Novels without Metaphors

Following up on yesterday's observation that Tolstoy rarely uses metaphor, I've been thinking of other novelists who don't and the first whom comes right to mind is Jane Austen. Offhand, you wouldn't think that Tolstoy and Austen have a lot in common, stylistically, thematically, temporally, but in fact I think they do both share this trait of style. And when you think about that, you realize that, yes, Austen, like Tolstoy, is a writer who is somehow transparent. She presents a particular world, her world, but we rarely see her. Or at least we don't see her "writerliness." We do sometimes hear Austen (and Tolstoy) when the expostulate about human nature (the famous: It is a truth universally acknowledged...) or human behavior (Tolstoy's extensive discussions about the forces of history). But though both (particular Austen) write about domestic affairs and the subtleties of social strata, they are completely different from the other great novelists of social behavior - I'm thinking here of Proust, who stands at the exact opposite end of the sprectrum, his writing superabundant with metaphor, a style that constantly makes you aware of the presence, the genius of the writer. To read Proust is to be lost in his style; to read Tolstoy or Austen is to be lost in their world.