What do you think?
Rate this book
Pride and Promiscuity: The Lost Sex Scenes of Jane Austen [Parody]
In 1999, two amateur Jane Austen scholars staying at an English estate stumbled upon a hidden cache of manuscript pages and made the literary discovery of the century -- the lost sex scenes from Jane Austen's novels. Published here for the first time, the lost pages display Emma taking self-satisfaction to a whole new level, and reveal Henry Crawford's thorough exploration of "brotherly love" at Mansfield Park. If you've ever wondered what really happened in the drawing rooms of Austen's beloved characters, Pride and Promiscuity will satisfy your curiosity...and a whole lot more.
160 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 2001
8 people are currently reading
430 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 103 reviews
February 24, 2014
Well, who hasn't wanted to beat Mr. Collins with a riding crop?
May 24, 2019
Once again, misguided curiosity has taken me to a mediocre book. Pride and Promiscuity: The Lost Sex Scenes of Jane Austen by Arielle Eckstut and Dennis Ashton wants to be funny (or maybe even scandalous?) but is not. It fails completely in execution. My only genuine snort of amusement came at the very end in “Persuasion: the Prequel.” A character is thinking how great his large, full-length mirrors will look in his library once he’s removed all the books. That’s rather amusing. As for all the other “lost” sex scenes, mostly I rolled my eyes at the groan-worthy (and obvious) double entendres. The sex scenes are not sexy or funny; the puns and juvenile humor are so tasteless and idiotic as to make the reader feel embarrassed for the authors. Ironically, these supposed lurid sex scenes are mostly innuendo and vague descriptions. I’ve read Judy Blume young adult novels that were more explicit (and better written).
The premise of Pride and Promiscuity is that two American tourists retracing the steps of Jane Austen just happen to find lost scenes from Jane Austen’s novels. They are sex scenes that Austen had to excise from her novels in order to publish them. This gag is carried throughout with an introduction by a fake Jane Austen scholar and scholarly footnotes to articles that (probably) don’t exist. Each sex scene is presented within the context of its surrounding story. Eckstut and Ashton often quote preceding text from the novel (the actual novel) in italics, then insert the discovered sex scene where fictitious Austen scholars decided it was cut. Sometimes this works, but often it does not.
The premise of this joke does not work. These sex scenes (if they truly existed) would have changed the course of the novels and how the characters behaved towards each other. If Austen had written a lesbian threesome between Jane Bennet, Mrs. Hurst and Miss Bingley (Pride and Prejudice), the rest of the novel would have been entirely different. Scenes such as these could not be simply cut from the novel. Also, the set-up for the sex scene is usually wrong. The authors/fake editors/Austen scholars (?) introduce the scenes by saying, well, scholars have always wondered about this or that event in the novel because it’s never explained—oh, but now that we have these scenes, the confusion is gone. This scholarly confusion is completely fictitious and the characters’ actions are fully explained by the events of the story. No fake sex scenes are required. I know I’m being pedantic about this, but c’mon. If you’re going to do a (fake) scholarly interpretation of the novels, do it better than this. I’m not a scholar, but I’ve read most of these novels a few times and I cried foul on the reasoning immediately. Also, the sex scenes often do not match Austen’s voice and (even more clumsily) tell the story from a POV not seen again in the novel, such as the excised scene from P&P. It’s told from Jane’s POV, however the rest of the novel is never from her POV. So Austen did that just to write a ridiculous sex scene?
I wouldn’t be surprised if the authors made a list of various sex acts then matched them to characters from each book, checking them off as they wrote. There’s lesbian threesome sex, masturbation, fantasy, incest, spanking, sex toys, cross-dressing, more serious BDSM, and “buggery” (gay sex). All of the scenes are ridiculous and void of humor. I found the implied bestiality between Edward and his horse (Sense and Sensibility) the most tasteless. This scene, which is actually an Elinor and Marianne Dashwood sister chat about their sexual experiences, is also the most inane. The sisters’ dialogue resembles two dipshit teenagers from a modern YA novel (“Did you touch it? Yes, I touched it!) and is eye-rolling stupid. The authors went to great lengths to keep finding objects or words that imply “penis”: swords, billiard cues, etc. There’s also suggestive phrases: a male character’s “hard nature,” and “premature ecstasy.” More eye-rolling. The incest scene between Henry and Mary Crawford of Mansfield Park is just…yuck. The two characters (who are horrible people) are made even worse by mocking Fanny and Edmund for being overly straitlaced and religious. This pissed me off for some reason because the accusations are false and this nastiness is clumsy and indicative of the juvenile sense of humor that the authors of this book possess.
I know some reviewers found the spanking scene between Charlotte and Mr. Collins to be funny, but I didn’t. It’s too over the top stupid for me. It requires (as do all the scenes) the characters to behave in ways that are outside of their personalities. It’s not that you cannot create sex scenes for all of these people (well, the married ones), it’s just the scenes need to correspond with their personalities. Realistically, would Jane Austen have any clue about this kind of sexual variety? You’re talking about a woman who never married, whose father was a reverend. She didn’t even move about in the kind of society that would have known about or engaged in these kinds of activities. Another reason the premise of Pride and Promiscuity doesn’t work for: Austen didn’t have the experience to have the imagination to create these scenes. And if you think, well, no one did at that time—au contraire! I have before me a book called The Pearl. It is a collection of Victorian England stories published in an underground magazine of erotica. A retired professor who collected Victorian erotica donated his whole collection to the university library I was employed at and I, out of curiosity, snapped up this book. It’s very explicit and devoid of any kind of romance or other adventures. Just lots of vivid descriptions of throbbing cocks and all that. That’s not really my thing so I’m going to donate it to my local library, but it really puts the fictitious lost Jane Austen sex scenes to shame. They’re children’s bedtime stories compared with this stuff.
