A similar article (maybe the same one? not sure) appeared in the weekend WSJ. I have to admit I'd never heard of the Porter sisters. I also just cited Sir Walt

A similar article (maybe the same one? not sure) appeared in the weekend WSJ. I have to admit I'd never heard of the Porter sisters. I also just cited Sir Walter Scott as a possible model for Crichton & Grisham's reputation 200 years from now. He's also not widely read anymore, for maybe the same reason: this breathless, overblown, wordy prose. No one likes that these days. Look, they were popular at the time, which sort of belies the notion that women were deliberately suppressed. Even Napoleon had heard of them: > Napoleon himself understood the dangers the sisters’ books posed to him: He banned Jane’s novels from publication in France, presumably because they might encourage popular uprisings. There are millions of would-be writers who'd kill for this sort of fame, even if they're forgotten after they're dead.