I just watched "Becoming Jane" and to me it totally contradicted this movie. I don't remember LeFroy being mentioned in "Jane Austen Regrets", and I was having a hard time matching up the characters. I thought the love of her life was the Preacher who married someone else. Can anybody clear this up for me?
shareBecoming Jane is complete fiction.
This one was much closer to the truth, but made a lot of assumptions.
She mentions Lefroy as being unsuitable and says that she didn't love him in a brief scene, which pretty much matches up with what the evidence suggests.
[deleted]
There was definitely something she did not want reveled in her letters. I would think that would be the only reason for her to destroy them. I mean, she destroyed 2,840 letters! She seemed to have gone to great lengths to hide something. Perhaps she was so proud of the novels she wrote that she did not want her personal correspondence to have been left for all to see.
As you said, she was a woman well ahead of her time. At the time she had no idea how popular she or her books would become, however, she could have destroyed the letters as a way to protect not only herself, but others as well. One of those she could have been protecting could have been Lefroy.
Think about it, 2,840 letters destroyed. That is a great deal of writing. That is a good number of letters that could span a life time of long distance correspondence with Lefroy. Let's do the math...They met in 1795, correspondence starts when they are separated in 1796. Austen dies in 1817, so from 1796-1817 is 21 years. If there were 2,840 letters destroyed and let's say they were all from Lefroy, that's 11 letters a year. I don't know how long it took for post to go from Ireland to England back then, but I'm guessing it was rather slow.
Here is the Wikipedia site on Lefroy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Langlois_Lefroy
And another interesting site: http://becomingjane.blogspot.com/2007/07/year-1795-and-1816-in-memoir-of-chief.html
The writers of this site have some interesting views from Lefroy's memoirs. Especially about the dates of 1795 and 1816 and how Lefroy was affected by them as possible turning points in his life.
A fan site, but an interesting read with interesting info: http://becomingjane.blogspot.com/2007/07/tom-lefroys-letter-to-mary-paul-1810.html
Patti...After watching Becoming Jane I became a bit obsessed with their relationship and just started reading anything online that I could find on Lefroy. Not too much is know about him and even less about his wife, Mary Paul. There is tons on Jane. Tons of different opinions out there on their relationship.
I must jump in to add something to this conversation. During this time period it was very common to burn letters when someone has passed away, no matter what the occupation of the person (author or not). There could be any number of subjects that Jane Austen did not want to be left for her family or friends to read. Given her biting wit, she may have said unkind things that she did not want known! Who knows? It's exciting to wonder about, though!
Having seen both, I enjoy them quite a bit. Neither may be accurate, but they are fun to watch! And since I love all things Jane Austen, I think it's wonderful that she has been the subject of TWO recent films!
:)
-lissadell
I would say both movies are both accurate on certain things .. that said here is what i think
Upon his death bed, Lefroy was asked by his nephew, a nephew that just happened to be married to Austen's niece, who the greatest love of his life was. his reply was Austen. However, he added, "in a boyish kind of love."
Now this could have been for the fact that he was married to Mary Paul for years and was thinking of her and his many children. He was the Chief Justice of Ireland and had his reputation to think about.
There's more...Upon Austen's death, Lefroy traveled from Ireland to England for her funeral. This was a very long way to travel for an old friend or even a distant family member by marriages death. By todays standards, it would not take long to get there, but by 1817 standards, that was a very long way to travel.
When Cadell Papers, a publishing house, closed it's doors, they sold/auctioned off their belongings. Lefroy purchased Cadell's rejection letter for "First Impressions" which became "Pride & Prejudice". I find this to be ironic since he is rumoured to be the inspiration for Mr. Darcy.
As Jane was dying from Addisons Disease, she destroyed most of her letters, including correspondence with Lefroy. Upon her death, she had instructed her sister Cassandra to destroy more. Why? I can't imagine what could have been in those letters. Did she and Lefroy keep correspondence after his marriage to Mary Paul? There were around 3,000 letters and only 160 survived after Austen's death and those have been heavily edited by Austen.
I think Lefroy could have very well kept in touch with Austen all those years. He could have very well had all of her letters delivered to him at his office under the disguise of business, even family as they were distantly related. So, it's very possible.
Of course, the letters that Austen destroyed before her death and had destroyed after could have nothing to do with Lefroy. However, it still does not answer why she would destroy so many letters.
********************************************
JA Letter
"Tell Mary that I make over Mr. Heartley and all his estate to her for her sole use and benefit in future, and not only him, but all my other admirers into the bargain wherever she can find them, even the kiss which C. Powlett wanted to give me, as I mean to confine myself in future to Mr. Tom Lefroy, for whom I don't care sixpence. Assure her also, as a last and indubitable proof of Warren's indifference to me, that he actually drew that gentleman's picture for me, and delivered it to me without a sigh.
