Posted by: rearadmiral | June 17, 2019

6/17 Week in review

Story: Northanger Abbey
Contemporary Story: Wanda receives mysterious letters.

Posted by: rearadmiral | June 9, 2019

6/9 Week in review……

“If they had uncles enough to fill ALL Cheapside,” cried Bingley, “it would not make them one jot less agreeable.” -P&P Chapter eight…perhaps

The John Knightleys

When in London…

Posted by: rearadmiral | June 2, 2019

6/2 Week in review

Found via JASNA-North TX:

Austentatious Library:

Raise your hand if you know these timeless quotes by heart too 😉
-Miss Laurie

#Persuasion #JaneAusten #AnneElliot #FrederickWentworth

London! Quote found via JASNA-VT:
Letter No. 3.
August 23, 1796
Jane (in Cork Street, London) to Cassandra (Steventon? not noted)
Boston Public Library (since 1966)
There has been a gap of seven months since Letter no. 2 (of January 1796), but Letter 3 finds Jane in London, likely staying at at the home of Benjamin Langlois in Cork Street (see below) and she hurriedly pens a quick letter to Cassandra. She begins with her oft-quoted
“Here I am once more in this Scene of Dissipation & vice, and I begin already to find my Morals corrupted.”
Photo choices made by AiB.

As always, OldFashionedCharm did a fantastic job with the images. Always thankful to Corrie Ann Hughes for suggesting I watch this one!

Posted by: rearadmiral | May 28, 2019

5/28 Week in review….

Found via Nathalie Aknin Mathey! The AbbeySchool, Reading…1790…Where Jane Austen went to school…

Natasha Duquette posted…
May 26 at 6:55 AM
“ … when Jane’s characters want to talk about what really matters — their feelings, the truth — they often have to go outdoors. They escape the jaws of the drawing rooms that confine their lives” (Lucy Worsley in _Jane Austen at Home_).


Found via The Making of Jane Austen and she posted…
A great line from Curtis Sittenfeld, for your reading pleasure! “Sometimes someone will say, like, ‘Jane Austen must be rolling over in her grave.’ And I’ll think, ‘And I’m the presumptuous one?'”
AiB: Here’s the P&P interview section….
“Your most recent novel, Eligible, came from a publisher essentially commissioning you to write a modern-day Pride and Prejudice, right?
CS: It was sort of irresistible to have someone say, “We want you to sit at your desk with a copy of Pride and Prejudice, and you get to just think about Jane Austen’s characters for two years.”
But Jane Austen is gospel to some people. Do you get blowback from Austen acolytes?
CS: Sometimes someone will say, like, “Jane Austen must be rolling over in her grave.” And I’ll think, “And I’m the presumptuous one?” That’s something I learned with The Man of My Dreams. That if someone says, “I don’t like Eligible.” I can say,
“That’s OK. You don’t have to. I did what I want to with that book.”
CS: But my experience is that the real Jane-ites who rent empire-waisted dresses and go to balls appreciate Eligible because there are Easter eggs in it. People can tell that I really climbed inside Pride and Prejudice and thought about the characters and themes. The people who object to it most read Pride and Prejudice maybe 40 years ago and think about it like the Bible. Like, it’s this sacred text that shouldn’t be toyed with.
It’s always the people who read the Bible 40 years ago—the ones who, in truth, understand it the least—who are the most protective of it.
CS: Totally. Pride and Prejudice has such a sense of fun to it, and so does Eligible. I mean, it’s Pride and Prejudice, but it takes place in Cincinnati in 2013 and it’s full of hate-sex and CrossFit. ”

Box Hill

Posted by: rearadmiral | May 21, 2019

5/21 Week in review….

Evil Aunt Norris earns my favorite comment from my beloved Ginny Weasley….”SHUT IT”!!!! I’m half way through MP 1983 and I must have hit the mute button 80 billion times!!!

Found via Jane Austen Literary Fest.

Beware of Ramsgate…Georgiana!!!!!!
(L)Dr Liv Gibbs posted
Ramsgate Harbour by Sydney Maiden (1893-1963) (Private Collection). Kent.
(R) Dr Liv Gibbs posted
Ramsgate by Charles Cheston 1928 (@Tate). Kent.

Photo on the left found via Jane Austen Picture Wall.

A warm welcome to all new likers!!! Continued thanks to regular and occasional visitors!! Cheers!
Found via Catherine Austen Hubback(image not showing in the post, please click the below link)

Jane Austen 2017 and onwards posted:

#OTD in 1966, 15 May, Greg Wise was born in Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
He played John Willoughby in 1995 adaptation of Sense and Sensibility

P&P at Tufts 6/5-29. Found via JASNA MA.

Pride and Prejudice

“I shall soon be rested,” said Fanny, “to sit in the shade on a fine day, and look upon verdure, is the most perfect refreshment.” MP

Polly Adams played Jane Bennet in P&P 1967. Her daughter Susannah Hanker played Jane Bennet in P&P in 1995…while pregnant! Happy Mother’s Day!

Happy Mother’s Day! Two pairs of real life mothers and daughters. I know someone will comment if I didn’t mention that Mrs Gardiner and Miss Darcy are not mother/daughter. However, they are real life mother and daughter!!! Lol…according to Austen Authors…don’t look to closely at Mrs. Weston’s “baby”.

