Rachel Billington
Author of Emma & Knightley: Perfect Happiness in Highbury: A Sequel to Jane Austen's Emma
About the Author
Lady Rachel Billington is the daughter of the late Earl and Countess of Longford. She is the author of fifteen novels and eight children's books Gered Mankowitz is the son of the celebrated author and playwright Wolf Mankowitz, and is a world renowned photographer
Works by Rachel Billington
Emma & Knightley: Perfect Happiness in Highbury: A Sequel to Jane Austen's Emma (1996) 104 copies, 3 reviews
Associated Works
Great Tours and Detours: The Sophisticated Traveler Series (1985) — Contributor — 35 copies, 1 review
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Legal name
- Billington, Lady Rachel
- Birthdate
- 1942-05-11
- Gender
- female
- Education
- University of London (BA - English Literature)
- Occupations
- novelist
journalist
screenwriter
children's book author - Organizations
- English PEN (former President)
- Awards and honors
- Order of the British Empire (Officer, 2012)
- Relationships
- Fraser, Antonia (sister)
Pakenham, Thomas Francis Dermot, 8th Earl of Longford (brother)
Longford, Elizabeth (mother)
Kazantzis, Judith (sister)
Pakenham, Frank, 7th Earl of Longford (father)
Pinter, Harold (brother-in-law) (show all 11)
Pakenham, Valerie (sister-in-law)
Powell, Lady Violet (aunt)
Billington, Kevin (husband)
Clive, Mary (aunt)
Lamb, Lady Pansy (aunt) - Short biography
- Rachel Billington was born Lady Rachel Pakenham into a well-known Anglo-Irish family. Her parents, both writers, were the the 7th Earl and Countess of Longford: Frank Pakenham, Labour minister and prisoner activist, and Elizabeth Longford, biographer and historian. Many other members of her family are also eminent writers, including her sisters Antonia Fraser and Judith Kazantzis, and her brother Thomas Pakenham, the present Earl. She married Kevin Billington, a film, theater and television director with whom she has four children. Rachel Billington's first novel was All Things Nice (1969). Since then, she has published 19 other novels for adults and 7 children's books. She has also worked as a journalist and written nonfiction, religious books, television plays and screenplays. She is a former president of English PEN, and contributes to Inside Time, the national newspaper for prisoners. She received the OBE in 2012 for her services to literature.
- Nationality
- UK
- Birthplace
- Oxford, Oxfordshire, England, UK
- Places of residence
- London, England, UK
New York, New York, USA
Dorset, England, UK - Associated Place (for map)
- England, UK
Members
Reviews
What a miserable book. Once again, feminism has defied history to choke the life out of Jane Austen’s characters. Desperate to make the point that marriage robs women of their independence (as motherhood drains them of any intelligence), Rachel Billington has re-written Emma as a depressing, bitter rant on the historical role of women. Set one year after the happy conclusion of the original novel, Perfect Happiness is a dark and cynical perspective of the Knightleys’ marriage, which show more successfully reverses all the humour and charm of Austen’s Emma. Opening with two deaths, one a cruel plot device and the other a form of euthanasia, any trace of ‘perfect happiness’, or even mild contentment, is quickly extinguished.
I will admit that I only read this ‘sequel’ to Emma, universally panned on its publication in 1996, as an experiment, and so wasn’t expecting to like or even approve of Billington’s negative treatment. (Emma Tennant, Lightweight Champion of Published Fan Fiction, released her own disturbing Emma-ulation of Austen’s novel at the same time, and the two writers had a bit of a face-off in the press about whose book is the best. I’m a bit scared to find out.) Apart from the culling of innocent characters, however, I was hopeful, or at least, not too distressed – until what began as a sensible, if contemporary, continuation of my favourite novel started falling apart at the seams.