I don’t recommend Pride and Promiscuity. The premise is shaky and doesn’t hold up and worst of all, it’s just not funny. The authors could have done this better by writing an entirely original novel in the style of Austen and hailing it as a lost Jane Austen novel—but radically different in that it includes sex scenes. I don’t think that would have successful either based on their inability to write humor, but at least they wouldn’t have put their grimy paws all over beloved Austen classics.
The premise of Pride and Promiscuity is that two American tourists retracing the steps of Jane Austen just happen to find lost scenes from Jane Austen’s novels. They are sex scenes that Austen had to excise from her novels in order to publish them. This gag is carried throughout with an introduction by a fake Jane Austen scholar and scholarly footnotes to articles that (probably) don’t exist. Each sex scene is presented within the context of its surrounding story. Eckstut and Ashton often quote preceding text from the novel (the actual novel) in italics, then insert the discovered sex scene where fictitious Austen scholars decided it was cut. Sometimes this works, but often it does not.
The premise of this joke does not work. These sex scenes (if they truly existed) would have changed the course of the novels and how the characters behaved towards each other. If Austen had written a lesbian threesome between Jane Bennet, Mrs. Hurst and Miss Bingley (Pride and Prejudice), the rest of the novel would have been entirely different. Scenes such as these could not be simply cut from the novel. Also, the set-up for the sex scene is usually wrong. The authors/fake editors/Austen scholars (?) introduce the scenes by saying, well, scholars have always wondered about this or that event in the novel because it’s never explained—oh, but now that we have these scenes, the confusion is gone. This scholarly confusion is completely fictitious and the characters’ actions are fully explained by the events of the story. No fake sex scenes are required. I know I’m being pedantic about this, but c’mon. If you’re going to do a (fake) scholarly interpretation of the novels, do it better than this. I’m not a scholar, but I’ve read most of these novels a few times and I cried foul on the reasoning immediately. Also, the sex scenes often do not match Austen’s voice and (even more clumsily) tell the story from a POV not seen again in the novel, such as the excised scene from P&P. It’s told from Jane’s POV, however the rest of the novel is never from her POV. So Austen did that just to write a ridiculous sex scene?
I wouldn’t be surprised if the authors made a list of various sex acts then matched them to characters from each book, checking them off as they wrote. There’s lesbian threesome sex, masturbation, fantasy, incest, spanking, sex toys, cross-dressing, more serious BDSM, and “buggery” (gay sex). All of the scenes are ridiculous and void of humor. I found the implied bestiality between Edward and his horse (Sense and Sensibility) the most tasteless. This scene, which is actually an Elinor and Marianne Dashwood sister chat about their sexual experiences, is also the most inane. The sisters’ dialogue resembles two dipshit teenagers from a modern YA novel (“Did you touch it? Yes, I touched it!) and is eye-rolling stupid. The authors went to great lengths to keep finding objects or words that imply “penis”: swords, billiard cues, etc. There’s also suggestive phrases: a male character’s “hard nature,” and “premature ecstasy.” More eye-rolling. The incest scene between Henry and Mary Crawford of Mansfield Park is just…yuck. The two characters (who are horrible people) are made even worse by mocking Fanny and Edmund for being overly straitlaced and religious. This pissed me off for some reason because the accusations are false and this nastiness is clumsy and indicative of the juvenile sense of humor that the authors of this book possess.
I know some reviewers found the spanking scene between Charlotte and Mr. Collins to be funny, but I didn’t. It’s too over the top stupid for me. It requires (as do all the scenes) the characters to behave in ways that are outside of their personalities. It’s not that you cannot create sex scenes for all of these people (well, the married ones), it’s just the scenes need to correspond with their personalities. Realistically, would Jane Austen have any clue about this kind of sexual variety? You’re talking about a woman who never married, whose father was a reverend. She didn’t even move about in the kind of society that would have known about or engaged in these kinds of activities. Another reason the premise of Pride and Promiscuity doesn’t work for: Austen didn’t have the experience to have the imagination to create these scenes. And if you think, well, no one did at that time—au contraire! I have before me a book called The Pearl. It is a collection of Victorian England stories published in an underground magazine of erotica. A retired professor who collected Victorian erotica donated his whole collection to the university library I was employed at and I, out of curiosity, snapped up this book. It’s very explicit and devoid of any kind of romance or other adventures. Just lots of vivid descriptions of throbbing cocks and all that. That’s not really my thing so I’m going to donate it to my local library, but it really puts the fictitious lost Jane Austen sex scenes to shame. They’re children’s bedtime stories compared with this stuff.
I don’t recommend Pride and Promiscuity. The premise is shaky and doesn’t hold up and worst of all, it’s just not funny. The authors could have done this better by writing an entirely original novel in the style of Austen and hailing it as a lost Jane Austen novel—but radically different in that it includes sex scenes. I don’t think that would have successful either based on their inability to write humor, but at least they wouldn’t have put their grimy paws all over beloved Austen classics.
July 16, 2019
My sister gave me this book many many Christmases ago with a note to say I would be absolutely mortified. That it was appalling. I am writing this review solely to confirm that she was indeed quite astute in her prediction. In short, she was right. Appalling just about covers it.
January 10, 2022
Dreadful. It tries so hard to be funny, farcical, and ‘maybe’ sexy. It fails. Poor writing is just poor writing. Low brow humor.
