Tag Archives: Jane Austen

Becoming Jane–A Rant

Updated on August 10, 2007 by megan

I asked my friend, author, and Pemberley co-founder Myretta Robens what she thought of the movie Becoming Jane and she sent me the following rant (see how I cleverly avoided having to think of fresh writing myself?). But before she starts, let me say we both recognize the importance of seeing something before judging it. She does admit, however, she went in with more of a closed mind than she would’ve liked.

Myretta Speaks:
Wrong, wrong, wrong! Becoming Jane is just wrong. Okay, I realize that for the regular movie-goer, this is probably a nicely filmed, affecting story. But for someone who is deeply and passionately interested in Jane Austen, it’s just wrong! And here’s why:

Location – Ireland is NOT England and the parts used for this film didn’t look at all like the bits of England they purported to be. And…Godmersham by the Sea? What the heck was that? Although Godmersham (one of the homes of Jane’s brother, Edward Austen Knight) is in Kent, and Kent has some coast, Godmersham is, most emphatically, not near it.

Anachronism – Steel nibbed pens. That’s all I’m saying.

Historical inaccuracies – This is a big one. Almost none of this story ever happened. Yes, Jane Austen met and flirted with Tom Lefroy for a couple of weeks in 1795-6. There is nothing to indicate that she ever did most of the other things depicted in the movie. And that last scene was totally impossible. I could go on and on about these inaccuracies in serious detail, but you probably don’t want to hear it.

The gravest problem of all is the implication on which the film is based: That Jane Austen was a frustrated and mediocre writer until a man entered her life, introduced her to Tom Jones and taught her love. And the idea that some of her most sparkling prose was cribbed from other
people’s ideas. The premises of this film denigrate the genius and originality of Jane Austen. I am outraged on her behalf and on behalf of other women writers who are fully capable of telling their own stories.

End of Rant; Beginning of Q&A Period:

Thanks, Myretta! Have you seen the movie? What did you think? And what do you think in general of historical fictionalized accounts of something that may or may not have happened?

Would she sell today?

Updated on July 25, 2007 by Elena Greene

I recently learned about an article in the Guardian which documents an experiment by David Lassman, the director of the Jane Austen Festival in Bath. He sent minimally tweaked versions of Jane’s novels to various publishers, who responded with rejections, most of them not seeming to have recognized the hoax.

This could be very depressing–if professionals in the publishing world are really unfamiliar with Jane Austen’s work or unimpressed by her wit and characterizations.

Instead, I suspect that the readers and editors handling these submissions did recognize Jane’s words but decided the source was a plagiarist (a stupid one!) or a nutjob or both, best handled with a form letter.

Still it leads to some interesting questions.

What if Jane’s books were never published in their own time and the manuscripts had just recently been discovered in some attic? I think they would generate interest as period novels and sources of information on society and women’s lives. Academics would read them. Some would inevitably become Janeites and pass the books onto their friends, reaching at least some level of cult popularity. Anyway, that’s my guess.

So let’s take the alternate reality further. What if Jane somehow time traveled into the present with her manuscripts, so they’d have to be represented to publishers as historical fiction? I’m not sure what would happen then.

If submitted as literary fiction would editors say they have too many romantic elements (plus that gauche HEA)? If submitted as romance, would editors tell Jane they weren’t sexy enough? Or would some clever person recognize that there’s a market for them? If there were not already a Jane phenomenon (as discussed in Janet’s post on I Dream of Darcy), our culture might still be ready for one.

Now–get your rotten tomatoes ready!–if I were that clever person, I have a dreadful suspicion that I would ask Jane to tighten her pacing and alter some of her language. I truly don’t think it makes sense for modern authors to be pedantic in trying to recreate period language. Making things accessible to modern audiences does not automatically equate to dumbing down. It’s not just about money; it’s about getting good stories out to a broader audience.

What do you think? Would Jane sell again today? If you were the acquiring editor, what would you do?

Elena

www.elenagreene.com

Posted in Jane Austen | Tagged Jane Austen | 10 Replies