Emma Knightley has the one-year itch. She loves her husband, who gave up his house and his independence to live with Emma and her fretful father at Hartfield, but their comfortable, happy life in Highbury bores her (‘Why, in the face of such goodness, was she tempted to become bad?’) Emma, as Billington constantly reminds the reader with her limited store of adjectives, is ‘young’ and ‘strong’ (or ‘not weak’), but she hates being treated like a child by her older husband (‘Stop acting like one!’ was my short answer to her petulant teenage angst). And this was my first indication that the author might have failed to understand Austen’s heroine, because Billington was obviously labouring under the misapprehension that the age difference between Emma and Mr Knightley makes him an old man and Emma a victim of Regency grooming. Emma is 21, Mr Knightley is 38. I hate to sound like a card-carrying Janeite, insisting – usually erroneously – that ‘It isn’t like that in the book!’, but Billington’s constant harping on the age gap started to grate on my nerves almost immediately. If Emma thought or spoke of her husband as ‘an old man’ once, she did it a thousand times. George Knightley is not old, nor is he a father figure – Emma already has a father. Mr Knightley is a close friend and neighbour, well known and liked by the Woodhouses, who later becomes Emma’s brother-in-law, and then falls in love with her when he recognises what a beautiful young woman she has become. I know fifteen year olds have a problem (of the ‘Ew! Gross!’ variety) with the match, but I expected more from a mature, married author.
In fact, Billington seems to be in complete denial about the marriage. Taking literally Emma’s comment at the end of Austen’s novel that she could never call Mr Knightley by his first name, Mrs Knightley turns into Mrs Bennet and refers to her husband throughout as ‘Knightley’. On her own part, both Mr Perry and Mr Elton call her ‘Miss Woodhouse’ on her first clandestine outing into Highbury (Mr Knightley has told her to stay at home, like he would), yet she only corrects Frank Churchill. One year on, and the people of Highbury are still calling her by her maiden name? Rubbish. Yet this Emma is in no hurry to accept the role of wife – or mother. ‘She, Emma, could not regret that she was still at liberty, unfettered by the joys of bringing new life into the world!’ (In balance, at least Billington doesn’t end the book with an announcement, after eighteen months of infertility.)
I have no issue with Emma and Knightley needing time to adjust to living together, or even arguing on occasion – being of different temperament but all too similar natures – yet I cannot see why she would turn against him, her best friend, or that he would keep anything from her. The whole clichéd complication of the plot, however, is a lack of trust and communication between the Knightleys. Emma thinks that her husband sees her as ‘the child he had always known’ – can’t think why, with all the whining and sulking she does – and that he prefers the matronly, docile Harriet Martin, and he thinks she is still in love with the newly widowed Frank Churchill, transformed by Billington from a selfish flirt into a demented Heathcliffian villain. And just to hammer home the feminist foundation of the whole book, if words and phrases like ‘independence’ and ‘unquestioning slave’ are too subtle, one of the few new characters stirred into the story is an outlandish bluestocking called Philomena Tidmarsh, who lives with her stepson and announces ‘I do not like men, in general’. Mrs Tidmarsh, an orphan forced into marriage at sixteen with a man of fifty, says what she thinks, reads philosophy and poetry, plays the harp, and will never marry again. The relationship between Emma and her new friend threatens to encroach on Emma Tennant’s twisted territory, so dearly does Mrs Tidmarsh ‘like’ Emma, and Emma respect her independent friend!
The one interesting and original storyline, however unlikely, that Billington contributes is that of John Knightley’s bankruptcy. Although laden with symbolism like the rest of the novel – ‘John Knightley’s downfall had taught Emma about the possibility of misfortune within her family circle’ – and completely out of character for Mr Knightley’s staid and domesticated brother, at least this subplot wasn’t ‘recycled’ directly from Austen, like Harriet and Frank and a whole paragraph cribbed straight from Emma (‘the butcher still carried his tray ...’) I also quite admired Mr Knightley’s solution to his brother’s debt, even though there was no reason apart from the author’s sheer perversity why he couldn’t tell Emma about her own family.
