I will be tackling GoT episodes 2 and 3 next week. As always, I will have thoughts. Lots of thoughts.

This week: the 2009 BBC adaptation of Emma.

First things, first. If you follow me on Instagram, you already know that Emma is my least favourite Austen heroine. I understand that this may be a controversial opinion for some of you, but bear with me. I think a big part of my dislike comes from the fact that the very first adaptation I saw was the Gwyneth Paltrow version from 1996; I’m not even sure anymore if I had read the book before or not. Was there ever a more perfect embodiment of Pretty Blonde Rich Girl Privilege than 90s era GP? Of course, Emma is not a terrible person (she just has a lot of growing up to do) but to my teenage self, she was a snobby brat who had or got everything she wanted without much angst or hard work. Teenage Adina was big on underdogs and ugly ducklings, and Emma … well, she’s neither of those things.

In Clueless – my favourite Emma adaptation – Cher is a far more likeable character, even though she’s as “princessy” as they come. Put that down to Alicia Silverstone’s performance, and the fact that the story is set in high school, making Emma’s behavior more palatable – she is a teenager after all. Book Emma is supposed to be 20 when the story begins; GP was around 22-23 when she played the part, but seemed older (and more self-assured) to me. Now, the interesting thing is that Romola Garai was probably a few years older than GP when she played Emma in the 2009 adaptation, but she was able to convey the youthful vulnerability behind Emma’s brashness much better, in my opinion. Next to Cher, hers is my favourite Emma to date.

At the start of the 4-episode series, Emma is still an annoying know-it-all. I mean, look, I was 20 once; I know what it’s like to think you have it all figured out and to want everyone to know it too. The annoying part comes from the fact that Emma gets indulged by almost everyone in her life. Once again, that’s probably my own life baggage showing up. By the end of the series, Emma has emerged a more mature and likable character, without losing all of her spunk. Having 4 hours’ worth of narrative space (as opposed to half that amount for a movie) probably helps that evolution feel more organic.

Now, the revelation for me in watching this series was Mr. Knightley. Excepting Paul Rudd’s Josh, Mr. Knightley never registered for me as a swoon-worthy Austen hero. I honestly can’t recall any line of dialogue from Jeremy Northam in 1996 Emma, much less any lingering feels … and considering that at one time or another I’ve had a crush on almost every middling-to-well-known British actor of the past 20 years, that’s saying something. Now, Jonny Lee Miller was actually not on that list, believe it or not. Prior to Emma, I had only every watched him in Trainspotting (and I had a crush of Ewan McGregor at the time, like everyone else), Mansfield Park (due for a rewatch), and Elementary. Y’all know I’m currently obsessed with the latter, but Sherlock Holmes is not my sexual orientation, as they say. Jonny Lee Miller as Mr. Knightley? That’s another story.

When you break it down, the Emma-Knightley love story has a high potential creep factor; he’s 36 and she’s 20. He’s known her since she was a child. (Also, their siblings are married – how did I forget that?) Garai and Miller definitely look age-appropriate, but somehow their pairing didn’t feel icky. I can’t put my finger on why, so I will attribute it to the actors’ talent and chemistry. This version of Knightley is not a stodgy “older man”, but he is also not a dashing young stud a la Frank Churchill (more on him in a minute). He reminded me a bit of Col. Brandon, minus the tragic backstory and with a bit more humour. [And I say this as someone who adores Col. Brandon, especially as played by Alan Rickman, so it’s about the highest praise I can give.] It felt like the series gave us a lot more insight into Knightley’s thoughts and feelings, some of which was not the result of dialogue as much as Miller’s non-verbal performance. He, like Garai, was excellent.

