TALKING JANE AUSTEN WITH ... MARGARET C. SULLIVAN + GIVEAWAY

Margaret C. Sullivan is the editrix of AustenBlog and the author of The Jane Austen Handbook. She is a life member of the Jane Austen Society of North America (JASNA). During the day she works as a web content coordinator for a large international law firm, and by night she attempts to convince the world that Henry Tilney is much cooler than that Darcy fellow.

Read the interview and win this precious handbook! 

 

Welcome Margaret and thanks a lot for finding the time to answer all my questions.
 

Maria Grazia, thank you so much for having me on your Jane Austen Book Club! 

I’ve quickly read through the introduction before starting writing my questions for you. It’s perfect invitation to go on! I can’t wait to read the rest of your The  Jane Austen Handbook, Margaret.  (I sent my questions to Margaret before finishing reading the book) It  sounds a precious contribution which all Janeites should treasure on their JA shelf. Who is the reader you were thinking of while writing it? 

I wrote it mostly for the newer reader of Jane Austen, someone who is unfamiliar with the time period. When I was writing it, I tried to keep in mind the questions that I had when I was first reading Austen. However, I knew that people who knew me, and who read my blog and my fiction and already knew a lot about Jane Austen, would also want to read it, so I put in little asides and references and jokes for Janeites; and I learned a lot while writing it, so I think even experienced Janeites can get something from it. I also want to say, as there seems to be some confusion about it—if you are not sure at any point in the book if I was joking about something, most likely I WAS joking about it! 

I also loved your dedication: “For my mother, who let me read everything”. Can you tell us something more about your freedom of reading and how it led you to discover and love Jane Austen? Do you owe that to your mother too?

That dedication is a little bit of a joke. I come from a family of readers, and had a library card when I was six years old, but even before then my eldest brother and my mother would get books for me on their cards. We were lucky to have a library right up the street from our house, and I spent a lot of time in there and read my way through the very large children's section. I was a precocious reader, and the librarians, knowing I read well above my age level, let me take out some books that were not quite age-appropriate (Paul Zindel is the main one I remember—his books are for teenagers and I was seven or eight years old). I would read them and then ask a lot of difficult questions. But my mother, to her credit, never told me, "You can't read that." It didn't hurt me to read them; the inappropriate stuff went over my head. I've never been afraid to read anything, and I'm sure she had something to do with it.

And yet, I didn't read Jane Austen's books till I was nearly thirty years old! I wish someone had directed me to them when I was younger, but that didn't happen. Sometimes I feel like I will never get to read all the books I want to read.

What is the best part of Jane Austen’s World to you?

If you mean the world of her novels, I think the best thing about  it is that there was so much fun and humor in the novels and even the politics of the day. The Victorians weren't really very funny people, but of course Jane Austen's books are hilarious, and other books from the Georgian and Regency periods are really funny, too. I was more accustomed to Victorian fiction when I first read Jane Austen's novels, and I was really surprised and delighted by how funny they are, and now that I've read more from the time period, I have learned it was a very common thing.

Also the design of the time—architecture, clothing, everything—was just elegant and exquisite.

If you mean places in Jane Austen's novels or life, my favorite would be Bath. I know it wasn't Jane's favorite place, but I love Bath. I was only there once for a few days, but I will be back! 

Which was the chapter/section you were more amused by while writing? (I love “Making Love” and “How to attend a Ball”!)

I love the sections about dancing and balls, too. I learned quite a bit while researching and writing them, especially about the social aspects of ballroom behavior. I really understand why everyone thought Darcy was so rude at the Meryton assembly, and why Mr. Elton was so rude at the Westons' ball. I also understand why young ladies got so excited about balls—even today, getting all dressed up to go to a party is a big part of the fun!

What do you envy to women living at Jane Austen’s time and what in their lives you are happy to avoid living in the present?

The amount of leisure time that gentry women had is very attractive to me! I have very little free time myself, and would love to have time to read, write, and do needlework.

However, I don't think I would like being stuck at home as much as they are. It was so difficult to travel and just get from one place to the other. Also I'm probably a little too fond of 21^st-century hygiene practices to really enjoy living in those days! And with my luck I would probably be a scullery-maid or something rather than a gentry lady. 

Studying about her so much and for so long, have you definitely understood what Jane’s opinion on marriage was?

I think Austen was all for marriage, if the two partners loved and respected one another, and if they had enough money to get by—not necessarily lots and lots of money, but enough to live on comfortably. Just love, or just money, would not do for her; and I think respect might be the most important thing of all. Look at the Bennets—Mr. Bennet could not respect his wife, and we see the results. And even the late Lady Elliot in Persuasion made an unwise marriage, and could not respect her husband, and Austen makes it pretty plain that she did not have a happy life. I think she shows that love does not last if respect is not there; or perhaps that "love" formed on the basis of hormonal attraction is not sufficient for a long-lasting marriage.

As for Jane herself, I think she never met a man for whom she felt it was worth giving up her independence. She chose to be single and try to support herself with her writing. Right after she accepted, and then rejected, Harris Bigg-Wither, she started sending out her work to publishers (and Northanger Abbey, in its first incarnation as Susan, was accepted). I suspect that those two things were not unrelated—that she made a very conscious decision to stay single and devote herself to her writing. She probably knew that if she got married that family responsibilities would prevent her from having a lot of time to write. I think that while she knew being single would limit her socially in many ways, the freedom it gave her to write was worth it. However, if she had met a man she wanted to marry, who was willing and able to marry her, I don't think she would have refused him.

