What is the best Jane Austen novel for teen boy?

[klmama]

Title says it all.  Thanks!

[Liz CA]

My son thought "Emma" was tolerable.

[Catwoman]

None of them. :D

[Swimtaxi234]

My son has watched A&E's version of P&P a few times.  I doubt I could get him to read the book, but he knows the story.

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't know that boys at large don't like Austen in greater numbers than girls? Persuasion is my personal favorite.

[Orthodox6]

I would posit none of them. If forced to choose anyway, I would say "Northanger Abbey" because of the trenchant satire throughout.

 

Another choice could be "Lady Susan" because of the over-the-top selfish, heartless main character.

 

Depending on the boy's age, why not skip Austen in favor of Dickens and Trollope? My now-nineteen year old son is permanently hooked!

[trulycrabby]

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. Seriously.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Pride-Prejudice-Zombies-Classic-Ultraviolent/dp/1594743347/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1386283395&sr=8-2&keywords=pride+and+prejudice+and+zombies

[marbel]

I agree - none of them. They're great books, and I love them.  But I wouldn't assign any of them to my son.  Yes to Dickens!

[Orthodox6]

Specifically, "Our Mutual Friend" and "Martin Chuzzlewit" from Dickens. DS wrote a highly praised paper on the latter for his high school class (an outside school).

 

For Trollope, one can start with "Barchester Towers", which includes incomparably comic characters. It is not necessary first to read "The Warden", which precedes it in the series.

[marbel]

Specifically, "Our Mutual Friend" and "Martin Chuzzlewit" from Dickens. DS wrote a highly praised paper on the latter for his high school class (an outside school).

 

For Trollope, one can start with "Barchester Towers", which includes incomparably comic characters. It is not necessary first to read "The Warden", which precedes it in the series.

 

Oh! I never could get through The Warden and thus never read any Trollope and could never understand why people liked him.    So now I will go find Barchester Towers.  Thanks!  Even though I'm not a teen boy.

[Orthodox6]

Marbel, you are going to LOVE Bertie, Madeline, Mrs. Proudie, and Mr. Slope!

[Mrs Mungo]

Why wouldn't people assign the books to a high school aged boy? because they mostly involve women? Young men shouldn't think about women's lives or the female contemporaries of Dickens? My kids are all getting the same book list. They read both Dickens and Austen in high school. I disagree with eschewing Austen because the student is male.

[Jen500]

My boys read Pride and Prejudice around that age, and really enjoyed it. Although they read a lot, it wasn't a book they would have picked on their own to read, so I was surprised that they liked it.

[Miss Marple]

Honestly?  My boys would not enjoy reading any of the books.  They have tolerated a movie version or two mostly because there was a girl involved who wanted to watch it.  I am sure that there are some fellas who would be fine with them, but we found plenty of other reading that was more tolerable for them.  FWIW I've read them all multiple times.

[Seasider]

For entertainment, or a lesson?

 

If it's a must to see a JA work, I'd go with P&P because it seems to be the most widely read of her works in a typical high school curriculum. For entertainment, I think there are plot complications which draw readers/viewers, male and female, into the story.

 

For something shorter, I'd go with Persuasion. I think every young man can benefit from knowing a character as solid as Wentworth.

[poppy]

Why wouldn't people assign the books to a high school aged boy? because they mostly involve women? Young men shouldn't think about women's lives or the female contemporaries of Dickens? My kids are all getting the same book list. They read both Dickens and Austen in high school. I disagree with eschewing Austen because the student is male.

 

I wouldn't say people shouldn't assign it.  But it's a domestic tale, a hard sell to most teens except a subset of girls and very small subset of boys.  No adventure, no mystery, no thrills.

 

For another author of that era, try Wilkie Collins, his books are page turners.  They're not as good as Austen's works, but they ARE good, and more likely to hold the interest of a younger audience.