Found via JASNA NY:
“Jane Austen is not an obvious ally of today’s feminist movement. All six of her novels are now more than two centuries old. All six centre on a tale of provincial domesticity and romantic courtship. And all six are full of twists and witty turns that move inexorably toward a gratifyingly happy ending.
Yet below their glittering surfaces and rose-coloured tales of well-matched couples falling deeply in love, Austen’s novels vigorously critique the patriarchal structures of her day. They bristle with anger and a deep sense of injustice. Many of her plots and sub-plots about men and power — and women’s resilience in the face of that power — sound like stories we are hearing today.
Austen wrote in the early 1800s, when life for most women involved submerging their individual identities in their responsibilities as daughters, wives and mothers. Women were considered politically, economically, socially and artistically subordinate to men. It was a life that condemned many women to half-lives of humiliation, loneliness and abuse.
The novelist and short story writer Carol Shields has concisely summarized the complicated nature of Austen’s artistry and appeal. Austen, declares Shields, exploits “an arch, incontrovertible amiability” to conceal “a ferocious and persistent moral anger.”
Fairy tales meet social critique
Mr. Darcy’s first marriage proposal to Elizabeth Bennet in Pride and Prejudice (1813) is the most famous moment in Austen’s most famous novel. It is also the most telling example of Austen’s remarkable ability to combine wish fulfilment with social realism, and fairy-tale romance with biting cultural critique.
The cover of Pride and Prejudice and the scene with Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy. American Library
On one level, the scene between the two would-be lovers is a world removed from harrowing accounts of sexual harassment and assault. Darcy is proposing marriage to Elizabeth, not sex, and in his eyes at least, it is a very romantic offer.
He knows that her social standing is far below his own, and that in asking for her hand he is going against the wishes of his family and his own better judgment. But, as he patiently and politely explains, his love for her has overpowered him, and he wants her to become his wife.
On a more fundamental level, though, the exchange between the two is full of irony and dark anxieties.
Darcy is a wealthy and well-connected man who enjoys great freedom, and who moves assertively through a world of elegance and opportunity. Elizabeth is a younger and much more vulnerable woman who can already see poverty and spinsterhood out of the corner of her eye, and who can only obtain a place in the higher echelons of society through marriage to a man like Darcy.
Asserting strength and independence
The stark power imbalance between them fills Darcy with certainty that Elizabeth will be delighted to learn that she has been singled out by a man of his influence and social standing, and that she will eagerly consent to the match. To be sure, as he outlines his plans for their future, he expresses his “hope” that she will accept him.
But this is an empty gesture. Elizabeth “could easily see that he had no doubt of a favourable answer. He spoke of apprehension and anxiety, but his countenance expressed real security.”
When Darcy concludes his offer and Elizabeth is finally given the chance to speak, she rejects him with an eloquence and a decisiveness that make her among the most admired women in English fiction. Her character gives passionate expression to the anger she (and Austen) felt at patriarchal presumption and authority.
Demanding respect
Darcy is utterly confounded by her refusal, but what Elizabeth objects to in his behaviour is what millions of women from her day to ours have objected to. Operating from a position of much greater social and financial power, Darcy wants Elizabeth to agree to an arrangement that suits him, but not her. He presumes that he knows what she wants. He devalues her. He objectifies her. He pressures her.
Elizabeth is having none of this. She may be well below Darcy on the social ladder, but she towers above him in terms of her understanding of sexual politics and gender relations. Darcy expects deference and gratitude from her. She demands respect from him. They spar constantly.
A drawing of Mr. Darcy from the 1895 edition of Jane Austen’s novel Pride and Prejudice C. E. Brock
Finally, she lashes out at him for his “arrogance,” his “conceit” and his “selfish disdain of the feelings of others.” No one — let alone a socially inferior woman — will have ever spoken to him in those terms.
Having imposed himself on Elizabeth, Darcy does not like it when she pushes back at him. “His complexion became pale with anger, and the disturbance of his mind was visible in every feature.”
Safely ensconced within the conventions of romance, Elizabeth does not have to worry about Darcy’s anger boiling over into violence. Indeed, after bidding her a civil farewell, his love for her quickly reasserts itself, and then steadily transforms him into a partner who is worthy of her.
A long-term fight
Austen occupies a key position in the long continuum of modern feminist thought. As the great novelist and literary critic, Virginia Woolf, observed almost a century ago, “Austen is…mistress of much deeper emotion than appears upon the surface.”
Elizabeth Bennet is her most sparkling character, and she plays the lead role in one of the most compelling love stories of the last 200 years.
But she is also a woman whose bravery, anger, and intelligence enable her to expose the patriarchal assumptions of Darcy, and to refuse him because of them.
Austen’s novels contain insightful contemporary critiques of patriarchy. They also throw searching light on the ways in which those same injustices continue to inflict widespread and long-term damage now.
Ultimately, Austen is about love and mutual respect. Her life was diminished by the same patriarchal structures that damaged the lives of so many women in her era, and far beyond. But Austen can inspire us now because she fought back in her life — and especially in her art.”…

Posted by: rearadmiral | May 10, 2019

5/10 Another two weeks in review….

