I admire your commitment, your originality, your math skills, and your devotion to Austen. This is brilliant. But the answer you are seeking is Darcy. The perfect man brought to life by a woman who never knew one. In other words the perfect man is imaginary.
May I make one suggestion? Define the primary dimensions explicitly so that ratings can be better judged and discussed.
F***ability, for example, is implicitly defined as handsomeness and charm, so I infer the dimension is referring to surface-level/first-impression characteristics but am not sure.
Another commenter challenged the F-rating on Col. Brandon, admitting the influence of Alan Rickman in the Ang Lee movie version. I like Alan Rickman in general and think him attractive in a basic way but would contend that his (and Brandon in the novel) F-rating increases as his virtues and love for Marianne becomes more apparent - versus through him being inherently handsome or charming.
I may be applying a different conception of F***ability than you are, so a definition would facilitate dialogue/debate around the rating.
i LOVE this. marianne and brandon are among my favorite JA pairings. btw the best tidbit from the Kate Winslet adaptation (which is perfect) is that Emma Thompson (Elinor) married Greg Wise (Willoughby) ☠️
As a passionate Janeite, I have the absolute honor of my life organizing a celebration of Austen's 250th and a related collection at my college in 2025, and it is this exact kind of fun, genius cultural scholarship that keeps her alive and evolving and relevant and will really engage the younger crowd! We may have to rephrase the fuckability part as I'm not sure the hallowed halls can take it, but the debate will be amazing!
OK. First off: never read any Austen - or watched any of the films. Why? Well I'm a bloke! And that genre doesn't appeal to me. How do I even know what genre Austen novels fall into - without ever reading one? I'm a bloke! :-)
But... I love what you've done here. Yeah, it's bat-shit crazy, but you genuinely seem to be on to something. Maybe you could apply the same modelling to something a bit more modern. Something like Alien - or Terminator? I didn't suggest Blade Runner, as that would be too easy. And 2001: A Space Odyssey was, obviously, never going to work. So I gave that one a miss too. Die Hard could work - maybe? It's got Alan Rickman in it. ;-)
I am going to give you a pass on the (epically misguided!) bloke stuff because Alien and Terminator made me laugh. You could absolutely apply Austen Math to other works—and I might!
As a bloke, Austen is one of my favourite authors. The delicious irony and social satire and the deep commentary on virtues elevate her to much more than "chick lit".
i confess that i'm not a particular Austen fan. i've enjoyed the film adaptations, however, and read one novel, which i *think* was Sense & Sensibility but didn't care for written Austen. nonetheless, i am a math nerd and love, love, LOVE the effort and thought you've put into this model. i'm especially intrigued with the secondary dimensions arising out of a combination of the primary ones. i may have to use this for my own work. thanks!
“Oh, but everything is important, Natasha! How can you bear these cold calculations.” ("early-novel Marianne") -- Reading ANJ is always an intricate delight, for me a giddy bridge between the art-for-art's sake people and the art-is-a-parable folks like me. Thanks, Natasha!
I just read Sense and Sensibility for the first time, and then read this post. You absolutely deepened my enjoyment of the book. Such a delightful analysis; can’t wait to come back to this series as I work my way through the books!
I admire your commitment, your originality, your math skills, and your devotion to Austen. This is brilliant. But the answer you are seeking is Darcy. The perfect man brought to life by a woman who never knew one. In other words the perfect man is imaginary.
This is an entirely reasonable if not the obvious leading hypothesis! But I’m going to save my final judgment for Part 7
This is brilliant.
Haha thank you!
"Marianne’s chief error in judgment is not undervaluing morality so much as mistaking manners and taste for it."
A lesson for us all!
The mileage so many of us are going to get out of this in the college classroom. What a gift! I look forward to reading each and every installment.
Oh my goodness if this actually makes your syllabus you have to tell me!!
Brilliant.
May I make one suggestion? Define the primary dimensions explicitly so that ratings can be better judged and discussed.
F***ability, for example, is implicitly defined as handsomeness and charm, so I infer the dimension is referring to surface-level/first-impression characteristics but am not sure.
Another commenter challenged the F-rating on Col. Brandon, admitting the influence of Alan Rickman in the Ang Lee movie version. I like Alan Rickman in general and think him attractive in a basic way but would contend that his (and Brandon in the novel) F-rating increases as his virtues and love for Marianne becomes more apparent - versus through him being inherently handsome or charming.