Some of the other performances were great as well. I really liked the small glimpses of the other Woodhouse-Knightley relationship; both were tertiary characters, but portrayed a rare arc in this type of story – a happy marriage years after the wedding. Jodhi May as Miss Taylor was wonderful as well, though she didn’t look old enough to me to have been Emma’s governess since childhood. One of my favourite games to play while watching any period drama is to figure out from which other roles I recognize the secondary cast members. Here, I recognized May from her role in Aristocrats (adaptation of a book about the Lennox sisters, highly recommend), Tamsin Greig (Miss Bates) from Episodes, Robert Bathurst (Mr. Winston) from Downton Abbey, and Michael Gambon (Mr. Woodhouse) from, well, everything.

I also recognized Blake Ritson (Mr. Elton) from the 2007 adaptation of Mansfield Park in which he played – fun fact – the same character as Jonny Lee Miller in the 1999 version. In the world of British acting, everything is 5 degrees of Jane Austen. Ritson was an appropriately smarmy Mr. Elton, although far better-looking (in my opinion) than Frank Churchill, which was not ideal for the story as far as I’m concerned. Frank Churchill, on the whole, was the biggest disappointment for me with this adaptation. He was simply not attractive or charming enough to make up for the brattish behavior and, unlike Emma, the character undergoes no growth that would help endear him to the audience. Ewan McGregor, who played the same role in the 1996 Emma, was also kind of miscast, but at least had enough charisma to make Churchill an appealing rascal.

All in all, this was a wonderful adaptation of one of my least favourite Austen novels, which has given me a newfound appreciation for the characters and, quite possibly, a Jonny Lee Miller Problem. We shall found out for sure after I re-watch Mansfield Park (1999). Join me next time as I dissect one of the weirdest Austen adaptations to date.

Texture Play

Back when I first started blogging, I was a big fan of wearing complimentary colour combos – the more striking, the better. Now, I prefer the play around with different textures instead. An outfit like this makes me so happy because, look at all those textures! There is (faux) fur and leather, wool, lace, and silk-satin! The colours are subtle and muted; gray, green, black. But beyond the juxtaposition of textures, there is something about this outfit that made me feel like a million bucks. On one hand, it’s a feminine take on my Adventurer persona, and I generally feel extra sassy when I’m in Adventurer mode. On the other hand, I feel like there is a kind of 1940s femme fatale undercurrent to the outfit – maybe because of the fur collar and skirt silhouette? – which feeds my delusions of coolness. Basically, this outfit makes me want to strut my stuff with Billie Eilish’ “Bad Guy” as my own personal soundtrack. I mean, as if … but it’s nice to pretend sometimes.

Short Lengths

My hair is getting longer and my skirts are getting shorter. I am really feeling this season of my sartorial evolution, friends. Emboldened by the print of this Isabel Marant dress, I went with more colour than usual for this outfit. I did ground everything with black tights because one still needs a little comfort zone. A nice thing about short skirts (once you stop worrying about accidentally exposing your business to the world) is that you can wear them with flat ankle boots. So French chic, so comfortable.

Colour Explosion

You know how I was just saying that I don’t wear striking colour combinations anymore? Oops. Well, to be fair, this outfit is really an exception more than the current rule. But when I thrifted this Floreat top, I immediately knew that I wanted to try pairing it with these marigold pants. The silhouette and details are Bohemian, but there is something of Old School Adina in the mix.

I have a history with perms. Or, perhaps more accurately, a history of perms. My first one was in the early 2000s and it was, well, not good. My next experience, in 2013, was much better; I wrote about it before. The main downside was that, after 3 perms in the space of 18 months (plus constant styling abuse), my hair was fried. But, for a while, I had Pretty Good Hair.

Mermaid hair.

As a person with a head of thick-but-fine, not-straight-not-wavy hair, this is my holy grail.

I’ve been rocking short hair – long pixie, blunt chin-length bob, and everything in (the short distance) between – since 2016. At the beginning of the year, I decided I wanted a change. I used to be quite adventurous with my hair, and I miss the excitement of doing some really drastic; it always made me feel like a new person, and reinvention is like manna to my Type 4 Wing 3 soul. Anyway, what would have made the most sense is to go really short again – instant drama. But I was about to head to a tropical vacation, and a short hair-do is extra work in a humid climate. That got me thinking. Why not grow out my hair a bit longer before chopping it all off?

