Austen, Mimetics, and Fanfiction (introduction to the blog)
Lately, I have been struck by the recurring thought that Jane Austen is treated unlike any other author. The many views of Janeites seem largely paradoxical at times. Jane Austen has been appropriated to communicate both alt right (https://www.chronicle.com/article/Alt-Right-Jane-Austen/239435) and liberal feminist (https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-jane-austen-can-teach-us-about-sexual-harassment-1514822957) ideals. She is heralded as mother of “chick lit” (Harmon, 201) and game theorist (https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/books/michael-chwe-author-sees-jane-austen-as-game-theorist.html).
The purpose of this blog is to examine Jane Austen’s own work, as well as her continued fandom, in relation to meme theory and fanfiction. If I can gain a better understanding of why and how ideas survive, than perhaps I can gain a better understanding of the cloud of truths which surround Austen. In this introductory post I will give a brief definition of meme theory and fanfiction, relate them to each other, and finally relate them back to Jane Austen, specifically her novels Northanger Abbey and Pride and Prejudice. Northanger Abbey because of its meta engagement with meme/fanfiction, and its general engagement with all things Austen (social class, marriage plot, sarcasm). Pride and Prejudice because it is arguably peak Austen fandom (who doesn’t swoon over Colin Firth’s Mr. Darcy?).
I’ll start with meme theory. Meme theory was first introduced by Richard Dawkins in his popular science book The Selfish Gene and it has continued to gain traction since. Dawkins presented meme theory to discuss culture in terms of genetics/Darwinism, and in doing so, he framed the possibility of a fit idea. Think back to whatever you’ve learned about Darwin in the past. Survival of the fittest. Dawkins explained meme “as a noun that conveys the idea of a unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of imitation” (Dawkins, 192). He even named memes to rhyme with genes. Dawkins explained that the part of an idea which make up a meme, is the thing about it which many individuals hold in common, as opposed to all of the disparate parts. When we think about the act of reading, we might think about reading different books in different languages, but generally, we all imagine the act of internally spelling out letters and words on a page which string together to create some larger meaning.
It must be noted, that considering culture in terms of Darwinism is a bit terrifying (Darwinism was used to justify racism, and colonialism generally, for a long time), and that shouldn’t be ignored (Dawkins does seem to ignore that fact, however). Thinking about the ways in which ideas are alive/act similarly to living organisms, however, doesn’t feel inherently harmful. So let us remember the ways in which dominant cultures can aid in the survival or death of particular memes as we go forward.
This brings me to fanfiction. Fanfiction are “stories produced by fans based on plot lines and characters from either a single source text or else a “canon” of works” (Thomas, 1). Fanfiction allow narrative worlds to be expanded upon (outside of the original text). When fanfiction meet internet platforms this expansion becomes basically limitless.
Fanfiction, in my opinion, are interesting to think about in relation to meme theory. They represent an expansion of ideas which are so obviously shaped by those who consume those same ideas. Fanfictions expand on the original meme, or multiple memes, which a book represents. In doing so fanfiction aids in the survival of the original meme(s). The more forms these memes are willing to take, the more people who interact with them, the more likely they are to be passed on. Simultaneously, fanfiction allow fans to play a role in potentially mutating the original meme. It makes sense that a meme (like genes!) would mutate over time to become better suited for their current environment. With fanfiction, these meme mutations can happen almost instantaneously. In What is Fanfiction and Why are People Saying Such Nice Things about it, Bronwen Thomas points out that “fan communities proudly boast about the influence they have on people’s engagements with the storyworlds about which they write”(10). Fanfiction, especially that which is written online, is not always created by the dominant culture, or even by the dominant fandom. Many platforms allow for different voices to contribute more equally. The interesting thing about Austen fandoms and fanfics, however, is that they “tend to be quite conservative and fiercely protective of the Austen legacy” (Thomas, 6).
So what is the central meme we can draw from or around Jane Austen? What is it that fans set out so fiercely to protect, even within their own fanfic? Let’s take a closer look at a couple of Austen’s novels to gain a better understanding of the stakes. Every Austen novel contains a marriage plot. Every Austen novel simultaneously contains a lot of wit and irony. It is not always certain how these two things interact, but their combination leave a lot of room for interpretation.
Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey functions through sarcasm and the marriage plot (as most of her novels do). Northanger Abbey, a kind of gothic fanfiction in its own right, ends with the marriage of Catherine and Mr. Tilney. Much of the novel’s tension resides in the uncertainty of romantic feelings between the two. A tension which moves the plot equally, however, is the central irony. Northanger Abbey begins, “no one who had ever seen Catherine Morland in her infancy, would have supposed her born to be an heroine”(Austen, 5). This beginning shows irony through a meta-awareness of format which continues throughout. Not long after this intro, the narrator openly defends novels, “I will not adopt that ungenerous and impolitic custom with novel writers, of degrading by their contemptuous censure the very performances, to the number of which they are themselves adding”(Austen, 22). In this, the narrator defends Catharine’s enjoyment of novels, while once again showing self-awareness of form.
Peak engagement with gothic fiction as a genre comes through at the points in which Catherine interacts with the Tilney’s own abbey. Catherine asks Henry Tilney if the abbey is “a fine old place, just like what one reads about” (Austen, 107), and Henry responds by explaining it as gothic, with “sliding panels and tapestry” (Austen, 107), “gloomy passages” (Austen, 108), and beds with “a funeral appearance” (Austen, 108). Although the abbey does not end up fitting these gothic descriptions, Catherine leans into every gothic mood which strikes her, eventually convincing herself that the General Tilney has murdered his late wife. By engaging with stereotypically gothic images and tone, Austen expands the world of gothic fiction in her own right. Northanger Abbey can thus be taken as a fanfiction, while the meme of gothic fiction is passed on.
Although similarly framed through irony, Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice is a more classic example of Austen as marriage plot meme. In Pride and Prejudice there are multiple proposal scenes, and the proposals themselves make up the major plot developments within the novel. The novel begins with the line, “it is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife” (Austen, 3). This line might be ridiculous, and obviously untrue, but it nevertheless alerts readers to the tensions to come. Elizabeth Bennet is proposed to three times, once by her cousin Mr. Collins, and twice by Mr. Darcy. Each proposal represents a peak in her character development. The first by Mr. Collin’s allows for her to the assert the separation of her own needs from her parents desires for her, the second proposal (first of Mr. Darcey’s) provides space for Elizabeth to begin questioning her own view and judgements of the world, while the third proposal finally ends with an engagement to Darcy. Without the proposals, Pride and Prejudice would be plotless. The irony of the first line does not negate this fact.
The role of irony and marriage plot together ultimately serve to complicate the larger meme of Jane Austen. In a way, irony allows for people to take the marriage plot as seriously as they want to. You can imagine Austen as lover of the institution, lover of marriage, or as institutional cynic; both are supported within the original texts. This makes the meme of Austen, although difficult to pin down, perhaps especially mimetically fit. Austen can continue to mean a lot of different things to different people, and the two major conflicting memes which exist within her novels, allow for these external conflicting views to align with her as a larger cultural symbol. Perhaps the extreme adaptability of Austen as a meme is why Austenites feel such a need to defend her. Memes are adaptable when they serve people or cultures as a whole. Austen’s ironic marriage plots give the people stories which help situate themselves to the paradox’s which surround them everyday.
Austen, Jane. Northanger Abbey. New York: Norton & Company, 2004.
Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. New York: Norton & Company, 2001.
Cohen, Paula. What Jane Austen Can Teach Us About Sexual Harassment. The Wall Street Journal, 1 Jan. 2018, https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-jane-austen-can-teach-us-about-sexual-harassment-1514822957.
Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press, 1976.
Harmon, Claire. Jane’s Fame: How Jane Austen Conquered the World. New York: Picador, 2009.
Mirmohamadi, Kylie. The Digital Afterlives of Jane Austen: Janeites at the Keyboard. Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.
Wright, Nicole. Alt Right Jane Austen. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 12 Mar. 2017, https://www.chronicle.com/article/Alt-Right-Jane-Austen/239435.
Schuessler, Jennifer. Game Theory: Jane Austen Had it First. The New York Times, 22 Apr. 2013, https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/books/michael-chwe-author-sees-jane-austen-as-game-theorist.html.
Thomas, Bromwen. “What is Fanfiction and Why Are People Saying Such Nice Things About it.” Storyworlds: A Journal of Narrative Studies, vol. 3, 2011, pp. 1-24.