The Literary Anne: The novels by L.M. Montgomery

[Brn2bwild]

5 hours ago, auntiemel said:

Oh, Walter's letter in Rilla of Ingleside! I just can't! Talk about a tearjerker.

It's jarring when you put his letter up against one scene in The Blythes Are Quoted, where Jem talks about the war with Anne.  His letter suggests that he was doing good by fighting in the war, while Jem's comments in the latter book (I forgot what he said exactly; it's been a while) underscore how futile his death was.

[Miss Dee]

On December 4, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Pepper the Cat said:

My biggest tear jerker is from Rilla when Jem comes home and Little Dob Monday greets him.

I sob like a mofo whenever I get to that part. I've wanted them to make a RoI movie solely for that part.

[BlossomCulp]

On 12/2/2018 at 8:41 PM, CherryAmes said:

I can still remember getting the first three Anne books, they came as a boxed set, for Christmas when I was about 12. 

Green, pink and blue?  I still have that set!  I got them around the same age and that started my lifelong love of LM Montgomery's fiction.  Anne is and will always be best of course! but I like most of her other books as well.  I agree with some others posting here that I wasn't that interested in Anne's children though.  Rainbow Valley and Anne of Ingleside (which you could really tell was written long after the other books in the series) were books I read just because Anne was in them not because I liked them.  Haven't re-read either of them in years!  Rilla on the other hand, wow, that one I really liked.  I'd love to see a movie made based on this book with the utter nonsense that was that movie where Anne and Gilbert end up in France during WWI completely forgotten.  

Edited December 9, 2018 by BlossomCulp

[Aryanna]

16 hours ago, BlossomCulp said:

Green, pink and blue?  I still have that set!  I got them around the same age and that started my lifelong love of LM Montgomery's fiction.  Anne is and will always be best of course! but I like most of her other books as well.  I agree with some others posting here that I wasn't that interested in Anne's children though.  Rainbow Valley and Anne of Ingleside (which you could really tell was written long after the other books in the series) were books I read just because Anne was in them not because I liked them.  Haven't re-read either of them in years!  Rilla on the other hand, wow, that one I really liked.  I'd love to see a movie made based on this book with the utter nonsense that was that movie where Anne and Gilbert end up in France during WWI completely forgotten.  

I had an 8 book boxed set of the paperbacks. I was about college age when I got into Anne. But when I did get into those books (and movies) I jumped in with both feet.

I so disliked the movie with Anne and Gil in WWI that I barely paid attention to it or remember much about it. It was all just so ridiculous to me because as a fervent fan of the books I knew that it should've been Anne's children and not her and Gil. The timeline was so off.

[auntiemel]

5 hours ago, Aryanna said:

I so disliked the movie with Anne and Gil in WWI that I barely paid attention to it or remember much about it. It was all just so ridiculous to me because as a fervent fan of the books I knew that it should've been Anne's children and not her and Gil. The timeline was so off.

I was so excited about that movie when it first came out. It wasn't playing in the states initially, only in Canada. I arranged with a girl I had traded Barenaked Ladies bootlegs with in the past to tape it on her TV and mail me the VHS. It arrived to my mailbox at Pepperdine and I planned a trip home that very weekend to watch it with my mother and sister.

 

Imagine our freaking disappointment.

[Camera One]

I read the first Anne book in high school (which I loved), and the rest I read during college.  It took me forever to get through the series because I would start a book and find it hard to get into, and then put it aside, and after half a year, I would need to start over.  I opened and closed Rilla for at least 2 years before I forced myself to finish it, just for completion sake.

With that WWI movie, I wouldn't mind the timeline change from the books if the story was actually good.  I understand that they had lost the rights to the books, so had to come up with their own story from scratch.  Anne was nothing like her old self and what a waste of bringing the original actors back, just to insert a horrific love triangle. 

