week also shone a much-needed light on Mr. Bennet's significant failings as a father and husband. His tendency to mock his wife's ignorance and volatility, rather than guiding her earlier in their marriage, seems to have set a poor example for his daughters, fostering an environment where Lydia and Kitty's embarrassing behavior goes unchecked. His dangerous complacency in allowing Lydia to go to Brighton, dismissing Elizabeth's earnest warnings, tragically puts the entire family at risk of social ruin, highlighting a severe abdication of parental responsibility.

Finally, we even get a glimpse of more humanity from Caroline Bingley. In her intense jealousy at Pemberley, she unleashes cutting words that are ultimately self-defeating, showcasing a deeply human act of hurting herself in an attempt to hurt someone else. This, along with the evolving perceptions of Darcy and Wickham, drives home the novel's overarching idea that true character—and the suitability of a partner—is revealed over time through actions, rather than through initial attraction or superficial charm. This is a lesson that, ironically, still applies to the foundation of the Bennet parents' own marriage, and indeed, to many relationships today.

Let's Discuss: Questions for Chapters 34-46

This section brought some of Pride and Prejudice's most significant character shifts! What were your biggest takeaways? Share your thoughts in the comments below:

1. Darcy's Letter as a Turning Point: Mr. Darcy's letter is a pivotal moment, forcing Elizabeth to re-evaluate nearly everything she thought she knew. What specific revelations in the letter were most surprising to you? How does this document challenge Elizabeth's (and our own) initial judgments of Darcy and Wickham?

2. Parental Responsibility and Social Ruin: Mr. Bennet's decision to allow Lydia to go to Brighton, despite Elizabeth's warnings, directly leads to the family's greatest crisis. How does this episode highlight the differing approaches to parenting between Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, and what are the profound societal consequences of their failures?

3. The New Darcy & The Old Prejudice: Elizabeth encounters a dramatically changed Mr. Darcy at Pemberley—polite, affable, and surprisingly welcoming. How does this "new" Darcy challenge Elizabeth's deeply ingrained prejudices against him? What aspects of his character are revealed here that begin to shift her opinion, and how does the scandal with Lydia immediately threaten this nascent admiration?

Unveiling Austen's Magic: The Power of Punctuation

It may be more difficult to notice the punctuation with all the drama happening in the narrative, but a few instances stood out to me this week.

Remember to pay attention to:

• The Dash (—): Mr. Darcy’s letter is full of dashes. How do they impact how you read the letter and his frame of mind while writing it?

“—That I was desirous of believing her indifferent is certain,—but I will venture to say that my investigation and decisions are not usually influenced by my hopes or fears.—I did not believe her to be indifferent because I wished it;—I believed it on impartial conviction, as truly as I wished it in reason.” (Mr. Darcy; Volume 2, Chapter 12)

• The Semicolon (;): Austen uses the semicolon to continue a thought where we today might split it into separate sentences. Does this style make sense to you? Or does it add confusion, given our different conventions now?

She remembered also…he had told his story to no one but herself; but that after their removal, it had been every where discussed; that he had then no reserves, no scruples in sinking Mr. Darcy’s character, though he had assured her that respect for the father, would always prevent his exposing the son. (Volume 2, Chapter 13)

• Emphasis (Italics): In Lydia’s speech, italics often convey her snide and judgmental tone. Do you think her lines would read the same way without the clear emphasis?

“I am sure there is not on his. I will answer for it he never cared three straws about her. Who could about such a nasty little freckled thing?” (Lydia Bennet; Volume 2, Chapter 16)

What other instances of Austen's punctuation or stylistic choices caught your eye in these chapters?

Looking Ahead and Joining the Conversation

Remember to share your insights in the comments below, and don't forget our dedicated Pride and Prejudice Book Club: General Discussion thread for broader conversations and connecting with fellow readers throughout the week.

Leave a comment

Next week, we'll be finishing the book! Thanks for your patience with this week’s delay.

Happy reading!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help organize and draft the content.

Missed last week? Catch up here:

Chapters 24-33: A Brief Recap

In my edition, these are Chapters 1-10 of Volume 2.

This section begins with Miss Bingley confirming her brother’s group will not return to Netherfield for the winter, a definitive end to Jane’s hopes for a courtship. Elizabeth, convinced of Bingley's affection, suspects his sister is actively trying to separate the pair—a thought Jane, ever charitable, struggles to accept.

Over Christmas, Mrs. Bennet's brother and his wife, Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner, arrive for their annual stay at Longbourn, offering a fresh perspective amid the Bennet family's anxieties. They invite Jane to stay with them in London, hoping the change of scenery will lift her spirits, and Mrs. Gardiner takes a moment to caution Elizabeth against forming an attachment to Mr. Wickham.