Baking Recipes Food – Creole & Cajun

Found via JASNA-South FL:…/eighteenth-century-ba…/…

Lol…I should have gone with “world treasure” for point #5 but there’s no one upping Shakespeare.
William Shakespeare

Apr 24
5 jobs I’ve had:
1. schoolboy
2. deer poacher
3. supporting actor
4. love poet
5. national treasure
Jane Austen

Replying to @Shakespeare
Jane Austen’s 5 jobs I’ve had…
1) sibling
2) schoolgirl
3) unpublished writer
4) published writer
5) national treasure

Such happy tunes! Such bloom! Oh what an Emma!!🎵🎶💞🎻🎼

Found via Lona Manning and Christina Boyd on Twitter:

Jane Austen 2017 and onwards
May 2 at 4:33 PM ·
to Jane Austen’s father, Rev. George Austen who was born #OTD yesterday in 1731, 1 May in Tonbridge, Kent, England.

Carol Shields
Jane Austen: A Penguin Life
New York: Viking, 2001. Pp. 185. $19.95
Reviewed by Nora Foster Stovel
“We would naturally expect that Carol Shields, being a novelist, rather than a biographer, would write a rather different biography of Jane Austen than other writers that have essayed this topic recently. But we would be mistaken, at least in part, for Shields was a biographer. Her first book was a biography of Susanna Moodie, written for her Master of Arts in English at the University of Ottawa in 1974 and published in 1976, and her penultimate book was also a biography-her life of Jane Austen published a quarter of a century later, in 2001. Thus, biographies frame Carol Shields’s writing career. Moreover, many of Shields’s novels are structured as biographies: her Pulitzer Prize-winning novel The Stone Diaries (1993), which also won the Governor General’s Award for Fiction, is the autobiography of Daisy Goodwill Flett; and Larry’s Party, recently adapted for the stage as a musical, is a biography of Larry Weller. One could argue that all her novels are partial biographies, and all of them are filled with miniature biographies. Shields said what interested her primarily in fiction is “the arc of the human life” (10), and that is what interests her in composing her life of Jane Austen: “Almost as soon as I began to read Jane Austen’s novels, I became curious about her life” (183). In fact, Shields, who wrote the biography after receiving her devastating diagnosis of terminal breast cancer, hypothesizes that Austen died of breast cancer (173).
Shields, whose last novel, Unless, proclaims her as an unabashed, if tardy, feminist, writes, not surprisingly, what I might call a womanist biography of Austen. She declares that “Jane Austen’s novels are about intelligent women who take themselves seriously but not solemnly” (25). She wonders “how women, despite their societal disentitlement, were able to play such a lively, even powerful, role” (2). She theorizes that Austen’s novels “can be read as a demonstration of submissive women and the wiles they use to get their own way-their pointed courtesies, quiet words of reproof, or direct glances. At the same time, the novels show men and women to be equal in intellect and moral apprehension. This is a great paradox and one that Jane Austen appears to have swallowed, but cannot have failed to notice” (38-39). While Austen’s brothers battled Napoleon, Jane, as Shields points out (45), “brought to the page the only kind of combat a woman was allowed: the conquest of hearts.” Shields notes that Jane Austen “lived in a day when to be married was the only form of independence” (85). Her novels demonstrate “a new determination to describe the plight of women, particularly the fact that women of Jane Austen’s class had nothing but marriage to rescue them from their parental home” (113), for, as Charlotte Lucas observes to Elizabeth Bennet in Pride and Prejudice, marriage must be a woman’s surest preservative from want.
Shields addresses the Austen paradox: “What is known of Jane Austen’s life will never be enough to account for the greatness of her novels, but the point of literary biography is to throw light on a writer’s works, rather than combing the works to recreate the author. The two ‘accounts’-the life and the work-will always lack congruency and will sometimes appear to be in complete contradiction” (175). Shields quotes nineteenth-century novelist George Gissing as insisting that “the only good biographies are found in novels” (10). She adds, “This is, in the end, what matters: the novels themselves, and not the day-to-day life of the author” (10).
