What's In A Name?

As far back as I can remember, I wasn't Jamie. Okay, yes I was. Legally. And that's the name I've been conditioned to respond to. But as far back as I can remember I've yearned for a different name. I wanted the names of my favorite characters. I wanted something other than my own. I was a very, very imaginative child to the point that I now wonder if there wasn't some association and identity issues early on. I would spend hours upon hours getting lost in make believe and the running theme was I wanted to be anyone but me. I get that this is normal, but I took it further. I projected heavily whether it be playing outside, playing with toys, lying in bed making up dream scenarios involving myself, or even just making up stories in my head with other characters but still always sort of ID-ing as the main character so that it could still be an extension of myself. Escapism may be the word for it. I just don't know.

What I do know is the common theme was I never ever ever used my own name. Granted I didn't play a lot with other kids (and that's a sad story in and of itself that would derail this post), but I don't recall anyone else having this fixation. Whenever there was a chance to pretend my name was something else, I jumped at it. I even lied a few times to other students in grade schools and was like "this is my nickname at home so you can call me that" only I picked names I would never use now (I was obsessed with the name Heidi for five minutes for some reason, no offense to Heidi's I just don't know if I look or act like one?) but alas the jerks never called me any of them - because honestly they just didn't want to talk to me at all (but again, dramatic backstory for another time). When digital avatars became a thing, you can better believe I was never Jamie. And then when identities online became a thing, I used a lot of different names in the guise of: it's safer that way. I even tried desperately to make Cali a thing for a while in early college, but was never brave enough to introduce myself blatantly as a different name.

Now at 28 I've only just finally started experimenting with getting others to actually call me something different. But because I feel like I have to somehow justify it (I have a severe case of social anxiety disorder) I still am only using my middle name, which I also don't love very much. And it's only at my new job because right out of the gate I asked them to call me by my middle name. With friends and family, I'm still Jamie. And my mom even called me Lynne once, but her tone felt patronizing or maybe it's that conditioning, or the social anxiety and fear that my parents truly think I'm ridiculous because deep down I think I'm ridiculous. And while I answer very easily to Lynne at work - it didn't even take a minute to realize this is my name and to know people meant me and not someone else - I now have the stressful notion that I'm living as two different people. I'm Lynne at work and Jamie everywhere else and eventually it's going to blow up in my face and I will be ridiculed. Did I mention social anxiety disorder?

The thing is, I won't stop going by Lynne at this job because it's at least better than Jamie. I don't like the sound of my name. I don't like the feel of my name on my tongue. I'm certain that there are many Jamie's out there that love their name. And maybe I'm insulting them because of my own issues. I get that. And I'm sorry. Truly. But I do have issues just the same and Lynne gives me a little bit of freedom from them. 

The other thing is, I'm still not happy going by Lynne as the 'at least it's better' alternative. I don't like having to sign J. Lynne. I don't like the e at the end that most people forget about because it's habit to spell it without an e. And I don't like, definitely don't like that I can't have that identity everywhere if I have to have it. My mother, father, and sister would probably call me Lynne if I sincerely sincerely asked them to. But it would be weird and they could never call me it in front of extended family because my extended family is harsh and unforgiving. 

I feel like at 28, I'm stuck. And nothing's going to fix it and I should deal with the other issues instead of stressing so much about a moniker. But I do stress. And the stress doesn't go away. It just sits there. I regularly feel spikes of jealousy towards other names. I regularly feel like I'm this person who is just here and doomed to hate her name (and maybe herself in general) forever. I regularly think if ever there was motivation for me to do anything within my power to get into theater or something else where a fake name is the norm it's my burning desire to just not be Jamie anymore. I've considered legally changing it - and earlier this year my mother quite literally said 'if it bothers you that much, just do it and get it over with, it's just a name' but she may have just been tired of hearing me fixate on it - but that's not something you just do and I realize there will always be those people that will call me Jamie or who will think I'm insane and the latter is what bothers me because I'm so afraid of being judged; I'm so afraid of living my life my own way for better or worse no matter what others say. And at 28 it still feels like "you probably should have done this 10 years ago before you started becoming more established and wouldn't have to change like a million different things legally to make it happen." But the option is still there.

