Scan barcode
mrs_merdle's review against another edition
4.0
Very interesting, especially how the author connects Jane Austen’s works to the social and political events of the time when she wrote them (which is in most cases quite a bit earlier than when they were published).
mamabadger's review against another edition
challenging
informative
fast-paced
4.5
This book offered a completely new perspective on Jane Austen and her writing. It especially expanded my understanding of one of her least well liked novels, Mansfield Park.
fourwhitetrees's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
sad
medium-paced
5.0
laraamaee's review against another edition
4.0
My English teacher gave me this book to borrow for a few days last year, and I only got to read the chapter on Pride & Prejudice and Emma before I had to give it back, but I was so intrigued that I bought my own copy of it (finally, almost a year later).
Many people view Jane Austen as light and bubbly; they associate her work with parlour room drama and Colin Firth in the 1995 BBC Pride & Prejudice series. But this book illuminates the fact that Austen wrote during a time when Britain was at war with France, and thus the country cracked down on creative works that dared to defy the government or challenge the status quo—in this context, it’s no wonder that the political messages in Austen’s work are fairly hidden, and that we have to look for them.
Most of us know that Austen highlights the inequality of marriage in her books, but Kelly links Pride & Prejudice to not only feminism but the French Revolution. There were many moments where I wanted to write ‘!!!!!’ in the margins of this book, particularly when Kelly underlined Austen’s criticism of slavery in Mansfield Park and enclosure in Emma (I can never look at Mr Knightley the same again). Even the fact that Austen may have been so meticulous in choosing her characters’ names that we can link the surname ‘Dashwood’ to how Austen wants to uproot the unfair system of primogeniture (whereby power and money is passed down the family tree to first sons only).
Although I had to skip the chapter on Northanger Abbey since I haven’t read it yet (but I’ve asked for it for my upcoming birthday…), I thoroughly enjoyed reading this enlightening book on one of my favourite authors. However, I cannot give it five stars because some parts aren’t the best, such as the passages at the start of each chapter in which Kelly writes about Austen’s life in a fictional, third-person narrative style (based on Austen’s letters) which somehow detracts from the serious tone of the rest of the book, and also the chapter on Persuasion which, although containing some good points about how Austen might have been challenging the Bible with regard to the scientific evidence of evolution, is not wholly convincing (see: “From Jane Austen to fossils is, really, just a step.”) Still, I would recommend this book if you enjoy Austen and want to examine the context and themes of her works in more detail, with a ‘radical’ lens.
Many people view Jane Austen as light and bubbly; they associate her work with parlour room drama and Colin Firth in the 1995 BBC Pride & Prejudice series. But this book illuminates the fact that Austen wrote during a time when Britain was at war with France, and thus the country cracked down on creative works that dared to defy the government or challenge the status quo—in this context, it’s no wonder that the political messages in Austen’s work are fairly hidden, and that we have to look for them.
Most of us know that Austen highlights the inequality of marriage in her books, but Kelly links Pride & Prejudice to not only feminism but the French Revolution. There were many moments where I wanted to write ‘!!!!!’ in the margins of this book, particularly when Kelly underlined Austen’s criticism of slavery in Mansfield Park and enclosure in Emma (I can never look at Mr Knightley the same again). Even the fact that Austen may have been so meticulous in choosing her characters’ names that we can link the surname ‘Dashwood’ to how Austen wants to uproot the unfair system of primogeniture (whereby power and money is passed down the family tree to first sons only).
Although I had to skip the chapter on Northanger Abbey since I haven’t read it yet (but I’ve asked for it for my upcoming birthday…), I thoroughly enjoyed reading this enlightening book on one of my favourite authors. However, I cannot give it five stars because some parts aren’t the best, such as the passages at the start of each chapter in which Kelly writes about Austen’s life in a fictional, third-person narrative style (based on Austen’s letters) which somehow detracts from the serious tone of the rest of the book, and also the chapter on Persuasion which, although containing some good points about how Austen might have been challenging the Bible with regard to the scientific evidence of evolution, is not wholly convincing (see: “From Jane Austen to fossils is, really, just a step.”) Still, I would recommend this book if you enjoy Austen and want to examine the context and themes of her works in more detail, with a ‘radical’ lens.
thebibliotake_89's review against another edition
4.0
3.5 Stars
For someone who is well-versed in all of the Austens and has read them both for pleasure and academic study, there wasn't a great deal of new findings or arguments for me, but it was nonetheless exciting to see Kelly's arguments published in a commercial book
I think this book is perfect for bringing awareness to the fact that Jane Austen isn't all chinz as often portrayed in film and TV adaptations, and I will continue to argue the case until I'm blue in the face.
