What do you think?
Rate this book
Becoming Jane Austen
Jon Spence's fascinating biography of Jane Austen paints an intimate portrait of the much-loved novelist. Spence's meticulous research has, perhaps most notably, uncovered evidence that Austen and the charming young Irishman Tom Lefroy fell in love at the age of twenty and that the relationship inspired Pride and Prejudice, one of the most celebrated works of fiction ever written. Becoming Jane Austen gives the fullest account we have of the romance, which was more serious and more enduring than previously believed. Seeing this love story in the context of Jane Austen's whole life enables us to appreciate the profound effect the relationship had on her art and on subsequent choices that she made in her life.
Full of insight and with an attentive eye for detail, Spence explores Jane Austen's emotional attachments and the personal influences that shaped her as a novelist. His elegant narrative provides a point of entry into Jane Austen's world as she herself perceived and experienced it. It is a world familiar to us from her novels, but in Becoming Jane Austen, Austen herself is the heroine.
Full of insight and with an attentive eye for detail, Spence explores Jane Austen's emotional attachments and the personal influences that shaped her as a novelist. His elegant narrative provides a point of entry into Jane Austen's world as she herself perceived and experienced it. It is a world familiar to us from her novels, but in Becoming Jane Austen, Austen herself is the heroine.
312 pages, Paperback
First published May 23, 2003
88 people are currently reading
6230 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 306 reviews
January 18, 2018
I’m so glad to read about my favorite author Jane Austen i really love her and i love everything she wrote 💜💜✨’
July 6, 2008
Let me start off by saying I was more than a little bothered by the movie produced based on this novel. Did I watch it? No... I REFUSE!!!! The movie tells a completely made up story with the premise that Jane almost eloped with a man (didn't happen) and that it took him to spark her brilliance (offensive). What bothers me most is that many people will believe the fiction of the movie and think they know Jane Austen.
Ok enough with the rant. The movie was based loosely on a few claims that Jon Spence made in this biography. I found it to be an interesting look at Jane Austen's life. This is the second Austen bio I have read and I liked the presentation of Spence's research. The book goes beyond merely retelling Jane's life and attempts to find sources of inspiration for her wonderful stories from the known and supposed facts of her life. This is not a straight forward biography and readers need to be familiar with all of Austen's novels to get the most from Spence's research. He also included a lot of her letters which added nice depth to the novel.
Overall, an interesting read... now if only Hollywood had made a worthy movie.
Ok enough with the rant. The movie was based loosely on a few claims that Jon Spence made in this biography. I found it to be an interesting look at Jane Austen's life. This is the second Austen bio I have read and I liked the presentation of Spence's research. The book goes beyond merely retelling Jane's life and attempts to find sources of inspiration for her wonderful stories from the known and supposed facts of her life. This is not a straight forward biography and readers need to be familiar with all of Austen's novels to get the most from Spence's research. He also included a lot of her letters which added nice depth to the novel.
Overall, an interesting read... now if only Hollywood had made a worthy movie.
October 19, 2007
I wrote an enormous review of this book in my blog, so I'm going to just copy and paste here (minus one paragraph because apparently it was too long):
This was a good read, a fascinating look into Jane Austen's life. It has all the requisite biographical details, but it goes one step further and tries to fill in the blanks for us. Unfortunately, that makes it more supposition than fact, and the author (Jon Spence) doesn't always make it clear which is which. There are plenty of "Jane must have felt"s, and "She was probably inspired by"s, which at least let us know it's the author's opinion. But he also attributes many opinions, feelings, and motivations to her without equivocation, things he couldn't possibly know. If he pulled them directly from his research, he would have annotated it, because this was a well-researched book with exhaustive endnotes and a full bibliography. But he merely states things as fact, when clearly there's no proof of their validity. This bothered me, leaving me to wonder how much of the book was actually true.
On the other hand, I found the author's personal explanations enormously helpful in my own search to satisfy my curiosity. Many of his ideas made sense to me, and he pointed out small things that I probably never would have considered, or even noticed. The big question seems to be: did Jane really have a secret understanding with Tom Lefroy? To watch "Becoming Jane", the movie inspired by this book, you'd think so. But after reading the book, itself so controversially full of conjecture, I can only say that the movie is almost entirely fiction. It's a good movie, very enjoyable, and containing enough heart-squeezing moments to classify it as a true chick flick. But it's not true. It takes one small segment of Jane's life, one with very little source material, and only suggested in Spence's book, and turns it into a two-hour movie with characters who apparently never existed (Lady Gresham) and situations that never arose (the elopement).
We don't know exactly what went on with Tom Lefroy. He never did come back to Stephenton, but Jon Spence submits rather compelling evidence that they did have a deeper relationship than anyone might have supposed. I'm inclined to believe him, especially since Jane's sister Cassandra destroyed most of her letters from that period, apparently at her request, and the few we have do hint at a relationship with Tom. But if this is true, then he's an utter cad for leaving her high and dry to wait for him, never contacting her again, and marrying someone else. It's true he did have a rich relation on whom he depended entirely, and who had a track record of giving or withholding money based on his approval of a relative's marriage. And it's true he had a LOT of siblings; I believe there were 12 in all. So perhaps he did what he had to do, just as the movie portrays.
What I really liked about the book was the way it drew parallels between her family life and her novels, showing possible inspiration for certain characters and situations. Some of these parallels were really stretching, but some seem so obvious I don't see how they could possibly be coincidental, even if only subconsciously showing up in her work.
Read the book, see the movie, take it all with a grain of salt, and enjoy.
This was a good read, a fascinating look into Jane Austen's life. It has all the requisite biographical details, but it goes one step further and tries to fill in the blanks for us. Unfortunately, that makes it more supposition than fact, and the author (Jon Spence) doesn't always make it clear which is which. There are plenty of "Jane must have felt"s, and "She was probably inspired by"s, which at least let us know it's the author's opinion. But he also attributes many opinions, feelings, and motivations to her without equivocation, things he couldn't possibly know. If he pulled them directly from his research, he would have annotated it, because this was a well-researched book with exhaustive endnotes and a full bibliography. But he merely states things as fact, when clearly there's no proof of their validity. This bothered me, leaving me to wonder how much of the book was actually true.
