Scan barcode
kirstypotter's review against another edition
4.0
I shelved this as 'to-read' when it was published in 2017; I bought it about a year and a half ago in preparation for my undergraduate dissertation on [b:Emma|6969|Emma|Jane Austen|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1373627931l/6969._SY75_.jpg|3360164] but simply didn't have time to read the whole thing; now I've finally been able to read this fantastic book in its entirety!
This is not one of the many biographies of Jane which rely heavily on artistic license and conjectural readings of the scant number of her letters which remain in circulation. Instead Kelly conducts incredibly detailed close readings of each of Jane's published novels to reveal truly revolutionary undercurrents. Reading this book requires a certain suspension of disbelief; indeed a few of the conclusions she draws did seem slightly exaggerated to fit the narrative, even to me, who wrote a dissertation on the radical themes that can be gleaned from Austen. Furthermore her tone can get slightly pompous at times - it's not like she's the first person to conduct alternative readings of her texts. However on the whole this was a very convincing and thoroughly well researched appraisal of Jane's ideas through her novels. The chapter on [b:Mansfield Park|45032|Mansfield Park|Jane Austen|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1397063295l/45032._SY75_.jpg|2722329] and its interlinked criticism of the Church of England and slavery was particularly illuminating and shocking. I can't wait to revisit all of Jane's books after reading this!
This is not one of the many biographies of Jane which rely heavily on artistic license and conjectural readings of the scant number of her letters which remain in circulation. Instead Kelly conducts incredibly detailed close readings of each of Jane's published novels to reveal truly revolutionary undercurrents. Reading this book requires a certain suspension of disbelief; indeed a few of the conclusions she draws did seem slightly exaggerated to fit the narrative, even to me, who wrote a dissertation on the radical themes that can be gleaned from Austen. Furthermore her tone can get slightly pompous at times - it's not like she's the first person to conduct alternative readings of her texts. However on the whole this was a very convincing and thoroughly well researched appraisal of Jane's ideas through her novels. The chapter on [b:Mansfield Park|45032|Mansfield Park|Jane Austen|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1397063295l/45032._SY75_.jpg|2722329] and its interlinked criticism of the Church of England and slavery was particularly illuminating and shocking. I can't wait to revisit all of Jane's books after reading this!
tytuarte's review against another edition
5.0
“Forget the Jane Austen you think you know” is right! This book is a must-read for any fan of Austen! The feminist, progressive perspective that was always peeking out from below the surface is fully revealed by the rich context and analysis provided by Kelly. I can't wait to re-read Austen's works with new eyes!
adriannamarguerite's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
4.5
joinreallife's review against another edition
3.0
This was a fascinating read, but a bit ironic that the author says, "we can't trust what we think we know of Jane Austen, because everything we know is other people's interpreting her, and not directly her," and then immediately following that up with, "What we do know about her is what she wrote, so let me now interpret that for you." Neither one of these points of view is subjective, though I admit I'm more inclined to believe that Jane Austen was a secret radical because I love her so much.
Despite that, and potentially dubious historical merit, quite interesting, well pieced together, well edited, and worthwhile.
Despite that, and potentially dubious historical merit, quite interesting, well pieced together, well edited, and worthwhile.
mcastello13's review against another edition
4.0
August 2020:
This is the second time I’m reading this book and both readings have greatly enhanced my past and, I’m sure, future readings of Jane Austen’s work. I don’t agree with everything Helena Kelly asserts but I do appreciate the overall project of encouraging people to think and read Austen’s work more critically than they usually do, and to not read them as romance novels only. Because, honestly, would you actually want to be in one the main romantic relationships in Jane’s novels? I wouldn’t. (Not that we still can’t enjoy the romances in the films and various miniseries, of course, because I certainly plan to continue doing so.)
I think what I most appreciate about this book is the historical context it provides for the novels, as this completely changes my reading of them, most notably of Mansfield Park. Going into this reading, I couldn’t remember why Kelly ties MP so closely to abolitionist and anti-slavery ideas; it seems so absurd when you read it at face value to think it has these more radical undertones. When I reread that chapter, however, I was a little blown away. Knowing the historical context actually makes it very clear (to me, at least) that Jane is skewering the Church of England for its ties to slavery. It’s fascinating.
Overall, I appreciate the depth of knowledge Kelly has of Jane’s work. I always think I know these novels well but reading this book makes me realize how many little details I miss (along with the broader historical context, as mentioned above). I love gaining this whole other layer of knowledge for works that I feel I know so well.
