Austen's 'The History of England', a spoof history written by a teenage Jane Austen. Image by kind permission of the British Library and Jane Austen’s Fiction Manuscripts Digital Edition.
Posted on 10/26/2010 8:50:39 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
The polished prose of Emma and Persuasion was the product of an interventionist editor, an Oxford University academic has found.
Professor Kathryn Sutherland of the Faculty of English Language and Literature made the discovery while studying a collection of 1,100 original handwritten pages of Austen's unpublished writings for the Jane Austen Fiction Manuscripts Digital Edition.
The project, led by Professor Sutherland in collaboration with the Bodleian Libraries, King's College London and the British Library with funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council has reunited in a free-to-access online archive all Jane Austen's handwritten fiction manuscripts for the very first time since 1845 when they were scattered by the terms of her sister Cassandra's will...
"But in reading the manuscripts it quickly becomes clear that this delicate precision is missing. Austen's unpublished manuscripts unpick her reputation for perfection in various ways: we see blots, crossings out, messiness; we see creation as it happens; and in Austen's case, we discover a powerful counter-grammatical way of writing. She broke most of the rules for writing good English. In particular, the high degree of polished punctuation and epigrammatic style we see in Emma and Persuasion is simply not there."
Professor Sutherland adds: "This suggests somebody else was heavily involved in the editing process between manuscript and printed book; and letters between Austen's publisher John Murray II and his talent scout and editor William Gifford, acknowledging the untidiness of Austen's style and how Gifford will correct it, seem to identify Gifford as the culprit."
(Excerpt) Read more at physorg.com ...
Austen's 'The History of England', a spoof history written by a teenage Jane Austen. Image by kind permission of the British Library and Jane Austen’s Fiction Manuscripts Digital Edition.
|
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe · |
|||
Antiquity Journal & archive Archaeologica Archaeology Archaeology Channel BAR Bronze Age Forum Discover Dogpile Eurekalert LiveScience Mirabilis.ca Nat Geographic PhysOrg Science Daily Science News Texas AM Yahoo Excerpt, or Link only? |
|
||
|
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · |
|||
Jane Austen had an editor? Who knew?
Doesn’t this guy, Sutherland, realize that first drafts are always garbage? The art of writing is revision.
Now my wife is going to be harder to live with than before. She’s a great fan of Jane Austen. I’ll never hear the end of it. And she now longer likes Stephen King.
Life is hard!
This is a revelation that writers have editors? I’m amazed but mostly thankful the British taxpayers footed this worthy and enlightening “project” instead of US.
They are probably attacking her because she was a conservative.
For most, revision after revision...
So the first draft of “Pride and Prejudice” opened with “It was a dark and stormy night”?
No, it was “The milky white globes of her breasts glistened in the moonlight.”
There must have been printers proofs back then, right?
I mean, who writes a clean first draft, anyway?
lol...i’m going to sic the vulgarity cops on you here
trust me...they are here...
i never knew till this past weekend....and they have “helper”
A woman could NEVER have written so intelligently. Yeah, that's the ticket.
John Murray II, who was also Byron’s publisher, was Austen’s publisher for the last two years of her seven year publishing career, overseeing Emma, the second edition of Mansfield Park and Persuasion. Professor Sutherland explains: ‘Sense and Sensibility, Pride and Prejudice and the first edition of Mansfield Park were not published by Murray and have previously been seen by some critics as examples of poor printing – in fact, the style in these novels is much closer to Austen’s manuscript hand!’
Studying Jane Austen’s unpublished manuscripts side-by-side for the first time also gave Professor Sutherland a more intimate appreciation of Austen’s talents. ‘The manuscripts reveal Austen to be an experimental and innovative writer, constantly trying new things, and show her to be even better at writing dialogue and conversation than the edited style of her published novels suggest,’ she says.
‘She is above all a novelist whose significant effects are achieved in the exchanges of conversation and the dramatic presentation of character through speech. The manuscripts are unparagraphed, letting the different voices crowd each other; underlinings and apparently random use of capital letters give lots of directions as to how words or phrases should be voiced.’ ‘Austen was also a great satirist. This thread in her writing is apparent in the sharp and anarchic spoofs of the teenage manuscripts and still there in the freakish prose of the novel she left unfinished when she died. The manuscript evidence offers a different face for Jane Austen, one smoothed out in the famous printed novels.'
I guess I’m odd in that I find it hard to read Jane Austen. I really enjoyed Emma Thompson’s adaptation of “Sense and Sensibility” for the movie, and was thrilled when she won an Oscar for it. And I liked the PBS adaptation of “Persuasion” with Ciaran Hinds.
Have you seen the newest BBC adaptation of Sense and Sensibility? I love it. :)
ah . . . you’ve got that right.
Thanks for the ping. :)
Is that one from the most recent series that also included “Mansfield Park”? I saw a bit of a couple of those and they WERE well done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