As a novelist herself, Shields is primarily interested in the ways that Austen’s life informs her fiction. Not that Shields considers Austen’s novels autobiographical. Indeed, she declares, “Jane Austen, clearly, is not a writer who touches close to the autobiographical core” (70), for “Austen’s life and fiction rode different rails” (76). Rather than finding sources for her fiction in her life, Shields opines that Austen “saw novel making as an excursion to an invented world rather than a meditation on her own” (72). Austen’s fiction compensated for deficiencies in her real life: “Her heroines claimed their lives through ideal marriages, while she found her own sense of arrival through her novels” (176). She argues that “Pride and Prejudice, that happiest of novels, erupted from a period of sadness, of personal disappointment” (76), and, in Persuasion, Austen may be “rewriting the trajectory of her own life and giving it the gift of a happy ending” (170). Shields argues that Austen’s disappointments in life provided the impetus for her novels.
“A writer of ‘marriage novels,’ Austen did not marry” (7). As a novelist, Shields takes a literary approach, asking, “How does art come from common clay, in this case a vicar’s self-educated daughter, all but buried in rural Hampshire? Who was she, really? And who exactly is her work designed to please?” (5). Her answers are interesting: regarding “the Tom Lefroy debacle” (54), she notes, “the episode multiplied itself again and again in her novels, embedded in the theme of thwarted love and loss of nerve. In the novels, happily, there is often a second or third chance, a triumphant overriding of class difference” (51).
Where Virginia Woolf famously argued for a woman’s need for “a room of one’s own,” Shields emphasizes the author’s need for a home of her own. Not only did Jane Austen have no home of her own, she had no room, not even a bedroom, of her own. As we know, she shared her bedroom with her beloved sister Cassandra, and shared her home with a large family and even, for a time, with a boy’s boarding school. Shields considers the shock to Austen’s sensibility of the standard practice of farming infants out to wet nurses and sending young children away to boarding school. She focuses on Austen’s forced dependence on others, on her role as a poor relation. She emphasizes her loss of her beloved parsonage of Steventon following the death of her father, her removal to Bath and her delight at Chawton.
Shields sees the influence of Austen’s life on her fiction as consisting of the fictional search for a home of one’s own. She argues that “the true subject of serious fiction is not ‘current events,’ ongoing wars or political issues but the search of an individual for his or her true home. Men and women in fiction and in life become separated from their home; in the novels of Jane Austen they are misdirected or misassigned, so that home, both in its true and metaphorical sense, becomes a desired but denied destination” (13). Quoting Austen’s famous definitions of her own subject-matter — “3 or 4 Families in a Country Village is the very thing to work on” and “the little bit … of ivory on which I work with so fine a Brush, as produces little effect after much labour” (8) — Shields argues that “all literature is ultimately about family” and “every novel is about the fate of a child” (9). Shocked by her various removals to school and later to Bath, Austen writes novels, Shields suggests, that reflect that child’s quest for love and liberty furnished in a home of her own.
Shields argues that Austen focuses on daughters seeking independence from parents: “In novel after novel, the Austen pattern is replayed, the non-Darwinian emergence of brilliance from a dull dynasty: Elizabeth Bennet’s ravishing intelligence, Fanny Price’s perfect balance, Anne Elliot’s assurance and sense of self-all these women overthrow the throttled lives they are born into and the oafish parents who bring them into the world.”
Shields points out that many of the parents of Austen’s heroines are woefully inadequate. Many mothers are distant or dead, while even the most energetic mothers, such as Mrs. Bennet, are intolerable to their intelligent daughters. Even the fathers are failures. Shields refers to this as the “Cinderella fantasy” (34), where the child is mysteriously superior to her parents: “Jane Austen chose to focus her writing on daughters rather than mothers…. Daughters achieve their independence by working against the family constraints, their young spirits struck from the passive, lumpish postures of their ineffectual or distanced mothers” (15).
Thus, Shields concludes that “Jane Austen herself, labouring over her brilliant fictions, creates again and again a vision of refuge furnished with love, acceptance and security, an image she herself would be able to call a home of her own” (14). Thus, we can understand that to be mistress of Pemberley might be something indeed.”…/…/article/view/7821/8878