I may be applying a different conception of F***ability than you are, so a definition would facilitate dialogue/debate around the rating.
Looking forward to "Emma" in particular.
An excellent suggestion, thanks - I will plan to rectify in Part 2
i LOVE this. marianne and brandon are among my favorite JA pairings. btw the best tidbit from the Kate Winslet adaptation (which is perfect) is that Emma Thompson (Elinor) married Greg Wise (Willoughby) ☠️
Omfg DID SHE?!
YES
Yes. Elinor is the biggest fraud in all of English literature.
As a passionate Janeite, I have the absolute honor of my life organizing a celebration of Austen's 250th and a related collection at my college in 2025, and it is this exact kind of fun, genius cultural scholarship that keeps her alive and evolving and relevant and will really engage the younger crowd! We may have to rephrase the fuckability part as I'm not sure the hallowed halls can take it, but the debate will be amazing!
How fun! You have my blessing to rephrase
Yay! 😀
OK. First off: never read any Austen - or watched any of the films. Why? Well I'm a bloke! And that genre doesn't appeal to me. How do I even know what genre Austen novels fall into - without ever reading one? I'm a bloke! :-)
But... I love what you've done here. Yeah, it's bat-shit crazy, but you genuinely seem to be on to something. Maybe you could apply the same modelling to something a bit more modern. Something like Alien - or Terminator? I didn't suggest Blade Runner, as that would be too easy. And 2001: A Space Odyssey was, obviously, never going to work. So I gave that one a miss too. Die Hard could work - maybe? It's got Alan Rickman in it. ;-)
P.S. Brilliant post - and very funny. Loved it.
I am going to give you a pass on the (epically misguided!) bloke stuff because Alien and Terminator made me laugh. You could absolutely apply Austen Math to other works—and I might!
:-) Thank you for the pass. I'm pretty sure my daughter, (an English Teacher) would be less forgiving. Probably horrified.
Which reminds me, I must send her a link to your post. I'm pretty sure she'll love it.
Hah! Thanks I hope she does
As a bloke, Austen is one of my favourite authors. The delicious irony and social satire and the deep commentary on virtues elevate her to much more than "chick lit".
Indeed! “Never marry a man who does not appreciate Jane Austen” was my father’s chief relationship advice to me btw.
i confess that i'm not a particular Austen fan. i've enjoyed the film adaptations, however, and read one novel, which i *think* was Sense & Sensibility but didn't care for written Austen. nonetheless, i am a math nerd and love, love, LOVE the effort and thought you've put into this model. i'm especially intrigued with the secondary dimensions arising out of a combination of the primary ones. i may have to use this for my own work. thanks!
Cool! Tell me if you do
I wish I was still teaching freshman comp. I would absolutely put it on the syllabus. It’s genius. Well done.
Haha thanks I wish you were too!
“Oh, but everything is important, Natasha! How can you bear these cold calculations.” ("early-novel Marianne") -- Reading ANJ is always an intricate delight, for me a giddy bridge between the art-for-art's sake people and the art-is-a-parable folks like me. Thanks, Natasha!
So glad you enjoyed & thanks for reading!
I just read Sense and Sensibility for the first time, and then read this post. You absolutely deepened my enjoyment of the book. Such a delightful analysis; can’t wait to come back to this series as I work my way through the books!
I am so delighted to hear this!
Have you considered including Austen's posthumously published novella, Lady Susan, in your series?
I hadn’t—but Laura Thompson reminded me how good the Whit Stillman adaptation is too, so maybe I’ll do it as an encore if we’re all still having fun
I love stories and quantitative analysis — and you’re unfailingly brilliant at showing that the twain in fact do meet.
Am thinking about how these dimensions and weightings might change when applied to Wharton’s work…
Thank you and this is a great question…maybe I will have to do Wharton Math next!
As a fellow Austen fan, this is hilarious!
Love the commitment and how understandable the math part was for those of us who are lacking at math.
Looking forward to the next installment of this series!
Oh I am committed - thanks for reading
OMG! This is hilarious! Can't wait for the others, especially Emma!
Emma is my reigning fave will she still be after this re-read?