Now that I've whined about how I really hate my name let me talk about some of the names that have for as long as I can remember been names that I've truly wished was mine and often used in make believe as a girl.

Ann, Anne and Annie has probably been the tried and truest name since the beginning. I fell in love with Ann-Marie of All Dogs Go To Heaven. I fell in love with Anne of Green Gables. And of course I fell in love with Annie from the musical. I may have also known a few adults with that name as a kid too. I've wanted to be Ann or Anne for so long and I named many of my most favorite dolls and toys this so I could project. And then I decided early on I would name a daughter Anna since I could never be an Ann. I don't know what it is about this name that even to this day I wake up and wish it was mine - even when many complain about having the name because it's common or boring or whatever - but I do. And sometimes I wish that I didn't have to settle for maybe naming a daughter what I'd rather be named myself. It doesn't help now that I've recently learned my mother wanted her own name to be Anne and told people it was for a time. Thus this name is on my short list of names I would genuinely consider for a stage name/legal name change. In terms of legal, I've considered being Anne Lynne James (Last Name) or even nixing the Lynne and doing what all the popular girls are doing these days and being Anne James (Last Name) so I can still honor my dad whose name is James (and would by more upset than if Lynne got nixed, since Lynne was my birth certificate typo'd saving grace from family members who literally wanted my middle name to be LuWayne - which I'd probably have committed suicide by now I'm serious if not). 

Thanks to my having been brainwashed by Disney from an early age (kidding, but also not), Ariel and Ella have both been names I've loved since a little girl. While I haven't the confidence to be an Ariel, Ella or Elle is on my short list of names. Like Anne, I've considered Ella Lynne James (Last Name) and Ella James (Last Name) and Elle James (Last Name). Elle Lynne, obviously out sense it's just Ellen. As much as I do love Ann and have always been fond of A names, and wanted one, something about Ella feels strangely right. Even when I play with the signature. It would be really hard for me to choose between the two. If I could have the best of both worlds ignoring legal change I'd be Ella Anne and if I was an actress, singer and/or writer I'd be Ella Anne James. Signing that feels the most right of all.

Claire and Clara were names I used a lot during my make believe that I'm still very fond of, but there is not a strong connotation there. I like signing Claire, but I don't know if it's a name I could see myself as.

Emma is a name I love, but I've thought if I could name myself Ann instead of naming a daughter Anna, she'd be Emma instead. And I'm not sure if I see myself as an Emma strangely something about the name Emma feels too good for me. Like it belongs to someone prettier and more loved than me. And I don't know if it's because of Jane Austen or the adorable girls typically named Emma, but that's why I don't know if I could call myself that and not feel still like 'that isn't me.'

Likewise Elaine is a name that I've loved since about 5th grade and later loved even more when I found out it's a variation on my grandmother's name, but one that I feel like it's just too good for me. Too classy. Which is why it's long been reserved for a daughter's middle name instead.

Rose is another name on the short list because I genuinely just love this simple pretty name. I have a rosy complexion and have thus been called Rosie as a nickname in the past. And I fell in love with Rosie Cotton from The Lord of the Rings when I was much younger. And I'd love to be Rose. I'd love to be Rose James (Last Name). Or Ella Rose (Last Name). Or like Ella Anne James above, signing Ella Rose James feels really, really right too. But I don't know if I'm feminine enough for Rose and I wonder if everyone would think "OF ALL THE NAMES YOU PICK THAT ONE?"

Laura (including variations) and Amy are both worth making mention of sense I loved them a lot growing up too. But I don't if either of those would make sense. Although I had a coworker say I looked like a Lauren so that was interesting.

I think though the thing about all of the names that speak to me is that they are more feminine and juxtaposed to how Jamie sounds like a playful nickname that you don't present to others as professional. That's why I've gone with Lynne at my new job because it at least sounds professional and is quick and easy. I may never have the nerve to change my name completely, but have considered settling for Lynne and legally changing my name to Lynne James instead of Jamie Lynne. I could always drop the e too since it's confusing as heck and a typo anyhow. Or maybe I'll be Lynne at this job and eventually change jobs and go back to being Jamie professional. I just don't know, but I don't foresee myself being happy no matter what with my given name.