January 4, 2012
The idea behind this book is really fun but the way it is written is so unoriginal, so unlike Austen! The dialogues definitely lacked Austen's wit, fast pacing and precise writing. What I found particularly amazing was what Elsa A. Solender (President of the Jane Austen Society of North America) had to say about this book:"A wickedly funny collection of X-rated parodies of Jane Austen's fiction…echoing her incomparable style with astonishing fidelity" Astonishing fidelity? I'm wondering if we read the same book! And this woman is supposed to be the President of the Jane Austen Society of North America??!! Stunning! Anyway, the stories become very repetitive and, after a few chapters, the book is just plainly boring...
Jane Austen would definitely *not* approve, mainly because the book is so badly written!
Jane Austen would definitely *not* approve, mainly because the book is so badly written!
August 21, 2019
For my full review: https://girlwithherheadinabook.co.uk/...
For me, the strangest thing about this book is that it was published in 2003. Discovering it by accident in a charity shop, I assumed that it was part of the post-Fifty Shades bonanza for stuffing sex scenes into classic fiction. But then I remembered that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Lack of overt passion in Austen's novels has been a sticking point since her books first hit the shelves. Even Charlotte Brontë found Austen's writing hard to connect with on these grounds. So instead, remedies are sought and the main solution is fan fiction. Strange to say, but this is actually not the first piece of Austen-inspired erotica that I have ever read however it is by far the silliest.
The premise is that two Austen scholars were staying at an English estate in 1999 and they uncovered a cache of letters by Austen which had been hidden after her death by her sister Cassandra. The letters detail Austen's battles with her publisher who express their horror at the scandalous content of her novels and demand that the offending scenes be cut out. She was forced to comply but with Pride and Promiscuity, we are finally reading her books as she really wanted them to be read. Ahem.
What makes me laugh about the other reviews is how so many of them seem to have completely missed the joke. 'Some' of the scenarios weren't realistic, bleated one. Another complained that Eckstut hadn't 'quite' captured Austen's voice. Yes, the scenes are ludicrous and far-fetched. Of course they are. This is a book about sex scenes in Jane Austen. Get a grip! Jane Bennet's illness at Netherfield is revealed as being due to the trauma at having to fend off the lesbian advances of both of Mr Bingley's sisters. Elinor and Marianne Dashwood discuss their sexual exploits which include Elinor pleasuring both Edward Ferrars and his horse. Henry and Mary Crawford's relationship appears to have shades of the Lannisters about it. This book is a pastiche. We are not being asked to take it seriously. To be frank, I found the earnest efforts within Scenes Jane Austen Never Wrote infinitely more irksomene since their authors clearly believed them to be credible.
Radio 4's sitcom Old Harry's Game has a recurring joke where Jane Austen is revealed to be a foul-mouthed Cockney who is quick with her fists. I could snigger at Pride and Promiscuity in a similar vein. It's not actually particularly explicit. If you want tasteful imaginings of intimacy between the new Mr and Mrs Darcy, I think you'd be better with Scenes Jane Austen Never Wrote. Here they just bonk on the grass while making awkward chit-chat. But even that is a clear play on the sexual tension which is so obvious when they have their unexpected encounter at Pemberley. Yes, it's sending up the novel rather than something to be taken seriously, but that doesn't mean that Eckstut hasn't picked up on something.
There are definite moments which raised a laugh. I had to admire how Eckstut had pieced together so many of the most memorable phrases from Austen's personal correspondence and jigsawed it together to produce letters explaining the book's existence. The imagined scene where Charlotte Collins (nee Lucas) dresses up as Lady Catherine in dominatrix mode and orders her husband around was probably the most successful of the novel. We all knew that there was something very weird in Mr Collins' servility towards his beloved patroness. The idea of Emma pleasuring herself out of sheer delight at her own wonderfulness also has a ring of truth. The imagined scene of Mr Palmer utterly ignoring his wife's attempts to dream up fantasy scenarios made me giggle given that a university lecturer once commented in class that it was a real mystery how the two of them ever conceived a child. I also loved the idea that The Watsons had had to be abandoned entirely because it was just pure filth. However. These were isolated moments among a lot of other scenes which were less successful. Ultimately it was not as entertaining a read as I might have hoped.
Despite presenting us with this anarchic re-imagining of the sex lives of Austen's characters, Eckstut's writing never feels particularly creative. ITV's Lost in Austen introduced a version of Wickham who was a true gentleman and who had taken the blame for Georgiana Darcy's attempt to seduce him to avoid her getting into trouble with her brother. We thought we knew the story, they flipped it on its head - it was hilarious. There are no equivalent moments here. Eckstut has tried to be outlandish here but aside from the Collins episode, her inventions fail to really bite into the text. More pertinently, in her desire to shock, she missed out some of the more obvious pairings. What kind of a relationship were Edward Ferrars and Lucy Steele having? How did Lucy end up switching brothers? Then there's Willoughby who was an accomplished and shameless seducer. Did Isabella Thorpe actually have sex with Frederick Tilney? Weirdest of them all, how did Henry Crawford end up sleeping with Maria Bertram when he was supposedly in love with Fanny Price? What Eckstut - and indeed many Austen readers - seem to have missed is that there are no 'lost sex scenes'. The sex in Austen has always been there. You just have to pay attention.
