I have long known that Jane Austen's beloved works have spun off a dizzying array of sequels, what-ifs, and stories about minor characters, but until recently I have only read one and it was quite traumatic. However, now with a scribd account, I have access to several of her self-proclaimed heirs and it has been interesting to peruse some of their works. As one might expect, there are 'the good, the bad, and the ugly,' among them. There can no more be another Jane Austen than there can be another Shakespeare, but it is amusing to read what might have happened. None can ever recreate her wit or even recreate her world, as she wrote about the world in which she lived whereas her heirs all live a century or two afterwards. What surprises me is the people who write 'in the style of Jane Austen' yet completely miss the whole point of her stories yet claim to be her heirs. I will not wander into the strange world of the Jane Austen meets the undead as I have not read those particular books nor have I any idea how Jane herself might respond. Will she be vastly amused as the writer of Northanger Abbey, or dismayed at the desecration of her beloved stories? I hope no one adds the like to my writing two hundred years from now! In the words of the Queen, I imagine her saying, 'we are not amused,' but who knows what she would say.
Returning to firmer ground, there are some sequels that contain rather lurid romantic interludes, as if one were peeking through the bed curtains at the newly wedded Darcys, Jane would no doubt be appalled, as I certainly was! Write what you will but do not call something an Austen sequel when it contains something to mortify the poor author, not to mention her beloved characters! Other books seemed to miss the point that Miss Austen's works were considered 'a comedy of manners,' basically a humorous look into human behavior, social interactions, and why people act the way they do. Some of the sequels tend towards a more 'historical' view, seeming to think Austen wrote books like Middlemarch and North and South, rather than Pride and Prejudice. The originals contain very little in the way of historic, political, or social commentary about the place and time they were written; they focus on the lives of their characters and therein are content whereas some of the sequels delve into the Napoleonic wars, the industrial revolution, slavery, etc. This is fine if one wants to read a novel dealing more with history or social upheavals (which is a laudable past time), but it is not in the style of Miss Austen. Others are poorly written, containing obvious errors, bad grammar, or worse, a more modern slang. Some have plots depending too much on adventure, intrigue, and tragic events, which again is not a feature of Jane Austen, who used such events sparsely in her stories and focused more on her characters response to such situations and how they grew (or not) in the process. Lydia ran away with Mr. Wickham, but we only hear news of it second hand rather than sitting in the carriage during the 'infamous elopement' and are heartened or saddened or amused by the reactions of the various characters to Lydia's foolishness. It is not the plot itself but rather a tool of it. A few of the sequels or 'what if' novels even go so far as to take a beloved character and twist them into someone other than his or herself.
All in all, there are several very good sequels and many passable ones and some that should not even be mentioned. I will try and compile a list (in no way exhaustive) of a few of them and we shall see what comes of it. All in all, it has been an interesting study, yet one wonders how to even begin to follow in the footsteps of such an esteemed and beloved author? It is a great undertaking and not all of the results are without merit, but some should never have been branded as heirs to this great author's works.
No comments:
Post a Comment