Not How It Is, But How It Could Be

When the first bits of news dropped in regards to the live-adaptation of Disney's animated telling of Cinderella, I was as skeptical as I usually am about new things - which is to say a lot. Yes, I'm a very guarded person with very serious trust issues and a pretty strong intuitive system. But in my defense, the first few articles that came out went straight to praising how this adaptation would showcase a less demure Cinderella, one who can ride horses and show cleavage and not sit on the sidelines. So, I really had a lot of good reason to roll my eyes and ask why any of it was necessary since we already have Ever After: A Cinderella Story. And, honestly, I love the original Disney film and various adaptations in general and was content not to have Maleficent 2.0 - which isn't a bad film as a loose adaptation of Sleeping Beauty per se, but that I didn't appreciate as an effort to demoralize the 1959 animated film as outdated and lacking (which is how it was strongly marketed).

Here's the thing. Those articles were talking up the aforementioned points of interest obnoxiously and with only a basic understanding of why those points are important in the grand scheme of things when it comes to stories geared towards females. They were trying to sell it as, "This won't be the Cinderella you [erroneously] remember as needing a fairy godmother and prince to escape her indentured servitude because hey look horseback riding!" I could write an entire think piece on how this flippant attitude towards Cinderella's lot in life is telling in regards to classism, disregard of slavery and indentured servitude as a very real thing that existed, disregard/misconceptions of abuse in modern society, and, yes, even misogyny (a lot of it internalized). But that's a think piece for another day.

Here's the other thing. Turns out: 1. I was 1000% wrong in my skepticism. 2. Those points about how director Kenneth Branagh's Cinderella would have agency and be empowering were 1000% right if misguided and 3. Many of those same people who were excited while I was skeptical were stunned and even angered because Branagh delivered a film inherently about women and gave Ella truly empowering agency for a period fantasy, but it wasn't the kind of obtuse agency that those people wanted.

The story opens up on young Ella with her mother. Ella's mother is so very important. So there's one chalk mark for how this is a movie about women right off the bat. Most adaptations of the story emphasize Ella's relationship with her father. The mother is already dead by time we meet Ella (either through childbirth or when Ella was too young to remember her). So essentially we never have a mother by which to compare the cruelty of the stepmother to. And before somebody cries, "Ah, but let's not pit women against women!" that's simply not how feminism works. The fact is, if you are a woman, you will certainly meet another woman in your life time who is cruel and even if she has her reasons, you will be forced to make comparisons of her to other women who are not cruel as a standard; and I'll come back to this point later because it's important.

The fact is, when adaptations emphasize how wonderful Ella's father was and how close they were it then turns into precarious narrative of pitting a saintly man whose one flaw was marrying for the sake of his daughter and being taken in by a woman against a scornful woman. It becomes a black and white narrative where Ella loses her loving and doting father, her protector, and then must fight for herself against a cruel woman who we know little to nothing about (or only know to be fortune hunting) and by being the opposite of that woman she gets the token prize of another man - who within the setting has to be the purchaser of her redemption by loving her the same as her father loved her (which, hey, isn't always a bad narrative either for the record; it has its purpose like all things when done well).

Branagh introducing Ella's mother as a much more powerful influence on her life is beautifully refreshing and we see so little of it in film, especially fairyale-based films. In Branagh's Cinderella, Ella's entire kingdom as a child may be paid for and provided for by her father's work, but it is Ella's mother who influences the place and makes it happy. She guides the father and gives him purpose and happiness and she guides Ella and rather than doting on her, bolsters her self-esteem by never talking down to her, by treating her with the capacity to believe in everything, to learn, to love, to simply be a good human being! It's subtle, but it's less about Ella's mother enforcing rules and regulations, but offering her own insight.

