What I’m watching: Mansfield Park 1983

I knew the 1983 BBC production of Mansfield Park had the reputation of being long and faithful to Austen’s novel, which are not necessarily good things considering the novel’s own reputation as being … difficult. However, I enjoyed MP and have enjoyed the 2005 and 1999 adaptations, despite complaints that the Fanny Price depicted in no represented Fanny Price as written. (More about the 1999 version in another post.)

Poor Fanny, many despise her timidity and rigidity, but I like her because I often suffer from those same complaints. And it is such a curious story because at times you want to read her as a Cinderella, but apart from the hateful Aunt Norris, the Bertram family is really quite kind to her. Maria and Julia are never the wicked step sisters and Lady Bertram is certainly. And Mary Crawford — delightful Mary Crawford — is certainly not a villain. Even Henry Crawford, who is closest to the villain of the story, is a tragic figure because we can’t help but wonder if he would have been improved by Fanny’s love. It’s almost as if Jane Austen purposefully set out to write a novel that would confuse our conceptions of hero and villain and incense us as to rightness of the match between Edmund and Fanny.

But back to this adaptation: It is long. It is faithful. And Fanny, as portrayed by Sylvestra Le Touzel, has none of the fire of Frances O’Connor (1999) or Billie Piper (2005). This 1983 Fanny has dark circles under her eyes (at least it seems that way watching the movie on YouTube) and has the posture of a scolded puppy; and I can’t imagine what the dashing Henry Crawford (looking too much of a dandy as played by Robert Burbage) might see in her. Edmund Bertam, played by Nicholas Farrell, does appear much older than Fanny, but I think he does properly display the unconscious love of his cousin.

And through it all I remained amused by the casting of Gorden Kaye, whom you may know from ’Allo, ’Allo, as Dr. Grant, a character who normally gets few lines in most adaptations. Of course, as bizarre as I found it to see the innkeeper/partisan René in the film, the most bizarre portrayal was Angela Pleasence as Lady Bertram. The 1999 version showed Lady Bertram quaffing laudanum, but this Lady Bertram must have had an IV drip of the opium derivative. She was hysterically perfect.

But I was most touched by Bernard Hepton as Sir Thomas Bertram. His performance, far beyond all others, made me wonder what events in Antigua changed him. (And I will ignore until that later post the slavery sub plot of the 1999 version.) Fanny supposedly blossoms after the departure of Maria and Julia, but I don’t think that explains Sir Thomas’ new found appreciation of his niece. Of course, I have not yet reached the scenes where Sir Thomas will pressure Fanny to consider Henry Crawford’s proposal, but I would be surprised if his performance is much out of character to the novel.

Britnylove says:

August 19, 2014 at 12:35 am

I think a defining characteristic of the ’83 adaptation is its faithful adherence to the novel’s characters—to the point of amusing absurdity, as in Angela Pleasance’s portrayal of Lady Bertram. This Fanny is also going to be timid, meek, and obedient to a similar point–but it is this vividness which makes her character admirable, even as it is exasperating sometimes. The posture she holds does credit to her ability to truly appear as modest, humble, and indebted as her character remains in Austen’s original work. I appreciate this version of Mansfield Park perhaps the most of them all, although I DID really like Billie Piper, and her Edmund (I don’t remember who plays him). This is the most true version, and so lacks the more satisfying transition from cousins to engaged between Fanny and Edmund (I love you, I have been blind. Forgive me.) And the affirming affection. The ’83 version takes no liberties and adheres concretely to the bounds of the book, and for that reason, I consider it the most accurate, although more liberal renditions are enjoyable as well. 🙂 Very nice review/post, by the way 🙂

Hollis Ramsey says:

April 27, 2016 at 3:13 am

i totally agree with you, except to say that the 1983 version is the ONLY one that i like, and it is one of my fave Jane series. this Lady Bertram is properly hysterical, Aunt Norris properly nasty, and Fanny exactly as i imagine her to be, even down to her voice. when she would not act in Lovers’ Vows, you can feel her desperate reluctance so strongly, that it is palpable. the costumes and sets are beautiful, and the script is, of course, impeccable.

Mary Fletcher Jones says:

July 16, 2024 at 9:39 pm

I’m re-watching this series in 2024, having seen it when originally aired on PBS. I agree that the casting and portrayals are nearly perfect, particularly Mrs Norris. While Ms. le Touzel’s portrayal isn’t off the mark exactly, according to the novel, there are things about her mannerisms that I find really almost discordant and distracting. It’s almost as if she is portraying Fanny as having a mild cognitive impairment or possibly some form of psychosis or other disorder of some kind. For most of the series, she rarely blinks. She moves stiffly, when she moves, rarely changes her expression and stares. That and her lack of affect are associated with some different kinds of disorders. When she does have an emotional scene, as she does with Lord Bertram, it is so sudden, hysterical and out of character for her that it really is alarming. I feel certain that was intentional on the part of the director and the actress, as the other characters (apart from Lady Bertram, of course) do have natural movements, phrasing, expressions and animation. The idiosyncrasies of this portrayal of Lady Bertram (like the compulsive way she appears to hold her hand her lips and freaks out when her dog is not near) also make me think the director must have intentionally wanted both of these characters to appear disturbed. But it makes for a strange type of heroine. This Fanny just seems to be suffering from something (and I’ve worked with and known people who are intellectually disabled or mentally ill, so that’s where I’m getting these comparisons — the non-blinking, unfocused stare she has is a big clue). Watching this series, it’s like listening to music and one note is always off. I guess what I’m trying to say is that it’s discordant in a way other Austen movies and series are not. I rather feel Fanny deserved better than this too-strange portrayal. Other than that, lovely costumes and settings.

What I’m watching: Mansfield Park 1983

Like this:

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Share this:

Like this:

Leave a ReplyCancel reply