‘Tis Auction Day
Today is the big day when we find out if some sucker with more money than sense an adventurous Janeite decides to give the Rice Portrait a new home.
The Toronto Globe and Mail covers the controversy, and to our astonishment commits actual journalism in the attempt, rather than simply regurgitating the the rather sketchy AP article from a couple of weeks ago.
While Christie’s addresses the controversy in the sale literature, it throws its weight behind the portrait’s legitimacy.
“We know so little about children’s costume at this period, so to dismiss the portrait on the grounds that the costume looks like it’s a bit later in date doesn’t seem very credible,” said Piers Davies, a Christie’s expert in Old Masters.
“So what the heck! Let’s give it a pass and call it authentic! Antiques Roadshow THIS, b*****es! HA HA HA HA HAAAAA!”
(Note to self: probably should not post when we’re up late doing laundry. We get a little intoxicated on the scent of vanilla and lavender Downy.)
“It’s not credible to me that [the portrait] is Jane Austen,” said Marsha Huff, the president of the Jane Austen Society of North America.
Some contemporary Austen academics have lined up in support, including Claudia Johnson of Princeton, who is writing a book about the portrait.
The Rice family tried to offer the portrait for sale in 2004 but withdrew it when it failed to earn the asking price of $3-million.
The portrait is expected to auction for $400,000-$800,000. This is going to be very interesting indeed.

An exchange of letters in the Basingstoke Gazette gives a tiny glimpse into the life of the young Jane Austen dancing at the Basingstoke Assembly. The 










