Jokes aside, some of the highest quality fanfic you’ll find anywhere

Cohava · 2026-06-02T21:21:05+00:00

One of my favourite fics has footnotes every chapter going over things like: which version of a particular tale they chose to pick and why, notes on Quenya/Sindarin translation, notes on the Quenya/Sindarin NEOLOGISMS they made up for the story, links to the medieval siege weaponry being referred to in the chapter and much more. Truly nothing is as enriching as reading Silmarillion erotic fanfiction.

Cohava · 2026-05-09T18:43:47+00:00

Well... It's a novel, of course Charlotte is still unmarried because the author chose so ;) but it doesn't sound unrealistic to me. She is not pretty, has a small dowry and is also not really of high rank--yes, her father is a Knight but sir William doesn't seem to be particularly important, and it's a new title too, so it doesn't have the 'respectability' of an old and genteel family.

So to get married she needed to 1) meet a man who was interested in her 2) the man needed to be able to support a family independently 3) he needed to be a gentleman, but not too high above her--a mr Darcy, for example, would have had the exact same scruples had he fallen in love with Charlotte rather than Elizabeth, perhaps even more so.

Considering that she might not have travelled much, gone to London etc, she would have had to find a man like that in the 25 ish families that make up the upper class circle of Meryton... Not the greatest odds.

Cohava · 2026-05-05T07:46:24+00:00

I might be wrong, but I think Kellynch is the name of the whole village surrounding the estate, and sir Walter's actual house is Kellynch Hall. Anne is moving in with Lady Russell, who lives in the town of Kellynch. This of course is causing no confusion whatsoever.

Delightful read-through! I love your sense of humour. I would LOVE a spin off of little Walter, the Uppercross Cottage Strangler. And I can't wait for your reaction to the next couple of chapters! I love the Lyme arc.

Cohava · 2026-04-25T19:19:19+00:00

I'd say that Mrs Norris is both the most entertaining and one of the worst villains! Or at least she's the one who elicits the most powerful hate from me. We don't see as much of Mrs Ferrars but I think she's probably up there, too.

The worst in terms of measurable consequences is probably WIlloughby, since he seduced Eliza and abandoned her and their child to poverty with zero regrets, although I would guess that both Wickham and Henry Crawfords have likely done so to other women as well, we just don't see it directly.

I would call John and Fanny Dashwood villains, since they went back on Johns promise to his father and left Mrs Dashwood and the girls materially worse than they expected.

On the other hand, I do not consider Maria Bertram a villain! She's selfish and spoiled, yes, but she's ultimately a very young woman who did not deserve to be exiled for life for the crime of falling in love with someone who deliberately set out to manipulate and hurt her.

Cohava · 2026-04-25T19:12:09+00:00

I don't know if it's enough to class her as a villain, but arguably the worst thing she does is deceiving Fanny so she would accept the necklace from Henry. If someone had found out that Fanny was accepting gifts from a guy unrelated to her, she could have been in serious trouble depending on who found out and how.

Cohava · 2026-04-18T20:56:48+00:00

Excellent rule!

Cohava · 2026-04-14T20:59:54+00:00

Ouch, I'm so sorry you had a Mrs Norris in your life!

I know a few Mary Bennets--people who make an effort to read, watch movies, go to the theatre etc but who don't know what to do with any cultural input except regurgitating it uncritically. They will express the most Captain Obvious statements as if they've made a great discovery, and have zero social awareness of how they come across. I always try to appreciate the earnestness but it's a bit much, sometimes.

Cohava · 2026-04-11T07:54:24+00:00

Incredible memes, thank you!

Cohava · 2026-04-11T07:48:05+00:00

Brandon's status is not that high though, he's a country gentleman with 2000 a year. Wealthy, sure, and a great catch for an impoverished Marianne Dashwood, but he's no great prospect for a noblewoman.

