Rescuing Austen: A Stern Evaluation of Twenty-First Century Fanfiction

by

Caroline Williams

A Senior Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Major in English

and the Bachelor of Arts Degree

Stetson University, DeLand, Florida

Advisor: Prof. Grady Ballenger

April 22, 2016

Williams 1

Introduction

“What separates the casual Austen fan from the aficionado? Is it her admiration for the style and manners of the Regency era? The number of times she’s read Austen’s novels?

Or her consuming love for Mr. Darcy?,” Mrs. Wattlebrook asks as the camera pans over a lavishly decorated, though slightly anachronistic Regency era home. She raises good questions, and the answers are explored in the rest of Jerusha Hess’s Austenland (2013).

This film is not a spinoff of a particular novel, but it is fascinating in that it explores, through the eyes of a devoted reader, the twenty-first century obsession with Austen.

There is no denying that Austen’s novels are popular. They have faced much criticism over the years, but the 21st century has seen the popularity of Austen’s novels explode partly due to this idea of an idealized past—one that we perceive to be simpler, more romantic, more happy endings, and no anxieties about life after college. However, it is also partly due to the more recent phenomenon of fanfiction. Fanfiction is fiction written by fans of a TV series, movie, or book, using characters and situations from the original work to develop new plots. There are entire websites devoted to these types of creations, written largely by amateurs. However, some of these online fan creations have later turned into professionally produced legitimate books, movies or series, and the Janeites especially have taken to fanfiction with zeal. These contemporary adaptations are not just limited to online websites such as dwiggie.com (the Derbyshire Writer’s Guild), meryton.com (another fanfiction site), and jaffindex.com (the Jane Austen fanfiction index). We now have legitimate, published book series dedicated to imagining what Lizzy and Darcy’s life must have been like after their marriage, cringeworthy Lizzy and Darcy erotica, video blog web

Williams 2 series that place Lizzy and Darcy in the 21st century, zombies at Pemberley, to name a few.

The academic world tends to shy away from the fanfiction of the Janeites, choosing instead to analyze the texts themselves, i.e. the brilliance of Austen’s style, approach to character, dialogue, plot structure, and technical elements. Academic critics today talk about her characters’ motives, the agency of women during the Regency period, the importance of social functions, marriage, or social and economic class, etc. Some critics have even attempted to sit Jane Austen on the couch and psychoanalyze her. But scholars, for the most part, try to dissociate themselves from the Jane Austen fandom, perhaps wanting to distance themselves from the enthusiastic fangirls (and perhaps a few fanboys, although the Austen fandom seems to be largely female). To be such a fanatic is considered unprofessional, and Austen spin-offs are not worthy of scholarly attention. This paper will analyze the appeal that Austen’s works have for 21st century readers, what our fascination is with Austen fanfiction, and why poor Jane ought to be rescued from her own fandom.

Pride and Prejudice seems to be the most famous of Austen’s novels. It has a catchy title, a classic story, and a happy ending, and a great deal of the spinoffs or parodies are about this book. Movies such as Clueless (1995), Bridget Jones’ Diary (2001) and Bride and

Prejudice (2004) are the first ones that come to mind when thinking about Pride and

Prejudice retellings. I instead would like to venture a bit father into the Austen fandom, looking at will two movies: Austenland and Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, two series:

Death Comes to Pemberley and the web series The Lizzie Bennet Diaries, and two novels, each from a series: Mr. Darcy’s Daughters and An Assembly Such as This. I hope to show why these works draw on or exploit Austen, separating works that have some merit of their own from those simply trying to cash in on Jane’s fame. In the end, I will argue that Jane has

Williams 3 nothing to fear from any of these contemporary reworkings. After all, these works do send viewers back to the real thing: Austen’s novels themselves.

Literary critic Ian Watt talks about the relationship between the reader and the reading, saying that the “reader’s direct relation to the novel or poem is what really matters, and anything that intrudes upon this relation, or, worse, because a substitute for it, has much to answer for” (1). In Watt’s eyes, it is the responsibility of the writers to make their works matter to the reader. It is their responsibility to make readers care, and in caring, we might learn more about ourselves as readers, or see scenes from our own lives reflected in what we read. Jane Austen was able to do that. Watt suggests that “our conversations to and about other people are actually unveilings of a more consequential reality, the self” (1). Austen’s use of irony as a social and moral judge is perhaps what she is best known for. The dialogue between her characters was based on her own experience as a young woman living in the English countryside in the 1790s and the turn of the century. A nineteenth century audience would have certainly read her books and experienced an “unveiling of a more consequential reality,” but what makes her work extraordinary is that readers still experience that today. She created characters that we still see in literature today, (i.e. the overbearing mother and passive snarky father) and even in our own lives. Virginia Woolf writes on Austen’s characters, saying that she “encircles them with the lash of a whip-like phrase, which, as it runs around them, cuts out their silhouettes forever” (20). Austen was fantastic at capturing character, and commenting on the ridiculousness of their behavior in witty ways, often so subtle that one might not even realize they are being insulted at first. In his essay “A Note on Jane Austen,” C.S. Lewis writes that contrasted with the world of modern fiction, “Jane Austen’s is at once less soft

Williams 4 and less cruel” (Watt 28). This is to say that Austen does not create a fairytale world where everything is good and perfect, but a real one, in which the characters’ experiences closely mimic real life.

The historical period in which Austen writes is also a significant factor in her novels.

Though she is not particularly detailed in describing her character’s clothes, the history of the time, or the geography of the land, we know exactly when and where it takes place. We can picture it in our mind’s eye. (Of course, multiple film adaptations have helped us in that regard, as have her letters to her sister Cassandra, but Austen’s words create a picture of

English country life in the early 19th century—a very specific and very condensed period of history. The Regency period style lasts a little longer than the actual historical period, but it became known as the Regency era because King George III went mad during the last years of his reign. His son, the Prince of Wales, ruled in his stead as Prince Regent until the king’s death in 1820. Published posthumously, her novels take place in the Romantic period of literature, a time when the sentimental, flowery literature contrasted sharply with the sharp clean lines of Neoclassical architecture, which was all the rage due to the grand tours of Italy and Greece. This is the tail end of the age of Enlightenment, but certainly not the end of European expansion. Trade flourished throughout the English colonies, bringing goods to the English world from parts of North America, Africa and Asia. Napoleon

Bonaparte was a major threat to European safety, but none of this is present in Austen’s novels. The presence of redcoats is perhaps the only indication that the world around her is in uproar, but even so, the redcoats serve merely as dancing partners in her novels.

Though Austen may not be everyone’s favorite, (Mark Twain once commented that if a library only consisted of one Austen novel, the library would be significantly improved

Williams 5 by its removal), we cannot deny the great impact she has had on literature, both in her time and in our time. We like Austen because she is witty, because of the realness of her characters (who act like people in our own lives), because we think the English countryside is quaint—there are many reasons. A large part of her appeal is in part due to this psychological reality. The plots of her stories offered (and still offer) to many women a romance of freeing them from an unhappy fate (whether it be marriage to Mr. Collins or taking a job we dislike just for security), and giving them love and a happy ending. We see her works as brimming with wisdom and sophistication, which is why we are still obsessed with her today. Countless movies and books and other forms of media draw on Austen’s works for inspiration. We are so obsessed with inhabiting Jane Austen’s world that we create alternate universes for it, and think of new ideas to add to her stories. In this way, we make sure that her stories never end, but that is not always a good thing.