[Catwoman]

Why wouldn't people assign the books to a high school aged boy? because they mostly involve women? Young men shouldn't think about women's lives or the female contemporaries of Dickens? My kids are all getting the same book list. They read both Dickens and Austen in high school. I disagree with eschewing Austen because the student is male.

I wouldn't assign Austen to my ds, because there are plenty of other good books he can read that he might actually enjoy.

 

Personally, I'm not a big fan of Austen or Dickens. Both bore me to tears.

[Hoot]

Why wouldn't people assign the books to a high school aged boy? because they mostly involve women? Young men shouldn't think about women's lives or the female contemporaries of Dickens? My kids are all getting the same book list. They read both Dickens and Austen in high school. I disagree with eschewing Austen because the student is male.

 

I agree.  I wouldn't assign them because, in my opinion they're awful, not because they're for girls.  :leaving:

 

[Beth S]

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. Seriously.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Pride-Prejudice-Zombies-Classic-Ultraviolent/dp/1594743347/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1386283395&sr=8-2&keywords=pride+and+prejudice+and+zombies

 

This was my friend's solution. 

 

Or just wait until he has a gf who's a JA fan.  He'll volunteer to sit close to her on the couch and watch the full 1995 P&P version.  I promise.  :)

[Mrs Mungo]

There are some books I didn't care for, but still made my kids read because they are part of the whole "Great Conversation" thing, like The Scarlet Letter. But, I love Jane Austen. I like some books by Dickens, but some of his characters are so whiny and annoying (especially true in Great Expectations).

[Mrs Mungo]

This was my friend's solution. 

 

Or just wait until he has a gf who's a JA fan.  He'll volunteer to sit close to her on the couch and watch the full 1995 P&P version.  I promise.  :)

Funny thing? I couldn't get dd17 to finish Jane Eyre until she had a boyfriend who loved it. LOL!

[Word Nerd]

 

For another author of that era, try Wilkie Collins, his books are page turners.  They're not as good as Austen's works, but they ARE good, and more likely to hold the interest of a younger audience.

 

I love Wilkie Collins! The Moonstone was so fun and funny, and Count Fosco in The Woman in White is one of the best villains ever.

 

As to the OP, I would say P&P or Northanger Abbey.

[Mrs Mungo]

I have the Zombie book.  I have yet to read it though.

It is very silly. But, worth a read.

[redsquirrel]

My son read Pride and Prejudiced last year, as a 7th grader, and enjoyed it a great deal. He has Sense and Sensibility 'on the pile' to get to sooner or later. Yes, I assigned P&P to him for school, and he did his usual moaning and groaning over assigned novels, but by the end he was feeling very positively about it.  He was quite sympathetic toward poor Mr Darcy, always having to wonder if a woman liked him for himself or his money.

 

Why would his being a boy have anything to do with his liking Austen or not? I know plenty of women who don't like Austen. Are they less female?  

 

Maybe he liked it because no one told him he would not, and he was able to make up his own mind.

[Catwoman]

Maybe he liked it because no one told him he would not, and he was able to make up his own mind.

Why would anyone tell their kid that he or she wouldn't like a particular book? I don't think anyone has suggested that. Some of us just feel that our sons wouldn't enjoy reading Austen, but I'm sure none of us would ban the books from the house. :)

[pooh bear]

My ds, 13, really enjoyed Pride and Prejudice. He laughed every time Mr. Collins made an appearance. We will be watching the Bollywood version soon, Bride and Prejudice.

 

He also really enjoyed Jane Eyre. Wuthering Heights is on his list to read.

 

He's read quite a few Dickens, Wilkie Collins, Walter Scott and Dumas. He's reading The Count of Monte Cristo at the moment.

 

These were all books of his choosing.

[Orthodox6]

 

Why would his being a boy have anything to do with his liking Austen or not? I know plenty of women who don't like Austen. Are they less female?  