I have probably mentioned before about when I first read His Dark Materials at the age of fourteen, how I was startled to hear two of my male friends discussing the sex scene between Will and Lyra. I was certain that no such thing existed. When I reread the book a few years ago, I spotted it straight away. So it is with Jane Austen. In John Mullan's spectacular What Matters in Jane Austen, he analyses the presence of sex in the novels and the important role of sexual desire across Austen's works. Helena Kelly's The Secret Radical takes the topic further, theorising that a key passage in Northanger Abbey represents masturbation, that Harriet Smith in Emma is Miss Bates' illegitimate child and that Edward Ferrars may be sexually deviant. She also traces out some of the disturbing implications around the sad history of Colonel Brandon's childhood love Eliza. Through her anti-heroine Mary Crawford, Jane Austen showed that she understood a rude joke about 'rears and vices'. Her side character Tom Bertram observed that Mrs Grant must lead a 'dull life' with the doctor and be in need of a lover. The assumed Prim Jane Austen does not exist.
We know that sex is not overt in Austen but much of the action of the novels depends upon it. If it is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a large fortune must be in want of a wife, why is that? Because of male sexual desire; if a man has enough money to support a wife, it is assumed that he will want one. Mr Darcy is drawn to Elizabeth Bennet so strongly that all of his attempts to restrain himself are futile. He proposes even though he believes her to be an entirely unsuitable wife because he desires her. Mr Collins and Mr Elton are both characters described as being ready for marriage - this seems to be an Austen euphemism. Then there are the various husbands across all the books who seem to have blundered into wedlock with wives who they cannot respect because they were fooled by a fair face. Mr Bennet, Mr Palmer, John Knightley, Charles Musgrove - the list goes on. They may bicker, squabble or even ignore each other in public but plentiful offspring appear nonetheless. Even Charlotte Lucas, who manages her household so that she can spend as little time as possible with her husband, is pregnant by the end of Pride and Prejudice.
Pride and Promiscuity bases its humour on the assumption that Jane Austen definitely knew nothing about sex, therefore it is comedic to write a book with a version of her being depraved. Since we know that the first point is not true, the joke doesn't quite work. Rather than ignoring sex, Austen's novels are often poking fun at the extent to which human behaviour is driven by it. So if Pride and Promiscuity is not entirely successful as a parody, does it work as effective pornography? Well. Here, I have to admit that I am not really the right person to judge. But I think probably not. A fun read but not one I am ever likely to revisit.
For me, the strangest thing about this book is that it was published in 2003. Discovering it by accident in a charity shop, I assumed that it was part of the post-Fifty Shades bonanza for stuffing sex scenes into classic fiction. But then I remembered that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Lack of overt passion in Austen's novels has been a sticking point since her books first hit the shelves. Even Charlotte Brontë found Austen's writing hard to connect with on these grounds. So instead, remedies are sought and the main solution is fan fiction. Strange to say, but this is actually not the first piece of Austen-inspired erotica that I have ever read however it is by far the silliest.
The premise is that two Austen scholars were staying at an English estate in 1999 and they uncovered a cache of letters by Austen which had been hidden after her death by her sister Cassandra. The letters detail Austen's battles with her publisher who express their horror at the scandalous content of her novels and demand that the offending scenes be cut out. She was forced to comply but with Pride and Promiscuity, we are finally reading her books as she really wanted them to be read. Ahem.
What makes me laugh about the other reviews is how so many of them seem to have completely missed the joke. 'Some' of the scenarios weren't realistic, bleated one. Another complained that Eckstut hadn't 'quite' captured Austen's voice. Yes, the scenes are ludicrous and far-fetched. Of course they are. This is a book about sex scenes in Jane Austen. Get a grip! Jane Bennet's illness at Netherfield is revealed as being due to the trauma at having to fend off the lesbian advances of both of Mr Bingley's sisters. Elinor and Marianne Dashwood discuss their sexual exploits which include Elinor pleasuring both Edward Ferrars and his horse. Henry and Mary Crawford's relationship appears to have shades of the Lannisters about it. This book is a pastiche. We are not being asked to take it seriously. To be frank, I found the earnest efforts within Scenes Jane Austen Never Wrote infinitely more irksomene since their authors clearly believed them to be credible.
Radio 4's sitcom Old Harry's Game has a recurring joke where Jane Austen is revealed to be a foul-mouthed Cockney who is quick with her fists. I could snigger at Pride and Promiscuity in a similar vein. It's not actually particularly explicit. If you want tasteful imaginings of intimacy between the new Mr and Mrs Darcy, I think you'd be better with Scenes Jane Austen Never Wrote. Here they just bonk on the grass while making awkward chit-chat. But even that is a clear play on the sexual tension which is so obvious when they have their unexpected encounter at Pemberley. Yes, it's sending up the novel rather than something to be taken seriously, but that doesn't mean that Eckstut hasn't picked up on something.
There are definite moments which raised a laugh. I had to admire how Eckstut had pieced together so many of the most memorable phrases from Austen's personal correspondence and jigsawed it together to produce letters explaining the book's existence. The imagined scene where Charlotte Collins (nee Lucas) dresses up as Lady Catherine in dominatrix mode and orders her husband around was probably the most successful of the novel. We all knew that there was something very weird in Mr Collins' servility towards his beloved patroness. The idea of Emma pleasuring herself out of sheer delight at her own wonderfulness also has a ring of truth. The imagined scene of Mr Palmer utterly ignoring his wife's attempts to dream up fantasy scenarios made me giggle given that a university lecturer once commented in class that it was a real mystery how the two of them ever conceived a child. I also loved the idea that The Watsons had had to be abandoned entirely because it was just pure filth. However. These were isolated moments among a lot of other scenes which were less successful. Ultimately it was not as entertaining a read as I might have hoped.
