Anyone watch this last night? I can't wait for next week! Tess is one of my favourite books, and it was lovely to see it being brought to life.

The only thing I have issue with was the rape scene-it was far more graphic than the book, in fact, a lot of people reading the book are unaware Alec has raped Tess until they find out she's given birth! The scene left no doubt in anyone's mind.

Apart from that, fantastic:)

I missed it :(

Am always wary of adaptations of my favourites though. And if they made the rape scene fairly graphic that would have cheesed me right off. I once argued in an essay that it's impossible to tell from the text whether she's raped or seduced (devil's advocate, you know how it is).

Might try and catch it if its repeated at all and you think it's good LM :)

Quite enjoyed! Much less effort than reading the book :P

I detest that book (so no I didn't watch it). I find Tess to be an intensely annoying weakling and an very bad example to either sex.

I missed it :(

Am always wary of adaptations of my favourites though. And if they made the rape scene fairly graphic that would have cheesed me right off. I once argued in an essay that it's impossible to tell from the text whether she's raped or seduced (devil's advocate, you know how it is).

Might try and catch it if its repeated at all and you think it's good LM :)

I thought it was nice to see it on the screen, I've never seen another adaptation of Tess before! They were fairly true to the book, apart from that one bit.

I was really annoyed at the rape scene too-funnily enough I devoted a large chunk of an essay to the "rape or seduction" issue also!:o I know which one I believe it is, but it isn't really possible to be absolutely sure from the book!

I'm wary of adaptations too-some things have been ruined for me, but this isn't too bad (so far) as they go.

Tess is satisfyingly definant:love:

Tess is satisfyingly definant:love:

I find Tess to be an intensely annoying weakling

Are we talking about the same character?:hihi:

Naive to a point, yes. I don't thinks she's weak.

I read it 16 years ago, but that's definitely the impression I got when I read it.
She lets life and men push her around, she never has the guts to make a decision or take any action for herself.

Maybe I blame her because if I'd liked that book I'd have probably got an A and not a B in GCSE English :D

I read it 16 years ago, but that's definitely the impression I got when I read it.
She lets life and men push her around, she never has the guts to make a decision or take any action for herself.

Maybe I blame her because if I'd liked that book I'd have probably got an A and not a B in GCSE English :D

:hihi:

I do see how someone could come to that conclusion. She lets her mother tell her what to do, but she is definant towards Alec, and in the end, decides to tell Angel about her past. Even though he didn't get the letter, the point is that she pushed it under his door in an attempt to be true to herself, even though her mother told her not to. I'm not sure she's fully aware of how strong she actually is.

Oh, and the way she talks to the priest who refuses to bury her unbaptised baby....go girl!:hihi:

I thought it was nice to see it on the screen, I've never seen another adaptation of Tess before! They were fairly true to the book, apart from that one bit.

I was really annoyed at the rape scene too-funnily enough I devoted a large chunk of an essay to the "rape or seduction" issue also!:o I know which one I believe it is, but it isn't really possible to be absolutely sure from the book!

I'm wary of adaptations too-some things have been ruined for me, but this isn't too bad (so far) as they go.

Tess is satisfyingly definant:love:

I will check it out next week :)

Angel does bad things to my blood pressure though :hihi:

I agree about the rape scene, I was very shocked and expected it to be ambiguous once she became shrouded in the mist. Like others, the issue of whether she was seduced or raped was the topic of many a heated debate and essay. It is virtually impossible to tell from the book, however, I guess it would have been impossible to write a graphic account of sex, given that Hardy had to change the scene where Angel carries Tess across a stream, to one where he wheeled her across in a wheel barrow. When I first read the book in my teens, the first indication to me was that the next phase was called 'Maiden No More'.

Apart from that it did very much bring the book alive, although I don't remember Tess as being quite so feisty, I must say. The symbolism was all there (the strawberry growing in the greenhouse out of season, Alec's cigar, nothing being what it seems etc). But the Victorian country gals are all so skinny.:suspect:

I personally loathe Angel Clare as a character, a nasty hypocrite full of double standards, not only that after he's prtly responsible for Tess ending up hanged he then shacks up with her younger sister.:rant::rant:

I will check it out next week :)

Angel does bad things to my blood pressure though :hihi:

Just seen that, ditto.:rant::rant::rant:

:hihi:

I do see how someone could come to that conclusion. She lets her mother tell her what to do, but she is definant towards Alec, and in the end, decides to tell Angel about her past. Even though he didn't get the letter, the point is that she pushed it under his door in an attempt to be true to herself, even though her mother told her not to. I'm not sure she's fully aware of how strong she actually is.