That's why it's so vital to pay attention to the wording when Ella's mother does ask her to make a promise. She prefaces it first by praising her daughter for the natural strengths she already possesses (groundbreaking) and then, like a teacher, explains how the strengths Ella already has the capacity for already has power and magic (i.e. Ella's mother already believes her daughter is strong). Ella's mother is wishing to bestow EMPOWERMENT on her daughter while she has one last chance so that nothing can ever destroy her when she's not there to help her anymore. Asking Ella to promise to be kind and courageous is asking Ella to trust herself and believe without a doubt that nobody has the power to take those choices away from you.

Furthermore, courage is open ended enough that it still gives Ella the agency to decide what she believes is the courageous thing to do. This is supported time and time again throughout the movie: Ella decides it is courageous to forgive her mother, Ella decides it is courageous to preserve the house she was once happy in, Ella decides it is courageous to disobey her stepmother, Ella decides it is courageous to stand up to a man with ideologies she disagrees with, Ella decides it is courageous to risk her own life and happiness for the sake of the entire kingdom. This is all empowering and it is all because of her mother's influence and not her father's!

In fact, Branagh turns the father narrative a bit on its head. Ella's father is not as strong as her mother was and lets loneliness cloud his judgment. Ella's father then mistreats a woman, who was seeking companionship and agency for her own daughters, because of that misjudgment and not knowing how to handle his mistake. He runs away, belittles his wife behind her back which negatively influences Ella's reaction, and thus sets up a reason for Lady Tremaine to fall back on her own bitterness for safety (which is exactly how you effectively create a villain who is not inherently evil, can be redeemed but still makes the wrong choices foregoing that ultimate redemption - on screen anyhow).

Meanwhile, the entirety of Kit's arc is his struggle against his father. Kit has a soft heart (shocking) that his father wishes to harden with reality and regulation (authoritarian parenting). Kit's father wants him to know what it means to be king. There's so much going on here about how men have a choice too and that shirking off things that are often seen in our society and in fairytales as feminine or ignoring a woman's input is just as unwise as being 'taken in by a woman' because of loneliness, misjudgment, etc. In the end, Ella's mother's spirit influences Ella to challenge Kit to be himself which in turn influences the king and reconciles a father and son (in a beautiful moment that shows how okay it is for men to be tender and openhearted with one another, that it doesn't make them any less princes or kings) and ultimately influences an entire kingdom. Do you see how absolutely powerful that is and how it's all because two women had a healthy relationship when it's usually about a father and daughter?

Now for discussing the other three women in the film, that is Lady Tremaine, Anastasia and Drizella.
Ella's relationship with her mother serves as a Venn Diagram backdrop to Lady Tremaine's relationship with her daughters that I find absolutely subversive and fascinating; I haven't seen many talk about it, but it's there and critical to the narrative. It's also universal in that it can apply to parenting styles/child psychology in general.

In the same way we are given a beautiful glimpse into the way Ella's mother encouraged her, believed in her, nurtured her, and was all around a textbook case for good parenting/teaching, we are given glimpse after glimpse of how Lady Tremaine does not believe in her daughters no matter how much she pushes them to be better. She turns up her nose at their lack of ability rather than nurturing other talents they might have if she were to look beyond the superficial. This point comes to a head when Lady Tremaine herself reveals to Ella that she believes her daughters to be beautiful, but stupid. This underlines the very empowerment and agency that people argue doesn't exist in the film. We are shown the contrast of a mother who doesn't see the worth that already lies in her daughters and how that strips them of empowerment and causes them to be insecure and pitted against one another subconsciously (internalized!). So whereas Ella is empowered to choose her lot in life and fall in love with Kit whether he be apprentice or prince, Lady Tremaine is the one in sole control of her daughters' futures and feels the need to take it upon herself to secure them marriages for the sake of provision (even though she herself claims to have once been married for love).

