Pages

Sunday, 22 March 2026

Why I stopped watching The Other Bennet Sister

With apologies to Aled, my former classmate who’s in the cast.  


When I first heard there was going to be a TV adaptation of The Other Bennet Sister, a Pride and Prejudice spin-off, I already had apprehensions: it’s about Mary, the most boring of the Bennet sisters. This is how Jane Austen describes her: 

“… After a song or two, and before [Elizabeth] could reply to the entreaties of several that she would sing again, she was eagerly succeeded at the instrument by her sister Mary, who having, in consequence of being the only plain one in the family, worked hard for knowledge and accomplishments, was always impatient for display.

Mary had neither genius nor taste; and though vanity had given her application, it had given her likewise a pedantic air and conceited manner, which would have injured a higher degree of excellence than she had reached. Elizabeth, easy and unaffected, had been listened to with much more pleasure, though not playing half so well…” (ch.6) 

But Janice Hadlow wrote a novel focusing on her, so I thought maybe something interesting could be done about the character of Mary: she’s the only plain one in the family; she’s the odd one out between two pairs of sisters (Jane – Elizabeth and Kitty – Lydia). 

In the end, I only watched 2 (out of 10 episodes). The Other Bennet Sister, I think, has 3 main problems. 

First of all, in Pride and Prejudice, Mary’s not only plain and boring, but also conceited, priggish, and rather oblivious; in the series The Other Bennet Sister (I haven’t read the book), Mary is bookish, socially awkward, more likeable than Jane Austen’s character, and constantly bullied by her own family. At the beginning, it feels as though they want to turn her into Fanny Price. Almost everyone in the series—at least in the first 2 episodes—is mean-spirited: everyone makes fun of Mary; Mrs Bennet treats her cruelly and constantly puts her down; Caroline Bingley mocks her before others, in a way that a genteel woman would not; Charlotte Lucas, now her friend instead of Elizabeth’s, becomes two-faced and “steals” Mr Collins behind her back; even Elizabeth, who in Jane Austen’s novel only looks at Mr Bennet when Mary embarrasses herself in public, now insensitively says to Mr Bennet “Papa, this has gone too far, and if you don’t step in, I will” when Mary can see her. All these characters are changed beyond recognition. Even if we pretend that The Other Bennet Sister is its own universe and separate from Pride and Prejudice—ignoring that the series passes over most plot points of Jane Austen’s novel, expecting the audience to be familiar with the story—the changes are terrible because they make the characters one-dimensional and extremely unpleasant. Elizabeth, described several times as quick-witted, here displays no wit. 

As the characters are all one-dimensional—Mrs Bennet especially is not only annoying but cruel and obnoxious—the series feels one-note. Perhaps it’s going to improve from the third episode, but I’m not interested enough to continue. 

Not only so, the series constantly gets on my nerves as it’s written by people—native speakers—who don’t know proper English. The Other Bennet Sister portrays Mary Bennet as an awkward, pedantic girl who corrects a guy during a dance for saying “less” when he should say “fewer”, and yet Mary says “My mother is concerned for my sisters and I.” These errors take me out of the story. 

(I’m not even going to talk about the racial aspect of the casting). 

Now some of you might say I should not dismiss a whole series after watching only 1/5 of it and perhaps it would get better, but I’m going to say that the first 2 episodes (at least) are very crude and very silly. Not a fan. 

11 comments:

  1. Agreed, you can't make Mary Bennet sympathetic without making the other characters less sympathetic. I watched a little snippet, it looked like they were beating the audience over the head with the message.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps, but I wonder if it's necessary to make Elizabeth insensitive and cruel, and turn Mrs Bennet into a villain.
      Also the BBC is heavily promoting the series so I've been seeing more clips all over Facebook, and they seem to portray Mary like someone on the spectrum. But at the same time, they also give her some comebacks. Hello, Mary is not meant to be the witty one, that's Elizabeth!
      But then the characters in this series don't seem to have much to do with Pride and Prejudice.

