I was initially interested in reading this book, however my tastes have shifted and I do not think I will be able to get to it now. Many thanks to the publisher for sending me a digital copy!

This was a beautifully written book about one of our most loved female writers. I thought I knew a fair bit about Jane Austen but this biography really was in depth!

Lucy Worsley is one of my favourite historians and I love the enthusiasm and passion she puts in to her work. A great read for anyone who is a fan of history and Jane Austen!

Another day, another Jane Austen biography, this time coming from the undisputed high queen of BBC history documentaries, Lucy Worsley.  I had noticed this one being heavily trailed when I visited the Jane Austen House Museum - unsurprisingly, it also came with an accompanying television special.  Given Worsley's long-standing hobby of poking round old houses and talking about the lives of those who inhabited them, it makes sense that she has chosen to tell the story of Austen's life through an investigation of the places that she lived.  Linking these together, Worsley considers what the theme of the home meant to Austen both as a person and as an author.  Of course, the bigger question though has to be what, if anything, marks this biography out from the crowd?

Worsley is clearly a long-term Austen aficionado, even noting with a certain amount of breathlessness that the two of them had attended the same school, although two centuries apart.  Indeed, Jane Austen At Home is a truly warm-hearted biography, full of admiration and respect for its subject.  Like so many others, Worsley seems to have her own ideas about the misconceptions which have gathered around Austen's life, noting that the Hollywood and BBC adaptations have tended to film in houses which would have been far bigger than the ones that Austen would have visited, let alone lived in.  Over time, we have raised Austen to a far grander life to the one she actually lived.

The concept of the Big House is an important one within Austen's fiction - Elizabeth Bennet jokes that she fell in love with Mr Darcy upon seeing his 'beautiful grounds at Pemberley' and although we know she is not being entirely serious, we see what she was getting at.  Getting a home no matter its size means a lot to Austen's more impoverished heroines - Charlotte Lucas will even put up with Mr Collins to achieve this - something which is interesting since Austen's own domestic set-up was unstable for years.  After her father retired from Steventon, he decamped with his wife and daughters to Bath, apparently against Jane's will.  Once there, the family moved from lodging to lodging, each less pleasant than the last.  After his death, the women's circumstances declined still further until they were finally given a cottage by Jane's elder brother Edward.  Austen legend has long had it that Jane's writing is divided into two creative periods, one while living in the rectory at Steventon as young woman and a second once they had finally found their home at Chawton.  Supposedly, she needed a home to have the space to write.  Worsley explores why this might have been - questions of physical space must have been in place in cramped lodgings, particularly if, as Austen legend has always had it, Aunt Jane was so private about her work that she could never bear that anyone might see it.

Still, Worsley dives into the family dynamics within the family with great gusto, speculating on Austen's relationship with her sisters-in-law, pondering what it meant that her brother George Austen was sent away.  She imagines the family theatricals, the drama around Edward Austen's adoption and her sister Cassandra's ill-fated engagement to Tom Fowle.  She pores over the letters from Austen's various brothers and decries their miserliness towards their mother and sisters.  While reading this, I could not help but hear the voice of Worsley herself throughout, particularly in the way in which she concludes paragraphs with acerbic comments which would fit in nicely in one of her documentaries.  She scolds biographer David Nokes for describing Austen as a 'plump dumpy woman' based on the rear sketch by Cassandra, noting that all he is really saying is that Austen 'doesn't look like a twentieth-century film star'.  Her use of exclamation marks and would-be cheeky remarks niggle in terms of style, such as the comment about how gusts of wind could make a muslin dress reveal 'the wearer's bum'.  Interestingly for someone who has tried their hand at writing fiction, I found Worsley's prose style to be less than smooth.

I did feel a certain sense of fatigue though when Worsley suggested that while she held it to be highly unlikely that Austen ever had sex with a man, she could not rule out lesbian sex.  She explains about how the 'stakes would have been much lower', that this was an age when 'women very often shared beds' and that people were 'much less worried about lesbian sex in general', before conceding at the end of the paragraph that while the 'door of possibility' remains ajar, it is 'only by the very tiniest crack, and only in the absence of evidence either way'.  Ever since that ludicrous article about Jane sharing a bed with her sister Cassandra, the suggestion has been trotted out - can Austen hold no interest as a writer and a person without the world finding some way to sexualise her?  Certainly, Worsley is eager to point out all of the rude jokes that Austen obviously understood.  Not just the 'rears and vices' in Mansfield Park, but when Maria Bertram is visiting Sotherton, she climbs over a fence to follow Henry Crawford, only for Fanny to warn her, 'You will hurt yourself on those spikes'.  Worsley intones solemnly, 'And Maria does, in every sense'. Later she explains how the sea is synonymous with sex in Austen's fiction and that for Georgian gentlewomen, being buffeted by waves 'was a source of physical pleasure'.  It all felt like a slightly lame attempt to titillate and shock.

One of the weaknesses of the book is how far it seems to echo Paula Byrne's The Real Jane Austen: A Life in Small Things.  Byrne's 2013 book took a similarly domestic focus, looking at various artefacts from Austen's life to build a clearer picture of who she was as a person and a writer.  I was surprised though to realise that others have felt the same - Private Eye actually came out and accused her of direct plagiarism.  It seems unlikely that Worsley would have done so deliberately, but the situation does highlight the challenge of producing something fresh from such well-worn material.  Byrne has a smoother writing style than Worsley and has a more in-depth knowledge around Jane Austen herself.  On the areas where they differed - such as which family member was the subject of the not-so-flattering portrait of Elizabeth I (Byrne thought Aunt Leigh-Perrot while Worsley favoured Jane's mother), I tended to side with Byrne.

Worsley approaches interesting material though when she considers how times were changing during Austen's life.  While nieces and nephews would anxiously tell biographers that their grandmother waited for company inside, Worsley points out that Austen's mother kept cows and had to work the land to make sure  her children were all fed.  There were recipe books around the house which the ladies obviously used.  With the advent of the Victorian era, Austen's descendants would come to feel embarrassed of their famous relative not merely because she wrote but also because she was insufficiently refined.  Jane had domestic duties which she frequently complained of and although her nephew emphasised that the ladies of his family 'had nothing to do with the mysteries of the stew-pot or the preserving pan', he is pretending towards a gentility which his family did not at that time possess.

However, there is a certain superficiality to Worsley's pronouncements on Austen's romantic affairs, her certainty that were five suitors (at least one of whom I had never read anything of before) and that Jane refused them all because she wanted her novels to be her progeny - it felt like a very twenty-first century conclusion and seems to have little basis in evidence.  Likewise for Worsley's decision that Austen was 'let off' household responsibilities by her sister, mother and housemate Martha Lloyd because of her writing talent.  I think I might have enjoyed the television documentary but I found myself thinking that I had read a lot about the contemporary context in Eavesdropping on Jane Austen's England and then most of what was specific to Austen, I knew from The Real Jane Austen.  I also found myself thinking of Yaffe's observation through meeting lots of Austen fans in Among The Janeites, that people tend to see themselves in Austen.  Worsley got herself in hot water a few years ago for saying 'I have been educated out of the natural reproductive function. I get to spend my time doing things I enjoy.'  While I have absolutely no issue with her decision, it struck me that in this book, she seemed to impute a similar outlook onto her interpretation of Jane Austen and this seems a risky approach for a historian.

It seems to me that far too much of this review has been spent picking holes in a book which I actually did enjoy.  Worsley writes with real enthusiasm and has clearly read the novels closely.  Jane Austen At Home contrasts sharply with Jane Austen The Secret Radical, particularly in its frequent quotations from the other traditional Austen scholars of whom Helena Kelly, author of Secret Radical, seemed to think so little.  Rather than being dismissed in a footnote, Claire Tomalin's Jane Austen: A Life is praised as 'a work of great perception and subtlety', although a few sentences later, Worsley completely disagrees with her.

Still, I mentally raised my hands and cheered when Worsley observed how something 'a little strange happens to [Austen's] story-telling' when it comes to the crucial moment in her marriage plots - she suddenly steps back.  It becomes 'abrupt, almost perfunctory'.  The true excitement comes from the domestic set-up afterwards - Fanny Price finds the parsonage 'as dear to her heart' as anything else.  Yet Jane herself did not 'marry a house' as Worsley puts it, since she turned down Harris Bigg-Wither.  Worsley points out though that in her fiction, Austen's novels built a meritocracy, since in Persuasion, Sir Walter Elliot's improvidence means he has to leave Kellynch Hall and let the Navy move in.  Another fascinating observation Worsley made though was that the heroines she created while living in Steventon - the Bennet girls and Catherine Moreland - are quite immune to the fact that they will be leaving their homes upon marriage.  Those she wrote while living in Chawton, after all of the years of upheaval - Emma, Fanny Price and Anne Elliot - all tend to have more complex feelings about the idea.  Home really is a state of mind.

One could almost fancy oneself as following in Worsley's footsteps as she pottered from the shadow of where Steventon rectory once stood, on to Bath, to Lyme and then to Chawton.  She reveals details of what each place would have been during Austen's time which are truly original.  Austen's books were grounded in the real world which she saw going on around her, but to the modern reader much of this context has been lost.  I liked too how Worsley tries to tap into this network of spinsters - Jane Austen, Cassandra, Martha Lloyd and the Bigg-Wither girls - who tried to support each other where they could.  Being an unmarried woman in Regency Britain was not for the faint-hearted - the more one reads of it, the more one could almost excuse Lucy Steele her bloody-mindedness - so it is heartening to read more of how they banded together.

Jane Austen at home is a light-hearted and accessible exploration not just of Austen's life and routines but also of the Regency era as a whole.  Tracing through the homes that Austen walked through, it is thought-provoking to consider how different her life was, how enclosed her circumstances as a female and how utterly forgotten she would have been if she had never lifted her pen.  Worsley is a speculative writer, but her suppositions and theories are not unpleasant.  Worsley has written a pretty, pleasant book about a writer who she clearly adores and if feels more than anything like a retread, she would hardly be the first.  First-timers to an Austen biography need look no further.

I watch an hour-long TV documentary which tied-in with this book. But I found it barely covered anything in comparison with this fascinating history. Unlike the author I am not a fan of Jane Austen but his did not prevent me wringing every ounce of enjoyment out of this.
JA is a recognisable figure for us to follow from birth through her upbringing and that of her siblings and to journey on her precarious rise and fall of fortune with her. Fascinating insights to the life of a gentile woman of insufficient means o keep to the social level it is expected she will mix in, who must strive for appearances sake. The wearing of cap reduces hairdressing costs, the need to give away a copy of her newly published book reduces her stock of gifts etc.
We gather that JA was not a domestic goddess and found the round of household duties she didn't manage to avoid were viewed as a hinderance to her writing.
We follow her from the young lady who is escorted by her brother to the older, business savvy woman who is able to hire her own transport but is dragooned into an effusive dedication of her upcoming book (to the Prince Regent).

Alongside all of these personal events is a fascinating insight into how life changed for women during this period. JA's comparative wealth is placed alongside the income of others during the period and there are insights into public feeling about the monarchy of the time and how fashions were changing along with an update of the locations and their state now.
.I'd really recommend it because it is not at all stuffy and has some wry comments.and is told with the author's skill at conveying historical events as something she could post on Facebook - along with her being a self-confessed "Janeite" and her enthusiasm shows

A beautiful evocation of a lost world. Georgian England illustrated in clear, compelling detail. Lucy Worsley conjures Jane Austen from the airy shadows of her surroundings and gives her a local habitation, drawing a convincing picture of a woman who died in relative obscurity, but soon became one of the most widely read and fervently admired writers of all time.

Triple Austin

Lucy Worsley Jane Austen at Home Hodder and Soughton Published 02 June 2017 (Given to me by the publisher in exchange for an honest review)
Paula Byrne The Genius of Jane Austen Harper Collins Published (given to me by the publisher in exchange an honest review)
2017 marks the 200th anniversary of the death of Jane Austen. So, expect Jane Austen to be at the forefront of cultural attention. But, when is she not? You see her face on many tee-towels, mugs, etc, etc. Her books are continually turned into; films, theatre productions and TV shows. Her face appears on a bank note. But, how much do we really know about Jane Austen? In this new crop of books, concerning different aspects of Austen life, Worsley and Byrne attempt to cast a new light on the life of this well-known author.

Lucy Worsley, traces Jane Austen’s life through the houses she lived in and her domestic life. Worsley takes on a trip around the various locations that make up Austen’s world, examining her life through every day documents, such as; diaries, recipes, budgets, and personal letters. She goes from Steventon, where Jane was born and lived for the first years if her life, to Chawton, and Winchester, where Austen spent her final years. Worsley looks at the struggles that Jane faced simply to survive, and prosper, on a limited budget.

Lucy Worsley mentions that the Austen’s often preformed plays. She points out that Jane Austen herself wrote theatrical works. Paula Byrne expounds upon this theme. Byrne contextualises Austen’s work with an analysis of the theatrical tradition that existed during Austen’s life and analyses the productions that the Austen’s, and their circle, performed. Byrne argues that the theatre played a large role in Jane Austen’s; life, education, and literary works. Before, examining how Austen’s work has inspired Hollywood, exploring the adaptions that have been made of Austen’s novels.
These two books are both interesting reads. If you want an overview of Austen’s domestic life then the Worsley is the one you should pick up. If you require an exploration of the work, and the works that inspired them, then the Byrne is for you. It would be great to read these books together. It would be great to read these two books in conjunction with Austen’s own works. Both books would make great reading for your Austen summer.

Jane Austen at Home is everything popular history should be--accessible, highly readable, and infinitely interesting. Lucy Worsley writes with such passion for her subject that it practically jumps from the page, her research is sound and her writing excellent. This book is perfect for Jane Austen super-fans, history non-fiction lovers, and anyone who wants to find out more about one of the most intriguing and well-known of female writers.

I found this a very engaging study of Jane Austen's life - Lucy Worsley's writing style was as fluent and readable as ever and she picked out details which had been overlooked in previous biographies to establish her own reading of Austen's life. I liked the details she picked from Austen's novels as well, which were used to demonstrate Jane's preoccupations but not put words into her mouth (a common problem with biographies of female authors, which often treat their heroines as mouthpieces for their own views). The book gave me a new view of Jane Austen's life and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

A thoroughly readable and enjoyable account of Jane Austen and her world, with a well-judged balance of scholarship and anecdote. The tone is a little breathless at times, to be sure – but then it is Lucy Worsley and the occasional exclamation mark is to be expected. I’m not sure that we learn anything new here but it’s all presented in a fun and accessible way. Worsley is a populist historian and this is a populist book, but none the worse for that. I really enjoyed it, learnt quite a lot, and found that Jane Austen came alive in a way she sometimes doesn’t in more academic biographies.

So before I start this review I should probably admit I am a little bit of a fangirl when it comes to Lucy Worsley. I love her TV shows and her enthusiasm for her subjects. She is a must-watch for me and now a must-read with Jane Austen at Home, which I loved.

One of the reasons I loved it was that it made Austen accessible. I know very little about her life and have tried to read a few biographies in the past but I found them dry. Here, Austen came alive to me, with her life told through the places she lived and the people she lived with.

Of the places, there were quite a few and not all as I might have imagined in my mind. After the retirement and then death of her father, for many years Jane and her sister Cassandra (as spinsters) and their mother were basically homeless, moving from house to house and relying on family members to put them up or pay their rent.

Some of these places were grand indeed, others not so much with some being described as cold, dark and damp – not necessarily conducive to writing some of the greatest novels I’ve ever read. But then life for Georgian women wasn’t conducive in general to writing other than letters.

There were domestic chores, a lot, and household management to deal with as well as the perception that their job was to grow up and get married. Women who wrote weren’t looked up to but often looked down upon and Jane lived most of her life as a writer anonymously, only coming out of the shadows later on when her books had become popular.

One of the things Jane did have on her side though was her family, who not only provided her with a place to live but supported her in her writing. It was her father who bought her her writing desk and initially acted as her agent (before this role was taken up by her brother) and her sister Cassandra was her life-long best friend who took up more than her fair share of chores to allow Jane time to write.

There were still family politics (when are they not?) but for the most part Jane seems to have had a loving, caring, family and this was nice to read about, making her seem human and not just a slightly mythical figure, sat alone at her desk. Worsley manages to make Jane a real person, someone with a great sense of humour (often quite wicked) who likes to enjoy herself (money permitting).

What she also shows is a woman who knows her own mind and stands by her decisions, including not to marry (unfortunately, it isn’t completely clear if her writing drove this decision, though it seems likely to have, as so much of her life is known through letters and her sister destroyed a lot of these).

At the end of this book, I found that, for me, Austen is a woman to be admired and one who is not now as cold and mysterious as she first appeared. Perhaps this will not be such a surprise to Janeites and the like, but I think it will be too many, all of whom I hope read, learn from, and enjoy this book.

My favourite historian on one of my most favourite authors. Amazingly detailed and interesting account of Jane's world and the world she knew so well, The Home. In a time where women were almost invisible, Jane Austen managed to forge a path that has left her literary work still known and loved to this day. Her comments on the Prince Regent and his wife had me giggling like a school girl, just like her character of Mr Collins had me laughing when I was 12. Lucy has done herself proud again, well research and written and again she manages to take an area of the past and enliven it with wit and interesting moments. Here's to Lucy's next work- another diamond no doubt!

A brilliantly researched and intimate insight into the life of one of my favourite novelists.
The adoration Worsley has for Austen really comes across, and I'm certain would infect even the. A warm and informative read, really enjoyed it. I highly recommend to any fan of Austen!

Darwin is out and Jane Austen is in, at least as the new face of the £10 note this year. The timing is no accident, as 2017 is the bicentenary of Jane Austen’s death and there is bound to be renewed interest in her life and work. Not that Jane Austen is ever really out of fashion. Last year, for example, saw the release of ‘Love and Friendship’ (based on the novella ‘Lady Susan’), the latest in a long line of stage, television and big-screen adaptations of Austen’s work.

Why does Austen continue to command a large audience? In the case of TV and cinema undoubtedly one factor is what has been termed ‘Big House Syndrome’: the idealised depiction of the world ‘upstairs, downstairs’ which not only affects Austen (with Lyme Hall providing the exterior and Sudbury Hall the interior shots of Pemberley for the much-loved 1995 BBC production of ‘Pride and Prejudice’) but many other period dramas, from ‘Brideshead Revisited’ (Castle Howard) to ‘Downton Abbey’ (Highclere).

In fact, as Paula Byrne has pointed out in her excellent ‘The Genius of Jane Austen’ (an expanded 2017 re-issue of her 2002 ‘Jane Austen and the Theatre’), the houses in Austen dramatisations tend to be too big as “the productions’ designers and location scouts failed to see that Austen speaks for the values of the lesser gentry and to scorn such idle, vain aristocrats as Lady Catherine de Bourgh (the embodiment of both pride and prejudice) and the Dowager Viscountess Dalrymple (in ‘Persuasion’).”

Lucy Worsley’s ‘Jane Austen at Home’ is a welcome attempt to ‘downsize’ Austen as author, placing her “in the context of the physical world of her [relatively humble] homes” in order the better to interpret her life. This approach yields real insight into the conditions in which Austen lived and wrote, as well as illuminating something of the more general social history of Regency England.

Where Worsley falls down is stylistically. Consider this passage:

“She [Jane] writes of some acquaintances, ‘all good humour and obligingness’, but mentions their inadequate dress sense, and hopes that they will follow the coming fashion of ‘rather longer petticoats than last year’. Those are literally the last words of her last letter - petticoats!”

One could object that Austen’s last words are not literally ‘petticoats’ because that is just one word and not even at the end of her last sentence. It is, however, the exclamation mark to which I take particular exception.

Exclamation marks – or exclamation points as they tend to be known in the U.S. – certainly have their place, and Austen herself often uses them but some writers, like Worsley, overuse them as a means of metaphorically jabbing the reader in the ribs (usually in order to ensure that they respond in the approved fashion).

Thus at various points the reader of ‘Jane Austen at Home’ is regaled with:

“Wrong, wrong, wrong!”
“Big mistake!”
“Horror!
“Thoughtless Henry!”
“Pitiful Fanny!”
“Poor Caroline!”
and so on.

It will thus come as no surprise to learn that Worsley entitles Chapter 25 “Published!”

‘Jane Austen at Home’ deserves to be published for the useful contribution it makes to Jane Austen studies. It’s just a pity that one of the greatest of literary stylists is sometimes serviced here by a form of gushing, breathless pre-pubescent prose that sounds like a parody of Angela Brazil.