The cover of this all-in-one edition of Jane Austen’s work annoys the crap out of the Editrix.
You see, the Editrix was engaged in a debate with an otherwise-intelligent person elsewhere on the internet who claimed that Jane Austen’s novels were about “upper class drips obsessed with marriage.” We begged to differ, naturally. Images such as that cover associated with Jane Austen’s work do not help our argument, and in our not so humble opinion are completely misplaced.
Humph.
An article in the Sydney Morning Herald about the upcoming authorized sequel to Peter Pan employs a sly reference to everyone’s favorite Pride and Prejudice sequel </snark>, Emma Tennant’s Pemberley:
Sequels are a risky business. For every Harry Potter there are hundreds of Pemberleys. Never heard of Pemberley? It was a 1993 sequel to Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Pemberley or Pride and Prejudice Continued, to give the novel its full name, scores an average one-out-of-five stars among Amazon.com users.
A financially distressed London hospital that owns the copyright for the J.M. Barrie classic Peter Pan will be hoping a planned sequel for the 1911 novel will be a Harry Potter instead of a Pemberley.
For the sake of the sensibilities of children everywhere, we hope so too.
However, we are feeling a trifle precise today, and wish to point out that the Harry Potter books are not properly sequels; they were a planned part of a larger whole that will span the seven books. That is most likely why they work so well together. 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License