On the other hand, I found the author's personal explanations enormously helpful in my own search to satisfy my curiosity. Many of his ideas made sense to me, and he pointed out small things that I probably never would have considered, or even noticed. The big question seems to be: did Jane really have a secret understanding with Tom Lefroy? To watch "Becoming Jane", the movie inspired by this book, you'd think so. But after reading the book, itself so controversially full of conjecture, I can only say that the movie is almost entirely fiction. It's a good movie, very enjoyable, and containing enough heart-squeezing moments to classify it as a true chick flick. But it's not true. It takes one small segment of Jane's life, one with very little source material, and only suggested in Spence's book, and turns it into a two-hour movie with characters who apparently never existed (Lady Gresham) and situations that never arose (the elopement).
We don't know exactly what went on with Tom Lefroy. He never did come back to Stephenton, but Jon Spence submits rather compelling evidence that they did have a deeper relationship than anyone might have supposed. I'm inclined to believe him, especially since Jane's sister Cassandra destroyed most of her letters from that period, apparently at her request, and the few we have do hint at a relationship with Tom. But if this is true, then he's an utter cad for leaving her high and dry to wait for him, never contacting her again, and marrying someone else. It's true he did have a rich relation on whom he depended entirely, and who had a track record of giving or withholding money based on his approval of a relative's marriage. And it's true he had a LOT of siblings; I believe there were 12 in all. So perhaps he did what he had to do, just as the movie portrays.
What I really liked about the book was the way it drew parallels between her family life and her novels, showing possible inspiration for certain characters and situations. Some of these parallels were really stretching, but some seem so obvious I don't see how they could possibly be coincidental, even if only subconsciously showing up in her work.
Read the book, see the movie, take it all with a grain of salt, and enjoy.
August 26, 2007
If you like biography, or you like reading about this particular time period in history, you'll enjoy this book, as I did. It helps if you enjoy Jane Austen but if you like her books & you DON'T like history, this might bore you. I enjoy Jane Austen's work & I love history, & I enjoyed reading about her family & friends because that's what makes a time period come alive for me. If you think you're getting a romantic account of Jane Austen's love story (as in the movie), forget it, because the book is not that! I talked to a friend about this book & we got into an interesting discussion about marriage & how our view of marriage today is so different from what it was then - at least in our Western culture. An interesting question the book brings up - for women, was it better to be married to someone you loved & were attracted to - with the result that you might be pregnant every year or so, at a time when childbirth was very dangerous? Or was it better to be married to someone you perhaps liked, with whom you had common interests, common family background, but maybe you didn't feel the need to sleep with that person very often - so you could have a good "business relationship" & perhaps a couple of children, & that was all? In Jane's time, not many women made the choice she did, to pursue a career rather than marriage. Would Jane have been able to write the books she did, if she'd gotten married & had children? I thought these were all very interesting questions.
September 20, 2019
For my full review: https://girlwithherheadinabook.co.uk/...
I had a bit of a push-pull about whether or not I would enjoy reading this book. On the one hand, I absolutely loved the 2007 film Becoming Jane which took this biography as its inspiration. However, despite the film being enjoyable and also showcasing the talents of Mr James McAvoy during what I saw as his heyday, I never lost sight of it being a piece of total fiction. Jon Spence's central proposition is that Jane Austen's life revolved around her disappointed love for Tom Lefroy, that she never got over it and that all of her writing was inspired by him in some way. Having finally sat down to read the book ... I remain unconvinced. However, I still found Becoming Jane Austen a thought-provoking attempt to connect with who Austen might have been as a person.
One thing that sets the Austen fandom apart from the others is the way that every fan has a different version of the author herself and every fan is equally convinced that their version is correct. Biographers are fans just like any others and indeed, the late Jon Spence does seem to have been a particularly devoted one. Becoming Jane Austen explores Austen on far more of an emotional level than any of the other biographies that I have read. Spence is willing to make conjectures and to speculate as he tries to understand the woman behind the enigma. It felt like an unusual approach but it ultimately brings the reader to a fresh understanding.
I am always wary of any myth-making that insists that a writer's entire work was over-shadowed by their one great love. I have noticed that this is a charge that is generally levelled at female authors rather than their male counterparts. I read Nick Holland's highly fanciful biography of Anne Brontë and as well as being strongly perturbed by his misuse of source material, Holland's insistence that Anne Brontë's life was dominated by her 'all-consuming conflagration' for William Weightman was just absurd given the paucity of the evidence. By contrast, there is considerably more material to suggest that Jane Austen did have feelings for Tom Lefroy. There are her own laughing letters about it, her later more cagey correspondence after his departure, the suggestion that she just might have visited him in London and of course, Lefroy's own admission in old age that he had had a 'boyish love' for her. Something went on. Lack of money on both sides likely made it unworkable. But the idea of all of Austen's novels having references to Lefroy, that she never stopped loving him ... that seems less clear.
Thomas Lefroy as a young man
As is the fate of so many female writers, Austen's personal life is given far greater significance than it would have been had she been a man. When Charlotte Brontë complained that Austen's novels were too tidy and left not enough room for feeling, the excuse was often made that Austen never knew love herself. That seems to have been untrue. More accurately, Austen was writing before the Romantic age really took hold and so had different influences on her work. Austen also was not writing romances but rather domestic comedies so had less of a need to focus on the passions that Charlotte Brontë felt were so absent. Another common myth was that Persuasion's Captain Wentworth, being her finest leading man, must have been modelled on Austen's own lost love. Rudyard Kipling even wrote a poem to that effect.
Myself, I think that people can get very carried away when searching for biographical data in an author's work and that it is also a little insulting to declare that Austen's genius required inspiration from a man. Spence's attempts to mine Austen's characters for clues about her feelings failed to convince. For Spence, it is a certainty that Austen gave her characters names from Tom Jones as a subtle reference to her ongoing love for Tom Lefroy, since this was (allegedly) his favourite book. For me, this felt like a massive reach. Similarly Spence's thesis that Tom Lefroy inspired Elizabeth Bennet while Austen herself was the model for Darcy. Given Spence's obvious admiration for Austen, it seems odd that he suggests that she required external inspiration. Do we really think that the woman who wrote Sense and Sensibility would advocate spending one's life moping after someone who had rejected her? I think back on my own past relationships - they seemed serious enough at the time but the idea of supposing that they would overshadow the rest of my existence is insulting. Austen herself seemed to advise her niece Fanny Knight that broken hearts heal.
