Content uploaded by Zsofia Anna Toth
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Zsofia Anna Toth on Jan 31, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
J
ANE
A
USTEN
R
ELOADED
Z
SÓFIA
A
NNA
T
ÓTH
°
In this paper, I intend to examine the diachronic inter/cultural interpretation and dialogue
concerning Jane Austen and her works within information society. One of the central images
to be discussed is the 1995 Entertainment Weekly picture of Jane Austen as a successful and
high-tech script writer in Hollywood equipped with a laptop and a mobile phone, although
sitting in her Georgian habit (photo by Theo Westenberg). My aim is to examine the
inter/cultural dialogue between her age and the age of information society and to see how she
and her works are recycled, reloaded and reinterpreted in the age of mechanical reproduction.
Her works as well as her persona as a subject of artistic reproduction in the context of
multimediality are to be discussed in addition to how all these are re/present/ed on the
internet, in digitalized forms or through any other technical/mechanical reused and re/adapted
forms such as films, audio recordings etc. Her overarching legacy through time is proven by
her presence even in the multimediality of information society.
First, I would like to discuss briefly what information society – in which we
supposedly live today – stands for before we could see how Jane Austen and her works are
reloaded, recycled and/or reinterpreted within this realm.
1
So, information society, according
to Robert Pinter, who is paraphrasing Manuel Castells (one of the great seminal fathers of the
theory of information society), can be defined as a new form of human existence and
organisational system the main focus of which is (the production of as well as providing
access to) information. According to Castells, it is
the new mode of human existence where the organized production, storage, retrieval, and
utilization of information play a central role. New structural elements and networks appear
through which a certain ‘network society’ is being created accompanied by appropriate
institutions that are transformations of those already existing. As a result of this, on the macro
level, politics, economics, and culture are reformulated, as are the institutions of the mezzo
level and at the micro level, families and individuals experience similar changes (Castells,
1996:13-18).
2
This complex system of ‘informational network society’ that upgrades itself out of already
existing structures is usually interpreted in two opposing ways. When discussing information
society there are two approaches to it or two discourses that try to weigh its pros and cons.
Group 1 is the Athenians (technophiles) and group 2 is the Orwellians (technophobes). Quite
probably, these names speak for themselves but I would like to highlight the Athenian
approach because that is the one that encompasses the idea of progress, prosperity and points
towards a constructive end result with the creation of an e-democracy that is realized in a
digital agora. Pinter claims that
[i]n accordance with the Athenian model technology should have a liberating effect and by
enhancing human prosperity, it will eventually lead to the development of a new electronic
Kinga Földváry et al., eds., HUSSE10-LitCult. Proceedings of the HUSSE 10 Conference (Debrecen: Hungarian
Society for the Study of English,
2011),
302–10.
1
Although as a minor/side remark it has to be added that the idea that we are approaching or already reached the
age of post-information society is gaining ground.
2
Robert Pinter, “Towards getting to know information society,” in Information Society. From Theory to
Political Practice, ed. Robert Pinter (Budapest: Gondolat – Új Mandátum, 2008), 13.
Jane Austen Reloaded HUSSE 10 Proceedings
303
democracy. The 2,500-year-old Greek city state’s direct democracy will be able to regain its
power in a new digital agora.
3
This evidently implies that information society has the capacity to create the most perfect
example of human communities.
Certainly, the question arises why our society, why this age we live in is called
information society since information has always been with us and no society or any human
formation could have functioned without (the circulation of) information. However, Pinter
argues that no society before ours was influenced by the possession, production and
dissemination of information to such an extent as our current society/ies is/are:
[w]hile undoubtedly true, since all societies necessitate information flow, yet none of them
were called ‘informational’ by contemporary critical thinkers or historians. None of the
previous societies were so extensively influenced by the communication, reception,
processing, recording, decoding, and flow of information as ours are.
4
Thus, it seems that this label (information or ‘informational’) signifies our contemporary
society/ies precisely because within this/these the centrality and significance of information
has reached greater ground than ever before; additionally, Pinter also explains that this
naming also reflects that we have passed the phases of human development – from an
economic point of view – in which materialism and mere survival were central, and by
upgrading ourselves from the agricultural and industrial stages (our society is also sometimes
referred to as a post-industrial one)
5
now “the information sector and information oriented
jobs dominate the economy.”
