Missing the forest for the trees
Alert Janeites Lisa and Tony A. sent us a link to a column from Chauncey Mabe at the Sun-Sentinel, who is despairing of the recent spate of Austen-themed books.
The conceit here — that’s lit-talk for “gimmick” — is that Hannon styles herself such an expert on all things Jane that she can, at will, speak in the voice of the author of Pride and Prejudice. She deploys this party trick to turn one of the greatest authors in the English language into an advice columnist, by way of answering questions posed by modern female readers (questions which, presumably, Hannon also composes).
In other words, Jane Austen as a time-traveling Miss Manners. What induces Plume, Hannon’s publisher, to consider the resultant work — tract? construct? bagatelle? — a novel is not readily apparent. One would have to read the text to find out, which labor I have no intention of doing. It is possible — remote, but … just … barely … uhnh! … possible — that Hannon has produced a wise and witty book that does actually capture the spirit of St. Jane. But I surely doubt it.
Possible, and indeed probable. We confess to a bit of trepidation when we received our copy of that book, many months ago, but were charmed in spite of our tar-hearted spinster self, and quite impressed by Ms. Hannon’s knowledge of Jane Austen’s work. While we have some sympathy for Mr. Mabe’s position, we think he chose the wrong object for his ire. We’ll be posting a little more about Dear Jane Austen in Friday Bookblogging (and giving a copy away as well).
Comments are closed.
Thank you very much for coming to my defense, Mags. Since Mr. Mabe acknowledges that he has formed his opinion without having read my book I can assure you of my present perfect indifference to the attack. I too have some sympathy for his position and wish all writers who discuss the recent Austen books would take the trouble to judge each one individually.
Cheers,
Patrice
At least he admits that he has not read the book (a copy of which I do own): One would have to read the text to find out, which labor I have no intention of doing.
In a recent interview with by Adam Langer, he fesses up as well:
Adam Langer: Before making an assignment, how much of a book and its press release do you typically read?
Chauncey Mabe: Very little, unless I’m close to selecting it.
In this case he chose to attack the book, but still did not bother to read it. Hmm. Isn’t that unfair and disingenuous? For the same reason, much as I wanted to, I had to restrain myself from posting a comment during the heated discussion here over that other book a few days back.
I guess we cannot blame the poor fellow; he must be overworked. He claims:
Number of books received per week: Anywhere from “100 to a billion.”
Yeah, right.
I, too, have some sympathy for his position, as that type of book may not be his cup of tea. But he really chose badly when he chose this particular book. It’s not an accident that Penguin chose to pluck it from relative obscurity.
Thank you, Tony. I’m glad you own a copy! And Mags, again, thank you.
Patrice