Films

Austenland

Austenland (2013) is a bit different than the other works in this paper. Instead of drawing upon the texts themselves, the film draws directly upon the fandom. Today,

Janeites can watch many BBC adaptations of Austen’s famous novels, buy merchandise such as teacups and totebags with “I Love Darcy” plastered across them, and take contredancing lessons to get even closer to the books. Such ideas are explored in this film.

Jane Hayes, played by Keri Russell, is a single, 30 something year old American woman with an obsession for Jane Austen’s novels. Her apartment is decorated in Regency style, complete with antique teacups, vintage furniture, a beautiful dollhouse with little Darcy and Elizabeth figurines, and a cardboard cutout of Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. In one scene,

Williams 6

Jane Hayes proudly announces that she memorized the first three chapters of Pride and

Prejudice when she was thirteen. In another scene, Jane and a boyfriend are cuddling on the sofa while watching the 1995 BBC version of Pride and Prejudice. Her boyfriend is much more interested in Jane than in the film, but Jane pushes him away when the famous wet shirt scene with Colin Firth comes on. Upset that Jane is more enamored with a fictional man, the boyfriend leaves, punching the cardboard cutout of Darcy on his way out. Instead of chasing after her boyfriend, Jane tenderly tapes the cardboard Colin Firth back together.

Such a scene inspires pity from the viewers. Jane Hayes is single and trapped in a fictional world, and no one in the real world seems to understand her passion. At one point, in her exasperation, she admits, “I am single because apparently the only good men are fictional,” thus echoing the voice of English majors across the world. For many Jane Austen devotees,

Austenland describes exactly what it feels like to be so wrapped up in the Regency era.

Early in the film, Jane’s friend Molly comes over to hang out with Jane at her apartment.

Molly is the exact opposite of Jane, and stands for everything “normal”: she is in her early

30s, she has a husband, a steady career that she loves, and a baby on the way. Everything in her life seems to be going as it should be. Molly is not obsessed with a fictional character, and she does not constantly think about what it would be like to experience a Jane Austen novel. When Molly comes over, she takes one sweeping look at Jane’s apartment, telling her

“this has really got to stop.”

The opportunity to immerse herself in Austen’s world arrives when Jane talks to a travel agency about a place called “Austenland.” Located in the south of England, the quintessential English countryside where Austen wrote her novels, “Austenland” describes itself as an immersive experience in the Regency era, where guests create an Austenite

Williams 7 persona and act out very Austenite situations. The actors in Austenland are paid to act these scenarios, and some of the guests have trouble understanding the difference between fiction and reality, as Mrs. Wattlebrook strives to make things as “real” as possible. Jane

Hayes spends all her money on this experience, only to find out that she has purchased the

“copper package,” not the “platinum package.” Mrs. Wattlebrook, played by Jane Seymour, oversees Austenland, and personally creates each guest’s story according to what package they purchase. Because Jane Hayes purchased the cheapest package, she was given a plain name (Jane Erstwhile), and a sad story. When introduced to the company in the drawing room, Mrs. Wattlebrook describes her character as “a poor orphan with no fortune.” This sets the tone for Jane’s Austenland experience, which is more lackluster than she expected.

She is given a place to sleep in the servants’ quarters, far away from the rest of the guests.

Her clothes are also plain, not fancy like the others. She doesn’t know it yet, but her story has also been scripted to reflect her “copper package” deal. Instead of ending up with the dashing Colonel Andrews, or the brooding Mr. Nobley, Jane is supposed to end up with the groundskeeper, Martin.

Throughout the movie, Jane struggles with what is fiction and what is reality, much like Austen’s heroine Catherine Morland. Jane Hayes resembles Catherine Morland in many ways: they are both obsessed with novels (Catherine with the gothic novel and Jane with

Austen’s novels), they constantly wish they could live in another world, and they are constantly misled by the language of others. Because Catherine mentally lives in a gothic novel, she assumes her friends are also speaking of novels. In chapter 14 of Northanger

Abbey, Catherine is walking with Mr. Tilney and his sister Eleanor at Beechen Cliff in Bath.

Eleanor has just been talking of gossip in the city, where Henry and Catherine have been

Williams 8 talking about novels. After a lull in the conversation, Catherine says “I have heard that something very shocking indeed, will soon come out in London.” Miss Tilney is startled, thinking that Catherine means something in real life. Catherine, thinking Miss Tilney is still speaking of novels, continues, “That I do not know, nor who is the author. I have only heard that it is to be more horrible than any thing we have met with yet” (Austen 75). Henry

Tilney understands perfectly well what is happening, and explains to both of them that nothing horrible will happen in London, at least not in real life.

Jane Hayes has this problem multiple times in Austenland. While out walking one day (she was not allowed to participate in the main event of that day because it was not included in her package), she meets Martin, a groundskeeper whose costume looks slightly anachronistic. He is wearing a Regency era costume, but his shirt is untucked and unbuttoned, his hairstyle is much more 21st century than 19th century, and he carries modern gardening tools around his belt, including a walkie talkie. Because he is anachronistic in this Regency resort, Jane feels she can talk to him without having to use fancy words, or mirror Austen’s witty banter. Jane finds Martin in a moment of her unhappiness, and feels that she can confide in him. As their relationship grows, she tells him she appreciates that he’s the only “real” thing about this place. Little does she know that he is not real—that he is acting his part for her, and that he is being paid by Mrs.

Wattlebrook to pay attention to her. Like Catherine Morland, she has trouble telling between fiction and reality and what people truly mean. In some ways, Austenland resembles an Austen novel, as characters form friendships for personal gain, unwanted flirtations occur, romances bloom and wilt away, and the main character discovers things about herself. Jane Hayes realizes that she has had this vision that the Regency era would

Williams 9 be exciting and full of banter and dancing and heartbreak, but what she finds out is that life is rather boring (they aren’t allowed to have their phones so they sit around and do a lot of needlework), there is only one ball at the end of the term, and she experiences more frustration and anger with daily life. In a word, she is disenchanted. She discovers that perhaps her own Austen obsession is out of hand, and decides to de-Austen her room as soon as she gets back home.

As it turns out, the only real part of Austenland was Henry Nobley, played by the ever so dashing JJ Feild. Although he played his part very well, the feelings he had for Jane

Hayes were very real indeed. At the beginning of the film, Mr. Nobley is introduced to us as a Mr. Darcy-esque character. He wears a frown on his handsome face, his nose is buried in a book, and he regards the company with disapproval. At dinner on the first night, Jane asks

Mr. Nobley if he likes dancing, to which he curtly replies, “not particularly.” The dinner continues on in relative silence, and Austen devotees may sense elements of Pride and

Prejudice in the relationship between Mr. Nobley and Jane. Neither of them care for each other at first, but end up falling for each other as the film progresses. One dinner scene draws on the witty Austen banter as Nobley and Jane talk: “Do you really believe, Mr.