6
Among the names to denote this specific entity, according to
Laszlo Karvalics, this name remained to encompass and represent the occurrences and
changes taking place in the late twentieth century: “[i]n the end the term ‘information
society’, which was the umbrella term used to describe the elemental societal changes that
took place in the second half of the 20
th
century, remained alone in the ring.”
7
Karvalics lists
several aspects of information society that facilitate its definition, for example: it is organized
around knowledge; its major aims (after knowledge) are innovation and change; “the
possession of information (and not material wealth) is the driving force” of development;
information is considered “an economic resource; freedom is also a central concept as well as
distribution, creation, access to and use of information, “global use of information,” the
accomplishment of better work, contributing to society in better ways and having “a higher
standard of living.”
8
This all implies that we reached the Canaan of any academic research and that Jane
Austen and her works can be better studied and interpreted than ever before. It is true, she and
her works are reproduced, reworked and (re)interpreted by almost every informational-
technological means, such as audio recordings, e-texts, film adaptations etc., not to mention
the ‘good old ways’ of reprinting or adapting her to the stage or turning her works into
musical pieces etc. Hence, the question might arise why there are still so many imaginative,
un-realistic, inaccurate, inauthentic and hyperreal interpretations and re-workings of Jane
Austen and her works when all kinds of technical and technological tools, devices and means
3
Pinter, “Towards,” 15.
4
Pinter, “Towards,” 22.
5
Laszlo Karvalics, “Information Society – what is it exactly? (The meaning, history and conceptual framework
of an expression),” in Information Society. From Theory to Political Practice, ed. Robert Pinter (Budapest:
Gondolat – Új Mandátum, 2008), 30.
6
Pinter, “Towards,” 23.
7
Karvalics, “Information Society,” 31.
8
Karvalics, “Information Society,” 34.
HUSSE 10 Proceedings Zsófia Anna Tóth
304
are at hand – also facilitated by the potentials of information society providing access more
easily and readily to information – to reproduce or reconstruct Jane Austen, her era and her
works with accuracy and authenticity.
In a chapter entitled “Austen cults and cultures” of The Cambridge Companion to Jane
Austen, Claudia L. Johnson states that early in the twentieth century Henry James already
protested against the too liberal use and abuse of Austen and her legacy. He “observed that a
‘body of publishers, editors, illustrators, [and] producers of the pleasant twaddle of
magazines’ found ‘their “dear”, our dear, everybody’s dear, Jane so infinitely to their material
purpose’ […].”
9
Austen thus became “a commercial phenomenon and a cultural figure,” yet,
James aimed his criticism not at Austen herself “but at her faddish commodification by
publishers and marketers.”
10
This, with the rise of information society, only worsened.
Maybe, it is a positive development that she (and her oeuvre) is available in every form (of
any quality) to everybody by almost every means but it did not primarily result in a positive,
constructive and advanced end result – and it is not only about what Johnson suggests that
“many of Austen’s most acute admirers have been unhappy with this extravagant
popularity”
11
but it can also be proven by objective and unemotional fact(or)s and standards.
Johnson adds that James, if he still lived and knew what became of Austen by 1997, he would
recoil in horror from the “dazzling movies from Hollywood and the British film industry
featuring our favourite stars, […] published sequels, imitations and homages, […] radio
broadcasts and editorial pages, […] bumperstickers, book bags, mugs” etc.
12
Then, Johnson
calls Austen “a cultural fetish,”
13
– and, in my opinion, this cultural fetishism of Austen only
deepened and got enlarged with the passing of time and the further development of
information society. Discussing mass media enthusiasts, fans and admirers outside of the
academy Johnson also lays emphasis on that they managed to legitimize “their own objects
and protocols of expertise” but adds that “unlike Star Trek, Austen’s novels hold a secure
place in the canon of high as well as popular culture.”