Soon after Christmas, Mr. Collins and Charlotte Lucas marry. Before her departure, Charlotte extends an earnest invitation for Elizabeth to visit her at the Parsonage in March, a visit Elizabeth reluctantly accepts out of loyalty to their former closeness.

While in London, Jane attempts to reconnect with the Bingley sisters, only to find them evasive, just as Elizabeth had predicted. Meanwhile, Mr. Wickham's attention shifts dramatically from Elizabeth to a Miss King, who has recently inherited a significant fortune. Elizabeth, surprisingly unfazed, rationalizes Wickham’s actions by considering his need for financial independence, a noteworthy contrast to her earlier judgment of Charlotte’s pragmatic marriage.

Elizabeth's visit to the Parsonage reveals Charlotte's smooth adjustment to married life. While perhaps not ecstatically happy, Charlotte has ingeniously adapted her living arrangements to minimize her husband's more tiresome quirks, creating a measure of peace. Less than a day after her arrival, the party receives an invitation to dine at Rosings, the grand estate of the formidable Lady Catherine de Bourgh.

At Rosings, Elizabeth remains entirely uncowed by Lady Catherine's imperious manner and luxurious surroundings. She answers Lady Catherine's intrusive questions with startling frankness, much to the older woman's dismay, revealing the Bennet sisters' unconventional upbringing and lack of formal accomplishments.

A few weeks into Elizabeth’s stay, Mr. Darcy and his cousin, Colonel Fitzwilliam, arrive to visit Lady Catherine at Rosings. Their unexpectedly immediate visit to the Parsonage leads Charlotte to believe Mr. Darcy is keen to continue his acquaintance with Elizabeth. Over several evenings at Rosings, Darcy and Elizabeth resume their familiar verbal sparring, while Elizabeth finds herself increasingly drawn to Colonel Fitzwilliam, seeing in him a more grounded and intellectual version of Mr. Wickham.

Darcy begins making unexpected, often silent, visits to the Parsonage, and Elizabeth frequently "stumbles" upon him in her favorite walking spots. During one such walk, she meets Colonel Fitzwilliam, who inadvertently reveals a crucial piece of information: Mr. Darcy played a significant role in saving Mr. Bingley from an "imprudent marriage" to a young woman—implicitly Jane Bennet. This revelation profoundly shocks Elizabeth, as she realizes Darcy, not the Bingley sisters, was the true architect of Jane’s heartbreak.

Subscribe now

Impressions and Observations

This week, we continued to see Lizzie’s inability to accept that others might find happiness in a situation she herself would not enjoy. When she expresses dismay at Charlotte’s engagement, Jane wisely reminds her, "'You do not make allowance enough for difference of situation and temper. Consider Mr. Collins's respectability, and Charlotte's prudent, steady character. Remember that she is one of a large family; that as to fortune, it is a most eligible match; and be ready to believe, for every body’s sake, that she may feel something like regard and esteem for our cousin.'"

The group’s arrival at Rosings brings the formidable Lady Catherine de Bourgh into focus. It’s interesting to note that Lady Catherine uses dashes in her dialogue almost as much as Mrs. Bennet, despite her higher breeding. This subtly suggests that perhaps a "lack of polish" in speech isn't solely confined to lower social classes, or that extreme self-importance can lead to a similar breathless conversational style. For once, Darcy needs to be a bit ashamed of his relations, even blushing at his aunt's "ill-breeding" when she suggests Mrs. Collins use the piano in the servants’ rooms, where she wouldn't be in anyone's way.

And speaking of Darcy, we start to see a more nuanced side to him in these chapters. He opens up about his discomfort talking to strangers and seems to be a bit more at ease with Elizabeth, even attempting to practice his conversational skills in his awkward visits to the Parsonage. His attempts to be often in her presence via these frequent, silent visits and by using her favorite walking paths reveal a quiet, yet persistent, interest.

Let's Discuss: Questions for Chapters 24-33

This week brought some truly pivotal moments and significant revelations! What were your biggest takeaways? Share your thoughts in the comments below:

1. The Truth About Bingley: Colonel Fitzwilliam's accidental revelation about Mr. Darcy's interference in Bingley's relationship with Jane is a huge turning point. How does this news impact Elizabeth's understanding of Darcy, Bingley, and even her sister Jane? Does it affect how you see any of these characters?

2. Elizabeth vs. Lady Catherine: The interactions between Elizabeth and Lady Catherine de Bourgh are electric! What do these exchanges reveal about each woman's character, social values, and sense of self-importance? How does Elizabeth's refusal to be intimidated challenge the social norms of the time, especially considering even Sir William Lucas is floored by Lady Catherine’s home?

3. Charlotte's Choice: We see Charlotte's married life firsthand, and it's clear she's made a pragmatic, rather than romantic, match. Does witnessing Charlotte's composure and clever adaptations change Elizabeth's (or your own) initial judgment of her decision to marry Mr. Collins? What does this reveal about different paths to contentment in Regency society?

