We Answer Your Most Burning Questions About 'Pride and Prejudice'

Caution Warnings: We talk about assault and sexual violence over the course of this episode

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/a3xzxa/we-answer-your-most-burning-questions-about-pride-and-prejudice

Good stuff, i really enjoyed this series tbh, even though i had never read the novel.

I don’t want to be that guy though, but i hope when covering lengthy series like this in the future that they do have a tighter schedule, especially with the EVA rewatch coming up.

Hard agree, I haven’t read the book or watched the show yet but this series was fantastic. Gave me a lot of context and deeper thoughts that I expect will help me enjoy the series more now.

I understand and to some extent agree with this, but I also liked that the crew were willing to let discussion run on and edited the episodes to fit what they had instead of sticking rigidly to a schedule that didn’t fit.

The only thing I would request is maybe adding bumpers at the front or end that clarifies what actually is/isn’t being covered and whether or not it really is the final episode. I know when recording discussions you won’t yet know how run time will make it play out, but if you could add a brief explanation after the fact it’d help avoid confusion.

Yeah, I get want of a schedule but as someone who mostly listens to these during work I’m all the way here for 5 hour podcasts.

Can’t believe Waypoint talked about my pie making home town AND answered my email. Incredible. This episode made my week.

1 Like

I have absolutely loved the P&P podcasts. I admit to having disregarded Austen as one of those “historically important but not for me” things (in a shitty gendered way I’m ashamed to admit), but i listened to half the first pod and immediately watched all of the BBC series and am now halfway through the book. So thanks for opening my eyes.


I haven’t had the time to dig into the series yet but I laughed when in the opening of episode one, Rob says something to the like of “I’ve wanted to do this since we started this show – you’re my hostages now” and I glanced at the upcoming (then) 12 hours of podcasts spread over 5 episodes that were up. Good stuff. Just wanted to share that moment.

1 Like

Me: Thank God we are done with Kingdom Hearts and can go back to regular video game talk.
Also me: Please continue to talk about Jane Austen forever.


This series was one of my favorite things Waypoint has done. I had zero issue with the length of it, but I have a really tedious office job, which podcasts carry me through, so I’m kind of perpetually tearing through Content.

Now that the nature of the pie has been exposed, I feel I can no longer hold my tongue about a grave misconception that has surrounded this worthy mainstay of the British table. It was not being eaten for breakfast! In the episode, Miss Bennet partakes of a healthy cooked breakfast with her family (Mr Kellogg’s insipid invention being some decades away) and then resolves to visit her ailing sister. She walks the three miles to Netherfield, and on arrival encounters Mr Darcy. After he escorts her to the house, we cut to a scene of Miss Bennet already tending to her sister, indicating that some time has passed. We cut again to the Bingley’s dining-room, where luncheon, not breakfast, is in progress, and comment is made on “her appearance, when she arrived this morning”, again indicating the passage of time since her arrival.
Interestingly, the men are present. Luncheon in this time period was usually considered necessary only for ladies to restore their strength, men being assumed to be robust enough to last until dinner without another meal. Since it was not a proper meal, it did not include hot food, and would be principally composed of leftover cold meats and pies eaten with various condiments and bread on the side. Some historians believe that sandwiches were a natural development of this meal,


Listening to this today, up to answering letters, and Austin says
“True meaning is eternally deferred”
I was wondering if this is a quote from somewhere.

The deferral of “true” or “objective” meaning is p key to some post-structural theorists, esp. Derrida, who lays it out in Writing and Difference.

It struck me as such a poetic way of saying the search for meaning doesn’t end that I thought it was a quote from something… but ok it was 100% Austin
thanks for the reply, going to read the wiki on Derrida now.

I am so glad that you guys concede the weaknesses of the Joe Wright film. Honestly, for people who are steeped in this novel, or Austen in general, it is widely regarded as garbage. From my perspective, mostly because you can argue that the fundamental theme of P&P is substance over style it also pointedly disregards that theme. The Joe Wright film is 100% style over substance and heavily leans on the fact that most viewers will know the major strokes of the story. Fucking lush countrysides get endless moments while he gives us ZERO character development. Lazy storytelling and self-indulgent filmmaking. Trash.
I also think that, were you to look at the novel through this lens of style vs. substance, you will start to realize that what you are given is many many complex shades with characters that fall widely on the continuum between the two. It’s one of the great accomplishments of the book, really. This paradigm might lead to a much more nuanced view of Mr. Bennett, who has been fighting a battle with utter vapidity for over 20 years. Note that the only reason Jane and Lizzie are well read is exactly because he was engaged with them. Their mother was in charge of their schooling and took care of none of it. Mr. Bennett makes learning available to those that would seek it and his two eldest took advantage of that. He’s far from perfect, but he is a sardonic, sarcastic, exhausted, distant father who has been financially ruined by the excesses of his wife’s pursuit of style, while he is concerned only with substance. This is all there in the books and is hinted at in the miniseries.
Your view of Lydia might change as well. You seem to place modern ideas about the expectations for teenagers on her, but they do not apply here. Mrs. Bennett and Lydia conspire to make the choice that she will be “out” when she has no goddamn business being in public, based on her maturity. But, since she is in public, she is expected to behave and be treated like a woman. It was part of the social contract. Since she is at the polar, absolute farthest end of the style continuum, I find it hard to give her much slack, with the exception that a good portion of her relentless shittiness can be ascribed to Mrs. Bennett’s neglect.

Preemptively: If the primary conclusion of the Us-cast isn’t to never ever go to Santa Cruz then Waypoint read the movie wrong.

Oh, also, watch The One I Love, Elisabeth Moss’ first doppelganger rodeo.

Headache trying to understand deconstructivism , i’m out of my depth with Derrida.
My fanfic of P and P would be a folk tale since I’m reading a huge book of them right now.

King and Queen Bennett have 3 daughters (because fairy tales are obsessed with this number), Princess Jane, Lizzie and Lydia.

… middle part lost to time

And then the curse was broken and Pemberly no longer had to turn into Mr. Darcy 3 times a month. There was much rejoicing and Princess Lizzie and the land of Pemberly were immediately married. Wikham the wolf was found asleep by a river and his stomach was cut open, the remains of Princess Lydia removed and replaced with stones.
Princess Jane chose to remain a carriage drawn by 6 horses and was often seen running over potters wares while laughing.

1 Like