14
She closes her argumentation with an
egalitarian and liberal idea (central ones to the ideal of information society) stating that “[i]f
Dr. Johnson, one of Austen’s favourite writers, was correct in opining that the purpose of
literature was to help us better to enjoy or endure life, then we must be glad, pace James, that
‘Jane’ is ‘theirs’, ‘yours’, and ‘ours’ after all.”
15
Emily Auerbach also supports the idea that Austen is ours and what she communicates
through her writing reaches and captures a wide variety of readers/audiences: “Austen’s
ability to appeal simultaneously to a popular and academic audience demonstrates the clarity,
universality, and profundity of her works.”
16
Yet, she will always remain enigmatic and out of
reach herself no matter how hard we try to find and catch her since she is everywhere but
nowhere as Auerbach states: at the end of the search for Jane Austen she is still the winner of
a game of hide-and-seek: “[t]he more one searches for the enigmatic Jane Austen, the more
one discovers artistry and intelligence, allusiveness and wit;” and she closes her argument by
also asserting that “[a]t the end of this search, Jane Austen seems closer yet still out of reach –
as she will always be […].”
17
9
Claudia L. Johnson, “Austen cults and cultures,” in The Cambride Companion to Jane Austen, eds. Edward
Copeland and Juliet McMaster (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 211.
10
Johnson, “Austen cults,” 211.
11
Ibid.
12
Johnson, “Austen cults,” 212.
13
Ibid.
14
Johnson, “Austen cults,” 224.
15
Ibid.
16
Emily Auerbach, Searching for Jane Austen (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2004), 283.
17
Auerbach, Searching, 289-290.
Jane Austen Reloaded HUSSE 10 Proceedings
305
One of the major modes of attempting to reach and appropriate Austen is to recreate
her in a visual medium. When considering the representations of Jane Austen herself one can
find him/herself in an interesting visual adventure mostly because representations generally
bear the mark of their creator(s) and reveal much more about this/these person/s, the
circumstances of creation and the culture in which it is produced than about the physiognomy,
the body or the personality of the subject – in this case: Jane Austen. Another noteworthy
peculiarity of the Austen representations is that we do not really have an authentic and
certified picture, painting, portrait, sculpture (or any other type of representational
production), not even from the time when she actually lived. We only have a few sketches and
(sketchy) watercolour paintings of Austen made by her sister, Cassandra, which could be
called authentic. One of them depicts Austen sitting on a lawn or in a meadow with her back
to the viewer and the other one is a (sketchy) portrait. Apart from these, we only have textual
descriptions about her appearance given by her family members (people who personally knew
her and could provide us with legitimate information). One of these is the following:
In person she was very attractive; her figure was rather tall and slender, her step light and firm,
and her whole appearance expressive of health and animation. In complexion she was a clear
brunette with a rich colour; she had full round cheeks, with mouth and nose small and well
formed, bright hazel eyes, and brown hair forming natural curls close round her face. If not so
regularly handsome as her sister, yet her countenance had a peculiar charm of its own to the
eyes of most beholders.
18
The aim of this paper is not to provide an overview of all Jane Austen representations but I
would like to mention a few unique examples. In the two recently produced (supposedly)
biographical films, Becoming Jane (2007) and Miss Austen Regrets (2008), the actresses
chosen for embodying Austen were: Anne Hathaway in the first case and Olivia Williams in
the second. Although, physically both actresses resembled the description given by family
members and even the performed ‘Austenian personality’ seemed to be more or less realistic,
still, Becoming Jane became only a fairy tale (much more fiction than fact) while Miss Austen
Regrets touched a much more rational, realistic and authentic chord being based on the actual
facts and biographical data of her life.