Now here's where it gets better and why it's so subversive. If you think that the Venn Diagram is lacking anything in the middle, think again. Both Lady Tremaine and Ella's mother love their daughters. That's right. Lady Tremaine's choices are just as inherently motivated by a desire to see good come to her daughters as Ella's mother - she says so explicitly. Circumstances and core values is what separates them in what they see as being good for those daughters. Lady Tremaine believes it is best for her daughters to be married and provided for (subtle narrative that only socially adept women who accept the role of men have agency and a chance to survive) and outlives her husband giving her a hard choice on how to live by her belief system and continue to do good for her daughters. On the other hand, Ella's mother is raising an individual who can stand on her own, but does not live to see her own belief system tested (such as if Ella's father had still died); that responsibility and struggle falls to Ella who must test what she's been taught and prove it true or untrue for herself which is why it's important she has moments of doubt, imperfect and despair and makes choices that maybe aren't the wisest, choosing heart over head (like staying in her family home). Basically, Branagh gives us a film that explores multiple sides of the same die which effectively humanizes why a stepmother may be cruel and why stepsisters may be raised to be the same. (And taking away the layer of feminism you still have a strong overall theme of why parenting is a huge responsibility and why early childhood is such a critical time in a person's development!)

Above I said sometimes when a woman meets with another woman who is cruel, even if she has her reasons, you will be forced to make comparisons of her to other women who are not cruel as a standard and that's not inherently anti-feminist or a pitting of women against women. It's an important point because Branagh had a choice to make when wrapping up Lady Tremaine's story. Which is why I love that Branagh ignored the request from people in focus groups to make Lady Tremaine's demise a lethal one in favor of forgiveness. Because, that is feminism! (obviously it encompasses the entire spectrum of what it means to be a good person, but since I'm focusing on the feminism of the film...) Feminism is realizing not every woman is on the same level and might not ever be, but coexisting and not dehumanizing the other woman for the sake of some rhetoric.

Lady Tremaine tells Ella her reasons and then uses them to justify her cruelty. Ella has the choice to either punish her for all of the lots in life that led to her brokenness and her desperation as soon as she has the power to or say 'no, what you did to me is not okay, but that's not the kind of person I'm going to be to you in return' and she thankfully chooses the latter. Lady Tremaine is still banished and not allowed entrance back in Ella's life (important when you view the film through the lens of abuse), but Ella still realizes that it is healthier to forgive and move on with her own life and allow Lady Tremaine the same right to go on living her own - there is always the possibility that if the story had continued Lady Tremaine's world might have changed in that moment and maybe she even began to heal which is an encouraging thing to consider (looking at you, fan writers).

I would like to just thank Branagh for having the courage to take that route, as someone who has been hurt by women who didn't understand or who were themselves hurt. I would like to thank him since I have often had times in my life where I was Lady Tremaine (or perhaps more appropriately the stepsisters) because I was hurt and responded in kind because there weren't better examples to follow or I just couldn't see past myself. That's the beauty of this film! It shows several women making choices and influencing one another for better or worse without ever stealing their agency away from them, rather showing how agency no matter your sex is a great responsibility (because it is a great power) that does not exist within a vacuum.

The film for all its merits is not above criticism no matter how much I adore it. There are valid complaints to be made, but none of them should be about how Ella is weak and a bad influence following the likes of characters such as Elsa and Anna in Disney's Frozen (actual claims that have been made). There is a sizist joke in which one of the largest, if not the largest, woman who appears in the movie is poked fun at for being unappealing (sweaty, stinky, etc.) and while kudos that she's a hard working woman it's also sad that it had to be a larger woman when a thin woman could be just as unappealing for the same reasons; however, it is so fleeting that it could have been worse and the movie mostly sidesteps demeaning people on their looks (the movie, for example, doesn't equate stupidity with physical ugliness with the stepsisters as Ella herself thinks they are lovely on the outside). Another criticism could be the narration - I've seen the complaint that it removes you from the story and breaks the flow. Personally I think it adds whimsy and another female voice to have Helena Bonham Carter's brilliantly portrayed fairy godmother narrate the story throughout, but I can understand the complaint. I can also see where maybe it was a choice based on test audiences just not following along or a concern that the younger audience might need some cues. I can understand that completely as even with those cues too many adult reviewers are just absolutely dense about the script - so if anything maybe Branagh should have made it Cinderella: Pop Up Addition complete with interstitial moments where he comes out onto the screen with a red sharpie to highlight what people have completely missed.

