Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Janeite Deb:

JASNA-Vermont’s Kelly McDonald has an article in the new issue of “Jane Austen’s Regency World”!

Originally posted on Two Teens in the Time of Austen:

Just thrilled to bits to see the release of the July/August issue of Jane Austen’s Regency World magazine: my article on Margaret Meen is included:

Jane Austen Regency World_8-14

Margaret Meen – believed by some to have been governess to the four Smith sisters of Erle Stoke Park – AKA, Lady Northampton, Mrs Chute, Mrs Smith and Miss Smith – was definitely a painter (on vellum and paper) of botanicals, and a teacher. Including, as the JARW line suggests: to the Royal family of Queen Charlotte and her girls. I truly hope that I’ve uncovered a bit of “life” for this somewhat undiscovered artist — and invite you to seek out a copy of the full-color publication that promises to deliver “EVERYTHING that is happening in the world of Jane Austen“, including this tidbit of Smith & Gosling history.

View original 9 more words

Janeite Deb:

Laurel Ann’s review of the book “Belle” by Paula Byrne – I highly recommend it…

Originally posted on Austenprose - A Jane Austen Blog:

Belle by Paula Byrne 2014 x 200From the desk of Laurel Ann Nattress: 

Commissioned by the producers of the new movie Belle, acclaimed biographer Paula Byrne aims to reveal the true story behind the main characters in the movie: Dido Elizabeth Belle, the illegitimate daughter of a captain in the Royal Navy and an African slave, and her great-uncle, William Murray, 1st Earl of Mansfield (1705-93) and Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench. Belle: The Slave Daughter and the Lord Chief Justice is both a companion volume to the popular movie and a time capsule into the turbulent abolition movement in the late eighteenth-century England.

Inspired by the 1779 portrait of Dido and her cousin Lady Elizabeth Murray, screenwriter Misan Sagay has written a compelling story based on facts she first learned of while visiting the 2007, Slavery and Justice Exhibition. Dido and Elizabeth were Lord Mansfield’s wards and raised together at…

View original 1,048 more words

Lisa & Marie

Lisa & Marie

With hearty thanks to Lisa Brown for sharing her love of the Royal Navy with us Vermont Janeites, and to Marie Sprayberry for telling us of her shared-with-Jane rabid dislike of the Prince Regent and why, and displaying examples from her Georgian era royal collectibles – a most delightful day, despite the intense heat of Burlington’s heat wave and the Fletcher Free Library’s air conditioning on the fritz… [I have now successfully subjected our members and guests to one freezing December Tea where the computerized heating system refused to cooperate and we listened most intently to the two speakers, quietly shivering in our winter coats; and now the reverse of overheating the same members and guests with no air and loud fans in the skylight heated Pickering Room – as one guest bravely noted – “it was all a cost-free day in a sauna” ] – I find I have some control over these meetings, but alas! minus zero control over the weather and heating / cooling system snafus – I do apologize and thank you for your tolerance and good grace as an audience…

That said, extra kudos go to the models who courageously wore their wool-clad Royal Navy uniforms with elegance and style, as they paraded for us samples from Lisa’s wonderful collection.  Here are a few pictures with descriptions of each, with thanks to our fearless models for being such good sports:

able seaman-MH

 Marilyn as appropriately clad “able seaman”
[photo: c2014 M. Harrington]

IMG_3639

Jim in the green Sharpe’s uniform of the “95th Rifles”
[see: http://www.95thrifles.com/history-95th-p1.html ]
[photo: c2014 M. Harrington]

Jess-red

Jess and her redcoat from the Royal Welch Fusiliers

 Carol-USNavy

Carole in the blue and red uniform as a “US” Navy Lieutenant during the Revolutionary War

 Jay-rearIMG_3647

 Jay [a.k.a. Captain Wentworth] in an 1812 Royal Navy Captain’s uniform, deservedly admiring his epaulette
[see: http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/71310.html ]
[top photo c2014 M. Harrington]

****

DSC00051

And a group shot of us all with Lisa (minus the able seaman, who had left to swab the deck), and with yours truly in the quickly donned uniform of a French Navy Lieutenant.

 *************************

Marie’s talk on the Prince Regent was cut short near the end by the heat and near fainting attendees, which was too bad as we were all quite taken with her chat on the dastardly Prince and his wicked ways – you can read the rest of her talk here in Persuasions-OnLine 33.1 (2012):

“Sex, Power, and Other People’s Money: The Prince Regent and His Impact on Jane Austen’s Life and Work” http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol33no1/sprayberry.html

sprayberry-fig-6a-caro-jug

 “Long Live Queen Caroline!” ceramic jug (1820)
[from the collection of A. Marie Sprayberry and Edward R. Voytovich;
photo by E. Voytovich] [see the POL article for more images of Marie's collection]

****************

All in all a great day, with a great audience, and a fun weekend with Marie and Lisa, here cavorting about at the incomparable Shelburne Museum… Marie (left) and Lisa (right) on a Vermont covered bridge:

DSC00030

DSC00016

 Gaoled JASNA Regional Coordinators Marie and Lisa (hoping to be released in time for the Montreal AGM]

[All images c2014 by Deb Barnum, unless otherwise noted; and with special thanks to Margaret Harrington!]

  c2014 Jane Austen in Vermont

austen silhouette

Our Next Meeting!