Guest Author Interview ~ Bryan Kozlowski on “The Jane Austen Diet”

Caroline….get out of the picture!!!!!…/tantrums-and-toasted-cheese-on-s…/

From JASNA Communications…photo choices by AiB:
“Jane Austen Snippet
[I]t was not very wonderful that Catherine, who had by nature nothing heroic about her, should prefer cricket, base ball, riding on horseback, and running about the country at the age of fourteen, to books— or at least books of information— for, provided that nothing like useful knowledge could be gained from them, provided they were all story and no reflection, she had never any objection to books at all. But from fifteen to seventeen she was in training for a heroine; she read all such works as heroines must read to supply their memories with those quotations which are so serviceable and so soothing in the vicissitudes of their eventful lives.
— Northanger Abbey, Vol. I, Chapter I”

AiB: Some great lines in paragraph six about the big six!
“To skip my somewhat, ahem, lengthy but totally engaging and informative introduction and just go ahead and read my reviews, just click here to skip to the end.
Back in June 2011, as I waited impatiently for A Dance With Dragons to come out and wondered if George R.R. Martin will even live long enough to finish the damn series (we’re pullin’ for ya, George!), I consoled myself with thinking that at least there’s still a chance for “A Song of Ice and Fire.” Because Sanditon is the ultimate teaser preview that will never be resolved.
All right, so the two are not exactly comparable. Jane Austen didn’t write about dragons. But in a way, she and George Arrrr! Martin (called so by me because of his predilection for wearing sailor hats) have a lot in common. They both concern themselves with a very specific world that has very specific rules, with very finely drawn characters who have specific motivations and pursue their goals by observing, manipulating, or outright thwarting those rules. In Jane Austen’s world, words are swords.
Okay, who else just realized for the first time ever that “swords” is just “words” with an s in front? Consider my mind blown.
I knew I had to read Sanditon at some point, just to complete my knowledge of her novels, but I put it off for a long time because of the dissatisfaction I knew would follow. Austen died before she could complete the novel, so all we fans have left are eleven chapters of a book that promised to retain all the Austen wit and sharpness of observation, while presenting us with a plot and scenery and problems that seemed so different from anything we’d seen before. Before Sanditon, all of Austen’s novels focused on the landed estate: who owned it, who should own it, what responsibilities came with owning it, who had been exiled from it, who abandoned it, and who rose up to claim it against all odds. The landed estate, in Austen’s time, represented the pinnacle of wealth and security, the utmost standing in society that could be reached short of nobility or royalty. The gentry Austen focused on was roughly the equivalent of most of the upper class families living in Greenwich, Connecticut, or the wealthier areas of Southern California: they’re not oil sheiks and they may only have two or three houses instead of 20, but mostly, they never have to worry about where the money’s coming from.
One of the most powerful assertions of Austen’s work was that the upper class, far from being fit to disdain or ignore the middle and trade classes, needed the moderation of values the middle class provided if it was to sustain itself. So Elizabeth Bennet, the middle class girl, teaches Mr. Darcy, the wealthy estate owner, what it really means to be a gentleman. (Hint: having money does not automatically make you a gentleman.) Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich, learns that there’s more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good-looking. Exiled from their former state of wealth, Marianne and Elinor Dashwood, with their intelligence and kind hearts, without even trying, make a lot of upper-class bitches look like damn fools. Fanny Price teaches her plantation-owning, slave-driving baronet uncle that wealth doesn’t count for much if your daughter’s a tramp and your son’s a man-whore spendthrift. I’m sure Catherine Norland teaches somebody… something. Anne Elliot learns that hot wealthy intelligent ship Captains beat the hell out of creepy scheming rich first cousins any day. (Although, really, I could have told her that. And anyway it’s really Captain Wentworth who needs to learn to get over himself and understand other people’s points of view.) And she bails on the landed estate and goes to sea.
In Austen’s last completed novel, then, Persuasion, we have the heroine leaving the corrupted landed estate altogether. And then! And then! In Sanditon, we have a heroine visiting an entirely new town! Charlotte Heywood visits the Parkers, who are trying to create and populate a new seaside resort. God, what an ingenious notion! What possibilities! Away from the landed estate, with a chance to start almost from scratch, what kind of society will these people come up with? In the first eleven chapters, Austen introduces Charlotte, a very sensible young woman from a sensible family with fourteen (!) children. Charlotte visits the Parkers in Sanditon, meeting Mr. Parker’s histrionic siblings, the Oprah-rich Lady Denham and her circle of hangers-on who wait for her to drop dead so they can inherit her wealth, the beautiful Clara Brereton, who dammit, I know has something up her sleeve butI’llneverknowwillI?, the two Miss Beauforts, mancatchers in the making, and the sickly but rich Miss Lambe, a “half-mulatto” West Indian heiress.
And then the book stops. Just stops. I made one of my reading projects for the year to read all the attempted endings to this novel, and compare them to one another. And offer my supreme judgment. And you, lucky you, can read my thoughts here. If things don’t go as I hope, in another ten years you’ll be here reading my thoughts on all the attempted endings to “A Song of Ice and Fire,” as well.
Sanditon, by Jane Austen and Another Lady, AKA Marie Dobbs, AKA Anne Telscombe, published 1998
A Completion of Sanditon, by Juliette Shapiro, published 2004
A Return to Sanditon, by Anne Toledo, published 2011
To Be Reviewed… someday:
Sanditon, by D.J. Eden, published 2002 (out of print)
Sanditon: A Continuation, by Anna Austen LeFroy, published 1983, (out of print)
Somehow Lengthened, by Alice Cobbett, published 1932 (out of print)”…/

Sanditon Project
To skip my somewhat, ahem, lengthy but totally engaging and informative introduction and just go ahead and read my reviews, just click here to skip to the end. Back in June 2011, as I waited impati…

Jane Austen 2017 and onwards
April 26 at 7:16 PM ·
#OTD in 1976, 27 April, Sally Cecilia Hawkins, an English actress, was born in Dulwich, London, England.
She appeared as Anne Elliot in Persuasion (2007), ITV’s adaptation of Jane Austen’s novel, but her first major role was in Mike Leigh’s All or Nothing in 2002.
Happy birthday 🎈🎁🎉

Jane Austen 2017 and onwards
April 26 at 7:07 PM ·
#OTD in 1965, 27 April, Anna Theodora Chancellor was born in Richmond, London, England.
Happy birthday 🎈🎁🎉

Posted by: rearadmiral | April 26, 2019

4/26 Nearly two weeks in review

Jane Austen 2017 and onwards

#OTD in 1965, 26 April, Susannah Harker was born.
She is an English film, television, and theatre actress whom I adored in 1995’s TV mini series of Pride and Prejudice.

Many happy returns 🎈🎁🎉🎉🎉

Found via the Jane Austen Fan Club….
Avantgardens posted:
Pride and Prejudice

My Jane Austen Book Club

« Miss Darcy was tall, and a larger scale than Elizabeth and, though little more than sixteen, her figure was formed, and her appearance womanly end graceful. She was less handsome than her brother, but there were sense and good humour her face, and her manners were perfectly unassuming and gentle ».