Although it is not an ‘information society’ representation, the little caricature entitled
“Austen with fan and mallet” by Lee Siegel that appeared in Atlantic Monthly (n.d.) is a
noteworthy representation because it reflects on Austen’s style with ironic accuracy as it
presents her in full feminine decorum with (proper attire and) a fan in front of her while she
holds a mallet in her right hand behind her back. Another quite ‘Austenian’ representation
(from the age of information society) can be seen on the cover of Jane Austen in Hollywood
by Linda Troost and Sayre Greenfield eds. (2001), where we can see Austen on the Walk of
Fame in Hollywood as a famous script writer at the moment of leaving her footprint in the
sidewalk for eternity (and receiving her star) while hordes of fans, media personalities,
paparazzi etc. surround her, yet, she is still in her Georgian dress and she displays a sceptical
(and slightly irritated) facial expression. However, the representation that best describes the
Jane Austen of information society is “Austen on a cell phone” by Theo Westenberger that
appeared in Entertainment Weekly in 1995. Here, she can be seen sitting next to a swimming
pool (probably in Beverly Hills or Bel Air) while talking on her mobile phone. There is also a
laptop on the table – quite probably she was working on her next script – while she holds the
script of Pride and Prejudice during the phone conversation. With today’s standards the
actual technical devices to be seen in the image are all outdated, yet, during the time of the
production of this fictionalized photo they were the latest-development products and they
18
Douglas Bush, Jane Austen (London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1978), 22.
HUSSE 10 Proceedings Zsófia Anna Tóth
306
suggest that this Jane Austen is a technically competent offspring of information society (even
if she is still in her Georgian attire).
Another important aspect of the Austen mania is the quintessence of information
society: the internet Austen. If we have a look at some instances of the digitalized Jane Austen
we can see that there are hundreds and thousands of internet sites (of various quality) about
Jane Austen and her works. She is entirely immortalized in the digital world. To list all of the
sites or to attempt to cover their multitude would be a futile endeavour, thus, only some
interesting examples will be mentioned here to have a look at Austen’s digital existence. One
of the most prominent ones is the “JASNA. Jane Austen Society of North America” page
which concentrates primarily on academic issues, approaches and dialogue.
19
It also includes
an interesting link to “The Victorian Literary Studies Archive. Hyper-Concordance” which
makes it possible that – thanks to a C++ program – we can search for specific words in
literary works (for example, those of Jane Austen
20
) and we can find, for example, that in
Emma, the word ‘Emma’ occurs considering “Total text lines: 16826; Total word count :
161974; Query result : 865”
21
times and it lists the concrete lines and how that word is
embedded into the sentences. The webpage of the “Jane Austen’s House Museum” provides a
virtual tour and museum blog etc., but it also has a Facebook group and videos on YouTube.
We can learn here that writing workshops, family activities and holidays are also organized
here.
22
“The Republic of Pemberley” contains information about almost everything
concerning Jane Austen: her life, her era, locations, e-texts of Austen’s works, lists of sequels,
filmography, chat possibility, fan fiction, recommendation for further reading etc.
23
As a last
example here, certainly, there is to be found the website of “The Jane Austen Centre” (Bath,
England) which does not only provide all sorts of information in relation to Austen, her works
and her era but it also provides tours, visits, programmes, festivals, even stationery, jewellery,
CDs, DVDs, cross-stitches etc.
24
Such online shops (merchandise) are to be found on most of
these pages. Almost everything is available for purchase: gold earrings in the shape of Jane
Austen’s head (and/or bust), coloured quills, silver pen with Jane Austen’s picture on it, I ♥
Mr Darcy bags, a Jane Austen Festival mug, for Valentine’s Day a mug with “In vain I have
struggled”
25
motto or a Regency-style nightgown… etc.
However, the question arises whether all these things really and actually bring us
closer to Jane Austen as a person and as an author. Do these things make us understand her
and her works more or do they lead us to more creative and innovative interpretations? It is
rather doubtful. The ideal of information society is that we can have access to information in
the most democratic and liberal ways and in a sense, we become detached from the
constraints of materiality since information society is supposedly a post-industrial and ‘post-
material’ society. Yet, it seems that instead of a constructive and advanced study and
interpretation facilitated by the (currently) highest technology as well as the advantage of
historical retrospect, the diachronic, transhistorical, inter/cultural, multimedial interpretation,
discourse and dialogue ‘drops us’ from the frying pan, not into the fire, but into a sweetened
mug of cream tea with the (misspelled) motto engraved on it: “In vain I have struggled.”
Nonetheless, even in relation to trinkets (and artistic memorabilia) Austen is the winner as
Natalie Tyler presents us with a comparative chart since considering the prizes of tobacco
19
“JASNA. Jane Austen Society of North America.”
