Back to Top

Tag Archives: Jane Austen

First, in the interests of encouraging others to waste time online, you can now find me on Twitter, not that I have anything particularly interesting to say there.

Today is the birthday of Isambard Kingdom Brunel, born 1806, possibly England’s greatest engineer, whose masterpieces like the Great Western Railway, the Thames Tunnel and the Clifton Suspension Bridge are still in use today. He was the inventor of the first propellor-driven ocean going iron ship, the SS Great Britain.

It is also–and I hope Megan wasn’t planning to blog about this exceptionally important date–almost the anniversary of another important date, April 10, when, in 1633, bananas first went on sale in London.

You can imagine–or at least, I can–the bemused discussions that took place regarding the fruit. I think we should throw the squishy part away, it’s probably gone bad…Too bloody expensive–quick, they’re not looking, put one in your codpiece…

The banana was first introduced to North American in the 1870s and an early, helpful publication, A Domestic Cyclopaedia of Practical Information stated: Bananas are eaten raw, either alone or cut in slices with sugar and cream, or wine and orange juice. They are also roasted, fried or boiled, and are made into fritters, preserves, and marmalades.

Banana marmalade? Jam? And it still doesn’t explain if you’re meant to consume the whole thing, the inside, or the outside, which I’d think would be the most helpful hint of all.

And now, I have decided to do an about face. I was wrong, I admit it. Jane Austen is a romance writer. I’ve been thinking about this for some time, and here are the points which made me change my mind:

Secret babies. Willoughby (Sense & Sensibility) has a secret baby.

Cowboys. There are many rural settings. Harriet Smith, in Emma, has a beau who owns at least one cow, (we know because it’s Harriet’s favorite). Therefore, Robert Martin is a cowboy. Yeehah. And Knightley himself, a powerful alpha male landowner, has to be a ranch owner. Pam Rosenthal blogged persuasively over at the History Hoydens that most of Knightley’s land has to be enclosed and is therefore grazing land.

Navy Seals. Close and almost a cigar–Persuasion is rife with manly men in uniforms, the cream of the Royal Navy, muscles rippling beneath their skin tight uniforms.

Sex. Who can forget the torrid sex on page 47 of Mansfield Park?

Alpha males. Yes… the glowering simmer of Mr. Darcy (Pride & Prejudice), the sinuous grace of Edward Ferrars (S&S), the riveting description of Mr. Collins as he masterfully handles the English Book of Common Prayer (P&P), Captain Wentworth’s mainmast, and Knightley, see above.

TSTL Heroines. Catherine Morland (Northanger Abbey, with the added bonus of being a TSTL heroine in her nightgown).

Can you think of any other examples? Let us know!


Like Janet, I don’t remember precisely when I started reading Jane Austen. I do know it was early on, because I’m pretty sure I read Pride & Prejudice when my family was living in New Hampshire, and we moved away after sixth grade.

I was lucky enough to be raised in a household filled with books, and with a person–my dad–who loved language and wordplay. And consequently I had a huge vocabulary for my age, as well as an appreciation for Austen’s wry, witty commentary on society and life in general. I specifically loved her portrayal of Mrs. Bennet, whose machinations I saw through because of Austen’s inciteful skewering.

Plus it had a love story! And even though I read the book multiple (MULTIPLE!) times, I was never quite sure it would end up happily ever after. I saw the movie with Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier, and loved that, too.

At the same time, I was reading and re-reading Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights, and in hindsight I can see those three books completely defined me as a writer and a reader. I read other Austens, too, but Pride & Prejudice had–and continues to hold–a special place in my heart.

When I was 15, I dated the captain of the football team (yes–really!) and made him watch that version of Pride & Prejudice with me (and what does it say that he actually watched it?). My husband puts up with me sighing over men in cravats, and promises to read Austen someday himself (he read Emma in college, but his teacher does not appear to have understood Austen’s wit).

Austen’s legacy to me, and to romance writers in general, is that it is indeed possible to write a fantastic, heart-wrenching love story that nonetheless disperses a wider commentary on society, offers clever writing, and can surpass its tag of ‘romance.’