Does Jane Austen give us a model married couple in any of her novels?

The Crofts in Persuasion are a wonderful couple. There is a little bit in the novel that is a great description of their relationship. It takes place in Volume I, Chapter X, when they give Anne Elliot a ride home from Winthrop, and shows how well each complemented the other.

(Mrs. Croft says:) "My dear Admiral, that post! we shall certainly take that post."

But by coolly giving the reins a better direction herself they happily passed the danger; and by once afterwards judiciously putting out her hand they neither fell into a rut, nor ran foul of a dung-cart; and Anne, with some amusement at their style of driving, which she imagined no bad representation of the general guidance of their affairs, found herself safely deposited by them at the Cottage.

They get on so well and are so much interested in each other. They are friends as well as lovers. From Volume II, Chapter VI:

The Crofts knew quite as many people in Bath as they wished for, and considered their intercourse with the Elliots as a mere matter of form, and not in the least likely to afford them any pleasure. They brought with them their country habit of being almost always together. He was ordered to walk to keep off the gout, and Mrs. Croft seemed to go shares with him in everything, and to walk for her life to do him good. Anne saw them wherever she went. Lady Russell took her out in her carriage almost every morning, and she never failed to think of them, and never failed to see them. Knowing their feelings as she did, it was a most attractive picture of happiness to her. She always watched them as long as she could, delighted to fancy she understood what they might be talking of, as they walked along in happy independence, or equally delighted to see the Admiral's hearty shake of the hand when he encountered an old friend, and observe their eagerness of conversation when occasionally forming into a little knot of the navy, Mrs. Croft looking as intelligent and keen as any of the officers around her.

I also love that Anne is getting a glimpse of what might be her own future life, though she doesn't know it yet!

Leafing on through the pages of your lovely handbook I read: “Is Mrs Bennet the hero of P&P?” I had never heard of such a hypothesis and found it rather puzzling. I’ve always been so sure the protagonists were Lizzie and Darcy! Do scholars really state Mrs Bennet can be considered as such?

Yes, many scholars and non-scholars have given their opinion that Mrs. Bennet is a heroic character, because she is the only one who truly understands that her daughters must marry well or they will have no home or money once Mr. Bennet dies, and that even though she is ridiculous, she is only concerned for her daughters' welfare. (I think they are exaggerating about Mrs. Bennet being the "hero," however, for extra effect.) There is even a little line given to Mrs. Bennet  in the 2005 adaptation of P&P, when Mrs. Bennet tells Lizzy that she only acts like she does because she worries about what will happen to the girls if they don't marry. (There is nothing like that line in the book.) While I agree that the Bennet daughters' situation is precarious, I don't think that Mrs. Bennet's interference is entirely unselfish. One gets the impression that she wants the girls to marry because it will make her look good, not because she is really concerned with her daughters' happiness. Compare the reaction of the Bennet parents to Elizabeth's engagement to Darcy. Mr. Bennet, who doesn't know that Elizabeth has had a change of heart about Darcy and thinks that she is only marrying him for his wealth, tries to talk her out of it. He fears that she will be unhappy in her marriage, which might lead someone of "her lively talents," living among high society as Mrs. Darcy would be, to have an affair, which could be disastrous—Darcy could divorce her, and then she would be in a terrible position. Once Elizabeth assures him that she does love and respect Darcy, he gives his blessing. Mrs. Bennet, on the other hand, badmouths Darcy right up till the time that Elizabeth tells her they are engaged, and then she can't say enough nice things about him!

When her mother went up to her dressing-room at night, she followed her, and made the important communication. Its effect was most extraordinary; for on first hearing it, Mrs. Bennet sat quite still, and unable to utter a syllable. Nor was it under many, many minutes that she could comprehend what she heard; though not in general backward to credit what was for the advantage of her family, or that came in the shape of a lover to any of them. She began at length to recover, to fidget about in her chair, get up, sit down again, wonder, and bless herself.

"Good gracious! Lord bless me! only think! dear me! Mr. Darcy! Who would have thought it! And is it really true? Oh! my sweetest Lizzy! how rich and how great you will be! What pin-money, what jewels, what carriages you will have! Jane's is nothing to it -- nothing at all. I am so pleased -- so happy. Such a charming man! -- so handsome! so tall! -- Oh, my dear Lizzy! pray apologise for my having disliked him so much before. I hope he will overlook it. Dear, dear Lizzy. A house in town! Every thing that is charming! Three daughters married! Ten thousand a year! Oh, Lord! What will become of me. I shall go distracted."

"Jane's is nothing to it." Her project of the past year—to marry Jane off to Bingley—is nothing. She thinks Darcy is an awful person, but now that he wants to marry her daughter, he's everything wonderful. If Mrs. Bennet really cared about Elizabeth's happiness, she would, like her husband, have questioned Elizabeth more about her feelings for Darcy before giving her blessing. Also, Mrs. Bennet is very happy when Lydia and Wickham get engaged—though they will not have a good, happy, mutually beneficial marriage. But to Mrs. Bennet, to have a daughter married at sixteen is something she can boast of.