Rachel Billington obviously had an agenda when writing this tawdry follow-up, but I doubt if it was a love of the original novel and a desire to visit the happy and familiar faces of Highbury again. Errors abound – from calling Mrs Suckling ‘Selina’ and ‘Serena’ in different chapters, and referring to Mr Woodhouse’s cook as ‘Sterne’ and not ‘Serle’ – but the real mistake was the usual pretension of modern authors: applying twentieth century interpretations to nineteenth century novels. Emma Woodhouse is witty, lively and compassionate, for all her ‘little faults’, but Mrs Knightley is selfish, demanding, immature and cruel, suspicious of her husband and sick of her father. Where Austen’s Emma imagined that she was only doing good and helping others, Billington’s version imagines that the world is against her and lashes out in anger. Badly done, indeed! show less
I will admit that I only read this ‘sequel’ to Emma, universally panned on its publication in 1996, as an experiment, and so wasn’t expecting to like or even approve of Billington’s negative treatment. (Emma Tennant, Lightweight Champion of Published Fan Fiction, released her own disturbing Emma-ulation of Austen’s novel at the same time, and the two writers had a bit of a face-off in the press about whose book is the best. I’m a bit scared to find out.) Apart from the culling of innocent characters, however, I was hopeful, or at least, not too distressed – until what began as a sensible, if contemporary, continuation of my favourite novel started falling apart at the seams.
Emma Knightley has the one-year itch. She loves her husband, who gave up his house and his independence to live with Emma and her fretful father at Hartfield, but their comfortable, happy life in Highbury bores her (‘Why, in the face of such goodness, was she tempted to become bad?’) Emma, as Billington constantly reminds the reader with her limited store of adjectives, is ‘young’ and ‘strong’ (or ‘not weak’), but she hates being treated like a child by her older husband (‘Stop acting like one!’ was my short answer to her petulant teenage angst). And this was my first indication that the author might have failed to understand Austen’s heroine, because Billington was obviously labouring under the misapprehension that the age difference between Emma and Mr Knightley makes him an old man and Emma a victim of Regency grooming. Emma is 21, Mr Knightley is 38. I hate to sound like a card-carrying Janeite, insisting – usually erroneously – that ‘It isn’t like that in the book!’, but Billington’s constant harping on the age gap started to grate on my nerves almost immediately. If Emma thought or spoke of her husband as ‘an old man’ once, she did it a thousand times. George Knightley is not old, nor is he a father figure – Emma already has a father. Mr Knightley is a close friend and neighbour, well known and liked by the Woodhouses, who later becomes Emma’s brother-in-law, and then falls in love with her when he recognises what a beautiful young woman she has become. I know fifteen year olds have a problem (of the ‘Ew! Gross!’ variety) with the match, but I expected more from a mature, married author.
In fact, Billington seems to be in complete denial about the marriage. Taking literally Emma’s comment at the end of Austen’s novel that she could never call Mr Knightley by his first name, Mrs Knightley turns into Mrs Bennet and refers to her husband throughout as ‘Knightley’. On her own part, both Mr Perry and Mr Elton call her ‘Miss Woodhouse’ on her first clandestine outing into Highbury (Mr Knightley has told her to stay at home, like he would), yet she only corrects Frank Churchill. One year on, and the people of Highbury are still calling her by her maiden name? Rubbish. Yet this Emma is in no hurry to accept the role of wife – or mother. ‘She, Emma, could not regret that she was still at liberty, unfettered by the joys of bringing new life into the world!’ (In balance, at least Billington doesn’t end the book with an announcement, after eighteen months of infertility.)
