Customer Reviews

Pride/Prejudice: A Novel of Mr. Darcy, Elizabeth Bennet, and Their Forbidden Lovers

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

To start, I have absolutely nothing against the content of this book. I've been around long enough and read enough fanfiction based on many different series/books/movies spanning many genres. Pretty much nothing can faze me. I'm sure this book is meant to be tongue-in-cheek and a bit shocking. The "Achilles/Patroclus" type of relationship between Darcy and Bingley doesn't squick me. End disclaimer.

But you see, I'm a Pride & Prejudice retelling/reinvention/modern adaptation collector. I've got shelves full of books putting a different spin on P&P. This book won't find a home on those shelves.

My problem lies in the fact that I am simply unable to imagine the characters from Pride & Prejudice acting and speaking this way. Ever. Rather than creating this situation in Pride & Prejudice, the author would have been better off creating original characters in a similar setting. Hell, she pretty much did already and just slapped on the names Fitzwilliam Darcy, Charles Bingley and Elizabeth and Jane Bennet. Yes, they are that OOC.

I simply can't enjoy this book. If I could replace the characters names in my head I'd consider a higher rating. But when "Fitz" Darcy and Charles and Elizabeth are splashed across every page, I just can't take myself there.

Disclaimer: I'm pretty flexible when it comes to P&P adaptions. I'm also not easily offended, and the reviews gave enough hints to the slash content that it didn't come as a surprise (nor, obviously, did it prevent me from purchasing). As long as the characters feel true, I'm willing to suspend disbelief and go along for the ride.

That being said, this book didn't click for me. To start with, I had trouble buying into one of the main premises of the plot - the idea that the widespread reaction of men and women in Regency times to the constraints on interactions with the opposite sex was to engage in relations with their own gender...not so much as a matter of preference, but more as a practical response to the options that were available. Characters are fooling around with each other willy nilly but it's not supposed to affect our view of their virtues (or vices). That was a big leap for me. Gay, straight or bi, a character's approach towards sex - be it hesitant, thoughtful, callous, or casual - says something to us about who they are.

Also, the flaws that Elizabeth believes Darcy possesses when they meet are merely the tip of the iceberg in this version. Instead of imagining Darcy's motivations through Elizabeth's eyes, we get to see and hear confirmation of his arrogance, jealousy, self-absorption and bitterness. (Did I mention that he's also shallow, unprincipled and incredibly selfish?)

The scene where Darcy finds Wickham holed up with Lydia in London and literally 'let's him have it' was the low point for me. For the character's actions to make sense we need to assume (a) Wickham's appalling behavior hasn't affected Darcy's deep seated desire for him; (b) Darcy believes sex can and should be used as punishment and revenge; and (c) Darcy doesn't care what Charles and Elizabeth would think of it.

In the real P&P Elizabeth says of Darcy, ``In essentials, I believe, he is very much what he ever was.' To me, it's the heart of the story, and central to the characterization. As I struggled to find a moral distinction between Wickham and Darcy, I realized that here, that essential goodness seemed to be missing. And that's where the author lost me.

The main problem here isn't the fact that everyone is a natural born porn star ho / bi. No. If your reading this book, you assume that's going to be everpresent. My main issue is the horrible meanness applied to every simgle character--even Jane. Yes. Darcy nightly assaults Bingley-while he's asleep-with force. When Charles objects - Hell no!!! Darcy rape. Also, when he meets Wickham in London after Wickham runs off with the newly whorish Lydia, his main objective is to give him the ride of his life. And does. Hey, it's a book - but it does show that Darcy views sex as a very power-giving thing...

On to the Bennets. Luckily we don't ever learn of, say, Mr. Bennets forays with other men. This would be expected, given that every one in the Regency era did that kind of thing. Whatever. Jane gets annoyed with Lizzy, she has Huuuuge boobs, Lizzy is largely nice towards the beginning. But after she and Darcy marry and she produces an offspring, she is all 'meh' towards her daughter, seems to cringe whenever she looks at her, says that her daughter's wet nurse is more a mother to her than she is. Not even ruefully. Just factually. She doesn't even want kids, because it interupts her ability to have sex with Darcy anytime, anywhere. Towards the end - literally, like ten pages from it, she nonchalantly discusses new found ways to abort unwanted pregnancies with Jane, who is shocked. I just...don't see this from her. Ever.

