Unfortunate ironies

Now Toronto reviews Brontë: The World Without.

The unfortunate irony of Brontë: The World Without is that a play about three of the world’s most compelling storytellers lacks an interesting narrative itself. [...]
Mand is less concerned with the sisters’ inner worlds than with their outer ones – the “without” of the title. Hence, we get details about looking for employment (usually as governesses), adding up household expenses and, when they start getting published, who gets better reviews. (Charlotte’s Jane Eyre is universally beloved, while Emily’s Wuthering Heights is trashed and Anne’s Agnes Grey ignored.)
All of that is fine in a Wiki-entry way. But Mand (Between The Sheets, Caught) never convinces us of the women’s imaginations and storytelling skills. The Brontës’ works must be in the public domain. Why not try out some passages on us, if not in dialogue – as it seems the sisters were secretive about their work – then in monologues?
There’s also little sense of place – strange, since the Yorkshire moors figure prominently in a lot of the women’s fiction.
And the musical choices – Chopin one moment, Regina Spektor the next – are disorienting.
What we’re left with is a thin slip of a play that serves more as a showcase for the fine acting ensemble ([Beryl] Bain [who plays Charlotte] is particularly commanding) than a look at three essential voices in 19th-century literature. (Glenn Sumi)

The Bangladesh Post has selected 'Four inspirational characters in literature', including

Jane Eyre
Another great character is Jane Eyre from the book with the same title by Charlotte Brontë. This is a great way to describe the mid-19th century woman. Jane Eyre is the embodiment of simplicity and plainness. Being a plain and humble character Jane Eyre is a great read for children, as a closer look to Jane Eyre will show one how to be humble and generous at the same time. (Md Saifuddin Al Quaderi)

Jane is indeed an inspirational character, but this description of her is, we think, way off the mark.

The Mary Sue discusses the recent name change for (the former) The Laura Ingalls Wilder Award, from now on to be known as the Children’s Literature Legacy Award because 'her body of work, includes expressions of stereotypical attitudes inconsistent with ALSC’s core values of inclusiveness, integrity and respect, and responsiveness'.

Removing Laura Ingalls Wilder’s name from this one award is not removing her books or altering the material in any way that would be “whitewashing”—it is recognizing that the content in the books does not hold up to the ideals of the organization or award now, hence it being renamed. We rename things all the time.
If people were advocating for Wilder’s books to be re-edited or banned I’d have more a problem with that because (a) banning books never works and (b) the books should be allowed to be capsules of their time and give the reader insight into the ideologies of the author.
Any of us who are fans of “classic” works are familiar with navigating the space of understanding that something can be “of its time” but still perpetuate harmful stereotypes. I can still love The Secret Garden and A Little Princess and recognize that those books are filled with imperialism. I can adore Jane Eyre and find is suspect that their madwoman in the attic is a Creole woman. (Princess Weekes)

Los Angeles Review of Books features Araminta Hall’s Our Kind of Cruelty.

The implication that what follows will also be a love story is both true and misleading, which sets the novel’s tone and identifies its central paradox: “[H]ow do you show someone that what they believe to be true is really not the truth?” This is, essentially, a love story; a story about love. It’s no starry-eyed romance, but a love story in the tradition of Wuthering Heights or Caroline Kepnes’s You, in which love manifests as darker, more obsessive, with lovers prepared to burn down the world that would keep them apart, even if they self-destruct in the process. Or, as the narrator of this book declares: “[S]ometimes two people need each other so much it is worth sacrificing others to make sure they end up together.” (Karen Brissette)

Geek Dad reviews the book You Are Awesome by Matthew Syed.

Chapter 5 includes case studies of Jay-Z, Mozart, Serena Williams, David Beckham, and the Brontë sisters. (Robin Brooks)

Independent reviews the film Patrick.

Sarah has just started teaching English at the Grange Hill-like Daneman High School and is struggling to discipline her unruly class. She is also on the lookout for a new boyfriend.
She has two potential candidates, a sleazy, narcissistic vet who spends too much time watching Game Of Thrones and talking about himself, and a sympathetic but mysterious dog-loving older man who seems like Richmond Park’s answer to Rochester in Jane Eyre. (Geoffrey Macnab)

Le Figaro (France) has a subscribers-only article on The Infernal World of Branwell Brontë by Daphne du Maurier.

En 1960, Daphné du Maurier, à travers le portrait de l'oublié de la famille, brosse le portrait en creux des célèbres sœurs
Dans la famille Brontë, on demande toujours les filles, surtout Charlotte et Emily, un peu moins Anne, trois étoiles filantes de la littérature anglaise, parfois le père, le révérend Patrick Brontë qui éleva la fratrie après la mort prématurée de la mère Maria, et rarement le frère. Il s'appelait Branwell et était celui dans lequel le révérend mettait tous les espoirs de la famille. Ses sœurs le vénéraient. (Françoise Dargent) (Translation)

And finally, more about Lily Cole's film Balls on the Brontë Parsonage Twitter:

Lily Cole directing on set of her new film 'Balls'.

Tickets for the premiere screening on Sunday 29 July available https://t.co/xYR8WGxBcE@furyfilms_ltd @FoundlingMuseum @rrunews @lilycole #LilyColeBalls pic.twitter.com/BFZ0tEjjel

— Brontë Parsonage (@BronteParsonage) June 27, 2018