June 8, 2014

You are Cordially Invited to JASNA-Vermont’s June Meeting 

A Peek into Jane Austen’s Regency World 

Lisa Brown

“‘Of Rears and Vices I Saw Enough’~
The Royal Navy in Mansfield Park and Persuasion

and A. Marie Sprayberry

“Sex, Power, and Other People’s Money ~
The Prince Regent and His Impact on Jane Austen’s Life and Work” 

Sunday, 8 June 2014, 1:00 – 3:30 p.m.

Fletcher Free Library, Fletcher Room
235 College St, Burlington VT

********

Lisa & Marie

Lisa & Marie

Lisa Brown will present an enlightening talk on how the Royal Navy figures in Mansfield Park and Persuasion. We will learn about the uniforms, the ships, the rating system, prize money, and more; as well as discover how very knowledgeable Jane Austen was about the Royal Navy because of her brothers’ involvement. Various uniforms will be on display – but, alas! without a Captain Wentworth in sight!

A. Marie Sprayberry investigates why Jane Austen wrote of the Princess of Wales in 1813: “Poor Woman, I shall support her as long as I can, because she is a Woman, & because I hate her Husband.” The Prince Regent brazenly personified the three themes of sex, money, and power – as long as the money was someone else’s! But did Jane Austen have particular reasons for disdaining him? And how might her views of the Prince have influenced her work? Photos of contemporary royal commemorative china and medals will illustrate the talk, all from Marie’s collection.

*Lisa and Marie are co-regional coordinators of the Syracuse Region; Lisa also co-chairs the Rochester Region, is an ECD teacher, owns a Regency era costume business, and has given various talks on the Royal Navy and Regency fashion; she works as a proof reader. Marie has spoken to JASNA on the Prince Regent and will be speaking at the Montreal AGM on “Fanny Price as Fordyce’s Ideal Woman?” She works from her Syracuse home for a NYC-based publisher.

Free & open to the public ~ Light refreshments served 

You can see the event flyer here: June 2014 flyer

Hope you can join us!

c2014, Jane Austen in Vermont

MP-Atlantic2012-ebay

Not sure about anyone else out there, but I’ve always thought Tom Bertram as nearly a throwaway character – other than the plot device of his being the eldest son and heir, which sort of messes everything up for Edmund and Mary, for what purpose is he in Mansfield Park?  He leaves the action early on to go to Antigua with Sir Thomas, and like Mary Crawford, we soon forget all about him … He brings grief to the Park with his profligate ways, but as a character, who is he really?

On this latest re-read of MP, I decided to pay close attention to Mr. Bertram, and find to my surprise and delight that he is quite the Talker! – He babbles on incessantly about all manner of things, often for a laugh-out-loud moment! Who knew MP was so funny??

I give here one such example; it is a long passage but just read it through – I promise a few laughs! – and then I wonder what your thoughts are about Tom – tell me in the comments below…

The scene:  Fanny at her first Ball, a very spontaneous Ball pulled together at Mansfield Park – [Vol. I, Ch. xii]

 

Fanny could listen no farther. Listening and wondering were all suspended for a time, for Mr. Bertram was in the room again; and though feeling it would be a great honour to be asked by him, she thought it must happen. He came towards their little circle; but instead of asking her to dance, drew a chair near her, and gave her an account of the present state of a sick horse, and the opinion of the groom, from whom he had just parted. Fanny found that it was not to be, and in the modesty of her nature immediately felt that she had been unreasonable in expecting it. When he had told of his horse, he took a newspaper from the table, and looking over it, said in a languid way, “If you want to dance, Fanny, I will stand up with you.” With more than equal civility the offer was declined; she did not wish to dance. “I am glad of it,” said he, in a much brisker tone, and throwing down the newspaper again, “for I am tired to death. I only wonder how the good people can keep it up so long. They had need be all in love, to find any amusement in such folly; and so they are, I fancy. If you look at them you may see they are so many couple of lovers—all but Yates and Mrs. Grant—and, between ourselves, she, poor woman, must want a lover as much as any one of them. A desperate dull life hers must be with the doctor,” making a sly face as he spoke towards the chair of the latter, who proving, however, to be close at his elbow, made so instantaneous a change of expression and subject necessary, as Fanny, in spite of everything, could hardly help laughing at. “A strange business this in America, Dr. Grant! What is your opinion? I always come to you to know what I am to think of public matters.” 