Two little complaints. One, their is an obvious preference given to Mr. Bingley and Mr Darcy's illicet and inumerable 'nights together.' Fine. Whatever. However, there is no time given to CHarlotte and Lizzy. Just saying. This book was pegged to include her forbidden lovers too. Then Charlottes all, "Oh, I'm married Lizzy. No more!!" while she then procedes to create a 'relationship' with Anne De Bourgh. Just saying. Inconsistancies.

My other minor, nay, MAJOR complaint was this 'Fitz' business. I don't understand it at all. Why not just call him 'William' or 'Will'? It's simply not the way normal or sane people operate.

I bought this becuase I thought it would be a rollicking and whimsical jaunt into the fake lives of fake regency era people. It made me sad instead. Just say no.

Disclaimer: This is not the greatest book ever written, but for what precisely what it's trying to be, which is very original, it's a very good book. And honestly, if you were not expecting orgies and gay stuff when you bought this book, that's your own fault for not reading summaries, reviews, or back covers.

This novel is set in some alternate universe where every man in England who has dialogue is either gay or bisexual. (Thankfully, Mr. Bennet has no active dialogue) Sodomy is still hugely illegal and a hanging crime, so it's all totally secret, as they can't turn one guy in because then EVERYONE would get turned in and there wouldn't be any guys left in England. They're also pretty terrible at keeping this secret, as the women either know or find out and then are not horrified. Seriously, Jane and Elizabeth took it really well. I think the spokesperson for GLAAD would take it slightly less well than Jane Bennet does. Only Elizabeth has some minor qualms, until Charlotte points out they're lesbians, which Elizabeth doesn't think is comparable.

That being the setting, crazy as it is, the book is a lot of fun. The dialogue isn't precisely Regency period but then again we left the Regency period on the front cover. There is actually a lot of use of terms for homosexuality (molly and madge cull) that the author is proficient in using, so some Georgian slang is mixed with some phrases that don't fit in the time.

The perspective is mostly Darcy's, with a few chapters from Elizabeth's perspective. It's really a retelling of Pride and Prejudice from Darcy's perspective, which means some enormous gaps are filled in to the storyline in a more interesting way than just "Darcy went to London and did business while avoiding Miss Bennet." There's a lot of focus on Bingley's character here, and I always feel that Bingley gets shortchanged in these sequels and rewrites, so good for him. He's the one who wants to stop only having sex with men and get married to Jane, whom he loves, and Darcy doesn't want him to, which provides the conflict for the first half of the story, before Darcy realizes he's in love with Elizabeth. Bingley wanting to "grow out of it" (loose rephrasing from the way the book puts it) and move into marriage and kids and a house to put them in while Darcy wanting to stay in an orgiastic bachelorhood is certainly a novel spin on why they abandoned Netherfield so early in the book.

To people who haven't read Pride and Prejudice, this book isn't for you. The author avoids using Austen's text, and skips and then summarizes prolonged encounters and pivotal scenes between Darcy and Elizabeth, as this is Darcy's story and she would rather retell it in post than rewrite it. So there are gaps that are filled in with summaries and quotations from scenes that didn't happen on-screen.

And there's smut. To the author's credit, it isn't prolonged, usually not lasting more than a couple of lines, and heavily interspersed with ordinary dialogue. It is graphic, but it's brief, and at times jarring because you aren't expecting, what with us fanfic authors writing long, somewhat agonizing details leading up to the actual coupling. If I had to choose one or the other I would chose her way for their particular book.

The book has some narrative problems, mostly at the end. It falls apart a bit after the marriages, having left Austen's territory, skipping ahead over the next few years between scenes. There's a plot with Georgiana that seems to be out-of-order with the main plotline and goes nowhere in particular. Anne's plotline is successfully addressed, which was a nice surprise, and a highlight of the ending chapters. Some of the choices made by the characters after marriage are ... well, I think Harvey Milk would be less progressive than these people in this situation, but if you've made it that far into the book, you're not going to drop it at the end.

My one HUGE problem with this book is referring to Darcy as "Fitz." Everyone does this and it is irritating. I never got used to it, as I hoped I would. Darcy does have a mouthful of a name (Fitzwilliam), which no one ever refers to him as in the actual Pride and Prejudice, not even his closest friends, who all call him Darcy. Other authors have had him referred to as Fitzwilliam, William, or simply Darcy, even when Elizabeth is speaking to him as his wife. This is the only "Fitz" I've seen. Future authors take notes: I don't recommend this choice.