I agree!
“As part of her introduction, Deborah Yaffe describes an only moderately successful attempt at running a Jane Austen book club: “We had a great time, and they liked the books, but– well, they didn’t like them quite the way I did. They didn’t seem to put themselves to sleep at night by composing dialogue for Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet… They didn’t worry about whether Marianne Dashwood is really happy at the end of Sense and Sensibility. In other words, they weren’t nuts.”
Girl, I know what you mean.
As Austen herself has written, “One half the world cannot understand the pleasures of the other.” And, as Yaffe accurately points out, sometimes, even Austen fans have trouble comprehending one another. She writes of “the tension between people who truly understand Jane Austen –people like me!– and those other, lesser fans who like her for all the wrong reasons, because of the movies, or the zombies.” But somewhere along the line– perhaps it’s when Yaffe goes from proclaiming she will never be caught dead in period costume to worrying about whether she’s chosen the right fabric to send to her custom dressmaker, or when fan-fiction writer Linda Berdoll discovers various Regency euphemisms with which to describe Mr. Darcy’s penis (“larydoodle” is the best of these)– I realized, if we’re all on the same ward, what’s the point of arguing over which of us is craziest? Let’s all just pop a pill and go nuts together.
Before we get too far into the fray, however, it’s important for Yaffe to establish her credibility early on, which she does effectively, describing a child version of herself as “the ultimate literature nerd”, who “earned good grades, hated gym class, and read with a ravenous hunger.” It’s a clever narrative device, as it mirrors the personality of the kind of reader most likely to pick up her book– well-read, discriminating, and well, nerdy. In this way, Yaffe assures the reader that he will have a steady Virgil to guide him through the circles of fandom, of which there are many. To list a few, Yaffe attends the Jane Austen Society of North America’s Annual General Meeting, tours Jane Austen’s England, posts in Jane Austen weblists, and gads about academia. We can share in Yaffe’s skepticism when she meets a man who claims to have a Grand Unified Theory of Jane Austen. We can also share in her sense of awe as Yaffe strolls the streets of Bath, turning the same corner where Captain Wentworth and Anne Elliot of Persuasion walked, while she reads the words from her Kindle describing that walk. And again, when she is on a Jane Austen tour in Lyme, a fellow tourist says, “You’re walking where Jane walked,” and we are as lulled into blissful contemplation of that fact as if we were there ourselves.
Like Yaffe, every Jane Austen fan will see herself somewhere along the spectrum of human curiosities Yaffe encounters. Though comparatively restrained in her demonstrativeness, Yaffe exudes such joy as a narrator, such real interest in the people she meets, that most readers will be too entertained to harshly judge what they might see as those “other” fans. It’s hard to pass judgment, for instance, on a woman who, through writing Mr. Darcy fan-fiction, finds the strength to abandon an abusive marriage. And it’s hard to maintain that Austen should only be regarded with utter academic rigor when even eminent scholars find themselves falling in love over Mansfield Park: George Justice, professor at University of Missouri at Columbia as of Yaffe’s writing, meets professor Devoney Looser and realizes he’s going to marry her when she proclaims that she is too much like Fanny Price.
The point of writing such a book, I suppose, is simply that the truly obsessed can never get enough of what they love. A person who collects porcelain cat figurines will never have enough shelves to hold all his porcelain cat figurines. One imagines Deborah Yaffe chortling to herself wickedly as she realizes she’s actually getting paid to do this stuff, and meanwhile she’s snorting up every book, every event, every person with the fervor of an addict.
Even when irked into raising an eyebrow over some rather outlandish interpretations (Mr. Darcy was introverted, not autistic, and I’m pretty sure Jane Fairfax was not pregnant with the child of Mr. John Knightley), Austen readers know well the kind of obsession and over-analysis her novels inspire. And those who aren’t fans, though I can’t imagine why they’d pick up a book about fandom, will at least recognize the heightened sense of being, that kicked-up vitality that is the result of immersion in what one loves. In a letter to her sister Cassandra, Jane Austen once described her most famous book, Pride and Prejudice, as “too light, and bright, and sparkling.” Omit the “too”, and you have a fair description of Pride and Prejudice, and of Yaffe’s delightful book as well.”…/among-the-…/

The Pemberley Post, No. 13 (April 15- 21, 2019) ~ Jane Austen and More!

Found via the Jane Austen Book Club…

Happy 40th Year JASNA!

Thatched cottage in Hampshire, England….fit enough for Robert Ferrars???

Found via Lauren Gilbert, Author…..

Amanda Root as Fanny Price in this 1997 radio adaptation! Yes, please!
Jane Austen Selskabet, Danmark posted:
Mansfield Park som radiodrama fra BBC 😍 Hele syv episoder – what’s not to like!? 😉 Tak for tippet til vores medlem Pia 😊
Mansfield park as radiodrama from BBC 😍 seven episodes – what’s not to like!? 😉 thanks for the tip to our member pia 😊

The Pemberley Post, No. 12 (Mar 25 – Apr 14, 2019) ~ Jane Austen and More!…

Both authors are delightful in this podcast. I’ve read both(Ayesha won’t be out until June but I won a copy on GR!). I enjoyed both but prefer Ayesha. In May, PP and Other Flavors is coming out.…/04/05/book-club-retelling-jane-austen

Posted by: rearadmiral | April 14, 2019

4/14 Week in review….