20
Although, she was not a Victorian writer since she lived during the Georgian Period.
21
“Victorian Literary Studies Archive. Hyper-Concordance.”
22
“Jane Austen’s House Museum.”
23
“The Republic of Pemberley.”
24
“The Jane Austen Centre.”
25
The motto is written this way on the website, yet, the precise quotation from Pride and Prejudice is the
following: “‘In vain have I struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell
you how ardently I admire and love you.’” (Austen 128)
Jane Austen Reloaded HUSSE 10 Proceedings
307
cards Austen was the absolute winner with $61.03, while Shakespeare came only second with
$43.50, Dickens ‘was sold’ for only $14 and Charlotte Bronte ‘earned’ only $7.50.
26
As Marilyn Gaull claims in her study entitled “Jane Austen: Afterlives”:
For readers, academic and otherwise, who find contemporary literary criticism too obscure or
out of tune with what brought them to Jane Austen in the first place, there is the heritage
industry, a rebirth of sorts in other forms (some historical and some technological), all of them
moving further away from the novels and even the history no matter how often and how
seriously it is invoked.
27
This is what can be experienced in the case of the above mentioned examples but also mostly
in the case of film adaptations or the so-called (supposedly) biographical films, sequels, fan
fiction etc. Andrew Wright puts it quite aptly when saying: “there is the all too easily
demonstrable fact that no one writes Jane Austen so well as Jane Austen. Any tinkering
means a change for the worse.”
28
Jane Austen and her legacy within information society seem to have entered a phase of
new fictionality of hyperreal dimensions. Hence, information society creates interpretive
strategies that might – in the name of democracy, equality and liberalism – result in a
manifold, diverse, free and multi-understanding of Austen and her works, yet, the question
occurs whether there is a limit to this. Gaull is also of the opinion that the end result
frequently borders “interpretive license”
29
Without the intention of being judgemental or
critical and excluding a wide range of interpretive strategies can it be stated with certainty that
all these productions really add something new and original, a new insight to the discourse
about Jane Austen and her works? Gaull goes on discussing what modes and ways there are to
resuscitate Austen – but all these only according to the current notions about her and her work
– and we watch as her diachronic survival and transhistorical presence turns her and her
legacy into a multimedial, technologized or even digitized cross- and transcultural non-entity.
In an appendix to Jane Austen & Co, a collection of essays somewhat on Jane Austen and her
second lives, mostly in the film Clueless (1995), Patrick Cooper provides a very useful listing
of radio, television, and film adaptations of Austen’s novels culled from various internet
sources. Along with the films, Austen, or versions of her, abound: films, books about making
films, web pages, tours, dolls, stationery, embroidery kits, tea sets, tee shirts, cookbooks,
societies, Web sites, festivals, conferences, and commemorative posters. With no sightings,
gossip, or cartoons to establish her social presence, no contemporary branding of the Austen
style, and no hats or silhouettes for dressmakers to copy, she is, as Ruth Perry says in
“Sleeping with Mr. Collins” (the tenth essay in this collection), “oddly nondescript,”
permitting, as Perry says tactfully of Jane Austen’s characters, “interpretive license.”
30
[emphases mine]
So, could it be the case that the ideal of information society seems to turn into interpretive
license in the case of Austen?
What I referred to as the hyperreal Austen of information society is the multi-charged,
oversemioticized and culturally, theoretically, medially and technologically burdened Austen
who is much closer to the spheres of simulacra than reality or authenticity. Gaull points out
that even scholars and people with academic endeavours tend in this direction and pour at us
26
Natalie Tyler, The Friendly Jane Austen. A Well-Mannered Introduction to a Lady of Sense & Sensibility
(New York: A Winkour/Boates Book, Penguin Books, 2001), 254.
27
Marilyn Gaull, “Jane Austen: Afterlives,” Eighteenth-Century Life Volume 28, Number 2 (2004): 116.
28
Andrew Wright, “Jane Austen Adapted,” Nineteenth-Century Fiction Volume 30, Number 3 (1975): 423.
29
Gaull, “Jane Austen: Afterlives,” 116.
