Austen Chat: Episode 26

August 7, 2025

Jane Austen & Her Wild Side: A Visit with Devoney Looser

Think you know Jane Austen? In this episode, we explore the wild side of Austen’s writings, life, and legacy with noted scholar Devoney Looser, who makes the case for Austen as a far more daring and unconventional figure than her prim Victorian reputation suggests. Whether you're new to Austen or a longtime Janeite, this episode offers a lively take on the beloved author—and reminds us why we’re all a little wild for Austen.

Devoney Looser is Regents Professor of English at Arizona State University, a Guggenheim Fellow, an NEH Public Scholar, and a Rockefeller Bellagio Fellow. She is the author of Sister Novelists: The Trailblazing Porter Sisters, Who Paved the Way for Austen and the Brontës, The Making of Jane Austen, The Daily Jane Austen, and her latest, Wild for Austen: A Rebellious, Subversive, and Untamed Jane, which will be released September 2, 2025. Her writing has also appeared in The Atlantic, New York Times, Salon, Slate, and The Washington Post. A life member of the Jane Austen Society of North America and frequent speaker at JASNA conferences, Looser has also skated in roller derby under the name Stone Cold Jane Austen.

Show Notes and Links

Many thanks to Devoney for joining us on Austen Chat!

• Learn more about Devoney Looser and her work on her website, devoneylooser.com
• Devoney also has a free Substack newsletter, Counterpoise.

Listen to Austen Chat here, on your favorite podcast app (Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and other streaming platforms), or on our YouTube Channel.

Credits: From JASNA's Austen Chat podcast. Published July 2, 2025. © Jane Austen Society of North America. All rights reserved.  Theme Music: Country Dance by Humans Win.

Transcript

This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity and readability.

[Theme music]

Breckyn: Hello Janeites, and welcome to Austen Chat, a podcast brought to you by the Jane Austen Society of North America. I'm your host, Breckyn Wood from the Georgia Region of JASNA. Listeners, my guest today needs no introduction, but I'm going to give her one anyway because her CV is just so darn impressive. Devoney Looser is Regents Professor of English at Arizona State University. She is the author or editor of 11 books on Jane Austen and literature by women, including the Making of Jane Austen and Sister Novelists: the Trailblazing Porter Sisters, Who Paved the Way for Austen and the Brontës. Devoney is a Guggenheim Fellow, an NEH Public Scholar, and a Rockefeller Bellagio Fellow. A much beloved JASNA speaker, Devoney has presented at many AGMs and in 2017 was JASNA's North American Scholar. Her most recent book, Wild for Austen: a Rebellious, Subversive, and Untamed Jane, comes out on September 2 of this year. Welcome to the show, Devoney.

Devoney: Great to be here, Breckyn. Thanks for having me on Austen Chat.

Breckyn: Okay, so as many people know about you, you are a roller derby player who goes by the name of Stone Cold Jane Austen, and this means that you are far more athletic than I. So I have a sporty-themed icebreaker question for you today. So, would you rather play baseball with Catherine Morland and her nine brothers and sisters or join Elizabeth Bennet on a vigorous 5K from Longbourn to Netherfield?

Devoney: Oh, that is a fantastic one. You know, I have to admit, first of all, that over the past year I have not been competing in roller derby, and so I've been spending a lot more brainy energy than brawny energy. And in recent months—

Breckyn: Writing a book.

Devoney: That's right, writing a book. So, if it has to be a vigorous 5K, honestly, I think Elizabeth Bennet and I are not running side by side, at which point, what—you know, what is even the purpose? If it could be a slow 5K, I choose Elizabeth Bennet, absolutely, from those two options, but only because I want a chance to talk to her, right?

Breckyn: Of course. Okay, if you can run and talk at the same time, then you are much better at running than I am. [Pretends to gasp for air.] That's what I sound like when I run.

Devoney: Leisurely 5K. But if I have to do it vigorous, then I'm definitely choosing Catherine Morland and the baseball, because I think what I most enjoy about this "what if?" is the community aspects of it. So, thanks for a fun question.

Breckyn: I think the Morlands sound like a fun, fun clan. I think it would be fun to hang—obviously, everyone wants to talk to Elizabeth Bennet, but I think an afternoon playing baseball with the Morlands would probably be pretty fun.

Devoney: Agreed.

