I made it about 30% into this book before I gave up on it. I was very hopeful that it would illuminate why I had never understood the Mr. Darcy hype, but instead, it read more like a rant about how characters like Mr. Darcy lead women to accept abusive treatment and reinforce patriarchal stereotypes that encourage women to "save men like this."

Yeah. Not what I expected or wanted.

There's plenty of Goodreads reviewers who have done a better job explaining my issues with this book in depth (Chels' review is brilliant), but I do want to provide a quick thought or two.

1) As easy as it would be to draw the conclusion, I don't think Mr. Darcy and the men of gothic-era literature hold enough space in our cultural collective consciousness to effect our modern romances. Sure, we've all seen or heard of Pride and Prejudice. That doesn't mean we, as young women, enter into romantic relationships genuinely expecting to find a Mr. Darcy or putting up with any of the Act-One-Mr.-Darcy-isms. This is just a really serious leap that I don't think the author adequately defended. (Especially considering how many of us grew up on a hefty diet of poorly written fanfiction that modeled relationship dynamics as imagined by a middle schooler).

2) I think the author blew over an important element of the Darcy myth- what readers like about Mr. Darcy is that he's socially inept, not that he treats Lizzy poorly. It's about the idea of someone not built for the society he lives in, not the "I can save him" dynamic. I read Pride and Prejudice for the first time a few months ago and Lizzy does not save Mr. Darcy. She doesn't put up with his BS. A reading of Mr. Darcy as a patriarchal, abusive partner is insulting to folks with actual abusive partners. Mr. Darcy is a character who grows up (like Zuko from Avatar: The Last Airbender) and gets his act together. There's a difference between an immature man and an abusive one.

Alrighty. Rant over. I really respect what Rachel Feder set out to do, however, I think it was a little too far off the reservation. I would definitely be open to reading more by her- her writing was humorous and sharp.

The author takes an analytical look at Jane Austen's novels which have become a part of our culture and analysis how they have influenced people's view of love. The author argues that Jane Austen's male love interests have taught people to love problematic men at the expense of the female love interest. She gives various examples through the centuries of this including Edward from the Twilight series and Christian Grey from the 50 Shades of Grey series. The author has a humorous tone throughout the book so even if the reader doesn't agree entirely with the author's arguments, they are very entertaining to read.

Feder presents and intriguing and insightful view of Jane System's Darcy and the role that he has played in our society since then. This book invites you in to explore this character that has taken over so much of our collective cultural imagination. I was enchanted with the way she divided the Darcy mono myth into not just character aspects, but also explores the history that Austen tapped into, and lived through, that gave birth to the idea of Mr. Darcy. But what is it about us, the reader, who still find him such a resonance figure? That is the question that drives this book and drew me in and kept me flipping pages.

Parsing out other rogues-turned-good as she goes, the author's (for me) overly folksy narrative style reviews Austen's hero of Pride and Prejudice as following a kind of prototype appearing in more books (at beginning she likens Sally Rooney's 'normal people' to austen .. unfortunate personality types who grow close) . Her point is that these books /stories aim at our accommodating these rogues rather than seriously undermining the patriarchy. I suppose we cannot honestly task Austen for this.. or should we?? So good galloping entertainment.. loads of stories and light analysis...

Unpacking gothic romance and reflecting on how it's impacted contemporary culture, as well as exploring other pieces of literature and entertainment - this is clever, funny, and insightful

As a fan of Jane Austen's novels, I enjoyed this book. It is so true that Mr. Darcy is held up as the ultimate romantic hero, but is he really? What would he be like in reality?

Thank you to Netgalley and the publisher for granting me free access to the advanced digital copy of this book.

"The Darcy Myth" by Rachel Feder presents itself as a thoughtful exploration of the cultural impact of literary figures like Mr. Darcy from "Pride and Prejudice." However, I found myself profoundly disappointed by the flawed arguments and superficial analysis that permeate the book. And, frankly, I was cringing at the writing style, which reeks of "older person trying to sound young." (I'm an elder millennial myself! I understand the temptation, but it does us no favors!)

Feder's central thesis seems to hinge on the notion that women, particularly young women, are naïve and susceptible to the influence of fictional characters like Mr. Darcy. To suggest that readers of Jane Austen's novels or viewers of contemporary adaptations are unable to distinguish between fiction and reality is downright insulting.

Moreover, Feder's choice of examples to support her arguments leaves much to be desired. Drawing from sources as varied as Bridgerton, Gossip Girl, and even Taylor Swift lyrics, the author attempts to construct a narrative around the supposed dangers of idealizing romantic figures. By portraying women solely as victims and men as villains, Feder perpetuates harmful stereotypes and fails to acknowledge the agency and accountability of all parties involved.

Feder acknowledges that she's not a Janeite. It's unfortunate that Janeites are publishing excellent, rigorous academic work on blogs and listservs while books like this, using and abusing Austen characters, get published to a wide audience. If you're looking for real Austen scholarship, look somewhere else than The Darcy Myth.

Thank you to the publishers and NetGalley for the opportunity to review a temporary digital ARC in exchange for an unbiased review.

As an Austen fan and my favorite book being Pride and Prejudice, I found the title intriguing. However, while reading, I found it lacking substance. I can understand the argument that we are taught from a young age and through literary works that the main character’s love interest are unattainable and raises our expectations in real life. However, Feder is trying to portray Darcy as a monster because of the things he says without taking into consideration the growth he makes as the novel progresses. Understandably that’s part of the plot, that “pride” and “prejudice” and it affects both characters, Darcy and Lizzy. It was a drag to read, I can see the good and the bad of the argument.

I think the title will find an audience on among the young female audience, still exploring the world. The theory author proposes insults women at large to be unthinking and stupid for ending up in bad relationships with those so called 'real life Darcys'. Darcy doesn't make decisions for you. You make decisions for you.

It would take me to write a whole new book to counterpoint and argue a lot of the things Feder has raised, but a couple of examples that stood out most off the top of my head.

The theory that the title poses: ultimately, to blame a fictional book for our behaviour in the real world is preposterous. It implies that women read a 19th Century romance novel and then expect real life to behave the same way, today. The way our lives go has nothing to do with books or expectations set in fiction (let me repeat that: fiction). We have our own brains that we need to use to deal with reality. We choose for ourselves, let's stop blaming literature. You end up in a bad relationship, don't blame Darcy, he didn't decide for you.

The examples through which Feder analyzes the hardships of love (or, horror and terror of love as author says) for women are from Pride and Prejudice (book), Bridgerton (TV Show), Gossip Girl (TV Show), Twilight(book) and Taylor Swift song lyrics. The scene Feder brought as an example from Twilight was so over analyzed I could not help but think about that example which goes along the lines of: 'sometimes blue curtains are just blue curtains'.

Would I recommend this book to others? Sure, if you're young and exploring the world. I firmly believe in looking at things from every possible angle so one can make their own informed decisions and take a stance on something.

Was the writing good? Yeah, I mean, Feder made her point. But, personally and as an example, I disliked how an English professor decided to 'level' with the cool kids and use terms like 'fuccboi'. The language used can be a massive factor in credibility for a wider audience. For me, the 'leveling' discounted much of the theory. There's no need to make discounts on language itself to level with the readers. It just made me stop in my tracks, it was unexpected and I'm not novice to a good session of swear words. But everything has it's own place and time. And maybe I am not the intended audience for the book. I don't listen to Taylor Swift either.

Additionally, there was a section that brought real life examples of relationships gone bad. The real life Darcy's. I don't mean disrespect toward anyone's real life feelings, but you give me a one-sided relationship story and I immediately take it with a pinch of salt. Yes, I believe there are bad people out there. I do. But if you're only presenting the woman as the victim and the male as the bad, I think of it as skewed. Last I checked, it takes 2 to tango. Last I checked, every situation has 2 sides. And if only 1 side tells their story, I believe only half of it. If you're a female, it does not make you innocent and 'do no wrong' by default'. It's good enough for gossip, it's not good enough to make a point. And herein lies my issue - perhaps I was expecting a more serious, a more academic take on this theory. To me, this is not it.

But what really pissed me off? To the point of hissing out expletives? It was that the author, Feder, and English professor, spoiled a classic title to drive home her point and then ask the reader not to read the title.
This is not right. Not right at all. You can tell someone not to read The Monk, by all means... But don't spoil the book to those who haven't read it! Good grief!

Thank you to Quirk Books and NetGalley for this ARC of this book. I have always really enjoyed the books that Quirk puts out and this was no exception. As a big fan of romance novels, this was wonderful and eye opening to the tropes and how Darcy has steeped into all of our lives. Having Feder really show how Darcy supports the patriarchy in his novel and in how we now interprets his character traits in the real world. I had so many moments of smiling or laughing as I read this because it was so honest and funny and just engaging. I highly recommend this book if you love romance novels or rom-com movies or Darcy in general to widen your perspective and get a lot of laughs. 4.75 stars.

