If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   That's enough. We're done with Jane Austen   (slate.com) divider line 24
    More: Obvious, Jane Austen, literary merit, Elizabeth Bennet, Pride and Prejudice, D.H. Lawrence, Regency, Sense and Sensibility  
•       •       •

4609 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 13 Feb 2013 at 12:36 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



24 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-13 12:51:24 PM
1.bp.blogspot.com
Agreed!
 
2013-02-13 12:54:37 PM
Knew it when this came out.

d.gr-assets.com
 
2013-02-13 01:04:54 PM
it was getting a little austentacious.
 
2013-02-13 01:09:15 PM
That shiat made my head hurt.  Ron needs to get laid.
 
2013-02-13 01:17:51 PM
If there were an Austen convention in Austin, TX, would the world implode?
 
2013-02-13 01:26:14 PM
That article was almost as long as Pride and Prejudice.
DNR
 
2013-02-13 01:26:49 PM

JohnAnnArbor: If there were an Austen convention in Austin, TX, would the world implode?


Austenception?
 
2013-02-13 01:30:21 PM
Jane's getting serious....
img.youtube.com
 
2013-02-13 01:47:49 PM
It has relevance as the proto-"Rom Com", which basically amounts to your standard fairy tale with twist of Prince Charming picking the "quirky girl" instead of Cinderella or Sleeping Beauty.

It should not be taken seriously as any satire or critique of classism in 19th Century England.   For that, one of the major characters might have to be portrayed as actually working one day in their entire lives.
 
2013-02-13 02:15:02 PM
Jane Austen sucks.
 
2013-02-13 02:19:05 PM
Americans criticizing English literature is like Ted Bundy faking an orgasm.
 
2013-02-13 02:33:40 PM

macadamnut: Americans criticizing English literature is like Ted Bundy faking an orgasm.


What do Canadians know about orgasms?
 
2013-02-13 02:51:26 PM
From the article:

"But it's begun to seem like she's now assumed the role of the designated highbrow writer for light readers. It's not that she's overrated. It's that she's in dire jeopardy of being overhyped-and dumbed down in the process.

I know that sounds elitist, and I hasten to assert that my admiration for her fiction is deep, sincere, undiminished. But I've begun to feel-in the midst of the tsunami of schlocky, rapturous, over-the-top, wall-to-wall multiplatform celebration of the 200th anniversary of Pride & Prejudice-that it's all a bit too much. Something quiet and true about Austen is being lost in the trumpet blasts and the spin-offs."


You're right, it does sound elitist, because it is. Just because a book is literary doesn't mean you need to be part of some academic cult to "get it" or like it. I know tons of people who love Great Gatsby for its plot and beautiful language, but they'd be bored to death if I tried to discuss whether or not Nick was a reliable narrator with them. That really doesn't diminish the book itself.

It's fine to think the Austen craze has been going on too long and should end now, but to revise one's opinion of the works themselves based on that is superficial and sounds like the author is whining that his favorite band sold out and now high schoolers are singing that song that only he and other true fans really get, damn it.
 
2013-02-13 03:06:05 PM

mahuika: From the article:

"But it's begun to seem like she's now assumed the role of the designated highbrow writer for light readers. It's not that she's overrated. It's that she's in dire jeopardy of being overhyped-and dumbed down in the process.

I know that sounds elitist, and I hasten to assert that my admiration for her fiction is deep, sincere, undiminished. But I've begun to feel-in the midst of the tsunami of schlocky, rapturous, over-the-top, wall-to-wall multiplatform celebration of the 200th anniversary of Pride & Prejudice-that it's all a bit too much. Something quiet and true about Austen is being lost in the trumpet blasts and the spin-offs."

You're right, it does sound elitist, because it is. Just because a book is literary doesn't mean you need to be part of some academic cult to "get it" or like it. I know tons of people who love Great Gatsby for its plot and beautiful language, but they'd be bored to death if I tried to discuss whether or not Nick was a reliable narrator with them. That really doesn't diminish the book itself.