Breckyn: Okay, Devoney, let's start with the title of your book—a logical place to start. A lot of people don't expect the word "wild" to be associated with Austen, and that's kind of your point. So, in what ways do you explore Austen's wildness?

Devoney: So, the book is divided into three sections, and in them, I look at different aspects of wildness in her writings, her life, and her legacy. So, the title is a bit of a play on words. It's what counts as wild in Austen, and who's gone wild over Austen as well as, you know, who's wild around her. But I think getting at that subject from all three angles lets us see that "wild" really is an appropriate word to use in conjunction with her. So, in the introduction to the book, I look at "wild" in its meanings in Austen's day, and that's really where I'm trying to stay in this section, especially on her writings. We don't really have, I think, a full sense of what this word meant in her day. And one of my favorite nerd word tools—you might use it too—is the Oxford English Dictionary, where you can look up the words of meaning historically. The Oxford English Dictionary, where you look up the meanings of words historically—did that totally backwards. Okay, so "wild" had many meanings then, and many of them are retained today. But by looking at that nerd word tool, the Oxford English Dictionary, we can dig more deeply into what "wild" meant in Austen's time.

Devoney: And, you know, the meaning of "wild" I see Austen as using in her fiction— which was, I think, most appropriate then for what she was up to, especially with her female characters—is "wild" meaning artless, free, unconventional, fanciful, or romantic in style. I mean, I love that version of what "wild" was and is. So "wild" could really be a personal style. And I think that is Austen playing with what it meant for women to be positively wild. Obviously, there are negative meanings of "wild" or natural meanings of "wild," and I'm a little bit less concerned with those in the book. I'm looking at this idea of "wild" as an unconventional, artless, fanciful, romantic, personal style. And there I think Austen is really digging in on what it means for women to be positively wild. You know, of course, she's not Mary Shelley. She's not the Brontë sisters. You know, she's not—

Breckyn: She's not burning things to the ground like Bertha.

Devoney: Right. Or running off to Europe with married men. You know, I mean, this is—if you're imagining "wild" that narrowly, then I don't know that you would see it as something that applies to Austen. But, in fact, there were women writers who were a lot more wild than Shelley or the Brontës. And I think this is something we forget. And I don't know, Breckyn, if you've ever read Harriet Wilson's memoirs—

Breckyn: I haven't.

Devoney: They've become newly intriguing and popular. There's a great biography on Harriet Wilson by the biographer Frances Wilson—no relation—but she was a courtesan who went to her lovers and said, "I am going to write a tell-all memoir about our time together," right?

Breckyn: OK, I've heard about this lady.

Devoney: Unless you pay me off, right? She was blackmailing them and then published this book. So, I mean, to me that is—like, that is truly wild. Shelley, Brontë—

Breckyn: Even by today's standards, that is wild, right?

Devoney: Right? It's a blackmail effort and a tell-all, and there's a lot going on there with Harriet Wilson. Interestingly, however, Austen may have had the closest personal connection to Harriet Wilson. It's believed that there is a reference to Lord Craven's mistress that was probably to a very young Harriet Wilson.

Breckyn: Oh, my goodness.

Devoney: So, in terms of what Austen saw of wildness and how she tracked it—she had lots of opportunities, and I definitely am going into that in the life, the life and social circle section of the book.

Breckyn: And I—yeah, I love that you're taking this on because the—I can't believe how long the prim and perfect idea of Jane Austen has lasted that we got in the Victorian age and that we got from her first family biographers. And I don't blame them really. I kind of roll my eyes at her nephew and her brother— what they say—because it doesn't seem like my Austen. But I can't believe that, like—if no one has read a Jane Austen book, they kind of still have that idea. And I think all you have to do is read a single Jane Austen book—anything by her—and you'll be like, oh, she's actually hilarious and kind of mean and snarky and, you know, she's, she's just so much more layered and complex than, than that old-fashioned idea of her.

Devoney: Absolutely. And the way I tried to make sense of it is the book—in the book—is a continuum from mild to wild. There have always been people who saw wildness in Austen, but the mild was kind of the dominant, right? Just like you're saying, coming out of Henry saying she had a life that was not a life of event. I mean, good grief, come on—that's just bunk, right? And biographers since Claire Tomalin have tried to show this, but I do still think we don't have enough of a concept of what the wildness was that she was grappling with and I think positively embracing.