Which are your favourite Austen hero and heroine? (not necessarily a couple)

My favorite hero is Henry Tilney of Northanger Abbey, who is witty and amusing and very sweet to his heroine. I love smart, funny men and he might be the smartest (and certainly is the wittiest) of her heroes. My favorite heroine is Elizabeth Bennet, because she is (for the most part) so confident in most situations and people are drawn to her and like her, except of course Caroline Bingley, and who cares what she thinks?

What is the minor character you find most interesting? Why?

I am extremely fond of Mary and Charles Musgrove's two bratty sons, Charles and Walter. I have given a great deal of thought to how they would turn out as adults (and written those stories). The answer: they have enough good adults around them to give them better direction than one might think!

I also gave William Price, Fanny's brother, to Captain Wentworth to be his lieutenant on the Laconia. I think they both will profit by it, not to mention the readers.

I love everything Austen,  so adaptations as well as fanfiction. What is your opinion on the great deal of films and books Austen-related come out in the latest years?

As I have produced some fan fiction/paraliterature myself (may I please put in a plug for my novella, There Must Be Murder, a sequel to Northanger Abbey?), I can't very well say bad things about it! I understand that a lot of Janeites don't think it's right to write such novels, but transformative storytelling has gone on since humans walked upright and learned to communicate and tell stories. I wish more people would give them a try—but do check out the reviews, positive and negative, first, so that you are more likely to find something you will enjoy.

I wish there was more variety in the stories, though I suppose fans of the novels other than P&P are too small a niche for commercial publishers. But there are a lot of really good Austen-related books out there, and I hope that those who are unsure will take a chance and try one or more of them.

As for the movies, I was unimpressed in general by the latest crop of them (except for Bride and Prejudice and Miss Austen Regrets; neither was perfect but I enjoyed them quite a bit). I think the mid-1990s films, while also not perfect, are still the gold standard. That could, however, just be a generational thing. Now you kids get off my lawn!

Is there anything of Jane Austen we should remind here to our readers, which is instead often forgotten according to you?

Her books are funny! You would never know it from some of the adaptations—fiction, films, etc. They are so earnest and serious and melodramatic! Not that there's anything wrong with some drama, but it should be, like all good things, in moderation. 

I think The Jane Austen Handbook is the perfect present for a Janeite, so I suggest my readers to take notes for their friends’ next birthdays! How would you review it in about 50 words?

Thank you! I hope that anyone who receives the book enjoys it. Here's my short review: If you have read and loved Jane Austen's novels and wondered about  anything you encountered there—from money to clothes to social events—you might just find the answers in the Jane Austen Handbook, and if you don't, you will at least have a laugh and celebrate being a Janeite! (Wow, that's exactly 50 words.)

Thanks Margaret for taking the time to answer all my questions. Best wishes for all your Austen related activities and your life!

Thank you for hosting me on your blog, and keep reading and writing about Jane Austen! I love the diversity of voices that are possible on the Internet, and I am delighted that Jane's books are being enjoyed all over the world. I'm sure she would be thrilled about it—any author would be.

That's all for now, Margaret. Keep up the good  Austen work !

Thank you, Maria Grazia. I very much enjoyed answering your  questions—I always love thinking and writing about Jane Austen's work.

GIVEAWAY

Win a copy  of Margaret C. Sullivan's new edition of THE JANE AUSTEN HANDBOOK. Leave a comment to this interview + your e-mail address. The giveaway is open only to US and Canada readers. Thanks to Quirbooks for providing the giveaway copy. The name of the winner will be announced on April 20.

WINNERS OF THE LATEST GIVEAWAYS

I'm glad to announce the names of the winners of the latest giveaways on My Jane Austen Book Club:

  

CAIT WINS VERA NAZARIAN 'S 

MANSFIELD PARK AND MUMMIES

 JERSEYSUE WINS VERA NAZARIAN'S 

NORTHANGER ABBEY AND ANGELS AND DEMONS

KIRSTEN WINS THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EMMA 

BY JULIET ARCHER

I want to thank heartily both Vera Nazarian and Juliet Archer for being such exquisite and generous guests. Many thanks to all of you who took part in the contest. 

And, last but not least, congratulations to the winners!!! MG

WHO LIVES THERE QUIZ & GIVEAWAY - POCKET POSH JANE AUSTEN

An easy task for real Janeites. A quiz chosen from Pocket Posh Jane Austen to give you all a chance to win a copy of this precious fun little book. Ready to guess and e-mail me your answers at learnonline.mgs@gmail.com? I'll draw the name of the winner on April 19 so you've got plenty of time to discover the matches, if you're not ready yet. In fact, the task I propose is to match the following characters with their homes. Here we go:

Characters

Colonel Brandon

Mr Bingley

Robert Martin

Lady Catherine

Sir Thomas Bertram

Mr Knightley

Homes
Rosings
Abbey Mill Farm
Downwell Abbey
Delaford
Netherfield
Mansfield Park

Now, to have the chance to win a free copy of Pocket Posh Jane Austen - 100 Puzzles and Quizzes , just leave a short comment here with your name or nickname but, remember, DON'T WRITE THE 6 MATCHES in it.  Send them via e-mail at the address given above. This giveaway ends on April 19 and is open internationally. Good luck, everyone!