It's fine to think the Austen craze has been going on too long and should end now, but to revise one's opinion of the works themselves based on that is superficial and sounds like the author is whining that his favorite band sold out and now high schoolers are singing that song that only he and other true fans really get, damn it.


Sounds like a hipster.
 
2013-02-13 04:45:10 PM

karnal: Jane's getting serious....


And Leon's getting laaarrger. . .
 
2013-02-13 04:55:01 PM

mahuika: From the article:

"But it's begun to seem like she's now assumed the role of the designated highbrow writer for light readers. It's not that she's overrated. It's that she's in dire jeopardy of being overhyped-and dumbed down in the process.

I know that sounds elitist, and I hasten to assert that my admiration for her fiction is deep, sincere, undiminished. But I've begun to feel-in the midst of the tsunami of schlocky, rapturous, over-the-top, wall-to-wall multiplatform celebration of the 200th anniversary of Pride & Prejudice-that it's all a bit too much. Something quiet and true about Austen is being lost in the trumpet blasts and the spin-offs."

You're right, it does sound elitist, because it is. Just because a book is literary doesn't mean you need to be part of some academic cult to "get it" or like it. I know tons of people who love Great Gatsby for its plot and beautiful language, but they'd be bored to death if I tried to discuss whether or not Nick was a reliable narrator with them. That really doesn't diminish the book itself.

It's fine to think the Austen craze has been going on too long and should end now, but to revise one's opinion of the works themselves based on that is superficial and sounds like the author is whining that his favorite band sold out and now high schoolers are singing that song that only he and other true fans really get, damn it.


This. In a Regency style gown.
 
2013-02-13 06:26:14 PM
There's no such thing as highbrow literary fiction. It is itself a fiction dragged out by snobs every time someone proclaims to prefer an author, for no other reason than to feel superior to a stranger. To suggest that someone's literary tastes are inferior to yours is the very lowest of civilized discourse and you might as well simply punch them.

/Stephanie Meyer and Nicolas Sparks, however, should be shot into space.
 
2013-02-13 07:39:19 PM
i45.tinypic.com
 
2013-02-13 08:16:59 PM
Can I love Jane Austen and just not read or watch the spin-off crap?  Oh, I can?  How nice.
 
2013-02-13 11:03:35 PM
Not just Jane Austen, but i cant stand any of that Victorian/Romantic/18thC English lit. Just so full of pretentious inauthentic drivel. People writing about the hard lives of others from the comfort of their well-served drawing rooms.

Charles can suck my Dickens, too.
 
2013-02-14 12:39:37 AM
Haters gonna hate.
 
2013-02-14 01:06:15 PM
I saw "Jane Austen" on a syllabus for class in college (Women Writers, fscking gender studies requirement) and dropped out of the class immediately after.
 
2013-02-14 09:50:48 PM

bborchar: Can I love Jane Austen and just not read or watch the spin-off crap?  Oh, I can?  How nice.


I've been reading her books for 30 years. I like some of the movies rather a lot, hate a couple of them rather a lot. For someone to equate the true love of the literature with the (at this point) nonsensical trends that developed from their recent popularity and then sum it all up by saying, "Over now, move on," is just absurd and shallow.

Unless maybe she didn't say quite that. I read only the first page because what? Three pages? But whatever.
 
2013-02-15 08:58:48 PM
That so many readers have found that much enjoyment and introspection of one's work is every writers dream.  Jane Austen deserves her place at the mantle of great writers.  If two hundred years later, fans are inserting Elizabeth Bennet into stories about fighting zombies with martial arts, she must have done something right.
I know that's circular logic, but to me great literature is something that a reader can identify with at a personal level.  People have different ideas about what appeals to them.  It's perfectly fine if Jane Austen is not your taste of literature.  I don't really like Hemingway, but I don't think he's a bad writer.  I'm merely not interested in his stories.
 
Displayed 24 of 24 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report