Breckyn: Mmhmm. Well, let's get into her writings, because I love what you say about the juvenilia, because it's what I have also been saying all this time, which is that anyone who thinks of Austen as prim and proper just needs to read her teenage writings to have those preconceptions blown out of the water. So, what are some of your favorite takeaways from Austen's juvenilia—some of the wildness that you found there?

Devoney: Yeah, first I say—have to say that that was one of the most fun chapters to research and write, because I got to reread the whole juvenilia, right? I mean, I—when I teach it to students, I usually do it in bits, not all of it. But gosh, it's just a pleasure to reread. And you and I know that the juvenilia's texts have been undergoing a kind of reevaluation, reconsideration for about a generation. And this is thanks to Kathryn Sutherland, Peter Sabor, and others. So, I'm just joining this chorus with you. I think these are important texts. They're also just incredibly fun. They're fun to read. And, you know, I called them 74,000 words of unpredictable, raucous, proto-feminist snark. And I will stand by that.

Breckyn: That's a great amalgam of adjectives. I love it.

Devoney: Yeah, and you know this too, Breckyn, many people who've read and love these texts—there are evil deeds that go unpunished. There's drunkenness, theft, uh—you know, "vices far outpace virtues" is one of the lines I use in Wild for Austen.

Breckyn: The sexual content is what surprised me the most because they are—it's very restrained and very—I mean, there's almost nothing in the published novels, right? I mean, Maria—probably Maria running away with Henry Crawford is the most scandalous sexual-level thing that happens. But it's, it's subtext, and I mean, it's even—we even find that out in a newspaper that doesn't actually name anybody. It's so coy, and I think as like a 15-year-old reader, so much of that went over my head. I didn't even know that anyone was having sex in an Austen novel at any point. I didn't think that it was happening. But it is right there in black and white on the page in the juvenilia. Just the adultery and the running away and just all that stuff.

Devoney: Little like cannibalism here and there, you know, I mean—

Breckyn: Doesn't a mother feed her children with her own fingers or something?

Devoney: Or they—yeah, they help themselves to her fingers, which shows her that they might be hungry and that she herself might be hungry, right? Anyway. But I think the fact that women are the most active wrongdoers, if we want to, you know, look at conventional morality, is also just humorous and funny and a sendup. Everything is, you know, over the top in these texts. And wild. I think wild applies here.

Breckyn: Absolutely. So, this is an interesting little bit of Austen lore that we've never talked about on the podcast before. Sophia Sentiment. Can you give us a little bit of overview of that and why you chose to include it in your book?

Devoney: Absolutely. And I'm going to call her Sophia [pronounces name as Soph-eye-a]. I think—

Breckyn: Oh, Sophia. Sorry, I knew about Maria, but I didn't know about Sophia.

Devoney: There's some room for debate here, but I'm going to say Sophia.

Breckyn: Go ahead. That makes—that makes sense.

Devoney: If anybody wants to correct me and tell me why I'm wrong with Sophia and Maria, I'm happy to hear it, but—so, the theory about Sophia Sentiment first emerged about 50 years ago through a scholar named Zachary Cope, and he floated the theory that Jane Austen may have first published a piece of writing in her teens. And I'm surprised that you haven't talked about this in the podcast. It's surprising more Janeites don't know about this, although some know it, right? I mean, some know this.

Breckyn: I mean, I've read it, and I think it's plausible. I totally think it is. But I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Devoney: Yeah. So, just to give people who don't know what this is a little background, Jane Austen's older brother James published a college periodical called The Loiterer. And this was in 1789 and 90. And he acknowledged at the end of 60 issues that he was the author of half of the numbers and that he was the editor. And then it was published in book form, so it had some staying power; this was not uncommon with periodicals of this day. But the theory is that Jane Austen might have written one mock letter to the editor.

So, a fake letter with a pseudonym, Sophia Sentiment, that was published in March 1989 [1789]. And it's just, you know, a few hundred words, 700 words, I think, about—and it appears to be a hilarious—well, I think it is a hilarious sendup of Oxford's male-oriented student culture and of The Loiterer as a magazine. So, basically what the letter writer does is ask the editor to give more content that would appeal to readers outside of Oxford, but also that would appeal to women readers and a very stereotypical woman reader. So sentimental fiction and love stories.

