Originally Posted by
allegro
What the hell?? That whole article is irritating to me, even the English Prof’s approach to it. She knows full well that most colleges don’t have a Regency period specialization so they group those authors and poets from Regency as “pre Victorian” for lack of a better way to offer them in academia but also because Victorian was INFORMED by Regency and Romanticism. She’s nitpicking, and so am I. Not that Idiot Yiannopoulos knows any of this. Anyway, this idea that Austen was a staunch feminist amuses me; I did a lengthy research essay in college viewing Elizabeth in P&P from the feminist perspective and the academic research was about 50/50.(Full disclosure: I actually enjoy reading academic criticism of Austen more than reading Austen.) Elizabeth knew she needed a husband to survive and she held out for the BEST ONE; Darcy is RICH and POWERFUL with a giant MANSION. But her heroines do express the desire for the same education and esteem that men possess, so there is that aspect of "feminism" (which of course didn't exist at the time, but the very fact that Austen was an AUTHOR yet she had to hide in her room so nobody would come rip up her novels shows what she was up against; it wasn't about hot or not). Austen wrote about the realities of that era. Mary Wollstonecraft was a total babe, arguing against smarmy romantic heroism. Then her daughter, Mary, married that romantic poet SHELLEY ... comparing the works of the two Marys to Austen is an interesting study.
Edit: Ugh I hereby resolve that I will never again attempt to read or compose anything of substance via my iPhone 7+. STILL TOO SMALL for this purpose.