Jane Austenâ„¢

To the inconvenience of its residents, the lobby of my building -- an old Beaux Arts hotel in Baltimore -- was closed off to residents yesterday since it was being used, we were told, to shoot a scene for the upcoming movie, He's Just Not That Into You. Moving my car from its usual convenient spot to make way for the film company vehicles, I thought to myself, wait a minute, He's Just Not That Into You? Wasn't that last year's dating advice book, a spin-off from an episode of Sex and the City? As I remember it, the two authors encourage a form of tough self-love, commanding women to stop puzzling over the behavior of less-than-enthusiastic suitors and dump them like the dogs they are. The book's message was considered painful but empowering (at least by Oprah, and who else matters?) because a man who really loves you will treat you with the adoration you deserve. Which, apparently, is endless.

A dating advice book seems unlikely material for a movie, but there's no reason for cynicism; after all, great movies have been made from thinner material. I'm reminded of the advice book that Katie, one of my students, was telling me about last week: Dear Jane Austen: A Heroine's Guide to Life and Love. Written by Patrice Hannon, it appropriates the voice of Jane Austen to address today's girl on such topics as finances, dating etiquette, family matters, sex, and most important, how to recognize the special man that may just turn out to be your future husband (clue: He's NOT the guy who's Just Not That Into You). I asked Katie if she really thought Jane Austen -- who, I reminded her, died an unmarried virgin at the age of 41 -- was she really qualified to give sex tips to the modern girl. Katie said that wasn't the point; it's not the REAL Jane Austen, but a fantasy version of her. Let's call this fantasy Jane Austenâ„¢.

Dear Jane Austen is part of the current revival of Austenmania, most evident at the movies, where Austen-themed films are constantly cropping up. This year has brought us Becoming Jane, a biographical portrait starring pretty Anne Hathaway as the famously plain spinster, and The Jane Austen Book Club, a cheerfully sentimental comedy about the title coffee-klatsch. Slated for release next year are Sense and Sensibilidad, a Latina spin on Austen's novel set in contemporary Los Angeles, and Jane Austen Handheld, which retells Pride and Prejudice through the lens of a fly-on-the-wall documentary crew.

There's no point trying to understand what it is about Jane Austen that's so compelling to today's women, because Jane Austenâ„¢ has very little to do with Jane Austen. Jane Austenâ„¢ is a retro fantasy creation, a sassy, ironic, independent woman. Jane Austenâ„¢ is all about social snubs, overheard conversations, implied relationships, and signifiers of status, especially hair and clothes. Jane Austenâ„¢ thrives in social enclaves full of privileged women obsessed with material wealth, class distinctions, and, always, the underlying mating dance. Exactly like He's Just Not That Into You.

In the world of Jane Austenâ„¢ the women who win may not be perfectly beautiful, but they're witty, smart, and well dressed. It's perhaps no coincidence that the actress who plays Jane Austen in Becoming Jane, the voluptuous Hathaway, is best known as the star of The Princess Diaries, since Jane Austenâ„¢ is essentially The Princess Diaries for grownups. It may be a lovely fantasy, but I suspect the historical Jane Austen would be Just Not That Into It.

Comments

[twocrows]

Oh, I dunno --
'He's Just Not That Into You' pretty much sums up Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice -- at least during the 1st 1/3 or so of the novel, right?

[BGonia]

I don't know what some of the above comments are about but as for Jane Austen--I am convinced she would be amused and gratified at her popularity and at how her characters and plots have been used/revised in film! Austen's novels are PERFECT works of literary art though--only a little portion can be transferred to film; not the best parts. Her novels work on readers not only on the usual levels of plot, theme etc.--NO, readers get INVOLVED in the characters; get TAKEN IN by the charming villains and villainesses; get INCENSED by the Mrs. Eltons. We fall into the traps, we LIVE the novels as readers....and if we are good readers, we LEARN from our "mistakes"; that's her trick. And her novels bear RE-reading (Disraeli read P&P 17 times!!! I've read it only 13 times so far!!!) Each time, the lessons are different. Each time, I am engaged in JA's world. And it is so much more perfect than our own. No movie can do that. But what a tribute to Austen that they try. Personally, the only thing I regret is that Austen received so LITTLE money for her perfect work. Think of the millions...the hundreds of millions that would be showered on her today if only....

p.s. I did not see "becoming Jane" --but I heard that it depicted Tom LeFroy "advising" Austen to read "Tom Jones" and giving her literary advice...NOT LIKELY!!! She had almost certainly read "Tom Jones" before she met Tom, and at age 20, she was already a remarkable writer -- no, Tom (also 20) could not have instructed her.

[InternationalObserver]

If we accept Jane Austenâ„¢ then we perhaps we can also expect to be offered George 'The Decider' Dubyaâ„¢; a common-folks hero travelling the world like a modern day Indianna Jonesâ„¢, solving international disputes between nations with that trademarkâ„¢ grin/smirk of his.

[FOXYLADY]

It is a joy to read any of Austins books...there is a recurring theme in them all, but the people are "real" and many of the happenings could relate to today. Although some of todays women would certainly not fit in at all....to bold and brash with no class.

