Join me on a tour of my book closet … erm … library. Every week – or other week, or whenever I remember to write one of these posts – we’ll take a look at another whack of books I may (or may not) have read.

Hey, so, we’re gonna talk about books this time. Imagine that. The books over … here:

Closer look at the left side:

I call this my “chick non-lit” section. History with a chick flavour. Let’s start at the top. Flappers: Six Women of a Dangerous Generation is the kind of history book I get really excited about. I love reading about the Jazz Age, and its famous women were a very interesting bunch. My favourite part about this book is that, apart from the ubiquitous Zelda Fitzgerald, it tackles some of the Jazz Age’s (now) lesser known stars: Josephine Baker, Tallulah Bankhead, Diana Cooper, Nancy Cunard, and (last but never least) Tamara de Lempicka. de Lempicka is one of my favourite painters, and lived a life worthy of a dozen biographies – which makes it doubly frustrating that it is almost impossible to find even one. Flappers does a good job of covering the highlights (she shares the spotlight with 5 other equally fascinating women), but I hope a full-length biography will be coming out one of these days.

I briefly mentioned In A Gilded Cage last time, and I’ll recommend it again. Think of it as a study of real-life Cinderella stories … after the “happily ever after”. It’s not much of a spoiler if I tell you that there wasn’t much “happily” or “ever after” for most of the American heiresses who married into the highest echelons of British aristocracy.

One of my favourite authors as a teenager was Emile Zola, and one of my favourite Zola novels was Nana – to which I attribute my subsequent, abiding fascination with courtesans. In an age when non-aristocratic women had very little chance of improving their lot in life, save by marriage, courtesans were an exception. They earned unimaginable amounts of money, lived in palaces, met the creme-de-la-creme of (male) society, and set fashion trends. Many but not all faded into obscurity after their heydays passed. Some became legends. Courtesans: Money, Sex, and Fame in the 19th Century is a good primer on 5 of the most renowned English courtesans. I haven’t yet read The Courtesans, but it promises a look at 12 of the most famous French grandes horizontales (some of whom were among the aforementioned legends), so it should be good.

I was a bit of a Francophile growing up (if the Zola love wasn’t a giveaway), not only in relation to literature but also history. If you spend any time reading about French kings, something you’ll run into again and again is … the French king’s mistress. They all had them, sometimes by the dozen. So you could say that I’ve been interested in mistresses – in a purely philosophical way, of course – for a while. Mistresses: A History of the Other Woman is a fun read, while at the same time a well-researched study of some of history’s most infamous women, from antiquity on. There are many paths to mistressdom, and this books explores them all. Truly, a fascinating read.

And if you like the smutty bits of history (like me), then Sex with Kings and Sex with the Queen looks at more (royal) adulterous liaisons, with plenty of politicking and wars thrown in for good measure.

More love affairs of the famous are discussed in The Love Affair as a Work of Art, which looks at the affairs of famous European duos (mostly French), like George Sand and Alfred de Musset. As I said, I’m a Francophile at heart, and am fairly familiar with the world of 19th century French art & letters; if you are not, this book may not be as interesting.

The Marriage of Cadmus and Harmony is … I have no idea. I think I picked it up in college, probably from some discount bin, possibly because it appears to cover aspects of Greco-Roman mythology, which used to be a topic I was once very much interested in. Haven’t read it. Yet.

Ditto for Goddesses in Everywoman. Amazon tells me the author is a renowned Jungian analyst, and that this book was a huge hit back in the 80s. I’m not sure whether that makes me more or less inclined to want to read it (finally), but perhaps it might help you decide.

The Second Sex was one of those revelatory books you read in your early twenties. You know, the kind of book that changes the way you think about stuff? I’ve never really considered myself a capital-F-feminist, but this book opened my eyes about the historical meaning and reality of being a woman. It might not be as topical today as it was when it was first written – I’ve lost track of which wave of feminism we’re currently riding – but it’s a classic regardless. Aspects of it are now outdated, and reflect some of the biases of its era, but it’s justly considered a groundbreaking work in its genre. Read it if you haven’t already.

The Weaker Vessel: Woman’s Lot in Seventeenth Century is another must-read for me. I generally enjoy Antonia Fraser’s history books, and this is one of her best. It covers all aspects of women’s lives in 17th century Britain, from childhood to marriage (or spinsterhood) to childbirth to widowhood to death. Unlike other similar books (Aristocrats by Stella Tillyard comes to mind, which I also love), this one considers women from all social castes, not just the upper crust. A fascinating read.