[Aryanna]

5 hours ago, auntiemel said:

I was so excited about that movie when it first came out. It wasn't playing in the states initially, only in Canada. I arranged with a girl I had traded Barenaked Ladies bootlegs with in the past to tape it on her TV and mail me the VHS. It arrived to my mailbox at Pepperdine and I planned a trip home that very weekend to watch it with my mother and sister.

 

Imagine our freaking disappointment.

Ooooh Pepperdine. You're a rich chick. I foolishly believed I had a chance to go there but I wasn't smart enough and we didn't have enough money. Pepperdine is where Zoey 101 was shot. It was so pretty. I'm guessing you spent a lot of time working hard and studying instead of having fun hijinks like Zoey and her friends.

 

3 hours ago, Camera One said:

I understand that they had lost the rights to the books, so had to come up with their own story from scratch.  Anne was nothing like her old self and what a waste of bringing the original actors back, just to insert a horrific love triangle. 

I actually don't think it had to do with losing rights. I watched an interview with Kevin Sullivan on youtube (i think) and he never was really impressed with or much liked the Anne books. That's why he started deviating from the books in the 2nd movie. The first movie was pretty faithful and pretty near perfect. The second movie was still great but he borrowed parts from 3 different books and created some new characters. In the WWI movie he went totally off the rails and after that I stopped paying attention. All that to say, he never really had any respect for the material.

[auntiemel]

4 minutes ago, Aryanna said:

Ooooh Pepperdine. You're a rich chick. I foolishly believed I had a chance to go there but I wasn't smart enough and we didn't have enough money. Pepperdine is where Zoey 101 was shot. It was so pretty. I'm guessing you spent a lot of time working hard and studying instead of having fun hijinks like Zoey and her friends.

Not a rich chick. I was on a full tuition academic scholarship and paid for the rest by working 30 hours a week spread over 3 jobs while I was in classes, and full time during the summers.

[Aryanna]

7 minutes ago, auntiemel said:

Not a rich chick. I was on a full tuition academic scholarship and paid for the rest by working 30 hours a week spread over 3 jobs while I was in classes, and full time during the summers.

Wow. That made me tired just reading it. Good for you. I spent too much time goofing off in high school and couldn't get academic scholarships.

[Camera One]

21 minutes ago, Aryanna said:

I actually don't think it had to do with losing rights. I watched an interview with Kevin Sullivan on youtube (i think) and he never was really impressed with or much liked the Anne books. That's why he started deviating from the books in the 2nd movie. The first movie was pretty faithful and pretty near perfect. The second movie was still great but he borrowed parts from 3 different books and created some new characters. In the WWI movie he went totally off the rails and after that I stopped paying attention. All that to say, he never really had any respect for the material.

I agree he didn't have much respect for the material, and I hate watching interviews with him.  However, there was a lawsuit from the heirs of Montgomery, so he was definitely not permitted to use anything from the books for Movie #3.  

Despite his arrogance, I'm surprised he managed to distill the essence from the book in Movie #1 (though I think Colleen Dewhurst probably helped with that).  Even in Movie #2, I thought he did an artful job of taking elements from 3 books and creating a narrative which was still true to Anne's internal struggle in those 3 books.  I'm fine with adaptations not following books exactly, as long as they don't stray from the heart of the material.

I still wish someone would adapt "Anne of the Island" properly... there was no need to hire such an old actor to replace Roy Gardner in the book.  Most of the new characters were clearly inspired by characters from the book... Emmeline Harris was a combination of Little Elizabeth and Paul Irving, for example.  Katherine Brooke, Mrs. Harris, Pauline, the Pringles were all from the books.  It is Montgomery's characters and quotes which made those two movies work.  Without them, the third movie was literally nothing of worth.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Camera One

[Aryanna]

I'm with ya 100% on a proper adaptation of Anne of the Island. As you saw earlier in the thread, that's probably my favorite book after AoGG. Again, I enjoyed the sequel but I wish he hadn't combined 3 books. I didn't care for the changes that you named off like replacing Roy with Morgan etc. Some parts I felt like went by too fast and other parts they lingered too long to the point of boring me. At points in that movie, I'm just sticking with it to see the kiss at the end. I love the kiss on the bridge.

