Redefining the Boundaries, an euphemism for Raping the Classics

Claire Siemaszkiewicz, the editor of the new erotic rewritings of classic books, including Jane Eyre, gives her opinion on The Guardian (where a new unforgettable quote from the book can be found):

If the Brontës or Austen were writing today, they'd feel less constrained. So we're publishing erotically enhanced versions. (...)
It has always been something I have wanted to do. Whenever I read classics from authors such as Charlotte Brontë, I was drawn to the underlying sexual tension between the characters. I would often think about the potential "uncensored versions" that the original authors were unable or unwilling to include. After all, a lot of these stories are, at the heart, romances. This was the seed of the idea that has led to the newly launched Clandestine Classics, risqué remakes of classics including Jane Eyre and Pride and Prejudice.
Readers will finally be able to read what the books could have been like if erotic romance had been acceptable in that day and age, redefining the boundaries and bringing the classics to a new generation of readers. We're keeping the works as close to the originals as possible. It's not our intention to rewrite them, but to add a deeper relationship and character development to them; to enhance rather than to distort. Our authors are co-authoring these books, adding the "missing" scenes for readers to enjoy.

If the Brontës were writing today they would have written completely different books. And please.... "add a deeper relationship and character development" sounds terribly pedantic for sexploitation à la mummy porn rewriting enhancing. We are not purists at BrontëBlog and in the past we have reviewed erotic takes on the Jane Eyre story... but they were new rewritings or developments, not just taking the novel and adding some turn on material in-between paragraphs. Opposite to what the editor says this is not a merit it is, in fact, a clear sign of laziness.

In the Telegraph, the Rev Dr Peter Mullen is not very happy with the idea:

Sexing up the classics? Don't these idiots know that sensuality is all about subtlety? (...)
So dumbed down and debauched are we these days that no doubt there is money to be made out of pornographying the classics. I might even try my hand at it myself. Let me begin by rewriting the first sentence of Jane Eyre: “There was no possibility of having a **** that day …” Certainly not up on Howarth (sic) Moor in a November thunderstorm.
What the explicit, in-yer-face, literal-minded re-inventors of classic fiction don’t understand is that the originals are far sexier than anything their lurid brains could produce. Mr Rochester is taciturn, moody and more than a bit weird. But Charlotte Brontë certainly conveys his brooding masculinity and repressed desire. Heathcliff – you can smell him a mile off – is the paragon, if that’s the right word, of sadomasochistic desire.

Kiri Blakeley on The Stir is even less happy:

Believe it or not, it wasn't a viral blog or even a Harlequin romance novel that made me want to become a writer. It was Charlotte Brontë's Jane Eyre. So when I read that this classic, as well as many others, is going to get the Fifty Shades of Grey erotic treatment from a publisher, I wanted to vomit on my keyboard. But that would prevent me from writing this rant, so I settled for dry heaving over it. (...)
 Imagine, instead of Jane Eyre's classic line, "Reader, I married him," she might say, "Reader, I f*cked him." Or possibly a more E.L. James-ish, "Reader, he went down there." Gag me with a dildo. (...)
 Never mind that the whole point of Jane Eyre is that the heroine won't have sex with Rochester -- even though he begs her to -- because he's already married. And if that just spoiled the book for you, shame on you for not having read it by now. (...)
Says Claire Siemaszkiewicz, whose company will release the e-books, "I've often wondered whether the Brontë sisters, if they were alive today, would have gone down the erotic romance route. There's a lot of underlying sexual tension in their stories."
Yes, Claire, that's the idea. The sexual tension is underlying. The sexiest thing in the world isn't when a couple knocks boots, but when they want to, but don't.
If the Brontë sisters were alive today, methinks they would vomit all over their ink quills at the idea of Rochester whipping Jane whilst she emits banalities like, "Take me now, you big stud."
Reader, leave the classics alone.