Finally, we have The Lives of the Muses: Nine Women and the Artists They Inspired. Another really, really enjoyable read. Some of the women discussed were artists in their own rights; others’ names are forever linked to the men whose work they inspired. The book covers a lot of ground – from Alice Lidell (of Alice in Wonderland fame), to Elizabeth Siddal, to Gala Dali, and Lee Miller. Also highly recommended.

Your turn: tell me what you’ve been reading lately.

Join me on a tour of my book closet … erm … library. Every week – or other week, or whenever I remember to write one of these posts – we’ll take a look at another whack of books I may (or may not) have read.

My last Reading Shelf post was a little unorthodox, but y’all seemed to enjoy talking about classics and cute guys (that’s my take-away from your comments, and I’m sticking to it), so I figured I’d tap that wellspring again. Mostly because I can talk about cute guys (and books!) all day, every day. Also, the “research” is most enjoyable. So, today, let’s talk about my favourite classic lit adaptations.

A couple of disclaimers. One, this isn’t a “best of” kind of list. My selections are based on movies or mini-series I have actually seen, based on books I have actually read. I’m not a movie critic and, more importantly, I’m a selective reader, so this criteria narrows down the field a lot. I don’t like Charles Dickens, and I don’t like depressing stories (I’m looking at you, Thomas Hardy). I don’t like Wuthering Heights. (Yeah, I said it. And I mean it.)

Two, I didn’t include any Jane Austen adaptations, since I touched on those last time. I also excluded anything Shakespearean, because I wanted to talk about novels only, and also because I don’t want to write a novel here.

Onwards. In no particular order:

Middlemarch

I’m not a diehard George Eliot fan, but I adore Middlemarch. I just love all of the interconnected stories; it’s a rare novel that gets me to care about all of the “secondary” characters, but Middlemarch does. (Side note: Rosamund Vincy would totally be a SAHW fashion/lifestyle blogger if Eliot was writing today. She’s so the type.) The 1994 adaptation is top notch. My only quibbles would be that Juliet Aubrey looks a little bit too old as Dorothea (though she conveys her intelligence and determination very well), and Patrick Malahide too creepy and repellant as Casaubon (which is odd, because he played the suave Roderick Alleyn during the same period). Still, this one’s a must-see. And if you need convincing, there is the …

Eye candy: Rufus Sewell (Will Ladislaw). Those cheekbones, you guys. I would totally get myself disinherited (and worse) for those cheekbones.

As bonus eye candy, we have Jonathan Firth (as Fred Vincy) … who I just discovered to be Colin Firth’s younger brother. How did I not know this before?! Anyway, he’s pretty cute, though in a decidedly non-Colin Firth way.

The Way We Live Now

I am a huge Anthony Trollope fan. Huge. I think it’s a crying shame that he’s not more widely read these days, especially as compared to certain other authors (cough, Dickens, cough). The Way We Live Now is one of his better known novels, and it’s a pretty good one. Some of the sub-plots are boring (I don’t care about the romantic destinies of Mrs. Hurtle or Ruby Ruggles), but Trollope was a deft hand at moving the story along at a lively pace. The 2001 mini-series was solid.

Eye candy: Cillian Murphy (Paul Montague). Cillian is not really my cup of tea, but he looks pretty enough to carry the romantic hero mantle in this one.

There is also Matthew McFaddyen, but he plays a cad (with a goofy haircut) so YMMV.

Bright Young Things

It’s rare that I prefer a movie adaptation to the original book, but this Stephen Fry-directed adaptation of Evelyn Waugh’s Vile Bodies might be one of those exceptions. I’m a little bit obsessed with the lives of 1920s English aristocratic socialites (also known, not coincidentally, as the Bright Young Things), and this movie captures the atmosphere of that era and social group so well. Also, the clothes – so gorgeous.

Eye candy: Stephen Campbell Moore (Adam). I have a terrible weakness for Brits, but not, like, your typical Britishy-looking Brits. (Except for Rupert Penry Jones. You’re lucky I didn’t include his photo in this post just because. And I might still change my mind about that.) SCM falls in that category, but I still kinda dig him in this role.