Despite presenting us with this anarchic re-imagining of the sex lives of Austen's characters, Eckstut's writing never feels particularly creative. ITV's Lost in Austen introduced a version of Wickham who was a true gentleman and who had taken the blame for Georgiana Darcy's attempt to seduce him to avoid her getting into trouble with her brother. We thought we knew the story, they flipped it on its head - it was hilarious. There are no equivalent moments here. Eckstut has tried to be outlandish here but aside from the Collins episode, her inventions fail to really bite into the text. More pertinently, in her desire to shock, she missed out some of the more obvious pairings. What kind of a relationship were Edward Ferrars and Lucy Steele having? How did Lucy end up switching brothers? Then there's Willoughby who was an accomplished and shameless seducer. Did Isabella Thorpe actually have sex with Frederick Tilney? Weirdest of them all, how did Henry Crawford end up sleeping with Maria Bertram when he was supposedly in love with Fanny Price? What Eckstut - and indeed many Austen readers - seem to have missed is that there are no 'lost sex scenes'. The sex in Austen has always been there. You just have to pay attention.
I have probably mentioned before about when I first read His Dark Materials at the age of fourteen, how I was startled to hear two of my male friends discussing the sex scene between Will and Lyra. I was certain that no such thing existed. When I reread the book a few years ago, I spotted it straight away. So it is with Jane Austen. In John Mullan's spectacular What Matters in Jane Austen, he analyses the presence of sex in the novels and the important role of sexual desire across Austen's works. Helena Kelly's The Secret Radical takes the topic further, theorising that a key passage in Northanger Abbey represents masturbation, that Harriet Smith in Emma is Miss Bates' illegitimate child and that Edward Ferrars may be sexually deviant. She also traces out some of the disturbing implications around the sad history of Colonel Brandon's childhood love Eliza. Through her anti-heroine Mary Crawford, Jane Austen showed that she understood a rude joke about 'rears and vices'. Her side character Tom Bertram observed that Mrs Grant must lead a 'dull life' with the doctor and be in need of a lover. The assumed Prim Jane Austen does not exist.
We know that sex is not overt in Austen but much of the action of the novels depends upon it. If it is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a large fortune must be in want of a wife, why is that? Because of male sexual desire; if a man has enough money to support a wife, it is assumed that he will want one. Mr Darcy is drawn to Elizabeth Bennet so strongly that all of his attempts to restrain himself are futile. He proposes even though he believes her to be an entirely unsuitable wife because he desires her. Mr Collins and Mr Elton are both characters described as being ready for marriage - this seems to be an Austen euphemism. Then there are the various husbands across all the books who seem to have blundered into wedlock with wives who they cannot respect because they were fooled by a fair face. Mr Bennet, Mr Palmer, John Knightley, Charles Musgrove - the list goes on. They may bicker, squabble or even ignore each other in public but plentiful offspring appear nonetheless. Even Charlotte Lucas, who manages her household so that she can spend as little time as possible with her husband, is pregnant by the end of Pride and Prejudice.
Pride and Promiscuity bases its humour on the assumption that Jane Austen definitely knew nothing about sex, therefore it is comedic to write a book with a version of her being depraved. Since we know that the first point is not true, the joke doesn't quite work. Rather than ignoring sex, Austen's novels are often poking fun at the extent to which human behaviour is driven by it. So if Pride and Promiscuity is not entirely successful as a parody, does it work as effective pornography? Well. Here, I have to admit that I am not really the right person to judge. But I think probably not. A fun read but not one I am ever likely to revisit.
February 13, 2021
The. Worst. Shit. Do not recommend. Not even my love of Austen and tongue-in-cheek humor could prevent me from flinging this into my nearest Little Library at the first opportunity. Go darken someone else's bookshelf you slim hack.
March 30, 2017
Yeah, what do I think about this book..? Funny but also a bit rude, call me a prude but I want my Austen sex-free. The Mr & Mrs Collins part was fun though
March 1, 2021
This book is an odd read, and not for the reasons it would lead you to believe. Based on the title and premise (a rather flimsy premise of 2 Americans stumbling upon Austen's lost work) I would have expected this book to be either half decent erotica or a tongue and cheek humorous retelling of Austen's works. It somehow manages to be neither, and so while the stories were charming in their own way and an easy read I'm not convinced the authors achieved what they set out to with this novel.
Read
July 16, 2018Absolute rubbish!
November 4, 2014
This review and others posted over at
my blog
.
From the back of the book: In 2002, an amateur Jane Austen scholar, while staying at Hertfordshire estate, stumbled upon a hidden cache of manuscript pages and made an extraordinary literary discovery - lost scenes from Jane Austen's novels that reveal an altogether different dimension of her oeuvre.
This book, much like The Princess Bride, would have you believe that it's contents are legitimate; except that William Goldman really tricked me into thinking his story was real :| . Eckstut proves that her findings of Auten's lost manuscripts are legitimate by including a letter of approval from English professor, Elfrida Drummond, authoress of splendid works, such as Pride in Punctuation and Proof and Prejudice. Alas, dear readers, Jane Austen didn't hide away sex scenes that her publisher refused to allow into all six of her novels, but this book was still a quick, quirky little read.
There's nothing erotic (in my opinion) about this novel, so if you're looking for detailed intimate moments between Elizabeth and Darcy, per say, you should probably look elsewhere. The best thing about this book is that Eckstut did her best to stick to the language of Austen's time and the scenes felt almost authentic. I say almost for two reasons: the writing doesn't really have Austen's voice, and some of the scenarios are too ridiculous to be believed. Re: Miss Bingley and Hurst involved in a threesome with Jane Bennett to test her marital suitability to Bingley. Again, there's nothing vulgar or overly explicit in the details, but the themes are intended for adult readers.