Leave a comment

Unveiling Austen's Magic: The Power of Punctuation

As we continue our journey through Pride and Prejudice, let’s dive a little deeper into how Austen wields punctuation to paint her characters and shape the narrative. While we've discussed dashes and semicolons before, this week's chapters, particularly with the introduction of Lady Catherine and more direct interactions with Darcy, offer new ways to consider their impact.

Keep your writer's eye sharp for:

• The Dash (—): Notice how the dash continues to reflect character and pacing. Do you observe how even Lady Catherine, despite her social standing, uses dashes in a way that creates a breathless or forceful tone, reminiscent of Mrs. Bennet's frantic pronouncements, but perhaps from a place of authority rather than anxiety?

“I am glad of it; but otherwise I see no occasion for entailing estates from the female line.—It was not thought necessary in Sir Lewis de Bourgh’s family.—Do you play and sing Miss Bennet?” (Lady Catherine de Bourgh; Volume 2, Chapter 6)

• The Semicolon (;): Observe how Austen uses semicolons to string together closely related ideas, creating a flowing, almost conversational rhythm within a single sentence, often highlighting a subtle connection or contrast between clauses. This is quite different from a full stop!

“Remember that she is one of a large family; that as to fortune, it is a most eligible match; and be ready to believe, for every body’s sake, that she may feel something like regard and esteem for our cousin.” (Jane Bennet; Volume 2, Chapter 1)

• Emphasis (Italics): Austen's use of italics to emphasize specific words often adds a layer of irony, humor, or a particular speaking cadence. In these chapters, did you notice any instances where the emphasis shifts your perception of a character's tone or hidden meaning, particularly in moments of witty banter or subtle disagreement?

“If she does not object to it, why should we?”

”Her not objecting does not justify him. It only shews her being deficient in something herself—sense or feeling.”

”Well,” cried Elizabeth, “have it as you choose. He shall be mercenary, and she shall be foolish.” (Elizabeth Bennet and Mrs. Gardiner; Volume 2, Chapter 1)

What other instances of Austen's punctuation or stylistic choices caught your eye in these chapters, and what did they reveal to you?

Leave a comment

Looking Ahead and Joining the Conversation

Remember to share your insights in the comments below, and don't forget our dedicated Pride and Prejudice Book Club: General Discussion thread for broader conversations and connecting with fellow readers throughout the week.

Next week, we'll be diving into Chapters 34-43 (Volume 2, Chapters 11-20).

Happy reading!

Karin Manley
Founder & Editor
Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic
ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help organize and draft the content.

Missed last week? Catch up here:

Chapters 11-23: A Brief Recap

Our second week of Pride and Prejudice takes us deeper into the intricacies of Regency society and the Bennet family’s fortunes (or lack thereof). We begin with Elizabeth and Jane still at Netherfield, though their departure—and the general disbanding of the Bingley party—soon follows, much to Mrs. Bennet’s dismay.

A new, rather silly, character arrives: Mr. Collins, Mr. Bennet’s pompous cousin and the entailed heir to Longbourn Estate. He arrives with the thinly veiled intention of marrying one of the Bennet daughters, hoping such a union will assuage his guilt over the entailment and keep the estate within the family line. Mr. Bennet is initially eager to receive his cousin, amused by his peculiar blend of “servility and self-importance.”

Mr. Collins, initially drawn to Jane’s beauty, is quickly redirected toward Elizabeth by Mrs. Bennet, who informs him of Jane’s impending engagement. He proves remarkably unconcerned with which daughter he marries, happy with any suitable, attractive, and well-mannered girl.

Another significant new character, Mr. Wickham, is introduced in these chapters. Newly arrived in Meryton with the militia, he is handsome and charming, quickly capturing Elizabeth’s attention. However, an icy encounter between Wickham and Mr. Darcy piques her interest in the men’s past. Wickham later paints a damning portrait of Darcy, accusing him of severe injustice and neglect. Elizabeth, still prone to believing the best of those she favors, readily accepts Wickham’s version of events, despite a nagging feeling that the story runs counter to Darcy’s gentlemanly conduct.

The long-awaited Netherfield ball finally arrives but proves to be a social disaster for the Bennet family. Mr. Collins tries to monopolize Lizzie’s attention, and Mr. Darcy requests her hand for a dance, leading to their most direct and cutting exchange yet—regarding Mr. Wickham. The Bennets, particularly Mrs. Bennet’s loud gossip and Mary’s ill-received musical performances, further embarrass themselves throughout the evening. Mr. Collins only adds to the awkwardness by brazenly presenting himself to Mr. Darcy, in spite of Lizzie’s advice to follow social protocol and wait for an introduction.