30
Ibid.
HUSSE 10 Proceedings Zsófia Anna Tóth
308
their non-real mental/intellectual creations that – although being channelled into the wide
stream of information available to everyone – may not get to the bottom of what is within
Austen’s works (yet, it has to added that her words are also witness to some degree of
sentimental idealism that might not lead to a more accurate understanding, still they
reverberate an attempt to find Austen as she was and to find what she produced in its
simplicity):
Many times removed from the shadowy original, critics have reached the stage of pure
invention, freeing their inner Austen, making her up as they go along, citing in this—as in
most other collections—a little “canonicity” here, some “consumer culture” there, and
“postfeminism,” “postmodernism,” “gender relations,” “knowledge production,” and
“intertexuality,” though the simple good words that Jane Austen used and the ones that Stuart
Tave savored in his luminous Some Words of Jane Austen (1973) are as rare as the readers she
honored.
31
[emphases mine]
We may have gained a lot with the wide array of information available but are we apt and
prepared to handle it? Can we manage to find our way through the jungle of information since
to have access to information does not mean that it can be or will be accessed and, most of all,
processed. It also has to be added that the Austen of today is not the Austen that she was but
an ideologically, culturally and historically multi-layered collage. This is not necessarily a
problem since we live today trying to interpret the world around us while we are also
ideologically, culturally and historically situated beings and cannot see and interpret Austen
as she was in an age to which we do not have actual access. In addition, we have to face the
fact that in spite of information society we do not have adequate information about her, her
life, her works, and in fact, we do not have actual access to them either. Hence, all this
semiotically overburdened or – at the other extreme – materially downgraded, simplified or
even vulgarized production of meaning about Austen and her works might simply be the
result of information society that makes it possible to see her in various lights, and maybe, the
purist tendencies of finding ‘HER’ would not or do not manage to result in an accurate and
authentic meaning production either. Quite probably, attempting to find Austen other than
‘ours’ is a pointless and futile endeavour.
Gaull comments on it similarly saying and citing – while implying that Jane Austen
could eventually be considered the ghost writer of our current culture – that
Deidre Lynch, on the other hand, brings really big guns to bear on the relationship between
Clueless, which our students may believe at some point Jane Austen actually wrote, and
Emma. The opening is provocative: “Can we [note the implicative “we” again] learn history—
can we regain that capacity for retrospection ostensibly lost in a postmodern age—when Jane
Austen is ghostwriting History’s screenplay?”
32
Although Gaull also cites Maureen Turim’s words about Clueless with ample sarcasm, what
Turim claims about our interpretive strategies of today point clearly to the bottom of this
quandary of the transhistorical and intertextual Jane Austen of information society: “We
retain much that criticism and histories of literature and film taught us about the specificity of
context and the historical transformations of form, and we add to that the layered questions
posed by intertextuality conceived as transhistorical.”
33
This is us, and this is our Jane Austen: transhistorical, intertextual, and I would add,
multimedial. As Linda Troost and Sayre Greenfield claim there is always the fear that the
31
Gaull, “Jane Austen: Afterlives,” 116.
32
Gaull, “Jane Austen: Afterlives,” 118.
33
Gaull, “Jane Austen: Afterlives,” 117.
Jane Austen Reloaded HUSSE 10 Proceedings
309
films, the internet websites etc. might substitute the novels as “[i]nstead of reading Austen,
the Caroline Bingleys of the 1990s may just visit the Colin Firth websites and buy CDs of
music from Austen’s era, thinking that they are participating in High Culture,” yet, they are
convinced that these can substitute Austen and her novels only for some people, and it is not
quite likely that these products would degrade or replace the original works.
34
They assert that
these later re-workings and spin-offs tell much more about us than Austen or her works
concretely stating about adaptations that they cannot stand the test of time as her novels can:
[t]he film and television adaptations are attuned to one cultural moment as Austen’s novels
have proven themselves not to be. Every generation needs a film or video remake of Pride and
Prejudice whereas Austen’s novels have fit a succession of cultural moments for nearly two
hundred years. That is the reason they form part of the literary canon. The films get remade
because they do not inhabit a long sweep of time comfortably.