“My dear Tom,” cried his aunt soon afterwards, “as you are not dancing, I dare say you will have no objection to join us in a rubber; shall you?” Then leaving her seat, and coming to him to enforce the proposal, added in a whisper, “We want to make a table for Mrs. Rushworth, you know. Your mother is quite anxious about it, but cannot very well spare time to sit down herself, because of her fringe. Now, you and I and Dr. Grant will just do; and though we play but half–crowns, you know, you may bet half–guineas with him.” 

“I should be most happy,” replied he aloud, and jumping up with alacrity, “it would give me the greatest pleasure; but that I am this moment going to dance.” Come, Fanny, taking her hand, “do not be dawdling any longer, or the dance will be over.” 

Fanny was led off very willingly, though it was impossible for her to feel much gratitude towards her cousin, or distinguish, as he certainly did, between the selfishness of another person and his own. 

“A pretty modest request upon my word,” he indignantly exclaimed as they walked away. “To want to nail me to a card–table for the next two hours with herself and Dr. Grant, who are always quarrelling, and that poking old woman, who knows no more of whist than of algebra. I wish my good aunt would be a little less busy! And to ask me in such a way too! without ceremony, before them all, so as to leave me no possibility of refusing. That is what I dislike most particularly. It raises my spleen more than anything, to have the pretence of being asked, of being given a choice, and at the same time addressed in such a way as to oblige one to do the very thing, whatever it be! If I had not luckily thought of standing up with you I could not have got out of it. It is a great deal too bad. But when my aunt has got a fancy in her head, nothing can stop her.” 

*******************************

MP-CEBrock-TomBertram

The above scene is depicted by C. E. Brock in the Mansfield Park of 1908 [Mollands]

There are more such scenes with Tom I shall post on – but I just love this one, with Fanny sitting there and nervously thinking that he must ask her to dance, but he just goes on and on about a sick horse and Mrs. Grant in need of a proper lover…

Do you have a favorite scene that stars Tom Bertram?? Or, who is your favorite Tom Bertram at the Movies? My personal favorite, I must confess, is…..

Purefoy as Tom

…. James Purefoy as Tom Bertram – Mansfield Park (1999) [Pinterest]

c2014, Jane Austen in Vermont

 

MP-vintagecover

I have something in hand – which I hope on the credit of P. & P. will sell well, tho’ not half so entertaining. (Ltr.  86: 3 – 6 July 1813, to Capt. Francis Austen)

*****************

Dear Gentle Readers: This history of the publishing of Mansfield Park serves as an introduction to Sarah Emsley’s seriesAn Invitation to Mansfield Park,” which will begin on May 9th on her blog. As we celebrate this bicentenary of Austen’s third novel, published in May 1814, it seems only right to begin at the beginning, from when Austen first makes mention of Mansfield Park in her letters and its subsequent road to publication, to the later printings and early illustrated works. I am posting it here because of its length and number of illustrations – and Sarah will be re-blogging it immediately. Please continue to visit her blog for the interesting posts she has lined up for the next several months from various Jane Austen scholars and bloggers – a worthy tribute as we all give Mansfield Park the undivided attention it deserves!

~

The Publishing of Mansfield Park

We have Cassandra’s word that Jane Austen began Mansfield Park “sometime around February 1811 and finished soon after June 1813.” Letters during this time [you can read all the letters relating to Mansfield Park here] indicate that at least Cassandra was already very familiar with this work-in-progress – a few of the letters show how diligent Austen was in checking her facts about ordination and hedgerows, ships of the Royal Navy, and correct terminology for the Gibraltar “Commissioner.”

Early readers of the letters took her reference to “Ordination”

Now I will try to write of something else; – it shall be a complete change of subject – Ordination. (Ltr. 79: 29 Jan 1813)

to mean this was the theme of her next book, i.e. Mansfield Park. It is now generally accepted that she was just acknowledging her request in a previous letter for information on the process of ordination – to get it right about Edmund. (But see Michael Karounos, “Ordination and Revolution in Mansfield Park.” SEL 44.4 (2004): 715-36, for a discussion of what Austen meant by this word “ordination” and how it is indeed the theme of the novel.)

 

HenryAusten-jasna-Zohn

Henry Austen

[image: JASNA.org / Zohn]

Henry has this moment said that he likes my M. P. better & better; – he is in the 3d vol. – I believe now he has changed his mind as to foreseeing the end; – he said yesterday at least that he defied anybody to say whether H.C. would be reformed, or would forget Fanny in a fortnight.  (Ltr. 98: 8 Mar 1814).