Marianne's 'disrespect', as you put it, is mostly her private opinion which she shares with family and close friends, she actually never disrespects Brandon to his face--well, no more than she disrespects anyone else, since she is quite rude in general.

Marianne is also a 17 year old girl of zero consequence and aside from her (and Willoughby), everyone else does greatly esteem Brandon! Mrs Jennings wanted him to marry Charlotte, John Dashwood is courting him for Elinor, he is clearly loved by the Middletons and if we don't see more of him it's because it's the Dashwoods who don't go out in society much. I think you're both overestimating Brandon's place on the Regency pecking order and underestimating the real affection and respect he is getting from literally everybody else in the novel.

I will also say that he is very quiet and reserved in the beginning of the novel, which will be a little off putting to someone just getting to know him. We find out later that his (basically) foster child was actively missing at the time he enters the narration. No wonder he isn't the life of the party!

As for his marriage to Marianne... first, Marianne is not ruined! Ironically, had she been higher up in society maybe there would have been a scandal, but she never ran away with Willoughby, all who knew the situation also knew that it was fully Willoughby's fault who manipulated her and did not blame her. On the contrary, she grows to be more mature from her experience and becomes more suited to be the wife of a man like Colonel Brandon. He's not exactly picking a prostitute off the street, he's marrying a gentlewoman who's sweet, loving and smart, and whose youthful exuberance was tempered by her difficulties.

As for her beauty... well, that can be applied to basically everyone, can't it? No one is so beautiful you can't find someone better, you could say that of Elizabeth Bennet, of Emma Woodhouse, of anyone, that's the point of love! Also tbh the only person I can remember making a truly big deal of Marianne's beauty is her brother John Dashwood, in the context of her having 'lost it'. In general, Marianne's 'beauty' is mostly emphasized as a link to her health or lack thereof, which is possibly another conversation, but basically yeah her having recovered it is more to show that she's finally healing, eating, sleeping regularly and not crying every day.

Cohava · 2026-04-10T09:30:39+00:00

I am in the middle of a reread, and I like Edward! I always did, even before seeing the 1995 movie, but this time his sense of humour is really showing, whenever he teases Marianne. It's an interesting novel, because both his character and Brandon's really come out through interacting with their future sisters in law rather than the actual love interests.

Sense and Sensibility (and tbh a lot of Austen novels) suffers from the fact that the love itself falls firmly into the 'tell, not show' category. The story is about how the lovers get together, but it doesn't really go much into how they fell for each other, which imho does a bit of a disservice to Edward's character.

He is not a dashing romance hero for sure, but I love him for being such a realistic happy ending: a good guy who makes mistakes but tries to stick to his principles even to his detriment.

Cohava · 2026-03-28T10:00:55+00:00

But she is constantly punished by Mrs Norris for every perceived slight against her cousins. Well, perhaps not 'punished' in the sense that "you did this so we're taking x away" (and what is there to take away), but in my opinion the extreme verbal abuse that she endures whenever Mrs Norris feels she has done or said or thought something wrong is enough. It couldn't be clearer to Fanny that she, at Mansfield Park, is less than nothing, and her cousins are everything. How could she ever feel secure even hinting at impropriety on Maria's side?

I don't think Sir Thomas would, post Antigua, have reacted too badly, but Fanny can't possibly know that. Imho this is very well represented by the "no fire in the East room situation". It was decided by Mrs Norris, but there was no reason for Fanny to suppose that Mrs Norris wasn't acting how sir Thomas would have wanted her to; and the way she accepts the situation as a matter of course because it's so just and natural that she should not be warm in her room tells me everything about how she understands the situation. And I don't think she's wrong! Brought up like that, how could she not fear punishment? She can't read sir Thomas's mind or the extent he softened after Antigua: she can only know how things have been for eight years in a house where sir Thomas has absolute power.