[Camera One]

35 minutes ago, Aryanna said:

I'm with ya 100% on a proper adaptation of Anne of the Island. As you saw earlier in the thread, that's probably my favorite book after AoGG. Again, I enjoyed the sequel but I wish he hadn't combined 3 books. I didn't care for the changes that you named off like replacing Roy with Morgan etc. Some parts I felt like went by too fast and other parts they lingered too long to the point of boring me. At points in that movie, I'm just sticking with it to see the kiss at the end. I love the kiss on the bridge.

Sadly, I don't know if anyone would properly adapt each of the books beyond the first book.  We just saw two adaptations these past 2 years which had no interest in getting to the essence of even the first book, much less the next 3.  It's sadly not very marketable.  

[Aryanna]

8 hours ago, Camera One said:

Sadly, I don't know if anyone would properly adapt each of the books beyond the first book.  We just saw two adaptations these past 2 years which had no interest in getting to the essence of even the first book, much less the next 3.  It's sadly not very marketable.  

I think that the people making these adaptations believe that faithful adaptations of the books are not marketable but I think it's at least as marketable, if not more so, than the adaptations they've thrown at us. If someone does faithful adaptations (and I don't mean word for word adaptations, I know to turn a book into a movie that compromises must be made) you at least have the interest of the fans of the books. And from that maybe you bring in new fans or maybe young fans who haven't read the books yet. That's what happened with the 1985 movie.

But with adaptations like Anne with an E, they're alienating the fans of the books right away and then hoping to bring in new fans by making it darker and edgier. I'm so tired of how everything has to be dark and edgy these days. I haven't watched either Riverdale or Sabrina but those are dark adaptations of fairly innocuous comics. Everything gets the Breaking Bad treatment these days of having to be dark and heavy. But Breaking Bad had it's moments of humor or times when they let you breathe instead of being oppressive all the time. It seems even the makers of Breaking Bad learned the wrong lesson from their own show since Better Call Saul has none of the appeal as Breaking Bad.

Sorry, that went off on a weird tangent that I wasn't expecting.

[Aryanna]

Awwww...c'mon you guys. It's been a few weeks since someone posted here. Don't let this thread die.

[Brn2bwild]

After reading Rilla of Ingleside, I decided to reread Anne of Ingleside.  I always thought Rainbow Valley was my least favorite, but I think AoI might be the worst.  Anne was so treacly, I half expected her to break out in song while little birds danced around her.  She was boring, weak, and insipid throughout nearly the entire book, until suddenly she became interesting by acting like a real mother would (at least some time), feeling burdened by her family and resentful of her spouse.  Then the resentment and burden vanished, as it had all been based on a misunderstanding (of course Gilbert would never, ever think of straying!). 

As for the Blythe children, most of them came off as stuck-up prisses.  Rilla had to carry a cake through town!  Di was fixated on the dirt at Jenny Penny's house and ordered around one of Jenny's cousins.  Nan was horrified at the thought of having to live with a dirty harbor family.  The only story I liked was where Walter walked six miles home from the Parkers.  AoI couldn't even dredge up an interesting story about Shirley.  Did Shirley have a personality at all?

The one intriguing thread through AoI was that Gilbert seemed to be slowly working himself to death.  I would have liked to seen that explored more.  Why didn't he ever try to get a partner?  Was he concerned it would leave him without enough business to afford that big house everyone oohed and ahhed over?  Yet intriguing as it was, we know that any foreshadowing of an early death is for naught, as Gilbert lives to a ripe old age per The Blythes Are Quoted.  

I realize that LM Montgomery wrote this book because she felt pressured and really didn't connect with Anne anymore, but what was stopping her from giving Anne more layers?  Making Anne just a little less perfect, more someone Montgomery recognized?  I can't see how this version of Anne would have satisfied anyone.     

[CherryAmes]

I think someone upthread touched on this as well but one thing that really bothered me about Anne's children was how totally unimaginative she was in the naming of them!  That just wasn't our Anne with an E!