Thanks, Jane.

What do you think Austen’s best legacy is? Is your favorite part the wit, the love story, the characters, the setting or something else?

Megan

I can’t remember my first.

What an embarrassing confession. I know that I had my massive teenage Heyer binge after I read Austen, which must have been for high school, because I remember telling my English teacher that Heyer was just like Austen. Hmmm. But I can’t remember which book it was, although I remember earlier listening to girls complain about having to read P&P and it was so boring. Ha. The rest of us were blessed with Silas Marner, chosen, I’m convinced, because it was the shortest George Eliot–that it’s also complex and difficult apparently wasn’t a problem for a bunch of teenage girls who were really only interested in John, George, Paul and/or Ringo.

I remember watching something on a black and white TV with terrible reception and realizing, despite the blizzard onscreen, that it was the BBC Persuasion (the one from long ago) because I recognized the words. But I really fell in love with Austen after college, when I lived in Bath, and found that you could retrace Ann and Wentworth’s steps through the city.

And she’s been pretty much a constant in my life ever since. Every time I reread one of her books I find something that relates to where I am at that time–falling in love, falling out of love, married, unmarried, being a parent, growing older. Her novels offer consolation, inspiration, and a challenge. I admire Austen’s toughness, her unflinching clarity on family relationships.

Here’s a great poem by Kathe Pollitt, Rereading Jane Austen’s Novels, which I borrowed from a collection of Austen-inspired poems at pemberley.com. It’s bleak and biased, and not altogether accurate–Lizzie Bennett thinks nothing of a five mile hike (in the mud)–but I hope you’ll like it.

This time round, they didn’t seem so comic.
Mama is foolish, dim or dead. Papa’s
a sort of genial, pampered lunatic.
No one thinks of anything but class.

Talk about rural idiocy! Imagine
a life of teas with Mrs. and Miss Bates,
of fancywork and Mr. Elton’s sermons!
No wonder lively girls get into states —

No school! no friends! A man might dash to town
just to have his hair cut in the fashion,
while she can’t walk five miles on her own.
Past twenty, she conceives a modest crush on

some local stuffed shirt in a riding cloak
who’s twice her age and maybe half as bright.
At least he’s got some land and gets a joke —
but will her jokes survive the wedding night?

The happy end ends all. Beneath the blotter
the author slides her page, and shakes her head,
and goes to supper — Sunday’s joint warmed over,
followed by whist, and family prayers, and bed.

And remember, this week we’re holding a contest for Austen’s birthday–so comment often and early!

Like many romances, my passion for Jane Austen had a rough beginning. From third grade or so, I’d been reading my mother’s Georgette Heyer novels and selected traditional Regencies, so you might think I was prepared for Jane, but it didn’t actually work out that way. I read PRIDE & PREJUDICE sometime around age 11 or so after having seen “in the tradition of Jane Austen” on many Regency covers. But I found it hard going.

Perhaps as a pre-teen, I was more able to appreciate the glitz of Regencies featuring members of the haut ton and including exciting events such as duels and elopements. Maybe I needed to mature to properly appreciate Austen’s brilliant characterizations and what she could do with “three or four families in a country village.”

But I also think the period language itself was a stumbling block, between the occasional long, convoluted sentence structures and some of the vocabulary. Of course, I’d already learned many new words from Georgette Heyer, yet with Jane they mattered more. I realized why this past summer, when I read P&P with my own 11 year old. In Heyer’s books, context could help one understand the longer words (e.g. the “diaphanous gown” or the “ubiquitous footman”). However, in Jane Austen, the difficult words are often central to the meaning.

Consider this bit of Darcy dialogue:

“When you told Mrs. Bennet this morning that if you ever resolved on quitting Netherfield you should be gone in five minutes, you meant it to be a sort of panegyric, of compliment to yourself — and yet what is there so very laudable in a precipitance which must leave very necessary business undone, and can be of no real advantage to yourself or any one else?”

To make sense of it for my daughter, I had to explain “panegyric”, “laudable” and “precipitance”. I also found it helped when I read to her aloud with loads of expression.