I think the argument for Sense and Sensibility might be the strongest, although each chapter makes me read the novels in a new light.
I don’t love being told how to think, however, and as I wrote earlier I can’t bring myself to agree with every argument Kelly makes. Also, I think the fictional scenes that open each chapter could have been cut. That being said, (and this will not be surprising given I was an English major) I absolutely love this way of critically reviewing literature, especially when it comes to my favorite writer of all time.
This is the second time I’m reading this book and both readings have greatly enhanced my past and, I’m sure, future readings of Jane Austen’s work. I don’t agree with everything Helena Kelly asserts but I do appreciate the overall project of encouraging people to think and read Austen’s work more critically than they usually do, and to not read them as romance novels only. Because, honestly, would you actually want to be in one the main romantic relationships in Jane’s novels? I wouldn’t. (Not that we still can’t enjoy the romances in the films and various miniseries, of course, because I certainly plan to continue doing so.)
I think what I most appreciate about this book is the historical context it provides for the novels, as this completely changes my reading of them, most notably of Mansfield Park. Going into this reading, I couldn’t remember why Kelly ties MP so closely to abolitionist and anti-slavery ideas; it seems so absurd when you read it at face value to think it has these more radical undertones. When I reread that chapter, however, I was a little blown away. Knowing the historical context actually makes it very clear (to me, at least) that Jane is skewering the Church of England for its ties to slavery. It’s fascinating.
Overall, I appreciate the depth of knowledge Kelly has of Jane’s work. I always think I know these novels well but reading this book makes me realize how many little details I miss (along with the broader historical context, as mentioned above). I love gaining this whole other layer of knowledge for works that I feel I know so well.
I think the argument for Sense and Sensibility might be the strongest, although each chapter makes me read the novels in a new light.
I don’t love being told how to think, however, and as I wrote earlier I can’t bring myself to agree with every argument Kelly makes. Also, I think the fictional scenes that open each chapter could have been cut. That being said, (and this will not be surprising given I was an English major) I absolutely love this way of critically reviewing literature, especially when it comes to my favorite writer of all time.
heypretty52's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting subject matter, but I struggle with lit crit on a good day and the structure of this book was very difficult to engage.
lizziepurpleserenity's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
4.0
DISCLAIMER - I knew very little about Jane Austen and the scholarly interpretations of her novels before reading this book. I read each chapter (along with a friend) immediately after reading (or rereading) each relevant novel, over the course of nine months, so the earlier chapters have faded in my memory a bit! Prior to this book, I had read the novels only in a typical light-hearted chick-lit kinda way, focusing on the characters and relationships, so the ideas set down in this book opened my eyes for the first time to alternative and political interpretations. I have read a few of the 1 and 2-star reviews on here of the book and realise I find it difficult to assess the content and conclusions in this book, because of my lack of knowledge, but I've opted for 4 stars and I'll try and explain here my pros and cons for the book.
As for the novels, Pride & Prejudice and Emma (my favourites) I already knew very well both from the books and TV/movie adaptations, Sense & Sensibility I had already read in the past, and possibly Mansfield Park too although I think I knew that one from the TV adaptation starring Billie Piper.... Northanger Abbey and Persuasion I hadn't read before, though I have vague memories of seeing the latter on TV/movie.
So, my reaction to this book:
Pros:
- I loved getting the historical, political, and personal context behind the time in which the novels were written, and to read about specifics from the novels in such context. I found this aspect of the book really interesting, though bear in mind I am super interested in history in general and especially the 18th and 19th centuries, so it's my jam!
- The alternative takes on what each book was actually intended to be about (or parts of them at least) were very eye-opening for me, given that I knew very little beforehand like I said. I have different feelings about each one and don't entirely agree with all that Kelly asserts but on the whole my reading of the novels has been enhanced with deeper understanding, in a positive, albeit sometimes a bit uncomfortable, way.
Cons
- Too many words in places, I think it could have been shorter and more concise.
- Some of her ideas, about smaller stuff, were a bit far-fetched and possibly unnecessary.
- With one or two aspects I felt like Kelly had not allowed for the fact that what was going on around Jane at the time of writing would naturally make its way into the novel; the setting, and so on - Kelly may have attached too much significance or meaning/intention in a few cases. (For example, the enclosures in Emma)
- I didn't really like the vignettes at the beginning of each chapter, told from Jane's POV. Too speculative, not always relevant. I would have preferred a concise paragraph introducing what Jane was up to/where she lived at the time rather than this.