Oh, and the way she talks to the priest who refuses to bury her unbaptised baby....go girl!:hihi:
She only tells Angel about her past after he confesses his and she mistakenly believes that that now makes them equals.

And the b******* then dumps her. Pious git.:rant::rant::rant:

She only tells Angel about her past after he confesses his and she mistakenly believes that that now makes them equals.

And the b******* then dumps her. Pious git.:rant::rant::rant:

He's horrid:rant: He only finds out when she actually tells him, but she does push a letter under his door beforehand explaining, but it goes under the carpet and he doesn't find it.

The sybolism was all present and correct, and very stonrg. That strawberry shocked me actually:hihi:

I read it 16 years ago, but that's definitely the impression I got when I read it.
She lets life and men push her around, she never has the guts to make a decision or take any action for herself.

Maybe I blame her because if I'd liked that book I'd have probably got an A and not a B in GCSE English :D

Is the whole point of the book though about coincidence and fate? She is propelled on this course of doom from the outset of her parents trying to claim kin with some family who adopted a landed gentry name. Circumstances, such as Prince dying, being set upon by the women when Alec comes to her rescue, always seem out of her control. Everywhere you look there are omens, that's how I remember it. Admittedly, I haven't read the book for about 20 years.

He's horrid:rant: He only finds out when she actually tells him, but she does push a letter under his door beforehand explaining, but it goes under the carpet and he doesn't find it.

The sybolism was all present and correct, and very stonrg. That strawberry shocked me actually:hihi:

I always hated him. I got into a row once with my A level English teacher when I said I preferred Alec to Angel.:hihi::hihi: Do you think they'll have the scene with Alec popping up devil-like by the bonfire?

Yeah, she's pushed around by circumstance, but not once does she try to do anything about it. She just floats along to her doom like she has a complete lack of volition.

Yeah, she's pushed around by circumstance, but not once does she try to do anything about it. She just floats along to her doom like she has a complete lack of volition.

Well, that is my perception, she was a pawn, which is why Hardy was so scathing about religion and the religious characters in this novel were all a bunch of hypocrites. It was the vicar who after all, sowed the seed and gave Tess's father grandiose ideas about his ancestry.

My recollection, and it some time ago now since I read and studied the book, was how she really had no control over her life, it was pre-ordained; fate is a very strong theme all throughout the novel and I seem to recall all sorts of references about the insignificance of man in the universe etc.

Oh my God, that book is so DEPRESSING!

Relentlessly depressing. Like all of Thomas Hardy

Beautifully written and all that - but unrelenting gloom and hopelessness. If something can go wrong, it will. Over and over again, in every book. Unbearable.

StarSparkle

I've never actually managed to finish reading the book - I just get so disgusted with the maudlin sentimentality of it, that I've abandoned it on many occasions.

But I'm now watching the TV programme, in the hopes I can get to the end of it and see what everybody else sees in the story!!

Oh my God, that book is so DEPRESSING!

Relentlessly depressing. Like all of Thomas Hardy

Beautifully written and all that - but unrelenting gloom and hopelessness. If something can go wrong, it will. Over and over again, in every book. Unbearable.

StarSparkle

Jude the Obscure is worse. That must rank as the most depressing book I've ever read. It haunted me for ages and that was years before I had children. I don't thing I could bring myself to ever reread it.

Oh my God, that book is so DEPRESSING!

Relentlessly depressing. Like all of Thomas Hardy

Beautifully written and all that - but unrelenting gloom and hopelessness. If something can go wrong, it will. Over and over again, in every book. Unbearable.


But this is what we like about Thomas Hardy. It's a lot more like real life than any book with a happy ending.

I saw the BBC adaptation, but I much prefer Roman Polanski's movie version with Nastassja Kinski as Tess.

Well, that is my perception, she was a pawn, which is why Hardy was so scathing about religion and the religious characters in this novel were all a bunch of hypocrites. It was the vicar who after all, sowed the seed and gave Tess's father grandiose ideas about his ancestry.

My recollection, and it some time ago now since I read and studied the book, was how she really had no control over her life, it was pre-ordained; fate is a very strong theme all throughout the novel and I seem to recall all sorts of references about the insignificance of man in the universe etc.

Maybe that's part of why I was so annoyed, I don't believe in fate, there is no grand plan, sure things happen, but you've always got the chance to change things and you have to take control of yourself at the very least.

Just watched the second ep, god I'd forgotten about all those ridiculous coincidences, Tess not being able to escape her past and that hateful vicar who refused to give Sorrow (?:gag:) a Christian burial.