Some scenes made me roll my eyes - primarily the one mentioned above, but others did make me chuckle. Re: Emma pleasuring herself to the thought of how useful she is to everyone in her life and "how essential she was to the flawless running of the household." At 145 pages I didn't feel like I wasted my time, and I actually wished it were a little longer. Eckstut had some very clever moments and I would have loved to see them further developed, especially the comedic aspects. This book didn't blow me away, but if you're open-minded and in the mood for a chuckle or two, check it out! If you're looking for hot and heavy Regency-era action, I'd say look elsewhere.
From the back of the book: In 2002, an amateur Jane Austen scholar, while staying at Hertfordshire estate, stumbled upon a hidden cache of manuscript pages and made an extraordinary literary discovery - lost scenes from Jane Austen's novels that reveal an altogether different dimension of her oeuvre.
This book, much like The Princess Bride, would have you believe that it's contents are legitimate; except that William Goldman really tricked me into thinking his story was real :| . Eckstut proves that her findings of Auten's lost manuscripts are legitimate by including a letter of approval from English professor, Elfrida Drummond, authoress of splendid works, such as Pride in Punctuation and Proof and Prejudice. Alas, dear readers, Jane Austen didn't hide away sex scenes that her publisher refused to allow into all six of her novels, but this book was still a quick, quirky little read.
There's nothing erotic (in my opinion) about this novel, so if you're looking for detailed intimate moments between Elizabeth and Darcy, per say, you should probably look elsewhere. The best thing about this book is that Eckstut did her best to stick to the language of Austen's time and the scenes felt almost authentic. I say almost for two reasons: the writing doesn't really have Austen's voice, and some of the scenarios are too ridiculous to be believed. Re: Miss Bingley and Hurst involved in a threesome with Jane Bennett to test her marital suitability to Bingley. Again, there's nothing vulgar or overly explicit in the details, but the themes are intended for adult readers.
Some scenes made me roll my eyes - primarily the one mentioned above, but others did make me chuckle. Re: Emma pleasuring herself to the thought of how useful she is to everyone in her life and "how essential she was to the flawless running of the household." At 145 pages I didn't feel like I wasted my time, and I actually wished it were a little longer. Eckstut had some very clever moments and I would have loved to see them further developed, especially the comedic aspects. This book didn't blow me away, but if you're open-minded and in the mood for a chuckle or two, check it out! If you're looking for hot and heavy Regency-era action, I'd say look elsewhere.
September 9, 2012
Pride and Promiscuity was recommended as a funny read by a member of a Goodreads group I’m in, so I thought I’d give it a try. I wish I’d never bothered.
The book assumes that the author has discovered a hidden cache of explicit scenes which were cut from all Jane Austen’s famous novels. Austen, we are told, was not the typical 19th century prudish spinster; on the contrary, she had a very active imagination and invented all sorts of sexual shenanigans for her characters, which only the horrified consternation of her publishers forced her to cut. My suspension of disbelief was struggling before I’d even got to the scenes themselves, but it’s meant to be a funny book so I did at least try to get into the spirit of things!
Each of the novels has a couple of “lost” scenes, so you will need a pretty good knowledge of Austen’s work to remember who’s who. Some of these were extremely cringe-making, such as Jane Bennett being inspected for fitness to marry Mr Bingley by his sisters (eewwww!) and an incestuous scene between Henry and Mary Crawford from Mansfield Park. Wrong, just wrong. The idea that Jane Austen could have ever even thought of such things is a leap too far for my imagination, and there was a big part of me that thought this was little more than an insult to her memory. The style of writing was also decidedly off, and didn’t come anywhere close to matching Jane Austen’s own mastery of the English language.
You might ask what I expected when I ordered a book like this. I had hoped for a slightly risqué pastiche that would make me laugh, but this wasn’t it. There was just one scene that raised a small smile, in which Charlotte Lucas dresses up as Lady Catherine de Bourgh and takes a riding crop to Mr Collins! All the rest were pretty horrible.
The book assumes that the author has discovered a hidden cache of explicit scenes which were cut from all Jane Austen’s famous novels. Austen, we are told, was not the typical 19th century prudish spinster; on the contrary, she had a very active imagination and invented all sorts of sexual shenanigans for her characters, which only the horrified consternation of her publishers forced her to cut. My suspension of disbelief was struggling before I’d even got to the scenes themselves, but it’s meant to be a funny book so I did at least try to get into the spirit of things!
Each of the novels has a couple of “lost” scenes, so you will need a pretty good knowledge of Austen’s work to remember who’s who. Some of these were extremely cringe-making, such as Jane Bennett being inspected for fitness to marry Mr Bingley by his sisters (eewwww!) and an incestuous scene between Henry and Mary Crawford from Mansfield Park. Wrong, just wrong. The idea that Jane Austen could have ever even thought of such things is a leap too far for my imagination, and there was a big part of me that thought this was little more than an insult to her memory. The style of writing was also decidedly off, and didn’t come anywhere close to matching Jane Austen’s own mastery of the English language.
You might ask what I expected when I ordered a book like this. I had hoped for a slightly risqué pastiche that would make me laugh, but this wasn’t it. There was just one scene that raised a small smile, in which Charlotte Lucas dresses up as Lady Catherine de Bourgh and takes a riding crop to Mr Collins! All the rest were pretty horrible.
March 9, 2022
★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆
Do I believe this to be the actual work of Jane Austen? No. But did I overall enjoy it? Sure. The Introduction at the beginning of the book feels like them saying “This is a genuine lost work of Austen, just trust us.”
But I put that thought aside and just enjoyed the hilarity of the scenes that were included. If the introduction didn’t convince me of it’s authenticity, the outlandish snippets included didn’t help at all.
I will take one of the tamer scenes of Elizabeth and Darcy to show you what I mean:
‘𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤, 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐬 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐡 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐭,’ 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝, 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐝𝐲 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬, ‘𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳.’
[...]
‘𝐈 𝐡𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐰𝐞𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐭 𝐑𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬, 𝐌𝐫. 𝐃𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐲?’ 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐦 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐡’𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐟𝐞𝐥𝐭 𝐮𝐩𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐬.
‘𝐍𝐨, 𝐈 𝐚𝐦 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐭, 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐭. 𝐈𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐠𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐭.’
Do I believe this to be the actual work of Jane Austen? No. But did I overall enjoy it? Sure. The Introduction at the beginning of the book feels like them saying “This is a genuine lost work of Austen, just trust us.”
But I put that thought aside and just enjoyed the hilarity of the scenes that were included. If the introduction didn’t convince me of it’s authenticity, the outlandish snippets included didn’t help at all.
I will take one of the tamer scenes of Elizabeth and Darcy to show you what I mean:
‘𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤, 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐬 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐡 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐭,’ 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝, 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐝𝐲 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬, ‘𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳.’
[...]
‘𝐈 𝐡𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐰𝐞𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐭 𝐑𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬, 𝐌𝐫. 𝐃𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐲?’ 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐦 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐡’𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐟𝐞𝐥𝐭 𝐮𝐩𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐬.
‘𝐍𝐨, 𝐈 𝐚𝐦 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐭, 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐭. 𝐈𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐠𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐭.’
January 22, 2011
I got this in the post today from a bookmoocher in the US. It's not a long book, so I have already read it this evening. It's a bit silly, but quite entertaining. You do need to know the Jane Austen stories, otherwise the characters and how these imagined sex scenes fit into the originals won't mean so much. To be fair, although this is humour, she's done a pretty good job with the language and style and picking up on what kind of perverse little traits some of the characters might have had, were Jane Austen's books more explicit.
February 24, 2016
Mostly it's good fun and occasionally quite sweet. This is one of the few times I've believed in a romantic connection between Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy. I think it could stand to be less teasing and more explicit, but I enjoyed it.
August 17, 2007
This book is hillarious. It gives a completley different look into Jane Austen's mind. Even if it's not real (I haven't made up my mind on that) it's totally worth it.
March 23, 2009
This book was amazing. Graphic but yet still managed to be proper. It was pretty hilarious esp if you've read all the books. I think the pictures and their captions were the best parts.
December 14, 2017
Hilariously bizarre! Perfect for Austen fans who don't mind a bit of bawdy humour.
December 27, 2009
A better parody than Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, but that's not saying much.
February 6, 2020
Yeah big no from me.
The idea is funny. I'm all for fan fiction, I'm all for erotic fan fiction. But this is just bad and really, really boring, surprisingly. I've seen a review saying that these "found" scenes don't fit in where they're supposed to be, and I've got to agree. A couple of the stories are also super uncomfortable to read. I'm usually a "don't like don't read"-kind of fan fic reader, and I'm not a fan of the purity culture that's been really purvasive in fan culture for some time now. But I really don't like reading incest, and I doubt Austen would write a brother/sister couple... cousins? Yeah, that was a bit more normal from what a gather, but not brother and sister. And then there's the first story, which is probably the worst way to start a book ever. This story reads like a sexual assualt in my opinion. Jane does a lot of mental gymnastics to participate in what's happening, and I'm not here for it. Now that I think about it... the two strictly (there's a threesome, also with questionable consent) same-sex stories have consent issues. I find it kind of insulting that the lgbtq+ stories/interactions are painted in a predatory gross light.
I also think the author comes across as super arrogant. Part of it is just how the preface and introduction is written. She keeps writing in this old school style, even for the parts that's supposed to describes what happened whenever she "found" the lost chapters. It comes across as confused and annoying, and overall it doesn't work as a literary device.
I thought this was going to be funny but it really, really wasn't!
The idea is funny. I'm all for fan fiction, I'm all for erotic fan fiction. But this is just bad and really, really boring, surprisingly. I've seen a review saying that these "found" scenes don't fit in where they're supposed to be, and I've got to agree. A couple of the stories are also super uncomfortable to read. I'm usually a "don't like don't read"-kind of fan fic reader, and I'm not a fan of the purity culture that's been really purvasive in fan culture for some time now. But I really don't like reading incest, and I doubt Austen would write a brother/sister couple... cousins? Yeah, that was a bit more normal from what a gather, but not brother and sister. And then there's the first story, which is probably the worst way to start a book ever. This story reads like a sexual assualt in my opinion. Jane does a lot of mental gymnastics to participate in what's happening, and I'm not here for it. Now that I think about it... the two strictly (there's a threesome, also with questionable consent) same-sex stories have consent issues. I find it kind of insulting that the lgbtq+ stories/interactions are painted in a predatory gross light.
I also think the author comes across as super arrogant. Part of it is just how the preface and introduction is written. She keeps writing in this old school style, even for the parts that's supposed to describes what happened whenever she "found" the lost chapters. It comes across as confused and annoying, and overall it doesn't work as a literary device.