Nobley, that you can know the worth of a person at a glance?” “Can you tell me that within the first few moments of meeting each person in this room, you didn’t form firm opinions of their character?” “Well, it would be a shame if my first impression of you proved correct.”

Jane then raises her eyebrows and takes a sip from her drink, delighted that she has mastered the Austen banter and used it perfectly in conversation. She has also rendered

Mr. Nobley speechless, an astonishing feat, as he always has a biting remark. Like Elizabeth

Bennet, she convinces herself that he is proud and cold, and refuses to let herself like him.

Williams 10

Mr. Nobley also refuses to like Jane at first, though for different reasons. He likes her very much, but he must play his part as an actor. He also does not want to contribute to this tangled mess of fiction versus reality that Mrs. Wattlebrook has created.

At the end of the film, Jane is disappointed with her Austenland experience. She was the only guest who didn’t get “engaged,” and she was upset to find out that Mrs.

Wattlebrook scripted her love story with Martin. The whole time, Jane was under the impression that in her story, she was supposed to end up with Mr. Nobley, even though they did not like each other at first. This is a very Austen trope that works wonderfully no matter what century. In the airport, she is accosted by both Martin and Henry. Martin is wearing normal, 21st century clothing, but professes his feelings for her. Jane knows he is being false and dismisses him. Henry is in full Regency era garb, also professing his feelings, but Jane cannot bring herself to believe him. After all, he is dressed in a waistcoat and breeches, and confessing his feelings in the middle of an airport. It all feels very fake to

Jane. So, she returns to America, unhappy with her experience. However, as with Austen’s novels, Jane Hayes’s story ends happily. She ends up with Henry Nobley, who confesses that he is a history professor who specializes in the Regency era. His aunt, “Mrs. Wattlebrook,” hired him as an actor. “You are my fantasy,” he tells Jane. This is a bit ironic, as a story like this has been Jane’s fantasy for quite some time, and she is still not sure that she believes him. But, after some convincing, she does believe him, and they end up together. And so they live happily ever after, having bought Austenland from “Mrs. Wattlebrook,” and turning it into a theme park instead.

Austenland is different from other spinoffs in that it doesn’t use characters from

Austen’s novels, or create a parallel universe using her characters. Instead, it draws on the

Williams 11 time period and the general fanatic frenzy surrounding Austen’s novels. Though there were scenes with classic Austen banter, and a story of false love and overbearing aunts,

Austenland draws mainly on the fans for inspiration. Over the centuries, Austen’s works have developed quite a following. Her books are constantly republished with beautiful, decorative covers, various quotes from novels are plastered on sweatshirts, tote bags, and coffee mugs, and entire courses at universities are devoted solely to her works. There are many women (and perhaps men too) who obsess over Jane Austen’s novels and wish they could live in the Regency era, and Austenland allows fans to step into a world where they can vicariously live through Jane Hayes. Because Austenland does not create an alternate universe for an Austen novel, it is a little less awkward than other Austen adaptations. It does not need rescuing from Janeites. Instead, it sort of rescues them. It sympathizes with them, and allows them to consider their own Austen obsessions. Perhaps deep down, it makes us literature lovers realize that we long for the simplicity of a romance set in the

Regency era, but it also draws attention to the fact that we have commercialized Austen’s works so much that they can be sold as Christmas ornaments or sweatshirts. Austenland allows devotees to appreciate the style and manners of the Regency era, but recognize also that those days are gone and they cannot be repeated, even when professional historians and literature critics are consulted.

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016 film, 2006 novel)

Jane Austen’s writing is known for its sense of order and grace. Her style is simplistic and straightforward, but that does not take away from the drama. When making a spinoff of an Austen novel, whether book, movie, or television series, one must remember that grace and simplicity. Unfortunately, that does not always happen. When Pride and

Williams 12

Prejudice and Zombies was released in February this year, it was met with very mixed reviews (but mostly negative). Based on the book by Seth Grahame-Smith, the movie followed the classic story of Mr. Darcy and Miss Elizabeth Bennet with a not so classic twist: a zombie apocalypse. When the book was published in 2009, it was also met with mixed feelings. The cover depicts a woman drawn in Regency wear as if she were sitting for a portrait, but half of the flesh on her face is rotting away, revealing a skeleton underneath.

Her white muslin gown is splattered with blood. The first line of the book and the film is a play on the ever so famous “truth universally acknowledged” line, but it lacks the sophistication of Austen’s original words: “It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains.” And that it putting it kindly. The Amazon review of the book tells readers that Zombies “transforms a masterpiece of world literature into something you’d actually want to read” (amazon.com).

This is a slap in the face to Austen’s work and to more academic Janeites, and the movie is not much better. Fortunately, most of the reviews are scathing. The New York Times said that “fighting zombies does nothing to improve on the original Elizabeth Bennet” (New

York Times). The film reviewer Mahola Dargis said “in Austen’s novel, the mutually hostile

Elizabeth and Darcy are already combatants of a kind whose primary weapons are their witty, wounding, deeply meaningful words. In the movie, Elizabeth and Darcy sling metaphoric arrows at each other now and again, but they’re so busy fighting the zombies overrunning the country that their actions invariably drown out everything else.” The

Guardian was not much more merciful, saying that “this seems like it’s just laughing at

Austen. It feels like anti-fanfiction.” Fanfiction is supposed to draw on the works of the original, but works that fail to stay true to the original character are often looked down

Williams 13 upon. It is common on fanfiction sites such as fanfiction.net and archiveofourown.org to comment that a character is too OOC, meaning the author’s rendition of this work is “out of character.” There do not seem to be any set parameters on what people can post—there are no set guidelines or rules on these sites, but it has generally become expected that if you’re going to write fanfiction, it needs to maintain the style of the original work so that it is believable. Writers who can perfectly capture character are often praised, but writers who do not capture the character well are criticized and their works are deemed OOC.

This is what happened with Zombies. Director Burr Steers drew on the work of Jane

Austen, but failed to include the dignity and grace of the novels, leaving Pride and Prejudice and Zombies a hollow, laughably horrible spin-off.

The film opens with an explanation of the zombie apocalypse in 19th century

England. Apparently a virus was brought over from the New World via trade patterns, and quickly spread throughout England. A large wall was built around London to keep it safe.

The only way into the city is by one bridge, which is constantly guarded by redcoats to keep the entry safe. The rest of the land is plagued with the undead, who are not typical

Hollywood zombies. Instead of limping around with their dead eyes and gurgling groans, these zombies are capable of speech and intelligent thought, even organizing military ventures against the British army.

The portrayals of the classic novel characters are much different than we are used to. Elizabeth Bennet, played by Downton Abbey’s Lily James, is a fierce warrior whose swords are sharper than her tongue. When we first meet the Bennets, they are sitting in their drawing room at Longbourne, cleaning their guns and sharpening their swords, as opposed to doing needlework or reading. The ever so famous “Netherfield Park is let at

Williams 14 last” line makes an appearance, but Mr. Bennet is a hard and seasoned warrior instead of a grumpy old man, so the line falls flat as he sharpens his samurai sword. Later that evening, the Bennets attend the assembly at Meryton. This is the only part that feels remotely reminiscent to any other Jane Austen film adaptation—there are beautiful costumes, lovely music, and well-choreographed contredances. This moment is short lived, however. Mrs.

