The Other Austen

1. OMG GET A NEW BEST FRIEND or TAKE THIS BITCH TO SCHOOL

2. Tell him to at least read a Jane Austen novel. Then tell him to read Twilight. I’m pretty sure he’s read neither.

3. His observations are sexist. Period. “Just” 18th century romance novels? Whatever you have to say about Austen or Meyer, you have to acknowledge that BOTH of them have made significant contributions to literature. Lumping all female writers into the bull shit ‘chick lit’ category makes their writing seem frivolous and inexperienced compared to supposedly solid, important, canonical male writing. No but you don’t get it, when Shakespeare wrote romances and comedies, they were like, so much better. If you’re going to delegitimize Austen for her ‘silly, girly’ romances, you might as well do it to Dickens, Fielding and the Brontes as well. Basically every writer ever actually. Well done!

4. His observation is more about the contemporary reception of Austen. The average 21st century dolt who has heard of that mad, scribblin’ Jayne Eyre Austin lady thinks she wrote about young ladies sitting at their windowsill, looking forlornly out the window upon the rainy English countryside, waiting for her Prince Charming/Mr. Darcy to show up. If you merely watch an Austen adaptation made in the last 20 years without thinking deeply about it, you might get this impression. From S&S 1995 to P&P 2005, there’s plenty of rain and dashing men on horseback to be had. But…

5. I’d say it’s a universal truth that people are fucking stupid and don’t understand irony. Austen is ironic about romance. Meyer is not. I’m not going to compare or add positive/negative value to their merits, because that goes against Austen’s “it’s only a novel” rant, in which she chides her fellow novelists for degrading each other and the medium itself. Not gonna do it. But it is extremely important to understand that Austen’s bread and butter was mocking the shit out of those ‘silly’ 18^th century romance novels. As a reader, she loved them and memorized their form and content. As a writer, she satirized some of their bull shit notions about women, marriage and money. Marriage was (and to me, still can be) a business transaction and was (to proto-feminists of her day) comparable to the slave trade. There’s a lot more going on in Austen that just silly girly romance.

6. But you know what, even silly girly romance has meaning. Twilight is political as fuck. Sex can wait until straight, white, Christian heterosexual courtship. A woman’s worth is defined by her sexual activity. Not that this does not happen in Austen as well, but I think there’s a huge distinction to be made. Meyer’s novels say things SHOULD be this way. Austen’s novels say things ARE this way and ain’t it shitty. I have not read Twilight, but as far as I know, Meyer is not interested in being critical of normative societal expectations. Twilight seems like romance played straight. Pride and Prejudice is romance with a razor’s edge. Romance and marriage don’t save you. They lock you in and bind you. If you’re REALLY REALLY LUCKY you will find a equal partner to spend your life with. But how many Austen characters find that? 7 or 8 maybe? That’s including the 6 hero/heroine couples plus a couple of side character couples that depict an ideal marriage (the Crofts in Persuasion, the Gardiners in P&P). Everywhere else is difficulty and bitterness and, I hate to say it, reality.

7. So I guess tell him that he can’t have a valid opinion about the subject until he’s read novels written by both authors. Until he’s read Claudia L. Johnson. Until he compares and contrasts the form and content of Austen and Meyer novels while taking into account historical context.  Tell him to remember that Austen uses IRONY. Please please please please remember that, everyone in the world. Tell him to take a closer look at why he delegitimizes the importance of female writers and readers. And if he refuses to do at least one of the above, tell to GTFO, like really.