 

 

 

My "take" is that underneath it all, Austen's books are romance novels (although of the highest caliber for any type of novel), and it is not customary that a boy or man will incline toward such.  Although I love Austen's books, I won't fault a woman who does not care for them.  My stomach curdled when I read the suggestion of the zombie spin-off; however, that is somebody else's cup of caffeine, and I don't need to worry about it.   

[poppy]

My son read Pride and Prejudiced last year, as a 7th grader, and enjoyed it a great deal. He has Sense and Sensibility 'on the pile' to get to sooner or later. Yes, I assigned P&P to him for school, and he did his usual moaning and groaning over assigned novels, but by the end he was feeling very positively about it.  He was quite sympathetic toward poor Mr Darcy, always having to wonder if a woman liked him for himself or his money.

 

Why would his being a boy have anything to do with his liking Austen or not? I know plenty of women who don't like Austen. Are they less female?  

 

Maybe he liked it because no one told him he would not, and he was able to make up his own mind.

 

That is an odd take on Mr. Darcy. 

[poppy]

My "take" is that underneath it all, Austen's books are romance novels (although of the highest caliber for any type of novel), and it is not customary that a boy or man will incline toward such.  Although I love Austen's books, I won't fault a woman who does not care for them.  My stomach curdled when I read the suggestion of the zombie spin-off; however, that is somebody else's cup of caffeine, and I don't need to worry about it.   

 

It's not just a romance novel, it's a 200 year old romance novel about the English gentry. 

 

And it's a book where the saucy young woman ends up with the stuffy rich guy. And the joking soldier hero figure is actually a nasty piece of work. And the other guy who guy who gets a girl is purely a joke.  There's a lot for young women to look up to in Elizabeth Bennett, but not much for younger men to identify with.

[Mrs Mungo]

It's not just a romance novel, it's a 200 year old romance novel about the English gentry.

 

And it's a book where the saucy young woman ends up with the stuffy rich guy. And the joking soldier hero figure is actually a nasty piece of work. And the other guy who guy who gets a girl is purely a joke. There's a lot for young women to look up to in Elizabeth Bennett, but not much for younger men to identify with.

Which is why I suggested Persuasion.

 

I don't see Austen's novels as romance novels. I see them as character studies, very similar in nature to Dickens, Shakespeare and other major figures.

 

Do people write off Shakespeare's comedies as mere romance novels? What about the fact that women drive *many* of his plays? Does that make them unworthy of male readers? I find this whole idea extremely foreign.

[klmama]

Thanks for all of the input.  I would like my ds to read at least one, just for awareness, and I think he would like the idea of approaching it as a character study.  Thanks, everyone.

 

 

[Catwoman]

Thanks for all of the input. I would like my ds to read at least one, just for awareness, and I think he would like the idea of approaching it as a character study. Thanks, everyone.

Let us know which one you choose! :)

[Mom in High Heels]

My ds, 13, really enjoyed Pride and Prejudice. He laughed every time Mr. Collins made an appearance. We will be watching the Bollywood version soon, Bride and Prejudice.

 

 

 

i absolutely adore that movie!

[Orthodox6]

I should not have used the words "romance novel", because that has become, over time, a term for the dumpy trash peddled today.  What I meant (and hoped people would grasp) was that central to each novel are the romantic involvements and romantic end-results of core characters.  I still don't think that appeals to the typical man or boy.  Of course the books encompass far more than just that.  (hence my recommendation of Northanger Abbey)

[Farmgirl70]

I would not say that "Pride and Prejudice," or other Austen novels are essentially romances.  They have romance, of course, but they are studies in manners and behaviors and the culture of the gentry of the time.  Austen is smart and witty and writes some brilliant conversations.  

 

I agree with the poster's son who felt "sorry for Mr. Darcy."  There is much more to Darcy than meets the eye--part of the point of the book is that he is misunderstood and misjudged.  Young men may find themselves in similar positions.  

 

A great book is a great book, regardless of the gender of the reader.  Also, young women tend to have to read much more by and about men.  I like to "even the playing field" a little and have my guys read something once in a while with female main characters or written by a female.  