Bennet asks Mr. Darcy if he likes to dance, and Darcy (portrayed by Sam Riley, who would look more at home at a Fall Out Boy concert than in an Austen film), replies, “Every savage can dance. Even a zombie.” This is not the only instance where the dialogue was butchered.

The classic scene where Darcy and Elizabeth discuss what an accomplished woman looks like was also awkward. In the trailer for the film, Elizabeth says “To succeed in polite society, a young woman must be many things: kind, well-read, and accomplished. But to survive in the world as we know it, she’ll need other qualities” (imdb.com). The trailer immediately cuts to Lily James in a beautiful Regency dress, stabbing a zombie in the face with a samurai sword and whirling around the room with ninja-like athleticism. In this parallel universe, every young woman is trained as a warrior to fight the zombies. Caroline

Bingley and Mrs. Hurst have been trained in Japan, as was more fashionable. Elizabeth

Bennet, however, was trained in China, which is seen as much less fashionable.

The film also desperately tries to keep the witty Austen dialogue. Caroline Bingley patronizingly asks Elizabeth to tell them about her training in China, to which Elizabeth replies, “Oh, I’d much rather give you a demonstration.” This silences Caroline for the time being. When Elizabeth picks out a book to read, Darcy takes notice and comments. The book is The Art of War, a Chinese military treatise by Sun Tzu. Elizabeth and Darcy

Williams 15 converse about the book in Chinese before she leaves to tend to her sister Jane, who is recovering from a run-in with the undead on her way to Netherfield.

The most embarrassing moment of Austen’s classic was the first proposal scene. In the classic novel, Elizabeth rejects Darcy eloquently, wounding him with her words:

I might as well inquire, replied she, why with so evident a design of offending and insulting me, you chose to tell me that you liked me against your will, against your reason, and even against your character? Was not this some excuse for incivility, if I was uncivil? But I have no other provocations. You know I have. Had not my own feelings decided against you, had they been indifferent, or had they even been favorable, do you think that any consideration would tempt me to accept the man who has been the means of ruining, perhaps forever, the happiness of a most beloved sister? (Austen 180)

Mr. Darcy replies to her eloquent accusation with an equally eloquent response: “I have no wish of denying that I did everything in my power to separate my friend from your sister, or that I rejoice in my success” (180). In the 2005 film directed by Joe Wright, this scene takes place in a gazebo in the midst of a thunderstorm. Darcy, played by Matthew

MacFadyen, states that he separated Jane and Bingley because she did not seem interested in his dear friend. Elizabeth, played by Keira Knightley, fires back with the reason that Jane is shy. This is a famous and beautifully done scene, and much different than the proposal in

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. In the latter, Darcy awkwardly proposes to Elizabeth in

Mr. Collins’s home, with some of the words from book Darcy and 2005 film Darcy.

However, instead of verbally sparring and ending the conversation with “Forgive me for having taken up so much of your time,” (183) as the book and other films do, Darcy and

Elizabeth physically spar. Instead of agitatedly explaining her reasons for her rejection,

Elizabeth throws books and fire pokers and other dull, heavy objects at Darcy in order to inflict physical pain. Each word is punctuated with a blow: “She….(throws book) is….(kicks

Williams 16

Darcy) shy! (punches him).” Darcy even takes lingering looks at her figure as one well- placed lunge with the fire poker accidentally unbuttons the front of Elizabeth’s gown, revealing her stays. They end up in a very compromising position, with Darcy on top of

Elizabeth, pinning her to the ground as he asks her to marry him. When he realizes she will not say yes, he sulks back to Rosings, leaving Elizabeth to cry in the middle of the messy, broken room. It is popular today to make female characters “strong” by also making them good fighters—think any female character in the Marvel movies. However, it seems that

Hollywood is confused that “strong female character” only means “girl who can hit and punch things.” Elizabeth Bennet was a strong female character in the original novel without having to physically stab people. She rejected two marriage proposals, both of which would offer her great financial security (of utmost importance back then), but she remained confident and was able to see the error of her ways after rejecting Mr. Darcy. To have

Elizabeth physically fight and then break down into tears afterward was supposed to show that yes, “strong female characters” can cry, but the crying really served no purpose other than dramatic effect.

Other characters are portrayed in absurd ways, as well. Lady Catherine de Bourgh, played by Game of Thrones’s Lena Headey, is a swashbuckling, leather and eyepatch wearing, double-sword wielding ninja known all throughout England for her skill and bravery at slaying zombies. Instead of simply confronting Elizabeth to ask if she is engaged to Darcy, she physically spars with her in the basement at Longbourne, which serves as the

Bennet’s training ground. Mr. Wickham is slimy as ever, but for different reasons. In one scene, he takes Elizabeth to a church called St. Lazarus (isn’t the irony wonderful?), where the undead gather for church services. Instead of drinking wine at Communion, they drink

Williams 17 pig brains. (Apparently zombies who feast on pig brains are the vegetarians of the undead community). The pig brains are supposed to keep them from craving human brains, and

Wickham insists that this is part of a cure that can stop the apocalypse. Elizabeth believes him, for a while, as she does in the classic novel and in other film adaptations. When Lydia runs away with Mr. Wickham, however, Elizabeth’s opinion changes rapidly, especially when she discovers that Wickham actually kidnapped Lydia and is holding her prisoner at

Lazarus. Darcy goes to rescue Lydia, and does so successfully, but not without a fight with

Wickham. In this fight, Darcy learns that Wickham is actually partly undead, has been fighting the virus all along, and plans to overrun England with the zombies. It is all very far fetched and silly, but Darcy manages to kill Wickham, save Lydia, and marry Elizabeth. It ends in happiness with two marriages, as does the original novel.

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies tried and failed to recreate Austen in a fresh new way. The fun is supposed to be taking a decorous work of high literature and mashing it with contemporary popular culture—and the intended audience has probably played more video games than read Jane’s novels. In short, the two fit together like toothpaste and orange juice. The total domestic gross at the box office was $10,907,291.00, a rather paltry sum considering their 28 million dollar budget. In comparison, the 2005 classic Pride and

Prejudice with Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen had a domestic gross of

$38,405,088.00. The numbers for Zombies at the box office match the reviews. By putting two of the most unlikely tropes together: 19th century love and marriage in the midst of a zombie apocalypse, Seth Grahame-Smith and Burr Steers only created mass chaos in a sad attempt at reinventing a classic genre. Both author and film director drew on the historical setting of Austen’s novels, but the film was so distant from the original sophistication and

Williams 18 wisdom that it was embarrassing. Zombies did not feel like a Jane Austen adaptation. It felt like a Regency era zombie movie, with characters whose names just happened to be the same as those in Austen’s books. The film was advertised as making Austen’s novel more enticing to contemporary filmgoers, but it ultimately failed. It felt like a horrible skin graft job, where some of the original text was ripped from the novel, and hastily and badly sewn into the movie. The dialogue and words did not match the setting. In this case, the Janeites went too far. Austen’s works are enticing on their own, and not every work of literature can be improved by the addition of the undead.