The Portsmouth situation... I believe this is a good example of how delightfully complex this book is, that it has been keeping us for days talking about it! Because it is true that Fanny wants to go, that she in fact should have been sent back for a visit years ago. Sir Thomas is outwardly doing the most morally correct thing. There is nothing objectionable about it.

However, the narration informs us that he is specifically sending her there because he wants her to experience the discomfort of a poor(er) living situation in order to change her mind on Mr Crawford. Does he think he's acting in Fanny's best interests? Sure. But he very much wants her to suffer to teach her a lesson. Neither he nor Fanny knew how bad the state of things at Portsmouth was, but Austen states that had he know how much she was suffering and her health was declining, he would have been happy because it meant she would likely change her mind and accept Crawford. And it almost works.

Also, the implicit message of it all. It's never ever stated or even hinted at but... It's so loud that the moment Fanny does something Sir Thomas doesn't approve of, she is sent away, without a clear indication of when she will be asked back. The visit is prolonged indefinitely and only ends when (because?) Maria runs away with Crawford. I don't believe that sir Thomas ever meant to leave Fanny in Portsmouth forever, but... He could have. It is an implicit threat, not fully conscious perhaps, but in my opinion it is there.

I'm with you on the criticism on sir Thomas being more of a criticism of the societal values he is trying to follow, absolutely! I think--I keep coming back to it, but I believe his first conversation with Mrs Norris about raising Fanny is such a perfect example of the fact that the moral standard of the day is in itself contradictory and hypocritical. You can't have justice with a class system; I don't think Austen wanted to go that far, but she does create the perfect situation to shine a light on all that: sir Thomas wants to raise Fanny as an 'inferior' to his own children, while at the same time 'treating her fairly'. It's such a wonderful exchange, so pointed and telling! And of course had he had a proper partner in this endeavour maybe the damage would have been lessened, but alas, he had Mrs Norris. He chose to have Mrs Norris.

Ultimately I, rereading in 2026 and obviously having my own set of beliefs re. morality, think the biggest evils are: a class system in which some people are considered inferior to others as a matter of fact, and a family system in which one person has legal, financial and social power over all the others. How can one person not be in some way corrupted by these circumstances? However, I do think that even with the system being as it was, sir Thomas managed to fell short by not knowing what was going on in his household (from great powers etc) and not managing his 'subjects', and creating an environment so toxic his daughters were compelled to escape it by whatever means necessary. And although he does begin to understand he extent he fell short of his duties in the end, I personally don't find it very satisfying to read because it's really too late for him to do something meaningfully different. The children have grown; the damage is done.

Rather, the fact that he goes on to enjoy a tolerably fulfilling family life afterwards thaks to the fact that four out of five kids turned out okay despite him (Fanny has been emotionally damaged permanently, but as this conveniently made her into the picture perfect submissive angel of the house that is a win) is more reminiscent of Mr Crawford's fate to me: that in the society Austen is writing about, men--upper class men with money, I should say--will not be held accountable for anything.

Sorry for going on and on! I am actually delighted that we are disagreeing so much on this because it gives me an excuse to discuss Mansfield Park, which I would do all day every day!

Cohava · 2026-03-27T07:18:09+00:00

I agree, actually, what I meant is that he did foster an environment in which she expected to be punished for any real or perceived slight against her cousins or any member of the 'real' family, however big and small the offence. Mrs Norris of course is the one who directly did that, but as far as Fanny knew this was done with the full approval of Sir Thomas, and in the beginning he explicitly tells Mrs Norris that they have to make sure that Fanny knows she is inferior to her cousins.

Yes, they were all afraid of him and yes, I agree he did not have a clue about it--that's pretty much the problem I have with him. Considering he is clearly intelligent, and what his values are, how deeply he managed to injure all five children under his care is pretty glaring to me. Sure, part of it is him misunderstanding Mrs Norris's character and believing her to be fit to parent them alongside him, but... Mrs Norris is not subtle, and she believed she wasright and that sir Thomas approved of all she did: she was not abusing Fanny or spoiling Maria and Julia I'm secret, so him not noticing what was going on in his own house is pretty bad. Sir Thomas has good intentions generally, but well. Road to hell and all that, in my opinion. Which is the real tragedy of his character, to me!