Devoney: And I did pull a section, just a short section from the letter to read, if you want me to go ahead and do that.

Breckyn: Oh, please.

Devoney: Nothing better than including Austen's own words, right? So—well, if they are hers, which I think the argument—

Breckyn: Asterisk

Devoney: I think the argument is strong and intriguing. So, Sophia Sentiment writes, "let us see some nice affecting stories, relating the misfortunes of two lovers, who died suddenly, just as they were going to church. Let the lover be killed in a duel, or lost at sea, or you may make him shoot himself, just as you please; and as for his mistress, she will of course go mad; or if you will, you may kill the lady, and let the lover run mad; only remember, whatever you do, that your hero and heroine must possess a great deal of feeling, and have very pretty names."

Breckyn: I mean, that is the exact same voice as the juvenilia and even—

Devoney: Truly.

Breckyn: And even Northanger Abbey. I mean, well, the line that came to mind is "run mad as often as you choose, but do not faint." I mean, she uses "run mad," that same phrase, in there. I mean, I'm not saying it is Jane Austen, but to me it sounds like the same person who wrote the juvenilia and Northanger Abbey.

Devoney: And in the chapter I try to run through the pro and con arguments that have been made in the past so that readers could make up their mind. But I agree with you; I think strong connections between the language there and the language in the juvenilia and—that would suggest a connection, wouldn't it?

Breckyn: Yeah, and what is—and Catherine Morland says in Northanger Abbey when she talks about she doesn't like to read history because there's all these wars and hardly any women at all. Remember that line that she uses. And to me it sounds like the same young girl—

Devoney: A similar naive reader, making a serious point.

Breckyn: Yeah, no, I love it. I think that's such a fun little thing. I don't know if there—we will ever be able to know definitively. Is there anything that could ever arise that would be like, yes, it's definitely—I guess, a handwritten manuscript or something?

Devoney: Yeah, I—for 50 years people have been looking for something concrete, and it hasn't come. But there are ways that—stylistically and even stylometry have been used to try to make a case, and, you know, maybe there'll be more in that direction, too.

Breckyn: That's fun. It's always fun. It is fun to have unsolved mysteries, right? But then what would scholars do if everything was already solved?

Devoney: Indeed.

Breckyn: So I, I laughed when I saw your chapter title for Mansfield Park. You call it "Bewildering," which—it's fair. You talk about how the novel isn't wild as much for its content as for the difficult arguments and rousing debates that it sparks. So, what is it about Mansfield Park that gets readers in such a tizzy?

Devoney: Right. Arguably, Mansfield Park should not be in a book about Austen's wildness. I think it's her least wild text from a content perspective. But the fact that it starts—regularly starts—arguments, which is how I put it at the opening, and that this is from the very first, gives it a solid place in any conversation we're going to have about what's wild in a sense of bewildering and what's wild in a sense of ongoing fights. What today we call the Fanny Wars, right? It's like an actual thing among Janeites, the Fanny Wars. But I start the chapter with the opinions that Austen collected on Mansfield Park. She sort of crowdsourced responses to both Mansfield Park and Emma among readers in her circle or friends of friends. And the ones that I point to and that I most love are from her sister, Cassandra, and her mother. Her sister, Cassandra, says that she is fond of Fanny, but Jane's own mother thought Fanny insipid. And I just—I just love that one-word takedown, right? Boom, yeah. So, the Fanny Wars started in Austen's own family. Again, I know some people read these opinions very carefully and know this well, but I think, again, what I see about the bewilderment that readers have in response to Mansfield Park or readers in conversation have is that it's positive again.  It's a—it starts good trouble. It starts good fights.

Breckyn: Well. And I think it would be fair to say that, again, on the surface, maybe Mansfield Park or Fanny doesn't seem that wild, but Fanny has a tumultuous inner life. She is—even if she's not as demonstrative as Marianne and just like crying and weeping and getting sick and falling down hills and stuff—I mean, she is in an almost constant state of panic because so many things are happening around her, and people are making bad decisions, and she wants to do the right thing, and she's—she's got a lot going on internally, even if on the surface it doesn't seem like that much.

Devoney: Oh, that's so—that's so good. That's a great way of putting it. Although, you know, she does cry when she's confronted by Sir Thomas, right? She cries.

Breckyn: It comes out in tears sometimes, but not nearly as much as she would like to, I think.