      Delete
    2. The writers of Mary Bennet fan fiction seem to think it's necessary. Like in "Mary B", Elizabeth is a horrible person. It's a different story with a cast of characters with the same names.

      Delete
    3. I have always avoided Austen fanfic, as I don't see the point.

      Delete
  2. If you watch it through to the end Lizzie is not unkind. Janice Hadlow’s book is better though and an interesting reimagining of Austen’s classic from the point of view of a minor character. The TV series deviates greatly from Hadlow’s book.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh, I think you misread that moment with Lizzie quite profoundly. It seemed to me like a sister who was looking to protect her younger sister and had clocked what was going on. I think she was even on to what Charlotte was about. After all, Lizzie seemed to like the idea of Mary and Mr.Collins. She probably knew what this would do for Mary's chances

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't misread that.
      There is a huge difference between the way Elizabeth handles it in Pride and Prejudice and in the series The Other Bennet Sister. What you say is true for Austen's book. In the spin-off series, the thing she says, even if that's her intention, is not something Austen's Elizabeth would say.

      Delete
  4. I'm browsing around for opinions now because the first two episodes have been a disappointment after largely enjoying the book. In Hadlow's book, Mary's moments of priggishness are recast as products of how she coped with not fitting in with her family. Her mom does devalue her (as her value system is entirely based on looks and marriageability), kitty does ridicule her, her father only has eyes for Lizzie--but in the book it's more about how she is fundamentally lonely because Lydia claimed Kitty and Jane and Lizzie have each other and her parents don't fundamentally care about her. In short, she feels that no one LIKES her.

    The main draw of Fordyce is that he espouses a worldview completely different from her mother's, in saying that the value of a woman is NOT on her looks--and so Hadlow's book explains how she gets more and more priggish more because of a lack of positive role models or anyone who can like her for herself (other than Hill). So it's not like Hadlow completely remade her, more like she created the possibility to see her previous self as a product of an unhappy environment--which then allows for the possibility of her transformation once she's out of that environment.

    I'm also really upset with how Charlotte is being portrayed on the show--so much more complex in the book. That's what got me googling around. In the show she's just unlikeable.

    And the Lizzie piano moment. No, you didn't misread the portrayal in the show, which did try to be in keeping with the book. In Hadlow's rendition, at this point Lizzie is for the first time ever seeing that outsiders judge her for her family. Hitherto she's always been liked for herself, witty and clever, and that was enough, so now Lizzie is shook. So she reacts during the party by trying to clamp down on all the embarrassing family members. And in the book, she doesn't go to apologize to Mary right away. For Mary, it's a very painful moment because Lizzie had been her favorite sister--the one she did still have some hopeful sense that maybe Lizzie would like her. (Lizzie doesn't apologize until a year or so later.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. I watched half the series (haven't read the book) and wanted to see if everyone feels like I do.

    I enjoy Austen fanfiction; I have no demands that an adaptation doggedly stick to every original characterisation -- except when it comes to the two main character/characters. I can see most others warped and worked upon, but the essence of who the main duo are is non-negotiable. They're like wind-up toys, whose nature is set but their route changes based on the circumstances writers put them into. Change their basic nature and its no longer a spin-off but a vague homage to a loose set of plot points. For example, Bridget Jones Diary or Clueless rip from the Austen source material plot, but never claim to be a spin-off.

    OBS feels like a totally rewritten fanfiction that's trying to claim the place of (or being advertised as) a sequel. I don't love the Lizzy in OBS, but I understand if they've smothered her so she's not a distraction (a mistake in my opinion but fine). She does improve towards Mary in later episodes at Pemberley, but where her nature really detours is in her reaction to the other characters and their new extremes.