SECOND JANE AUSTEN MEETING IN RICCIONE FROM APRIL 14th TO 17th

Jane Austen is celebrated for the second time in Riccione (Italy) by "Il Club Sofa and Carpet" on occasion of the Sense and Sensibility Bicentenary . After the enthusiastic outcomes and successful experience of the first meeting last year, a new fabulous schedule full of events is offered to participants . What best then reading and discussing Jane Austen's work by the sea and  the sunny, sandy beaches in Riccione. 

Among the most interesting proposals : 

• Regency Dances - Workshop
• Prof. Roberto Bertinetti of TriesteUniversity on Sense and Sensibility ( he's the editor of the latest Italian release of the novel  for Eidnaudi, 2010)
• Cesare Catà of Fermo University will present an interactive workshop about Jane Austen's philosophy and soul; 
• Regency costume parade
• theatrical performances at the Castle 

The First Meeting 2010 - Jane Austen on the Beach

Chiara at  Il Club Sofa and Carpet di Jane Austen did a brilliant job at organizing all that!  Oh, and by the way,  you are all invited, of course!

To get in touch and know more about the event

www.clubjaneausten.it ( sito web work in progress )

www.sofaandcarpet.blogspot.com ( blog ) 

info@clubjaneausten.it

GUESTBLOG: JULIET ARCHER, TAMPERING WITH PERFECTION + GIVEAWAY

Juliet Archer describes herself as ‘a 19^th-century mind in a 21^st-century body – actually, some days it’s the other way round’. She is on a mission to modernise all six of Jane Austen’s completed novels. The first in the series, The Importance of Being Emma, was shortlisted for the 2009 Melissa Nathan Award for Comedy Romance – a genre she believes Austen excelled at. The second, Persuade Me, will be published in September. You can find out more about Juliet on www.julietarcher.com and www.austenauthors.com; she is also taking part in the Austen Twitter Project. Today she is talking to My Jane Austen Book Club about Austen’s heroes and offering a copy of The Importance of Being Emma as a giveaway. Please comment and provide your email address if you would like to be entered into the giveaway competition.Open worldwide, this giveaway ends on April 14th.

Hi, everyone! And thank you, Maria , for inviting me along. I love your blog and drop in as often as I can.

Some of you may be asking, ‘Why on earth would anyone tamper with Jane Austen?’ Well, first of all, my theory is that most romantic fiction is modeled on one of Austen’s stories. Hate at first sight? Think Pride & Prejudice. Lost love regained? Persuasion. Old friends falling in love? Emma. Love Gothic-fantasy-style? Northanger Abbey, and so on. Second, if you want to write comedy romance, why not learn from the master of the genre? Austen attained absolute perfection with her unforgettable characters, sparkling dialogue, elegant prose and page-turning plots.

But in my view there’s no point in producing a pale imitation – you have to tamper with it to make it your own. That’s why I’ve decided not only to bring Austen’s novels bang up to date, but also to get inside the heads of her heroes. I find that this is the most enjoyable part of modernising Austen – filling in the gaps that she left in our understanding of her male characters. Apparently, she never wrote a scene with just men in it – there had to be a woman. For each of her heroes, therefore, she provides a starting point and an end point and a few little clues along the way – but the rest is up to me!

Inevitably, modernising Jane Austen’s novels means taking certain liberties with the originals, mainly around transporting the characters, dialogue and plot lines into today’s world. These liberties are acceptable to Austen fans, because without them the modernisation would be stuck in a time warp, belonging to neither the 19^th nor the 21^st century. 

See all Jane Austen heroes HERE

 When it comes to tampering with Austen’s heroes, however, an author is treading on far more dangerous ground. Imagine Mr Darcy with a lisp, or a manic-depressive Henry Tilney! But sometimes leaving them unchanged just will not do.

When I started my first modernisation, The Importance of Being Emma, I took a long, serious look at George Knightley. Forget Jeremy Northam, Mark Strong and Jonny Lee Miller, who portray him on screen! In the original, he’s 37, has no apparent history with the opposite sex, is a pillar of Highbury society and woos Emma with the immortal line, ‘God knows, I have been a very indifferent lover’. So, on paper at least, he has far less appeal for most readers than Darcy or Wentworth. And why would 21-year-old Emma Woodhouse, with her rampant eligibility and penchant for matchmaking, consider him remotely lustworthy? Well, knowing the original Emma, she was after position rather than passion – but my heroine was already evolving into a sassy, savvy, 21^st-century woman.

There was no alternative: George Knightley had to have a makeover. I cut the age difference between him and Emma, to make sure he’s not old enough (technically) to be her father. Changed his first name from George to Mark (in spite of my weakness for George Clooney, ‘George’ just didn’t feel right as I didn’t know any 34-year-olds by that name – they’re all much older or younger). Gave him a stunning girlfriend, and kept him well away from Highbury while Emma was growing up. It seems to have worked: readers love the new Knightley, as does Emma who we first meet at 14 years old, in the prologue. It’s a flashback to the moment when Knightley discovers she has a crush on him; he deals with it less than sympathetically, giving Emma every reason to resist his charms when they meet years later …

And if I say that Mark Knightley is six foot two, dark-haired and blue-eyed, can you guess who my inspiration was for this makeover?  

