] I see. What distinguished "serious" literature
> from that in the "circulating library"?

The word "serious" in JA's time usually refers to religion.CS Lewis did a lovely article about JA based on this theme.

You have to remember that the Novel, as a literary art form, was still fairly new, and evolved from poetry and drama, rather from philosophical and critical prose. So novels were seen as rather frivolous entertainment, and possibly a degenrate and dangerous thing.... a thought that JA went to town on in the first few chapters of Northanger Abbey.

Circulating libraries were also new. They were full of rather trashy novels,such as The Mysteries of Udolpho as well as 'improving' ones like Rasselas.Although most circulating libraries wouldn't let you join if you were below a certain income( say £100 p.a.)it still brought literature of all kinds to a class that previously wouldn't have been able to afford their own great libraries.

And is > her presentation of her work as "unserious", in
> some sense, responsible for the lack of recognition during
> her lifetime?

Quite possibly. The family were intent on keeping her identity a secret- even neices and nephews were not told for a long time.This suggests to me that she's done something 'a bit naughty' in publishing her stories. And there's her own comment about P&P being "rather too light, bright and sparkling...."needing be padded out with "shade" and "specious nonsense". She was obviously aware that "serious" authors didn't write as she did.

What would have happened, do you think, if
> she had written under a male pseudonym? Though she was
> still published as a woman, might (apparent) male
> authorship have brought her more attention and, on its own,
> changed people's perception of her work?

Possibly, but there were many female authors around. Interesting question.