Television and Web Series

Death Comes to Pemberley (2013 television series, 2011 novel)

A much more tasteful way to add intrigue and mystery to Austen’s novels comes in the form of BBC’s three-part 2013 miniseries, Death Comes to Pemberley. Based on the 2011 book by P.D. James, esteemed English crime writer, this series follows the lives of Mr. Darcy

(Matthew Rhys) and Elizabeth (Ana Maxwell Martin) six years after their marriage. They have a son, they live happily at Pemberley, and it seems that nothing can go wrong (as long as they stay out of the haunted woods, that is). At the start of the first episode, Elizabeth is planning for the Lady Anne ball, a ball held in honor of her husband’s late mother.

Georgiana (Poldark’s Eleanor Tomlinson) is living at Pemberley, and she is the subject of a love triangle with her cousin Colonel Fitzwilliam (Tom Ward), and a new face, a young attorney named Henry Alveston (James Norton). Everyone seems very happy and pleasant, except for a few servant girls. They run into the kitchen, hysterical and claiming that they have seen the ghost of Mrs. Riley, who seems to be an urban legend in this part of the

Williams 19 country. Elizabeth and the housekeeper dismiss the servant girls, and are not worried until later that evening. Lydia (Doctor Who’s Jenna Coleman) and George Wickham (Matthew

Goode) enter the picture. One night, Colonel Fitzwilliam goes out for a ride. That same night, Lydia’s carriage comes careening into the drive at Pemberley, and she is shrieking and sobbing and spouting all kinds of incoherent gibberish. Mrs. Bennet, who has come to stay at Pemberley with her husband, does not help the situation. She screams and cries with Lydia, fancying her nerves acting up again. All of this comes as a shock to the residents at Pemberley. George Wickham is not allowed on Darcy’s estate because of his offences against Georgiana when she was just a teenager. Lydia explains that she thought it would be great fun to come to Pemberley just a day or two before the ball, so that she could attend and it would be too late for Elizabeth to turn her away. They were traveling with Captain

Denny, whom some Austen devotees will remember from Pride and Prejudice. Wickham and Denny are quarreling, and at one point, they stopped the carriage in the woods, where

Denny got out and headed into the thicket of trees. “Denny, don’t be a bloody fool!” George shouts as he runs after him, leaving Lydia in the carriage by herself. After some time passes,

Lydia hears two gunshots in the distant thicket. Frightened for her life, she urges the driver to ride full speed ahead toward Pemberley. Once in the safety of the estate, Lydia manages to explain what has happened.

It is a dark and stormy night as the men of the house put on their greatcoats and light their lanterns, riding off heroically into the dark forest to investigate the circumstances. The party consists of Mr. Darcy, Colonel Fitzwilliam, the carriage driver, and some other servants. What they find in the woods is shocking: Wickham is holding the dead body of his friend Captain Denny and crying out, “My only friend, I’ve killed him!” From this

Williams 20 point on, a full-scale investigation is launched, and the ball is canceled. When consoling the servants, Elizabeth tells them, “Let us look only to the past as it gives us pleasure. And look to the future as it only gives us hope.”

Wickham is arrested the next day. At his trial, he is shown to be guilty of killing his friend Captain Denny, and he is condemned to hang. However, that does not happen.

Elizabeth stumbles upon some evidence that sets him free. As it turns out, Wickham fathered an illegitimate child with a servant at Pemberley. The servant’s husband wanted revenge, and meant to kill Wickham, but accidentally spooked Denny so that he fell and hit his head and died. The shots fired were by Wickham in defense, as he saw a figure running away in the woods.

This plot is highly dramatic and sounds like something out of a 19th century

Romantic novel, but it fits the style of the period perfectly. It is not trying too hard to make

Austen’s original work more interesting, and it has a believable storyline that fits the time period perfectly. The focus is not entirely on the action—the costumes are lovely, the dialogue is appropriate, and the audience is really drawn to the characters. We know just as much as the characters do—we learn along with Elizabeth, Darcy, and Georgiana. And we feel for these characters. For example, Georgiana is in love with Henry Alveston, but is told by her brother that she cannot marry him because of his station in life, which is decidedly lower than hers. Darcy is in favor of Fitzwilliam, while Elizabeth is in favor of Mr. Alveston.

This is sort of an interesting twist. All those years ago, Darcy forsake family duty and married the woman he loved. Here, he does not advocate for true love, and instead tells

Georgiana to put her family first. Janeites might scratch their heads at this scene: how can

Fitzwilliam Darcy, who is clearly happy with Elizabeth and who married her because he

Williams 21 truly loved her, tell his sister that she cannot marry for those same reasons? It is never made clear in the series, which leaves it open for interpretation, allowing viewers to think about their impression of Darcy compared to the original book.

Darcy and Elizabeth argue like any married couple, and in their arguments, we get to see what every Austenite has dreamed of: the actual marriage of Darcy and Lizzy, not just a mention of it at the end of the novel. This explores their relationship on a deeper level. We see Lizzy and Darcy kiss, argue, and talk about mundane things, such as the silver in the dining room, or the new servants in the kitchen. Most importantly, we see the actual love between them. We also see Elizabeth struggle with her new station in life. Even though she is married to a man she loves dearly, she cannot shake the feeling that she does not belong with this rich man and his fine estate. There are several flashbacks in the series where Elizabeth remembers the rude things people said about her at various social functions. Comments about her social class seemed to be of the utmost concern to the snobby guests, while other comments were directed at Darcy for marrying a “common” girl.

Some of these guests even said that Elizabeth was putting on the airs of a great lady because of her new station and that such behavior was in poor taste. These insecurities pop up at various points throughout the series, but Darcy is always quick to kiss his wife and assuage those fears.

Another interesting dynamic in Death is the relationship between Georgiana and

Elizabeth. The two seem to have grown rather close over the years, and now Georgiana is at a marriageable age. Elizabeth errs on the side of true love, while her husband errs on the side of duty—that is, Lizzy would rather her sister-in-law marry for love, and Darcy would rather have her marry someone of her station to preserve her good name. At one point in

Williams 22 the series, it seems as though Darcy has convinced Georgiana to marry Colonel Fitzwilliam.

The poor girl is upset by her decision, but she does not want to disappoint her brother.

Later, after Mr. Alveston performs so well in court, Darcy has a change of heart, and sees why Georgiana loves him. In a particularly heart-wrenching scene, he accosts Georgiana on the grand staircase in the foyer, imploring her: “Marry for love, Georgiana. Marry the person your heart cries out for. And when you have that person, do not doubt them, not for a single moment.” It is obvious that Darcy speaks from experience, and in 21st century terms, we hear Darcy declare his love for Elizabeth in ways that we never heard in the original novel. Georgiana’s story ends happily. She marries Alveston, and is very happy indeed. Everyone else’s stories end happily, too—Darcy and Lizzy find out they’re pregnant with a second child, Lydia and Wickham are reunited and he isn’t executed, and the mystery is solved.