However, while biographies can often focus so much on facts that they can come to feel cold towards their subject, Spence's stance is so full of sympathy that I could not help but warm to him as a writer, even if his central supposition felt spurious. He suggested an interesting alternative theory about Austen's relationship with her sister-in-law Eliza. Rather than idolising her glamourous cousin, Spence theorises that Austen's early admiration turned to suspicion and disapproval. Trekking through Austen's work from the earliest juvenilia, Spence identifies the characters he believes were inspired by Eliza and identifies a pattern of distrust. I was particularly intrigued by his insinuation of a link between Lady Susan and Eliza. I was interested though that Spence never comments on the rather dubious nature of Eliza's title, something which Claire Tomalin's iconic Jane Austen - A Life rather lays bare. Similarly, I was also surprised by his unquestioning portrayal of Mrs Austen as an affectionate mother. By contrast, most other biographers identify Mrs Austen's hypochondria as being behind some of the more unflattering portrayals of older women in Austen's own novels. Every writer will have a different approach but these variances seemed unusual.
Still, for all that I disagreed with so much of what Spence said, I enjoyed the book. Spence is a very thoughtful writer and the amount of care that went into this book is clear. The prose style is engaging and flows well. Becoming Jane Austen is a highly readable book, more than can be said for many other biographies. I particularly liked how Spence connects with the position of women in Regency Britain. He describes how strange it is that despite all that stated otherwise, it was women who truly required physical coverage, regularly facing death via childbirth. Spence again plumbs Austen's writing for evidence of her ambivalence towards mother and constructs a compelling case for her dissatisfaction at the role which women were obliged to play. Austen expressed a hope that her niece Fanny Knight need not be plunged into it just yet, seemed truly sorry that her other niece Anna should be so plagued with constant pregnancy. Austen was not so very prim and proper. She knew what the consequences of marriage were. Women lost the right to bodily autonomy.
Austen knew that people who married for love ended up with very large families. Her character Mrs Jennings expresses her sorrow for the marriage that Lucy Steele and Edward Ferrars will have, since Lucy will have a baby every year. Sanditon's Charlotte Heywood is the eldest of twelve. Three of Austen's own sisters-in-law died in childbirth, two of them after having given birth to eleven children apiece. Spence provides a compelling argument that the birth-dates of her children suggest Mrs Austen knew her own body well enough to practice some form of family planning. Perhaps her husband helped her. If so, it seems that Austen's brothers were less considerate.
Reading Becoming Jane Austen felt like a conversation. Spence never seems pushy in his perspective and so even where I disagreed, I still enjoyed the read. I will always believe that suggesting that a female writer's work can be traced back to the inspiration of a man is sexist and in most cases provably inaccurate. However, much of Spence's textual analysis remained intriguing. His version of Austen was a less sharp-tongued creature than the one summoned up in so many of the other books that I have read on the topic. A book worth reading if not perhaps believing.
I had a bit of a push-pull about whether or not I would enjoy reading this book. On the one hand, I absolutely loved the 2007 film Becoming Jane which took this biography as its inspiration. However, despite the film being enjoyable and also showcasing the talents of Mr James McAvoy during what I saw as his heyday, I never lost sight of it being a piece of total fiction. Jon Spence's central proposition is that Jane Austen's life revolved around her disappointed love for Tom Lefroy, that she never got over it and that all of her writing was inspired by him in some way. Having finally sat down to read the book ... I remain unconvinced. However, I still found Becoming Jane Austen a thought-provoking attempt to connect with who Austen might have been as a person.
One thing that sets the Austen fandom apart from the others is the way that every fan has a different version of the author herself and every fan is equally convinced that their version is correct. Biographers are fans just like any others and indeed, the late Jon Spence does seem to have been a particularly devoted one. Becoming Jane Austen explores Austen on far more of an emotional level than any of the other biographies that I have read. Spence is willing to make conjectures and to speculate as he tries to understand the woman behind the enigma. It felt like an unusual approach but it ultimately brings the reader to a fresh understanding.
I am always wary of any myth-making that insists that a writer's entire work was over-shadowed by their one great love. I have noticed that this is a charge that is generally levelled at female authors rather than their male counterparts. I read Nick Holland's highly fanciful biography of Anne Brontë and as well as being strongly perturbed by his misuse of source material, Holland's insistence that Anne Brontë's life was dominated by her 'all-consuming conflagration' for William Weightman was just absurd given the paucity of the evidence. By contrast, there is considerably more material to suggest that Jane Austen did have feelings for Tom Lefroy. There are her own laughing letters about it, her later more cagey correspondence after his departure, the suggestion that she just might have visited him in London and of course, Lefroy's own admission in old age that he had had a 'boyish love' for her. Something went on. Lack of money on both sides likely made it unworkable. But the idea of all of Austen's novels having references to Lefroy, that she never stopped loving him ... that seems less clear.
Thomas Lefroy as a young man
As is the fate of so many female writers, Austen's personal life is given far greater significance than it would have been had she been a man. When Charlotte Brontë complained that Austen's novels were too tidy and left not enough room for feeling, the excuse was often made that Austen never knew love herself. That seems to have been untrue. More accurately, Austen was writing before the Romantic age really took hold and so had different influences on her work. Austen also was not writing romances but rather domestic comedies so had less of a need to focus on the passions that Charlotte Brontë felt were so absent. Another common myth was that Persuasion's Captain Wentworth, being her finest leading man, must have been modelled on Austen's own lost love. Rudyard Kipling even wrote a poem to that effect.
Myself, I think that people can get very carried away when searching for biographical data in an author's work and that it is also a little insulting to declare that Austen's genius required inspiration from a man. Spence's attempts to mine Austen's characters for clues about her feelings failed to convince. For Spence, it is a certainty that Austen gave her characters names from Tom Jones as a subtle reference to her ongoing love for Tom Lefroy, since this was (allegedly) his favourite book. For me, this felt like a massive reach. Similarly Spence's thesis that Tom Lefroy inspired Elizabeth Bennet while Austen herself was the model for Darcy. Given Spence's obvious admiration for Austen, it seems odd that he suggests that she required external inspiration. Do we really think that the woman who wrote Sense and Sensibility would advocate spending one's life moping after someone who had rejected her? I think back on my own past relationships - they seemed serious enough at the time but the idea of supposing that they would overshadow the rest of my existence is insulting. Austen herself seemed to advise her niece Fanny Knight that broken hearts heal.