Let’s not forget a young James McAvoy.

There is also Michael Sheen (not my type, but perhaps yours), and David Tennant (looking goofy and not very Doctor-esque, sadly).

Portrait of the Lady

I went through a phase in my late teens when I was obsessed with PotL. I think I read the book a half dozen times in the span of a year or so (and underlined bits of it, and everything), and saw the 1996 Jane Campion-directed movie just as many times. I have a sort of love-hate relationship with the movie, because I love Nicole Kidman as Isabel Archer (one of my favourite literary heroines), and hate John Malkovich as Gilbert Osmond. Wonderful actor, terrible miscasting. (See also below.) I would have bought (1996) Gary Oldman in the role. Or everybody’s favourite almost-ginger, Michael Fassbender (though he would have been too young in 1996). Anyone but John Malkovich. The rest of the cast is great, though, especially Martin Donovan. And I love the look and feel of the movie too. Really, it’s a great one – watch it.

Eye candy: Viggo Mortensen (Casper Goodwood). Young Viggo. Enough said.

Can you believe that I had forgotten that Christian Bale was in this movie? I am a terrible fangirl. Anyway, he is … looking very young and adorable.

Cranford

I actually watched the 2008 mini-series before I read the book, but I enjoyed both immensely. I love that the sub-plots in Cranford all center around women, at various stages of life, rather than men – a relatively rare thing in classic lit. There are some romantic elements to the novel, but they’re not the main attraction … not that you’ll really notice.

Eye candy: Simon Woods (Dr. Frank Harrison). Not really my type (he looks like a blond Elijah Wood here, doesn’t he?), but whatever. This isn’t really a story about teh sex.

Dangerous Liaisons/Valmont

Let me start by saying that Les Liaisons Dangereuses is one of my favourite classic lit novels. I hate epistolary novels, but this one is so seductively witty and engrossing, it makes me forget that. I like both movie adaptations of it, although I’m somewhat more partial to Dangerous Liaisons. Glenn Close, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Uma Thurman are perfection in their respective roles. But, you guys, the curse of miscast John Malkovich strikes again. He is a terrible Valmont. Horrible. Valmont is supposed to be sexy. Dangerous but irresistible. John Malkovich is many things, but sexy … no. I will argue with you about this, if need be, all day. I really, really would love a new adaptation of Les Liaisons Dangereuses. I need to spend some time thinking about my casting choices … In the meantime, there is …

Eye candy: Colin Firth (Valmont). Listen, he’s a far better choice for the role than Malkovich. Not my ideal choice, but infinitely better. He’s badly handicapped by that ridiculous wig, but I’ll chalk that up to late 80s movie wardrobe budget limitations.

And let’s not forget the also comically miscast Keanu Reeves, still looking fairly cute despite the abomination on his head.

Forsyte Saga

I’ve read all 3 volumes of the Forsyte Saga, but I like the first one best. The 2002 adaptation covers the first two books, I believe, but I kinda lost interest in it after Phil … spoiler alert … dies. It’s a nicely done adaptation, though, so don’t be deterred by my capricious attention-span.

Eye Candy: Ioan Gruffud (Phil Bossiney). I couldn’t find an in-character photo, so you get this broody one. Gruffud is not the best actor out there (have you seen The Fantastic Four?), but he sure is pretty. (I’ll just add an unrelated PSA here for King Arthur, which is a schlocky movie that’s a veritable hot guy buffet: Clive Owen, Mads Mikkelsen, Ioan Gruffud, Hugh Dancy … tell me you have watched it already, or are lining it up in your Netflix queue right now.)

Back to the Forsyte Saga, there is also Damien Lewis. I’m not a fan of gingers, but I expect that some of you are, so in the interests of inclusiveness, I did my best to find a good photo for you. You’re welcome.

I Capture the Castle

I’ve written about I Capture the Castle before, so I won’t repeat myself. The movie is quite good, mostly due to its solid British cast and despite the American contingent. I think both of the Cotton brothers (the aforementioned Americans) are woefully miscast, which is a shame, because it kinda robs of the story of most of its emotional heat. Nonetheless, it’s a perfectly enjoyable, lazy Sunday-afternoon kind of show. If not for the kidlets, I would be watching it again right now. Mostly because …

Eye candy: Henry Cavill (Stephen Colley). I still can’t believe Cassandra passed on THIS. For the E.T. kid, of all people. Jeebus.