Devoney: Yes. Is she timid? Is she boring? Is she quiet? Probably. Does she stick to her principles in ways that show great strength? Also yes.

Breckyn: Absolutely.

Devoney: So she may be admirable, but I think some people don't like her because she's no fun.

Breckyn: Yeah.

Devoney: You know?

Breckyn: Well, and then that's what Mary Crawford is for, and she has a little too much fun, I would say. But it's okay. I know that people have very strong opinions in both directions about Mansfield Park, and we'll just let everybody have their own opinion about it.

Devoney: Absolutely.

Breckyn: Okay, so, your next section is about her wild family. And Austen has some crazy family history, and you devote a whole section to this. She's got a fashionable cousin whose first husband was guillotined during the French Revolution, an aunt who was arrested for shoplifting, a brother who became Admiral of the Fleet in the Royal Navy, which is like the highest rank that you could achieve. So, what are some of your favorite stories from that research, and how do you think that Austen's family influenced her work?

Devoney: Yeah, I think I'm most proud of the things I found unearthed digging into stories about Austen's brothers, slavery, and abolition. And some people have read those before when they came out in the popular press, but I've revised them here. And I really feel like it's important to find new facts and reframe old stories. And that's what I think this section of the book does. So the Aunt Leigh shoplifting charge—I try to recreate that in that chapter. I found a few new little things—although there is very little to go on—but some new things that I've tried to reframe and make sense of.

But I'm especially proud of the things that I've put together about the people Austen knew in London, probably through Henry and Eliza Austen. And some of these are in the biographies, but they're there as a sentence or two sentences or a paragraph, and they really deserve several thousand words and their own digging into, and so that's what I've done here. So, they include a famous radical politician, a retired opera diva, and an international spy. And making sense of what Austen would have seen and would have done in these circles is a lot of speculation, but who these people were is hard fact. And that is wild.

Breckyn: Yeah. And, well, to go back to talk about her family—to go back to the juvenilia—how surprising it can be when you read it after you've read her mature novels—if you understand the environment that she grew up in, the juvenilia make way more sense. She was living in, like, a boys’ boarding school. And she—first of all, she had a ton of brothers. And then her father also has a bunch of boys just running around. And if you've ever gotten more than two boys together in the same room, you'll know just—they just amplify off each other, and it's loud. And what would they have been singing and talking about, and their theatricals, and what would—what would they have been reading and sharing with Jane? And she would have been witnessing this sort of like, rambunctious, boy-heavy environment. And I think that sort of helps explain the juvenilia as well.

Devoney: Totally. Totally. And I think that the scholar Azar Hussein has counted almost 20—I think it's 18—different male pupils who would have cycled in and out over the years. So, yeah, absolutely. She was raised in a boys’ boarding school as well as in a, you know, a clergyman's home with her own siblings. There's—that's a lot.

Breckyn: Yeah. And I think—and there's a lot of boys' humor in the juvenilia, even though I think it is, like, amazingly feminist, with you said, how many different strong female characters and not all of them—almost none of them are good. They're sort of morally gray at best—sort of like Lady Susan. But, yeah, you can definitely see that—when you understand that aspect of her biography, I think you understand those works a little more.

Devoney: Yeah. And it's not all rosy. I mean, there are things in here that are definitely not rosy. And I have a chapter looking at some of her collateral descendants and the things that they did to try to hinder women's access to education and to the right to vote. And I think it's important that we look not only at the things that are, you know, fun and delightful, but the things that are troubling and that raise historical questions about her life and legacy that don't always make us feel good.

Breckyn: Well, and I know that's another thing that makes people a little uncomfortable about Mansfield Park—is the ties to slavery and Antigua and stuff like that. But were you saying that in one of your chapters there's some hope there maybe that there is some abolition work in the Austen family.

Devoney: Oh, unquestionably. So, starting in 2021, I published a series of three pieces on Henry, then on Charles, and then on Frances Austen, her—three of her brothers, who after her death, all affiliated themselves with public anti-slavery activism. So this idea that the Austen family was apolitical and had nothing to do with any of these questions of the larger world, that they were conservative Tories who stayed at home and, you know, didn't participate, is not true. And I do think that although there are nominal ties—not economic ties, but social ties—to a family of enslavers in the West Indies that we really need to make more sense of and that many scholars, including John Avery Jones, have been making sense of, that this is overblown. The sense that George Austen was a trustee of a plantation that was run on enslaved people's labor is not true. He was not a trustee of a plantation. He was a co-trustee of a marriage settlement of the woman that that enslaver's son married. So it becomes economically less direct.

