I am sorry, dear readers, that I have been radio silent these last several weeks. My wife and I have been closing down our apartment (second place) in Seattle and consolidating everything in our permanent home in Las Vegas. That said, I was inspired by the April JAFF Writer/Reader Get-together Work-in-Progress session. There we heard some wonderful examples which illustrated to me how much has changed in our genre in the last two years in terms of diverse presentations in #Austenesque literature. Today’s column finds its roots therein. Given that I have not engaged with you for several weeks, it will be longer.
For new subscribers, I offer a promotional code to download a free Audible copy (US or UK stores only) of Volume One of the Bennet Wardrobe…The Keeper: Mary Bennet’s Extraordinary Journey. Please enjoy.
***
Recognizing that a mission statement makes me sound a bit like a corporation seeking to burnish its public image, I have discovered over the last six years that I have been composing my own.
If literature—good literature—is a mirror in which we, as authors and, through our writing, our readers as well, see society’s reflection, then we must consider the need to look squarely in the eye our choices about character and plot. If we are to write our truth and allow our stories to articulate theirs, then we need to be honest about the choices we as writers make every day.
I have been upset over the past two years reading comments posted about the seasons of Sanditon and Bridgerton. While many focus on plot and character development, there is a distinct subset that complains about what I will distill into a simple term as being forced diversity in casting. The sentiment seems to run that “people of color, be they of African or Indian descent, did not play major roles in Regency society.” I will leave you to consider the age and descent of those posters.
My position is very unambiguous: disqualifying a POC character in an Austenesque story simply because nobody would believe they existed in the Regency is bad writing. I ask upon what historical ground such an assumption could rest? One that had been articulated by other assumptions that POC were of lower moral fiber (as affirmed by the pearl clutchers of The Lost Cause to justify Jim Crow) or those comforted by the idea that POC have weak racial bloodlines (after all, who would allow themselves to be enslaved usually espoused by those who are terrified that POC will resist oppression by the established order) and therefore always position them at the bottom of the social hierarchy?
As for not including a POC character because that would make a reader uncomfortable, then I must ask, ‘why write if not to move the audience to a new understanding?’ Providing what the audience wants may sell books and generate page reads, but it will not do that which art does, challenge the crowd. Authoring is an act of courage, and we must be willing to disequilibrate some readers to tell our story’s authentic truth.
Recall that the critics savaged Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony. Others found the work of the Impressionists sloppy, weak, and disturbing. Those individuals found their position by loudly supporting the status quo.
However, I must stop here before you throw your hands up in disgust. I am, in no way, suggesting that Jane Austen was glossing over the realities of the world to gain acceptance. Her sharp social commentary shines brightly through her work. While I could be imposing my ideas upon her books, I do find illuminating her portrayal of the role of women, her lampooning of the Church of England, and her exploration of the growing social divide between land and trade to be illuminating. The vicar’s daughter spent her life away from the places where POC would have been found. She did offer her readers Miss Lambe, but probably only because she was familiar with Dido Belle, the god-daughter of Lord Mansfield.
I would wager that if Elizabeth Bennet spent as much time on Gracechurch Street as she supposedly did, she would have seen many freedmen and women in the streets. Recall that Great Britain offered freedom to any slaves who had been liberated from American slaveowners (found in all thirteen colonies) or who had voluntarily voted with their feet during the American Revolution. Is it not plausible for the Longbourn daughter to have interacted with them within one of our plots? Is it not plausible for those same persons to save Georgiana from a dire fate? Is this forced diversity? Please refer to the column reproduced at the end of this article which sounded, I am convinced, the clarion call to authors seeking to explore the reality of the Regency world beyond how many buttons were appropriate for a gentleman’s waistcoat.
Diversity, by the way, includes far more than what we expect. To be sure, race, class, and gender identification are drivers, but I believe in a bigger tent. Yes, I centered much of the second book within The Grail: The Saving of Elizabeth Darcy around the manumitted slave Cornelius Johnson who educates Darcy about the incipient racism in American society.