A very easy to digest take on Darcy romance trope. Some critiques were good, those usually came from others though. I enjoyed the formatting. Loved meeting a Darcy pages.

I think this is a pretty good literary analysis for the general public. It looks at how we internalize tropes in media - not just Mr Darcy but every relationship we see.

Gives a perspective the romantic in me wants to ignore, but the woman in me needs to hear.

Loved the style of this, literary and academic but also full of witty asides, Trump card-like scores for romantic heroes, and a heck of a lot of considered interpretation and theory.

My favourite book is Pride and Prejudice. I love film adaptations, retellings, all of it. But I'd never ever considered quite a few things that Feder brings to light here, not just actions/scenes from the book, but the meaning both then and now of what characters did and why. And just what sort of a man a Darcy is - and if he's any sort of aspirational romantic partner.

Short answer is - no, but.

How Feder compares a Regency-era standoffish hero with the men of the 21st century and what contemporary women try to read into them is very well done indeed. Clearly an aficionado in her area, I was able to follow the references almost wholly to other works and characters, authors and settings.

She really does summarise what a lot of us can't easily put into words about what we expect and hope for in a partner: "Herein lies the Darcy myth; the fantasy that the person who at first seems arrogant and insulting will in fact become your soulmate once you put in the work, and might in fact ultimately be more of a catch because you had to convince them."

Wow. She doesn't stop there either, with plenty of examples from real people and excerpts from their love lives.

I very much enjoyed the insights into Austen's life, reading and preoccupations as well, they added to my understanding of her writing.

I must say I had my eyes opened a wee bit. This is still my favourite book. As much for the wonderful Elizabeth as her love interest, but I feel I might now be more aware of falling into certain traps of thinking.

My plan is to return to this in a few years, refresh my thoughts on it. If I were a mother of daughters I'd probably want them to read this after introducing them to P&P (maybe not too soon afterwards - let them come to their own conclusions first!) but it gives perspective and realistic expectation to a classic and a trope that we need to have.

With thanks to Netgalley for providing a sample reading copy.

Mr. Darcy: the swoon-worthy hero we all are waiting for. But maybe not? In The Darcy Myth: Jane Austen, Literary Heartthrobs, and the Monsters They Taught Us To Love (Quirk Books, November 2023), literature scholar Rachel Feder retells this narrative in a more accurate way. With an abundance of humor and with plenty of modern examples, Feder points out the inconsistencies between our Jane Austen heroes and the realities of relationships.

With pointed comparisons to Gothic literature and Jane Austen’s contemporary novelists, as well as modern television and movie examples, Feder helped me I gain a new perspective on the romantic troupe that is so familiar in not just our novels but our entire society. A cranky guy with a past changes to become the hero that our heroine loved all along: most likely the unfriendly guys we meet will remain that way. We can’t change other people in our relationships.

Feder included tons of modern references, from reality television to personal interviews, that parallel the Darcy story. She also included plenty of details and summaries from other Gothic and Romantic literature from Austen’s own era, as well as real people, like Lord Byron. I’ll admit, I am not culturally literate with relation to reality television (or much of any television). While I also was not overly familiar with the literary and Romantic era discussions, I certain could relate a lot better to that portion of the book than the modern references.

With a very appealing layout, the book introduced these literary characters (both modern media and old) with sidebars and humor. The entire book had a humorous approach to the subject and Feder’s unbridled tongue is sure to be a hit with the younger crowd. I was a bit put off by some references and especially by the cursing. This is a modern book about literary criticism for a new generation. It certain makes her argument easily accessible, and does not feel academic in any way (even though it is!).

After reading this book, I have started considering other novels I’ve read with this new perspective. In fact, in the audiobook I just finished listening to with my daughter, I saw the same “Darcy myth” playing out, even though it is not about romance but friendship. (More on this when I review it next week!) The Darcy Myth is an intriguing look at the message in Pride and Prejudice and how it retells a tale as old as time. It’s just that the “tale as old as time” is not really a good message at all.

Don’t worry: it’s okay to still love Darcy. But this book gives a memorable new perspective. I think it is a lot of fun, even though the pop culture references and super casual tone made me feel pretty old.

I voluntarily read and reviewed an advance review copy of this book provided by the publisher via NetGalley. All thoughts and opinions are my own.