But she hung in there with me, enjoyed it very much and laughed in all the right places. Now we’re planning some Austen activities over the holidays. We’re going to watch the 1995 P&P together and start reading NORTHANGER ABBEY. I am now looking forward to years of shared Austen obsession. I expect she’ll soon want a Regency gown of her own. : )

Has anyone else tried introducing Jane Austen to friends, family or offspring? How did it work out? Have you ever tried reading Jane aloud?

Comment for a chance to win assorted Austen-related prizes!

Elena
www.elenagreene.com

Today we welcome Marsha Altman, whose book The Darcys and the Bingleys: A Tale of Two Gentlemen’s Marriages to Two Most Devoted Sisters was released this month.

Marsha, big congrats on the book and thanks for coming to visit today! Marsha is offering a signed copy of the book to a lucky winner–your comment or question enters you in the drawing.

We’ve seen a lot of Austen sequels lately. What makes yours stand out?

Every author has their niche, the story they want to tell within the niche of Pride and Prejudice sequels. Some people want to speculate on the sex lives of the married Darcys – all well and good of it’s done well – some want to focus on marrying off the remaining cast, and one person writes cozy mysteries. I value uniqueness very much, which is why I’m attracted to the stories that haven’t been told yet. Georgiana’s gotten married in numerous sequels, Elizabeth and Darcy have a great marriage life but the kid is slow in coming – I wanted to do something about the Bingleys, and about the friendship of Darcy and Bingley.

Also my book has some fight scenes. I like swords. Also guns, wooden legs of chairs, candlesticks – whatever works.



How did you come to write this book?


It started as a short story meant to be between Darcy and Bingley about their pre-wedding jitters and expanded from there. Some people take offense to the idea that Darcy would be experienced upon entering his marriage, which is historically improbable (he is roughly 29 when he marries, depending on when his birthday occurs, which is never mentioned in the book). But Bingley, who’s more sweet and innocent, could be a virgin. So he goes to his best pal for awkward advice. I found the notion amusing. Everything that came after that was just more ideas I had. I told myself I would stop writing when I ran out of things to do with the characters or they died, and I haven’t had it in me to kill any of them yet.

How did you feel about taking on Jane Austen?


I think I could take her. I’m probably taller than her, and I have martial arts experience. On the other hand she was a good dancer and got plenty of exercise, and we’re both pretty sickly, so it might be an even match. I wouldn’t underestimate her.

Now for the serious answer, in terms of “taking on” the length and breadth of her work by attempting to continue it, I don’t worry about it because it simply can’t be done. I’m not one of the foremost novelists in the British language and I wouldn’t be even if I changed my citizenship. I’m trying to have fun with her characters. As to whether she would mine, Miss Austen has posthumously endured her nephew and extended family publishing all of her unfinished writing and personal letters for profit, numerous sequels and adaptations, books analyzing her personal life, and even movies about her starring actresses wearing heavy lipstick. So, if she’s been spinning in her grave, she’s probably tired by now and may well have gotten over it. That or she understands imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, if that phrase existed in the Regency period.

What sort of research did you do, and did you discover anything 
surprising?


I’m a historian by nature. It was my undergraduate degree and I almost went for a PhD in it but got fed up with graduate academia. Therefore I had some initial trouble navigating the Regency fiction waters. This a culture you’re far more familiar with than I am, as I’ve not read much Regency romance outside of Jane Austen and Austen fanfic, but the world as it is portrayed in Regency fiction and Regency romance in conventional, modern publishing seems to be a world contrived from actual history and some assumptions about history based on writers from the period, Austen being the main one. Some people don’t realize that Jane Austen wrote contemporary fiction; I’m writing historical fiction. They’re two different things. I can’t write the story I think she would have written. I can only write a story set in that period of history using characters that resemble hers. I decided to rely on historical accuracy over Regency writing traditions. While certainly not true of everything (especially “Risky” Regencies!), the Regency period is presented in fiction as this very sanitized, rule-bound world. This is the world Jane Austen wrote about. It doesn’t mean it was the world that actually existed during the Regency period.

