Observing the decline of Britain is a sad, infuriating spectacle. The great people who stood alone and fought so heroically when the rest of Europe was being swallowed by the Nazi conflagration is but a pale shadow of its former self.
Yes, now we have an island seething with intellectual Jew-haters who disguise their medieval venom under academic credentials by labeling it anti-Zionism.
This same mind-set has now seen fit to remove Winston Churchill from the grade school syllabus, and replace his towering political and moral genius with politically correct sludge.
The British government now in power, with Orwellian mastery, refuses to use the phrase “war on terror”—as do the Democrats in America—and to further enable the aggressive jihadists down the street, the words “Islamic terror” are officially banned from all official government communiques. As do the Democrats in America—unofficially.
Indeed, the first casualty in war is the truth.
If all that wasn’t bad enough, we now learn that the British, whom we thought were at least well-read Jew-haters and appeasers, are also, sigh, illiterate.
Jane Austen, weep for your not so great Britain.
She might have sold millions of books in the past 200 years, but a daring experiment has found Jane Austen would struggle to secure a book deal today.
David Lassman, a frustrated author and director of the Jane Austen Festival in the English town of Bath, sent off manuscripts featuring several chapters of Austen’s most famous work to 18 publishers and agents, claiming it was all his work.
To his amazement all publishers rejected the manuscripts, and most failed to spot that he had ripped off opening chapters of Pride and Prejudice, Northanger Abbey and Persuasion.
“I was staggered,” Mr Lassman told The Guardian newspaper.
“Here is one of the greatest writers that has lived, with her oeuvre securely fixed in the English canon and yet only one recipient recognised them as Austen’s work.”
Mr Lassman decided to send off the manuscripts, which contained only slight alterations to Austen’s words, in frustration at having his own original thriller rejected.
“I know it isn’t a masterpiece but I think it is publishable,” he said.
“Yet nobody wanted it. I was talking with some friends and we wondered if Jane would find a publisher or agent if she were around today.”
The original article can be found here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin.
Seraphic Friend Dr. Carol has just sent us this disturbing article about the rising tide of Jew-hatred in Britain.
Ariel Chaim Avrech, ZT'L, May His Righteous Memory be a Blessing.
13 Comments
just surfed on in.
i dont hate jews or israel, and i have no idea why anyone would. im sure people are around who do, but it seems so pointless to hate jews, only a moron would dedicate any serious time to doing so. i dont know the exact history of why israel was created 50 or so years ago, but doesnt it say in the talmud or torah that the jews werent supposed to have their own state? i have no problem with jews or israel, but i prefer to think of israel as a country, not associate it with a religion or race. race-ism is race-ism either way you slice it. i will admit that i think that is weird if its true that israel is a race/country/religion. there are terrorists on both sides of every war. fear is the number one weapon, thats what killing is for in the first place. to create fear among the survivors. why cant everybody on earth be thought of as jews and lets all forget about these deadly serious differences? its likely that all the people on earth came from the original tribes anyway. lets just give it a rest i say. if i could, i would proclaim everyone a jew right now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Kishke:
Grrr, muggle!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jake:
Hollywood gets Jane because audiences get Jane. Not complicated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Kishke:
Mark Helprin can be one of my favorite writers. But his last novel was a great disappointment, and I didn’t get past the first 30 pages. As Byatt? She’s Margaret Drabble’s less boring sister.
Listen, some people just can’t get into Jane Austen. We forgive you, still consider you a close friend:)
Watch the movies instead.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Rowling a brilliant writer? I’m going to have to disagree with you again, Robert. The first novel was quite clever and a fun read. The next two weren’t bad either. Since then, the books grow longer and longer, the plotting grows ever more holey and the writing ever more clunky, and the whole miserable, interminable saga grows more and more improbable. The most recent book could barely hold my interest.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Clearly there is a market for Austen as her books keep getting made into movies just about every two years or so. Sometimes Hollywood understands better storytelling than 6th Avenue.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
No to all three. But I have read and enjoyed some other modern slow-paced writers; A.S. Byatt comes to mind, and Mark Helprin.
I’ve been reading some Austen lately, and what can I say, it’s just so old-timey. I’m calling it pacing, but maybe it’s just a matter of style.
Not to say that she’s not a very clever and talented writer. There are passages and sentences and usages that enthrall me. But the overall experience? Let’s just say I don’t find myself eagerly awaiting the next free moment I’ll have for reading.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dr. Carol:
Yep, why read Jane Austen or Charles Dickens when you can read some obscure “story-teller” from an iron-age village in Upper Volta, or listen to aboriginal creation tales from the Outback. Or better yet, read the best of French modernist Robbe Grillet.
Which, come to think of it, should be a very short list.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pearl:
Respectfully, I like J.K. Rowling. I think she’s a brilliant writer, and the Harry Potter series is masterful.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Kishke:
Style, pacing? Have you read, Ian McEwan’s tedious Atonement? Or Thomas Pynchon’s latest incomprehensible but critic-proof snooze-fest? Or Margaret Drabble’s feverish blast of Thorazine-like novels.
Well, I haven’t either. I tried, G-d knows I tried. But sleep quickly overtook this weary mind and body.
Jane’s work moves like a bullet, with wit and great pacing, compared to most post-modern scribes who are lauded daily by our, ahem, lit-crits.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve written two ranty comments on this and lost them both to bad hotel internet access. Jane can’t get published now, she can’t even get READ. I am not surprised they didn’t recognize the excerpts. Current canon avoids the great writers and great ideas in favor of “diversity” and we are going to be not just poorer for it, but endangered by it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think it’s a brilliant experiment that this Mr. Lassman tried, but what a sad statement the results make on the publishing industry and “literature.” Harry Potter reigns over Jane Austen’s characters, I guess.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
That they didn’t recognize it I guess is strange, but that they didn’t publish it – not so strange. It may be great literature, but the style and pacing is definitely dated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0