The reviews surrounding this Austen spinoff were generally pleasant. The Guardian praised the series, saying it “recognizes and respects the architecture of the original, but is not afraid to stand out and be its own very different thing as well” (theguardian.com). The reviewer continued with their effusive praises, calling it a “fabulous mashup…period drama meets Agatha Christie, Midsomer Murders even, with a hint of CSI Pemberley.” The Los

Angeles Times gave a great review as well, saying that the series “observes the happier rites and rituals of the canon: There are music and cards, walks in the woods and trips to the village; Mrs. Bennet remains a flibbertigibbet and Mr. Bennet remains hiding in the library.

The added elements of a forensic procedural give the new work a novel twist but don't mask its essential flavor, like a chocolate cake with chili on top” (latimes.com). Death Comes to Pemberley drew on the wisdom and sophistication of Pride and Prejudice, seamlessly

Williams 23 working in original characters while giving them fresh new stories. Lizzy and Darcy’s married life is enjoyable to watch, but it did lack the witty banter that we are used to experiencing from the 1813 novel. Other than that, the miniseries is graceful, elegant, tasteful, and perfectly combines the original world of Jane Austen with a new intriguing twist. This sort of work is something that Janeites all over should be proud of. In fanfiction, authors must strive to write their characters and situations as close to the original as possible, or their work is discredited by other fans and readers. Fortunately for Janeites

(and perhaps academics, if they can look past the frenzied fangirls), Death Comes to

Pemberley is a well-done fanfiction. Perhaps this is due to PD James’s background as a writer. Having written twenty books, James was the recipient of Mystery Writers of

America Grand Master Award and the National Arts Club Medal of Honor for literature.

The Lizzie Bennet Diaries ( 2012 web series)

Another reimagining of Pride and Prejudice comes to us in the form of a web series called “The Lizzie Bennet Diaries.” In this 21st century retelling of the 1813 novel, Lizzie

Bennet is a 24 year old graduate student studying media and communications. This modern Lizzie does a series of video diaries on the web, telling her viewers about her crazy life and overbearing mother, whom she often impersonates while wearing a ridiculous hat and using a Southern accent. (This is the first purely American adaptation, by the way— most others have been English, filled with tight breeches and grand estates, often BBC productions.) Lizzie lives at home with her parents and her sisters, Jane and Lydia. Sweet, shy Jane works at a fashion company, and wild Lydia is characterized as a crazy slut.

(Lizzie’s words, not mine). Charlotte Lu, portrayed by Julia Cho, often makes appearances on Lizzie’s diaries as her best friend and video editor. Each episode is available on

Williams 24

YouTube, and each is about three minutes long. In each mini episode, Lizzie brings us up to speed on the happenings in her family. In the beginning of the series, we learn that a wealthy, handsome, single, young doctor named Bing Lee has moved into the mansion at the country club where the Bennets live. He attends a wedding held at the country club’s reception hall, and Mrs. Bennet is enamored. Of course, the viewers do not witness any of this—it is all recounted by Lizzie, in front of her computer screen, which is always facing the same way in her bedroom. Many of the episodes focus on the progress of Bing Lee and

Jane, with Lizzie often complaining about William Darcy. In this series, Darcy’s father owns a multi-million dollar company, Pemberley Digital, which Darcy is expected to run one day.

Darcy is also a bowtie wearing hipster who disdains popular culture, and tries hard to cultivate the image of a disinterested intellectual. Lizzie absolutely cannot stand him, and is determined to hate him. Eventually, Lizzie realizes she might not hate Darcy so much after all, just as she does in the book, but she does not admit that to herself just yet. Near the end of the series, she is offered a job at Collins and Collins. It is her dream job, but she turns it down in favor of finishing her master’s degree first. The financial security she risks by turning down this job is immediate, much like Elizabeth’s refusal to marry Mr. Collins in the original novel. Mrs. Bennet is very upset with this decision, as both Lizzie and Jane’s student loan debts are piling high. Ultimately, everyone ends up with who they are supposed to—Jane is happy with Bing Lee, and Lizzie learns to overcome her prejudices against hipster William Darcy.

This web series brings Jane Austen straight into the 21st century. In this digital age, it is popular among young people to make video blog series on the web. We are connected via the Internet and our computers, so telling Austen’s original story this way is clever. The

Williams 25 actors all have American accents, very relevant, modern jobs, and are all worried about things people worry about today. It is a quirky re-imagining of a novel centered on class, society, money, and the things we do for love. It proves that although Jane Austen’s novels took place in the historical past, the stories themselves are not bound by time. Nineteenth century Lizzy was worried about financial security and marrying for love, as is 21st century

Lizzie. Lydia is a wild flirt in both versions—she just enjoys more freedom as a woman in the 21st century. It might be said that if Jane Austen were alive and writing today, she might write something very much like this, though I am hesitant to say those words. Because this is such a digital age and people can video blog about anything, a modern alternate universe

Jane Austen might not receive the credit and praise that 19th century Jane did. When people try to bring Austen’s work into the 21st century, it loses meaning. It becomes ordinary instead of extraordinary, and it feels cheap. It feels watered down in order that it may appeal to a wider audience, but perhaps that is what television does as a whole. Because a novel is merely words on a page, it demands imagination from the reader. It demands reflection and thought. Television is easy because we do not have to imagine anything—it is all right there in front of us. This series does nothing to help the image of the Jane Austen fandom. Instead, it reinforces the idea that Janeites are obsessive dreamers with stars in their eyes, who try to bring Jane Austen’s novels to life in the 21st century so that they can somehow live her stories.

Novels

Mr. Darcy’s Daughters (2003 Novel)

Since 1813, many Pride and Prejudice spin-offs have been published. Elizabeth’s

Aston’s Darcy series are no exception. The first book, called Mr. Darcy’s Daughters,

Williams 26 published in 2003, is almost a re-hash of the 1813 novel. The year is 1818, “twenty years after Pride and Prejudice,” explains the summary on the back cover. This is the first problem with this novel—it is highly anachronistic. Pride and Prejudice was first published in 1813, just five years before Aston’s setting. Furthermore, the eldest daughter in this series is 21, which implies that somewhere in the original novel, Darcy and Elizabeth engaged in premarital sex, which Jane Austen would not have written about. Firstly, it would have been highly improper, and secondly, there is no indication of such a thing in Pride and

Prejudice. There is hardly any indication of a chaste kiss. Publisher’s Weekly described

Daughters as more of “a beach book for historical fiction fans than a literary homage to

Austen's masterpiece” (publishersweekly.com).