Roger Sales wrote a very interesting book, Jane Austen and Representations of Regency England. In the 1995 edition he included a postscript about the BBC adaptation and what was altered to match people’s perceptions of what the Regency period was over what it actually was. Earlier in the book, he comments that when Jane Austen’s letters were first published, it was during the Victorian period, and they were edited. Not that there was anything scandalous in there, but references to mundane things like bedbugs and illness were removed for a Victorian audience, that wanted to see Jane Austen in the sanitized world of her fiction.

To do the things I really wanted to do in the story, especially the later half where there’s more drama and violence, I decided to take a more historical route, which means people getting shot and having gruesome surgeries and some people dying. I saw no reason to focus on the mechanics of sex – plenty of more competent romance writers have done that – but I didn’t feel a need to leave out some of the other un-polite parts of Polite Society. It was too limiting to do otherwise. The characters still act appropriately (most of the time), but they encounter the gritty parts of their world whether they like it or not. It’s not very “Austen-esque” but it was a decision on my part and I’ve stuck with it ever since.

You tell the story of two characters who aren’t wholly sympathetic– 
Bingley himself and his sister Caroline. How did your perceptions of 
them change?

First off, Bingley. Despite the fact that he was inspired by Simon Wood’s portrayal of him in the 2005 movie, where his lines were a bit dumber than the lines given to the BBC Bingley (Crispin Bonham-Carter), I had to give Bingley some intelligence, just not in the realm of social intercourse.

Bingley is a foil to Darcy. He’s comfortable in social situations but not a great wit; Darcy is uncomfortable before strangers but always has something intelligent to say. They make a great pair in terms of dialogue, and you could see how one would rely on the other for their perceived deficiencies. Eventually it becomes a very brotherly rivalry, and Bingley actually bests Darcy a few times, though largely at things beyond his control. His father was a brilliant businessman, so I gave Bingley a head for numbers and languages, which plays a bigger role in future books. But he remains lovable and affectionate Bingley, which is key to the Caroline story.

I wanted to work with Miss Bingley because it’s territory very few people have done and I don’t think in any published work. There’s a few scattered fanfics I can name, but mostly in sequels she’s either not there, still scheming, or outright psychotic. While all of Austen’s writing on her would lend itself to that, it was more challenging to do the opposite. Besides, why would she pursue Darcy after he married? She’s too calculating for that. What would she do with her time? She makes some bad decisions, but Bingley is good enough to know she’s in trouble and Darcy is good enough to know he should help. Portraying the Bingley siblings affectionately, after they’ve lived their whole lives together even after the marriage of the eldest sister, has been something I’ve enjoyed doing. I want to make people love these characters. I want to give them a chance to be redeemed.



How did your perceptions of Elizabeth and Darcy change? Are they 
still the ultimate, perfectly matched couple?


It’s a difficult act to make Darcy and Elizabeth partners in every sense of the word without betraying their essential characters. Elizabeth is too self-assured, Darcy is too distant and uneven. Their love transcends it, and they learn the lessons of Pride and Prejudice and don’t repeat them, but upon their marriage they have to learn to lean on each other when both are used to being very independent. I had no interest in writing a story where they fight for any extended period of time, but there are still subtle battles for dominance and understanding in the relationship. Most of it is expressed quickly or unexpressed but still present. In a marriage, as two couples move towards each other physically and emotionally, it’s a bit like a battle even if it isn’t one – there are advances and there are concessions, however minor, that cause the forming of a stable and lasting relationship. The foundation is there but it still takes work to build on it, and even when caught up in other plotlines, Darcy and Elizabeth are still working towards the ultimate companionship a true marriage can bring.

What’s next for you?


Several books in this series. They get increasingly dramatic – there are only so may wedding one-liners you can do – but I hope to maintain the undercurrent of humor to ease the burden of the challenges the characters face. There’s more on the Darcy family history that takes awhile to be fully revealed, the other characters get a bit caught up in some of the political things going on around them without being political themselves, and of course there’s kids. Lots of kids. I really need a good genealogy chart.

Also I write sci-fi, so I’ll probably get back to that when I’m done with the series.

How do you intend to end the series?

They all get eaten by dinosaurs.