For someone who is well-versed in all of the Austens and has read them both for pleasure and academic study, there wasn't a great deal of new findings or arguments for me, but it was nonetheless exciting to see Kelly's arguments published in a commercial book
I think this book is perfect for bringing awareness to the fact that Jane Austen isn't all chinz as often portrayed in film and TV adaptations, and I will continue to argue the case until I'm blue in the face.
keeganrb's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
3.5
Content Warnings
Minor: Chronic illness and Death
petrauusimaa's review against another edition
2.0
While Helena Kelly surely knows how to write nonfiction, I can't get past of her interpretations of Jane Austen's novels. Kelly has a point of view that is highly anachronistic and far fetched at many points. She has surely done her research; when it comes to the contemporaries of Austen and the historical background, Kelly comes across as a good scholar. However I am so frustrated by everything else in this one, including how it seems that Kelly thinks her interpretation is only point of view that matters.
s_books's review against another edition
2.5
*I received this book for free through Goodreads Giveaways*
This is really a 2.5 star book.
It may be a bit presumptuous for the author to claim that she is presenting Jane Austen and her works as "[Jane] wanted to be read", especially considering the tear-down Kelly presents of Austen's family's portrayal of her but the concept is enticing, namely that Jane Austen's works were well-disguised criticisms of her contemporary society and not just drawing room romances. Also, even though the order of the "critical readings" is supposedly in the order they were made ready for publication, it could also--considering how Austen's works and Austen herself are typically viewed--be seen as in increasing likelihood of main character(s) ending up as spinster(s).
Also it's a bit confusing -- and comes off a bit like too much like trying to be "in" or "down" -- that the author constantly refers to Austen as "Jane" and not by her last name. It feels like the author is trying to impress how well she knows "Jane", enough to be on a first name basis and that she is closer to her and to understanding her than all those other writers who use "Austen". Furthermore, since Austen used the name "Jane" herself for several of the characters in her books, and since this book is about a way of reading those books, certainly the characters' names come up many times throughout the book, including Jane. This is especially confusing (read: annoying) in the chapter about [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926] since the secondary female character is named Jane -- I'm never sure whether the author of this book is referring to that Jane or to Austen herself and I often have to go back and reread a sentence because I'm left confused, having thought we referring to the former when really it was the latter.
I'm not sure I agree with Kelly's readings of Austen's novels although her reading of [b:Mansfield Park|45032|Mansfield Park|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1397063295s/45032.jpg|2722329] is somewhat convincing, helped in no small part by the fact that the maker's of the 1999 film adaptation seemed to wholeheartedly share the view that the book is about or at least heavily referencing slavery. However, some of the others feel a bit stretching, especially the last one about [b:Persuasion|2156|Persuasion|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1385172413s/2156.jpg|2534720]; it almost feels like the author didn't originally have an alternative reading in mind for Persuasion but since all the other books had one, they came up with one quickly even if the amount of evidence for it feels decidedly lacking compared to some of the others. Overall, I agree only with the very ending of this book: read Jane Austen's works again.
This is really a 2.5 star book.
It may be a bit presumptuous for the author to claim that she is presenting Jane Austen and her works as "[Jane] wanted to be read", especially considering the tear-down Kelly presents of Austen's family's portrayal of her but the concept is enticing, namely that Jane Austen's works were well-disguised criticisms of her contemporary society and not just drawing room romances. Also, even though the order of the "critical readings" is supposedly in the order they were made ready for publication, it could also--considering how Austen's works and Austen herself are typically viewed--be seen as in increasing likelihood of main character(s) ending up as spinster(s).
Also it's a bit confusing -- and comes off a bit like too much like trying to be "in" or "down" -- that the author constantly refers to Austen as "Jane" and not by her last name. It feels like the author is trying to impress how well she knows "Jane", enough to be on a first name basis and that she is closer to her and to understanding her than all those other writers who use "Austen". Furthermore, since Austen used the name "Jane" herself for several of the characters in her books, and since this book is about a way of reading those books, certainly the characters' names come up many times throughout the book, including Jane. This is especially confusing (read: annoying) in the chapter about [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926] since the secondary female character is named Jane -- I'm never sure whether the author of this book is referring to that Jane or to Austen herself and I often have to go back and reread a sentence because I'm left confused, having thought we referring to the former when really it was the latter.
I'm not sure I agree with Kelly's readings of Austen's novels although her reading of [b:Mansfield Park|45032|Mansfield Park|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1397063295s/45032.jpg|2722329] is somewhat convincing, helped in no small part by the fact that the maker's of the 1999 film adaptation seemed to wholeheartedly share the view that the book is about or at least heavily referencing slavery. However, some of the others feel a bit stretching, especially the last one about [b:Persuasion|2156|Persuasion|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1385172413s/2156.jpg|2534720]; it almost feels like the author didn't originally have an alternative reading in mind for Persuasion but since all the other books had one, they came up with one quickly even if the amount of evidence for it feels decidedly lacking compared to some of the others. Overall, I agree only with the very ending of this book: read Jane Austen's works again.