So today we're going to be talking
about Death Comes to Pemberley. Okay, it's not that dramatic. But we are going to be talking
about Death Comes to Pemberley and is the book worth reading? So this is a review of both the book and
the BBC miniseries, how they're different. And if you do love the miniseries,
is reading the book worthwhile? I will give you my opinion
on that in just a bit. So let me know in the comments
below, if you have read, seen or even heard of Death Comes to Pemberley. My name is Ellie Dashwood and
this is my channel where we talk about classic literature,
history, and death at Pemberley. So Death Comes to Pemberley
was written by PD James, who is a very famous crime author. In 2011, it was published. And in 2013, it was made into
a BBC miniseries staring Anna Maxwell Martin and Matthew Rhys. I have long been a fan of the mini-series. But recently my friend died. Actually, no, she got
married and moved to Canada. But when she did, she gave me this book. So I say I inherited it when she
died and moved to Canada and got married to the love of her life. So. I hope you're having
fun in Canada, Kelsey! I miss you! But thanks for the book. Anyway. So let's just talk about the very basic
storyline first, because it is the same in both the book and the movie. Overall, there's obviously differences,
but the basic plot line is that it is a sequel to Pride and Prejudice. And it's six years into the
marriage of Darcy and Elizabeth. They're living in Mr. Darcy's glorious house at Pemberley
and they're about to have a ball called Lady Anne's ball. It's named after Mr. Darcy's mother, Lady Anne. Anyway, Elizabeth is
busy making preparations. When all of a sudden Lydia shows up. Who was not invited, because
again, remember Lydia is married to Wickham and Wickham's creepy. Anyway, Lydia shows up, but she's
screaming that there has been murder. And so it turns out that Lydia
was going to come crash the ball. And she was in a coach with Wickham
and Denny, who, if you're also a big P&P fan, you know Denny is another
soldier from Pride and Prejudice. And they're coming up the road through
the Pemberley woods, when Denny gets out, runs into the woods and then ends up dead. And Wickham is the number one suspect. But did Wickham kill Denny? What's going on? And it goes into this sort of crime
investigation and we see the court trial and all of that greatness. While of course, a lot of the
characters from the original are in it. Bingley and Jane are in the
book, just Jane shows up in the miniseries for some reason. Of course you have Georgiana,
who has a love triangle going on. Always love those. And of course Lydia and Wickham and Mr. And Mrs. Bennet. So up next, here's a
quick review of the book. So overall the good of the book, I feel
like it's very cozy in an Austen way. It's like the cozy, little Austen world. And I also loved that she
treats the Austen world like it contains all of Austen's novels. So there are references to characters,
both from Persuasion and Emma in the book. Now you could actually sort of
miss that almost in the miniseries. There's just one very quick reference to
a character from Emma in the miniseries. But it's much more obvious in the book. With PD James being this very famous
crime writer, she served a lot of course in the British government,
I feel like she definitely did a lot of research into how trials and
investigations worked back then. And you definitely see that in
the book, like she's going to lengths to make it accurate. But then at the same time, there's
a lot of like tongue in cheek references or things said that are
like, "Well, wouldn't it be great if this thing happened instead?" And of course it what's going
to happen in the future. Or, "Oh, that's not possible!" But it's something that's
going to happen in the future. So it's very aware of itself
as historical fiction. Which I think too on the maybe, I don't
know if it's bad, but it's just a fact, is it's obviously historical fiction. Historical fiction versus true
classics has some tell-tale signs, as soon as it starts happening. Which is where they describe in detail
something that an author of that time period would assume everyone knew
and they wouldn't describe in detail. It'd be like us talking about opening
a refrigerator, what the inside of the refrigerator looked like this and that. Were in a real book written now
you'd just be like, "Oh, they grabbed something from the fridge." Because everyone knows what the fridge
is and what the inside of it looks like. So in historical fiction, authors do this. And she definitely did that where she
would describe in detail something that Austen would have taken for
granted that her audience knew. And so on some of the aspects of that
were maybe not the best parts of the book. I feel like PD James wanted to have a lot
of commentary on the first book, she had a lot of flashbacks where she would have the
characters almost re-analyze what happened in Pride and Prejudice the original. Or she had this huge conversation
between Darcy and Elizabeth, where he analyzes all his past actions. And I think a lot of it was just
her trying to reinterpret the first book in her own fashion. Which didn't really move
the plot line along. And I didn't think made the book stronger. She also would take a lot of quotes, which
at the beginning of the book was okay. Like there's a few, like a rehashing of
famous quotes from the original Pride and Prejudice, and I'm like, "Okay, she's
trying to set the scene a little bit." But it just kept happening to the point
that it would take me out of the story. I was like, "Okay, like, I don't
think the characters and the narrator would be constantly saying the same
thing over and over again, just because it was in the first book." And of course she made alterations
