Tuesday Open Thread: Stimulating The Economy Edition
Welcome to the Tuesday Open Thread, in which we give our Gentle Readers the opportunity to talk about something that interests them and in which we feature links that might be of interest to Janeites but might not necessarily merit a post of their own.
The Ever-Alert Baja Janeite sent us a couple of links to goodies available for sale out there on the Intarwebs. The first is not one but two complete miniature sets of Jane Austen’s novels to be used in a dollhouse or similar Regency-themed setting. The more expensive set is incredibly real-looking!
Baja Janeite also was amused (as were we) by an apron declaring “Let’s BBQ Wickham!” We also liked the male/female division of labor apron, and not just because it’s a Henry Tilney quote.
This is an open thread, so let us know what’s going on in your patch of Janeiteville.
Comments are closed.
I recently picked up a nice used copy of David Nokes biography of Jane. I’ve searched the AustenBlog files for a review and didn’t find one. Before I get too deep into the book I’d like to know if this is considered a relatively authentic work or just a made-up mess.
What? No “I love verbal combat with Lizzie?” No, its her fine eyes-Really! Dancing does in Darcy? or “Wallflower Fitzwilliam?”
James
I was able to get a copy of P&P and Zombies recently and am really enjoying reading it. I’m sure someone can take some great quotes from that book and sell more aprons, I’d buy them.
Dear Deb R.,
I think the Nokes biography is well-grounded in fact — he did not actually invent anything — but he does take a different approach to interpreting some of the facts of Jane Austen’s life and of people around her. Sometimes he may go a little far, but I found it fascinating. As I recall he is about the only biographer who seems to think that Aunt Leigh-Perrot actually WAS a kleptomaniac, for example, and I am not sure how he managed to conclude that.
Here’s review that’s much better thought out than my sketchy one:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1252/is_n19_v124/ai_20227040
Thanks, Kathleen — just what I needed.
On another note, from my “patch of Janeiteville”: on Saturday I attended the Virginia Festival of the Book in Charlottesville. This is an annual week long event with dozens of panels discussions, readings, workshops, etc. for the benefit of readers and writers, and brings in BIG. NAME. AUTHORS. from all over the country. All events are free and open to the public without any advance registration, except for some luncheons. Check it out next year if you can (and let me know if you’re going so we can meet!).
One of the panel discussions I attended was with four female authors of mystery series. A topic raised regarded picking the occupation of the protagonist and/or if it is important to know how the main characters earn their keep. One author brought up Darcy and his “living” of 10,000 a year, and the other authors jumped right in with details of other Austen characters. They were headed off into a lively discussion of all things Jane when the panel moderator actually had the gall to bring them back to the topic of their own writings!
It was a Janeite feel-good moment, to see again how much she is read and appreciated.
Not really major Jane news, but on the PBS Masterpiece Theater site they have videos about behind the scenes for Little Dorrit (which by the way is terrific, can’t wait for Sunday!)Claire Foy, in a video entitled “On Amy Dorrit” compares Dickens to Austen, in a way that is not exactly flattering to the latter. However, I think if you watch her you’ll understand the point she was trying to get across, even though I don’t think it’s fully accurate to relegate Austen’s books to the “sitting around and sewing” kind.
Well, the past week has reinforced my opinion (and many other Janeites’, I’m sure) that Jane teaches us many valuable things. Things like the proper pronunciation of Derbyshire and that yes, 27 was once considered the age one became a spinster. Others in my college-level English class were unable to grasp these concepts.
As a true Austenite or Janeite (whichever terms you prefer!) I have started a Jane Austen blog and would love anyone and everyone to have a look, post a comment, or just send a line. I know there’s lots of you Jane Austen obsessives out there and I’d love to hear from you, it would be great to hear your thoughts on my daily Austen musings. Jane can never be discussed enough.
So come have a look at http://alljaneaustenallthetime.blogspot.com/ I’d love to see you there.
Thanks!!
Trai: Any unmarried woman, legally, was a spinster! It’s just a legal term. But 27 is that “dangerous” age. However, one will note that Miss Elliot wasn’t troubled by being 29 and even more handsome than she had been ten years before. I always wonder if she ever found any man good enough to marry.
Deb: I haven’t read Nokes, but he gets mixed reviews. Your event sounded like a great time–how serendipitous to learn Herself really is everywhere.
Mags;
The only one who might want “Miss Eliott” for a wife,after the scandal has died down might be young Mr.Eliott.There is no way to prevent him from the estate.With her attitude,arrogance and spoiled behavor I would think Young Mr Elliot would deserve better!
James
James, interesting idea! Miss E originally had the hots for him, and she would probably do anything to keep her station in society, even if it meant marrying a man who liked her sister better and ran off with her friend. Young Mr. E was still going to inherit the estate and title, right? Do you think he would marry Miss E to help repair his reputation? That would be quite a loveless marriage, though would probably suit them both very well. Miss E could still keep her nose in the air and he would probably take advantage of every lovely young thing that crossed his path. Hmmm. I think a fanfic sequel is in order.
RE: Mr. & Miss Eliott
I always got the impression that Mr. Eliott ended up marrying Mrs. Clay. I know it doesn’t say that for sure, but it always seemed like it was pretty much a foregone conclusion…
I never quite understood the goings on with Young Mr.Elliot and Clay except that he did not any woman marring sir Walter and producing a son.
Mrs Clay would of been inferior to sir walter. And he would get her freckles,too! Perhaps he’d of wanted Miss Carteret? A young lady,of peerage birth,and most likely of a sizable fortune.You must remember that wally is only a commonier with a title!
Marriage to “Miss Elliot” would have only one purpose to gain the title and estate.The older sister most likely enjoy becomming his wife and remaining at the family home. Anne after all is only marrying a rich navy captain.But they are marrying for love.
From the look on the servants faces (1995 film) when walter was leaving-(am I still getting paid?) or good ridance!They would prefer the new tennants of kelynch- The Crofts.
Mags, I’ve been meaning to ask what happened to your favicon? I really miss it.
I didn’t know spinster was a legal term; that’s interesting! (It appears my comment stirred up a debate here…)
It just came up mostly because a character in a work was referred to as “ancient” though she was only 27, and even my teacher had found that odd. Others in the class were having a hard time grasping that an age that young (by today’s standards) was considered unmarriageable (is that even a word?) back then, so I tried to explain it in terms of how short their lifespans were in those days (1600s, in the case of this book).
I purchased a copy of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies today! The B&N I work at put it on the floor early. I’ve only read a few pages, but I am laughing so much! The illustrations (while they do not contain strict period clothing) are even funnier. I never would’ve imagined Elizabeth Bennett brandishing a broad sword.
Lizzie Bennett= my favorite broad brandishing a sword…..