…indeed the question that has been plaguing readers ever since!

Austen is traveling with Henry to London in March 1814 to negotiate its publication with Thomas Egerton; Henry is reading the manuscript for the first time, i.e. he was not in on the story during its composition over the past two years, as Cassandra was – Henry did not see it until it was ready for the press. It is also telling that her primary interest is Henry’s opinion concerning the ending and what happens with Henry Crawford!

Mansfield Park was being written at the same time Austen was revising Pride & Prejudice for publication [published in January 1813] – Janet Todd makes note of this allusion to the first sentence of P&P: “…there certainly are not so many men of large fortune in the world, as there are pretty women to deserve them.” (Todd, 75). Was Austen perhaps making a sly nod to her previous novel? MP is also the first work to be entirely written after settling in Chawton in 1809. The secret of her authorship is already out, thanks largely to Henry, though she will continue to publish anonymously. She writes to her brother Francis in September 1813:

Francis Austen - wikipedia

Francis Austen – wikipedia

 

…the Secret has spread so far as to be scarcely the Shadow of a secret now – & that I beleive whenever the 3d appears, I shall not even attempt to tell Lies about it. – I shall rather try to make all the Money than all the Mystery I can of it… (Ltr. 90: 25 Sept 1813)

The internal chronology has created its own controversy among scholars and readers – it is an especially important issue when deciphering her references to slavery (the topic of another post!). John Wiltshire in his introduction to The Cambridge Edition of Mansfield Park (2005) wonders why this book took so long to write (Feb 1811-June 1813), longer than her other works, and why the nine-month delay in getting it to London for publishing (March 1814). He speculates that “Mansfield Park is a novel carefully revised and perhaps thoroughly rewritten” and this accounts for the discrepancies in time, what he calls the “double-time scheme.” (Wiltshire, xxxi). But the delay could also be attributed to the long illness of Henry’s wife Eliza and her death in April of 1813. (Wiltshire, xxvii). [See links below for the chronologies.]

**********

This detective work on the composing of Mansfield Park is so very interesting, and essential to interpreting Austen’s intent in this controversial and often misunderstood novel. We are left largely with speculation and a host of unanswered questions. But today I am going to talk about the physical object, the book Mansfield Park as part of our material culture – how it came to be, what it looked like, who bought it and what it cost, followed by a brief introduction to the later printing history that included the American, illustrated and foreign editions.

~

The 1st Edition:

MP-1sted-titlepageMansfield Park title page – 1st edition

Like her S&S and P&P, Mansfield Park was published by Thomas Egerton in 1814. The title page states: “By the Author of ‘Sense & Sensibility,’ and ‘Pride & Prejudice.’” Writing to Francis on March 21, 1814, she hopes that

Perhaps before the end of April, Mansfield Park by the author of S&S. – P.&P. may be in the World. Keep the name to yourself. I sh’d not like to have it known beforehand. (Ltr. 100)

But it is not advertised until May 9, 1814, in The Star, and again on May 14, and further noted in The Morning Chronicle of May 23 and 27. Published on commission – Austen retained the copyright, paid for the costs of paper, printing, and advertising; the publisher distributes to the trade and takes about 10% of the profits – the author loses if the book does not sell well. This third novel came into the world in a run of about only 1250 copies, in 3-volumes, and sold for 18 shillings in boards. And it sells well – Austen writes in November of 1814 You will be glad to hear that the first Edit. of M.P. is all sold.” (Ltr. 109). As with all the finished novels, excepting the cancelled chapters of Persuasion, there is no manuscript.

~

*What did it look like?

FirstEdP&P-NLScotland

Pride and Prejudice 1st ed. – National Library of Scotland

The popular 3-volume format, called a “triple-decker” or a “three-decker,” was typical for novels of the day – what Susan Wolfson calls “a reader-friendly form for sequential purchasing and borrowing and family sharing.” (Wolfson, 112). This image is of a nearly perfect first edition of Pride & Prejudice at the National Library of Scotland – Mansfield Park would have looked like this, bound in blue-gray paper boards, with gray-brown or off-white paper backstrips and white paper spine labels. As Egerton engaged two different printers, many variations in quality and type result in the text. The volumes are 12mo, or duodecimo [about 7-8 inches], i.e. the original printed sheet has been folded four times to its constituent 12 leaves, resulting in 24 pages with about 23 lines to the page. [Note that P&P had 23 lines to the page; MP had 25 lines]

R. W. Chapman, editor of the Oxford complete works in 1923, writes in his memoir The Portrait of a Scholar:

“Those who have once read P&P in three slim duodecimos, with a ha’porth [= a halfpennyworth] of large type to the page, will not easily reconcile themselves to the inelegance of the modern reprint, close printed in one crowded volume.”  