[Brn2bwild]

32 minutes ago, CherryAmes said:

I think someone upthread touched on this as well but one thing that really bothered me about Anne's children was how totally unimaginative she was in the naming of them!  That just wasn't our Anne with an E!

Right. Did Anne really need two children named after her father (Walter, Shirley)?  She could have rolled out at least one romantic name (even Diana did). There should have been one named John or Gilbert at least.

And just to add to my post above: Anne's daughters were The. Worst. at picking new friends.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Brn2bwild

[Camera One]

4 hours ago, Brn2bwild said:

I always thought Rainbow Valley was my least favorite, but I think AoI might be the worst. 

I actually thought the same.  Although I wouldn't be re-reading "Rainbow Valley" again anytime soon, the stories about the children were somehow more interesting than the ones about Anne's children in "Anne of Ingleside".  Maybe because "Rainbow Valley" had more of an overarching story and character arcs?  I'm not sure since it's been so long.  

When I was reading the series initially, I found I enjoyed every second book more... so that would be "Anne of Green Gables", "Anne of the Island", "Anne's House of Dreams" and "Rainbow Valley".  After a re-read, I did appreciate "Anne of Avonlea" and especially "Anne of Windy Poplars" a lot more.  I never bothered to re-read "Anne's House of Dreams" onwards.  

Edited December 23, 2018 by Camera One

[CherryAmes]

What was funny was Anne of Windy Poplars and Anne of Ingleside were both written much later and long after Rilla of Ingleside (the theoretical last book in the series) and of course you can tell if for no other reason than because some characters only appear in those two books, but Anne of Windy Poplars is good.  When the books were just about Anne Montgomery seemed to retain her magic touch, she just couldn't seem to handle Anne's children - at least not the childhood part anyway.

Edited December 23, 2018 by CherryAmes

[Miss Dee]

My favourite part of Rainbow Valley was John Meredith and Rosemary West.

[Aryanna]

On 12/23/2018 at 7:24 AM, CherryAmes said:

What was funny was Anne of Windy Poplars and Anne of Ingleside were both written much later and long after Rilla of Ingleside (the theoretical last book in the series) and of course you can tell if for no other reason than because some characters only appear in those two books, but Anne of Windy Poplars is good.  When the books were just about Anne Montgomery seemed to retain her magic touch, she just couldn't seem to handle Anne's children - at least not the childhood part anyway.

I had forgotten that. You're right. It is so odd to think about where they come in the timeline as opposed to when they were actually written. AotI was published in 1915 and AoWP was published in 1936. More than 20 years later. I would think it would be really hard to get your mind back to where Anne was at the end of AotI after 20 years.

[SmithW6079]

On 11/27/2018 at 4:47 PM, Pepper the Cat said:

I am reading a new book, not by LM Montgomery, but a big fan of hers. It is Marilla of Green Gables and tells the story of Marilla growing up. I am only about 1/4 through but I am enjoying it.

 

On 11/30/2018 at 12:13 AM, Aryanna said:

ooh...that sounds good. Do you think it's available on Kindle? Who's the author?

There's also "Diana of Orchard Slope" by Libbie Hawker, which takes place during "Anne of Green Gables" but from Diana's perspective. It's OK, not great.

[Pepper the Cat]

On 2/1/2019 at 9:48 PM, SmithW6079 said:

There's also "Diana of Orchard Slope" by Libbie Hawker, which takes place during "Anne of Green Gables" but from Diana's perspective. It's OK, not great.

I thought it was interesting to see things from Diana’s perspective. I thought the ending was a little flat, but overall not a bad book

[MMEButterfly]

On 4/30/2017 at 11:12 PM, mbutterfly said:

This is the first time I knew others loved Rilla. I still return to read it on boring winter evenings. And I agree is it Montgomery's finest writing. I love HofD too though. 

I do that, too.