However, while biographies can often focus so much on facts that they can come to feel cold towards their subject, Spence's stance is so full of sympathy that I could not help but warm to him as a writer, even if his central supposition felt spurious. He suggested an interesting alternative theory about Austen's relationship with her sister-in-law Eliza. Rather than idolising her glamourous cousin, Spence theorises that Austen's early admiration turned to suspicion and disapproval. Trekking through Austen's work from the earliest juvenilia, Spence identifies the characters he believes were inspired by Eliza and identifies a pattern of distrust. I was particularly intrigued by his insinuation of a link between Lady Susan and Eliza. I was interested though that Spence never comments on the rather dubious nature of Eliza's title, something which Claire Tomalin's iconic Jane Austen - A Life rather lays bare. Similarly, I was also surprised by his unquestioning portrayal of Mrs Austen as an affectionate mother. By contrast, most other biographers identify Mrs Austen's hypochondria as being behind some of the more unflattering portrayals of older women in Austen's own novels. Every writer will have a different approach but these variances seemed unusual.
Still, for all that I disagreed with so much of what Spence said, I enjoyed the book. Spence is a very thoughtful writer and the amount of care that went into this book is clear. The prose style is engaging and flows well. Becoming Jane Austen is a highly readable book, more than can be said for many other biographies. I particularly liked how Spence connects with the position of women in Regency Britain. He describes how strange it is that despite all that stated otherwise, it was women who truly required physical coverage, regularly facing death via childbirth. Spence again plumbs Austen's writing for evidence of her ambivalence towards mother and constructs a compelling case for her dissatisfaction at the role which women were obliged to play. Austen expressed a hope that her niece Fanny Knight need not be plunged into it just yet, seemed truly sorry that her other niece Anna should be so plagued with constant pregnancy. Austen was not so very prim and proper. She knew what the consequences of marriage were. Women lost the right to bodily autonomy.
Austen knew that people who married for love ended up with very large families. Her character Mrs Jennings expresses her sorrow for the marriage that Lucy Steele and Edward Ferrars will have, since Lucy will have a baby every year. Sanditon's Charlotte Heywood is the eldest of twelve. Three of Austen's own sisters-in-law died in childbirth, two of them after having given birth to eleven children apiece. Spence provides a compelling argument that the birth-dates of her children suggest Mrs Austen knew her own body well enough to practice some form of family planning. Perhaps her husband helped her. If so, it seems that Austen's brothers were less considerate.
Reading Becoming Jane Austen felt like a conversation. Spence never seems pushy in his perspective and so even where I disagreed, I still enjoyed the read. I will always believe that suggesting that a female writer's work can be traced back to the inspiration of a man is sexist and in most cases provably inaccurate. However, much of Spence's textual analysis remained intriguing. His version of Austen was a less sharp-tongued creature than the one summoned up in so many of the other books that I have read on the topic. A book worth reading if not perhaps believing.
August 21, 2008
I'm pretty sure every biography in the bookstore has a quote on the back about how the book isn't dry, boring, or overly pedantic. The amazing thing is--I FALL FOR IT EVERY TIME!!! I have yet to read a biography that didn't fit those adjectives EXACTLY... and this one is no exception. Full of information, to be sure. And if you love Jane Austen OBSESSIVELY you might be able to put up with it. I personally love her, but with a healthy, balanced kind of love... which wasn't enough to help me enjoy this book.
May 31, 2014
The movie Becoming Jane was based on this biography of Jane Austen. As I am a huge fan of that movie, I thought I may as well read the book.
Though I enjoyed the idea that Jane Austen was at one time in love with a man named Tom Lefroy, I thought this author stretched facts a little too much for me to believe this was a love that Austen was obsessed with her entire adult life.
He bases this belief on the fact that many of Austen's characters share names and surnames with characters from "Tom Jones," Lefroy's apparent favorite book. But all one has to do is read the names of the many relatives and friends of Austen to find that these names from "Tom Jones" appear in her real life all the time. She may have just chosen common names because they'd be familiar. It makes more sense than going out of her way to scour one particular book for names because of its connection with a former love interest. The author even says Austen was very about making sure her books were as current and relatable as possible. Using names anyone would recognize would be a sign of that, for sure.
The author makes a lot of assumptions about Austen's feelings about various events and people as well. It is clear he feels a very strong connection to his subject, and cares very much about her, but that doesn't make his assumptions any more believable. It all comes across as wishful thinking.
I enjoyed this interpretation of Jane Austen. A woman that fell in love once when she was young and made every decision there on out based on her disappointment when it didn't work out. When you're young and in love and then disappointed, it feels like you'll never get over it. The author treats Austen as that sort of person -- I have my doubts as to how realistic it is, but it's an idea most people can relate to, at least.
Though I enjoyed the idea that Jane Austen was at one time in love with a man named Tom Lefroy, I thought this author stretched facts a little too much for me to believe this was a love that Austen was obsessed with her entire adult life.
He bases this belief on the fact that many of Austen's characters share names and surnames with characters from "Tom Jones," Lefroy's apparent favorite book. But all one has to do is read the names of the many relatives and friends of Austen to find that these names from "Tom Jones" appear in her real life all the time. She may have just chosen common names because they'd be familiar. It makes more sense than going out of her way to scour one particular book for names because of its connection with a former love interest. The author even says Austen was very about making sure her books were as current and relatable as possible. Using names anyone would recognize would be a sign of that, for sure.
The author makes a lot of assumptions about Austen's feelings about various events and people as well. It is clear he feels a very strong connection to his subject, and cares very much about her, but that doesn't make his assumptions any more believable. It all comes across as wishful thinking.
I enjoyed this interpretation of Jane Austen. A woman that fell in love once when she was young and made every decision there on out based on her disappointment when it didn't work out. When you're young and in love and then disappointed, it feels like you'll never get over it. The author treats Austen as that sort of person -- I have my doubts as to how realistic it is, but it's an idea most people can relate to, at least.