Like I said, there is some questionable casting here. Who is going to pay attention to Henry Thomas or that guy from Buffy (who isn’t Angel or Spike) when the hotness that is Henry Cavill (playing a sweet guy with a heart of gold) is around? Nobody, that’s who.

Little Women

Little Women (the movie) is like comfort food. I’ll binge watch it when I need the warm-n-fuzzies. Although I absolutely adore the 1994 version, I got a little excited last year when the rumours surfaced about a possible remake. It’s not that I hate the 1994 casting choices (quite the opposite); I’m just intrigued by the possibilities offered by the 2014 acting field. I’m not sure if the remake is still happening, but feel free to speculate with me in the comments. But let’s not forget …

Eye candy: Christian Bale (Laurie). Yeah, I know. Again. I guess I should have added my Bale-bias to my disclaimer. CB as Laurie is another one of those touchstones of my adolescence, like Paul Rudd in Clueless. I’m still mad he ended up with Amy. Humbug.

There is also Eric Stoltz as John Brooke (my one exception to the no-gingers rule, and mostly because I’m a John Hughes junkie), and Gabriel Byrne as Prof. Bhaer (too old for my taste, but I’m willing to concede YMMV here).

The Buccaneers

I’m really fascinated by the stories of American heiresses who married into the British aristocracy, in a reverse “invasion” of sorts, at the end of the 19th century. Edith Wharton’s Buccaneers, her last and sadly unfinished novel, is loosely based on the lives of women like Consuelo Vanderbilt and Consuelo Yznaga, and offers a glimpse into their luxurious but constrained world. (If you want to read more about them, I highly recommend Marian Fowler’s In a Gilded Cage: From Heiress to Duchess.) The tacked-on ending of the 1995 mini-series is controversial, but it’s nevertheless an enjoyable adaptation overall. I love the performances of the female leads, especially Carla Gugino and Mira Sorvino.

Eye Candy: Greg Wise (Guy Thwaite). Not long before he played the caddish Willoughby in 1997’s Sense and Sensibility, Greg Wise played the nice guy here. Hate the mustache, but he’s rocking a Rufus Sewell-ish vibe, so I dig.

There is also a young James Frain (who has his fans, I believe) as the villain-ish Duke of Tintagel.

Cold Comfort Farm

I’ve also talked about Cold Comfort Farm before, so I’ll just urge you again to read it. Do it. And then watch the 1995 movie. It is so good, not even the presence of Kate Beckinsale can ruin it. (Not a fan, sorrynotsorry.) Especially because …

Eye candy: Rufus Sewell (Cousin Seth). Yes, again. You know the whole book-ending thing that fashun bloggers love? This is my cute guy version of that. Look at this photo and tell me you mad.

Alright, your turn: what are your favourite classic lit adaptations? Who is your hot-guy-of-classic-lit of choice? Which book adaptations would you like to see re-made, and who’d make your dream cast? Tell me everything in the comments.

Join me on a tour of my book closet … erm … library. Every week – or other week, or whenever I remember to write one of these posts – we’ll take a look at another whack of books I may (or may not) have read.

I haven’t done one of these in a while, but before you get too excited (?), know that this week’s post is a cheat. It’s only book-adjacent. Hey, it’s not too late to “x” your way out of here, especially if you hate Jane Austen and/or cute guys. Consider that your trigger warning.

This is one of two (or three? I forget) classic English lit shelves in my library, and houses my Jane Austen collection. Before we get to that, a few side notes.

1. Yes, I have two copies of Vanity Fair. I love it a lot, but more importantly, I love matching book covers, so I couldn’t resist buying a second copy when I found it, along with Jane Eyre and Middlemarch, in the $2 discount bin.
2. I am not a fan of Charles Dickens. The only Dickens novel I actually like is Martin Chuzzlewit, and only because it has a happy ending and because the BBC made a good adaptation of it, starring, inter alia, Saffy from Absolutely Fabulous. The Beeb can make me like almost anything. (In case you are wondering, the other two Dickens books were discount bin buys, and my feeble attempt at a “well-rounded” library. I have my favourites, and I totally discriminate.)
3. I love P.G. Wodehouse, but I can only read his stories in short spurts. They make my brain tired. Too much funny, I guess.