I have no issue with Emma and Knightley needing time to adjust to living together, or even arguing on occasion – being of different temperament but all too similar natures – yet I cannot see why she would turn against him, her best friend, or that he would keep anything from her. The whole clichéd complication of the plot, however, is a lack of trust and communication between the Knightleys. Emma thinks that her husband sees her as ‘the child he had always known’ – can’t think why, with all the whining and sulking she does – and that he prefers the matronly, docile Harriet Martin, and he thinks she is still in love with the newly widowed Frank Churchill, transformed by Billington from a selfish flirt into a demented Heathcliffian villain. And just to hammer home the feminist foundation of the whole book, if words and phrases like ‘independence’ and ‘unquestioning slave’ are too subtle, one of the few new characters stirred into the story is an outlandish bluestocking called Philomena Tidmarsh, who lives with her stepson and announces ‘I do not like men, in general’. Mrs Tidmarsh, an orphan forced into marriage at sixteen with a man of fifty, says what she thinks, reads philosophy and poetry, plays the harp, and will never marry again. The relationship between Emma and her new friend threatens to encroach on Emma Tennant’s twisted territory, so dearly does Mrs Tidmarsh ‘like’ Emma, and Emma respect her independent friend!
The one interesting and original storyline, however unlikely, that Billington contributes is that of John Knightley’s bankruptcy. Although laden with symbolism like the rest of the novel – ‘John Knightley’s downfall had taught Emma about the possibility of misfortune within her family circle’ – and completely out of character for Mr Knightley’s staid and domesticated brother, at least this subplot wasn’t ‘recycled’ directly from Austen, like Harriet and Frank and a whole paragraph cribbed straight from Emma (‘the butcher still carried his tray ...’) I also quite admired Mr Knightley’s solution to his brother’s debt, even though there was no reason apart from the author’s sheer perversity why he couldn’t tell Emma about her own family.
Rachel Billington obviously had an agenda when writing this tawdry follow-up, but I doubt if it was a love of the original novel and a desire to visit the happy and familiar faces of Highbury again. Errors abound – from calling Mrs Suckling ‘Selina’ and ‘Serena’ in different chapters, and referring to Mr Woodhouse’s cook as ‘Sterne’ and not ‘Serle’ – but the real mistake was the usual pretension of modern authors: applying twentieth century interpretations to nineteenth century novels. Emma Woodhouse is witty, lively and compassionate, for all her ‘little faults’, but Mrs Knightley is selfish, demanding, immature and cruel, suspicious of her husband and sick of her father. Where Austen’s Emma imagined that she was only doing good and helping others, Billington’s version imagines that the world is against her and lashes out in anger. Badly done, indeed! show less
The story of a feisty girl, and how she deals with the pain of her dad's downfall, has much to say about the harsh realities faced by the unlucky children of prisoners. I think we forget about the children and how they deal with one of the parents in jail. A must read! I was given this book thru LibraryThing.com
This review was written for LibraryThing Early Reviewers.Emma & Knightley: Perfect Happiness in Highbury: A Sequel to Jane Austen's Emma by Rachel Billington
While I loved the premise (Emma wants to be treated as a wife, not a spoiled child, and Mr. Knightley wants to be treated as a husband not an older brother) too many details were wrong and too many characters seemed to act contrary to who they were. The author also made many mistakes throughout the book, the prime example Mrs. Elton's sister was Selina Suckling, but through the middle of the book she was Serena. The Woodhouse cook was named Serle in Jane Austen's book, but in Ms. show more Billington's the cook's name was Sterne. Beyond the mistakes, I felt this book was so dark, everyone slowly sinking further and further into a mire that it was difficult to ever hope for happiness for anyone. [Spoiler Alert] I also feel that the character of Mr. Woodhouse, in which Jane Austen expresses surprise at his ever having married before, would never enter into the marriage state again, no matter how much his comfort was at stake. show less
This is a quality book for young adults that is written by someone who clearly has done her research regarding the prison system. Poppy is a very likable and real character, and I think there should be more novels like this one that take the lesser-heard perspective of a child with parents who are in jail or otherwise troubled. As a librarian, I would definitely recommend this to middle grade readers, particularly if they are struggling themselves. Good writing, good plot pace, and show more well-rounded characterization of all the characters. show less
This review was written for LibraryThing Early Reviewers.Lists
Austenland (1)
You May Also Like
Associated Authors
Statistics
- Works
- 45
- Also by
- 3
- Members
- 637
- Popularity
- #39,574
- Rating
- 3.2
- Reviews
- 14
- ISBNs
- 153
- Languages
- 4