Wheels, they got into motion.

Arriving at the idea of a perm didn’t take long after that. My last one helped me to grow out my hair, why not use the same trick again? Because of its fineness, my hair has a tendency to go limp and lifeless once it gets near shoulder length … and it still, somehow, requires straightening to look, well, straight. A perm – or its current iteration, the body wave – gives my hair texture and volume which, in turn, makes it look better. It still requires styling, but that’s non-negotiable for me at almost any length.

Dear readers, I went for it.

I got a perm at the end of February and haven’t looked back.

Here’s a before and after, both taken on the day of the perm.

The “after” photo was taken before I was able to wash my hair following the perm. It always looks better once you’re able to wash and style it, but this photo is a fairly accurate representation of how the perm looks with minimal styling. It is not mermaid hair by any stretch of the imagination. To get the “natural” beachy wave look, I need to use products that enhance the curl; I used to use beach spray for that, but don’t recommend it for long-term use – it dries out your hair like whoa. I’m too lazy to investigate better alternatives, so I rarely wear my hair “natural”. I did so in Mexico and it looked great, largely thanks to the combination of sea water and humidity.

Mostly, I do what I have always done: alternate between curling my hair and straightening it. [I use BaByLiss Nano Titanium tools, which are fantastic and super easy to use – I am all thumbs when it comes to styling hair.] Straightening takes a bit longer than before, and I have to be careful about having any moisture near my hair afterwards (it starts to frizz and curl), but my hair looks fuller and bouncier. Here’s a comparison – pic on the right is from April, about 2 months after my perm:

Curling is easier because I no longer have to bother with the underlayers – I just curl the top half. Because my hair is a bit drier than before, I can often go 4 days between shampoos. Mostly, I wash my hair to remove the hairspray build-up, because it rarely gets noticeably oily. [I don’t work out so there is no sweat to worry about.] Other than hairspray and leave-in conditioner, I don’t use other products. As for the latter, currently I alternate between L’Oreal Miracle Oil (an old fave) and the Ouai leave-in mist (from my recent FabFitFun box – more on that next week).

Since I get asked this a lot on Instagram, here is a quick summary of my curling routine: I wash my hair at night; I use a micro fiber towel to get excess water out, apply leave-in conditioner and then leave it to air dry overnight. The next morning, I curl it, starting from the bottom layers up. I divide the hair into quarter sections – part first in the middle of the head, starting from the front all the way back, then divide each half into a top part and a bottom part – and then separate each quarter into 4-6 or more smaller sections, which then get curled separately. I apply hairspray to each quarter after I’ve curled all the sections in it. After all the hair is curled, I leave it alone; no touching. I finish getting ready for work, getting the kids ready, etc. About 45 minutes later, I shake out the curls and give them another spritz of hairspray. And that’s it.

I am by no means a hair expert, but I’ve got a pretty good routine going and I’m happy with the results of my new perm. I was planning to cut my hair short – REALLY short – in the fall, but now I am toying with the idea of waiting a little longer. But you never know … I can be really impulsive when it comes to my hair, so plans have a way of changing on a dime.

I will leave you with one last tidbit I was told by my hairstylist. I recently found my first white hair – or at least the first one that’s incontrovertibly white and visible – which started me thinking about turning grey. How does that work for redheads, I pondered? It’s a silly thing but, honestly, I had no idea. Turns out I likely already have far more white hairs than I realized. My hair has been turning lighter (blonder) over the last few years; I thought it was just a gradual loss of pigmentation in my hair overall. Turns out I was right and wrong. There is less pigment … because there’s probably quite a bit of white hair in the mix. It’s easy to miss because, for the most part, it blends in with my natural highlights. According to my hairstylist, I can look forward to my hair continuing to move towards strawberry blonde, on its way to full white. Considering how much money I’ve spent in the past trying to be blonde, I find this somewhat ironic and bittersweet.