As the world commemorates the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen‘s birth, various cultural events, including the BBC docuseries Jane Austen: Rise of a Genius and the PBS mini-series Miss Austen, are exploring her literary contributions. While Austen is celebrated for her innovations in the novel form and her enduring popularity, the framing of her work often inflates claims of her radicalism. Critics argue that such portrayals overlook the complexities of her narratives and the socio-political context of her time.
The BBC series aims to position Austen as a pivotal figure in modern literature, paralleling her with well-known authors like Shakespeare. By blending scholarly insights with popular commentary, the series promotes the idea that Austen was not just a novelist but also a socially subversive figure. Yet, despite the engaging storytelling, Austen’s works primarily reflect the societal norms of her era rather than challenge fundamental structures. Her novels, though skillfully written, do not incite social or political revolutions; instead, they offer a reformation of Regency Britain through romantic plots that often align with the status quo.
The narrative surrounding the celebrations of Austen’s life must be contextualized within contemporary issues, such as the implications of Brexit and the ongoing discussions around nationalism and imperialism. Celebratory events risk recreating a cultural framework that emphasizes a white, nationalist perspective, particularly in light of Britain’s historical involvement in slavery and colonialism.
Framing of Slavery and Empire
The BBC series portrays the 18th century as a period of economic prosperity driven by trade. Although it acknowledges slavery, it implies that emerging progressive politics were challenging the institution. This characterization perpetuates colonial narratives that overlook the realities of racism and the impact of the British Empire, especially during the Victorian era, which followed the peak of the slave trade. As noted by literary and cultural critic Edward Said, the European literary canon’s formation coincided with colonial expansion, suggesting that Austen’s works cannot be divorced from the imperial context of her time.
In her novel Mansfield Park, the backdrop of Caribbean slavery is integral to the narrative, with characters like Sir Thomas Bertram benefitting from plantations in Antigua. The series does acknowledge that Austen’s family profited from slavery, which places her work within a broader historical framework that complicates the portrayal of her as a radical voice.
Questioning the Notion of Genius
The term “genius” frequently emerges in discussions about Austen, with many contemporary authors, including Helen Fielding, labeling her as such. This characterization may inadvertently support problematic historical hierarchies. The concept of genius has its roots in 18th-century racial theories, positioning white individuals at the pinnacle of a hierarchical structure. Furthermore, the use of “genius” can evoke ableist interpretations that link intelligence with evolutionary superiority.
Critics like Marilyn Butler argue that Austen’s narratives reinforce conservative roles for women, emphasizing themes of duty and self-sacrifice. While her works contain a range of perspectives, they ultimately affirm the societal norms of her time rather than challenge them. The romantic plots in novels such as Pride and Prejudice serve to integrate the lower gentry and trading classes into the existing social fabric, rather than advocating for radical change.
Despite some interpretations suggesting Austen engaged with abolitionist themes, her novels do not explicitly denounce slavery. Although she may have been aware of the inhumanities of her time, being part of the abolitionist discourse does not equate to being a public advocate against slavery. Many of her contemporaries, including prominent abolitionists, were vocal in their opposition to the institution, while Austen’s writings, though insightful, did not align with explicit anti-slavery movements.
In conclusion, while Jane Austen remains a significant figure in literature, framing her as a radical or a genius may obscure the realities of her work and the cultural context in which she wrote. As the 250th celebrations unfold, it is vital to approach Austen’s legacy with a nuanced understanding that acknowledges both her literary innovations and her complicity in the imperial culture of her time. This critical examination encourages a more comprehensive discussion of her contributions to literature and society.