Friday. -- At length the day is come on which I am to flirt my last with Tom Lefroy, and when you receive this it will be over. My tears flow as I write at the melancholy idea. Wm. Chute called here yesterday. I wonder what he means by being so civil. There is a report that Tom is going to be married to a Lichfield lass. John Lyford and his sister bring Edward home today, dine with us, and we shall all go together to Ashe. I understand that we are to draw for partners. I shall be extremely impatient to hear from you again, that I may know how Eliza is, and when you are to return. "
As for more letter There were certain letters that she passed down to her niece Fanny because she thought them so alike, almost like sisters. After Austen's death and Fanny got married and the Victorian Age was moved in, Fanny's attitude toward her Aunt Jane changed. Mostly due with the changing times and "keeping with the Jones'" kind of thing. However, Fanny felt her Aunt's lifestyle, behavior was a bit undignified.
So if you ask me i believe that there was more to that tom lefroy fling than meets the eye .. Taken that into account i dont think she was as lonley as this movie made her out to be i felt alittle sad after i had watched it..
Upon Austen's death, Lefroy traveled from Ireland to England for her funeral. This was a very long way to travel for an old friend or even a distant family member by marriages death. By todays standards, it would not take long to get there, but by 1817 standards, that was a very long way to travel.
From what source you got this information? Some of the biographies I have read about Jane Austen mention who attented the funeral and in none Lefroy is mentioned as one of them. Please, I would like to know that.
Likewise, from where did you get this:
When Cadell Papers, a publishing house, closed it's doors, they sold/auctioned off their belongings. Lefroy purchased Cadell's rejection letter for "First Impressions" which became "Pride & Prejudice".
That is not mentioned in the JA Letters, edited by Dierdre LeFaye, and I would think she would have mentioned that in her notes. Is this info taken from the Austen Papers?
[deleted]
Both pieces of information were found on this site:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Lefroy#cite_ref-1
The part about Lefroy traveling from Ireland to England was taken from his family history.
Upon learning of Jane Austen's death (on 18 July 1817), Thomas Langlois Lefroy traveled from Ireland to England to pay his respects to the British author.[2] In addition, at an auction of Cadell's papers (possibly in London), Tom bought a Cadell publisher's rejection letter-for Austen's early version of Pride and Prejudice (originally titled First Impressions). Caroline Austen said as follows in her letter to James Edward Austen-Leigh on 1 April 1869: " I enclose a copy of Mr. Austen's letter to Cadell-I do not know which novel he would have sent-The letter does not do much credit to the tact or courtesy of our good Grandfather for Cadell was a great man in his day, and it is not surprising that he should have refused the favour so offered from an unknown-but the circumstance may be worth noting, especially as we have so few incidents to produce. At a sale of Cadell's papers &c Tom Lefroy picked up the original letter-and Jemima copied it for me - "
It was rather unlikely that Caroline Austen would address the Chief Justice Lefroy as only 'Tom Lefroy' (she indeed addressed him as the still living 'Chief Justice' in the later part of the letter). However, if it is true that the original Tom Lefroy purchased the Cadell letter after Jane's death, it is possible that Tom would then keep it and handed it over to Thomas Edward Preston Lefroy
Thanks for providing the information. Since it comes from Wikipedia, I will remain sceptic. IMHO, it would have been the kind of information that Jon Spence would have included in his Becoming Jane Austen book to support his theory about the relationship. He did not, nor any other researcher with authority has done so, and that I would require to accept what the Wikipedia mentions. I repeat, thanks again anyway :).
shareHi,
Forgive me for butting into this conversation but I also came across that passage when I read a blurb about the Lefroy family estate, Carrigglas. I went to the internet archive to see a picture of the mansion as the website of the mansion had been taken down sometime in 2005 or early 2006 and the domain name seems to be used by someone else. Here is the page where it is mentioned that Tom Lefroy went to Jane Austen's funeral and purchased the letter in question. The source is the old carrigglas website. I don't know if the story is true or not but that is where I read about it.
http://web.archive.org/web/20030213021516/www.carrigglas.com/family.html
There are more pages from the old www.carrigglas.com website but they can only be found in the internet archive at this time. The current page of carrigglas.com yields nothing interesting.
Just an fyi, the internet archive takes pictures of websites and stores them so that they can be viewed even after a website is no longer in existence. I find it quite useful sometimes but you have to know the web address or at least the domain name.
The internet archive web address is www.archive.org, just plug your web address into the wayback machine and hit enter. The carrigglas domain looks like it has been purchased by someone else so you have to go back a few years to see the site as it looked in the past. Here's the page you get when you plug in www.carrigglas.com into the wayback machine.