35
I would add to the example of films – either adaptations of Austen’s novels or biographical
film attempts of her life, or even spin-off films of spin-off works – all the other
reconsiderations and re-workings of her and her writing on the internet, on the stage, in print
etc. Eventually, the same can be said about all of them: that we are to be found in these
products as Troost and Greenfield also suggest: “[t]hese adaptations, then, have more to tell
us about our own moment in time than about Austen’s writing. In watching them, we watch
ourselves.”
36
Or perhaps, to see more clearly, we would need a slightly radical aversion
therapy that Gaull proposes ironically citing Benedict Nightingale that maybe “the Austen
fever” and the “blinding Austen obsession […] would require ‘aversiontherapy clinics where
demure maidens in crinolines beat addicts over the head while American academics read them
interminable essays on the semiotics of Jane Austen.’”
37
Bibliography
Auerbach, Emily. Searching for Jane Austen. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press,
2004.
Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions Limited, 1997.
Bush, Douglas. Jane Austen. London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1978.
Gaull, Marilyn. “Jane Austen: Afterlives.” Eighteenth-Century Life Volume 28, Number 2
(2004): 113-24.
“Jane Austen’s House Museum.” Accessed January 22, 2011. http://www.jane-austens-house-
museum.org.uk/.
“JASNA. Jane Austen Society of North America.” Accessed January 22, 2011.
http://www.jasna.org/.
Jarrold, Julian, dir. Becoming Jane. Written by Kevin Hood and Sarah Williams. HanWay
Films. 2007.
Johnson, Claudia L. “Austen cults and cultures.” In The Cambride Companion to Jane
Austen, edited by Edward Copeland and Juliet McMaster, 211-226. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1998.
34
Linda Troost and Sayre Greenfield, “Introduction. Watching Ourselves Watching,” in Jane Austen in
Hollywood, eds. Linda Troost and Sayre Greenfield (Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 2001), 9.
35
Troost and Greenfield, “Introduction,” 9.
36
Troost and Greenfield, “Introduction,” 11.
37
Gaull, “Jane Austen: Afterlives,” 119.
HUSSE 10 Proceedings Zsófia Anna Tóth
310
Karvalics, Laszlo. “Information Society – what is it exactly? (The meaning, history and
conceptual framework of an expression).” In Information Society. From Theory to
Political Practice, edited by Robert Pinter, 29-46. Budapest: Gondolat – Új
Mandátum, 2008.
Lovering, Jeremy, dir. Miss Austen Regrets. Written by Gwyneth Hughes. British
Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). 2008.
Pinter, Robert. “Towards getting to know information society.” In Information Society. From
Theory to Political Practice, edited by Robert Pinter, 11-28. Budapest: Gondolat – Új
Mandátum, 2008.
Siegel, Lee. “Austen with fan and mallet.” Atlantic Monthly n.d., n.p.
“The Jane Austen Centre.” Accessed January 22, 2011. http://www.janeausten.co.uk/.
“The Republic of Pemberley.” Accessed January 22, 2011. http://www.pemberley.com.
Troost, Linda, and Sayre Greenfield. “Introduction. Watching Ourselves Watching.” In Jane
Austen in Hollywood, edited by Linda Troost and Sayre Greenfield, 1-12. Lexington:
The University Press of Kentucky, 2001.
Troost, Linda and Sayre Greenfield eds. Jane Austen in Hollywood. Lexington: The
University Press of Kentucky, 2001.
Tyler, Natalie. The Friendly Jane Austen. A Well-Mannered Introduction to a Lady of Sense
& Sensibility. New York: A Winkour/Boates Book, Penguin Books, 2001.
“Victorian Literary Studies Archive. Hyper-Concordance.” Accessed January 22, 2011.
http://victorian.lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp/concordance/.
Westenberger, Theo. “Austen on a cell phone.” Entertainment Weekly, 1995, n.p.
Wright, Andrew. “Jane Austen Adapted.” Nineteenth-Century Fiction Volume 30, Number 3
(1975): 421-53.
Zsófia Anna Tóth
University of Szeged
tothzsofianna@gmail.com