The next day, Elizabeth faces Mr. Collins’s ridiculous and unromantic marriage proposal. Despite her increasingly firm refusals, he misinterprets her “no” as a coy “try harder.” Elizabeth eventually leaves him to his musings on feminine wiles. Her mother attempts to force the match by pulling in Mr. Bennet’s approval, but he cannot support his daughter marrying such a ridiculous man.

In a surprising turn, the sensible Charlotte Lucas, Elizabeth’s friend, accepts Mr. Collins’s proposal, seeking practical security over romantic love. This pragmatic but ill-fitting match creates a rift in her friendship with Elizabeth, who fails to hide her dismay.

Mrs. Bennet’s woes come in threes, contemplating Charlotte becoming the future mistress of Longbourn and tolerating Lady Lucas’s triumphant visits. The final blow lands with the news that Mr. Bingley has departed for London with no immediate plans to return. Caroline Bingley’s letter to Jane clarifies the situation, mentioning their visits to Mr. Darcy and his sister—hinting at a growing connection between Mr. Bingley and Georgiana Darcy. While Jane charitably believes Caroline would never act against her brother’s attachment, Elizabeth suspects the Bingley sisters are manipulating their brother to keep him away from Jane.

Subscribe now

Impressions and Observations

This week, I was struck by how many small social moments in the novel still resonate today.

The first moment to jump out was Miss Bingley’s interruption at the end of Chapter 11. When Darcy and Lizzie are engaged in their witty verbal sparring, Miss Bingley cuts in, “tired of a conversation in which she had no share.” Haven’t we all been there? Feeling left out of a conversation, perhaps jealous of the speakers, and finding some way to shift the topic. Even more so when one of the conversants is your crush! And Darcy’s immediate reaction—realizing he may be paying too much attention to Lizzie and deciding later “not to fix his eyes on Elizabeth”—is just like high schooler hiding a crush by looking and talking to everyone except the person he likes.

Another relatable theme is Elizabeth’s initial approach to Mr. Wickham. She finds him handsome and charming, which immediately seems to skew her perception. As she reflects in Chapter 16, even “the commonest, dullest, most threadbare topic might be rendered interesting by the skill of the speaker” if that speaker is someone you’re attracted to. This bias isn’t unique to Elizabeth, either; the usually discerning Jane finds it “not in her nature to question the veracity of a young man of such amiable appearance as Wickham.” You could say it’s like modern women “missing the red flags” in a man they just met.

Then there’s Mr. Collins’s absurd persistence after Elizabeth refuses his proposal. He almost sounds like one of those guys who read The Game in the early 2000s, believing that Elizabeth’s “no” is merely a show of “natural delicacy [that leads her] to dissemble.” And, like many women then and now, Lizzie would much rather be believed than condescendingly deemed “elegantly” modest. She would prefer “to be paid the compliment of being believed sincere.” It perfectly encapsulates the enduring struggle of women getting men to believe that they simply, honestly aren’t interested in them.

Finally, Lizzie’s reaction to Charlotte Lucas’s engagement to Mr. Collins is profoundly human. Elizabeth simply cannot fathom her friend finding happiness in a choice she herself would never make. It’s a common, if unconscious response: an inability to imagine that something you wouldn’t want for yourself could genuinely bring contentment to someone you like and respect.

Let’s Discuss: Questions for Chapters 11-23

This week brought a bunch of new characters and plot developments! What were the standout moments to you? Share your thoughts in the comments:

1. Marriage and Proposals: We see to very different proposals, even from the same man: Mr. Collins’s to Elizabeth, and then, a few days later, to Charlotte. What do these proposals reveal about the three characters and the societal expectations surrounding marriage in Regency England? How do Elizabeth’s and Charlotte’s reactions clarify their philosophies on love and security? Do you think Austen reveals a preference here?

2. First Impressions and Bias: Mr. Wickham makes a compelling first impression on Elizabeth, and his dramatic story about Mr. Darcy immediately sways her. How does her strong initial like for him influence her judgment of Wickham? Do you see any red flags in his story or behavior that Elizabeth, or even Jane, might be overlooking?

3. The Netherfield Ball and the Bennets’ Behavior: This event is famous even for those who haven’t read the book. Which moments did you find the most embarrassing or revealing for the Bennets’ social standing and ambitions? Do these public missteps impact Elizabeth’s perception of her family, or are her glasses still rosy?

Leave a comment

Unveiling Austen’s Magic: The Power of Punctuation

I want to keep our analytical eye (perhaps our writers’ eye?) on Austen’s subtle yet powerful use of punctuation. While there aren’t a ton of new examples that stood out to me this week, we can still notice their use amid the flurry of awkward social encounters.

Remember to pay attention to:

• The Dash (—): How does it continue to shape the rhythm of dialogue? Do you notice any social difference between the characters who use it?