That being said, the story follows Elizabeth and Darcy’s five daughters, spending their time in London. Darcy and Elizabeth are conveniently gone, on what the narrator calls a “diplomatic mission” to Constantinople. This leaves the five girls to get into as much mischief as they can without the watchful eyes of their parents. The eldest daughter, 21 year old Letitia, worries and frets all the time. Nineteen year old Camilla, the more levelheaded and independent daughter, is more interested in a good book than a party. At sixteen, the twins Belle and Georgina look nothing alike, with the first being “dark as night” and the latter being “fair as day.” In any case, they are the flirtatious ones who relish the social scene of London. Lastly, the youngest daughter, musical, fifteen year old Alethea, practices the pianoforte under the watchful eye of her governess, and wishes she could join the twins in their mischief. This entire novel feels suspiciously like Pride and Prejudice all over again, only this time, the girls have money and social status, something that is supposed to significantly add drama to the story. The girls are staying with Colonel

Williams 27

Fitzwilliam in his large London house (why they cannot stay at Pemberley with a governess or another chaperone is a mystery to me), who is married to a pretty, silly little wife who wants nothing more than to dress the girls in frills and find husbands for them before their parents come home. (That is, if they ever come home—Letitia is constantly worried that their carriage will overturn or that they will catch Turkish smallpox and die). Elizabeth’s old enemy Caroline Bingley makes an appearance, as well, only this time, she is called Lady

Warren. Some things never change, as she still plots scandal against Mr. Darcy’s daughters.

Aston also introduces Aunt Lydia into the story, telling us that Wickham died at Salamanca, and that Lydia is now married to one of the Prince Regent’s intimates. The girls’ association with Aunt Lydia places them in a much higher social station than they are used to, giving them even more opportunities to get into trouble and cause drama for the plot. Not that there isn’t enough drama already—Letitia’s former beau was reported killed at Waterloo in

1815, but he is discovered perfectly happy and healthy walking about in London with another woman. The drama there is that some explosion caused him to lose his memory, so he could not remember his engagement to Letitia. It was terribly convenient. The other drama is that one of the twins has run away with a redcoat (a bit too reminiscent of Pride and Prejudice), and Camilla falls in love with a much older man who actually turns out to be a homosexual, a crime in Regency England. Fortunately for Camilla, she marries a man whom she dislikes greatly at first, thinking him proud and cold. In true Pride and Prejudice fashion, they each learn that the other is not so bad after all, and of course, the book ends in a marriage. Aston even describes their wedding and wedding night, as if trying to bring a sexy element to Austen’s work:

‘“Shall I blow out the candle?” he asked, clasping her round the waist and kissing her loosened hair. She wrapped her arms around him, rejoicing in the

Williams 28

feel, the scent, the sound, the very being of him. “Leave it be, what need do we have of darkness?”’ (360)

This sounds like something that should be written in a historical romance novel, which this might be, but the author tries too hard to emulate Austen’s style for it to be a trashy historical romance. (Her surname is Aston; could it be any more obvious?) However anachronistic and horrid this novel may be, it is an interesting concept to explore. While this book was more physical in its description (loosened hair, clasping round the waist, the smell of him), Austen relies entirely on dialogue to build romance. One of the most beautiful passages in Pride and Prejudice comes from chapter 60, when Mr. Bennet has just given his approval for their marriage:

Elizabeth’s spirits soon rising to playfulness again, she wanted Mr. Darcy to account for his having ever falling in love with her. ‘How could you begin?’ said she. ‘I can comprehend your going on charmingly, when you had once made a beginning; but what could set you off in the first place?’ ‘I cannot fix the hour, or the spot, or the look, or the words, which laid the foundation. It is too long ago. I was in the middle before I knew that I had begun.’ (359)

Austen’s language is simple, but eloquent, and their words convey all that needed to be said. Touches and candlelight are not necessary in her romance. Daughters tries in vain to use the grace, dignity, and sophistication of Austen’s original works, but ultimately falls short due to its anachronistic prose and melodramatic plot. The reader almost wishes that

Darcy would come back from Constantinople at once, and slap some sense into his children.

The same may be said about the author, as well, only Austen would prefer to do her damage with her biting wit. Aston’s book also feels cheap. It is not quite a horrible skin graft, like Zombies, but it does try terribly hard to scoop up bits of the original text and sprinkle them throughout. The result is, as the Publisher’s Weekly review said, more of a relaxing summer beach read for historical fiction fans rather than a Jane Austen work.

Williams 29

Fitzwilliam Darcy, Gentleman: An Assembly Such as This (2003 Novel)

Another series with a more interesting perspective comes from writer and Austen devotee Pamela Aidan, who penned the Fitzwilliam Darcy: Gentleman series. Written as a novel in three parts, it retells the story of Pride and Prejudice through the eyes of Darcy rather than Elizabeth. The prose is less anachronistic than Aston’s, but still does not perfectly capture the original voice of Jane Austen. Such a feat seems impossible, after reading so many Austen spin-offs. Nevertheless, this book attempts to capture the voice of

Fitzwilliam Darcy all by himself. Aidan gives Darcy a chance to explain himself, but what the reader finds is that he isn’t much different than Elizabeth’s first impression. Indeed, from the very first line, we see that Darcy is portrayed as a snob, and that the author tries desperately hard to emulate Austen’s style: “Fitzwilliam George Alexander Darcy rose from his seat in the Bingley carriage and reluctantly descended to earth before the assembly hall above the only inn to which the market of Meryton could lay claim” (9). This is the Darcy with whom we are all familiar—proud, cold, and unsocial. This is the tone that follows for the rest of the novel. Although, it is rather interesting to hear Aidan’s presentation of his thoughts at the Meryton assembly:

Why had he agreed to this waste of an evening? There was no beauty, conversation, or fashion to be found in the entire room saving those with whom he had arrived. Rather, he was surrounded by the common, the dull, and the trite, that class of the barely gentrified whose idea of conversation was no more than gossip—and that of the vulgar sort of which he was now the current object. Darcy could not help but compare his present circumstance with the last time he had been to Tattersall’s in search of a suitable new thoroughbred stallion for his brood mares. Then and there, he privately vowed to purchase no more horseflesh at auction. (Aidan, p. 11)

It is interesting that we get to hear Darcy’s thoughts, which are not often made clear in the original novel, which is mostly from Elizabeth’s perspective, or the perspective of a third

Williams 30 person, omniscient narrator who occasionally slips into free indirect discourse to give voice to her thoughts. In the original, we see Darcy through the eyes of this narrator and the opinions of others:

Mr. Darcy danced only once with Mrs. Hurst and once with Miss Bingley, declined being introduced to any other lady, and spent the rest of the evening in walking about the room, speaking occasionally to one of his own party. His character was decided. He was the proudest, most disagreeable man in the world, and everybody hoped that he would never come there again (8).

Other than his meditating on a pair of fine eyes on a pretty face, we do not hear much of what Darcy is thinking in the original. This novel at least attempts to understand Darcy on a deeper level, though one could also argue that such an understanding is not needed, since he explains himself to Elizabeth and he rescues her sister Lydia from scandal. This particular volume, the first in the series, focuses on Darcy’s dislike of the country and his disdain for everyone around him. The second, called Duty and Desire, relates his struggles between his social position and his love for Elizabeth Bennet against his better judgment.

The last, These Three Remain, focus on him mending his relationship with Elizabeth, and ultimately, the most famous marriage in classic English literature. Why it is published in three separate volumes, I cannot tell you. It would work perfectly as one novel, but for whatever reason, Pamela Aidan felt the need to extend Darcy’s story into three books. She tries very hard to emulate the simplicity and grace of Austen’s original works, but unfortunately, Aidan’s prose is too flowery, too personal, and too contemporary.