JASNA Eastern Washington/Northern Idaho posted…
We haven’t a quiz in awhile! What type of tea are you, based on the food you pick? Share your results in the comments!!
💌 Giveaway Update:
We have decided to keep the giveaway open until April 16, so enter again!↙️
‎Jason Nicholls-Carrer‎ to Jane Austen Fan Club
April 11 at 4:59 PM
Ok enough about the characters of her fantastic novels, What about Jane ?

Dear Darling Jane:

Its been 206 years of Pride and Prejudice‘s publication. 206 years in which girls, and some guys, have fallen in love with Darcy and wishing we had our own. Generations of people have formed friendships because of their love for the book. Mothers and daughters bond over discussions and of course seeing the adaptations. One cannot forget the first time we read Pride and Prejudice nor can we forget our very first screen Darcy (my favorite is Matthew Macfadyen ).
A lot has changed socially since your book’s publication. Women attend university and have the right to vote. Single women no longer have to rely on their male family members to provide for them since they can now earn their own living and depend solely on themselves. Family members still pester a few regarding marriage. Although some women still do marry for money, a majority of women in today’s society marry for love. It is also acceptable to set up a household and live alone as well as travel alone.

Pride and Prejudice has sold over 20 million copies since its initial publication. It’s been adapted for stage, film, and even television. You’re probably wondering what film or television is and this is the best I can describe it: think of it as a play, but instead of a stationary stage, there are moving pieces. These pieces are recorded frame by frame to create a moving picture. Pride and Prejudice also has inspired authors to write their own version based on your plot.

My favorite Pride and Prejudice television / film adaptation is the Andrew Davies production of 1995. It stars Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy and Jennifer Ehle as Elizabeth Bennet. It also inspired the Lost in Austen adaptation to feature the famous lake scene from the 1995 version, where Amanda asks Mr. Darcy ( Oh My God Elliot Cowan )to emerge himself in the water as Colin Firth had done.

We learned a lot from Pride and Prejudice. You taught us to stand up for ourselves and our beliefs. Family members may embarrass us on occasion, but they are still family. Things may look dire and we think we’ll never recover from a situation, but in the end we are stronger than we think we are and do recover. You also taught us to never settle for a Mr. Collins.That there are always two sides to a story and even the most dashing man may have an ulterior motive. Through you we learned, that first impressions aren’t always what they seem and it is okay to change your mind. Most importantly you taught us, that he’s worth waiting for. When we finally meet our Darcy, he will do anything to make us happy even if involves facing his own past and knowing it is humiliating to him.

We owe a lot to you Jane. I do wish you could see the influence of not only Pride and Prejudice, but of all your books in our society. You should be proud of your accomplishment and how I wish I could turn back time and inform you not to sell your copyright, but alas that is not possible.

Thank you. Thank you for giving us a beautiful story; for the lessons learned and for the friendships formed.

Yours very affectionately,

Marie Kondo’s Contributions to the Reception History of Jane Austen

Kirk Companion is with Jasna N.Y. and 4 others.
April 8 at 10:15 PM
Because my phone charger ceased working during the overnight trip down to the event (I just attended the Sunday events) and I thus have zero photos(if there are no photos, did the event take place?!!)during the trip…..
The “joy of transportation” …many dollars and annoyance

Change fee because one bus company was so late that the next company’s bus was missed… annoying dollars

Wonderful hosts, speakers, attendees, tour of musical instruments museum, and location… priceless!

Running into a friendly face during the long layover in the tiny bus station… priceless!

JASNA Connecticut Region posted:
This year Flock Theatre presents Pride and Prejudice, an adaptation of the Jane Austen novel in the Long Parlor of the Shaw Mansion in New London CT. Enjoy the play amid this historic setting. Pride and Prejudice, adapted by Jon Jory, is a play adaptation of Jane Austen’s Regency era-set romance novel. Pride and Prejudice explores the importance of marrying for love at a time when society is pressuring young women to find profitable suitors. The story follows Mr. Bennet and his five unmarried daughters, focusing specifically on Elizabeth as she and the wealthy Mr. Darcy navigate their attraction. The play runs for three weeks May 11-26, Friday and Saturday evenings, with a Sunday Matinee. To purchase tickets, visit the Flock Theatre website

Jane Austen Fan Club posted….
Vera Miniel Rubio said…
“Just few things I wanted to share with this wonderful group who truly appreciates and understands our true love for Jane Austen .My daughter went to a wedding in London and thought of me ….I was like a kid in a candy store when I open the bag she held out to me!!!! .”

“Austen draws her landscapes without the minute descriptions of later novelists, such as Dickens(AiB-YES!!!!!!), but these landscapes provide her heroines with spaces to reflect knowledgeably-even psychically-upon their landscapes.”
pg 98 “Prospect and Refuge in the landscape of Jane Austen” by Barbara Britton Wenner 2006 Ashgate Publishing Burlington,VT
3 Regency Teacups overall but the line above should be in gold leaf, as Cassandra wrote about a line of Jane’s in Persuasion.

In honor of the Boston Marathon(best wishes to all involved!)…here’s a version of the Bath Marathon!

Posted by: rearadmiral | April 4, 2019

4/4 Another week plus a couple of days Week in Review….