My favourite chapter was about Pride & Prejudice, mostly because it spoilt nothing about the book and the characters I love - enhanced them in fact - and I love the theme (of revolution).
The chapter that had the biggest negative 'effect' on my feelings about the novel was Sense & Sensibility, and the chapter with the most positive effect on my feelings was Persuasion (my least favourite Austen novel), and also Mansfield Park - both of those two I will reread through a different lens that will improve the novels for me a lot, I think, whereas with Emma and Sense & Sensibility I'd rather continue to enjoy them in the way I did before. (FYI Emma is my favourite Austen, although by a very small margin - difficult to choose between this and P&P!).
Northanger Abbey, being the first novel read nine months ago, I don't remember a lot about but Kelly's chapter certainly put in context the dangers that women faced in their normal, conventional lives and had me going 'woah'...
I'm glad I read the book. But if you want your Austens to remain fluffy, escapist, light-hearted, romantic chick-lits, I'd advise to give it a miss!
As for the novels, Pride & Prejudice and Emma (my favourites) I already knew very well both from the books and TV/movie adaptations, Sense & Sensibility I had already read in the past, and possibly Mansfield Park too although I think I knew that one from the TV adaptation starring Billie Piper.... Northanger Abbey and Persuasion I hadn't read before, though I have vague memories of seeing the latter on TV/movie.
So, my reaction to this book:
Pros:
- I loved getting the historical, political, and personal context behind the time in which the novels were written, and to read about specifics from the novels in such context. I found this aspect of the book really interesting, though bear in mind I am super interested in history in general and especially the 18th and 19th centuries, so it's my jam!
- The alternative takes on what each book was actually intended to be about (or parts of them at least) were very eye-opening for me, given that I knew very little beforehand like I said. I have different feelings about each one and don't entirely agree with all that Kelly asserts but on the whole my reading of the novels has been enhanced with deeper understanding, in a positive, albeit sometimes a bit uncomfortable, way.
Cons
- Too many words in places, I think it could have been shorter and more concise.
- Some of her ideas, about smaller stuff, were a bit far-fetched and possibly unnecessary.
- With one or two aspects I felt like Kelly had not allowed for the fact that what was going on around Jane at the time of writing would naturally make its way into the novel; the setting, and so on - Kelly may have attached too much significance or meaning/intention in a few cases. (For example, the enclosures in Emma)
- I didn't really like the vignettes at the beginning of each chapter, told from Jane's POV. Too speculative, not always relevant. I would have preferred a concise paragraph introducing what Jane was up to/where she lived at the time rather than this.
My favourite chapter was about Pride & Prejudice, mostly because it spoilt nothing about the book and the characters I love - enhanced them in fact - and I love the theme (of revolution).
The chapter that had the biggest negative 'effect' on my feelings about the novel was Sense & Sensibility, and the chapter with the most positive effect on my feelings was Persuasion (my least favourite Austen novel), and also Mansfield Park - both of those two I will reread through a different lens that will improve the novels for me a lot, I think, whereas with Emma and Sense & Sensibility I'd rather continue to enjoy them in the way I did before. (FYI Emma is my favourite Austen, although by a very small margin - difficult to choose between this and P&P!).
Northanger Abbey, being the first novel read nine months ago, I don't remember a lot about but Kelly's chapter certainly put in context the dangers that women faced in their normal, conventional lives and had me going 'woah'...
I'm glad I read the book. But if you want your Austens to remain fluffy, escapist, light-hearted, romantic chick-lits, I'd advise to give it a miss!
sophistikitty's review against another edition
3.0
This was an enjoyable, and interesting, read, but I couldn't escape the feeling that, quite a lot of the time, the author was rather stretching things to make her argument. She seems to begin most of her points with 'surely' Jane must have known this, or felt that, and therefore we can draw these conclusions from her text. And perhaps she's right, but she states her case with a lot more certainty than seems warranted.
Of course, the fact that she also expends a lot of energy in casting problematic aspersions on some (or most) of Jane Austen's beloved characters might be biasing me against her, as she no doubt anticipates. But even bearing that in mind, and trying to take it into account, I couldn't quite be convinced.
Even so, I think I'll reread the novels again.
Of course, the fact that she also expends a lot of energy in casting problematic aspersions on some (or most) of Jane Austen's beloved characters might be biasing me against her, as she no doubt anticipates. But even bearing that in mind, and trying to take it into account, I couldn't quite be convinced.
Even so, I think I'll reread the novels again.