    That's what's killing me in OBS: the extreme side characters (if you can call the Bennets such). I'm generally fine with wildly different minor characters in an adaptation -- as long as their actions are true to the situation and time they've been placed in. There is no way the Lizzy we know would just stand there and let Mrs Bennet or Lydia talk to Mary like they do at Pemberley in OBS. In P&P, she publically chastises her mother multiple times for being socially crass -- for alluding to a wedding in public. So the idea she would stand silent as Mary is openly, cruelly bullied by her mother and sister is just ridiculous. This Lizzy is like a scooped out pumpkin of a character; the same goes for Jane, who could be literally any woman on the planet.

    Mrs Bennet is unforgivable. If your take on a P&P adaptation is 'what if Mrs Bennet was a bully and outright cruel, rather than misguided and simple-minded', fine -- sell it like that. This is not Austen's Mrs Bennet, and her actions would be soundly, roundly quashed by the other characters if they were acting their normal selves in a 'sequel'. Mrs Bennet is the reason I won't be watching any more. She's a pantomime villain.

    The same goes for Caroline Bingley. As you mentioned, she's acting wholly anachronistically, like some modernised fanfic mean girl misplaced in a Georgian drawing room. She'd never approach Mary - MARY - and say what she does, either in private or company. Nor would Caroline demand to take the role of a hostess for a man she has no relationship with and move his place settings around. And if we're going to make her so wholly out-of-era mean girl, why aren't the other characters reacting to her nastiness? Why doesn't Mr Ryder, who doesn't want to marry in the manner society demands, point out that her hostessing for him is wildly inappropriate?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Why change Charlotte into a confidante then make her out to be a back-stabbing meanie? Why have an entire dining room of strangers chant and clap to force Mary to sing when we quite literally have an Austen scene in Emma demonstrating how a character is implored to sing -- its done with well-meaning entreaties but even that is reprimanded by Mr Knightley. It's all anachronistic nonsense that reads like a teenager wrote it. And you know what? I'm fine with that in fanfiction. Teenagers should be writing this stuff! But none of this should be a BBC legitimised sequel.

      One of the new characters, Mr Ryder, basically says 'no one in this society says what they mean', which is LAUGHABLE given everyone absolutely does! Caroline, Lydia and Mrs Bennet are open bitches. Mrs Gardiner is a woke queen, Mary's friend Anne speaks like a modern day young woman who's dating too. The potential suitors are pretty open in their awareness, if not their admiration too. Why bother keeping a setting and era famous for its social considerations and allusive language if you're going to make everyone act like they're from 2020? All the subtlety Jane Austen is renowned for, all the complex social intricacies, have been violated and stripped and the result presented as some sort of triumph.

      Everyone above has already pointed out the flaws in Mary's characterisation far better than I could, but I just want to point out one thing: her wardrobe. Why, dear god why, can she not be allowed to blossom and enjoy the choice of her own clothes, without being made to look a laughing stock? She's disinterested in fashion, she's not blind. She's lived in a household with her sisters and Mrs Bennet, has been brought up with the same aesthetic. Why does 'not opting for drab colours' mean choosing clearly clashing, poorly trimmed, overly embellished, ugly-as-sin dresses? It actually makes me as an audience member feel complicit in her mockery and bullying, because they've made her dresses so irredeemably bad that you can't help but wince.

      All of this because Mary's said to not care about her appearance. Lizzy shows no interest in horse riding, but we don't then have a scene of her trying to ride a horse backwards. Disinterest is not total removal from all understanding of the basic concept, and it makes Mary into an idiot worthy of raised brows and snide comments. I also don't understand why the highly aware, kind Mrs Gardiner of OBS wouldn't easily help Mary navigate her choices into something actually flattering, rather than just letting her design an outfit that's abominably bad. Seeing her outfits has been of the worst parts of the show -- like the writers themselves enjoy being cruel to Mary. You know what Caroline Bingley would have relentlessly, actually commented on? Those hideous dresses.

      Rant over. Would love to know if anyone agrees.

      Delete

Be not afraid, gentle readers! Share your thoughts!
(Make sure to save your text before hitting publish, in case your comment gets buried in the attic, never to be seen again).