Devoney: The estimate is that about 20% of wealth in this period in Britain directly derived from colonial slavery. So about a fifth. The Austens never did. I don't think George Austen ever believed that he was going to benefit in any way, but they certainly were related to and affiliated with enslavers in the second half of the 18th century. By the 19th century, I think her family's position has shifted. And I think it's important that we understand this when we say, was Jane Austen or was Austen's family pro-slavery, anti-slavery? Over the course of 50 years, I think we can see a shift. So, I think the answer should probably be both, but it depends on the years. And once we get into the siblings her own age, it definitely shifts for half of them toward a anti- slavery abolitionist set of activities—public activities and beliefs. And I think that's important that we recognize.

Breckyn: Yeah, that's interesting. And, like, that is an area of Austen scholarship that I know very little about, so I need to look more into that.

Devoney: Yeah, so two of my pieces appeared in the Times Literary Supplement and one appeared in what's called the Conversation. And I do hope people will read and make up their own minds about what these facts mean. But the fact is that her brothers were publicly involved in anti-slavery activism in the years just after her death.

Breckyn: And yeah, that's helpful, because people—I mean, so—so little is said directly about it in Mansfield Park. Again, it's sort of subtext, and there's one little conversation, but it's there. It's always lurking in the background. And so you do kind of wonder, like, well, what did Jane Austen think? I wish she had told us more. And we always wish that she would give us more than she gives us. But that's also part of her appeal.

Devoney: Exactly.

Breckyn: Yeah. Well, that's really interesting. Okay, so the last section of your book is about Austen's afterlives. We're not going to get into it here, but I will tell listeners there's a section on Austen erotica, and that's all I'm going to say about that. But while it doesn't surprise me that there is Austen-inspired lingerie, it did surprise me to learn how often Austen shows up in the British and American legal systems. So why is Austen so often quoted in court cases?

Devoney: So, I do want to just clarify. The "so often" applies to the contemporary U.S. legal scene. And I go into what various legal scholars and people who've looked at the history of literature and court cases find. So, Austen is one of the more cited figures in various documents of legal life. And there are people who've written about this extensively and asked why. And I think one of the reasons is because she's popular, right? Yeah. So if you mention her, people in the room—or you mention Shakespeare—people in the room might immediately think, if they're listening to this on a jury or reading it in a judgment, well, that's persuasive, because it comes from a source we all agree is good or great or known. So I think that might be one reason. That it's—

Breckyn: Like a cultural touchstone, like she's reached that status.

Devoney: But without giving away too much, what I talk about in the book is that I've uncovered new things about her book—about one work of her fiction being used to sway a jury in an English courtroom in the 1820s. So, as with many things—

Breckyn: That soon after? Wow.

Devoney: Yes, indeed. So, as with many things, we think this has started yesterday, but in fact, it goes, you know, back almost to her lifetime. And I think in this case that I go into—and I hope it's a fun story; it's an interesting story, definitely—that it was because the defense lawyer was trying to persuade the jury and, so, went into a rendition of one of her novels to try to do that.

Breckyn: That's interesting. And people will have to just find out whether or not it worked. Yeah, I think that that's a really interesting testament to her, her long-lasting influence and to her broad appeal—is that people assume that they can quote her or mention one of her books and that their listeners will know what they're talking about. She's—you know, it's not a niche reference. She's Jane Austen, and she's up there with Shakespeare, right? And I've done an episode recently on Jane Austen and Shakespeare, because I think they are two names that deserve to be put together for their popularity, and their long-lasting legacies, and just for their adaptability as well—just because they, they both are so good at those, those characters and those universal truths that transcend their own time period.

Devoney: Unquestionably. And one of the myths that I hope we can do away with once and for all is this idea that she was ignored until 1870 and the publication of that memoir. This—you'll still hear this repeated by some very smart people, and it's just not true. And I definitely, I hoped, started the way to demolish this in the Making of Jane Austen, which came out in 2017—joined other scholars trying to demolish this myth of her having been ignored before 1870. But I add to that in Wild for Austen in some ways that I hope are equally persuasive. Austen became a figure—and a public figure—almost right away and certainly far sooner than 1870.