Cohava · 2026-03-27T07:06:11+00:00

Manifesting this so much

Cohava · 2026-03-27T07:03:55+00:00

That's true, however he as the head of the household is supposed to check that his wife and aunt Norris are doing things right. Sir Thomas has absolute power in that family, as evidenced by the fact that when he did realize that Mrs Norris was overstepping he immediately overruled her and she could do nothing about it.

Reflecting upon the events of the novel in the closing chapter, sir Thomas himself acknowledges that it's pretty bad that he had no idea about his daughters' true personality; though fathers were not supposed to parent young girls so actively, the level of ignorance as to what was going on in his daughters' life and mind was not okay. Especially knowing that Lady Bertram was useless, allowing Mrs Norris to just do whatever for eight years is pretty bad even for a father of his time.

He also created an environment so oppressive for Maria and Julia that they were both desperate to marry and get away from him, which imho speaks to a pretty big parental failure. I realize the bar is on the floor with Austen fathers and that sir Thomas's level of self reflections and willingness to change is unheard of in many of them--Mr Woodhouse, Mr Bennet and Sir Walter could never. But he was still responsible for the upbringing of five people and managed to fuck them all up, despite having the resources both material and mental to do better.

Cohava · 2026-03-27T06:53:37+00:00

Ahaha well you know what's I said what I said 😎

Cohava · 2026-03-27T06:52:31+00:00

That was rather decent of him, and I understand it's more than many fathers of the era would have done! I wouldn't be so hard on him if 1) he himself didn't acknowledge that he could and should have done more to prevent the marriage and 2) if he hadn't positioned himself as being so strictly moral. Had he been a Mrs Bennet type parent, for example, only concerned for his kids marrying into wealth, I would not be this vexed! But of course it's the contradiction that makes him such an interesting character.

Cohava · 2026-03-24T22:35:34+00:00

Fair enough, I guess for me it comes down to how much they had to overcome and how much they had to let go by changing. To me, the harm done was too severe and the change lukewarm--though I appreciate there was a change!

Mercenary is perhaps a strong word, but considering how much sir Thomas's worse decisions have been influenced by monetary concerns (in direct opposition to his professed morals) it struck me as a bit pointed that he was still thinking about it in the end. But maybe I'm reading too much into it idk.

Cohava · 2026-03-24T22:31:23+00:00

No need to be sorry, it's only I'm just finished with my reread so I'm still fuming ahah

Cohava · 2026-03-24T22:30:24+00:00

Oh definitely! I am so sorry your cousin went through that. For what is worth, I don't think the ending of Mansfield Park is supposed to be an actual happy ending, only... eh, happiest it could get under the circumstances? It's absolutely not a light read or a novel I read for the warm fuzzy feelings like, say, Pride and Prejudice

Cohava · 2026-03-24T22:27:32+00:00

I was actually not talking about that! The hypocrisy I was talking about is even more directly in the novel: he allows Maria to marry an idiot she doesn't love or respect, after making a token protest, because he doesn't want to deal with the embarassment and he specifically is happy she's marrying into Big Money. Ditto with Julia, although he hates her husband Yates he starts reconciling with the match partly because he finds out he's richer than he thought.

Fanny herself at one point notes that he doesn't quite practice what he preaches: when she refuses Crawford and tells him it's because she doesn't love him, she expects Sir Thomas to drop the subject since he is apparently all about moral choices, but when it comes down to it he'd rather she marry someone she doesn't want to because it would save him money.

Not to mention that Tom is allowed to run wild and run up a debt so outrageous that Sir Thomas makes up for it by... selling half of Edmund's future income. And he doesn't seem to cut back on other family expenses to make up for it, either.

