Jane Austin to replace Charles Darwin on the £10 note.

Talking about Salman Rushdie on Question Time?

x

Where did she say that?

In light of that comment, she should not be on the tenner.

The feminists have shot themselves in the foot on this one, all they have achieved is a token woman on some banknotes. For the aforementioned reasons once people like Ada Lovelace and Rosalind Franklin etc has been used up then the Bank of England, still feeling pressured to have at least one woman will start scraping the barrel and the tokenism will become obvious. The feminists should have kept their mouths shut, let more and more women over time achieve leading to more and more women on banknotes. But instead they have decided to awkwardly force things.

Darwin has changed the face of Biology. Austen, sure she wrote some books which are classics, but why her specifically? What makes her the best of English literature?

This is ****ing bull****. It should be based on merit, not your gender!

Darwin should be spinning in his grave over his. I'm disgusted over this announcement.

She says it here: Give a girl an education and introduce her properly into the world, and ten to one but she has the means of settling well, without further expense to anybody.

And through her books. I'm not saying that she was a feminist - she was far from that as she wrote characters that aspired to be nothing more than married . But if you look at her novels in its historical context it makes complete sense - the way women got power at such a time was through their husbands and marrying.

For example in Pride and Prejudice Elizabeth is intelligent and witty and as a result in the end gets everything she wanted in the beginning of the story - a good rich husband, Lydia is an airhead and in the end marries wickham (against his will). Mr bennet often draws comparisons between her and her mother and throughout the novel these comparisons seem to reflect the bennets marriage and is austens way of telling the reader (through irony) that this marriage is going the same way as the bennets.

Elizabeth refuses mr Collins's proposal - which at the time is seen as stupid because her family's estate was in danger of being lost but she refused deciding she would rather be single for life than be married in the name of the estate. in those days notions of marriage were that every woman needed one and should oblige in lieu in of love
Austen even shows readers how such a sacrifice would have played out.

Through many of her books the smart female ends up with the fairytale ending and as many critics such as Lionel Trilling would agree do so "not in spite of their subversive self assertion but rather because of it".

Jane austen was my author of choice when i did english literature so if you need anymore analysis on her life and work feel free to ask

Boris Johnson on the £10 note? LOL
Jane Austen is just as deserving as Darwin so in a sense if they are going to replace him then she is a great option.

Except for the fact that science is much, much more important than literary fiction. Darwin's theories completely changed humanities view on existence and reality from one of fictional, religious delusion to factual, scientific evidence..

Austen on the other hand, has hardly shaped the way humanity thinks.

I know Jane Austen is a legend within her own right but would like her to be on the note because she still influences society today through her work.

Still not worthy of being on the £10 note.


Now if she actually spent her time with girls being forced into crap marriages, then maybe. Essentially she just made up fiction.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23424289

Thoughts?

Call me sceptical, but it seems to me that this is only being done because of the moaning of some people about her being pipped to the post by Churchill to appear on the £5.

And before you load your neg gun, I honestly think she would have been better on the £5 than Churchill anyway, as I think that we should celebrate the people who made great contributions to various fields (in her case literature, in Darwin's case, science) over the achievements of a politician, considerable, at least in wartime, though they were.

That's just my thoughts anyway... what do you think?