to characters' overall personalities, such as Colonel Fitzwilliam. I think too, just on the level of
writing itself, she did this thing several times where she would repeat
not really essential information, almost word for word, it was like
random details and it would be repeated three times within 50 pages. And I was like, "Okay, we get it." Elizabeth was like, "We
don't need these flowers." And then like a few chapters later
Elizabeth was again, like, "Oh yeah, we don't need these flowers." Five pages later "Elizabeth had
decided they didn't need the flowers." And it wasn't even
relevant to the plot line. It was just like, why are you repeating
the same thing over and over again? And then finally, I think on
plotting things were underdeveloped things she should have really
went into were passing mentions. And too much of the story was
saved for the end and then brought out in conversation. It was like, "Okay, here's the
bulk of the book where you get a few hints of what happened. And at the very end, it's like,
boom, let's just have a long conversations about what's happened. Not really emotionally react to any of
it and then move on with our lives." Okay. So now let's talk about the miniseries. I feel like ultimately what
happened with the miniseries is the writers came in and they took
stuff that had overall good bones. Like maybe it was like a good first draft
and they made it so, so, so much better. I have to say, this is one of those
times where the movie, or the miniseries, is so much better than the book. First of all, I just have to give
a shout out to Pemberley, which is of course, you know, my ultimate
favorite place on the planet, which is played by Chatsworth house. And if you haven't seen my video, my
trip to Chatsworth house slash Pemberley, then definitely check that out. Cause I'll tell you all about my
trip to Pemberley there, obviously. But overall, I feel like what they did
is they found those aspects of the book that could have been really interesting if
she had delved deeper into them, like Mr. Darcy's feelings about his marriage,
that issues with the Bidewill baby, the whole love triangle with Georgianna. The love triangle ended
in like chapter two. It felt like, "Oh, we have a love
triangle for one second in the book and then now it's done." Where they actually really developed
it into a full issue in the miniseries. And I feel like that was the thing. It's like everything that was
barely glazed over in the book was finally fully developed. Also, everything was
more dramatically told. Everything was like way, way more
dramatic and more emotionally intense and also tightened. Obviously the timeline was tightened,
the investigation was tightened. And also you felt like, at least I
felt like you got to see the story play out more believably where all
of the information is told throughout the plot versus not much happening and
then all of it coming out at the end. Also, I feel like in the miniseries,
they bring in Lydia Bennet and Mrs. Bennet into greater comic effect. And also Elizabeth becomes
more central to the story. So in the book, Mr. Darcy, I feel like takes over a lot of
the story, probably because at this time in history, a man would be more involved
in the investigation than the woman was. But in the miniseries, Elizabeth
definitely comes to the forefront. She has this more active voice and a
bigger impact on how the whole story plays out in the end, I felt like. I think a few things that happened in the
miniseries that might not be the best is that they did simplify the investigation. They simplified the trial. So I feel like a lot of maybe
historical accuracy was thrown out in order to do that for the series. And of course we don't get as full
of backstory on characters like Mr. Alveston, which is one of the
guys in the Georgiana love triangle and that sort of thing. And also, I want to point out
that the ending is different. I mean, it's not hugely different
in that, like the outcome of the investigation and trial is not different,
but a lot of the things that happened to secondary characters and how it
happened is significantly different. So I just want to throw that out there. I do love the miniseries ending, but
there's a couple of things, especially when it's referencing other characters
from Jane Austen's world that I thought was kind of cute in the book. So overall, I definitely would recommend
watching the miniseries from the BBC. It's absolutely amazing. Obviously, is it fully capturing
Jane Austen's characters? No, but this is what
I have to say on that. First of all, honestly, I don't
like the majority of sequels or spinoffs of Jane Austen's works. Most of them are awful, just terrible. This one is actually on
the good side of that. And I think part of it is
a lot of them lack depth. And another thing is, is Jane Austen's
characters were real in her head. Like they were very real to her. She understood them. And so anyone else trying to take Jane
Austen's characters, they can't do it. They're not the people
in Jane Austen's head. They're now the people through a
filter in this new person's head. So they're never going to fully
capture what Jane Austen wrote in any sort of spinoff or sequel. But I feel like for what it
is, it did it well, right? You have to sort of like accept that it's
not going to be the same and that's okay. But I did really enjoy it. Anyway, so that is my review of should
you read Death Comes to Pemberley? And ultimately only if you want to. Because honestly, the
miniseries is better. My name is Ellie Dashwood. This is my channel where I talk
about classic literature and history. If you like, either of those
things, please subscribe. And have an awesome day. Byeee! There's a UPS guy. Whenever I sit here and do videos, just
delivery people just fall out of the sky.