Of course, the main criticism that could be had is that the movie is 98% white. On the one hand, I'm thrilled that Nonso Anozie has a main part as the Captain, sidestepping the rule of thumb that a poc can not have a position of power in a period fantasy because of "historical accuracy" or other such nonsense. The Captain is truly one of the most delightful parts of the film (seriously, I'd marry him just as fast as I'd marry Kit!) as he understands Kit, challenges him, speaks to him as a friend as much as a subject, is loyal to him, and proves his merit time and again as a contrast to the Grand Duke. That said, it would have been nice for more diversity. By bucking the norm with one poc in a position of power, it would have been nice to see that nonconformity carry to somewhere else in the film. While I don't believe in colorblindness on a whole, the colorblind Broadway-based adaptation with Brandy in the 90s at least gave us talking points on why in fantasy it shouldn't matter the color of the character's skin as the story is still the same (as well as talking points on interracial relationships) and I think that's where this adaptation, nearly 20 years later!, is lacking.

Honestly, I could talk for days (and have) about this movie. I haven't even touched on the fairy godmother, the acting, the filmography, the costuming, the score, the countless quotes that have been like lights and inspiration for me in a very dark year, and other little nuances that keep me coming back to this movie like a thirsty person. But at the very heart I have to say what I think I love most about Branagh's Cinderella is if you take it beyond its worth as a film about females, it's simply a beautiful movie about people. It's about relationships and choices and the various types of strength that exist in this vastly complicated and deeply marred world. It's about how different people can go through the same thing or something similar and come out on the other side totally unalike. Some come out resilient, others broken. Some who have been hurt, hurt others. Some who have been hurt never want to hurt another human being even if they continue to hurt in the process. Some people are kind by nature and some have to learn it, but at the end of the day we all have the capacity for magic.

Which is what leads me to the quote I chose for the title of this post.

She saw the world, not always as it was, but as it could be.

Which is to say there is hope for everybody even when it seems like there isn't and even when others operate in the realm of how this world often is (dark, selfish, cruel, angry, sad) or we're tempted to do so ourselves (because we're only human) that doesn't mean we can't operate in the realm of how it could be or at the very least believe in that potential and strive for it. That's precisely what this movie is all about and there's absolutely nothing wrong or problematic about that. Perhaps those who say otherwise are simply scared that kindness, a very difficult trait, and courage, also difficult, really are the answer because it would mean they would have to try harder - and I say that as someone from experience who is neither of those things naturally but who will never stop trying to be better at them.

In essence the message of the film reminds me of the timeless quote by Wilferd Peterson (who, ironically credited his views on life on the inspiration and collaboration of his wife who lived the way he idealized) -

Walk with the dreamers, the believers, the courageous, the cheerful, the planners, the doers, the successful people with their heads in the clouds and their feet on the ground. Let their spirit ignite a fire within you to leave this world better than when you found it.

Handsome, Clever, and Rich

Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition, seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence; and had lived nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her.

I first read these lines when I was sixteen, perhaps a little unaware that I was about to discover my most favorite book in the world - one that would transcend even my love for J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings. I wish I could have fallen in love with Jane Austen's Emma sooner, but I suppose it was simply the right timing. 

I didn't read it sooner for a few reasons. Chiefly, I didn't really clamor to read anything by Jane Austen because my mother burned me out on Emma Thompson's adaptation of Sense & Sensibility when I was a little girl (a movie I appreciate now that I'm older and understand her reasoning for watching so often). Then when I finally did my first foray into Austen literature was Pride & Prejudice. For some reason, thirteen or fourteen year old me just didn't understand why everybody in the world adored the book or its leading characters. It was somewhat of a let down because I had been determined to fall in love with Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy like teenage girls are supposed to do. Whenever the subject arose, I never knew if I should pretend that I liked it and feel guilty that I didn't or take the special snowflake route of saying it was overrated. Even to this day, I am not as in love with Pride & Prejudice, Elizabeth, or Mr. Darcy as much as the rest of the world and I'm not certain I'll ever understand why. 

source: Wikipedia

Fast forward a few years to a rainy, summer afternoon. The 1996 adaptation of Emma starring Gwyneth Paltrow was on Fox and I caught a bit of it in the middle. I was absolutely hooked and had to get a copy of the book immediately. I did and was all the more in raptures as I read through this gem of a novel, never wishing to put it down. Every praise of Jane Austen suddenly made sense to me. I hadn't found my bosom-friend in Elizabeth, but in Emma. I hadn't lost my heart to Mr. Darcy, but oh how my teenage heart beat wildly at the very thought of Mr. Knightley. Emma not only opened my soul to the world of Austen at long last, it also became my one true literature love. 