Conclusion

Austen spin-offs such as Austenland and the Lizzie Bennet Diaries on YouTube are popular because they are relatable. Jane’s novels are often seen as “high literature,” something that ordinary readers cannot find pleasure in because it is too lofty. Fanfiction

Williams 31 seeks to water down her novels and present them so that contemporary audiences feel more welcomed. By bringing Jane and her issues—finding love, financial security, one’s true self—into our twenty-first century world, we find that perhaps she is more relevant than she seems. The Regency era seems too long ago and too distant of a past for people other than serious Janeites or historians to connect to. That is part of the reason Zombies was able to be made into a film. The historical past, unless made into a romance or given a modern twist, is often seen as stuffy. Adding a great twenty-first century phenomenon like a zombie apocalypse was a great way to grab the attention of those who would not otherwise pick up an Austen novel. Series like Mr. Darcy’s Daughters or Fitzwilliam Darcy:

Gentleman are popular because people like historical romance. The harlequinism (in reference to the infamous Harlequin romance novels) of Austen’s novels is popular in the contemporary era because for some, there is no “romance” in the original novels. There are no sex scenes, and hardly any mentions of a chaste kiss. Sex sells, and when combined with historical fiction, it sells well.

I have often heard people say that Austen was the Nicholas Sparks of her time, and such a comparison makes me recoil. Sparks writes cheap trash, beach reading, if you will, for people who like romantic comedies in the form of a book rather than a film. Austen did not produce cheap trash. She did something that no one in her time had ever done before, which was give a voice to a whole generation of young, middle class women, who had previously been left out of literature. Daily middle class life was not often depicted in literature, and if so, rarely did it focus on the hopes and dreams of young women. This may not seem remarkable to a contemporary audience, but it was extraordinary back then, and we still continue to draw on her ideas and gain inspiration from her sophistication and

Williams 32 wisdom. That is perhaps the reason why we have so much Jane Austen fanfiction. We try in vain to recreate that sense of originality, quaint Englishness, and timeless stories.

The historical past has always been popular, and today, it seems we are trying to revive and give new life to old classics. We make series, and sequels and prequels, because we don’t want stories to end. We want to experience characters’ lives right alongside them, and that is precisely why there is so much Austen fanfiction. Even though no one can perfectly capture her style, try as they might, they endeavor to keep her stories alive and fresh, because we hate to see a good story come to an end. Unfortunately, all the beautiful, intricate, and complex things about Austen’s novels are picked apart, scrapped, and repackaged for cheap sale. Perhaps this is elitist thinking. There is nothing wrong with fanfiction, after all. It provides amateur writers with a sense of community, it becomes a fun hobby, and it allows them to grow as writers and thinkers. And there is certainly no harm in reimagining stories, especially since that kind of storytelling is very popular in this day and age. But, some retellings and alternate universe ideas simply take things too far, fail to measure up to the original, and result in awkward, lackluster stories. The beauty, grace, simplicity, and sophistication of Austen’s novels are easily lost, and it no longer feels special to read about Lizzy and Darcy’s relationship when zombies are groaning and limping in the background.

Furthermore, Austen’s works are about so much more than a man and a woman falling in love in the Regency era. They talk about money, social class, friendship, and self- awareness, among many other things, and Austen is able to convey all those things in such a pure and simple way. This is something that the fanfictions often overlook—the basic depictions of the vulnerability of the human condition. Instead of simply accepting Austen’s

Williams 33 work as it is, they seek to pile on to it with fantastical romances, murders, and adventures, which simply don’t fit Austen’s style. Her work has maintained popularity for the last 200 years, and I have no doubt they can last for 200 more. Austen is timeless and elegant, which is why, even after all this Janeite frenzy, her novels remain popular. In addition, modern women like to think of themselves as free and liberated from the oppressive etiquette rules that governed the past. We have the ability to make our own lives for ourselves without the financial security of a husband if we so wish. However, some things do not go away. We still face gender, class, social, and economic issues. The idea of finding love and building a romance with someone despite all of these unspoken societal rules is just as attractive to a

21st century reader as it would have been to a 19th century reader.

Williams 34

Works Cited

"Product Summary." Amazon.com. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

Prejudice-Zombies-Classic-Ultraviolent/dp/1594743347>.

Aidan, Pamela. Fitzwilliam Darcy, Gentleman: An Assembly Such as This. Coeur D'Alene, ID:

Wytherngate, 2003. Print.

Aston, Elizabeth. Mr. Darcy's Daughters: A Novel. New York: Touchstone, 2003. Print.

Austen, Jane. Northanger Abbey. Mineola: Dover Thrift Publications, 2000. Print.

Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. New York: Vintage, 2007. Print. This is a special

Anthropologie edition with a pretty cover. Vintage Books is a division of Penguin House.

Boyle, Laura. "The Way of the World/Mr. Darcy's Daughters by Elizabeth

Aston."Janeausten.co.uk. 2011. Web. 26 Mar. 2016. .

Bradshaw, Peter. "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies Review – Undead Breathe No Life into

Revamp." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 2016. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

Dargis, Manhola. "Killing Zombies, With Prejudice." The New York Times 5 Feb. 2016. Print.

Williams 35

Gilbert, Sophie. "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: Classic Romance with a Nasty Bite." The

Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 5 Feb. 2016. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

Austenland. Dir. Jerusha Hess. Prod. Shanon Hale. Perf. Keri Russell and JJ Feild. Sony

Pictures Classics, 2013. DVD.

Laski, Marghanita. Jane Austen and Her World. New York: Viking, 1969. Print.

Lloyd, Robert. "In "Death Comes to Pemberley," a Brisk Mystery in Austen-land."Los Angeles

Times. Los Angeles Times. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

20141024-column.html>.

O'Hara, Helen. "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies Review: 'glossy but Tedious'"The

Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 11 Feb. 2016. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

"Fiction Book Review: MR. DARCY'S DAUGHTERS." PublishersWeekly.com. Web. 26 Mar.

2016. .

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. Dir. Burr Steers. Perf. Lily James and Sam Riley. Screen

Gems, 2015. Film.

Williams 36

Su, Bernie, Margaret Dunlap, Rachel Kiley, Jay Bushman, Kate Rorick, and Anne Toole. "The

Lizzie Bennet Diaries." The Lizzie Bennet Diaries. YouTube. 9 Apr. 2012. Web. 26 Mar. 2016.

Towhidi, Juliette. "Death Comes to Pemberley." Death Comes to Pemberley. BBC and PBS.

United Kingdom, 26 Dec. 2013. Television.

Watt, Ian P., ed. Jane Austen, A Collection of Critical Essays. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-

Hall, 1963. Print.

Welsh, Kaite. "Pride and Prejudice at 200: The Best Jane Austen Small-screen

Adaptations." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 2013. Web. 26 Mar. 2016.

Wollaston, Sam. "Death Comes To Pemberley – TV Review." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 2013. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

Williams 37