June 17, 2008
Very interesting read for true Jane Austen fans who don't mind wading through names, places, and sometimes tedious details. Since this is the inspiration for the movie, be prepared for a strong insistence on a relationship between Jane Austen and Tom Lefroy (the author frequently finds connections that may or may not be true). I enjoyed learning more about Jane Austen's life and the society of those times; Jon Spence does a thorough job of relating events of her life to storylines of her novels. Some readers may resent his theories and feel they discredit Austen's creativity, but I found that many of his views were insightful and added to the depth of my fvorite stories. In the end, this book taught me that biographers take the same historical material, give it their own spin (romantic, feminist, traditional, etc.), and create their best guess for a personality.
August 4, 2025
My rating is actually about a 3.5.
Jon Spence has packed his biography of Jane Austen with intriguing and new-to-me details about Jane Austen’s extended family. He seems to have had access to a lot more family letters and records than previous biographers did, at least those I’ve read. Some of those sources open new ways of interpreting events in her life. And he has read those family sources with careful attention, teasing out many telling details. That’s the good part of this book.
What I didn’t appreciate were (1) his tendency to connect that information to the novels in ways that were often a stretch and (2) the thinness of his engagement with the novels as texts. He’s a very keen observer of Austen correspondence but a very weak literary critic.
Just one example of the first issue: he makes much of Jane Austen’s supposed youthful attachment to Tom Lefroy, a young man she is known to have flirted with at several balls one winter. Based on slim additional evidence, he has blown this relationship up into the love of Austen’s life, complete with a presumptive unannounced engagement. He goes further, attributing the burst of creativity that produced Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice to her being in love, before she learned that Lefroy had become engaged to another and was moving back to Ireland. And Spence quite outrageously accuses her of salting little loving tributes to Lefroy into all her novels by using surnames for characters drawn from Henry Fielding’s Tom Jones because it was supposedly Lefroy’s favorite novel. I kept wanting to ask Spence: How then do you account for her naming a ridiculous character in The Watsons Tom?
The lack of literary analysis is more understandable: many biographers believe they have to choose between a deep dive into the events of a writer’s life and a deep dive into their artistic product. But the lack of literary examination was glaring to me here because of the often implausible connections made between events or people in Austen’s life and characters in the novels. It spoke to me of someone who has no feeling whatsoever for the creative process.
So my verdict is that this bio is worth reading if you’re an Austen enthusiast for the information about her family, but it won’t add to your understanding of the novels.
Note: This bio was the inspiration for the movie Becoming Jane, but the movie takes the Tom Lefroy speculation much further than even the book does. I like the movie a lot but only as a work of fiction, not a biopic.
Jon Spence has packed his biography of Jane Austen with intriguing and new-to-me details about Jane Austen’s extended family. He seems to have had access to a lot more family letters and records than previous biographers did, at least those I’ve read. Some of those sources open new ways of interpreting events in her life. And he has read those family sources with careful attention, teasing out many telling details. That’s the good part of this book.
What I didn’t appreciate were (1) his tendency to connect that information to the novels in ways that were often a stretch and (2) the thinness of his engagement with the novels as texts. He’s a very keen observer of Austen correspondence but a very weak literary critic.
Just one example of the first issue: he makes much of Jane Austen’s supposed youthful attachment to Tom Lefroy, a young man she is known to have flirted with at several balls one winter. Based on slim additional evidence, he has blown this relationship up into the love of Austen’s life, complete with a presumptive unannounced engagement. He goes further, attributing the burst of creativity that produced Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice to her being in love, before she learned that Lefroy had become engaged to another and was moving back to Ireland. And Spence quite outrageously accuses her of salting little loving tributes to Lefroy into all her novels by using surnames for characters drawn from Henry Fielding’s Tom Jones because it was supposedly Lefroy’s favorite novel. I kept wanting to ask Spence: How then do you account for her naming a ridiculous character in The Watsons Tom?
The lack of literary analysis is more understandable: many biographers believe they have to choose between a deep dive into the events of a writer’s life and a deep dive into their artistic product. But the lack of literary examination was glaring to me here because of the often implausible connections made between events or people in Austen’s life and characters in the novels. It spoke to me of someone who has no feeling whatsoever for the creative process.
So my verdict is that this bio is worth reading if you’re an Austen enthusiast for the information about her family, but it won’t add to your understanding of the novels.
Note: This bio was the inspiration for the movie Becoming Jane, but the movie takes the Tom Lefroy speculation much further than even the book does. I like the movie a lot but only as a work of fiction, not a biopic.
May 1, 2008
Overall, the book was okay. I found the facts to be interesting, but when the author professed to know who or what inspired Jane Austen's characters, I found it a bit irksome. It's unfortunate that not much is known about Austen's personal life and I didn't mind when Spence made a few speculations, but I dare say he speculated too much.
As for this book being the inspiration behind the movie Becoming Jane- I didn't get that at all. There's very little information about her romance with Tom Lefroy, merely that they met, she was enamored of him, and Spence believes they may have met again later in life.
I would say read this book for the facts, and take his opinions with a grain of salt. If you're looking for an Austen style romance about Austen's life, watch the movie.
As for this book being the inspiration behind the movie Becoming Jane- I didn't get that at all. There's very little information about her romance with Tom Lefroy, merely that they met, she was enamored of him, and Spence believes they may have met again later in life.
I would say read this book for the facts, and take his opinions with a grain of salt. If you're looking for an Austen style romance about Austen's life, watch the movie.
September 12, 2018
Becoming Jane Austen is part biography, part genealogy, part literary critique. I'm not really a biography person so I found it dry at times, especially when going on about such and such great aunt, and who will get what inheritance, etc. The best parts were definitely those that dealt with Austen and her oeuvre.
August 24, 2017
Ich hatte vorher den Film gesehen. Der Film war in bezug auf JA lebendiger. Das Buch reflektiert hingegen die Werke von JA und wie sie ihre Verwandtschaft als Charaktere in ihre Bücher einbezog.
January 3, 2024
Loved it!
August 27, 2019
Review to come
May 31, 2016
This writer has really done his homework and brings Jane out of the shadows with his clever detective work,analysing her juvenilia, her correspondence
and
what is NOT there ...the omissions and hints and signs.
Once so far ...a GREAT read!!!
You will find Austen Treasures here.
It was reading "Becoming Jane" that caused me to really settle down and read ALL Jane's Juvenalia so that I could really appreciate what Spence was saying and arguing. I tell you, I have never laughed so much...