…as you can see from this first page of Pride & Prejudice: FirstEdP&P - firstpage 4
But Mansfield Park was printed on much cheaper paper than P&P, with 25 lines to the page. Chapman, who relied on the 2nd edition of MP for his Oxford works, said that “of all the editions of the novels, the 1st edition of Mansfield Park is by far the worst printed.” (Chapman, xi-xii). Much scholarly debate has centered around the errors in the text, especially the lack of consistency in the spelling, grammar, and punctuation. We are reminded of Henry Tilney’s complaint to Catherine Morland about women letter-writers, where there is “a general deficiency of subject, a total inattention to stops, and a very frequent ignorance of grammar,” a criticism often directed at Austen herself! (I discuss this further under the 2nd edition below).

~

*Who bought copies? 

-At a cost of 18s in boards – remember: 20 shillings = a pound – the average person earned maybe 15-20 pounds / year – so who was actually buying books? [See Wolfson on this]

  • ½ purchased by circulating libraries
  • ½ were purchased by the titled gentry and upper middle classes, who would often rebind the volumes in leather for their private libraries, an example here:

MP-1sted-3vol-Jonkers

 Mansfield Park – 1sted, rebound – image: Jonkers Rare Books, UK

 ~

* Who reviewed it?

- There were no contemporary reviews of Mansfield Park. Wiltshire rather humorously compares this to the treatment of Fanny Price in the tale: “neglected, passed over, misunderstood, sneered at and ill-used” (Wiltshire, lvii). This lack of notice certainly distressed Austen. She kept a list of “Opinions of Mansfield Park” from family and friends (she later did the same for Emma) – a selection first appeared in James Edward Austen-Leigh’s Memoir of Jane Austen (1870), and all were published in Chapman’s edition of “Plan of a Novel” in 1926, and later reprinted in the Minor Works volume in 1954. You can read them here at Jane Austen’s Fiction Manuscripts in their original and transcribed form:

OpinionsMP-JAFM

 “Opinions of Mansfield Park” – from “Jane Austen’s Fiction Manuscripts”

As you can see, the commentary from the time differs little from today: better than P&P / not as good as P&P; Fanny not likeable / Fanny the best; love Mary Crawford / hate Mary Crawford; Will Fanny marry Henry or Edmund?; Not enough love between Hero and Heroine, etc., etc. – all the same arguments we go round and round with! I especially like Cassandra who “delighted much in Mr. Rushworth’s stupidity,” and Mrs. Austen: “My Mother — not liked it so well as P. & P. — Thought Fanny insipid. – Enjoyed Mrs. Norris.”

Austen was later piqued by the 1816 review of Emma in the Quarterly Review (March 1816), and now known to be by Walter Scott. She writes to John Murray on April 1, 1816 (Ltr.139):

The Authoress of Emma has no reason I think to complain of her treatment in it – except in the total omission of Mansfield Park. – I cannot but be sorry that so clever a Man as the Reveiwer of Emma should consider it as unworthy of being noticed.

Did Jane Austen know this review was by Scott? – We can only conjecture…

~

*Where can you see a copy?

-David Gilson, in his Bibliography of Jane Austen, lists the various institutions and individuals who own first editions of Mansfield Park – certainly available for viewing in many of the major libraries in the US and UK. Of special interest is Cassandra’s copy, held by the University of Texas at Austin.

~

*The 2nd Edition:

MP-2ded-titlepageHaving sold the copyright of Pride & Prejudice to Egerton outright, Austen was unable to make any changes to its 2nd and 3rd editions. But for Mansfield Park she was able to correct the many errors of spelling and punctuation and made several technical edits. She hoped for a quick edition after November 1814 - it is not settled yet whether I do hazard a 2d Edition. We are to see Egerton today… (Ltr. 114). But Egerton did not publish – Did he refuse? Not offer good terms? Or was Jane Austen displeased with Egerton for the poor and mistake-ridden printing of the first?

She moved to the firm of John Murray to publish her Emma, and Murray took on the 2nd edition of MP as well. She writes on December 11, 1815 to Murray: I return also, Mansfield Park, as ready for a 2d Edit: I beleive, as I can make it. (Ltr. 130).

Austen likely gave him a marked up copy of the 1st edition. Succeeding editions have offered varying texts to the reading public, beginning with Richard Bentley’s “Standard Novels Series” of 1833 to Chapman’s Oxford edition of 1923, with his full textual analysis of the two editions, choosing the 2nd as the preferred text.

This analysis continues as to author intent (see for example Claudia Johnson’s “A Name to Conjure With,” Persuasions 30 (2008): 15-26), and current scholarly editions collate the two editions, updating Chapman, and offer the reader all instances of variation and a certain amount of confusion.