Breckyn: I mean, in her own lifetime, the Prince Regent liked her work. And also she was receiving a letter from Stanhope? Is that his name, that librarian? He was like the royal librarian.

Devoney: James Stanier Clarke. Yeah, James Stanier Clarke.

Breckyn: Whatever, I was way off. That one, yeah. So, she was on people's radars from the beginning. Yeah. Okay, so I guess this is kind of like a broad wrap-up question, but you study her, her reception and legacy a lot. That's what The Making of Jane Austen—I read that back when it came out and that was fantastic. So, what do we—what do the many remakes and rewrites and the reimaginings of her work say about her and about her readers? Like, what, what do we learn by studying those, those sort of tangential things—like this aura around her. You give that your scholarly attention. What do we learn from it?

Devoney: Well, I think one of the things we learn is humbling, which is that we're not the first, almost always, to have had this conversation.

Breckyn: Absolutely.

Devoney: I mean, some new details are unearthed, like I was saying about abolition and slavery. Some new details come to light and give us new ways to read, and I think that will always be true. I think we will always find new ways in our own context to read her differently. But the humbling part is that it has an incredibly long history. But I don't think that history is universal or makes her universal. I think it's particular and I think it's shifting. And when we study the legacy and we look at the ways that she was read in the past or groups of readers read her in the past, I think we can see the possible shifting nature of our own readings of her. And this is really the idea of her from mild to wild. I'm not looking for us to settle this exactly. You know? I think there are some aspects of her that deserve to be called "mild." But I think when we see the ways that her texts are reinterpreted, we really can grasp what she means to readers now and point it—that points to what she might mean in the future.

Breckyn: No, I think that's a—that's a great point, and I love you continuing to add to this ever growing body of Austen-related literature. And when people are like, do we need another adaptation? Do we need another podcast? Do we need a...? It's like, yes. The answer is always yes. We just need more Jane Austen, more people talking about her, more people just joining this conversation, because it's, it's always going to be fascinating. It's always going to be funny. It's always going to be worth our time. I think.

Devoney: I don't know about the "always" part. I'll just add that, Breckyn. I don't know about the "always" part. And I do have a chapter where I think about this and muse over this. But I hope that if it's not "always," that whatever might replace is just as generative. I think these texts have become a really beautiful touchstone for many people who might not necessarily agree with each other on other things. But they allow us to have conversations and to talk about value and meaning and fun. And I, I hope that continues. I very much hope that continues to, you know, long past the 250th to whatever the next celebration is, when I will be dead.

Breckyn: It'll be floating in space somewhere, living on Mars or something. "Jane Austen on Mars"—I would read that. I would read that adaptation. It'd probably be amazing. Thanks for coming on the show today, Devoney. This has been a lot of fun. Where can listeners learn more about you and your work?

Devoney: Oh, thanks for asking that. You know, of course I would say St. Martin's Press would want me to say that after September 2 Wild for Austen can be purchased at your favorite bookstore, and before then it could be pre-ordered. But I have a website, devonylooser.com; it's D-E-V-O-N-E-Y. And that has my contact information and a link to my free Substack newsletter, which is called Counterpoise. And there I send out occasional updates about all things Jane and history's strong women. And I do love to hear from Janeites. I hope to see some of you in person in Baltimore at the next AGM for JASNA. And I know I'll see you there, Breckyn, and we will celebrate.

Breckyn: It's going to be the biggest party. That's so great. Thank you, Devoney.

Devoney: Thank you so much. Breckyn.

Breckyn: Hello, dear listeners. I just wanted to ask you a favor. If you've enjoyed listening to Austen Chat, please consider giving us a five-star review on Apple Podcasts and leave a comment saying what you like about the show. The more positive reviews we get, the more people will see and hear about the podcast, and the more Austen fans we'll find to join our community. Though Emma Woodhouse may have disagreed, I side with Mr. Weston. One cannot have too large a party or too many Janeites.

As a final reminder, JASNA is now on YouTube. So be sure to follow us there, as well as on Instagram and Facebook, for updates about the podcast and new episodes. And if you have any comments, questions, or suggestions, please send us a line at our email address, podcast@jasna.org.

[Theme music]