It also caused me to read Chekhov's Juvenalia..he is another Favourite of mine...and it was the same as with a Young Jane Austen...again so funny, witty ...the more reflective and sombre blossoms with age and experience and growing wisdom. Youth is the Time for freshness and joie de vie...it is NOT less, not ignorance...it is a valid response to the world.There are hints of shadows, an awareness of loss etc .
It really enriches to follow these writers from A to Z...not from M to Z...one misses so much, misses the Full Portrait.
I recommend their youthful works with gusto and promises of great Enjoyment !!!!
And do do DO DO get to Chawton...a lovely spot ...and nearby Winchester where Jane is buried. Most moving.
The house is nearby where Cassandra nursed her younger sister until she died. One can still feel close to this loss after almost 200 years...time dissolves...feelings bring past and present into an embrace.
and
what is NOT there ...the omissions and hints and signs.
Once so far ...a GREAT read!!!
You will find Austen Treasures here.
It was reading "Becoming Jane" that caused me to really settle down and read ALL Jane's Juvenalia so that I could really appreciate what Spence was saying and arguing. I tell you, I have never laughed so much...
It also caused me to read Chekhov's Juvenalia..he is another Favourite of mine...and it was the same as with a Young Jane Austen...again so funny, witty ...the more reflective and sombre blossoms with age and experience and growing wisdom. Youth is the Time for freshness and joie de vie...it is NOT less, not ignorance...it is a valid response to the world.There are hints of shadows, an awareness of loss etc .
It really enriches to follow these writers from A to Z...not from M to Z...one misses so much, misses the Full Portrait.
I recommend their youthful works with gusto and promises of great Enjoyment !!!!
And do do DO DO get to Chawton...a lovely spot ...and nearby Winchester where Jane is buried. Most moving.
The house is nearby where Cassandra nursed her younger sister until she died. One can still feel close to this loss after almost 200 years...time dissolves...feelings bring past and present into an embrace.
September 11, 2009
I truly enjoyed reading this book, albeit slow, it was treasure to get a glimps into Jane Austen's life.
Becoming Jane Austen is about her life and how each novel she wrote was a play on her own life at the time. Stories taken from real life experiences, family names, love lived and lost. Jane Austen was a woman ahead of her time. She shares her views on marriage, family, letters between her sister, Cassandra and herself, and a little sneak peak of her feelings on Tom Lefroy, the only man she loved but didn't marry.
I've seen the movie, Becoming Jane, and it is one of my favorite movies, but it's interesting to see how Hollywood made Tom Lefroy a character that you love and pity rather than dislike as we really should in the case of real-life instance.
Jane Austen's last book she saw to publication was Persuasion. She was working on another novel, Sanditon, which was much different from her earlier work. Darker settings, characters, and more physical attraction that is blatantly obvious to the reader. Unfortunately, she was only 12 chapters into this novel before her death.
I have 2 more books to finish, Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, before I can officially say I have read the collections of Jane Austen.
Becoming Jane Austen is about her life and how each novel she wrote was a play on her own life at the time. Stories taken from real life experiences, family names, love lived and lost. Jane Austen was a woman ahead of her time. She shares her views on marriage, family, letters between her sister, Cassandra and herself, and a little sneak peak of her feelings on Tom Lefroy, the only man she loved but didn't marry.
I've seen the movie, Becoming Jane, and it is one of my favorite movies, but it's interesting to see how Hollywood made Tom Lefroy a character that you love and pity rather than dislike as we really should in the case of real-life instance.
Jane Austen's last book she saw to publication was Persuasion. She was working on another novel, Sanditon, which was much different from her earlier work. Darker settings, characters, and more physical attraction that is blatantly obvious to the reader. Unfortunately, she was only 12 chapters into this novel before her death.
I have 2 more books to finish, Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, before I can officially say I have read the collections of Jane Austen.
June 8, 2008
To preface this - its a history book that digs into the sources and makes some pretty interesting connections about Jane Austen's life. So I am a history major, and I love this stuff. I can't say I buy his argument all the time, but the author really looks at letters, facts, and connections to point out the key events and feelings of Jane Austen. He really shows how much her family and friends, as well as romance with Tom LeFroy though this is the most sketchy part, influenced her stories. But also that she herself was a real person with a quick wit and avid mind. She also was not the quiet domestic and eternally patient person you might expect from her writing. Instead she was very active, bored with household tasks, and struggled to control her own spirit at times. Çassandra, her sister, was Jane and Eleanor wrapped into one. Jane Austen was Mr. Darcy with a sharp tongue and talent for making people laugh. I loved it. I do think the author stretches some points a bit and has a few shaky pieces of evidence, but loved it non-the-less.
Read
January 24, 2016This is a very, very, very, very thorough examination of Jane Austen's life and writing. If you LOVE Jane Austen and want to know about her family relationships and how they may have impacted her writing give this a try.
My experience with Jane Austen is mixed, I read 'Pride and Prejudice' which I hated and I watched 'Becoming Jane' which I loved. This I gave up on around page 85 even though it was a book club selection and I had a slight fear of being beaten about the head with it because I didn't finish.
Someone who has read several, many or maybe even more than just one of Austen's works just might appreciate this more than I.
I could see this being used by teachers in English Lit classes all across America...and those students have my sympathies.
I would recommend the movie, no need to even know Jane Austen to enjoy that.
My experience with Jane Austen is mixed, I read 'Pride and Prejudice' which I hated and I watched 'Becoming Jane' which I loved. This I gave up on around page 85 even though it was a book club selection and I had a slight fear of being beaten about the head with it because I didn't finish.
Someone who has read several, many or maybe even more than just one of Austen's works just might appreciate this more than I.
I could see this being used by teachers in English Lit classes all across America...and those students have my sympathies.
I would recommend the movie, no need to even know Jane Austen to enjoy that.
Read
April 16, 2017I love the insights gained through perusal of letters and memoirs, but I get impatient at too much examining of Austen's text to extrapolate details of her life. They are rarely convincing, especially in some of the recent biographies, which read like cash-ins
Spence is not nearly as irritating in this regard as some of the other biographers. He also makes a good case for Henry's marriage to Eliza lying behind such works as Lady Susan (which is so frequently ignored by Janeites) and some of the other odder moments in the juvenilia.
Spence is not nearly as irritating in this regard as some of the other biographers. He also makes a good case for Henry's marriage to Eliza lying behind such works as Lady Susan (which is so frequently ignored by Janeites) and some of the other odder moments in the juvenilia.