Yesterday I finished my re-read of the novel, having spent one too many years since having visited it in print (trust me, I watch the Paltrow adaptation as tirelessly as I did when I first got my DVD of it the Christmas after falling in love with the book). I am happy to say that my passion for this book has not dwindled in even the least. On the contrary, I seem to love it more deeply the older I get even if I am now more than a handful of years older than the titular heroine. 

Emma Woodhouse

source: IMDb

Why do I prefer Emma to Elizabeth? Emma is spoiled, prone to jealousy, attention-seeking, vain, snobbish, clueless, a bit childish, obstinate, and a myriad of other varying personality traits that fascinate me even if I've known similar people with these characteristics who drove me nuts because they clashed with my own brand of these characteristics. In fact, I connected with her when I was younger because although I am not rich and handsome like she, I do have quite a few of her flaws. Now that I'm older, however, I realize I'm not really an

source: The Art of Clothes

Emma so much as I'm a Marianne Dashwood. I don't have the energy and vanity to be an Emma full time. But this disparity has made her all the more interesting to me. On the one hand, I wonder had I come from a rich family, would my personality somehow aligned more to Emma's? I also enjoy watching her grow while never losing that sort of harmless self-centeredness that she just wouldn't be herself without. For example, I love how one minute Emma is all remorse for Harriet and yet as soon as Harriet is gone away for awhile, Emma pretty much forgets she exists in favor of her own happiness. It's just hilariously flawed and realistic. I love it and am even guilty of the same duplicity from time to time. Emma is just a delightfully flawed character who embodies everything about the upper class society of the time.

Mr. Knightley

Sigh. Mr. Knightley will always be the Jane Austen hero who has my heart. There can be only him. That said, I must admit I'm not entirely sure I could handle him. I fear my lack of vanity and self-esteem, which Emma of course has in spades, would make me ill-suited for him. Mr. Knightley himself says he couldn't be happy with Jane because she lacks an open temper. I'm closer to Jane in how she tries very hard to be guarded, proper, correct, etc. I fear that having Mr. Knightley scold me would only depress my spirits. I have come to the conclusion that I would probably be better off with Colonel Brandon or Frederick Wentworth - or some lovely in between of the two. But my heart will always belong to Mr. Knightley just the same. He is my fantastic idea of prince charming: the man who I could never attain or match well with, but the one I dream about all the same. 

source: Solitary Elegance

And of course, half the reason I adore the book belongs entirely to the subject of Emma and Mr. Knightley together. I know there are some people who can't stomach it because they're so rich, he's so much older, etc. but I adore the way their relationship unfolds with every fiber of my being. I smile like an idiot from nearly start to finish as Austen cleverly leaves us all the hints of why these two are destined for happiness together until at last they both realize it. And oh the snark. Their wit back and forth leaves my heart in a flutter. I cannot but love them. Only Anne and Wentworth come even close to the amount of fangirl stomach butterflies these two incite in me. (Edmund is too busy being blind for me to get that effect with him and Fanny and likewise Marianne is being too blind for me to get that effect with her and Colonel Brandon, although those are my two other most favorite Austen pairings.) As for the age disparity, it just doesn't bother me. In fact, I'd even say I have a bit of a problematic romanticism of 15-20 year age gaps (or at least an extreme amount of tolerance) likely stemming from being raised on Classic Hollywood films, but that's a story for another day. 

