Articles on Spinoff Books in the Centre

[stella]

austen, we have a problem
re-invent the classics, or leave them be?
by jael mchenry


I’ve got nothing against zombies. I just don’t want to see them at Pemberley.

It’s not coming out until next month, but Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is already making quite a stir in literary circles. By “making a stir” I mean “plucking every string on the spectrum between amusement and outrage”.

If you’ve never heard of the book, it’s really all there in the title. It’s the entire book of Pride and Prejudice, all the lovely Jane Austen characters and plotting and delight… but in between bits, Darcy and Elizabeth also happen to be trained zombie hunters. So there’s Bingham and Lydia and whathaveyou. But our two chief lovebirds, in between balls and misunderstandings, mostly they go splattering braaaaaains across the countryside.

No thanks.

Classics get revisited all the time. As they should. One of the funniest things about the constant re-interpretations of Shakespeare (WWII Richard III! Zydeco Tempest! High School Othello!) is that Shakespeare himself was re-interpreting and re-assembling scores of plots and characters from existing works. So wouldn’t he approve of revisiting these stories again, and shaping them into something new that’s relevant to a new audience? Especially if there was money to be made? You bet he would.

Modern re-inventions of classics can be beautiful, wonderful, mind-expanding works. They can be fun and fabulous, like “Wicked” and “Clueless”. They can be dark and lovely, like Wide Sargasso Sea and March and Finn. They can be huge and grand like “Mourning Becomes Electra” or flat-out goofy like Strange Brew.

But here’s the important thing. A “re-invention” should still be an invention. It needs to do one of two things: give us a new view of the original work, or hit a bullseye on modern society. New stage interpretations of Shakespeare or other classic playwrights tend to do the former. Recently a theatre company in Philadelphia staged a new version of “Hedda Gabler” wherein Hedda’s lover was also a woman, making Hedda a lesbian unable to live how she wanted in her own time. That was a new spin on the character. It gave Hedda something else to be angry about, another reason to resent her husband, another reason to feel trapped. So: a re-invention. Mostly the same text and same characters, but a spin that invests the play with new, different meaning.

As for the bullseye on modern society, that’s harder. “Clueless” did it: take that timeless matchmaking plot and that timeless meddling character from “Emma”, but transform everything else about the story to make it twinkle in the materialistic, shallow subculture of a sunny California teen princess. Take the timeless and put it in our time. That’s what a real re-invention should do.

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies? That’s not invention. That’s marketing. Brand recognition. An author who wants to blend zombies and Regency romance could just write a story about Regency characters killing zombies, but it probably wouldn’t stir much controversy, and it might be hard to market. The name recognition on Pride and Prejudice kicks this into a whole new gear. (Which is probably why there’s also a film script making the rounds out there called “Pride and Predator”. Not only is there nothing new under the sun, but sometimes there’s too much of it at the same time.)

But in my opinion, zombies and Regency romance don’t really belong together. There’s nothing about one that gives us a better or more interesting lens on the other. It’s not because they’re dissonant concepts. People cram dissonant concepts together all the time. And maybe it’s just because I’ve watched the entire series in the last week, but Joss Whedon’s “Firefly” stands as the perfect example of this to me. It’s a space Western. And if space and Westerns sound dissonant, they’re really not: the characters are semi-outlaws cruising around a big dark frontier, threatened by the other wild things that live beyond civilization, living by their wits rather than sitting pretty in a cityscape where they don’t belong. It’s a jamming-together that really, really works. Not least because Whedon and his creative team are masters of plotting and character. There’s so much there beyond the concept.

Add that to the list of things a re-invention needs, then. It needs to go beyond. If it’s just the original with a few tweaks, that’s not worth it. I remember seeing a race-reversed staging of “Othello” in Washington, D.C., with Patrick Stewart in the title role. Was it good? Sure. Was it anything beyond the original? Not really.

Will Pride and Prejudice and Zombies go beyond? Me, I’m not holding my breath.

If you need me, I’ll be working on my script for “How to Bury a Billionaire”. If you want something done right, sometimes you have to do it yourself.

[stella]

Originally Posted by stella

“Jane Bites Back,” Michael Thomas Ford’s (the zombies arrive this April and my book arrives in early 2010)

Hence the reason I haven't gotten it yet it should be good and funny read.

Stella

Jane Bites Back
Michael Thomas Ford.
Ballantine Books
Trade Paperback, 320 pages
* On Sale: January 5, 2010
* Price: $14.00
* ISBN: 978-0-345-51365-6 (0-345-51365-7)

Ford's (Last Summer) fang-tastic satire of the Jane Austen craze catches up with “Elizabeth Jane Fairfax,” the undead 233-year-old author and owner of an upstate New York book store. She's disgusted by the Pride and Prejudice knockoffs that fly out of her store (poor Jane hasn't seen a royalty check in almost 200 years), and her last manuscript's been rejected by 116 publishers. Things start to look up when she finally gets a deal for the book, but two problems arise as she's promoting Constance: Lord Byron, who turned Jane, wants her back; and Violet Grey, a vitriolic Brontë blogger, accuses Jane of stealing Charlotte Brontë's last unsold manuscript. Ford's Jane is a very fun and funny heroine to root for as she endures the indignities of publishing and bookselling, fends off danger and (perhaps) finds love. Her hilarious smack downs with Violet hint of more madness to come in this first of a series. (Jan.)