Angel Clare and his harp - I'd forgotten that but not Alec standing by the bonfire with a fork (not yet shown) - subtle Hardy, very subtle.:rolleyes:

I 'did' this book as part of my English Lit A level many years ago and knew it inside and out at the time (the thing with Hardy is his continuous descriptions of the countryside, scene settings and attention to detail which pads out most of the book - Tess could walk across a field and it takes 3 seconds on the screen but fills out about 20 pages in the book!).

It has been nice to relive the story without the heavy descriptions stalling the plot.

I remember the A level questions - Was Tess a temptress? Was she a tragic heroine or did she make her own fate? Discuss the hypocrisy of Angel. Double standards - discuss!

Ahhh didn't watch this last night-I was caught up in other things-but will watch it on demand either tonight after dog-training or tomorrow after work. Looking forward to it:D

Jude the Obscure is worse. That must rank as the most depressing book I've ever read. It haunted me for ages and that was years before I had children. I don't thing I could bring myself to ever reread it.

That's got to be in my top ten. It's an amazing novel. Yes it's depressing, but it's interesting depressing, almost French in fact. To me, just as despairing as what happens to the children is when Jude is rejected by the University and driven to scrawl on Bibliol College wall: "I have such understanding as you; I am not inferior to you". It's a very modern book, and still a relevant one.

That's got to be in my top ten. It's an amazing novel. Yes it's depressing, but it's interesting depressing, almost French in fact. To me, just as despairing as what happens to the children is when Jude is rejected by the University and driven to scrawl on Bibliol College wall: "I have such understanding as you; I am not inferior to you". It's a very modern book, and still a relevant one.

Yes, absolutely.

I've written a very long defence of Hardy (not that he needs my help ;)) twice now on this thread and deleted it for not wanting to bore people. But honestly, he's SO great. I don't say that lightly.

I 'did' this book as part of my English Lit A level many years ago and knew it inside and out at the time (the thing with Hardy is his continuous descriptions of the countryside, scene settings and attention to detail which pads out most of the book - Tess could walk across a field and it takes 3 seconds on the screen but fills out about 20 pages in the book!).

It has been nice to relive the story without the heavy descriptions stalling the plot.

I remember the A level questions - Was Tess a temptress? Was she a tragic heroine or did she make her own fate? Discuss the hypocrisy of Angel. Double standards - discuss!
Do not get me started on that pious hypocrite Angel Clare.:rant::rant::rant: He fell in love with an ideal then shacks up with Tess' sister.

Yes, absolutely.

I've written a very long defence of Hardy (not that he needs my help ;)) twice now on this thread and deleted it for not wanting to bore people. But honestly, he's SO great. I don't say that lightly.

Gerrit posted up!!!! :thumbsup:

Hardy's another of my favourites. I've come round to thinking he had more in common with Zola or Tolstoy than with other English writers - and that Lawrence followed in his footsteps. I remember sitting the Oxford entrance exam many moons ago and being delighted when one of the questions was about whether landscape could be considered a 'character' in literature and I ended up writing a mad piece on Hardy, Emily Bronte and Tolkien ;)

Ahhh didn't watch this last night-I was caught up in other things-but will watch it on demand either tonight after dog-training or tomorrow after work. Looking forward to it:D

It's available on demand, unlike the programme I wanted to watch, which isn't :( :(

It's available on demand, unlike the programme I wanted to watch, which isn't :( :(

Awww:(

Which programme was that? And was it my fault you didn't get to watch it? If so, I'm sorry:hihi:

Awww:(

Which programme was that? And was it my fault you didn't get to watch it? If so, I'm sorry:hihi:

It was that Ireland to Australia thing, every other week it's been available on demand, but no, not this week :P

Have to have a look in the TV guide for a repeat!!

Do not get me started on that pious hypocrite Angel Clare.:rant::rant::rant: He fell in love with an ideal then shacks up with Tess' sister.

Well, to be fair to Angel, Tess did ask him to marry her sister... :)

But yes, he did fall in love with an ideal, and was brought rudely down to earth

StarSparkle

Well, to be fair to Angel, Tess did ask him to marry her sister... :)
Gosh, I'd forgotten about that., sorry! even so, wasn't she 14 or something when her and Angel wandered off into the sunset after Tess had been hanged.:suspect::suspect:

Oooh, that Angel Clare, what an odious character.