This book is a theory on how we've probably been reading romance novels wrong and it's all Mr. Darcy's fault. The author points out problematic themes throughout Austen's work, and how her influence has ruined dating for the rest of us.

*Special thanks to NetGalley and Quirk Books for this e-arc.*

I felt like this was a bit repetitive, especially talking about Darcy in regards to Lydia and Wickham. The judgment on Darcy about his actions of getting Wickham to marry Lydia seemed harsh and viewed through our current mores instead of what existed at the time.

I am a 'Pride and Prejudice' fan. Not a super-fan, or a Janeite or an Austen obsessive, but I can enjoy the novel. I'll never love 'Mansfield Park' (hideous A Level flashbacks) and I was the wrong generation to appreciate Colin Firth in THAT shirt (yes, I totally get it now...) but I totally respect the way that Jane Austen quietly wrote novels that are still part of the collective consciousness over 200 years after her death.

So I came to this book with purely an interest in a feminist reading of Mr Darcy by someone who really knows 'Pride and Prejudice' inside out - and has had the headspace to ponder on it at length as part of her career in academia. Rachel Feder is an associate professor in English at the University of Denver and really knows her stuff.

The central argument of this book is that we've all been taken in by the Darcy Myth - the fact that romantic partners worth having might be rude or obnoxious at first, but we have to see through this and change them. They'll have their reasons for their behaviour - not just that's they're horrible people - and women need to see beyond it because that's romantic and ultimately rewarding. Kind, 'safe' men get pushed aside, because we want the mean, moody one with emotional depth - and this is what the patriarchy want us to want. Feder argues that this type of enemies-to-lovers plot actually fits better with Austen's Gothic influences - a kind of horror story given what courtship and marriage can signify for women of the era (and beyond).

Along the way, Feder illustrates extensively why the Darcy Myth is problematic using a combination of Austen's work (obviously 'Pride and Prejudice', but not exclusively) and other examples. These examples of other Darcys range from Byron (just ugh) to Beast (he might gift Belle a library but it's still in his house - where he is literally keeping her prisoner!) to The Batchelor. In fact, there's lots of references to literature, TV and modern culture -a bit too modern for me in places as Taylor Swift turns up more than once and it made me feel soooooo old. However, I think this means that the book has appeal beyond those with an Austen addiction, and Feder's chatty and humorous writing style adds to the attraction.

Feder tackles some really big ideas here, some much more convincingly than others (but always entertainingly). I loved the analysis of the literature and how these themes continue to play out in today's media and I enjoyed meeting the various iterations of Darcy from throughout the ages. I liked the look at Jane Austen in the context of Gothic literature - that's an interesting take that I hadn't fully considered before and I felt like I learnt a lot. I was less keen when it got a bit psychoanalytical with case studies towards the end and shifted the focus to abortion in literature - while this was engagingly done, it just wasn't for me.

I think this book would appeal to anyone who likes reading about classic literature, social issues or feminism. There's lots to enjoy, regardless of your prior knowledge of 'Pride and Prejudice' - those new to it have it all explained by Feder while those more au fait with the story will have new ideas thrown at them to consider. It certainly gave me a lot of food for thought, even if I didn't fully buy all aspects of the argument. It's funny, lively and clever - what's not to like?!

Thanks to NetGalley for my copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.

The Darcy Myth by Rachel Feder is a fun look at how we view Jane Austen's Mr. Darcy and offers fresh perspectives into modern sensibilities. Feder defines the myth of Mr. Darcy and discusses why women are (not) drawn to characters and people like him.

Though I enjoyed learning and thinking more about the topic (especially like the nerdy delves!), irreverent writing just isn't my wheelhouse. For me this was an "it's not you, it's me" book. Many readers, however, may enjoy this tremendously. I prefer to leave Mr. Darcy be.

My sincere thank you to Quirk Books and NetGalley for providing me with a digital copy.

I enjoyed reading this book. She made valid points and introduced ideas (also characters/stories both familiar and unfamiliar to me. Helped me become more aware of them). The absolute entertainment I got from this is, while I was reading (in my head) I was sort of arguing with her. This book brought out the argumentative person in me, which made this more interesting and insightful. I did not learn about Mr Darcy until I was far advanced in age, have 2 kids and married for a long time. So it was not Mr. D that introduced the concept of an ideal man, thus the argument.

If this sounds intriguing, I recommend reading this book