Review of the book and TV series, by Brenda S. Cox
“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.”—Pride and Prejudice, chapter 6
Mary Bennet
Those of us who love books often feel sorry for Mary Bennet: a bookworm who tries to make her way with second-hand knowledge of the world. We ask, why didn’t Mr. Collins marry Mary? Austen says,
“Mary might have been prevailed on to accept him [Mr. Collins]. She rated his abilities much higher than any of the others; there was a solidity in his reflections which often struck her, and though by no means so clever as herself, she thought that if encouraged to read and improve himself by such an example as hers, he might become a very agreeable companion” (P&P, chapter 22).
However, he marries Charlotte Lucas instead, leaving the Bennet daughters still in desperate need of “good” (financially sound) marriages. Pragmatic Charlotte, of course, was probably a good match for him. She could help him better cope with the world and tone down his excesses. Charlotte had plenty of practice dealing with a pompous, foolish (but kind) father.
But what about Mary? Can we imagine a happy ending for her? Here’s the ending Jane Austen gave her:
“Mary was the only daughter who remained at home; and she was necessarily drawn from the pursuit of accomplishments by Mrs. Bennet’s being quite unable to sit alone. Mary was obliged to mix more with the world, but she could still moralize over every morning visit; and as she was no longer mortified by comparisons between her sisters’ beauty and her own, it was suspected by her father that she submitted to the change without much reluctance.”—P&P, chapter 61
In this Hugh Thomson illustration for Pride and Prejudice, Mr. Collins checks out the Bennet sisters, overlooking Mary, who is reading a book on the right.
Then what happens after her father dies and the Collinses take over Longbourn?
Janice Hadlow, author of The Other Bennet Sister, has given Mary her own story. I have now read the book twice and watched the series twice, loving them every time.
The Book: The Other Bennet Sister
The Other Bennet Sister begins,
“It is a sad fact of life that if a young woman is unlucky enough to come into the world without expectations, she had better do all she can to ensure she is born beautiful. To be poor and handsome is misfortune enough; but to be penniless and plain is a hard fate indeed.” (The TV series adds, “or so my mother taught us.”)
Janice Hadlow, in the book, then takes us deeper into the Bennet family. Mrs. Bennet’s “beauty had been enough to win him, but, as Mr. Bennet soon understood, it was not enough to make him happy.” However, not being “reflective,” Mrs. Bennet still focuses on beauty as the most important quality of a young woman, and cannot forgive Mary for being “plain.”
We get to know Mary as the overlooked Bennet sister, trying various coping strategies. I love all the background and depth we get as Mary grows up, which understandably is skipped in the TV series.
I enjoyed the different strands and surprises woven together in this novel, all of which seem reasonably consistent with Pride and Prejudice. Mrs. Hill at Longbourn proves Mary’s friend. Mary’s eyeglasses exasperate her mother but provide a potential beau. Mr. Collins teaches Mary some Greek and introduces her to Aristotle’s ideas of happiness. The Gardiners take Mary in, include her, and nurture her.
Wordsworth’s poetry, shared by an attractive gentleman, opens Mary up to the world of feelings, beyond facts. The gentleman tells her, “That is the power of poetry. . . . It allows us to imagine ourselves anew, if we will permit it to do so. It reveals to us the hidden wishes of our hearts.”
Mary finds herself, fights for her happiness, and obtains her “room of one’s own” (a little ‘Easter egg’ reference to Virginia Woolf). And she’s not the only one. Even Caroline Bingley, who contributes some nasty wit here and there, has a little change of heart. And Mr. Collins and Charlotte find some happiness in their marriage. The book and its ending are satisfying for all.
The Other Bennet Sister is well-written, compelling, and shows Mary Bennet and other Pride and Prejudice characters in a plausible new light. I highly recommend it. (Bonus: It’s currently available through Kindle Unlimited.)
The Other Bennet Sister, by Janice Hadlow, tells the story of Mary, the overlooked sister.
The TV series: The Other Bennet Sister
The series of ten episodes of The Other Bennet Sister is also a delight. The blurb on Amazon says, “In this fresh Pride & Prejudice spin, overlooked Mary Bennet leaves Meryton behind to pursue love, independence, and self-worth, proving there is more to her than anyone expected”: a good summary. Even having read the book, I found the series intriguing.
For preview photos, see BBC Media Center part one and part two.
It includes some major changes from the novel. For example, in the novel, Mary is absolutely set against becoming a governess. In the series, that job is her way of achieving independence. (Never mind that Jane Fairfax of Emma considers the job of governess akin to slavery.) Independence, of course, is more of a modern goal for women, but today’s audience will appreciate it.
More of the story happens at Pemberley in the series than in the book. I suppose that’s because it seems a more romantic place than Hunsford or Netherfield. Or perhaps because the book takes Mary to one place after another as she tries to find the right place to settle, and it was easier in the film version to focus more on one place. Other events and situations also differ from the novel (I’m trying not to give you too many spoilers here).