Jane Fairfax

I cannot begin to explain my love for Emma without spending a good chunk of time following in Mrs. Elton's footsteps and raving about Jane Fairfax. Without Miss Fairfax, I wonder if any of my love for the book would be diminished. Austen presents her so well through the lens of Emma because we see how wonderful and sweet she is and how unreasonable Emma is being due to her jealousy. It's such a great satire on real life and shows you how you can root for both women, regardless of their contrast, rather than taking sides - at least that's how I interpret it. Thus, I root for Jane heartily. I root for her to be healthy, to find love, to find security in life, and to become just a tad less cautious for the sake of pleasing others. 

That she finds all of this in Frank makes me cheer. Frank is certainly a cad, but he's a goodnatured cad who simply has a bit to learn. He's actually a lot like Emma in that he is often blind to things because of his own desires and imagination. If Emma were a man, it's almost safe to say she'd be a good deal like Frank. However, Frank is such an amazing romantic foil for Jane because he's in a position to dote on her in the way she deserves, enliven her spirits, and draw her out of herself. Likewise, she's in a position to love him with the excess his personality requires while also being grounded enough to admonish him without being nagging about it. I agree with Mr. Knightley that the merit is mostly on her side, but I believe they work as a pairing and I love their backstory. I also love the added touch that Frank seems to genuinely cherish Miss and Mrs. Bates on Jane's behalf.

source: Cap That

However, there's another relationship I root for beyond Frank and Jane's romantic one and that is for the friendship of Emma and Jane to materialize. Again, it goes back to how Austen writes it so well. Every time I read the book, I want so much for Emma and Jane to become the best of friends as they should have been from the start. I realize it was not the way society worked, but I wish for them to become so dearly acquainted that they become correspondents, that they spend holidays together as they can, and that maybe even a match comes of it in the future when they have children (yes, I am a matchmaker like Emma). Also, I love the part of the book where Austen has Emma muse about how different things would have been had she and Jane been friends from the beginning or else better acquainted. That bit always causes me to desperately wish for that alternate version of the story. I would more

source: Cap That

than happily read The Many Misadventures of Emma and Jane if it were a thing!

All in all, I just really love this book. I could go on for ages about it and probably never even scratch the surface of an adequate expression of my love for it. It is a book that gives me endless pleasure, which I am always sad when it ends, and which I am always wanting to discuss in great detail so as to dissect every single line. This book is one of the greats, in my opinion, and I think I would class it as one even if I weren't one hundred and one percent biased. 

But seriously, The Many Misadventures of Emma and Jane. Who wants to create a kickstart for me so I can write it myself? Because, honestly, I'm writing it myself. 

A Letter To Simoa

Dear Simoa,
   
Where do I begin? You are such a beautiful and talented young lady; and no matter how contrite those words may sound when overused, I mean them truly and deeply. It never ceases to surprise me that your eyes and soul burn for Audrey Hepburn. You are more than kindred spirits. You seem to beat with the same heart as she. But only to compare you to a wonderful woman of yesteryear would be remiss, because you are so much more than that on your own.

You are a gloriously unique and bright queen sent by heaven to grace us with your presence. It is a presence so wordlessly brilliant that it is as if you were breathed to life by some starry incantation. You are as sweet as a deer and as fierce as a velociraptor. I am ever in awe of this combination and how excellently you pull it off as I continue to stumble along like an ant carrying more weight than she knows how. You inspire me. You rock me to my core when I need it most.

But this isn't about me, it's about you. And you are bound for greatness. I can taste it. Every time you post a selfie or use your wordsmithing, I just sense it. Don't ever stop quoting Treasure Planet, dear. Because you really will rattle the stars. I believe it every bit as strong as Silver did for Jim. Like a solar flare so bright that others will have no choice but to catch some of the light as well.

This letter may be strong on flowery speech and littered with borrowed sentiments, but I hope they pierce your heart just a little so that I can always have a place in it. I am so happy to have met you even if I have yet to physically stand in your presence. You will always be the Ellie this Atta desperately needs.

I hope that this very special birthday and coming year finds you with all of the carefree Joy that Princess Ann exudes. I hope your troubles are few and your heart never more weary than you can bear. I hope that you have all that you need, all that you desire, and then a little more for good measure. Most of all, I hope you allow God to guide you as you continue to grow into the woman He created you to be.

I love you my deer friend!