It is one of the ironies of literary history that, although Jane Austen was possibly the greatest writer of romantic novels in the English language, we should know so little about her own romantic life. A few years ago one academic earned the obloquy of Janeites everywhere by suggesting that their heroine might have had lesbian tendencies. There is very little evidence to support this hypothesis, but in fairness to the said academic it should be pointed out that there is not much more evidence to prove definitively the hypothesis that Jane was heterosexual. We know that in her early twenties she had a brief friendship with a young Irish lawyer named Tom Lefroy, but we do not know how deep that friendship went. We know that she received and refused a proposal from a young man named Harris Bigg-Wither, but we do not know her motives for rejecting him. (This would have been a financially advantageous match, so they were presumably not mercenary ones). We know that she was still unmarried when she died in her early forties. And that's about it.
"Becoming Jane" is essentially a filmed biography of Jane Austen told in the style of a filmed Jane Austen novel. It explores the possibility that she and Lefroy might have been deeply in love and suggests that this romance might have been the basis for her novel "Pride and Prejudice". Jane, like her heroine Elizabeth Bennett, is an attractive, high-spirited girl of 21. Like Elizabeth, Jane has an older sister to whom she is devoted. Her parents are portrayed as very much the inspiration for Mr and Mrs Bennett in the novel, in financial difficulties and forever worrying about how to marry off their daughters. There is an elderly, imperious widow (clearly the original of Lady Catherine de Bourgh) and a creepy clergyman (the prototype of Mr Collins), obsessively in love with Jane. There is a clandestine elopement, serving as the basis for Lydia's adventure with Mr Wickham.
This is, however, an Austen novel with a difference in that it ends unhappily for the lovers. Unlike Mr Darcy, Tom Lefroy is not the rich owner of a stately home but an impoverished, struggling barrister. The romance between Jane and Tom has the support of neither her parents who would prefer her to marry a wealthier suitor, Mr Wisley, nor his autocratic uncle, the ultra-reactionary Judge Langlois, on whom his prospects depend. (Wisley is an invented character, but he is obviously based upon Bigg-Wither, who in reality did not come into Jane's life until several years after the events shown in this film).
The film critic of the "Sunday Times" criticised this film for being insufficiently erotic, suggesting (referring not only to this film but also "Miss Potter" and "Mrs Brown") that the British like to imagine their national heroines in love but not in bed. There is, however, a perfectly good reason why this film did not show any love scenes between Jane and Tom, quite apart from the need to keep the family audience. Young women of good family in the late eighteenth century, even when deeply in love, did not jump into bed with their boyfriends as readily as they do in the twenty-first. Contraception was much less reliable than it is today, and any woman who lost her reputation for chastity would have been regarded as bringing shame not only on herself but also on her whole family.
Another criticism I have seen (both on this board and elsewhere) is that Anne Hathaway is too attractive to play Jane. In fact, we do not really know what Austen looked like during this period, although her contemporaries paid tribute to her "pleasing" appearance. There is something of a tradition of casting glamorous actresses as literary figures, and Hathaway playing Jane Austen is a much less obvious case of miscasting than Nicole Kidman as Virginia Woolf or Kate Winslet as Iris Murdoch. (Coming next: Catherine Zeta Jones as George Eliot? Angelina Jolie as Emily Dickinson?) Hathaway, in fact, played her part very well. As in "Nicholas Nickelby" her British accent was near-perfect, and James McAvoy (something of a rising star of the British cinema after "The Last King of Scotland") made an appealing hero as Lefroy, a man who hides his better nature under the guise of a roguish libertine. There were also some good cameo performances in the minor roles, especially from the late Ian Richardson (in his last role) as the formidable Langlois. Another notable feature was the look of the film. Like most period dramas it was attractively photographed, with County Wicklow in Ireland substituting for Austen's native Hampshire.