Gerrit posted up!!!! :thumbsup:

Hardy's another of my favourites. I've come round to thinking he had more in common with Zola or Tolstoy than with other English writers - and that Lawrence followed in his footsteps. I remember sitting the Oxford entrance exam many moons ago and being delighted when one of the questions was about whether landscape could be considered a 'character' in literature and I ended up writing a mad piece on Hardy, Emily Bronte and Tolkien ;)

Great question! And there was me believing the rumours that you'd be expected to write for 3 hours on 'Is this is a question?' ;) (Answer: 'If this is an answer', of course). :hihi:

My undergrad dissertation was on Hardy - the title was something about 'aesthetics and Wessex' - so I spent a lot of time looking at the heath in The Return of the Native and Tess's wanderings. One of the things that really struck me was David Lodge describing Hardy as a 'cinematic novelist' (which is very different from a novelist that can be easily adapted to screen - Michael Crichton, I'm talking about you) - there's a brilliant passage in RotN where Clem's eyesight has deteriorated to the point where he can only see close ups, and he's looking at butterflies and bees and flowers and they're all compared to semi-precious stones...wonderful stuff.

One of reasons that I end up shouting at the screen with adaptations, for the most part, is that all that subtlety with language is lost. When Classic Rock mentioned the scenery and attention to detail that 'pads out' the novel - yes, on one level I suppose it does, but on another it's the way he writes those bits that gives the plot (which I certainly won't argue is overblown in places) meaning beyond melodrama.

I've never read Lawrence beyond Kangaroo and Lady Chatterly (sp?). I should give him another go - I love Katherine Mansfield, so Women in Love is maybe next on the list.

That's the very, very long list of things I want to read and don't ;)

Anyway, Hardy :love:

RotN's a brilliant example of landscape as character. It's a driving force in the actual plot of the novel, forces of nature determining events. It's even somehow malevolent at times. That's where I draw parallels with Tolkien (the areas of the UK which inspired them even overlap) who also lingers on scenery because that very scenery (which some see as mere 'padding' :o ) determines the turn of the story.

Likewise in Wuthering Heights.

This is also all very Pagan of course. And the interesting thing is these are real landscapes but extruded to form bigger ones. The actual small heathlands of Wessex become a massive Egdon Heath; the Lambourn Downs become the huge and spooky Barrow Downs; and small farms on Yorkshire Moorlands become sprawling places like Wuthering Heights.

I'll have to dig out that passage from RotN and read that again! It's also reminded me of just how important colour is in Hardy's novels too.

I have to laugh though when people say they don't like descriptive passages - it reminds me of my English teacher's mother who apparently used to say she never bothered with anything other than the dialogue in novels! :o

RotN's a brilliant example of landscape as character. It's a driving force in the actual plot of the novel, forces of nature determining events. It's even somehow malevolent at times. That's where I draw parallels with Tolkien (the areas of the UK which inspired them even overlap) who also lingers on scenery because that very scenery (which some see as mere 'padding' :o ) determines the turn of the story.

Likewise in Wuthering Heights.

This is also all very Pagan of course. And the interesting thing is these are real landscapes but extruded to form bigger ones. The actual small heathlands of Wessex become a massive Egdon Heath; the Lambourn Downs become the huge and spooky Barrow Downs; and small farms on Yorkshire Moorlands become sprawling places like Wuthering Heights.

I'll have to dig out that passage from RotN and read that again! It's also reminded me of just how important colour is in Hardy's novels too.

I have to laugh though when people say they don't like descriptive passages - it reminds me of my English teacher's mother who apparently used to say she never bothered with anything other than the dialogue in novels! :o

Didn't nature also reflect Tess's mood and stage in life? The may-day dance at the beginning, being enshrouded in mist when Alec raped/seduced her, the sunny dairy farm where she met Angel again and spent her happiest times, then the gruelling work on the turnip field (was it?) in harsh conditions when she and Angel separated. I seem to recall she always appeared to be at one with nature.

I'm not so sure that Hardy doesn't clear up any ambiguity regarding the rape/seduction issue a little later on when Tess is at Talbothays, talking to Izz et al. Its breakfast time, and Tess says that she knows how to make her soul leave her body whilst she's alive.

"A very easy way to feel 'em go," continues Tess, "is to lie on the grass at night and look straight up at some big bright star; and, by fixing your mind upon it, you will soon find that you are hundreds and hundreds 'o miles away from your body, which you don't seem to want at all."

I interperate that as Tess detaching herself from the physical assault. I'm not sure what others think.

All in all, I thought it an excellent interpretation, with Gemma Arterton doing full justice to the role. The best thing I've seen on TV for some time.

As a side issue, I did the "Trumpet Major" for my English lit...