[stella]

Austen’s new-found popularity infuriated her original fan-base. George Saintsbury, in his introduction to the 1894 edition of "Pride and Prejudice", identified these select readers ("a fairly large and yet unusually choice" group, himself included), as “Janeites”. The implication was that only the true Janeite understood the author. Everyone else was merely seduced by her celebrity. Hundreds of other sites publish Austen-inspired work as well. Some of the stories are good, most are bad and a few are nearly incomprehensible. The difference between “gentile” and “genteel” is apparently a source of great confusion, and while lines like “‘Oh, hello’, cheerfully said a stranger and smiled broadly. ‘A nice weather, isn’t it?’” are not the rule, they are not the exception, either. Happy endings are ubiquitous

Today's Austen industry is an unwieldy behemoth, encompassing sequels, spin-offs, and adaptations. This year alone will see the release of at least two more published follow-ups to "Pride and Prejudice"; a 500-piece Jane Austen puzzle; a journal, desk diary and pocket diary emblazoned with Austen quotations and illustrations; the book "Rude Awakenings of a Jane Austen Addict" (the follow-up to "Confessions of a Jane Austen Addict"), in which a “modern Los Angeles girl” finds herself in Regency England; another journal; another time-travel romance; and a note pad. "Jane Bites Back", a trilogy of novels starring Austen herself as a vampire, will be released in 2010. For the full article see below:

(Elizabeth Gumport is an MFA candidate at Johns Hopkins University. She writes about short stories for Bookslut.)

http://www.moreintelligentlife.co.uk...e-writing-jane

[stella]

We have a release date, September, 2010, for the paranormal anthology from Harlequin headlined by Mary Balogh and with Susan Krinard and Colleen Gleason, based on paranormal versions of Jane Austen. I chose my favorite Austen, Emma.

I’ve just accepted a two-book contract with HarperCollins for paranormals starring Jane Austen. The first book (to be released in summer, 2010) is set in Bath under French occupation and there will be blood and vampires.


http://www.janetmullany.com/

[stella]

I just caught this clip on Youtube and said (Oh,no) and then chuckled well just for a laugh I am sure Jane wouldn't mind.
The dreaded spinoff of

Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters: Book Trailer
posted by:
irreference

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jZVE5uF24Q

The book trailer for the hotly anticipated follow-up to Quirk Books' international best seller, 'Pride and Prejudice and Zombies'. In stores now.

For more information, visit www.quirkclassics.com.

Video written and directed by Ransom Riggs
Produced and shot by Seth Dalton
Starring Martin Roe and Michelle Page
3D creature effects by Jon Gutman
Music by Michael Picton
Sound editor: Michael McKone
Sound mixer: Zack Howard
Color grade by Dirty Robber

[stella]

They had ones for Darcy the Vampire and P&P and Zombies I would post them but after the first one I said maybe not. But to those who are less afraid can look them up on Youtube. I am trying to still get copies of Darcy and the one for Jane Austen the vampire but still have not found it at least at my local book seller.

I still recommend the P&P mashup and might even try the S&S just for fun it doesn't mean I love Jane any less. After all Jane herself has a great sense of humour after writing Northanger Abbey her own spoof of gothic literature.

Stella

[stella]

Austen's Powers
There's something about Jane! It's been more than two centuries since Jane Austen first put pen to paper and took on the task of skewering the social customs and calamities of the privileged classes in Regency England. Remarkably, Austen is still topping bestseller lists today, aided in no small part by some valiant modern-day scribes who've managed to, er, reanimate her work — if you'll pardon the pun — with the help of hideous sea monsters, Shaolin warriors and, of course, an army of ravenous zombies. This May, the Book Club explores Austen's weird and wonderful legacy in all its forms.

2011 will mark the 200th anniversary of Jane Austen's first published novel, Sense and Sensibility. That shrewd study of romance, family dynamics and class consciousness in 19th-century England showcased Austen's great strengths as a writer: her keen wit and appreciation of irony, her interest in challenging the era's ideals of "proper" femininity and her tremendous talent for creating realist fiction with a keen edge of social commentary. At the time, Sense and Sensibility cost Austen a healthy sum to publish (she paid the publisher to release her book and gave him a commission on sales!), but it was quite a success in its day — the first run of 750 copies sold out, and a second printing was ordered not long after that. The sea monsters came much later.