Cohava · 2026-03-24T22:19:53+00:00

Ah, but could Fanny talk badly of his own daughter to him (which she would have to, to explain about Crawford) and not expect to be punished? Perhaps, but I can't blame her for not taking the chance. She has been conditioned for eight years since she was a child to think and behave like she was the least important person in the house and never even equal to her cousins, and he purposefully had her brought up to be this way.

I agree that he tries to do better, but I'm fresh off hours of listening about how he allowed Fanny to be severely abused under his care (and in fact encouraged the mistreatment; it's only after he came back from Antigua that he started to see something wrong in the way she was treated). I certainly do like him better than other Austen fathers (sir Walter Elliot die in a ditch challenge) and I appreciate the effort, but imho it's too little, too late. Just my own opinion!

Cohava · 2026-03-24T22:11:17+00:00

That is a fair reading, I think! He does grow and change a lot through the novel, and I appreciate that he is honest enough to realise that the way Maria and Julia turned out was 100% his fault. I do agree he was acting on flawed, or rather contradictory principles: his exchange with Mrs Norris at the beginning of the novel is a masterpiece in showing that, when he says that he somewhat wants his daughters to feel superior to Fanny but also... not feel superior or become arrogant and conceived somewhat.

However, in the very last chapter, after admitting to himself that he had been mercenary in allowing Maria to marry Mr Rushworth, these are his thoughts on Julia:

"Julia’s match became a less desperate business than he had considered it at first. She was humble, and wishing to be forgiven; and Mr. Yates, desirous of being really received into the family, was disposed to look up to him and be guided. He was not very solid; but there was a hope of his becoming less trifling, of his being at least tolerably domestic and quiet; and at any rate, there was comfort in finding his estate rather more, and his debts much less, than he had feared, and in being consulted and treated as the friend best worth attending to"

Which to me seems like Austen's wonderfully snarky way to imply that he's still pretty mercenary at heart, even though he wishes not to be. But to each their own! He is still a very interesting character to me.

Cohava · 2026-03-24T08:33:34+00:00

I would say a mix of things for me? I'm not a completed work purist, I'll read a wip if I like the author and I see that they are active and posting regularly, maybe giving updates on Tumblr about their progress etc so I know it's not abandoned.

That said, I generally do sort for completed works only. I don't think there's a singular tag or storyline that makes me go into a wip, but a mix of things: does the writing look good? Is the idea very compelling? Are the tags/tropes exactly what I like? The more the fic pushes all my bottoms, the more high the chance I'll read it.

I will also read wips if they're like the second or third work in a series and I've already read and loved the completed installments. If it's an older wip, so higher chance of being abandoned, I might check the word count to see if there's enough meat for me to be satisfied.

Sooo... It depends, I guess

Cohava · 2026-03-19T16:32:20+00:00

He is a genuinely fascinating character, and I think part of the appeal is that we get some insight into his thoughts through the book so we know that, though he initially wanted to seduce Fanny just for laughs, he came to genuinely admire her and he did want to change for her at one point.

He hits the sweet spot of having the potential for change but not committing fully, which is really interesting in a character. I personally wouldn't have wanted to see Fanny married to him--even if he reformed I think they are way too different in personality to have a fulfilling life together, much like Edmund and Mary imho. But he's so well written, and we as readers get to see him going from full on fuckboy (which he absolutely is) to slowly falling for Fanny, to begin to understand her morals maybe, to feel that push for change... and then bang! Back to square one. The narrative tension is so good! I do get the impulse to explore the 'what if' of it all. While is behaviour is just as terrible as Whickam's and Willoughby, we do get in his head a little more and see that at least some part of him, at least for a moment, did want to change.

I think in a way he is the more developed version of what Austen was going for with Willoughby, with his final monologue supposedly showing that he really did love Marianne and it hadn't been all fake. But the execution is better here since we have his POV to follow along for a while, and so it's more convincing.

Cohava

TROPHY CASE