April 30, 2009
I liked this. It was on my shelf since the movie came out, and I had loaned it out for a long time, too, before picking it up. I think you have to be in a good place to be able to spend time with this biography. There are a lot of names that are confusing, and I didn't try to keep them all sorted out. It was interesting how the author pulled together influences on Jane Austen's writing. I think he occasionally reached pretty far, but he presented a great slice of the period.
April 25, 2017
Before this week, I would have told you I had already read the best book available on Jane Austen (A Fine Brush on Ivory, by Richard Jenkyns). I approached Jon Spence's work with an expectation of covering some familiar, pleasant territory that would be traveled via the lightest of scholarship. (I blame the latter on the book cover which is attractive in a lovely Hollywood rendition sort of way but which, dare I say it, Austen might have joined me in finding a bit too precious?)
Well, I was wrong. Forgive me, Mr. Jenkyns, but you have been supplanted.
Spence is thoughtful and detailed and often slyly funny. Your reward for knowing Austen's work well is all through the book -Spence rehearses stories from her real life and laughs with you at her brilliant pokes and nods at family members and friends, who appear in her novels as characters you love (or love to despise).
He makes much of the few historical facts still intact from the story of her great disappointment, the unexplained disappearance of Tom Lefroy from her life. But he argues his case so carefully and documents it so thoroughly, that I can't really find any fault with his characterization. I've read at least four other biographies of Austen and this is the first I recall to highlight the connection between so many of Austen's characters - in all her books - and Lefroy's favorite novel.
I remember seeing "Becoming Jane" and feeling that a fair amount of Hollywood liberty had been taken. Now that I've read Spence, I'm not so sure.
This is a scholarly work, in that every page is littered with footnotes. But it reads like a cousin of the novels it details - descriptive, amusing, poignant, critical and revealing.
Of course, it comes with the two problems that plague you after any book on Austen: a renewed fury at dear, faithful Cassandra, for burning all those letters and robbing history of a more complete window into her sister's mind. And an overwhelming urge to ignore the rest of the pile on the nightstand and immediately reread all of Austen's work. I am trying to deal maturely with both of these problems at this moment.
Well, I was wrong. Forgive me, Mr. Jenkyns, but you have been supplanted.
Spence is thoughtful and detailed and often slyly funny. Your reward for knowing Austen's work well is all through the book -Spence rehearses stories from her real life and laughs with you at her brilliant pokes and nods at family members and friends, who appear in her novels as characters you love (or love to despise).
He makes much of the few historical facts still intact from the story of her great disappointment, the unexplained disappearance of Tom Lefroy from her life. But he argues his case so carefully and documents it so thoroughly, that I can't really find any fault with his characterization. I've read at least four other biographies of Austen and this is the first I recall to highlight the connection between so many of Austen's characters - in all her books - and Lefroy's favorite novel.
I remember seeing "Becoming Jane" and feeling that a fair amount of Hollywood liberty had been taken. Now that I've read Spence, I'm not so sure.
This is a scholarly work, in that every page is littered with footnotes. But it reads like a cousin of the novels it details - descriptive, amusing, poignant, critical and revealing.
Of course, it comes with the two problems that plague you after any book on Austen: a renewed fury at dear, faithful Cassandra, for burning all those letters and robbing history of a more complete window into her sister's mind. And an overwhelming urge to ignore the rest of the pile on the nightstand and immediately reread all of Austen's work. I am trying to deal maturely with both of these problems at this moment.
June 29, 2019
Excellent biography of Jane Austen, built off her & friends/family's letters. You get a lot of detail on the money matters of the extended Austen clan, and also a better understanding of the everyday realities of Austen's life. Without thoroughly discounting the bios written by those who survived her (though, yes, they were extremely biased), and a less romantic and better-supported interpretation of Jane Austen's loves.
This is detailed, and I did need to refer to the family trees a few times in the beginning, but by the end , you know all the players.
In addition to the biographical details, you learn some of the connections of names/characters in Austen's works (including juvenalia) and her friends/family.
I really wish Austen had lived to finish Sanditon. Spence points out well aspects of the chapters we do have that differ from her earlier novels.
This is detailed, and I did need to refer to the family trees a few times in the beginning, but by the end , you know all the players.
In addition to the biographical details, you learn some of the connections of names/characters in Austen's works (including juvenalia) and her friends/family.
I really wish Austen had lived to finish Sanditon. Spence points out well aspects of the chapters we do have that differ from her earlier novels.
July 14, 2020
This is my second time trying to read this book, the first time it was so dry I couldn’t really get into it. This time I must’ve just been in the right mood because the book definitely got more interesting and I was able to engage with it more towards the middle. Definitely has the most research about Jane, and the only part that’s a little sad is that so many people she knew died in the course of her life. I know it was something that happened a lot back then, but it’s sad to read about.
December 23, 2019
I love Jane Austen’s books and I do find biographies interesting, however this one was rather dull. The beginning chapters of genealogy were difficult to wade through and the ending was quite abrupt. There were a few interesting portions, but overall this was a dry read.
December 6, 2022
Interesting insights on Jane Austen’s life…. No wonder she’s one of my favorite authors
June 19, 2024
I learned a lot about Austen and how hard her life was for her. She and her sisters were left without a lot of support after her father died. They were kind of at the whim of her brother who inherited money and married for money. He was not overly generous. There weren't a lot of options for women in her era. Even writing books was not very profitable. There was discussion as to why she never married despite at least one or two possible proposals.
November 9, 2024
3.5 The historic family tree at the beginning was a bit hard to follow; a lot of duplicate family names. Moving on to Jane’s immediate family and her relationships with her sister Cassandra, her brothers and Tom Lefroy was more engaging. It was interesting how the author cited occurrences in Jane Austen’s life, family and events and how they may have influenced her novels.
September 25, 2011
We started off with a detailed family history, and it was really hard to keep track of everyone because the same few names appeared rather frequently.
As much as I love Jane Austen, I couldn't get into the book. While Jane's family had a big influence on her writing, I felt like they were more prominent than Jane herself. The book itself was really dry, and I had a lot of trouble getting through it. Sadly, I don't remember much of anything from the book, mostly because I couldn't bring myself to care.
