Why do movies and TV adaptations of Jane Austen often have only shapes?

Stills from "Emma" directed by Ottem Day Wilder in 2020. (Infographic/Figure)

"Jane" is a discriminatory name in English, representing plain and vague. Examples include "Plain Jane" (the inconspicuous girl) and "Jane Doe" (the nameless lady). But, ironically and fairly (one might even say karma), one of the best, most beloved, and time-tested English-language fiction authors of all time is named "Jane."

Jane Austen's literary status is no longer disputed, and what is at issue is her art of fiction. On the surface, her words are light and the story is as calm as a mirror, why can it move people's hearts? In other words, how exactly did Plain Jane transform into Jane Austen?

This is a topic of "tantalizing" in the history of Western literature. Woolf, who is highly self-conscious of her identity as a writer, said that of great all the great writers, Austen writers Austen is the most difficult to catch in the act of greatness.

Woolf still thinks so, not to mention a heroic male writer? Men are compulsive explainers, not only to conquer women, but also to explain women. Freud's ancient question, "What does a woman want?", speaks to many big men. After Austen's literary status was established, countless heroes competed to provide explanations. Those who failed to do so expressed frustration. Conrad, author of Heart of Darkness, wrote to his novelist friend H.G. Wells sighed, "What the hell is Jane Austen about?" What can she do? ”（What is all this about Jane Austen ? What is it in her?）

Some people say that you should start with the sentences she writes. There's no doubt that Austin is a top "phrase maker." The first sentence of Pride and Prejudice seamlessly combines the sociologist's accurate observation with profound irony: "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife." The sentence is nearly perfect, just too long because Austin is "The Queen of Short Sentences." My two favorite lines are "Till this moment, I never knew myself" from Pride and Prejudice and "If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more" from Emma.

But Austin is extraordinary and even immortal, not because she writes many such sentences, after all, writing is more than sentence-making. Reading Austin in today's "me too" era, I find that the most remarkable thing about her is her ability to infuse her strong authorial personality and feminine consciousness into her work without a trace. Female consciousness is the conscious awareness of women's status, role and value as subjects in the objective world, and is the internal motivation that inspires them to pursue independence and autonomy, as well as to exert initiative and creativity.

How did Austin do it? She pioneered a method of entering the inner world of the characters of the novel at any time without giving up her opinion, which later became known as the "free indirect style". "Free Indirect Style" allows Austin to use the language and ideas of his characters to conduct what is called "third-person narration." In this way, Austin can see the world almost as he pleases through himself and the characters she creates. There is an incomparable satisfaction in reading Austin's novels, because she gives us the author's "omniscient perspective" and the key character's "point of view."

Movies and TV adaptations of Austin often take shape, and here's why. "Externalize", that is, expressed in a way that is visible to the audience, is the main means of expression in television and film. The secret channel of "free indirect style" takes us to the hidden inner world and subjective consciousness of the characters. Movies and TV series and Austen's novels are destined to be bitter couples.

Austin wrote novels in a way that had never been done before, providing inspiration for those who came after him to "take what is inexhaustible." In this sense, Flaubert, Henry James, James Joyce, Kafka and even Eileen Chang were her protégés.

American novelist Sigrid Nunez won the National Book Awards two years ago for "The Friend." Instead of a free-indirect, the author adopts a first-person narrative perspective, but it is the 100% unmistakable female voice and female consciousness that runs through the book and gives it personality and life. In this regard, Núñez can be said to be the best of the truth. Núñez writes about the possessiveness of men towards women, but women are by no means the playthings of men in her writing. They will let men do whatever they want, and they will make them subservient. Núñez reminds us that young girls like older, status men, sometimes for the thrill of bringing an older man in a position of authority to his knees.

This is "Janesplaining" as opposed to "Mansplaining". The word "mansplaining" comes from "explaining" (explanation), which refers to the fact that a man is a (female) teacher, always interrupts women, not only covers the topic, but also often presents himself as an expert and authority without self-awareness, and gushes about understanding women he thinks are ignorant. Men do this to silence women, to make them understand that knowledge and power are the preserve of men, and then to return to their own world—the home, the kitchen, the bedroom, the beauty salon, and the dressing room. They failed because people like Austin, Eileen Chang, and Núñez spoke up for women. From this point of view, Janesslang did not defeat or lose to Mansplaining.

Lin Peili