« | Home | »

Austen’s Face

Tags: | |

Attributed to Cassandra Austen, c.1810.I wonder if the Bank of England knew what they were letting themselves in for when they agreed to put Jane Austen on the £10 note. Janeites have been arguing over the authenticity of portraits for decades. The most settled on is the watercolour sketch held by the National Portrait Gallery and attributed to Austen’s sister, Cassandra. It was offered to James Edward Austen-Leigh (their nephew) by one of their great-nieces for inclusion in his 1869 Memoir.

Jane Austen by John Andrews, 1869.Not thinking her pursed lips and crossed arms proper enough for the frontispiece, Austen-Leigh commissioned a new version, which softened her expression – and her features – and put her hands neatly on her lap. The artist, John Andrews, took a few liberties with her figure and dress too. Her shoulders are less broad, her waist tucked in and her chest shallowed so that her head looks enormous. He filled in the frills and ruffles that Cassandra hadn’t included: maybe Austen didn’t want to sit around all day having her picture done.

lizarAusten-bank-note

The image that will appear on the banknotes, though, is neither of these but an engraving made in 1870 from Andrews’s painting. The engraver made things still worse and the now most widely reproduced picture of Austen is of a diminutive, large-eyed, round-faced girl with trembling lips (and a very awkward figure), not the cross and impatient-looking woman of Cassandra’s sketch. One of her relatives said: ‘it is a very pleasing, sweet face, -tho’, I confess, to not thinking it much like the original;- but that, the public will not be able to detect.’

But as Claudia Johnson points out in Jane Austen’s Cults and Cultures, there’s no record of Cassandra’s sketch before 1869. She painted many watercolour miniatures, but this one isn’t mentioned in her will or letters, or in the list she made of Austenian keepsakes. The National Portrait Gallery decided to accept it as authentic – as many Janeites have – out of custom rather than evidence. The only undisputed image of Austen we have is another of Cassandra’s watercolours. Stolen hastily while she sat outside with her bonnet untied, it shows Austen with her back to us, her face obstinately hidden. I think that’s the image I’d like to see on the £10 note.

Portrait of Jane Austen by Cassandra Austen.

Comments on “Austen’s Face”

  1. kittentoast says:

    Fun post! I personally don’t see the amended versions of Jane’s portrait as any kind of whitewash. Cassandra was a mediocre artist, guilty of the standard amateur dodges in the face of portraiture difficulty – just leave it unfinished, it looks more arty that way. Just draw the clothes – faces are so pedestrian. Oh, please!

    I agree that the world craves an authentic Jane Austen likeness, and it’s beyond tragic that we’ll probably never see one. This doesn’t mean Cassandra’s awkward sketch should be held up as the platonic ideal of Jane’s face. The problem isn’t that Austen looks cross in it – it’s that it’s a terrible drawing. The facial proportions are way off, and the treatment is completely flat. It’s not even an engaging example of naive art.

    Yes, the softened portraits by Andrews don’t capture anything like the force of personality Jane Austen must have had. She was unusual in her talentss, her insights, her choice of mode of expression. Some aspects of her world view were unconventional, and others conformed closely to the assumptions of her milieu. She was a complex individual, and the “improved” portrait treatments don’t express this complexity at all. But neither does the bizarre sketch produced by Cassandra.

    I want to like Cassandra, but everything I’ve learned about her makes me angry. She was the one who burned all those letters, for one. And, when faced with the difficult task of creating a likeness of a woman who was not only her sister, but one of the most interesting personalities and powerful talents of her age (or any age), what does she do? She paints her BACK. I’m sorry, but that just makes me want to scream.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • andymartinink on Reacher v. Parker: Slayground definitely next on my agenda. But to be fair to Lee Child, as per the Forbes analysis, there is clearly a massive collective reader-writer ...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: And in Breakout, Parker, in prison, teams up with a black guy to escape; another white con dislikes it but accepts the necessity; Parker is absolutely...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: Parker may not have the integrity and honesty of Marlowe, but I'd argue that Richard Stark writes with far more of both than Raymond Chandler does: Ch...
    • Christopher Tayler on Reacher v. Parker: Good to see someone holding up standards. The explanation is that I had thoughts - or words - left over from writing about Lee Child. (For Chandler se...
    • Geoff Roberts on Reacher v. Parker: ..."praised in the London Review of Books" Just read the article on Lee Child in a certain literary review and was surprised to find this rave notice...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement