Jane and the Genius of the Place

The "genius" in the title has a fun, unexpected meaning in that it's a landscaping term. In this one, Jane is staying with her wealthy brother and his family at their country estate. Landscaping and architecture come up a lot. One of my favorite things about this series is that I learn a lot about the details of life in early Nineteenth Century England, but all while trying to figure out a murder mystery.

In this case, the victim is an infamous woman who may be a spy for Napoleon. Everyone suspects so, but was she killed to keep her from learning something or to prevent her from telling something that she already knew? And if she wasn't a spy, what then?

There's an important clue in the early chapters that's pretty obvious, but Jane and her fellow investigators (her brother is also the area magistrate) missed. That's annoying, but Genius of the Place is otherwise a great, twisty mystery is a picturesque setting. 

And outside of that one clue, Barron's Jane Austen is as observant, insightful, and witty as I want her to be. Her adventures in this series are historical fact as far as I'm concerned.

Jane and the Wandering Eye

This was a fun book to revisit after finally getting to see Bath myself a few years ago. 

It's not my favorite in the series, mostly I think because of the Will They Won't They between Jane and a character named Lord Harold Trowbridge. Barron is great at bringing Austen's historical family and acquaintances to life, but Trowbridge is rare for the series in that he's a recurring character created entirely by Barron herself. And he's great.

He was introduced in the first Austen mystery as a potential suspect in the murder, a gentleman rogue who both infuriates and intrigues Austen. At least at first. When all is revealed, she's more intrigued than infuriated.

He mostly sits out the second book, but makes a full, welcome return in this one. We know enough about him now that we also know he's going to be an ally in Austen's investigation, but Barron reintroduces tension by showing that Austen and Trowbridge are clearly attracted to each other. Sadly, they come from very different social stations and Trowbridge's work keeps him moving around, so there are Obstacles. 

It's a fun, compelling relationship, but in the Will They Won't They of it all, history has clearly revealed that They Won't. What keeps me interested is the question of Why Not. Barron is too good a writer not to have thought this through, so I trust that she has a plan for the couple. And I'm along for the ride of learning what that plan is.

Not that Wandering Eye gives any clues about that, which is what affects my enjoyment of the story some. It's only Trowbridge's second appearance, so the goal of the book (as far their relationship is concerned) is to push them back together and make us dig them as a potential couple. Which it does. I'm just impatient for more.

As for the mystery itself, it's good, but the backdrop of Bath's theatre community can't compare with the ghosts and pirates of the first two novels.

Jane and the Man of the Cloth

Jane Austen's second mystery has her vacationing with her family in the seaside village of Lyme. The town is famous for its harbor wall called the Cobb, which Austen included in her novel Persuasion (though it will be a long time before this fictional version of Austen writes that book). The Cobb is also an important feature in The Man of the Cloth since that's where the first dead body is found. Austen of course takes an interest in the murder (for good reasons that I won't spoil here) and begins to look into it.

I like the setting of the previous mystery a little more with its old manor house, but Lyme is quaint and located near dramatic cliffs, so I enjoy spending time there too. The mystery is good with lots of characters to explore and unravel and I love the element of a mysterious red-cloaked girl wandering the sea cliffs with a lantern.

Jane and the Unpleasantness at Scargrave Manor

I've re-read this several times, but recently did it again in order to catch up to the rest of the series (which I'll also jot some notes about here in yet another attempt to figure out what to do with this blog).

I love the series. I've always known who Jane Austen was and what she wrote, but it was Stephanie Barron (a pen-name for Francine Mathews) who introduced me to Austen as a human being who happened to also write several classic novels. Her Austen is observant, smart, and funny. The mysteries tend to be spooky, but even when they aren't, they're compelling. Barron includes great details to bring the historical period to life and has created a fantastic cast of supporting characters (some based on real people, but not all) who follow Jane from book to book. 

This one picks up right after Jane has rejected a marriage proposal. It would have been a good match for practical purposes, but she didn't love him. Her decision created some drama in the family and community, so in this novel she escapes to stay with a recently married friend and her husband. And when the husband dies under suspicious circumstances and people start looking side-eyed at Jane's friend, Jane takes it on herself to find out what really happened. 

And there may be a family ghost involved.

The story tends to drag a little for me in the middle these days, but I think that's because I'm so familiar with it that I'm eager to get to the final revelations at the end. It certainly didn't feel slow the first time I read it.

Thinking About God

Evan Hanson and I have talked for a couple of years about producing a feature on After Lunch where we talk about the intersection of religion, philosophy, and art. The word "art" might give the wrong impression. Mostly we're thinking about movies and TV shows that spark ideas in us about religion and philosophy. 

We're very serious about doing it, but if you listen to After Lunch, you know that Evan's wife is ill and has been for a while. So Evan's time for podcasting is limited and it's impossible to predict when we'll get around to adding this series to the show.

When we first started talking about it, Evan came up with a list of topics that we could discuss. So while I try to do something with this blog, I think it might be good for me to take a stab at writing about each of these topics a little. Not instead of producing the episodes or in any way competing with that project, but just as a form of note-taking for myself. When we do get around to the series, I may use some of this or I may find that I've completely changed my mind. And it will certainly be true that conversations with Evan will challenge how I think about these topics. He's done at least as much thinking about religion as I have and endlessly more study of the world's philosophers. 

His idea for the first episode is a natural place to begin: Introductions. It'll just be a chance for us to talk about our backgrounds with religion, spirituality, and philosophy and why we're both interested in discussing those things with each other on a podcast. Evan has questions about how religion, spirituality, and philosophy are alike and how they're different. And what our relationships are to religious and philosophical texts: how we read and apply them.

I've only done basic high school study of philosophy, though I'm very interested in big ideas and excited to hear Evan explain them so that we can talk them over. I've spent a lot more time on religion and spirituality - my whole life really - and it's going to be a challenge not to ramble about my background. I'll try to be concise.

I was raised by Christian parents and have always believed in that view of God. I have doubts that I'll talk about in future posts and eventually on the podcast, but I cannot shake off the belief that someone created all of this. I don't believe this is opposed to Science. I'm sure this will get fleshed out later too, but I believe that Faith and Science are answering two different questions and that we come closest to the truth when we use them together. 

I passed the point where walking away from my belief in the Christian view of God is even a possibility. There's no part of me that wants to, however many questions I have about him. But that's mostly because I've spent my life asking those questions and receiving good answers. As it turned out, my biggest questions weren't about the believability of God, but about specific ideas about him that I heard as a kid. When I kept an open mind about the theology and allowed my vision of God to change and grow, I found that I was always led to a view of him that made sense. 

I got my Bachelors degree in Theology with the intent of going full time into ministry, but one of the benefits of that education was that I learned I didn't want to become a professional minister. I don't regret a dollar or minute that I spent though. I learned new ways of thinking about God and Scripture that I've used the rest of my life and have shared with other people. 

This is getting long, so I'll save for another post the questions about how religion, spirituality, and philosophy are alike to me and how I think they're different. And what my current relationship is to the Bible, the religious text I'm most familiar with, and how I read and apply it.