In the slew of rewrites and sequels on the market, at least three of which I am personally responsible for, I award a lot of points for originality, probably more than I should. So here's to you, Miss Herendeen, for doing someone no one else is done and I don't think anyone else would attempt to do. I raise a glass in toast to that.

I absolutely adored Pride/Prejudice. It was very Austenesque but with delightful erotic underpinnings. It was quite funny and paid reverential homage to JA's clever style. The sex of all flavors was hot, hot, hot - an excellent blend of just a soupçon of description mixed with wonderful naughty witticisms and humorous epigrams. As an example from page two: "He paid his forfeit with an alacrity bordering dangerously on enthusiasm." If Jane Austen had ever written an explicit scene, could she have said it better?

But let's get to the meat (pun intended) of what I really want to say. Many have written reviews that express horror that Pride/Prejudice's Darcy is portrayed as bisexual. Within P & P variations it seems to be easily accepted that he might be a werewolf, a vampire, a dragon, a ghost or a zombie hunter - but love a man - oh my, how gross! . I think the case for Darcy and Bingley being lovers, and that D has a past with Wickham as well as others of both sexes, plausible and much more probable than most Pride and Prejudice what-ifs.

Herendeen uses Austen's own words to make her case. Because of her thorough knowledge of the original source, I found no difficulty buying her premise. Darcy and Bingley are the only example of strong male friendship in all of Austen. Darcy is clearly written by Austen as a controlling mentor for his `particular' pal. In many ways they are an unlikely pair as best friends. They are not of the same class, they were not school chums and there is an age difference - not to mention Bingley has problematic sisters Darcy must endure in canon. JA Fan Fiction authors have often delved into why Darcy is so bent (pun intended) on protecting Bingley from Miss Bennet when he is not as diligent in protecting himself. Herendeen's premise for that inconsistency is very logical.

There is not a great deal of interaction Austen allows us to observe between these friends, but what there is (particularly at Netherfield) is delightfully enigmatic. Their dialogue could be taken as a cryptic sort of familiarity that could easily pass for the shorthand of lovers - that are in the midst of a major disagreement. I will forever have images from P/P when I reread P & P and hear Charles speak of his friend in such an intimate taunting way. Jane Austen has him deliver in the presence of both Elizabeth and his sisters the following lovely veiled jab at Darcy:

"By all means," cried Bingley; "let us hear all the particulars, not forgetting their comparative height and size; for that will have more weight in the argument, Miss Bennet, than you may be aware of. I assure you that, if Darcy were not such a great tall fellow, in comparison with myself, I should not pay him half so much deference. I declare I do not know a more awful object than Darcy, on particular occasions, and in particular places; at his own house especially, and of a Sunday evening, when he has nothing to do."

The interplay between B & D comes off slightly petulant in the original text, but it has a crude similarity to the sparring that is simultaneously happening between Darcy and Elizabeth. The E & D exchanges have all the earmarks of flirting and are filled with hints of attraction. Of course we find out before poor Darcy that was not Lizzy's intent, but one can easily see why he might have gotten a different impression - or could he have been correct to make such an inference? P & P devotees will be debating what exactly is happening in these tantalizing scenes for at least another 200 years.

I found Ann Herendeen's research impeccable. The Regency period was rampant with all sorts of outrageous behavior among the best upper sets. The Molly Clubs she referenced existed and St. James Park where P/P has Darcy meet Bingley was indeed a Regency cruising spot.

Sexual relationships with unmarried women from one's own circle had many more possible lasting consequences than one with a male friend. The practice of cloistering upper class males in schools during a period when their hormones were raging, I am certain resulted in much experimentation. Another factor to consider about Darcy and Bingley is that neither was encumbered by parents or guardians looking over their shoulders - just powerless females.

Marriage was changing during the time of P & P. It was still mainly a mechanism for passing on property for those at the top of society - hence all the talk of connections and family at Hunsford, but the period was also embracing the new ideas of both the Romantic Age and capitalism. Austen has several different takes on marriage within her novels. Pride and Prejudice is the one that most clearly introduces the idea of strong attraction and possibly even love as a basis for marriage. Pride/Prejudice seems aware that we live in an age where once again marriage is changing. Love is still very important in our time, but the definition of who can marry is what is under contention. In a humorous but frank manner Herendeen weighs in on that debate, and I appreciated her effort.