MP-Penguin2-ebayFor the Penguin edition of 1996, Kathryn Sutherland relies on the 1st edition and includes seven pages of textual variants between the two editions. In her Textual Lives, Sutherland explains her preference for the first edition, feeling that Chapman’s “improvements” in his Oxford edition, especially those of punctuation, were at odds with [his] commitment to ‘recovery and restoration’ of the text. (Sutherland, 2007, 292).

Claudia Johnson in her Norton Critical Edition of Mansfield Park (1998) favors the 2nd edition – she praises Chapman for his “monumental achievement” in creating the Oxford Works, but finds his practice in collating the 2 editions was at times “capricious” and without justification. In writing of all the punctuation and spelling variants, Johnson surmises that Austen may have been relying on the printer to make corrections, as was often the practice in publishing at this time in order to ensure uniform punctuation. [Johnson cites Caleb Stower The Printer’s Grammar; or, Introduction to the Art of Printing (London, 1808).] (Johnson, xviii – xix).

MP-Cambridge

John Wiltshire, in editing the 2005 Cambridge edition, returns to the text of the 2nd edition as Chapman had, concluding that both “Austen and Murray wished to produce a second edition of the novel which, whilst it may not have been closer than the first to the author’s original manuscript, would be more creditable to both.” (Wiltshire, xxxix).

~

*What did it look like?

750 copies were printed, published also on commission, Austen paying costs up front. It is again in the 3-volume format, set by three different printers, again an explanation for the lack of consistency; boards were gray-brown paper or blue-gray, on better quality paper. It was advertised in The Morning Post on February 19, 1816 and sold for 18 shillings. It did not sell well and most copies were remaindered; her costs were set against her profit on Emma, which as a result made little for her.

 

-It is important when reading your Mansfield Park to note which edition it is based on – these many variations, be they mistakes in the 1st edition, Austen’s own corrections for the 2nd, printer errors in both, or the various editorial decisions in subsequent publications, often change the meaning of the text, and trying to determine Austen’s intention just adds to the many questions we would ask her if we could…

~

Other Editions of interest:

*1st American Edition:

1stAmerEd-Swann-MP-11-21-13Mansfield Park – 1st Amer. Ed. Swann auction 11-21-13

The first of Austen’s novels to be published in America was Emma in 1816 by Matthew Carey of Philadelphia. It is unlikely that Austen knew of it. Mansfield Park first appeared in 1832 published by Carey & Lea, in two volumes, with a title page stating “by Miss Austen, Author of ‘Pride and Prejudice,’ ‘Emma,’ etc. etc.,” in drab paper boards with purple cloth spines and white paper spine labels. 1250 copies were printed, with a number of variations from the British text, most referring to the Deity, such as:

  • “Good Heaven!” = “Indeed!”
  • “Some touches of the angel” = “Some excellencies”
  • And Mr. Price’s many “By G__” are just completely omitted!

These 2-volume editions sold for around $2.00 and are quite rare today in the original boards.

~

*First Translated Edition:

Mansfield Park was first translated into French and published in a series of extracts in 1815 in the Swiss periodical Bibliothèque britannique. A year later the 4-volume Le Parc de Mansfield, ou Les Trois Cousines par l’Auteur de Raison et Sensibilité, ou Les Deux Manières d’Aimer; d’Orgueil et Préjugé, etc. Traduit de L’Anglais, par M. Henri V*****N [Vilmain], Paris, 1816, appeared. [see title page above] This translation is readily available today in a paperback reprint published by Hachette Livre.

~

*The First Sequel:

Brown-SusanPrice-cover-amMansfield Park does not have the following of P&P, where sequels and retellings abound. But of interest is the first such for MP, titled Susan Price, or Resolution by Mrs. Francis Brown (London: John Lane / Bodley Head, 1930.) It concerns Susan Price’s romance with her cousin Tom Bertram (Gilson, 423). Mrs. Brown is Edith Charlotte Hubback, great grand-daughter of Francis Austen. She also wrote continuations to S&S (Margaret Dashwood, or Interference, 1929) and a completion of The Watsons in 1928, as well as co-authored Jane Austen’s Sailor Brothers (1906).

~

 

*The First Illustrated Edition:

The topic of Jane Austen’s illustrators would take more than an entire book! – so will just here note that the first illustrated edition of any of Austen’s novels was the French translation of Persuasion as “La Famille Elliot” in 1821 – it was also the first edition to name “Miss Jane Austen” as the author.

