Insufferable presumption!

The New York Times and Gawker discuss the Austen beauty myth. Was she pretty? Wasn't she? I kind of agree with the Gawk when I ask: who gives a flying fuck? Honestly, the Times just knows people are mad obsessed with saint Jane and they're trying to cash in on Austen-Mania with this drivel.

Why not publish a thoughtful article about, oh, let's see...anything, instead of horribly biased election coverage and sniveling features about the trials and tribulations of the upper-upper-upper class in Manhahattan? (What's with designer diapers? Have you been to the Hampton lately? Wot, who cares?) They're trying to Sunday Styles-ify Jane A, and I won't let them. I'll leave that to Anne Hathaway.

Thanks to Romancing the Tome for the ingenious way of summing it up: "they've gone all Caroline Bingley on Jane Austen."

And my favorite Gawker commenter on this thread (someone knows their JA) who said "she's handsome enough to tempt me." Hahahahahaha that was a hi-larious Austen in-joke. My bosom is heaving with laughter, like, right now.

In conclusion:

• Is this to be borne? It shall not.
• I am most seriously displeased.