However, to me, diversity in Austenesque literature also can deal with emotions—of the character, the author, and the reader—as well as the flow of the work—drawing-room conversations versus action, for instance. I turned to several authors who I deeply respect for their thoughts and a few excerpts.
Bethany Delleman is exploring a variation of Emma which casts the young woman as being of the LGBTQ+ community.
Even though Austen never included a character who is a member of the LGBTQ+ community, some seem to have features that lend themselves to different expressions of sexuality.
Emma, for example, claims to have never been in love, seems obsessed with the beauty of women (specifically Harriet Smith and Jane Fairfax), and is dismissive of attractive men. Even when Emma realizes that she is in love with Knightley, doesn’t come off as very passionate; it is his company and companionship that she seems to crave more than a romantic connection.
While changing Emma’s sexuality might seem like a huge change from what Austen intended, my inspiration remains rooted in her text. It was reading the exchange with Frank Churchill where Emma vehemently defends Jane’s beauty after Frank insults her complexion, that inspired my most recent variation.
An excerpt from Different Ways of Being in Love:
Miss Taylor was almost too with overcome with joy to speak, for she had for some time been fearing Emma’s reaction to her engagement and knew that without the daughter’s approbation she would never make the father easy. She did manage, however, “Thank you, Emma. You have been so dear to me; I wanted most to hear your opinion.”
“Nothing could make me more happy,” Emma said, and for that moment it was true, for not only would Miss Taylor be most happily and fortunately married, but now all of Emma’s sanguine hopes for Jane’s instalment at Hartfield might be answered. There would be no solitary evenings that winter or tender regrets on Emma’s side. Jane would come and Jane could stay forever. This knowledge of future happiness carried Emma through the difficult evening. Mr. Woodhouse hated marriage and cries of “Poor Miss Taylor! Poor Isabella!” was the work of many following days to placate.
When she could go to bed, however, Emma was all elation. She wrote to Jane, told her that she could come to live at Hartfield in only a few months. Her words were nearly illegible in her excitement. She missed Jane so deeply her soul ached. The letter was sent and Emma waited in acute agitation for the days it took for her to receive the reply. The response crushed her.
No.
Melanie Rachel seeks to push beyond the ODC boundaries which circumscribe much of the published work in our genre even when using one of the traditional tropes.
I always wanted to write an “Elizabeth is kidnapped as a child” story but to make it different than the other kidnapping stories out there. In I Never Knew Myself, I focused on the emotional distress the kidnapping caused for everyone involved, rather than the kidnapping itself. It made Darcy so worried about Georgiana that she can hardly breathe and becomes the reason Fitzwilliam decides to go to war.
Kimbelle Pease employs humor and misdirection to reveal an unusual depth of character in an unexpected and, thus, diverse manner. Here she employs Charlotte Lucas to speak what we all believe Elizabeth Bennet to be thinking.
Miss Lucas having a voice and DARING to speak to Mr. Darcy forthrightly???? The horror!
“I’m sorry, Miss…” Mr. Darcy’s voice cut into her musings.
“I’m not surprised that you didn’t bother to remember,” Charlotte glanced at Mr. Darcy. “It’s Miss Lucas, Mr. Darcy. My father is the host.” She nodded toward him. While ebullient and one who strove to see things from a happier perspective, Sir William had his faults, as all humans do. For him, it was extolling his knighthood, but it was his shining moment, and sharing the memory allowed him to relive it. Charlotte fully believed it would take her or Maria marrying someone with a title to overshadow it.
“I seem to have offended you in some way, Miss Lucas,” Mr. Darcy spoke quietly so they would not be overheard.
“Not just myself, Mr. Darcy, but yes I’m among those you have offended tonight. If you’re an example of the gentlemen from town, I’d rather stay here and be on the shelf, so to speak. Please excuse me, Mr. Darcy. I prefer not to be seen speaking to you, sir, for it would surely lead people I care for to wonder why I might be conversing with one such as yourself. I am in no humor at present to give consequence to men who are so disdainful of our society,” she replied as she executed a small, polite dip and turned away, smiling at someone else as she left him. At someone else.
