Every time I go into a bookstore I seem to see another book thats inspired by Jane Austen. It's overwhelming how many of them there are, so many that I can't even recall the names of most. Theres some that are continuating stories of Austen's characters and some that are set in modern time and have parallels to hers in romance. I read somewhere that there is even a series of books that revolve around the spinster Austen, who goes around her hometown solving mysteries.
There was a recent post about the movie Becoming Jane. I said that I thought (and still do) it was wrong to go distorting the story of Austen. That got me to thinking. Do you think its wrong to go and take the characters of another's book and use them to make your own story? I never thought of this before, but now think that it IS wrong. I would not like it if someone took the characters (and plot) of my book and did whatever they liked with them and changed my whole vision. To me, it just seems wrong and unethical to do that.
Its one thing to build off of someones idea and continue it, its another to steal them. I think its okay to write a FACTUAL biography of Jane Austen, and even a book discussing her writing and situations and characters in her books.
I can see how Jane Austin could inspire ones actual style of writing (how could writers NOT be inspired by her?).
I could also understand it if someone was writing a book in the same time period of Jane Austen to use her books to make your own more facutal, such as in the habits, manners, and modes of living of the people of that time.
Of course I can understand WHY someone would write books like this. I remember when I first read some of Austen's books as a teenager I daydreamed about being in it myself. I still even daydream about what happened to the married couples after the book ended...but I leave it at that, daydreaming.

But What do you think? Do you think it falls into the category of 'imitation is the sincerest form of flattery', or do you think that this is bordering on the plageristic? You must admit that, at the very least, it shows a great want of imagination on the author's part.

OK! Now onto the second, and lighter, question.

It would be very unjust of me to criticize these 'Austen inspired' books without even having read any of them.
As of now I have read four such books. Three by Elizabeth Aston (am I the only one that wonders if thats her name is real or not?) and Shannon Hale.
I read several of Aston's books several years ago. I started with 'Mr. Darcy's Daughters' (which I belive is supposed to be the first). I actually thought it was all right. Not great, but a good light read. Some things struck me as rather out of place for the time period. I thought the book would have been ten times better if Aston would have set the plot in a much later date (which would make more sence with the activities of the characters).
'The Exploits and Adventures of Miss Alethia Darcy' was simply ghasty. If this had been set during the Female Rights movement it would have made more sence.
'The True Darcy Spirit' was also a horrable addition to modern literature. It all felt so contrived and fictitious! I was writhing with agony at this books cornyness. None of the characters seemed real.
I think Aston recently came out with another book (which I havent read). Was it called 'The other Mrs. Darcy'???

Shannon Hales book 'Austenland' wasnt bad. I breezed thru it in the bookstore while waiting for someone. I expected it to be a cheezy romance, and it delivered. It wasnt bad though; ive read much worse.
It was about a youngish woman (thirty something) who's dead Aunt or somebody stipulates in their will that she is to take a trip to England and vacation in this old house that is themed to Austen's time period (because the main heroine obviously cant be so cheezy romantic and desperate to go there herself, someone has to MAKE her do it). Everyone dresses up too. She falls for the obvious jilter and then realizes she likes the Darcy-like actor. It ends up that he likes her too and they go back to the USA and live happily ever-after. I personally would have changed the ending; not everthing can be happy!!!!

So have you read any 'Austen inspired' books? If so, what were they about and how did you like them?

-Sorry this is so long! Everyone I know says im a quiet person. Obviously they haven't brought up the subject of books, on which I am long-winded, lol!
CMK

I could absolutely not stand to read the Jane Austen mysteries, because I know enough about her to know that while she might conceivably have enjoyed snooping around, she was not a sleuth and never solved any murders. However, if spaceships or unicorns were included in the stories, I might enjoy them for being outrageous. On the other hand, I am now reading The Dante Club, which features a number of figures from American history in both major and minor roles, but since I know little about them except their names and occupations and approximately when they lived, I am able to look past it and enjoy the story as pure fiction. Had I read, for example, a biography of James Lowell or Longfellow, I would have hated it.

I don't mind when historical figures are used as minor characters, for example when the made-up protagonist of a novel meets a famous real person. I think it can spice up a historical novel and make it more realistic. Neither do I mind novelisations of real events, as long as they are faithful to historical facts.

As to using characters from other author's works, you could say that such derivative works show a certain lack of imagination on the author's behalf, much like using real characters rather than basing fictional characters on real ones, but I think that if done well, they can be entertaining and give one a new perspective on familiar characters. For example, I quite like how Laurie R. King has continued the Sherlock Holmes stories. The problem with continuing Jane Austen's work, using her characters, is that to pull it off you would need to be an excellent writer, stylist and humourist like Austen was, and also possess an encyclopedic knowledge of Austen's work and the era. Georgette Heyer could possibly have pulled it off, but she had the good sense not to try.

As to modernisations of classical novels, by Austen and others, I have never read one that was much good. The best of the bunch was Kate Fenton's Lions and Liquorice (aka Vanity and Vexation) which is partially based on Pride and Prejudice, but the author had the sense to only use Austen's novel up to a point.

The best modernisation of an Austen novel I know is not a book, but a movie: Clueless, based on Emma. I have heard of an Indian film that does a good job of modernising Sense and Sensibility, but I haven't been able to find it to check for myself.

What do you think about doing a movie based on a book? I think its quite allright if the film does JUSTICE to the book. But I wonder if the authors of classical works, if they were living, would like their books being put to film? I know many modern writers feel privilaged and even proud to have their books made into movies, so maybe the classical writers would too if they were living (except maybe for Dickens and Tolstoy).
CMK

After that I read an article I found by Martin Amis on the attraction of Jane Austen and her work in the New Yorker which may be of interest.

I have had my "historic fiction gone awry" and "movies that use only the title, none of the plot of a book" rants here before...so I won't do it again.

Netla, the movie you were looking for is called Bride and Prejudice. I rather liked it, though it lacked the humor of Clueless.

Rosefolly

Also look out for yet another TV adaptation of Tess of the d'Urbervilles. Many of the outdoor rural scenes were shot in my area. They wanted a realistic 'backwards' landscape. :-) Pity I didn't know it was happening, maybe I could have got a part as an extra playing 'an aged crone' or 'third hag'.
Another Dickens series is coming up, this time Little Dorrit. Last year Bleak House was beautifully produced. Some of you may have seen it.