 

My favorite Austen pick for a teen boy would be either "Pride and Prejudice" or "Persuasion".  P&P has the wit and sparkle of Darcy and Lizzy.  Persuasion has Captain Wentworth and the navy : ).

 

[Farmgirl70]

One more thought….men and boys engage in romance in real life.  Perhaps they might not mind reading about it now and then, if it is written well.

[Mrs Mungo]

I understand what you meant by "romance," but I disagree that romance is the heart of those novels. It is like saying romance is the heart of Merchant of Venice. Is there romance? Yes, but that is not the whole point. The point is the plight of women at the time. They had little power on their own. That is the point from a historical standpoint. That is why Austen wrote novels.

 

I agree with the poster's son who felt "sorry for Mr. Darcy." There is much more to Darcy than meets the eye--part of the point of the book is that he is misunderstood and misjudged. Young men may find themselves in similar positions.

 

At the very least, it is a study in how NOT to propose to a girl. Just compare that scene to Wentworth's letter," which IS how to propose to a girl. ;)

[Laura in CA]

Haven't read all the replies, but I saw that someone else already posted my brilliant solution ... have my son read P&P, which I think he'd end up enjoying on its own merit, and then watch the Bollywood Bride & Prejudice. Hysterical!

[poppy]

I don't know, I'm still thinking romance novel.  Hunger Games is a love triangle that also has bows and death matches and evil Presidents and killer bees.   P&P is a love triangle that also has... an unwanted proposal and an inappropriate tryst. And someone gets a cold.  Every romance novel is a character study, a study in manners, and has some wit (or strives to).  Don't get me wrong, I think it is a great novel, and also a really good read. But if I had to slip it into a genre, I'd pick romance.

 

I didn't like Austen when I was younger, but I do as an adult. Persuasion is my favorite by far. 

 

 

[redsquirrel]

That is an odd take on Mr. Darcy. 

 

Really?

 

“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."

 

If I were a single man in possession of said fortune, I might take that opening sentence as a warning.

 

Anyway, I don't think it is out in left field.

 

[poppy]

Which is why I suggested Persuasion.

 

I don't see Austen's novels as romance novels. I see them as character studies, very similar in nature to Dickens, Shakespeare and other major figures.

 

Do people write off Shakespeare's comedies as mere romance novels? What about the fact that women drive *many* of his plays? Does that make them unworthy of male readers? I find this whole idea extremely foreign.

 

Who wrote off Austen? Confused.   I guess one person said they're "awful".

The Dickens and Shakespeare unusually assigned to teens are the ones with some ruffians and adventure. MacBeth, Hamlet. Great Expectations instead Bleak House, even though the latter is almost universally considered the finer novel.  I don't necessarily think this has to do with gender, either. I don't think teen girls naturally love Austen, either.

[Mrs Mungo]

Who wrote off Austen? Confused. I guess one person said they're "awful".

Multiple people said they would not assign Austen for a boy. To me, that is writing her off.

 

The Dickens and Shakespeare unusually assigned to teens are the ones with some ruffians and adventure. MacBeth, Hamlet. Great Expectations instead Bleak House, even though the latter is almost universally considered the finer novel.

In high school we read: Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, Midsummer Night's Dream and MacBeth. We read Christmas Carol and Tale of Two Cities. We didn't read Great Expectations, but you wouldn't call it a romance, would you? Despite the fact that the entire premise is trying to win a girl?

 

We read-The Pearl, The Scarlet Letter, The Great Gatsby...I don't know what else off-hand, I would have to think about it. But, many contain a love relationship as a driving force as the novel, but that doesn't make them romance novels at heart, IMO. It is fine if people disagree with me, they usually do. ;)

[poppy]

Really?

 

“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."

 

If I were a single man in possession of said fortune, I might take that opening sentence as a warning.

 

Anyway, I don't think it is out in left field.

