I was a bit confused about this book when it was released because I felt that a. these are in fact quite canonical writers and many of them have been well read for years (as much as any 18th century author is); b. If you wanted to write about Austen's influences you obviously would have to include some men. I eventually suspected that the Austen thing itself might be a bit of a publishing industry framework to make the book "feel relevant" and justify writing a collective biography about these writers. From your account that does not seem to be the case so I can't really understand the gap the project is attempting to fill.
I might well like to read it for a way to look at a handful of interesting writers, and maybe after that one of the other books on austen's influences you suggest.
I hope you get on better with it than I did, if you do read it. I suppose the novelty lies in telling the story of building a collection of Austen's predecessors, but a bit too much is built on this foundation, I guess..
I was a bit confused about this book when it was released because I felt that a. these are in fact quite canonical writers and many of them have been well read for years (as much as any 18th century author is); b. If you wanted to write about Austen's influences you obviously would have to include some men. I eventually suspected that the Austen thing itself might be a bit of a publishing industry framework to make the book "feel relevant" and justify writing a collective biography about these writers. From your account that does not seem to be the case so I can't really understand the gap the project is attempting to fill.
I might well like to read it for a way to look at a handful of interesting writers, and maybe after that one of the other books on austen's influences you suggest.
I hope you get on better with it than I did, if you do read it. I suppose the novelty lies in telling the story of building a collection of Austen's predecessors, but a bit too much is built on this foundation, I guess..