Ok, with that useless prelude out of the way, let’s take a closer look at the Austens:

[Yes, I have two Sense & Sensibilities. Matching covers obsession strikes again … I just forgot that I already had the same book. Sigh. (Anyone need a copy?)]

Y’all have read the books – you have, haven’t you? – so I’m not going to waste your time giving you my thoughts on the plot, characters, endings, etc. No, today I want to talk about something more pressing.

Who is the hottest Jane Austen leading man?

The orthodox party line is, of course, that Colin Firth as Fitzwilliam Darcy is IT, forever and ever, amen sisters. And, listen, I see the appeal. Oh, I see the appeal.

[Although, can I be perfectly frank for a moment? BFF to BFF? These days, I kinda dig Colin Firth as the-other-Darcy more. I know – sacrilege! Which is not to say that I don’t still think that Austen’s Darcy is the bee’s knees … wait, don’t pelt me with rotten cabbages!]

The thing is … I’m a contrarian at heart. I can’t help it. (See above.) So Mr. Darcy (and Mr. Firth) is not my choice for hottest Austen leading man. Who is? Without further ado, my top 3 Austen leading men (in reverse order):

3) Paul Rudd as Josh Lucas (Clueless)

Yeah, I went there: best adaptation of Emma, hands down. If you’re a hetero woman in your 30s and don’t have a forever crush on Paul Rudd because of this movie … are we sure that you’re not an alien? Or perhaps suffer from retrograde amnesia that wiped out all of your teenage memories? I spent a good portion of my early college years convinced that my parents were to blame for my non-existent dating life, because they didn’t make it possible for me to have a sardonic-but-sensitive older ex-stepbrother whom to seduce with my knowledge of Shakespeare Hermann Hesse. Ridiculous? What-ever!

2) Alan Rickman as Colonel Brandon (Sense and Sensibility)

Older ex-stepbrother fantasies aside, I totally don’t have a thing for older men – slightly creepy, young-girl obsessed older men at that. Except for Alan Rickman’s Colonel Brandon. First of all, that voice, you guys. I know Alan Rickman’s Voice is the most predictable of clichés, but … eh, don’t care. But beyond the Voice, Alan Rickman is kind of a fox. Like, you totally can’t help but be curious about what would happen if you two were alone somewhere behind closed doors. Yeah, you know what I’m talking about.

1) Rupert Penry-Jones as Captain Wentworth (Persuasion)

Let me say, right off the bat, that I don’t really dig blond guys, and haven’t since Brad Pitt’s Legends of the Fall Se7en days. But I swooned so effing hard at the end of the Beeb’s 2007 Persuasion adaptation, I damn nearly slid right off the sofa. So I will make ALL of the exceptions for RPJ, and then a few more. Maybe it’s an age thing, because the older I get, the more I appreciate Persuasion‘s story of second-time-around love; it’s kind of slow-moving, and sort of unassuming, and not much happens (in the way of wild plot twists) along the way, but the pay-off is sublime. Every time I get to part when Anne reads The Letter, I’m basically a puddle of water. “You pierce my soul … Tell me not that I am too late.”

Also, The Kiss. I’m not generally a fan of movie kissing, especially when it involves a really drawn-out build-up. The Kiss in Persuasion is guilty of the longest build-up in the history of ridiculous movie kisses, but it still manages to be the g-damn sexiest thing ever. (I would have totally jumped RPJ’s bones about 10 seconds into that scene, and been done with it, so I give Sally Hawkins props for restraint in that particular case. That’s why she’s the professional actress and not me.)

(Side note and true story: I actually met my husband about 10 years before we started dating. We were not star-crossed lovers during the intervening period – in fact, we rarely saw each other at all – but we sometimes joke about what life would have been like if we had started dating when we first met. The consensus: we would have broken up after 3 months, and never spoken again. Thank goodness for a decade’s worth of growing up. But, yeah, maybe this also explains my soft spot for Persuasion.)

Honourable Mention: Dan Stevens as Edward Ferrars (Sense and Sensibility)

I mean, I would have preferred James McAvoy in this role, but Dan Stevens is infinitely preferable to wet-blanket Hugh Grant. But, really, I’d pick Colonel Brandon every time.

OK, so that’s my top 3. Your turn: tell me, am I right or am I right wrong? And if I’m not right, who’s in your top 3?