Sam Parker on The Huffington Post is of the same opinion:

Perhaps it hasn't occurred to Siemaszkiewicz that the sexual tension is 'underlying' for a reason, and that Emily Brontë decided not to have Catherine and Heathcliff ravish each other in a pile of hay for reasons of craft, rather than simply because she was living through less enlightened times than ours.
A quick poll of the office's biggest Brontë fans reveals that it is precisely the unconsummated, spiritual nature of the pair's love that makes Wuthering Heights one of the most exciting and romantic stories ever written.

Washington City Paper reviews Dizzy Miss Lizzie's The Brontës:

For you newbies who don’t know that no matter what the subject is, Dizzy Miss Lizzie is worth seeing, here’s a brief summary: The Brontë siblings (Charlotte, of Jane Eyre; Emily, of Wuthering Heights; Anne, of some novels you’ve never heard of; and brother Branwell, who died a drug addict) existed. They had lives. These lives they had, with the writings of those respective books, their failures and smashed hopes and early deaths, are Dizzy Miss Lizzified in The Brontës. Which is to say, they’re turned into sideshow-rock music-mini operas. (...)
In this case, we have The Brontës. Each of the four gets a few songs and vaudeville acts to tell their story. None of their stories are coherent if you look too closely, but that’s immaterial. The tightly-drilled songs are melodic, expressive and muscular. The gags and characterizations are sharp. The metaphors (e.g. the Grim Reaper reimagined as a boom-box wielding dude) are brain-tickling. The cast looks sexy and spectacular in gothy corsets and gypsy-circus mashups.
Who needs the moments to add up to something? Who needs it to make sense that Wuthering Heights is retold for Emily’s section and Emily’s life mostly ignored, while Anne’s writings are skipped over in her section in favor of looking at her struggles with making a living, when the specific moments are all so glorious? It’s no different than The Simpsons abandoning one storyline for a completely different one halfway through the episode, in order to deliver you more laffs and more unexpectedly sad twists. The Brontës lived, and died, and in the middle, there was rock music. (Brett Abelman)

Natural History traces a biography of Astley Cooper (1768–1841) who

Sitting around their fireside while snowstorms came down on the Yorkshire moors, the Brontë family—not medical in the least—included this surgeon in their imaginary games, placing him alongside the Duke of Wellington, conqueror of Napoleon, in their personal pantheons. (Druin Burch)

Wharf on kleptomaniac children (literal):

The posts for advice from parents dealing with the same issue were filled with anguish, the replies extreme (who needs a Brontë novel when you have the Net). (Giles Broadbent)

The Irish Times talks about the memories of the writer William Carleton:

But her husband was even worse. If she was a sort of Mrs Bennett, Piers was a cross between Heathcliff and a member of the Starkadder family in Cold Comfort Farm. (Anna Carey)

The Yorkshire Post discusses a development project in Haworth:

A chance is being missed to capitalise on Haworth’s rich industrial past if consent is given to demolish a derelict mill and engine room, council chiefs are being warned. The former Ivy Bank Mill and engine house, in Haworth, has been empty for a number of years but now developers want conservation area consent to demolish both. They are also seeking outline permission to build new homes on the site.
The site at Ivy Bank Lane, to the west of the Keighley and Worth Valley railway line, is in a state of decay. The mill building, in the Haworth Conservation Area, was badly damaged in a fire and has no roof.
The engine house, near the main mill, has a collapsed roof and both buildings have been unused for a number of years.
Officers from Bradford Council are recommending both proposals are given the go-ahead. However the Ancient Monuments Society has raised concerns

Preternatura interviews the author Amy Kathleen Ryan:

Book you most want to read again for the first time: Wuthering Heights, by Emily Brontë.

Książki, wino i ja (in Polish) reviews Agnes Grey; Sommerreifen Günstig kaufen (in German) and  Christians Read post about Wuthering HeightsAre We Beautiful? (in Portuguese) posts about the Brontës Distant Mountains Trips has visited Haworth; Ninaah Bulles (in French) reviews Jane Eyre 2011; Massive Magazine talks about Wuthering Heights 2011.