Yes! Richard Armitage. Who else?

 Moving on to my next modernisation, however, the hero of Persuasion didn’t need any tampering with – apart from giving him a more convincing reason to disappear for 8 years than the Napoleonic Wars! I still wanted him to do something sea-related – so Captain Frederick Wentworth has become Dr Rick Wentworth, a marine biologist who’s become a world expert on sea dragons, beautiful creatures that live only off the south coast of Australia. He returns to England on a book tour and meets Anna Elliot, the girl who refused to go to Australia with him 8 years ago. The words ‘forgive and forget’ aren’t in Rick’s vocabulary, but the word ‘regret’ is definitely in Anna’s. When they meet again, can she persuade him that their lost love is worth a second chance? You’ll have to read the book to find out – although I suspect you already know what the answer is!

I’ve already started work on my third Austen modernisation, Northanger Abbey. Like Wentworth, the delicious Henry Tilney doesn’t need much tampering with. Neither will Darcy, I’m sure, when I get round to updating Pride & Prejudice.

But what about Edward Ferrars and Edmund Bertram? They’re often considered the least attractive of Austen’s male leads. For a start, each is entangled with the anti-heroine, Lucy Steele and Mary Crawford respectively, to a far greater extent than Austen’s other heroes. Both have a second, potentially more attractive, male lead to contend with – Colonel Brandon and Henry Crawford. Finally, on the page their personalities have less impact than playful Henry Tilney or brooding Fitzwilliam Darcy. At this stage, I see Edmund as more of a challenge than Edward – but who knows?

Let’s return now to my 21^st-century version of Wentworth and an extract from Persuade Me – that fateful moment when he and Anna meet again in Uppercross, at the house of Charles and Mona (another name change, for obvious reasons!) Musgrove:

Charles took a little turning off the lane, beside a large sign saying ‘Uppercross Manor’, and Rick followed him blindly. Down a side path, into a sudden fragrance of lavender, across a wide sunny terrace strewn with kids’ toys. Then through a door and –

Two worlds collided. The one he inhabited now, with its ship-like order and restraint; and the one he’d glimpsed eight years ago. With a girl who’d once wiggled her toes at him until he caught hold of her small, perfect foot and covered it in kisses.

This girl. These toes. This foot.

He dragged his gaze to her face. She was too busy with the little boy to notice him, so he had several long seconds to study her haggard, unkempt appearance. He felt oddly pleased that she’d lost her looks; especially since she wouldn’t see much change in his.

At last, she glanced up and their eyes met. He watched her smile fade and her face go rigid with disbelief; then she flushed and looked away.

The boy broke the strained silence. ‘Who dat man?’

Charles breezed in – Rick hadn’t even realised that he’d gone out of the room – and said, ‘That’s Rick, he’s coming up to see our lake. Sorry, Rick, haven’t introduced you. This is Anna, Mona’s sister, and my son, Harry. By the way, Anna, have you seen my spare rod?’

She gave him a stunned look, but said nothing.

Charles’s voice softened noticeably. ‘Don’t worry, you’re obviously on another planet, I’ll check the shed.’ He turned to Rick and added, ‘She’s whacked – my other son sprained his ankle yesterday and he’s had a bit of a restless night. Poor Anna bore the brunt, she’s wonderful with the children, always happy to come and help us out.’

Quite the little ménage à trois, Rick thought sourly. He cleared his throat, muttered ‘Hi’ and followed Charles outside.

It was over. He’d met her again and he’d felt nothing. Nothing at all.

I hope you recognise something of Jane Austen’s original hero and feel that my tampering has not been in vain!

Thank you for ‘listening’ – any questions?

Juliet Archer

TALKING JANE AUSTEN WITH ... VERA NAZARIAN + DOUBLE GIVEAWAY!!!

 Here I am with a new guest to talk Jane Austen with! Vera Nazarian is a young very original Austen-inspired writer. Her speciality are monster mash-up. Here she is to explain her choice answering my very indiscreet questions. 

How bothering/nosey  can I be? I guess, infinitely! I love asking questions. Here's my interview, then. Ready to read, ask Vera questions or leave your comments. Two of you will have the chance to win an autographed book. Vera Nazarian granted you a copy of "Mansfield Park and Mummies" and a copy of "Northanger Abbey and Angels and Dragons". Please, leave an e-mail address so that I can contact you in case you win and choose the book you'd like to win/read.

Good luck, everyone! And welcome to Vera Nazarian! Here's my first questions for her.

After writing fantasy and science fiction you came to write a "monster mash-up" parody of one Jane Austen’s novels,  “Mansfield Park and Mummies” . How did that happen?

An interesting question, thanks for asking!  Here is how it all began.

About three years ago, when the literary classics mash-up craze was born via the Pride and Prejudice and Zombies phenomenon, and everyone clamored to jump on the bandwagon, I received an unusual book submission from author and university professor Adam Campan for my small publishing house Norilana Books.

 For starters, it was different because it was a serious mash-up. James Fairfax by Adam Campan is an elegant, thoughtful gay and lesbian version of Jane Austen's Emma, with many characters' genders reversed. I found the story and language to be very true to the original, subtle, and yet a whole new take on the original classic. And, unlike the other mash-ups out there, it was genuinely well-written. It mimicked the style of Jane Austen seamlessly. I was proud to acquire Mr. Campan's unusual book, and released this title through the main Norilana Books imprint.