 

RIght, the book is about and marriage and status and social negotiations.  It's about the problems of young women whose security entirely depends upon finding a spouse. I just thought it was odd to view it as a book about the problem of a man who was not able to know how sincere women's attentions were towards him.  Mr. Darcy is the most powerful and wealthy person in the book, he holds all the cards, and he knows it.  He's completely flabbergasted when his proposal is refused. It's unheard of.  He's not the one in a position of insecurity.  He can walk into a ball and declare all the women unworthy.

[poppy]

IWe didn't read Great Expectations, but you wouldn't call it a romance, would you? Despite the fact that the entire premise is trying to win a girl?

 

Nope, I'd call it a coming of age story, really more about father figure and his son than the girl. It also has a scary escaped con in chain and creepy, crazy Miss Havisham to spice things up.

[redsquirrel]

RIght, the book is about and marriage and status and social negotiations.  It's about the problems of young women whose security entirely depends upon finding a spouse. I just thought it was odd to view it as a book about the problem of a man who was not able to know how sincere women's attentions were towards him.  Mr. Darcy is the most powerful and wealthy person in the book, he holds all the cards, and he knows it.  He's completely flabbergasted when his proposal is refused. It's unheard of.  He's not the one in a position of insecurity.  He can walk into a ball and declare all the women unworthy.

 

It wasn't his only opinion of the book or the character, if that makes you feel better. I was simply pointing out that he read it, enjoyed it and was able to discuss it. And seeing as he was 12 at the time, he might not have mastered all the nuances of relationships and social status yet. But, he did enjoy the book and appreciated Austen's wit and he very much liked spending time with her characters. He is looking forward to reading more by her, so I count that as a success. I don't think it was a waste of time for him to read the book.

 

So many of his female friends have seen the mini-series and get all swoony over Mr Darcy and I thought that it was interesting that he had a slightly different take. We had some very interesting conversations as he read the book and he saw a lot more in the character than I expected he would. He saw a lot more in all the characters than I expected. You may not agree with him, and of course you bring much more experience both with literature and life to the reading, but I think for a pre-teen he did pretty well. Anyway, I don't see what is to be gained by criticizing his efforts at this date. 

[Rosie_0801]

One more thought….men and boys engage in romance in real life.  Perhaps they might not mind reading about it now and then, if it is written well.

 

True enough! A friend of mine said when he and his wife were dating, she said he reminded her of Mr Darcy and this made him happy. That he knew who she meant made her happy. :)

[poppy]

It wasn't his only opinion of the book or the character, if that makes you feel better. I was simply pointing out that he read it, enjoyed it and was able to discuss it. And seeing as he was 12 at the time, he might not have mastered all the nuances of relationships and social status yet. But, he did enjoy the book and appreciated Austen's wit and he very much liked spending time with her characters. He is looking forward to reading more by her, so I count that as a success. I don't think it was a waste of time for him to read the book.

 

So many of his female friends have seen the mini-series and get all swoony over Mr Darcy and I thought that it was interesting that he had a slightly different take. We had some very interesting conversations as he read the book and he saw a lot more in the character than I expected he would. He saw a lot more in all the characters than I expected. You may not agree with him, and of course you bring much more experience both with literature and life to the reading, but I think for a pre-teen he did pretty well. Anyway, I don't see what is to be gained by criticizing his efforts at this date. 

 

Didn't mean to make you feel defensive.  Really just posted to say it was an odd take on Mr. Darcy, simple as that.  I think you even agree.    I'm kind of surprised to hear that young teens watch the miniseries still. But why not, that's the advantage of a period piece, it doesn't age.

[flyingiguana]

Pride and Prejudice -- because there's way more cultural references to that than just about any other Austen novel.

 

Don't go with Emma.  I've read it twice. It's really dull.  The movie isn't bad, but I seriously wonder if the book was written by the same person who wrote P & P.  It's only advantage would be that you could watch Clueless and look for parallels.  But you could just watch Clueless anyway.