“Good heavens!” cried Elizabeth; “but how could that be?—How could his will be disregarded?—Why did not you seek legal redress?” (Chapter 16)

• The Semicolon (;): Notice how semicolons might be used to guide your interpretation of a sentence’s meaning, compared to the dash or other punctuation.

“A thorough, determined dislike of me—a dislike which I cannot but attribute in some measure to jealousy. Had the late Mr. Darcy liked me less, his son might have borne with me better; but his father’s uncommon attachment to me, irritated him I believe very early in life. He had not a temper to bear the sort of competition in which we stood—the sort of preference which was often given me.” (Mr. Wickham, Chapter 16)

• Emphasis (Italics): Are there any words or phrases you noticed Austen italicizes for emphasis? How does it affect how you “hear” the character or narrator’s tone?

“It must be his own doing.—He is his own master. But you do not know all. I will read you the passage which particularly hurts me. I will have no reserves from you.” (Jane Bennet, Chapter 21)

Keep an eye out for these moments and think about how Austen uses punctuation to develop a character’s tone or personality in your head. Share any examples that particularly strike you from what we’ve read!

Looking Ahead and Joining the Conversation

Remember to share your insights in the comments below, and don't forget our dedicated Pride and Prejudice Book Club: General Discussion thread for broader conversations and connecting with fellow readers throughout the week.

Next week, we'll be diving into Chapters 24-33. Get ready for more twists and turns, and don’t forget to keep an eye out for discussion opportunities!

Happy reading,

Karin Manley

Founder & Editor

Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic

ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help organize and draft the content.

Chapters 1-10: A Brief Recap

We start with the flighty Mrs. Bennet and her consuming ambition to see her daughters well married. The story kicks off with the Netherfield estate rented by wealthy, amiable Mr. Bingley, his haughty sisters, and his proud friend Mr. Darcy—setting the local society in Meryton abuzz.

At the Meryton assembly ball, Mr. Bingley is immediately captivated by pretty and gentle Jane Bennet. Meanwhile, Mr. Darcy goes from an object of fascination to one of deep dislike, given his unwillingness to participate in conversation and his dismissal of the local girls—including Jane’s younger sister, Elizabeth.

As the story continues, we get to know the Bennet family and their friends more fully. Jane is sweet and trusting, while Elizabeth is spirited and witty. Mrs. Bennet is an incessant schemer, to the amusement of her more complacent husband. Elizabeth’s friend Charlotte Lucas offers a more pragmatic worldview, pointing out that Elizabeth’s bias toward Jane could blind her to the latter’s inability to demonstrate her nascent affection for Mr. Bingley.

By Chapter 6, we start to see a shift in Mr. Darcy. He becomes complimentary of Elizabeth’s “fine eyes” and drawn to her quick wit. Her agreeable disposition—exemplified by her un-stilted, pleasing piano playing compared to her sister Mary’s superior technical proficiency—further endears her to general observers.

The Bennet family is rounded out by the youngest sisters, Kitty and Lydia, who are thrilled to learn of an arriving militia regiment and the flirtatious opportunities it presents. Mrs. Bennet confesses that she doesn’t mind the idea of her daughters marrying officers, so long as they are financially supported. Her schemes rise to new heights when Jane is invited to dine with the Bingleys: she orders her daughter to travel on horseback through a rainstorm—leaving Jane bedridden with a cold at Netherfield.

The subsequent chapters spent at Netherfield further display the current social landscape. Mr. Bingley remains good-natured, but his sisters—Caroline and Louisa—quickly reveal themselves to be judgmental and snobbish. Mr. Hurst, Louisa’s husband, is an amusing side character, content in with simple pleasures. Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy indulge in some intellectual sparring, often underscored by the class distinctions that make easy conversation a challenge. Chapter 10 especially underscores the Bennet family’s less refined social graces, when they come to visit Jane but spend their time gossiping and begging Mr. Bingley to host a ball—once their sister is healed, Lydia belatedly adds.

Subscribe now

Impressions and Observations

In these opening chapters, I’m immediately drawn to Austen’s distinct characters. Elizabeth Bennet is, perhaps, a basic favorite, but she is my favorite. She’s a complex, deeply human personality. Her humor and wit make her fun to read, but her flaws make her compelling. She’s prone to forming strong initial opinions and then seeking out evidence to support them, whether it’s finding faults in people she dislikes or confirming strengths in those she admires. It’s a trait I’m sure we’ve all seen in the real world, and Austen portrays it deftly.

Mrs. Bennet is another standout character. I wouldn’t want to spend time with her in real life, but she is well written and you can recognize her through her dialogue alone. Her foibles make her an interesting and humorous presence.