Then, as time went on, and the more I thought about it, I wanted to try my own hand at this mash-up genre. Except, I wanted to do it in a way that would combine the best of both worlds -- a wacky and humorous story that was also well-written and true to its own time period, and seamlessly fitting the style of Jane Austen.

 The humor was to come from wit, repartee, satire, and comic timing, as opposed to shock value and the juxtaposition of bloody gore and zombies and classic literature. The mayhem was to be harmless, like Abbott and Costello, and suitable for most readers.

And so, for my main supernatural element, I used mummies, historically relevant to the Egyptology craze of the time. They easily fit into and subtly expanded the original story of Mansfield Park.

 A mummy is such a complex, interesting "monster." It can be romantic, funny, tragic, and scary, all at the same time.  I also widened the supernatural milieu to include various other creatures -- vampires, werewolves, even the Brighton Duck  (a monstrous duck of my own creation, with a nod to the Hound of Baskervilles).  After all, a magical world that has one kind of monster will likely have them all -- the more, the merrier!

 Now, if a reader is expecting the same kind of blunt, crude, bloody kickass modern shocker mash-up as P&P&Z, they will not like my novels.  (Admittedly, there is nothing wrong with P&P&Z, and that kind of humor definitely has its place.) But if they want real satire -- subtle language, complexity, wit, and completely non-gory mayhem -- they've come to the right place.

In the process of writing Mansfield Park and Mummies, originally started on a lark, and as a way to help me out of a tough financial situation (I am in foreclosure, after years of struggle, illness, and death in the family) I found that I absolutely love working in this literary niche that combines comedy, parody, supernatural fantasy elements, and social satire. It's as if something truly magical has clicked for me, and it has become my own genre -- a combination of period-style language (at which I excel) and my skill at writing fantasy.

And now, I am resolved to single-handedly reclaim the classics mash-up as a respectable literary form.

And so I decided to commit myself to a three-year project called the Supernatural Jane Austen Series, and re-work all the Jane Austen novels into amusing, witty, charming and hilarious romantic fantasies. 

We know the Gothic Novel was a trendy genre when Jane was young and loved reading novels with her family. She teased the too sentimental, overreactive Gothic heroines through Catherine Morland’s misadventures at Northanger Abbey.  How do you explain this new trend in Austen-inspired fan-fiction mixing the two worlds, that of gothic/horror/terror and Austen?

First of all, I actually do not consider the previous mash-ups to be even remotely associated with the so-called Gothic genre. Gothic is narcissistic high emo, has little-to-no sense of humor, and truly loves to feed on itself.  P&P&Z on the other hand, is completely irreverent. It is the original example of the popular trend of infusing violent or gross monsters (zombies or vampires, but, notice, they're never pretty sparkling ones) and gory bloody mayhem into everything imaginable, for pure shock value.  It is its own genre, and should really be called the Monster Mash-up.

What I write instead is the Fantasy Mash-up, which takes a classic and expands it with all kinds of supernatural elements into a greater, wider 3D imaginary experience.  Think of it as a folded fan or umbrella of "story" that is one thing when collapsed, and becomes a completely new other thing when unfurled.  The underlying story remains the same, and yet it is now Story Plus.

Having said all that, the reason why Jane Austen seems so attractive and "vulnerable" to the gothic-supernatural-horror treatment of any kind, is because of how "peaceful, bland and genteel" her works appear to be on the surface, especially to those who don’t really know or understand Austen and are unaware of her dark side -- the biting wit, wicked satire skills and deep psychological insight and commentary. Jane Austen's books are thought to be stuffy and prudish romance and chick stuff.

And "messing with" Austen appeals to people who hate the "girly" stuff."  It's the act of stomping on the dainty rose beds and throwing a naughty baseball at the window… In modern terms, a monster is nothing more than a rude, awful frat boy being dropped into a formal ballroom, or crashing a proper ladies' tea party. And other supernatural elements (no matter how genteel and harmless in themselves) are also often perceived (incorrectly) as immature, nerdy, or "rude boy" stuff. So, mix in the rude boy attitude with the chick stuff and you get something palatable for the so-called macho crowd. It's perceived shock value and the "desire to despoil."

It is also the reason why so many classic literature purists justifiably find such monster mash-ups abominable. Unfortunately such purists also tend to lump together all things that have fantasy, gothic or supernatural elements, and that's rather unfair.

When and how did you happen to read Austen first? Was it at school /college/ university as for many of us?

I was assigned Pride and Prejudice in high school, and at the same time our class got to watch the Pride and Prejudice BBC mini-series starring David Rintoul and Elizabeth Garvie. That did it; I was enchanted, hooked completely, and in love with Austen, Darcy, Lizzy and the whole thing!

What do you like most in the world of her novels?

I love the romantic relationships and the happy endings, and the deft realist humor. But even more, I really think Jane Austen is balm for our painful stressed-out violent times. She represents what so many of us secretly crave -- not sensuality but stable companionship.  And the problems that are faced in Austen's novels are never worse than the vagaries of interpersonal relationships, as opposed to starvation, war, death, abuse, and basic struggles for sustenance.  She chooses to show a very specific, very narrow range of life's spectrum, the portion of the existential pie that we necessarily overlook when hardships pile on.  And because most of us are living in tough uncertain times, reading Austen reminds us of those overlooked things -- things that are experienced in more stable, quiet times -- and we can truly escape.