Mansfield Park was first illustrated in the Richard Bentley one volume edition of 1833, with an engraved frontispiece and title page vignette by William Greatbatch after George Pickering. The frontispiece is of Fanny trying on the infamous necklace with the caption:

MP-1833-frontis-tp-abe2 Mansfield Park – 1833 ed. frontispiece and title page [image: ecbooks, UK (abebooks)]

“Miss Crawford smiled her approbation and hastened to complete her gift by putting the necklace around her, and making her see how well it looked.” [this differs from the text!]

The title page vignette is of Sir Thomas encountering Mr. Yates on the stage, with Tom lurking in the background:

“The moment Yates perceived Sir Thomas, he gave perhaps the very best start he had ever given in the whole course of his rehearsals.”

[You can view them here at Google Books.]

These fashions are quite from the wrong era! – looking more like those from the 1940 film of P&P! It was not until the Dent edition of 1892 by R. Brimley Johnson with the illustrations of William Cooke and decorations by F. C. Tilney (no relation to the adorable Henry!) that illustrators actually got the Regency right. And these were rather quickly replaced by the Brock brothers for the Dent edition of 1898. H. M. Brock illustrated the Mansfield Park volume with a frontispiece and five plates:

MP-HMBrock-in vain

“In vain were the well-meant condescensions of Sir Thomas”

Mansfield Park, illus. H. M. Brock (Dent 1898) [Mollands]

MP-HMBrock-alone

“Miss Price all alone!”

Mansfield Park
, illus. H. M. Brock (Dent 1898) [Mollands]

And C. E. Brock later captured the same Yates / Sir Thomas scene in his Dent edition of 1908:

MP-CEBrock-Yates-SirThomas-mollands

 “A ranting young man who appeared likely to knock him down backwards”

Mansfield Park, illus. C. E. Brock (Dent 1908) [Mollands]

Our favorite illustrator Hugh Thomson, like the Brock Brothers, had a more humorous approach to the novels. As he had in his 1894 George Allen edition of P&P, Thomson illustrated Mansfield Park with a frontis and 39 line drawings. This was published in 1897 by Macmillan and included an introduction by Austin Dobson. An image here of Fanny and Henry Crawford:

MP-Thomson-hc-fanny-rop Mansfield Park, illus. Hugh Thomson (Macmillan 1897)  [Republic of Pemberley]

  Another important illustrated edition to note was the 1875 Groombridge edition (London), with a lithograph frontis and six plates after drawings by A. F. Lydon (Alexander Francis Lydon). The only Austen novel from this publisher, and hard to find today, the illustrations offer a more serious, darker vision of the novel, with purplish-gray toned illustrations emphasizing Fanny’s isolation from the Park and all those in it. (See Carroll, 67).

MP-illus-Groombridge1875-CarrollMansfield Park, illus. A. F. Lydon (Groombridge, 1875)

You can view the novel and the other plates by Lydon here at Google Books

The numerous illustrated editions that have followed, right up until today, show these varied approaches to the tone of this novel. I’ve read Mansfield Park a good number of times – I find I would take a very different view from one reading to the next if I was attempting to illustrate the text. What about you? – how would you illustrate MP?

~

*What is it worth today?

-Prices vary, so this is a ball-park estimate with a few recent auction examples: note that the book in its original state, i.e. the paper-covered boards in the case of Mansfield Park, will have a higher value than even the most beautifully bound set – this is the first rule of book collecting; condition, condition, condition is the second! These estimates noted here are taken from the Quill & Brush Author Price Guide for Jane Austen, 2007, and are based on auction sales and bookseller catalogues.

  • 1st edition: in original boards = $75, 000. / rebound = $25,000.
  • 2nd edition: in original boards = $25,000. / rebound = $5,000.
  • 1st American ed.: in original boards = $10,000. / rebound = $3,500. – rare in original boards
  • Bentley edition of 1833: vary from $3,000 – $5,000.

Available at present online are two 1st editions, all rebound and of varying condition – one is on sale for $15,000, one is for $38,000. There is also a 2nd edition in original boards online for $10,000. You can begin your search here at abebooks.com.

MP-1stEd-leather-Sothebys-MP-12-5-13

Mansfield Park – 1st ed. Sothebys 12-5-13

Recent Auctions:

1. This 1st edition sold at Sothebys in December 1813 for $13,750.; but a rebound 2nd edition recently sold for as little as $688. – so buyer beware!

2. 1st American edition, 2vols, Philadelphia: Carey & Lea, 1832. 8vo, original publisher’s 1/4 cloth-backed drab boards, lettering labels on. Estimate $4,000 – 6,000.; Price Realized $5,376.

***************

This only gives a brief introduction to the very varied and interesting publishing history of Austen’s third novel, with all the decorative bindings, illustrators, and scholarly editing and introductions not being touched upon here. She of course saw only the first and second editions, in their drab boards – what would she make of this visual feast of editions through the past 200 years? What would she think of the great variety of illustrations of her Fanny and Edmund, and Mary and Henry Crawford, Lady Bertram and her pug, and Sir Thomas and Mrs. Norris? And while she earned a meager £320 for Mansfield Park alone, what would she think of the costs of these first editions today?