That Austen's Darcy sees marriage as a necessity to produce an heir, but does not seem to be in any hurry to indulge is a logical conclusion, when reading canon. P/P runs with that basic premise to tell the tale of what happens when a man, content with his status quo and a plan for his future, gets hit by the witty impertinence and his physical attraction for a very inconvenient woman. This Fitz had been planning to wait until the very last minute possible and marry the aging spinster sister of his lover and `get' her with child. Bingley on the other hand is looking for a loving marriage to go along with an estate as part of his graduation into the realm of true manhood. He thinks he and Fitz are, perhaps, getting too old for their revels and should put away childish things. For all those who want a cruel end for Caroline Bingley, you should love what this Darcy has in mind for her. When I read about his long term plans for Caro, I wondered whether he might actually hate women - rather than believing the Greek philosophy rationalization he had bought into to cover his lustful enjoyment. Of course, first I laughed.

And now for a few of my favorite things as well as a few wishes for this enjoyable novel.

I loved this variations take on both Jane Bennet and Charles Bingley. Austen had Elizabeth tell us as she speaks to her sister: "You never see a fault in anybody. All the world are good and agreeable in your eyes. I never heard you speak ill of a human being in my life." P/P's Jane truly was as she was originally depicted. Of course there is that one itsy bitsy teeny tiny grudge Herendeen's Miss Bennet is forced to overcome before the end of the story. I adored that twist. This Bingley is much stronger than either JA or most fanfics depict him - and he has much more to lose than his canon counterpart when he stands up to `the great tall fellow.'

P/P's Georgiana was a delight. We glimpse her growing up and overcoming her betrayal by Wickham. In the end she handles that character's perfidy much better than her brother did. The scene where Georgiana helps Bingley write a poem to Jane is one of the funniest I have ever read. I loved how in the process of becoming friends, G & B both realize what a disaster it would be if they married each other - which was part of the domineering Fitz's master plan.

Elizabeth and Darcy are simultaneously electric and hilarious in their interaction. You actually can see the sparks fly between these two. I loved their wedding night with Lizzy preparing to tutor a Darcy she thinks has no experience with women while simultaneously falling prey to maidenly jitters for what is to happen. And then there is the next morning - especially their discussion about the etymological origins of certain terms. Herendeen wrote one of the most testosterone laden Darcys I have ever encountered, and in this Elizabeth he has truly met his match.

P/P's Lydia might actually figure out how to enjoy marriage to Wickham and keep him in line.

Here are few things I wished had happened:

I would have liked there to be more of the relationship between Elizabeth and Charlotte - both physical interaction as well as philosophical discussions. Their different takes on life and love are very important to my enjoyment of Pride and Prejudice but I feel are not so well developed in Pride/Prejudice.

Finally, I really would have enjoyed at least one scene where Fitz caught. He was obviously an accomplished ballplayer and hardly ungenerous with his skill - several times we saw how proficient he was orally. I guess it comes down to the fact that he was known in his league as an extraordinarily gifted pitcher.

Wow. I picked up Pride/Prejudice expecting a racy and shallow summer read -- along the lines of Linda Berdoll's Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife: Pride and Prejudice Continues. Be warned -- Ann Herendeen writes Harlequin Blaze-caliber homoeroticism (hardcore, including c-words). If you're put off by the first scene of the book, read no further! But if you find yourself entertained or strangely compelled (if a little embarrassed) to see where these characters are going? Read on. This might be the Mr. Darcy that you've been looking for.

The sex in this book initially struck me as gratuitous. But that's the story: the gratuitous indulgence of young lovers who can't get enough. They resort to doing it when they don't know what else to do. They communicate with each other through sex -- about sex -- and during sex. It's too much, but isn't that the way it is? Herendeen connects this, quite methodically, to Austen's original plot: Darcy's initial impression of Elizabeth, Bingley's growing affection for Jane Bennett - these core mysteries of the story are graphically, but poignantly, illuminated in the light of Darcy's most intimate desires and conflicts. This is not sexed-up Austen exclusively for the sake of sex (although believe me, the titillation factor is high). Like few other books, Pride/Prejudice delves into some compelling ideas that lend a new -- and a credible -- dimension to the motives and characters of Bingley, Darcy, Elizabeth and Jane. Although the story wanders (too often) back into the bedroom, it always returns, with workmanlike fidelity to the original, to move the plot forward as we know it must. The prose is solid and refreshingly unaffected, and the plot and character development -- echoing Austen's -- proceed at a satisfying pace. Perhaps it was my own bias, but I did like Pride/Prejudice best when it stays in the world of the women. Jane and Elizabeth's candid conversation about the men together - not just curious giggling, not quite shame - rings especially true.