I particularly enjoyed the scenes at Netherfield involving Elizabeth and the Bingley clan. Mr. Hurst is a brilliant side character—his decision to simply take a nap when no one would play cards with him is, as the kids would say, “a mood.” This moment also offers a fascinating glimpse into Regency society, where downtime seems to have been a feature of social gatherings. People could be in the same room, conversing, playing music, reading quietly, or even napping, without the pressure to be constantly engaged or entertaining.

The theme that has stood out to me the most so far is the contrasts among characters in long-standing relationships. The impetuous, easy-going Mr. Bingley softens his best friend, contemplative, opinionated Darcy. The Bennet parents, too, present an interesting dichotomy: Mrs. Bennet is talkative and meddlesome, while her husband is more distant and idle. And of course, there’s the dynamic between the eldest Bennet sisters. Elizabeth has an outspoken nature and is quick to judge, while Jane is a more reserved personality, who wishes to see the best in everyone.

I’m consistently impressed by Austen’s genius in conveying character without getting bogged down in physical details. I couldn’t tell you the color of anyone’s hair or the precise layout of their drawing-rooms, yet I feel I know these characters intimately. Their voices are distinct and their personalities are realistically flawed. I feel I could describe them all, as if I’ve met them, to a stranger.

Let’s Discuss: Questions for Chapters 1-10

As you read through these opening chapters, what stood out to you? Here are some questions to get our conversation started in the comments below:

1. Dichotomies and Relationships: The novel's title, Pride and Prejudice, presents a central dichotomy. How do other relationships in these early chapters reflect contrasting traits? Consider Elizabeth and Jane, Bingley and Darcy, or others. What opposing qualities do they embody?

2. Regency Society's Expectations: What do these first ten chapters reveal about the social expectations and pressures in Regency England, especially concerning marriage and fortune? Do all characters view these societal norms in the same way, or are there subtle (or not-so-subtle) differences in their perspectives?

3. Elizabeth's Judgments: We've discussed Elizabeth's tendency toward quick, sometimes static, judgments. Can you identify any specific instances in these chapters where her opinions seem to be influenced by her own preconceptions? Or do you find her more open-minded than she initially appears?

Unveiling Austen’s Magic: The Power of Punctuation

In these early chapters, I’ve been particularly interested in Austen’s use of punctuation to maker her characters’ voices distinct. In these opening chapters, pay close attention to:

• The Dash (—): Notice how Austen frequently uses the em dash, especially when Mrs. Bennet speaks. How does it affect her pacing compared to characters like Jane, or, on the extreme other side, Mr. Darcy?

“Oh!—you mean Jane, I suppose—because he danced with her twice. To be sure that did seem as if he admired her—indeed I rather believe he did—I heard something about it—but I hardly know what—something about Mr. Robinson.” -Mrs. Bennet, Chapter 6

• The Semicolon (;): While less obvious than the dash, the semicolon often connects closely related independent clauses. Does this make a character harder to understand because the sentences flow so seamlessly? Or perhaps it’s easier because they stay on one topic?

“I dare say you believed it; but I am by no means convinced that you would be gone with such celerity. Your conduct would be quite as dependent on chance as that of any man I know; and if, as you were mounting your horse, a friend were to say, ‘Bingley, you had better stay till next week,’ you would probably do it, you would probably not go—and, at another word, might stay a month.” -Mr. Darcy, Chapter 10

• Emphasis (Italics): Indulge me that this is not punctuation, but Austen makes careful use of emphasis to clarify an important word or speaking cadence. Does this affect how your read a line? Do you ever feel like a character has put emphasis on an unusual word?

“If I may so express it, he has a right to be proud.”

“That is very true,” replied Elizabeth, “and I could easily forgive his pride, if he had not mortified mine.” -Charlotte Lucas and Elizabeth Bennet, Chapter 6

As you continue reading, keep an eye out for these instances. How do these small marks contribute to your understanding of the characters' personalities, their social interactions, and the overall tone of the novel? Share any examples that particularly strike you!

Leave a comment

Karin Manley

Founder & Editor

Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic

ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help organize and draft the content.

For many, Jane Austen isn’t just an author, she’s a lifelong companion. Even though I was a fan of classic literature in high school, I came to Austen late, not reading her works seriously until after college. Since then, I’ve read all of her best known works but haven’t spent time with them in the last few years.

With Pride and Prejudice briefly returning to theaters recently, and after the great time we had discussing Far from the Madding Crowd on Booklub, this seemed like the perfect time to pick up Austen and restart the club.

Subscribe now

Why Pride and Prejudice for Read, Watch, Write and Booklub?

Pride and Prejudice is the perfect choice to reinvigorate our book club because it offers that surprising blend of timeless themes and modern relevance. Jane Austen has this uncanny ability to craft narratives that, despite being set centuries ago, resonate deeply with our lives today. Everyone can find a point of connection, a character trait, or a societal observation that feels incredibly current.