Darcy stared after her, unable to fathom what had just occurred. She cared not at all that he was Fitzwilliam Darcy of Pemberley, even though everyone had been talking about his wealth when he walked in.
Barry Richman is a new voice in the Austenesque world. His latest work sets many preconceived notions on their ear.
I understand readers demand the HEA for ODC. I do not eschew their love story. I desire to feature new or adapted existing canon characters to be the primary love thread; the ODC journey to find their denouement supportive. In Doubt Not, Cousin, I present a less than perfect Jane Bennet, a lady I find a joy to present.
February 1804
Mrs. Ophelia Ecclestone joined Longbourn under the terms of a seven-year contract. She came highly recommended by the vicar of St. Albans. Mrs. Ecclestone had successfully educated and seen married two different gentlemen's daughters, each to young men of respectable families. Having learned of the Bennets' trials from her vicar, a close connection of the Ecclestone family, she accepted her first 'multiple' assignment. A tall, stocky woman, she wore no-nonsense, unadorned day dresses with high collars, her hair pulled tight in a matronly bun. Her trademark was consistency; her visage was everything proper.
It took little time for the girls to fall in line, behave perfectly, and attend their lessons in a timely, appropriate manner. A rare throat clearing settled Lizzy back to feminine behavior, as Kitty continued to work through her injury and Jane was... Jane. Much like Jane, Mrs. Ecclestone had hidden depths, one of which was a pleasantly dry sense of humor.
Her previous charges had been clients to her. She educated them. She outlined proper behavior. She mentored. After their presentation to society, she guided them. She guided them through courtship and betrothal. She accepted their gratitude for her service. She did not see them exchange vows with their future husbands. She did not see them sign their maiden surnames for the last time in the parsonage wedding registry. She did not take part in wedding breakfast toasts.
That all changed with the Bennet family. Ophelia Ecclestone, spinster governess, had found something unexpected: purpose, passion, and family!
Today's lesson took place in the back parlor. All three girls, instructed to enjoy themselves milling about, were to practice coordinated curtsies. The purpose was to show a dignified display to gentleman callers, showing them respect whilst illustrating elegance and grace.
"Zoologists must be mistaken, as they have all written that the male peacock performs to attract his mate," quipped Lizzy. "Yet here we are, learning to do just that."
"Miss Elizabeth, may we revisit that impertinent tongue of yours at a later hour? We have much to do today to remain on schedule," scolded Mrs. Ecclestone.
Jane rapped Lizzy with her fan and rolled her eyes.
"Miss Bennet, I am shocked to see you roll your eyes. My, my, what a morning we are having." She turned to Kitty, pulled a small notebook from her day dress pocket, flipped through some pages, and held it up for Kitty to see.
'Et tu, Brute?' appeared in large block letters. Kitty shook her head back and forth, signifying the negative.
"Delightful. Let us continue."
Fully chagrined, the girls stood shoulder to shoulder, Jane first, then Lizzy, Kitty to her left.
"The elegance is in the synchronicity."
Mrs. Ecclestone shot Lizzy a look. "Yes, Miss Elizabeth, a word of over four syllables. They do exist, and I do know them," she quipped rather dryly. All three girls smirked, Kitty emulating her sisters, knowing she would laugh later when they explained it to her in writing.
"Normally, the eldest would use a pursing of the lips to signal the 'dip', as you refer to it, Miss Elizabeth. However, our limitations warrant another more pronounced approach."
Jane, Lizzy, and Kitty adored Mrs. Ecclestone for that single declaration alone. It took them no time to see through her gruff exterior and infiltrate her huge heart. A heart that belonged to them, as they had given theirs to her freely. Their infirmities were our infirmities. Their lessons were our lessons. Their failures were our failures. Their governess embraced our limitations and rejoiced in the girls' successes.