Yes, a Pride & Prejudice spiced with gay sex romps is shocking. But if Seth Grahame-Smith can introduce zombies to Jane Austen -- adding novelty but offering no real insight on the original -- why not? In reality, the prevailing ethic of the era didn't assume everyone was virginal: Modesty was valued because chastity is a challenge. Why was it a scandal for an unmarried man and women to be uncapheroned in a closed carriage? The answer is more pragmatic than idealistic: if people were alone together, they were probably doing it. And the truth behind all the drama and tension surrounding marriage -- even though Austen only implies it -- is always in some sense sexual. In that vein, the struggles of these characters reminded me of Sarah Dunant's The Birth of Venus: A Novel: Herendeen looks honestly at the intimate puzzle of arranged marriage and love beyond the boundaries of sexual orientation. By breaking out of the most profound literary motive - the single-minded pursuit of marriage to the opposite sex - she's free to tell truly human stories about the complexity and conflict of passion.

As an avid Jane Austen fan, a reader and collector of spin-offs and sequels, and an English teacher, I'm pretty open to creative license when it comes to modern re-imaginings of Austen's work. I purchased this book in a book store, so had no opportunity to see reviews other than what was on the back cover, which kind of led me to believe this would be a bit juicier (read: gossipy) than others I've read.

That being said, the first chapter of this book was an eye-opener. And then some. I was not prepared for gay porn. But, I thought, ok...it's just the first chapter. Maybe it improves. I always tell my students to give a book 100 pages before moving on. I thought the storyline might be interesting, and I'm not a prude.

Personally, after only reading the first several chapters while attempting to eat lunch, I feel like I need a shower, a purging, and a retinal scraping to get some of the imagery out of my head. I had to go fold laundry and clean the bathrooms to feel somewhat back in a normal world again.

Pictureless porn aside, none of the characterization in this book has any connectivity to the originals, and the almost constant walking erections, both male and female, which seem to pop up upon the mere sight of another individual, male or female, are so unrealistic as to make the whole premise ludicrous.

I'm not even going to discuss plot, which is so loosely Austen-based as to make me imagine that poor Jane not merely turning in her grave, but spinning like a rotisserie hooked up to a fan motor.

I never return books I've bought, but this one is going back.

I feel awful that I actually purchased this book. Being a great admirer of the Jane Austen collection and a gay man, I was insulted on both levels that someone had the nerve to even attempt this - if possible, I would recommend banning it simply becuase of the utter poor quality of everything about it - writing, plot, writing, interest, writing...could I say that anymore. I wanted to rate this anything minus, but we obviously don't have that choice. It is shame on you for doing this

You have to have an open mind to read Pride/Prejudice as it is a guilty pleasure. It is strangely compelling. I had the same reaction to Pride/Prejudice as I did reading Stephanie Meyer's Twilight series. I knew I shouldn't like it (Twilight = emo heroine with no plans for future except getting bit and turned into a vampire by her possessive/stalker boyfriend), but I found myself devouring it over and over again. It's the same with Pride/Prejudice. I knew I shouldn't like it, but I found myself constantly turning the pages wondering what was coming next. Just like Twilight, I had a hard time pinning down why I couldn't stop reading Pride/Prejudice, despite the flaws, but I'm going to try and do my best.

What I loved:

1. The concept appeared more original compared to other Pride and Prejudice fan adaptations that I've read in the past. Darcy is bi-sexual and in a very close relationship with Charles Bingley. Elizabeth shares a passionate affair with Charlotte Lucas before Charlotte marries Mr. Collins.

2. Jane Bennett. I loved how in Pride/Prejudice she's not as passive as she is in the original. She has a back bone and Pride/Prejudice is worth buying just to see Jane put Elizabeth and Darcy in their place. I also like that the author fleshed out the reasons why Jane totally believed in Charles and their relationship even against all the odds.