There has in recent years been a glut of films about British female authors, but apart from "Miss Potter", a touching romance about somebody who played a very minor role in the history of English letters, the only one I really enjoyed was "Sylvia", which I felt gave us a real insight into Sylvia Plath's life. "Iris" was well acted, but there seemed little connection between either Judi Dench's senile old lady or Kate Winslet's student sexpot and the real-life novelist Iris Murdoch. Similarly, "The Hours" was not very enlightening about either Virginia Woolf's life or her work. "Becoming Jane" falls into the same category. It relies too heavily on the biographical fallacy, the idea that works of fiction must be, in effect, disguised memoirs of the author's own personal experiences, an idea which downplays the role of creativity and imagination in literature. As a romantic drama with a period setting it is perfectly acceptable, but it does not do much to enhance our understanding of Jane Austen. 6/10
"Becoming Jane" is essentially a filmed biography of Jane Austen told in the style of a filmed Jane Austen novel. It explores the possibility that she and Lefroy might have been deeply in love and suggests that this romance might have been the basis for her novel "Pride and Prejudice". Jane, like her heroine Elizabeth Bennett, is an attractive, high-spirited girl of 21. Like Elizabeth, Jane has an older sister to whom she is devoted. Her parents are portrayed as very much the inspiration for Mr and Mrs Bennett in the novel, in financial difficulties and forever worrying about how to marry off their daughters. There is an elderly, imperious widow (clearly the original of Lady Catherine de Bourgh) and a creepy clergyman (the prototype of Mr Collins), obsessively in love with Jane. There is a clandestine elopement, serving as the basis for Lydia's adventure with Mr Wickham.
This is, however, an Austen novel with a difference in that it ends unhappily for the lovers. Unlike Mr Darcy, Tom Lefroy is not the rich owner of a stately home but an impoverished, struggling barrister. The romance between Jane and Tom has the support of neither her parents who would prefer her to marry a wealthier suitor, Mr Wisley, nor his autocratic uncle, the ultra-reactionary Judge Langlois, on whom his prospects depend. (Wisley is an invented character, but he is obviously based upon Bigg-Wither, who in reality did not come into Jane's life until several years after the events shown in this film).
The film critic of the "Sunday Times" criticised this film for being insufficiently erotic, suggesting (referring not only to this film but also "Miss Potter" and "Mrs Brown") that the British like to imagine their national heroines in love but not in bed. There is, however, a perfectly good reason why this film did not show any love scenes between Jane and Tom, quite apart from the need to keep the family audience. Young women of good family in the late eighteenth century, even when deeply in love, did not jump into bed with their boyfriends as readily as they do in the twenty-first. Contraception was much less reliable than it is today, and any woman who lost her reputation for chastity would have been regarded as bringing shame not only on herself but also on her whole family.
Another criticism I have seen (both on this board and elsewhere) is that Anne Hathaway is too attractive to play Jane. In fact, we do not really know what Austen looked like during this period, although her contemporaries paid tribute to her "pleasing" appearance. There is something of a tradition of casting glamorous actresses as literary figures, and Hathaway playing Jane Austen is a much less obvious case of miscasting than Nicole Kidman as Virginia Woolf or Kate Winslet as Iris Murdoch. (Coming next: Catherine Zeta Jones as George Eliot? Angelina Jolie as Emily Dickinson?) Hathaway, in fact, played her part very well. As in "Nicholas Nickelby" her British accent was near-perfect, and James McAvoy (something of a rising star of the British cinema after "The Last King of Scotland") made an appealing hero as Lefroy, a man who hides his better nature under the guise of a roguish libertine. There were also some good cameo performances in the minor roles, especially from the late Ian Richardson (in his last role) as the formidable Langlois. Another notable feature was the look of the film. Like most period dramas it was attractively photographed, with County Wicklow in Ireland substituting for Austen's native Hampshire.
There has in recent years been a glut of films about British female authors, but apart from "Miss Potter", a touching romance about somebody who played a very minor role in the history of English letters, the only one I really enjoyed was "Sylvia", which I felt gave us a real insight into Sylvia Plath's life. "Iris" was well acted, but there seemed little connection between either Judi Dench's senile old lady or Kate Winslet's student sexpot and the real-life novelist Iris Murdoch. Similarly, "The Hours" was not very enlightening about either Virginia Woolf's life or her work. "Becoming Jane" falls into the same category. It relies too heavily on the biographical fallacy, the idea that works of fiction must be, in effect, disguised memoirs of the author's own personal experiences, an idea which downplays the role of creativity and imagination in literature. As a romantic drama with a period setting it is perfectly acceptable, but it does not do much to enhance our understanding of Jane Austen. 6/10