For Read, Watch, Write, Pride and Prejudice offers rich ground for exploration:

• Read: We'll enjoy Austen's brilliant prose, her famous wit, and the meticulous way she builds characters through dialogue.

• Watch: This novel has inspired beloved film and television adaptations, and we'll touch on how these visual interpretations bring Austen's world to life, offering new perspectives on her characters and settings.

• Unveiling Media's Magic: Through Pride and Prejudice, we'll uncover the subtle magic of character development, social commentary, and the enduring power of a well-told story.

How the book club will work: our hybrid approach

To make sure everyone can participate and get the most out of our discussion, we're adopting a flexible format:

• Weekly Reading & Discussion Posts: Each Monday (starting May 26th), I'll publish a new Substack post covering a specific section of Pride and Prejudice. These posts will include:

  • A brief summary of the week's reading.

  • Discussion questions to guide our conversation.

  • My own insights and observations, including a special focus on Austen's use of punctuation to reveal character and nuance.

• The Central Discussion Hub: In addition to the weekly posts, we'll have a dedicated, ongoing discussion thread where you can chat freely, share your overall thoughts on the book, ask questions, and connect with other readers at any time throughout our journey.

Our goal is to finish Pride and Prejudice by June 20th, and this schedule will help us stay on track together.

Ready to join the conversation?

Here’s how you can dive into the Pride and Prejudice book club:

1. Grab Your Copy: If you haven't already, get your hands on a copy of Pride and Prejudice! Any edition will do, but I will be reading the Fourth Norton Critical Edition, if you want to match page for page. You can buy a copy on amazon.com. Please note, I may receive commissions from purchases made using that link.

2. Start Reading: Our first weekly discussion post, covering Chapters 1-10, will go live on Monday, May 26th.

3. Introduce Yourself in the Central Hub: Head over to our dedicated Pride and Prejudice Book Club: General Discussion thread to introduce yourself, share your initial thoughts, and connect with fellow readers!

4. Subscribe to Read, Watch, Write: Make sure you're subscribed to this Substack so you don't miss any of our weekly discussion posts, updates, or other content.

5. Enable Chat Access: To participate fully in the ongoing discussions, ensure your Substack chat feature is enabled (if applicable). This will allow you to connect directly with other members.

6. Watch Along: Feel free to enhance your reading experience by watching the Pride and Prejudice movie or BBC television series adaptations as we go!

Let the discussions being

I can’t wait to dive into this new format and book with you! This book club is going to be a great way to connect, discuss, and unveil the magic within one of literature’s most beloved stories.

Happy reading, and see you in the comments!

Subscribe now

Karin Manley

Founder & Editor

Read, Watch, Write: Unveiling Media’s Magic

ReadWatchWrite.substack.com

This post was created with the assistance of an AI, to help organize and draft the content.

The RWW 5-star system:

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ I loved this and want everyone to experience it and talk to me about it.

⭐⭐⭐⭐ I liked this a lot, and I think many other people would like it, too.

⭐⭐⭐ I liked this, but I’m not sure it’s a great recommendation for most people.

⭐⭐ I didn’t really like this, but I didn’t hate it, and some other people might like it.

⭐ I really did not enjoy this experience and do not recommend it.

Subscribe now

Want to support my work? Subscribe!

Not ready for a monthly commitment? Buy me a coffee:

Read

The Dryad Storm, Laurie Forest

The pitch: “Black Witch of prophecy Elloren Gardner Grey has unleashed her powers and embraced her legacy as a Dryad and guardian of the Forest. But the losses—of life, of love—have been almost too great to withstand as the Shadow continues to devour the world. With only a tattered shred of hope remaining, the Bearers of the Wand of Myth must battle their way back to each other to mount a final stand.” -official description from the author’s website

My rating: TBD. I’m nearly 70% through this book, and I plan to write up the whole series. I definitely recommend reading the first book in The Black Witch Chronicles, at least.

Check it out: amazon.com *As an Amazon Associate, I earn commission from qualifying purchases

A Glimpse of my To Read List

1. Throne of Glass, Sarah J. Maas

2. The Color of Magic, Terry Pratchett

3. Total Cat Mojo: The Ultimate Guide to Life with Your Cat, Jackson Galaxy

4. The Monsters Know What They’re Doing: Combat Tactics for Dungeon Masters, Keith Ammann

5. Six of Crows, Leigh Bardugo

6. African Founders: How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals, David Hackett Fischer

7. The School for Good and Evil, Soman Chainani

8. The Misleading Mind: How We Create Our Own Problems and How Buddhist Psychology Can Help Us Solve Them, Karuna Cayton

9. Where the Crawdads Sing, Delia Owens

10. Daughters, Greg Hanks

Watch

Arcane: season 2, Netflix

The pitch: “Amid the stark discord of twin cities Piltover and Zaun, two sisters fight on rival sides of a war between magic technologies and clashing convictions.” -official Netflix description

My rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ I look forward to future stories from the League of Legends universe. You don’t have to know a single thing about the game to enjoy this series—in fact, you might be better off going in blind. This is a great limited series about family, choices, and responsibilities. If you like urban fantasy, gray morality, gorgeous animation, and deftly choreographed fight scenes, Arcane could be for you.

