http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075 The NewsBiscuit Community en-US Sun, 19 May 2013 07:03:39 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/search.php http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135355 Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:00:48 +0000 JohnA 135355@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>Not yet. The petty bickering has barely begun. </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135316 Tue, 21 Aug 2012 19:55:35 +0000 ricky33 135316@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>Good one, Mark Twain. Have I reached some kind of record here for comments-to-stars ratio? </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135237 Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:59:59 +0000 Yikes 135237@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>Think Mark Twain has a mortgage on this one ... Comments like wanting to dig her up to hit her over her head with her shin bone and any library that contains none of her books is a good library even if it contains no other books. </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135228 Mon, 20 Aug 2012 19:57:44 +0000 ricky33 135228@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>Yes - they're brothers. </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135219 Mon, 20 Aug 2012 19:01:28 +0000 Al OPecia 135219@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>IS that a bit like Boutros Boutros Galli? </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135215 Mon, 20 Aug 2012 18:57:10 +0000 ricky33 135215@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>The AA stands for Anus Arsehole, according to Richard Herring. </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135207 Mon, 20 Aug 2012 18:05:11 +0000 Al OPecia 135207@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>Isn't that AA* Gill? </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135204 Mon, 20 Aug 2012 17:57:34 +0000 Oxbridge 135204@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>AA Gill agrees, apparently </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=47075#post-135203 Mon, 20 Aug 2012 17:33:55 +0000 ricky33 135203@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>It would seem that generations of bored A level English students have been proved right, as a respected scholar has reached the conclusion that Jane Austen was actually rubbish.</p> <p>Professor Stanley Fanshawe of Oxbridge University was writing an introduction to a new collection of essays, <em>Of Petticoats and Priapism: Towards a New Hermeneutic Epistemology of Early-Nineteenth Century Literature</em>, when he made the discovery.</p> <p>‘I was rereading <em>Persuasion </em>when I suddenly realised that the plot was skimpy and predictable, the characterisation weak and the writing style clumsy and tedious. I then saw that this was true for all of her output. My former view, that she was one of the greats of English literature, has now been changed for ever.</p> <p>‘To put it in a nutshell, she’s a bit crap.’</p> <p>Agatha Hawthorne of the Jane Austen Society was anxious to dispute the findings. ‘Austen has a special place in British culture,’ she said. ‘Opinion polls consistently show <em>Pride and Prejudice</em> to be the number one book people pretend to like. Star-studded adaptations of her lightweight and sanitised novels have given countless tourists a confused and unrealistic view of British history. Quite simply she is the backbone of the thriving period drama industry.’</p> <p>The government has announced it would be taking Professor Fanshawe’s advice and dropping Austen from the curriculum. It is expected she will be replaced by someone good. </p>