3. Speaking of stronger characters. Charles Bingley and Georgiana Darcy are also fleshed out very well in this story. I found myself cheering for them.

What I thought could've been improved:

1. Despite the awesome concept, in the first half of Pride/Prejudice the narrative drags. While Pride/Prejudice has pretty much the same timeline as Ms. Austen's awesome work, the author of Pride/Prejudice skips over scenes in the original. The characters only think or talk about them later. This made the narrative choppy and boring at first. I actually nodded off a couple times while reading the first half of Pride/Prejudice.

2. I can buy the concept of Elizabeth and Darcy having same-sex partners, what I couldn't get was how they and the other characters were so blasé about it. There was no worry about the ramifications of the actions. Everyone seemed too accepting of these relationships, especially in this time period. I found it impossible to suspend disbelief.

3. Once Darcy and Elizabeth marry (no spoiler there, right?), I had serious issues that some of the outside relationships continue (slight spoiler, sorry, at least I'm not telling you which one). It really annoyed me and devalued the romance for me and the strength of Darcy and Elizabeth's relationship.

Overall: Pride/Prejudice was a compelling idea. I was intrigued with how the author took two of the most well known characters in fiction and made them her own

COURTESY OF LYNETTE'S TWO CENTS REVIEWS

I am a big fan of 'what if' scenarios in the world of established canons, and the thought of turning "Pride & Prejudice" on its ear in this way was very appealing to me; when I saw that my library offered this as a Kindle loan through Amazon, I jumped at the chance.

However...

My first disappointment was that the sex scenes... well, let's just say I am not a fan of describing the mechanics, but would rather read about the sensations evoked (call that erotica if you will). The former is what happens here. Some of the terminology made me chuckle; some rather turned me off.

The second (and to my mind larger) disappointment was the utter lack of exploration of Elizabeth and Charlotte's 'forbidden' love. There are, if I recall correctly, only two direct references to Elizabeth getting her gown green before the scene fades to black (though there are many more allusions to the same). There are more paragraphs dedicated to their talking about the relationship (mostly after Charlotte's gone off to become Mrs Collins) than there are to their actual liaisons. Not a very good thing when the cover seems to dangle the promise of equal time.

**Possible Spoilers Below**

Cons:

I would agree with some of the opinions here on out-of-character behaviour (Darcy's non-consensual nighttime assignation with Bingley (and with Wickham as well) is prominent and at the top of the list). I did not at all care for "Fitz", though as a first name, it is, granted, a bit awkward to shorten.

I really could have done without the insertion of the Brotherhood of Philander (which bothered me more when I realized it was from the author's previous novel). Darcy having a secret relationship with Bingley (a la the ancient Greeks), a man he loved, was believable to an extent; Darcy belonging to a secret society which seems to exist for the purpose of the members to essentially go all orgiastic on each other... stretched the premise's believability beyond the breaking point. A same-sex relationship between Darcy and Bingley I can be sold on. Not so much re: frivolous, casual ruts.

In researching the Regency period myself (prior to and independent from reading this novel), I have one other small (and probably unique) criticism: the class of people from which these characters would have been did not use contractions when speaking, except in case of possessive. They thought of it as 'vulgar'; only the lower classes used contractions. Yes, it tends to make for slightly stilted conversation to our modern ear, but to me, the presence of "didn't" and "wasn't" took me out of the story on more than one occasion.

Pros:

The more philosophical discussions I actually truly liked; the first to come to mind is the justification in Darcy's mind (for his relationship with Bingley) in the classical Greek mentor-youth relationship, and I really can see that dynamic there. Getting into the head of Jane and of Georgianna, and even that of Anne de Bourgh, proved quite the interesting character studies. And Wickham getting exactly what he deserved in Lydia as more of his equal than previously portrayed ('meeting his match') was quite satisfying.

I was also quite amused by the subtle hat-tips to the BBC P&P miniseries, most notably the reference to Mozart's Voi Che Sapete, because this tune is Lizzie's signature (albeit with different words) and is what plays when Darcy thinks of her strolling the dark halls of Pemberley in that production. I'm also pretty sure that calling the nursemaid 'Bridget' (as in 'Jones', as in 'modern P&P adaptation') was not an accident, either.