I wasn’t really distracted by the few historical inaccuracies. However, the following aspects of the TV series are not proper etiquette of the time:
- Mary sometimes (though not always) walks outside with her hair uncovered, no bonnet.
- She walks around in London unescorted even by a maid, also inappropriate for her gentry background.
- She is sometimes alone with a gentleman when it seems not quite appropriate.
- She sometimes introduces herself to people rather than waiting for a correct introduction (which she could easily have obtained).
- Mr. and Mrs. Collins show up at Pemberley out of the blue, without an invitation, which seems very unlikely.
And, these two oddities:
- One of Mary’s beaux is a nephew of Lady Catherine de Bourgh, but he never seems to connect with or mention Darcy, who must be his cousin.
- Someone receives a surprising inheritance. The book does give an explanation which is semi-plausible, but the TV series gives no explanation.
The Actors
Ella Bruccoleri makes a convincing Mary, growing from the analytical, insecure middle daughter into a young lady learning to be comfortable with herself. Her suitors, played by Dónal Finn and Laurie Davidson, are attractive and interesting. Mr. Collins (Ryan Sampson) seemed a bit off to me at first, more twitchy than Mr. Collins in the movies, and more intelligent, but he grew on me as a character.
Mrs. Bennet (Ruth Jones) is an exaggerated version of the Mrs. Bennet in the novel, especially in her negative attitude toward Mary. But the scene where Mary finally stands up to her is satisfying. (Mary’s final confrontation with someone else—a person who has tried to make choices for her—is also beautifully done.) I found the other Bennet daughters hard to distinguish until later on in the series, but the show isn’t really about them. A very pregnant Lydia (Grace Hogg-Robinson) does have some funny moments.
The Other Bennet Sister series came out this year (2026) and is now available on Britbox and through Prime Video. My recommendation? Read the book AND watch the series, if you can. Both are great entertainment and new perspectives on Mary Bennet. Mary may be “an example to us all” in learning to follow both her mind and her heart. Caroline Bingley says that sarcastically, but there is truth in it.
So Odd . . .
One more thought: Phyllis Ferguson Bottomer, in So Odd a Mixture, suggests that Mary Bennet is on the autistic spectrum, and therefore is misunderstood by, and misunderstands, those around her. I am no expert on any of this, but it appears to me that Janice Hadlow in The Other Bennet Sister is instead assuming Mary has been traumatized by early verbal abuse and neglect. Mary chooses to cope in certain ways—somewhat like Fanny Price in Mansfield Park. Once Mary is in a loving, accepting environment, she is able to heal and flourish. (These approaches are not mutually exclusive, I assume.) I will be reviewing So Odd a Mixture for you soon.
If you have read The Other Bennet Sister or if you have watched (or are watching) the series, what do you think? Please share your thoughts with other readers!
Brenda S. Cox is the author of Fashionable Goodness: Christianity in Jane Austen’s England. She also blogs at Faith, Science, Joy, and Jane Austen.
Wonderful reviews of the book (which I have not read) and the series which I have watched. The series was quite delightful and now you have made me want to read the book. Thank you. ☺️
Thank you – that was an interesting discussion of book and TV series, both of which I intend to avoid. I have been burned too badly lately by lame adaptations of Jane Austen’s work (I couldn’t hold my nose hard enough to watch whatever Netflix is going to do to Pride and Prejudice, even for a glimpse of Rufus Sewell).
I really don’t understand how anyone could read Jane Austen’s own description of Mary, as quoted in your review, and conclude that she is anything other than a conceited, pedantic bore. Any claim that she is downtrodden and in need of nurturing is given the lie by the passage describing her belief that she is in a position to educate and improve Mr Collins. I guess there is something about the way she is depicted in visual media that appeals to women who luxuriate in a fantasy of victimhood.
I wouldn’t object to writers and filmmakers who asked themselves, “What might a character LIKE so-and-so do in these particular circumstances?” and then created original works that didn’t directly reference Austen. There are good writers who have done this. Of course, they then run the risk of their work having to stand on its own merits, rather than enjoying the advantages to be gained by leeching off Jane Austen.
I haven’t read the book but have watched and enjoyed the series. I did not like the series interpretation of Mrs Bennett who is depicted as cruel and selfish beyond measure. Jane Austen’s Mrs Bennett was thoughtless, empty headed and silly but not cruel. Selfish perhaps and no doubt tiresome once she was widowed in her demands for company but I don’t believe she would have held Mary back from a good marriage. Mary ‘s great advantage in the series is her cleverness and steadiness, which her suitors find appealing. In P & P however, she is bookish and charmless which is not akin to cleverness. She lacked insight, and self awareness, rating her musical talent far greater than it was. That Mary might have done for a genteel kind of man unable to get anyone else but she would not have attracted a sensible man at all. In the series she has 3 vying for her attention.
I was disappointed with her sisters’ portrayals and Mr Darcy’s as well.
The nephew of Lady Catherine I assumed to be by marriage ie the son of her husband’s sister.