Andrew Harrison‎ posted to Landscapes Of Yorkshire
Sledmere House

“Austen scholar and adaptation theorist John Wiltshire has advanced one such alternative way of looking at film adaptations and their architects. In “Recreating Jane Austen”(2001), Wiltshire suggests that, in the case of each individual adaptation, the ‘scriptwriter and filmmakers be understood as readers, and that one advantage of all such revisions is that they make public and manifest what their reading of the precursor text is, that they bring out into the discussably open the choices, acceptances and distortions that are commonly undisclosed within the private reader’s own imaginative reading process.’ ”
pg 9 “Emma Adapted: Jane Austen’s Heroine from Book to Film” by Marc DiPaolo Peter Lang NY, NY
3.75-4 Regency Teacups

Found via Jane Austen Fan Club….yes yes yes Caroline Bingley said it but……/a.22284460405…/2382960925053765/…

“Examining the Emma adaptations as a group, it becomes fairly clear that they offer diverse and contradictory readings of the novel. In fact, it is both the strength and the weakness of the films that they offer unequivocal visions of the text.”
-pg 143 “Emma Adapted: Jane Austen’s Heroine from Book to Film” by Marc DiPaolo Peter Lang NY, NY
3.75-4 Regency Teacups N.B. As this book was published in 2007, Emma 09 is not discussed. A pity!

Found via JASNA-MA, NH, and RI Facebook page….
Laura Sanscartier shared a link.
Hope this is allowed here, but the Parker Memorial Library in Dracut MA is celebrating “Austen in April” with a number of presentations, films, and book discussions. If you’re in the area, come join the fun! Visit us at for our upcoming events page and sign ups. We’ll be ending the month with a Salon! Love to see folks there!
Austen in April event: Portrait of a Lady
Wednesday Apr 3, 2019 from 6:30 PM – 8:00 PM
Austen in April event: Portrait of a Lady
Austen in April Discussion: Sense & Sensibility
Saturday Apr 6, 2019 from 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM
Austen in April event: Musicking in Jane Austen’s England
Wednesday Apr 10, 2019 from 6:00 PM – 8:15 PM
Austen in April film: Becoming Jane
Tuesday Apr 16, 2019 from 6:00 PM – 8:00 PM
Austen in April Film: Emma
Wednesday Apr 17, 2019 from 6:00 PM – 8:15 PM
Austen in April: Open Mic Salon: a Creative Forum
Saturday Apr 27, 2019 from 1:00 PM – 3:00 PM
Austen in April: Open Mic Salon: a creative forum…

Katherine Osborne-Hightower: “The Mister Collins”
A thoroughly unenjoyable take on the classic Tom Collins – This drink includes premium top-shelf gin (the label of which I’ve been told costs £800!) watery, insipid tea and large dollops of cloyingly sweet simple syrup.

“She was considered to read aloud remarkably well. I did not often hear her but once I knew her take up a volume of Evelina and read a few pages of Mr. Smith and the Brangtons and I thought it was like a play. She had a very good speaking voice….yet its tones have never been forgotten-I can recall them even now-and I know they were very pleasant”.-Caroline Austen “My Aunt Jane Austen: A Memoir”(1867)

Found via the Jane Austen Fan Club:

The Pemberley Post, No. 11 (Mar 11-24, 2019) ~ Jane Austen and So Much More!

Posted by: rearadmiral | March 24, 2019

3/24 Week(+2) in review….

“What’s the news from Kent?” (I believe that’s from 2005 P&P only)

A comment posted by Katherine Osborne-Hightower:
“The Mister Collins”
A thoroughly unenjoyable take on the classic Tom Collins – This drink includes premium top-shelf gin (the label of which I’ve been told costs £800!) watery, insipid tea and large dollops of cloyingly sweet simple syrup.…/a.10823535684…/2048348181887383/…

Guest Post ~ Nancy I. Sanders on Her New Book, “Jane Austen for Kids”

And for Emma a grove of Box Trees from…wait for it…Box Hill. A little reminder to keep it humble although perfect with all her imperfections…..:)

JASNA Eastern Washington/Northern Idaho We all want to stay humble 😊
Hide or report this
It’s almost too cliche to give a hyacinth to Catherine Morland….almost! 🙂

The Last Rose of Summer for reblooming Anne Elliot! 🙂

JASNA Eastern Washington/Northern Idaho Oh yes!!!
Light to mid blue flowers for the ever lovely Jane Bennet!!!! 🙂

JASNA Eastern Washington/Northern Idaho Apple blossoms from Mr. Knightley (although there is no way he would interrupt the growing cycle for his apples, so maybe a small tree to plant?). Michele🍎

Something strong and steady…annually blooming for Elinor Dashwood..:)

Team Emma! Yes yes yes…1972 should be included too. Hopefully the new one will be good too.

I rarely post these two. Not that I think they are bad but compared to Winslet and Rickman….Also I like to joke that S&S ’95 is more Marianne’s story, whereas this one is more Elinor’s story with Hattie Morahan and Dan Stevens being “divine” together…which includes the DVD comments. Thoughts?

From the Jane Austen Picture Wall:
Teresa Burvill posted:
“Good morning xx I came across Anna and Elena Balbusso (twin sisters) artists and illustrators, and I really like their work!! I hope you do too, here we have Lizzie reading Darcy’s letter and Pride and Prejudice garden xx have a lovely week end xx”

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »