I'm looking at this portrait of Jane Austen and thinking that the early-nineteenth century writer was pretty cute. I mean yeah, she looks all 1810 with that bonnet and stuff, but if I met her in a drawing room and heard her making the sorts of witty remarks she does in her novels, I would be smitten. Unfortunately, her publisher wouldn't.
The London Guardian reports:
So Trayler has ordered a gussied-up version of Jane for the new editions of Austen books. See below the fold for "new Jane."
Looks like they made her face skinnier, too. I'm as pragmatic as the next person, and I know that people judge books by their authors' looks. But Austen is an historical figure, and anybody buying her stuff is going to know that. Does the average Austen reader really care whether her portrait has make-up and long hair? I'd like to see the market research proving that this is really an issue.
Seriously, I think people who buy Austen books enjoy the fact that they are genuine historical artifacts. These readers, many of whom are probably avid romance readers, appreciate the idea of a real portrait of the author accompanying the book. You don't want your antique repainted to look "modern." You want it to look authentic. Boo on Wordsworth for tarting up Jane Austen.
Jane too plain for publishers [via London Guardian (Thanks, Sacha!)]