[FOXYLADY]

OH MY WORD.........JANE AUSTIN WOULD BE DAMN ANGRY WITH THIS MOVIE..........WHAT CAN COMPARE TO HER WRITINGS..­........CL­ASSICAL STUFF THERE.......NOT IN THIS MOVIE

[Potomacker]

Austen is not the first author whose literary talent is inversely proportional to the reliable biographical data. The same liberties have been taken by biographers and fans of Sappho, Homer, and Shakespeare just to name a few. We know as many facts about their individual lives as might fit on half a sheet of paper. There is an obsession to flesh out authors even when the flesh becomes as much myth. There seems to be a need for our cultural creations to have a creator whom we can adore and praise.

[Tulka2]

Jane Austin's message, the real Jane Austin, is that it maters not the restrictions of one's circumstace, one can mantian one's dignity through the exercise of personal integrity. That's a powerful message felt closely by every generation of smart women (an men) since. Bet it still echos in 100 years.

[richardsoares]

oH, AND oPRAH wINFREY has made her money too. She's making more right now by asking,'Where are all the men?' They're all rats, you know, but how do I get one? 'Gosh', she sighs,'We've all got GAY friends, but where are the straight men?'

Yes, watch my show, commiserate with me, see my commercials and buy their products, but let's not take responsibility for abandoning an entire nation of men for over 40 years now. 'We've all liberated ourselves right out of any chance at a relationship and a truly fulfilling life!' 'We've lost our opportunity for the truest kind of human happiness!'

I fear that very soon American women are going to be heard wailing and moaning in their loniliness together and guess what! SINGLE Oprah Winfrey will be right there with a microphone, just like Jane Austen, but richer and offering women escape in a book, or in this instance, a BOOK OF THE MONTH CLUB!

[richardsoares]

Unfortunately, powerful influences thrive on chaotic, weak social relationships and have used media to inveigle American women by the millions to march in the 'WE DON'T NEED MEN' parade. They're still marching, all those single defiant women, some marrying each other now. Still marching down empty streets. Still demonizing American men. Getting old together and reciting mantras of perceived power and independence.
Betty Friedan made her money....and so did Ann Rand....and so did Gloria Steinem....did they continue to function for the impoverished American women and children? To shape peace instead of gender war? To invite new understandings of real power-the small human powers we share in surviving and living together? The 'Poverty of Power' should be the next Feminist foray. American men are marrying foreign women not because they are more dependent, domestic or controllable. Women have never been without power. Men have to use money and technology just to try to match them. Rather, American men marry women from the Philippine­s,Japan,Ch­ina, Taiwan, Russia, Germany, Africa, Canada and many other places because they are female, feminine and happy with themselves and thus able to share happiness, to get outside their own needs and wants.
Thus enabling some reasonable kind of give and take relationship and a balance which brings untold wealth of family, friends and a brighter future filled with love and all of the above.
THANK YOU FOR THE FINE ARTICLE.

[janmB]

There are so many experts out there regarding relationships with mixed messages that its a wonder our society remains confused and somewhat still ignorant.

[sbrownmiller]

"Clueless" was supposed to be a Jane Austen tm movie based on "Sense and Sensibility," but I never noticed.

[NotaBeliever]

Jane Austen wrote novels about the manners and relationships in her own world. She's hardly giving advice to the lovelorn. Her characters end up making the most practical decisions at the end of the day. Romance is recognized for what it is, or could be ... but practicality rules. I never forget that Miss Elizabeth Bennet didn't fall in *love* with the super rich Mr. Darcy until she saw his beautiful estate Pemberley. Jane Austen was a lot smarter than people give her credit for.

[Blogmommy]

I'm a huge fan of Jane (not your trademarked one). But maybe all of this fake Jane -related stuff might inspire at least one adolescent to check out the real thing. And I remember re-reading EMMA after seeing the movie "Clueless"... Many great authors have had ridiculous spin-offs and it hasn't seemed to hurt. Your article, while well-written and bringing up some good points, seems to have more than a subtle whiff of snobbery about it. But then that's a lot of what Jane wrote about anyway.....

[knittingbuddah]

Jane Austen's novels (the real Jane Austen's novels) have appealed to women and men for countless years. I enjoyed them as a child and as an adult. I think the woman who wrote them was very intelligent and had a highly developed sense of humor.

When I saw Becoming Jane my first thought was that the real Jane would be rolling in her grave. My second was that I enjoyed the movie very much. My third thought was that the real Jane Austen would have probably be in shock that her work was still read and existed in derivative form...and then she would have had a good chuckle.

You forgot to include the Bollywood versions like Bride and Prejudice (which, by the way, I enjoyed). Of course, the real Jane is the best. However, I for one wouldn't want to miss the delightful fun of Bride and Prejudice. It made me smile.

[avicenna]

If there were parasite paparazzi in time of Dear Jane, I wonder if her virginal status would be in tact as Britney Spears - but that is a moot point. I just find it puzzling why anyone would assume to know the long gone author's "real" life - no one can - and in such instances, the reality in your mind is as good as any. And I'm sure Kate's mother would think a 41 year old virgin is exactly the right woman to be giving sex advice - she is obviously doing something right!