The world can all use a vacation from itself and shrink down into a comprehensible human-sized place, found only when reading Austen.

Which of her heroines do you feel you resemble most?

That's a tough one.  I think I am a cross between Elinor Dashwood and Fanny Price.  Probably two-thirds Elinor and one-third Fanny, with maybe a pinch of Charlotte Lucas tossed on top... While I might dream of grand romance, I am likely to do the less romantic and more sensible thing. Though, now and then I am a clown like Mr. Collins!

You’ve chosen to write your own mash-up parodies of Austen novels which are considered her less popular ones, MP and NA. Why?

I really admire Fanny Price as a character and can relate to her stubborn insistence on doing the right thing and making the right choice above all else. She is indomitable, and the novel Mansfield Park is sadly underrated, for the reason I mention below (in the question about re-writing a novel). Maybe for the same reason it is so complex and disturbing on an emotional level, I find it so fascinating. And I do believe Jane Austen herself held a very high opinion of MP, unfortunately not particularly shared by the readers and critics of her time.  In general, I feel that not enough has been done with MP in the sense of adaptations, and it is not as "tired" as the more popular P&P for example.

As for Northanger Abbey, it is also less "tired" and it has so much fun fodder for supernatural additions!  I simply took it to the next level, and made real the things only hinted at by Austen.  Bringing the Gothic wonders of the abbey to life was sheer joy and fun!  Add in the Udolpho Code, guardian angels that only our noble and naïve heroine can see, spooky ghosts, demons, and mysterious dragons, and you get the recipe for delightful wonder.

This is something I asked other writers of mash-up before, i.e. Michael Thomas Ford author of Jane Austen Bites Back and Jane Goes Batty. What do you think Jane Austen would think, reading your parodies?

I honestly think Jane with her wicked sense of humor would love them.  She would laugh uproariously, and be completely and utterly delighted with the pure and unadulterated satire. To the best of my abilities I stay true to Austen and the heart of all her characters.

Nothing that matters has been changed, only widened, expanded, and heightened -- like a sprinkling of MSG to heighten the flavor.  Jane would wholeheartedly approve.  And -- diehard Janeites, trust me on this.

What kind of readers do you have in your mind while writing your mash-up stories?

Definitely not zombie lovers! I am hoping for sophisticated readers with a sense of humor, and a love of the absurd, who enjoy the play of language, both period and modern, and the juxtaposition of modern pop culture notions, mores, and terminology cleverly disguised into period costume and beautiful glimmers of fantasy.

Lovers of satire, this is for you.  Also, lovers of sheer joy that can only be derived from mayhem and charming silliness -- plunge in!

As for language and style, did you try to mimic Austen witty prose in the Regency manner or have you tried to create your own style, a more contemporary language?

My own natural style is heavily old-fashioned, since I learned English mostly by reading 17th through 19th century English and English translation novels.  Russian is my first language and I am steeped in world classics.

So I am uniquely suited to mimic the period styles, and Austen in particular, I believe. However, please do judge for yourself by picking up a book of mine.

Blogging and surfing the Net, I’ve discovered what a successful and popular market the brand Jane Austen has got. What’s her huge popularity nowadays due to, in your opinion?

I think as I mentioned above, the world of her books brings a sort of calm and steadiness of mind to our troubled times. Jane Austen is truly balm for the modern soul.

Going back to Austen tradition, if you could change the destiny of an Austen hero/heroine, whose story would you rewrite?

I think it would have to be Mansfield Park. I really think that here was an opportunity the author did not take. Henry Crawford is bright, charming, fascinating. And, if rewritten as a man with more integrity and less flakiness, would make an excellent true reformed rake hero -- if only Jane Austen had taken him all the way.

As the story is, she basically put him on the road to redemption, but left him short. Because of the fundamental shortcoming of his character as written -- an ultimate shallowness, inability to follow through, and hence insufficient personal strength and not enough true love for Fanny -- Henry Crawford is and will always be such a dissonant figure for many readers who want him to be better than he really is.

Meanwhile, Edmund, the object of Fanny's love, is infatuated with Mary Crawford for most of the story, and his change of heart is barely touched upon by Austen in just a few frugal sentences at the end. So his eventual romantic appreciation of Fanny does not ring entirely true to the reader. Therefore, as a psychological story arc, Mansfield Park fails to truly satisfy. 

Overall, I do feel the original story works. As is, it underscores Fanny's moral fortitude and gives her a worthy and similar-minded mate (Edmund). It is complex and not "easily resolved," which makes it in some ways more "real" -- after all, in real life bad boys hardly ever change. But oh, it makes for a less deeply pleasing storyline.

So, in my rewritten version, I would give Henry Crawford a true inner nobility and have him not run off with Maria. He would prove his genuine love for Fanny by some profound means, maybe an act of self-sacrifice of some sort (not just an easy and contrived commission for her brother William). Then, once he has reformed, Henry and Fanny will be paired, and Edmund in turn would "reform" Mary Crawford and end up with her.