Sea monsters? Oh right, they — and the zombies — are a 21st-century phenomenon. Austen's work has provided ample inspiration for savvy writers, artists, filmmakers and musicians over the years, who've transformed the ideas and stories from her novels into everything from Bollywood musicals to Valley Girl comedies. We'll talk more about the wild and woolly world of Jane Austen in popular culture. But in the past year, Austen's best-known tales have taken on new life in a wholly marvellous form, thanks to the wicked imagination of one Jason Rekulak, the creator of the Quirk Classics series.



Inspired by the explosion of pop-culture hybrids, mash-ups and reinventions — or what we might more formally describe as "creative copyright infringement" — he found on the internet, Rekulak drew up two lists. One included popular classic novels that existed in the public domain; the other was a geeky overview of the supernatural and superhuman characters beloved of fanboys and -girls the world over (to wit: vampires, zombies, werewolves, pirates, etc.). Through some clever matchmaking, Rekulak and his team of authors have created unexpectedly successful literary marriages, including Pride and Prejudice and Zombies and Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters, both of which came out in 2009. Just this spring, Quirk published Dawn of the Dreadfuls, a prequel to PP&Z.



One can only imagine what Jane might have to say about the slithery, slimy creatures who've helped breathe new life into her best-known work over the last couple years. We'd like to think she'd have a good chuckle.

For more info see the link below
http://www.cbc.ca/books/bookclub/books/index.html

[stella]

Originally Posted by stella

The jury is still out trying to manoeuver past all the modern language and cliches used in this book you get the sense that she had read the book a few times and just made it up based on little research.
What she bases Mary on is unsubstantiated and false and not at all what I would have written in regards to what happens to everyone after P&P ended. One thing I noticed later in the chapters is the fact that she made Mary out to be some kind of feminist and Lydia like character. Rambling about with no thought to her own safety. I am beginning to wonder if I had wasted my time in reading it. I had expected better from an accomplished writer than this contrived mess.
I think she was aiming more at trying to make Mary in Jane Austen's likeness though I will push through no matter how this book irks me. I will pass it on to a friend instead of keeping it after I am done dissecting it.

stella

I stand in my statement as McCullough should have not gone off her own path of novels and try a Jane Austen P&P sequel. Each to their own but as an Austen reader for 30 years I wouldn't recommend it.

[stella]

Originally Posted by stella

Jane Bites Back
Michael Thomas Ford.
Ballantine Books
Trade Paperback, 320 pages
* On Sale: January 5, 2010
* Price: $14.00
* ISBN: 978-0-345-51365-6 (0-345-51365-7)

Ford's (Last Summer) fang-tastic satire of the Jane Austen craze catches up with “Elizabeth Jane Fairfax,” the undead 233-year-old author and owner of an upstate New York book store. She's disgusted by the Pride and Prejudice knockoffs that fly out of her store (poor Jane hasn't seen a royalty check in almost 200 years), and her last manuscript's been rejected by 116 publishers. Things start to look up when she finally gets a deal for the book, but two problems arise as she's promoting Constance: Lord Byron, who turned Jane, wants her back; and Violet Grey, a vitriolic Brontë blogger, accuses Jane of stealing Charlotte Brontë's last unsold manuscript. Ford's Jane is a very fun and funny heroine to root for as she endures the indignities of publishing and bookselling, fends off danger and (perhaps) finds love. Her hilarious smack downs with Violet hint of more madness to come in this first of a series. (Jan.)

I haven't gotten my hands on this one as I am seriously behind on spoofs can anyone assist who has read it?

[stella]

Mr. Darcy, Vampyre Reviewed

It started out very slow this story but very much some of what we missed at the end of Pride and Prejudice when Darcy and Elizabeth were wed and the Bingley's went off on their wedding tours.
There were many sprinkles of Jane Austen's own words and as well snatches of history from Napolean to Roman Gods. True to the spirit of the vampire I can say as far as I know yes, Ms. Grange did that and sure that she did her research well. Using a bit of Dark Shadows and Interview with a Vampire as references made it interesting. The show Being Human comes to mind also with some references. Only one error I noticed not sure if it was missed or not regarding the beginning of the Darcy curse. It does unlike the book give reference to what happened to the Darcy family in this instance though very sparingly mentioned in Pride and Prejudice if at all. Somehow this book seemed to bridge the gap of enemies sworn in the book but thoughtfully making loving references to characters like the Collins, The Bennets, De Bourghs and even Wickham makes an appearance. Although slow in the beginning a quarter of the way it does pick up and keeps you wondering until the end. The tale was interwoven very carefully and she did her best to keep the speech and period alive all the while retaining mystery. Unlike Pride and Prejudice and Zombies I found it less of comedy and graphic scenes but more of mystery and romance with a touch of gothic as Northanger Abbey and perhaps not the Henry James touch I was expecting. If you are expecting Harlequin or Mills and Boons or similar you will not find a bodice ripper here just a tale of true romance beyond all odds. I end this review with a favourite quote of which there are more than a few but this one is lovely.

"That to know another human being absolutely, and to love them, is the greatest adventure of our lives".

~ Amanda Grange, Mr. Darcy Vampyre

Reviewed by Stella