Don’t ask my opinion of Mary’s clothes! I suppose that was meant to indicate her eccentricity which was an interesting POV.
I agree with you about some of the errors in the TV adaptation – but what irked me most was the unrealistically clean streets of London, absolutely pristine, and in particular Gracechurch Street which was not considered a smart part of town. In Regency times the streets would have been full of horse manure for a start, and probably a lot of other debris of city life.
Thanks for that reminder, Joan – London was beyond filthy in that era.
Hi Brenda. I too have written a review for London Calling about the TV series. I have only just started reading the book. I am finding the book, the first few chapters , setting the scene psychologically for Mary very interesting. As the book continues it seems very structured. It’s almost as though Janice Hadlow is progressing through a shopping list of ideas. Maybe I am being too harsh. Must stick with it.
I loved the TV series though. I was interested in reading your analysis of Mary as autistic. I connected my development of Mary to Mary Wollstonecrafts ideas. The scenes set in the Kake District ( they used Snowdonia in North Wales instead of the real place for some odd reason) as amazing. Both The Kake District and Snowdonia are beautiful places. All the best, Tony
I enjoyed your review, and agreed with almost all of it. The BBC did the book proud (I speak as a Brit and a BBC fan, so might be biased). I think Hadlow HAD to make Mary unpedantic (despite what Austen did) in order to make the book work. Most authors seem to have made her bright – and not pretending. I wrote an article for HISTORIA magazine describing some of the approaches in ‘The curious allure of Mary Bennet.’ However, here, I’ll just say that I’ve often noticed, on social media and at conferences, a wishfulness from some Austen lovers to believe Mary both bright and misunderstood – not because Austen made her so, but thanks to sympathies having been aroused by some adaptations… And one has to allow for the fact that Austen fans are likely to be bookish themselves, and averse to having bookishness – even affected bookishness – made a matter for ridicule.
I loved the series and look forward to reading the book. I particularly loved Richard E Grant as Mr Bennett. However I didn’t care for the portrayal of Mrs Bennett, but that is just me. Mary plays such a small role in P & P, that she was a perfect character to portray and embellish. Well done Janice Hadlow!
Thank you all for your diverse insights! I hope readers will read all the comments before making their own choices. I do agree that Mrs. Bennet was over-the-top, and I didn’t care for her either; she makes us see Mary as abused, not just neglected, which I think was part of the idea here. Like Tony, I appreciate the deeper psychological background in the novel. We’d love to hear from more readers/watchers; what did you like and dislike about these adaptations?
Thanks for your insights and review, Brenda – I have the series on my watch list. You’ve given us lots of thoughts on the good and bad of both series and the book.
I agree entirely with both reviews. I’ve had the book since it first came out, loving its depiction of Mary’s blossoming, as well as the wonderfully detailed accounts of London in that period. The series was good, but no match for the book, and not just because of the anachronisms. I’d recommend watching, then reading.
Thank you so much for your review, Brenda. The miniseries has not been released yet in my part of the world (Hispanic America), but in preparation I have read the book and I found many inconsistencies which prevent me to suspend my disbelief. Beyond transforming Mary Bennet’s personality, there are other details that I found unbelievable and I must add some spoilers to comment.
First of all, the male protagonist is supposedly related to Mrs. Gardiner and for years has frequented her home at Gracechurch St. So, are we supposed to believe he never met either Jane or Lizzy there before? He must have been aware of their existence or was he the one who wrote poems to Jane?
Also, his rival: a nephew of Lady Catherine. But that relationship is never explained. Is he a cousin of Darcy and Col. Fitzwilliam or from he is marriage related, that is from the De Bourgh’s side?
The main story develops 2 years after P&P, and by the end, Anne de Bourgh has just reached the majority of age and marries by special license? Because although we are never told her age in P&P, she must have been closer in age to Darcy, thus maybe older than Lizzy, not younger. And we know not even Darcy could have married by special license, because he was not a lord nor the son or daughter of one (that is one of the big Austen jokes against Mrs. Bennet).
I haven’t checked the novel but in the 1995 BBC series Darcy says in his letter to Elizabeth that the “love affair” between Georgiana and Wickham occurred when she was 15 or 16. I always assumed from that she must be at least 8 or 9 years younger than Darcy. I always wondered if Mrs Darcy had died in childbirth having Georgiana. If this novel takes place 2 years after P&P then she would be around 20 by then assuming the event with Wickham had taken place 2 years before Darcy wrote the letter.
Yes, I wondered how the chap in this novel was related to Lady Catherine and concluded it must be via the De Burgh side.
Well I just read your post again and see that you were referring to Anne de Burgh not Georgiana. Doh! As I can’t edit my reply I must post again and Yes I always assumed Anne was about the same age as Elizabeth. She was 20 in the novel so Anne must have been 19 or just about to turn 19 by this author’s reckoning. I suppose that makes sense as Anne has a companion in the older woman who fusses around her suggesting she is not old enough to be left alone when her mother was in town or out visiting. Or perhaps if you are rich enough you have these chaperones irregardless of age.