I thought this was going to be funny but it really, really wasn't!
unfinished
May 24, 2020Though a short book, I didn’t get very far into this before giving up on it. It’s fiction, of course, but written to seem like a scholarly work. There’s a fair amount of time devoted to a story about how the authors found the lost sex scenes Jane Austen’s editor forced her to cut, asserting their expertise in Austen. This is followed by an equally long faux introduction by an Austen scholar. After all the assurances of what experts the authors are in Austen and her voice, I expected more than what I found.
The “lost scenes” read like poorly written fan fiction. The book is sold with the premise that these scenes will sound like Austen, but instead it’s just bad purple prose. And not even good bad purple prose—there are people who love and understand the romance genre well enough to write hilariously intentionally bad sex scenes, and annual awards for the worst sex scenes of the year, probably unintentionally so, and equally hilarious (Google and enjoy.) Granted, I only tried two of these brief scenes and couldn’t bring myself to finish reading either, so maybe it gets better, but I’m not willing to invest the time to find out.
The “lost scenes” read like poorly written fan fiction. The book is sold with the premise that these scenes will sound like Austen, but instead it’s just bad purple prose. And not even good bad purple prose—there are people who love and understand the romance genre well enough to write hilariously intentionally bad sex scenes, and annual awards for the worst sex scenes of the year, probably unintentionally so, and equally hilarious (Google and enjoy.) Granted, I only tried two of these brief scenes and couldn’t bring myself to finish reading either, so maybe it gets better, but I’m not willing to invest the time to find out.
June 30, 2018
There are already very mixed reviews on this book. Although I have only read Sense and Sensibility (which I enjoyed) by Jane Austen I was quite intrigued when I saw this paperback version in a second hand store. I actually feel that this book has completed what it set out to do, and this is, to unearth 'the lost sex scenes of Jane Austen' - Although this is totally fabricated I felt that the 'lost scenes' were rather funny. I do feel that whether you are a Jane Austen fan or not, you do have to have a sense humour, adventure and an imagination to read this book. I think Arielle Eckstut gave herself a rather large task in trying to write these lost sex scenes, and I feel she has succeeded - So well done Arielle. As this book may be considered 'a little racy' I would recommend this be read by over 18's. I also feel that this book would be good on holiday or on long travels. And yes, even by the bedside!
Read
January 24, 2022A short, quick read of never before published scenes from Jane Austen novels (aka The Lost Sex Scenes of Jane Austen). I don’t really agree with the title so much because while some snippets are racy, others are pretty docile. But if the author is telling the truth that these are in fact unpublished pieces but Austen that were found and later revealed, I’m sure at that time these would be considered the “Fifty Shades” of that time period. It was interesting to read but not one of my favorites.
October 17, 2022
…a lot of it seemed out of character. I know it’s not supposed to be realistic with attitudes about sex in the 19th century but there was maybe a little too much artistic freedom. The most enjoyable one would probably be between Elizabeth and Darcy; it was also the most in character so perhaps boring too. Emma’s was also in character, and the discussion between Marianne and Elinor Dashwood. But Charlotte and Mr. Collins seemed like it was trying too hard and I didn’t like Henry and Catherine’s interaction. Especially after rereading Northanger Abbey and noticing his gaslighting tendencies.
March 12, 2025
Awfully hilarious or hilariously awful? As long as prepared not to take it seriously or grounded in any credibility -Elinor Dashwood, really?! Just no. - it's worth a peruse and a laugh. And perhaps provides a greater appreciation as to how amazing Jane Austen really was and sad to say, why anyone else who tries it is probably won't be quite as ahem, orgasmic, whatever the angle.
But worth a giggle. You need a sense of humour and suspension of disbelief but it did make me chuckle. But Elinor Dashwood, again, just no.
But worth a giggle. You need a sense of humour and suspension of disbelief but it did make me chuckle. But Elinor Dashwood, again, just no.
February 14, 2019
I found this at goodwill and figured it would be entertaining enough for what I paid for it, but it's mostly just mediocre writing. I do appreciate that it wasn't entirely heteronormative but most of these "excerpts" felt way too contrived to even be fun. I don't consider myself versed in Austen at all, but even I could tell the style was completely off.
January 11, 2020
An intriguing idea, but flawed execution. This book throws every taboo into Austen's beloved stories. A lesbian scene between Bingley's sisters and Jane in Pride and Prejudice puts a new spin on why Bingley and Jane were separated. Added bestiality to Sense and Sensibility and incest between the Crawford siblings in Mansfield Park did not make anything better. I wish I could unread this!
August 13, 2024
This book is poking fun at academics who analyse sex in Austen's novels. The joke is that Austen knew nothing about sex, therefore sex scenes in her novels are funny and ridiculous. This joke doesn't work because there objectively is sex in her novels, e.g. Lydia running away with Wickham, Henry and Maria having an affair. So whilst interesting its premise doesn't work.
April 12, 2025
I was amused.
("It is not that serious" is what I would say to most of the joyless reviews on here, but if you want some seriousness: this book got more than a few chuckles out of me, although the sex is more suggestion than explicit. There were too many typos for such a short book, though. CW for incest and implied bestiality.)
("It is not that serious" is what I would say to most of the joyless reviews on here, but if you want some seriousness: this book got more than a few chuckles out of me, although the sex is more suggestion than explicit. There were too many typos for such a short book, though. CW for incest and implied bestiality.)
June 11, 2021
I knew this was to be a parody of some of the great scenes from Austen's books, but really, it is just silly. The writing style is clever, which allowed me to gove it a three. Otherwise, it would only received teo stars. It was mostly a waste of money and my time.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 103 reviews