Check it out: netflix.com

A Glimpse of my To Watch List

1. The Menu (trailer)

2. The Holdovers (trailer)

3. Late Night with the Devil (trailer)

4. Oppenheimer (trailer)

5. Saltburn (trailer)

6. The Green Knight (trailer)

7. Talk to Me (trailer)

8. Cobweb (trailer)

9. Drag Me to Hell (trailer)

10. 2001: A Space Odyssey (trailer)

Play

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II, Warhorse Studios

The pitch: “Kingdom Come: Deliverance II is a gripping tale of revenge, betrayal and discovery. Embark on an epic journey from a humble blacksmith's forge to the court of Kings. From bustling city streets to lush forests, discover this open-world Medieval Europe through an unforgettable adventure filled with action, thrill and wonder.” -official game description

My rating: TBD. It’s a long RPG! I haven’t made it very far yet, but it’s already what I wanted: an improved version of the first game. The acting is solid, the historical setting is immersive, and the combat is challenging. What more can you want from an historical fiction game?

Check it out: kingdomcomerpg.com

Thanks for reading! What would you recommend next? And feel free to roast my To Watch list, I know there’s some old stuff on there.

Published: 1995

Written by: Gregory Maguire

Genres: Fiction, Fantasy, Adaptation

My rating: ⭐⭐⭐ I liked this, but I’m not sure it’s a great recommendation for most people.

The Story

As the subtitle implies, Wicked, follows the life and times of Elphaba, the Wicked Witch of West. Follow her from her infancy in Munchkinland to her eventual murder* in the Vinkus (*or manslaughter, depending on who’s doing the telling).

Maguire delivers a witty, incisive look at the rise of, resistance to, and downfall of a tyrant, from the point of view of a girl growing up with his regime. See how she grows from naive school girl, mocked for her looks, to a jaded woman made wicked in her attempts to take down the authoritarian ruler.

Subscribe now

My Notes

I first read Wicked in high school, not long after the release of the Broadway musical. I enjoyed the novel but was too young to properly understand all of its themes. I wouldn’t recommend it for anyone younger than 20-ish.

After the 2024 movie version of the musical, I decided to give the book another visit. One, because content, and two, because I didn’t remember much about the original story beside it being very different from the musical. And boy, is it ever different from the musical.

Wicked is a challenging read. Partly because of the writing. Maguire’s vocabulary ranges from words I’m vaguely familiar with to those I’ve never seen before. I recommend reading the Kindle edition, so you can automatically look up words you don’t know.

The novel is also a challenge because of the subject matter. You’re following the story of a girl who you know is going to die at the end. And you may find yourself avoiding the book because each page gets you closer to that ending. It took me longer to read this book than it usually would for that very reason: I didn’t want to see Elphaba suffer.

And, without getting too into spoilers, suffering is all the Witch seems to do. Hardly a single one of her plans goes right. Hardly a single person she loves is with her (much like Elphaba’s fate, you know her sister’s, as well). And in the end, she’s so disconnected from the world that she doesn’t know if little lost Dorothy will be her savior or assassin.

It’s a sad book, but I do recommend reading it. If you’re a fan of the musical, and want to get the more detailed version of that story, do not read this book. It will not provide what you’re looking for. But if you’re a fan of The Wizard of Oz or historical fiction focused on authoritarian governments, Wicked could be a good choice for you.

I don’t know much Wizard of Oz outside of the MGM film, but I sense that Wicked brings in more of Frank Baum’s original writing than the movie’s version. You’ll get a detailed look at the land of Oz, understand its history—both cultural and political, explore the similarities and differences of religion, and follow young women as they learn to fight for themselves within their rapidly changing culture.

An interesting tidbit I learned from researching Wicked is that Baum was an early supporter of women’s suffrage—that’s why so many of the powerful figures in Oz—from Ozma to Glinda to Dorothy—are women.1 That theme carries through Maguire’s work, as well, having each woman work levers of power in her unique way.

Maguire’s writing is dry and witty, very British-style humor, if that’s what you’re in to. I recommend Wicked for those who want a darker take on Oz, want a witty, scathing take on authoritarianism, and those who want to read something unlike anything else on their shelves. Maguire has a unique style. He isn’t for everyone, and I recommend you see if he and Wicked will be a good choice for you.