Book Tidbit 4: Leave Austen Alone


That is my response to all this repackaging of Jane Austen. I long for the days when Austen was just Austen, and not "the Grandmother of Chick Lit." For pity's sake, she's only the grandmother of chick lit because some marketing executive thought it would be great to cash in on the "intellectuality" of Jane Austen's novels.

Point 1: Jane Austen never wrote just romance novels. Austen's novels were a highly incisive commentary and criticism of the foibles in her society.

Point 2: Jane Austen did not write for the reader of the 21st century, so please, spare me the comment that "she's not readable" or "she's boring." Boring probably to a lot of us who have been weaned on the shallow prose of the Dan Browns, Sidney Sheldons and Stephenie Meyers of our day and age. (By the way, I have read and enjoyed these authors. Notwithstanding, I think their prose is shallow.)

I'd like to reiterate that Austen's writing would be much better served by letting it speak for itself. Granted that Jane Austen's novels aren't for everybody, but my opinion on all this repackaging is that it seems to create a false image of the author who, by and large, has stood the test of time on her own.

Obviously, I am a big fan of Jane Austen (but not a modern Janeite). I have been since I first read her, and have proceeded to read all her novels. But what exactly brought on this rant? Mainly, a combination of the following factors: all the Jane Austen rip-off I see in bookstores today, new readers of Austen who think she's boring because they were expecting some kind of modern chick lit book, and the things I learned in this review of the book "How Jane Austen Changed the World."

Seriously?

Jane changed the world with her novels centuries ago. Now, the only change being effected is by those marketing executives who want to cash in on a trend by using Austen.

Comments

Anonymous said…
It is like every popular novelist wanting to say they are like Dickens, just on the basis of popularity.
I also sometimes wonder if people actually read Austen or do they just watch the adaptations? Which can be a bit of a mixed bunch, some good some not. Marketing has a lot to answer for and a closer examination of the marketing of books would be an interesting exercise.
fantaghiro23 said…
Hi, Book pusher! Yeah, it is sort of like people riding on the back of a popular author. Except what I really don't like about it is how it transforms the image of the author. What exactly do they mean when they say that Austen is the mother of chick lit? Is it because she writes books that mostly women read? Do these chick lit books have biting social commentary?

I know a few people who have been intrigued enough to read Austen after reading Bridget Jones' Diary or simply after finding out the Austen is the supposed originator of chick lit. They get disappointed that Austen isn't as readable as the chick books on the market today. And I think that's when the marketers do a disservice to Austen--creating that false expectation.

Lastly, yes, marketing of books would be an interesting thing to study. On another note, it's also why I hate it when every other fantasy book has a blurb that compares it to Harry Potter, or the author called "the J.K Rowling of ____."
Sana said…
Hi,

I totally agree with you! I love Jane Austen and for me it sacrilege and disservice to call her a grandma of chicklit! She is one the most influential writers. Her novels offer a social commentary in a very witty manner. The social behavior during her time is still prevalent today.

And nope, she is not only for female readers! =)

Sana
fantaghiro23 said…
Hi, Sana! Welcome, fellow Austen fan.:) You're right, Jane Austen isn't just for females. In fact, most of the individuals who started to treat Austen's books as serious literature were men.

Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case these days. Guys I know who've read Austen dismiss her as chick crap. But I really believe it's because their perception of Austen has been colored by the image they've been forcing on Jane today. Too bad.
Anonymous said…
You are so right, fatanghiro. It seems to me that bad taste seems to be in fashion these days. With a book like : Pride and Prejudice and Zombies now on Amazon's bestseller list, who can argue with this? From Amazon's editorial review :

"Pride and Prejudice and Zombies features the original text of Jane Austen's beloved novel with all-new scenes of bone-crunching zombie action. As our story opens a mysterious plague has fallen upon the quiet English village of Meryton and the dead are returning to life! Feisty heroine Elizabeth Bennet is determined to wipe out the zombie menace but she's soon distracted by the arrival of the haughty and arrogant Mr. Darcy. What ensues is a delightful comedy of manners with plenty of civilized sparring between the two young lovers and even more violent sparring on the blood-soaked battlefield as Elizabeth wages war against hordes of flesh-eating undead. Complete with 20 illustrations in the style of C. E. Brock (the original illustrator of Pride and Prejudice) this insanely funny expanded edition will introduce Jane Austen's classic novel to new legions of fans. "

Well, Jane Austen's breaking new ground as rising grandmother of comedic horror.
fantaghiro23 said…
O my God, Jo. I am horrified by this book. And not in the flattering way.

It seems like it's enough for Austen to rise from her grave and give these writers an earful. Oh, that would be in keeping with the zombie thing, huh?;P
czar tigno said…
fundamentalist? wahahahahha!

Popular posts from this blog

Soledad's Sister by Jose Dalisay, Jr.

Filipino authors with internationally-published books

The El Bimbo Variations by Adam David