A full collection of Mansfield Park will not take up as much space on your bookshelves as a collection of Pride & Prejudice – but the variety is just as beautiful and desirable – whether you think Fanny a “creep-mouse” or an independent woman who learns to value herself as others finally do, the book itself, in all its many incarnations, will always be worth your study, will always satisfy your collecting habits – like Fanny herself, you too can become “a subscriber – amazed at being anything in propria persona, amazed at [your] own doings in every way; to be a renter, a chuser of books!”

~

One of my favorite covers: MP-Routledge-1900-LastingWords

Mansfield Park (Routledge, 1900) – Lasting Words, UK for sale for £125 on abebooks

 *****************

Further reading: with lots of Mansfield Park bindings!

References:

Austen, Jane. Jane Austen’s Letters. 3rd ed., edited by Deirdre Le Faye. Oxford, 1997. [I have the 4th edition but alas! it is not with me at present, so I continue to cite the 3rd ed.]

_____. Mansfield Park. Ed. R. W. Chapman. Oxford, 1966.

_____. Mansfield Park. Ed. Claudia L. Johnson. Norton, 1998.

_____. Mansfield Park. Ed. James Kinsley. Introd. Jane Stabler. Oxford, 2008.

_____. Mansfield Park. Ed. Kathryn Sutherland. Penguin, 1996.

_____. Mansfield Park. Ed. John Wiltshire. Cambridge, 2005.

_____. “Opinions of Mansfield Park.” Jane Austen’s Fiction Manuscripts. http://www.janeausten.ac.uk/manuscripts/blopinions/1.html

Carroll, Laura, and John Wiltshire. “Jane Austen, Illustrated.” A Companion to Jane Austen. Ed. Claudia L. Johnson and Clara Tuite. Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. 62-77.

Chapman, R. W. Portrait of a Scholar. Oxford, 1923.

Gilson, David. A Bibliography of Jane Austen. Oak Knoll, 1997. The most invaluable resource of all. If you are collecting Jane Austen, you need this book!

Karounos, Michael. “Ordination and Revolution in Mansfield Park.” SEL 44.4 (2004): 715-36.

Sutherland, Kathryn. Jane Austen’s Textual Lives: From Aeschylus to Bollywood. Oxford, 2007.

Todd, Janet. The Cambridge Introduction to Jane Austen. Cambridge, 2006.

Wolfson, Susan J. “Re: Reading Pride and Prejudice ‘What Think you of Books?’” A Companion to Jane Austen. Ed. Claudia L. Johnson and Clara Tuite. Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. 112-22.

~

The Chronology of Mansfield Park:

They both argue for a 1808-09 time frame beginning with the Ball in December.

  • Brian Southam in his “The Silence of the Bertrams.” (TLS 17 Feb 1995: 13) argues for an 1812-13 scheme.

***************

MP-Thomson-1897-horse2

“How much I used to dread riding”

Mansfield Park, illus. Hugh Thomson (Macmillan 1897) [Internet Archive]

 

c2014, Jane Austen in Vermont

The winner of Stuart Bennett’s Lord Moira’s Echo is announced! – an inscribed copy will be sent to Joy King, who wrote:

Stuart, I do have a question if you do not mind. Since this is fiction based on facts, what percentage is fact and what percentage is fiction? The premise is intriguing.

Stuart answered:

 The “fact/fiction proportion” question is a great one, and not that easy to answer.  Apart from my fictional Vanessa and her romantic interest, almost every character in the novel is real and could have been when and where I put them.  This is especially important, of course, in the case of Lord Moira himself.  But the Jane Austen narrative is deliberately put in the years when almost nothing is known of her movements, and although I have appropriated the surviving rumors about her for 1801-1802, I can’t say these, or my narrative is actually “historical.”

    One of the best reviews I ever read of Patrick O’Brian’s Aubrey/Maturin novels said that if one of Jane Austen’s nautical brothers had shared her literary gifts, he would have written like O’Brian.  I make no such claim for my own writing, of course, but what I think the O’Brian reviewer meant – among other things –  was that O’Brian’s books transported the reader to Nelson’s navy and, once there, the reader never felt the anachronistic lurches that turn up in so many would-be historical novels.  Readers have complimented my books on their historical accuracy, and if you’ll allow me to include the details of my novel in the fact/fiction equation I think I can safely say the factual side is well in the ascendant.
    Thanks for writing!
******
Thank you all for commenting; and congratulations to Joy!
c2014, Jane Austen in Vermont
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,476 other followers

%d bloggers like this: