This was a fascinating book, with the kind of deep literary criticism I used to read all the time in college, which was so nice to get back to. Entwined with the lit-crit is more history than I ever expected. Not just Jane Austen's own history, or the history of her novels, but the history of the Austen fandom. In fact, this isn't a book about Jane Austen or about her novels so much as about her fans. And that's the real reasons I decided to read it, after reading this review on Austenprose.com. Because I keep feeling like I'm not the same kind of fan of Austen's books as other people I've met, both in real life and in the blogosphere, and I was hoping this would help me figure out why I feel that way.The good news is, it did. The bad news is, it took me a year to read because I kept getting caught up in other books. But I'm glad I've finished it at last, and will probably use it as a reference book in the future.
There are 5 chapters, an introduction, and an afterword. There's also an appendix containing three folk tales from the Austen family that Jane herself was likely familiar with. Here's a quick description of each chapter:
"Jane Austen's Body" discusses fan's reactions to the fact that Jane Austen was a human being with an actual body, not an ethereal literary goddess. "Jane Austen's Magic" involves the way Victorians viewed Austen's books, often equating them with fairy stories! "Jane Austen's World War I" talks about how British soldiers in particular looked to Austen's books to give them courage and strength in the face of terrifying war experiences. "Jane Austen's World War II" details the way that both military and civilians used Austen's books to remind themselves of the heritage they were fighting to preserve. And "Jane Austen's House" shows how, by collecting relics in some way connected to Austen, her fans seek a sense of closeness with the author.
In the introduction, Johnson defines Janeism as "a self-consciously idolatrous enthusiasm for 'Jane' Austen and every primary, secondary, tertiary (and so forth) detail relative to her" (p. 6). And while I enjoy her books, enjoy movies based on them, even enjoy books about her or her characters, I don't really revere Jane Austen herself. She doesn't even quite make it into my top ten favorite authors -- I put her at number eleven here. So what I have long suspected is true: I am not "a Janeite."
I'm okay with that.
However, please don't think that Johnson is mocking Janeism or Janeites. Far from it. Also in the introduction, she declares that her "aim is not so much to trace Jane Austen's reputation as it is to ponder what loving her has meant to readers from the nineteenth century to the present" (p. 14). By exploring how Austen's works have been differently appreciated and interpreted over the years, Johnson shows just how deep and multi-faceted those works truly are.
Jane Austen is my favourite author because of her consistency. I love all of her six novels, some a lot more than others admittedly but I'm still very fond of them all. I love many Austen adaptations as well. But even though I'm a massive Austen fan I'm not sure I'd label myself as a "Janeite". Partly because I associate the word with dressing up as her at fan conventions but also because I don't really revere her as a person either. I don't really revere any of my favourite writers as people with the exception of C.S. Lewis but that's only because his books had a big impact in my conversion. I used to be an agnostic you see.
ReplyDeleteI do feel like being a "Janeite" involves more than just enjoying reading the books and watching movie adaptations. Like, having Jane Austen-themed coffee mugs and making period costumes and stuff. I do have an Austen-themed journal that I used a year or so ago.
DeleteHow fascinating that C.S. Lewis' books helped you come to faith! I've known a couple people who said they really brought them back from a weak faith, but never that they helped in a total conversion. Wow.
Sounds like an interesting book! Maybe I'll read it someday when literary criticism sounds interesting again (right now if I added yet more literary criticism to what I already read for school, I would die). I don't know that I'm a "Janeite" either. I do love her books though. She might make it into my top ten.
ReplyDeleteWell, neither the book nor its subject are going to be somehow stale in a few years -- it can keep :-)
DeleteThis sounds so interesting! Especially the chapters about WWI and WWII I would love to read.
ReplyDeleteIt was really fascinating how differently soldiers in the two wars viewed Austen's books. At that time, her books weren't viewed like they often are today, sort of classic chick-lit. They were unashamedly enjoyed by men too, not viewed as fluffy romance or anything. I quite liked that, since I don't think of them as fluffy or particularly romantic for the most part.
DeleteI agree with you, I don't see them as just romantic stories either. Though I think they're being 'pushed' that way, by adaptations and everything in the Janeite culture. But they are comedy as well and social commentary and family drama and 'coming of age' stories etc.etc.
DeletePrecisely! I like their satire and social commentary particularly much. And her insights into human nature. So sharp.
DeleteThis sounds really interesting! I would agree w/ you about not being a "Janeite." Even though Austen is one of my favorite authors, I feel strange reading Austen fan blogs sometimes. I don't overly romanticize her or her books, so the obsession thread is missing, I guess. Nevertheless, I enjoy reading her work, and that's what's important!
ReplyDeleteYes, I think the obsession is missing, you are exactly right. I enjoy Austen's books, but I'm not obsessed with them. Which is odd, as I obsess easily. Hmm.
DeleteI'll have to look this up to find out a bit more about the Jane Austen family fairy tales!
ReplyDeleteJohn Smith, it was an interesting book!
Delete