 

The screen versions of P and P are really NOT the book.  Don't make that mistake.  The BBC miniseries that was done some time ago might be the best bet if you have to do a screen version and want it truer to the book.  But the one with Colin Firth isn't as good.  There are some good bits -- Colin Firth is one of them but not for his dreamy presence.  It's because he was one actor who really understood what it was about.  The guy who plays Mr. Collins was another one.  But the folks making that version actually thought the book was a romance novel, with a couple bits of satire thrown in.  It's really the other way around.

 

My kids kind of hate Dickens.  We keep trying, hoping the next one will be better.  But he's got this habit of just dumping words on a page in random order.  Lots and lots of words.  Words with no purpose.

 

The real joy of reading Pride and Prejudice is that each word actually means something.  Each sentence is worth reading.  Dickens, eh, not so much.  The plots of Dickens may be great.  The characters may be unforgettable.  But the writing is stodgy.  Worth reading, but really no replacement for Austen.  It's a different experience.

 

As suggested, The Moonstone is also pretty good.  But it's a different time period.  And the treatment of women is more man-centered.  Part of the reason for reading Austen is because her books really do get at the female experience from a female viewpoint.  Both The Moonstone and The Woman in White tend to view women as passive.

 

That it's a boy doing the reading is no reason to skip the view point of a stronger female character.  It would be like saying girls should never read anything about men and their experience.  And believe me, we all are having our girls read a lot more books that are mostly about boys than there are available books that are mostly about girls.

[flyingiguana]

True enough! A friend of mine said when he and his wife were dating, she said he reminded her of Mr Darcy and this made him happy. That he knew who she meant made her happy. :)

 

Actually, that wouldn't be my idea of a compliment.

[flyingiguana]

I don't know, I'm still thinking romance novel.  Hunger Games is a love triangle that also has bows and death matches and evil Presidents and killer bees.   P&P is a love triangle that also has... an unwanted proposal and an inappropriate tryst. And someone gets a cold.  Every romance novel is a character study, a study in manners, and has some wit (or strives to).  Don't get me wrong, I think it is a great novel, and also a really good read. But if I had to slip it into a genre, I'd pick romance.

 

It's a novel of manners:  "The novel of manners is a literary genre that deals with aspects of behavior, language, customs and values characteristic of a particular class of people in a specific historical context. The genre emerged during the final decades of the 18th century. The novel of manners often shows a conflict between individual aspirations or desires and the accepted social codes of behaviour. There is a vital relationship between manners, social behaviour and character."

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel_of_manners

 

The emphasis is on social mores, not strictly romance.  Although romance can play a part because it is also governed by those mores.

 

From the P and P wikipedia page:

As Anna Quindlen wrote,

 

Pride and Prejudice is also about that thing that all great novels consider, the search for self. And it is the first great novel that teaches us this search is as surely undertaken in the drawing room making small talk as in the pursuit of a great white whale or the public punishment of adultery.^[3]

 

 

That's why it's not just a romance novel. 

 

I find it interesting, too, that people just write Austen off because it's "just" romance.  What they are saying is that women's lives don't count.  The experiences that women had in the 18th century is of no possible interest to anyone.

 

It's one thing to just say Austen is unbearably dull (which could be a personal opinion, and which I tend to agree with in the case of Emma), but it's another to say it wouldn't interest half the population because it's about something that doesn't matter.

 

Which is tantamount to teaching young men that women's experiences don't matter. 

 

Not to mention what's already been said -- that every romance and marriage involves two people, often of the opposite sex.

 

And the reason I would assign P and P over Wuthering Heights is because P and P really is more about female experience.  It's about a woman who actually does something.  (And although Jane Eyre might fall into this same category, it still makes me kind of uncomfortable.  It  really falls into the romance category much more easily than P and P does.  Darcy has to change himself to get Elizabeth to fall for him -- Rochester gets changed and then Jane allows herself to be taken over by him because he's ever so slightly less powerful and scary.  And no longer trying to be a bigamist.)