"Miss Bennet, let us try a minute nod of the head. You are much taller than Miss Catherine, thus enabling her to see your signal easily, I daresay."
The girls milled about the parlor, as instructed by Mrs. Ecclestone. Their governess waved her hands, signifying an introduction pending. The girls lined up as instructed, Jane to the furthest right, Lizzy to her left, then Kitty. Kitty looked at Jane from the corner of her eye. Jane nodded minutely, a small tilting of her head towards her right shoulder, her chin slightly to the left. In unison, the girls curtsied to the same depth and returned to a standing position.
"Well done, ladies. Again."
The girls all checked their positions. Jane nodded. The girls curtsied.
"Well done. Let us practice until we, meaning I, tire of the exercise."
Jane and Lizzy did a double-take, staring at their governess wide-eyed. Kitty sensed Mrs. Ecclestone had made a joke but knew not the content, seeing their governess's eyes crinkling a bit.
Everyone burst out in laughter. Most unladylike, but oh, so diverting. The lesson continued.
What Thomas found most intriguing, resulting from that lesson, was the unmasking of Jane's wry sense of humor, she quickly tiring of being mocked by her younger sisters. The girls would practice their coordinated curtsies prior to sitting to a meal and then right after. It took no time for Lizzy and Kitty to reply by curtsy every time Jane nodded her head, a gesture genetic to the Bennet line. Jane took her revenge in a most un-Jane-like manner. It happened while the Lucas family paid a call.
Jane, knowing of the Lucas family's call from her mother, sent a short note to their friend Charlotte, a very intelligent, handsome woman being courted by the heir of the Goulding estate. In it, she implored Charlotte to ask Kitty direct Yes or No questions, as Jane would have Kitty with her sharing the settee. The stage set, Jane embraced Ben Johnson's 'Silent Woman',
'O Revenge, how sweet art thou!'
The next morning, an unsurprised Thomas and Franny entered the dining room to see Jane sitting to breakfast alone, her sisters appearing not to have come down.
"Mrs. Hill!" bellowed Thomas, in good humor.
"Yes, Mr. Bennet?" approached Mrs. Hill, smiling.
"Please go upstairs and remind our two younger children that the Bennet family dines together. The kitchen shall tender no trays. Take Mr. Reeves if you require assistance," he admonished. The housekeeper departed.
Mr. and Mrs. Bennet stared at their eldest, who was calmly and quietly breaking her fast in a most exaggerated lady-like fashion. Father and mother looked at each other briefly in wonder, then returned a more piercing gaze upon their, until now, perfect daughter.
Jane, in an unimaginable manner, looked at her father in the eye and deadpanned,
"Irony takes nothing away from pathos."
Franny's eyes went as wide as a tea tray. Thomas, who had been drinking from his water glass, inhaled a mouthful of water into his lungs, leapt out of his chair and folded over the table coughing violently.
Reeves, Hill, and the two younger girls, in a tizzy, ran to him, pounding his back, trying to raise his arms, anything to ease his distress. After several minutes, Thomas recovered himself and the family sat again to break their fast together. Lizzy and Kitty avoided looking at Jane directly, fearing she would nod her head and make them curtsy, as their legs and knees ached from overuse. Jane stood, the girls cringed, Thomas made sure his water glass was on the table, and Franny looked lost. It was a lovely soprano that wafted across the room as Jane exited, quoting the Book of Common Prayer,
"Here endeth the lesson."
***
Following is the column earlier mentioned by the author Bella Breen It was originally published on July 3, 2020 on the Austen Authors blog and later deleted by the administrators as being “too controversial.” This led to the resignation from the blog by Ms. Breen and at least ten other author members, this writer included.
People of Colour in the Time of Austen
Reproduced from https://www.bellabreen.com/racism-of-erasure-in-regency-romance-novels/ dated July 3, 2020
I posted this on the Austen Authors blog today for my monthly post. I’ve copied it here as it’s important.