[Harvey]

Love the Anne books, one of the memorable parts for me was when Gilbert's aunt goes to live with the family and she makes Anne miserable. But by embracing her presence, Anne actually manages to make her want to leave the house.

Did anyone read the Emily books on here? I think they are even more fantastic than the awesome Anne books, there is something about Emily's personality and overall story I connected with more.

[Aryanna]

14 hours ago, Harvey said:

Love the Anne books, one of the memorable parts for me was when Gilbert's aunt goes to live with the family and she makes Anne miserable. But by embracing her presence, Anne actually manages to make her want to leave the house.

Did anyone read the Emily books on here? I think they are even more fantastic than the awesome Anne books, there is something about Emily's personality and overall story I connected with more.

I know of them. Haven't read them. What's the premise of them?

[Harvey]

16 minutes ago, Aryanna said:

I know of them. Haven't read them. What's the premise of them?

A young girl becomes an orphan after her father's death, and she is forced to move in with her extended family. From there it's the everyday life of Emily much like the Anne books. But Emily has a very different personality - more ambitious and prideful, less friendly - so the tone of the books is different.

[dogandcat]

I think I'm the only person who likes Rainbow Valley. I found the plights of the Merediths quite touching. Those poor kids were basically raising themselves and it was nice that John and Rosemary found a second chance at love with each other. I know those are ongoing themes in all LMM's stories, but if she wasn't going to write about Anne then I'm glad it was about the Merediths and not Susan the irritating housekeeper. There was already more than enough of her in Rilla.

[lavenderblue9999]

Here is an interesting webpage I found about the timeline in the L.M. Montgomery Anne series books:

https://rebeccathehistorian.tumblr.com/post/74350013738/two-different-timelines#notes

[PennyPlain]

With the exception of Rilla of Ingleside (because - well obviously!)  I totally agree with that timeline!  Anne of Green Gables to my mind was always meant to be set in the 1890s, it's only when you try and make a timeline make sense that suddenly it's set back in the 1870s which really doesn't work with what actually happens in it and the books that immediately follow it.

[lavenderblue9999]

So which is better- if "Rilla of Ingleside" is set in 1914-1918 (world war 1)

or if "Rilla of Ingleside" is set in 1929-1934?

 

Which timeline is better?

[Roseanna]

On 12/3/2018 at 5:58 AM, Aryanna said:

When I read the part where Ruby Gillis died in Anne of the Island, I cried like a little girl. I just had to put the book down and have a good cry.

Some people may call it melodrama but I think it was written so beautifully. I felt like I had grown up with Ruby and that I was losing a friend that I had known for years. And it was so sad when Ruby said she was afraid to die because Heaven wouldn't be what she was used to. She told Anne she was so young and hadn't gotten to live her life and wanted to have what other girls would have by getting married and having children and she would miss out on all of that.

In this older books for youth some character always dies young: in Little Women it was Beth, in Rose in Bloom it was Charlie. That was realistic at the time when many illnesses had no cure, but it was perhaps also a religious lesson: one should live in such a way that one was ready to die in any moment.

Anne of course experienced many losses: her parents had died before she had a chance to get to know them, her beloved Matthew died when she was in her teens, her first-born died after living only a day and her son Walter was killed in the WW1. 

Gilbert was also mortally ill and it was only then Anne realized she loved him.

[Aryanna]

On 3/21/2021 at 4:19 PM, Roseanna said:

In this older books for youth some character always dies young: in Little Women it was Beth, in Rose in Bloom it was Charlie. That was realistic at the time when many illnesses had no cure, but it was perhaps also a religious lesson: one should live in such a way that one was ready to die in any moment.

Anne of course experienced many losses: her parents had died before she had a chance to get to know them, her beloved Matthew died when she was in her teens, her first-born died after living only a day and her son Walter was killed in the WW1. 

Gilbert was also mortally ill and it was only then Anne realized she loved him.

You're right, it was true to the time. And having a character die is also a good way to jerk the tears and have an emotional climax. If it's written well it doesn't matter if it's not a main character. As long as the other characters feel the sentiment.