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.carrigglas.com
As you can see, there are several pictures of the web address taken over the years, if you choose an older version, you can see it before the site was changed. Don't choose any links after 2005 because it looks like it turned into a search page.
The source webpage cited in that wiki article is full of mistakes. There is no documentation that Austen based Darcy on Lefroy. That wiki article is full of speculation and was probably written by the author of the Becoming Jane wiki article, which is also full of speculation.
share[deleted]
The Jane Austen Centre in Bath website has reviewed the two films. You may want to read the reviews.
Becoming Jane: http://www.janeausten.co.uk/magazine/page.ihtml?pid=549&step=4
Miss Austen Regrets: http://www.janeausten.co.uk/magazine/page.ihtml?pid=594&step=4
Thanks for posting these informative links.
share[deleted]
I agree with what both coleburg and booklover have mentioned.
Becoming Jane is 99.99% fiction. Miss Austen Regrest is a more realistic approach.
Why oh why oh why would someone assume that a film would be accurate in the first place?
Good grief!!!
If you love Satan and are 100% proud of it copy this and make your signature!
I don't believe either film is any more of a fiction than the other. People put their own spin on what little facts are known, so any characterization of her inner life and feelings is fiction.
Becoming Jane was 1000 times better as a film though - and to me personally, more believable.
Except that Miss Austen Regrets doesn't try to give the impression that Jane Austen "copied" all of her characters from real people in her life. Becoming Jane makes it seem that everything in Austen's novels was "borrowed" or "copied" from things that Austen observed being said or done by other people.
Seriously, Becoming Jane is fiction along the lines of Shakespeare in Love. Miss Austen Regrets is a more serious (albeit speculative) examination of the author. MAR doesn't try to turn Austen into her heriones; it tries to portray the Jane Austen found in her letters.
Except that Miss Austen Regrets doesn't try to give the impression that Jane Austen "copied" all of her characters from real people in her life. Becoming Jane makes it seem that everything in Austen's novels was "borrowed" or "copied" from things that Austen observed being said or done by other people.
While Miss Austen Regrets attempts to stay closer to the little we know of Austen from her surviving letters, both films are forced to speculate. As to which gives a truer feel for what Austen was really like, MAR is probably closer than Becoming Jane (the latter also suffers from Anne Hathaway's accent slipping now and then, which is distracting). People of that era were generally supposed to be more reserved, but really, who can be sure?
First, there is this to consider: while she lived, Jane Austen chose to publish anonymously. Quite possibly, this was because writing and then publishing as a woman under her own name would have damaged whatever reputation she did have and thus burdened her family further socially. Had she been willing to publish with her name attached to her work, she might have had more notoriety but also more income. Either she liked her privacy, or she wanted to spare her family the notoriety, maybe both.
Second, yes, many people routinely destroyed their own letters prior to death or instructed others in their wills to destroy them, but there were exceptions -- otherwise we'd know far less about that period than we do. We don't really know how many of her letters Jane herself destroyed, but we do know that of those still in existence when Jane died, 1) her sister Cassandra destroyed most and censored nearly all the rest, and 2) other family members also destroyed most of the correspondence they had from her. Was this to preserve Jane's privacy, or was it because it never occurred to either Jane or her relatives that Jane's letters would be important to future scholars because Jane's books would be far more widely accepted and lauded long after her death than they were when she lived? We don't know, because neither Jane nor her relatives explained themselves on this point. If not for her nephew's memoir, we would know even less about her and what may (or may not) have inspired her work than the little we do.
However, given the comparatively modest reception her books had while she was alive, neither Jane nor her relatives had reason to think that 120 years after her death Austen would be considered one of the great English writers -- or that almost two centuries after her death, her work would still greatly influence popular culture.
As for inspiration, as a writer myself I can tell you this: many of us take our starting points from events or people of our acquaintance, but the starting point is merely that. I've often taken a person, event or circumstance I know, turned it on its side, and twisted it on an angle before I use it in fiction or poetry. I make a more general case of it that way even while describing a specific one -- but the specifics have departed from actual details, even as the departure is used to tell a greater truth. No doubt Austen had more than enough skill and imagination to do the same. So, to the question of whether Austen used imagination or reality for her inspiration, I say both -- and it isn't in an author's interest to tell us how much of either is/was the case.
Which means that both filmmakers, in this case, probably took a wisp of truth about Austen's past and elaborated on their own, to the degree they felt comfortable -- because given the lack of details about her that survive, that was their only recourse.
I don't think "Becoming Jane" was meant to be perceived as accurate or realistic by it's makers. I could be wrong, but I remember seeing some interviews with the people behind the movie in which they say that they based the story on some facts from Jane Austen's life but mixed it with stuff from her own stories.
On the other hand, I believe "Miss Austen Regrets" was shooting for a more realistic depiction, so I don't think the two movies can be compared in this aspect.