My story would be a more passionate story overall, possibly more emotionally satisfying for readers -- but it would not be true Jane Austen.

Which of the Austen famous matches do you think will be the most successful and happy, after the novel end? The couple who will have the least exciting married life, instead?

This is a bit of a trick question! I really do think that all of Austen's matches are perfectly happy as they are written, and in fact that is part of her underlying perennial appeal to the reader. There is no question in my mind they will all be equally happy and satisfied, though I do think that Emma Woodhouse might periodically drive Mr. Knightley crazy. 

However it is much easier to guess who might be a bit of a dull couple for the rest of us to observe (but never dull to each other!) -- it would be Elinor Dashwood and Edward Ferrars.  They both have very reserved and semi-repressed personalities, and they will be blissfully placid in their quiet daily lives.

Your latest release is “Northanger Abbey and Angels and Dragons”. Why don’t you tell us more about it?

The second book in the series, Northanger Abbey and Angels and Dragons, with a nod to Dan Brown and modern love of theological conspiracy theories, is available now. 

 It has wonder and absurdity, ludicrous indoor British weather, angels who follow Catherine in droves and give her endless advice (from how to comb her hair to which gentleman to dance with), demons (who belch), and a haunted gothic abbey. The Brighton Duck makes an encore appearance, the whole town of Bath goes on a scavenger hunt for hidden treasure (and absurd new fashions are born as a result), and dragons mysteriously fly in the skies overhead.

And here's the description:

Dragons in the skies of Regency England!

Gothic horrors collide with high satire in this elegant, hilarious, witty, insane, and unexpectedly romantic supernatural parody of Jane Austen's classic novel.

Young and naive Catherine Morland is constantly surrounded by angels only she alone can see. Leaving her country home for the first time, to embark on a grand adventure that begins in fashionable Bath, our romantic heroine must not only decrypt the mystery of the Udolpho Code but win her true love Henry Tilney.

Meanwhile she is beset by all the Gothic horrors known to Impressionable Young Ladies—odious demons, Regency balls, elusive ghosts, pleasure excursions, temperature-changing nephilim, secret clues, ogre suitors, and a terrifying ancient Dragon who has very likely hidden a secret treasure hoard somewhere in the depths of Northanger Abbey.

Have you already started writing your next? Top secret?

I am hard at work on the next novel in the Supernatural Jane Austen Series.  Each book takes the original Jane Austen storyline and adds in delightful fantastic elements.

Each one also comes with so-called Scholarly Footnotes -- absolutely inane and hilarious, and written by a complete lunatic. The footnotes insert anachronistic or purely silly commentary, harangue the reader, and include gag references to all kinds of things.

The other fun feature is the Appendices.  They must be seen to be appreciated.

Then of course there are the interior illustrations.  The books have some highly amusing line drawings by Yours Truly, and hopefully come as a fun surprise when you turn a page.

And so, next up in the series is:

Pride and Platypus: Mr. Darcy’s Dreadful Secret -- tackles all the werewolf and shape-shifter legends. When the moon is full over Regency England, all the gentlemen are subject to its curse.

And then, the other titles:

Pagan Persuasion: All Olympus Descends on Regency -- tackles the entire Greek Mythology fascination.  Ancient gods and heroes and creatures battle it out, and only the true love of Anne Eliot and Captain Wentworth can save the world from destruction!

Emma Enchanted -- takes on the current fad with fairies, and dips into The Faerie Queen. The Queen of all Faerie challenges Emma to a wondrous matchmaking contest.

Sense and Sanguine Sensibility -- tackles Twilight. (Oh boy, oh boy! Team Willoughby! Team Brandon!)

Lady Susan, Succubus -- takes on the popular sexy incubus/succubus demon fad.

For more information, go peek at the website:  http://www.norilana.com/norilana-curiosities.htm

 So that's all for now, Vera. Thanks for being my guest today  and kindly answer all my questions!

 Thanks for asking me these fun questions, it's been a pleasure!

Vera Nazarian is a two-time Nebula Award® Finalist, and a member of Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America. She immigrated to the USA from the former USSR as a kid, sold her first story at 17, and has been published in numerous anthologies and magazines, honorably mentioned in Year's Best volumes, and translated into eight languages.

Vera made her novelist debut with the critically acclaimed Dreams of the Compass Rose, followed by Lords of Rainbow. Her novella The Clock King and the Queen of the Hourglass made the 2005 Locus Recommended Reading List. Her debut collection Salt of the Air contains the 2007 Nebula Award-nominated "The Story of Love." Recent work includes the 2008 Nebula Finalist novella The Duke in His Castle, science fiction collection After the Sundial (2010), and Jane Austen parodies, Mansfield Park and Mummies (2009), Northanger Abbey and Angels and Dragons (2010), and Pride and Platypus: Mr. Darcy's Dreadful Secret (forthcoming).

Vera lives in Los Angeles. She uses her Armenian sense of humor and her Russian sense of suffering to bake conflicted pirozhki and make art. In addition to being a writer and award-winning artist, she is also the publisher of Norilana Books. Visit her website at www.veranazarian.com. 

Now it's you turn. Vera and I are looking forward to your contributions, questions and comments! Good luck with the double giveaway!  The contest is open worldwide and ends next Wednesday 13th April when the names of the two winners will be announced.