There was a lot more speculation than I thought. We don't know a lot about Jane Austen, so I'm okay with some speculation. The problem is that he presents it as facts, and tells us how Jane felt, when really...how can we know what she was feeling? And the cover was misleading- on the front cover, it says (and I quote), "the true love story that inspired the classic novels." The back cover mentions that Tom Lefroy, a young lawyer that Jane met, "affected her life and caught her imagination." It's misleading in the fact that he's only mentioned a few times. And the whole "we don't really know for sure, but her sister Cassandra would have known" thing...well, why bother making it seem like her meeting Tom Lefroy is a big deal, when it really wasn't?
I might be somewhat accepting of the fact that Tom Lefroy may have inspired Pride and Prejudice, but I just couldn't believe that 20 years later, she was still pining for him and that meeting him had an influence on both Persuasion and Emma. For all the influence he supposedly had on her life, it would have been nice to learn more about him and what happened to him.
Another thing that I didn't like was the ending. For a book that started back in the 1600's, it would have been nice to see what happened with her posthumously published novels. The book literally ends with Jane's death, and a few more pages about how her death impacted her family.
I have to give a 1 out of 5. I couldn't like it, and while I'm curious about Jane Austen and her life, this book did nothing to satisfy that curiosity.
As much as I love Jane Austen, I couldn't get into the book. While Jane's family had a big influence on her writing, I felt like they were more prominent than Jane herself. The book itself was really dry, and I had a lot of trouble getting through it. Sadly, I don't remember much of anything from the book, mostly because I couldn't bring myself to care.
There was a lot more speculation than I thought. We don't know a lot about Jane Austen, so I'm okay with some speculation. The problem is that he presents it as facts, and tells us how Jane felt, when really...how can we know what she was feeling? And the cover was misleading- on the front cover, it says (and I quote), "the true love story that inspired the classic novels." The back cover mentions that Tom Lefroy, a young lawyer that Jane met, "affected her life and caught her imagination." It's misleading in the fact that he's only mentioned a few times. And the whole "we don't really know for sure, but her sister Cassandra would have known" thing...well, why bother making it seem like her meeting Tom Lefroy is a big deal, when it really wasn't?
I might be somewhat accepting of the fact that Tom Lefroy may have inspired Pride and Prejudice, but I just couldn't believe that 20 years later, she was still pining for him and that meeting him had an influence on both Persuasion and Emma. For all the influence he supposedly had on her life, it would have been nice to learn more about him and what happened to him.
Another thing that I didn't like was the ending. For a book that started back in the 1600's, it would have been nice to see what happened with her posthumously published novels. The book literally ends with Jane's death, and a few more pages about how her death impacted her family.
I have to give a 1 out of 5. I couldn't like it, and while I'm curious about Jane Austen and her life, this book did nothing to satisfy that curiosity.
June 29, 2010
I'll have to preface this "review" (I don't think my bookly blurbs actually deserve that title, but whatever) by saying that reading this biography was interesting for me. It's highly readable and takes into account a lot of facts, it seems.
I can't help it, though, that overall Jon Spence's biography feels more mainstream than something that could be academically usable. He presents his own speculation and interpretation about Jane Austen's life as if it were the truth, going so far as to talk about Jane Austen's feelings at a certain moment in time in indicative rather than conjunctive, assuming an authority over her life which he cannot have. The links he establishes between Austen's writing and Tom Lefroy's influence seem, at times, willful and far-fetched, something he'd like there to have been instead of something that might actually have been. Plus his way of reading Austen's writing as entirely autobiographically inspired bothers me, especially after he quotes someone who says her inspiration does not come from her surroundings, at least not to the degree that Spence seems to find.
Okay, I'm sorry, I'm starting to write myself into indignation. To end this: I can understand how this is the basis for the 2007 feature film Becoming Jane. Becoming Jane Austen is more fanon than canon.
I can't help it, though, that overall Jon Spence's biography feels more mainstream than something that could be academically usable. He presents his own speculation and interpretation about Jane Austen's life as if it were the truth, going so far as to talk about Jane Austen's feelings at a certain moment in time in indicative rather than conjunctive, assuming an authority over her life which he cannot have. The links he establishes between Austen's writing and Tom Lefroy's influence seem, at times, willful and far-fetched, something he'd like there to have been instead of something that might actually have been. Plus his way of reading Austen's writing as entirely autobiographically inspired bothers me, especially after he quotes someone who says her inspiration does not come from her surroundings, at least not to the degree that Spence seems to find.
Okay, I'm sorry, I'm starting to write myself into indignation. To end this: I can understand how this is the basis for the 2007 feature film Becoming Jane. Becoming Jane Austen is more fanon than canon.
January 19, 2010
I do not in fact finish this book. As a typical biography, it became boring. The beginning was very entertaining when it discussed her genealogy. It is my opinion that most of her family member, extended that is, where nuts.
This book does talk about Tom Lefroy. But not like what the cover let on. This book is apparently the basis for the movie Becoming Jane. The movie's plot is all based on her love, Tom Lefroy.
While I enjoyed the movie, it is in fact quite fake. The book talked a little bit about him but almost every sentence said that nothing is known or there is no certain account, only Cassandra would know, etc.
While I think Jane Austen is a great literary figure, I feel she led a simple and mundane life.
I learned some new things from what I read and this book had added pictures of the family and extended family members and some of the homes she live in. They are interesting enough to look at but when I was in Bath I was exposed to the same things.
It is now a personal goal to go to England to see all the Jane Austen tourist sites. I am still interested in her life, however this book did not create my interest, nor take it away, it was just something to look through and pass on.
This book does talk about Tom Lefroy. But not like what the cover let on. This book is apparently the basis for the movie Becoming Jane. The movie's plot is all based on her love, Tom Lefroy.
While I enjoyed the movie, it is in fact quite fake. The book talked a little bit about him but almost every sentence said that nothing is known or there is no certain account, only Cassandra would know, etc.
While I think Jane Austen is a great literary figure, I feel she led a simple and mundane life.
I learned some new things from what I read and this book had added pictures of the family and extended family members and some of the homes she live in. They are interesting enough to look at but when I was in Bath I was exposed to the same things.
It is now a personal goal to go to England to see all the Jane Austen tourist sites. I am still interested in her life, however this book did not create my interest, nor take it away, it was just something to look through and pass on.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 306 reviews