UPDATE – the Austen Authors admins removed my post due to it not being “appropriate”.
Given popular depictions of Jane Austen’s Regency, authors and readers often overlook the diversity in Britain during this period. Like in the 21st century, people of color, people with different sexual and gender identities, and people with disabilities all lived in the 19th: eating, drinking, joking, working, and falling in love. As authors, when we pay attention, really pay attention, we discover new opportunities in diversity to add conflict, vibrancy, and depth in our work.
From high school history class, something you probably slept through — or was that only me – we learned the British Empire conquered a large amount of land, including in the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia. Humans being humans, this resulted in many mixed-race children.
Ten percent of the English men stationed in Jamaica fathered children with Jamaican women, and provisions were often made for those children to be sent back to Great Britain with their fathers. Stories abound of famous biracial children raised in the gentry and rising to prominence through the military and other areas of British society. Examples include Dido Belle, a British heiress born a slave, Col. James Skinner, an Anglo-Indian mercenary best known for two cavalry regiments he raised for the British, and Captain John Perkins, the most senior black officer in the Royal Navy during the American War.
Many scholars posit Queen Charlotte was also biracial!
Others of note include Bill Richmond an American boxer who moved to England and was well received by the upper classes. He was even an usher at the coronation of George IV. Later, he married a white woman and had several children. Joseph Emidy from Guinea was a violinist and composer who fought in the Napoleonic wars. John Edmonstone, a former slave from the West Indies, taught at the University of Edinburgh — including a man you may have heard of — Charles Darwin.
Unfortunately, as the Regency era advanced, the debate about ending slavery fanned the flames of racism. British Imperialism already enculturated an attitude of British superiority, and this concept grew more tightly bound to white supremacy in general. White British subjects struggled with the idea that people of color could be their equals, even as those same former slaves served the country at all levels of society, including as nobles and even royalty.
Racist attitudes also found support in popular “scientific” theories. Charles White, an English physician and surgeon, believed that races occupied different stations in the “Great Chain of Being”, and he tried to scientifically prove different races of people originated from different species.
While modern Regency romance does not overtly extoll such racist principles, the insidious racism of erasure is common. How often does a Regency era romance have men and women of color? How about a JAFF novel? I have not read a JAFF yet featuring a person of color in a prominent role.
Have you?
People of color were not only servants (though a 1764 issue of the Gentleman’s Magazine noted that at least 20,000 black servants were residents in British homes), but also professors, ship captains, entertainers, and in the gentry. Many former slaves even fought for the British in the American Revolutionary War and Napoleonic wars and returned to England afterwards to live full lives. Did Col. Fitzwilliam serve with men of color? Probably! Let’s write it!
I’m making this post as a call to action for myself, my fellow authors, and our readers. To be historically accurate, we must include a wide cast of characters in our books. Though I’ve centered this post primarily around black folks and people of color, it holds true for non-gender binary people, people with different sexual orientations, and people with learning, mental, and physical disabilities. Widening our cast will make our stories more interesting and fun to read and write.
Which Regency romances have you read, JAFF or otherwise, that have rendered non-white, non-cis, or non-hetero characters with grace and flair (or at all)? Leave your recommendations in the comments!
I’m excited to read more wonderful, diverse books as I strive to improve my work as a Regency JAFF author.
Sources:
https://www.regrom.com/2019/05/24/representing-regency-multiracial-people-in-the-19th-century/
https://www.wm.edu/news/stories/2011/neh-postdoctoral-fellow-livesay-presents-new-views-on-mixed-races-and-their-families.php, (https://www.history.com/news/biracial-royalty-meghan-markle-queen-charlotte).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Cuvier
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perkins_(Royal_Navy_officer)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Skinner_(East_India_Company_officer)
I completely agree. There should be little debate about allowing POC to be a part of the JAFF. To be even more sure in the conviction of adding POC as characters in JAFF, authors should read Gretchen Gerzina "Black London".