Women are supposed to be very calm generally: but women feel just as men feel

I finished Jane Eyre this weekend and, for those who were worried after my last post, I did not end up hating the book. I didn't love it, I haven't found a new favorite, but I enjoyed it and I'm glad I read it.

*As with the others, this will contain spoilers. Heads up*
Jane redeems herself for her earlier weakness when she refuses to marry St. John Rivers. Initially she can't say no to St. John's requests, even though she says she doesn't want to listen to him. She never gives sufficient reason for why she felt she had to listen to him, his sisters wouldn't take part in his studies, but nevertheless, she is obedient. This is a good set up to the surprise for the reader and St. John when she refuses his marriage proposals, but I wanted to know more from Jane about why she couldn't refuse him before. She was articulate about why she wouldn't marry him, she stayed strong, she never became overly emotional,  and she never got angry with St. John. It was a this point that Jane's independence and strength shone. And it was with this that her return to Rochester worked.

The feminist in me was disappointed with two points in Jane's return to Rochester: her happily ever after is wrapped up in her marriage and that Rochester had to be physically maimed in order for the two of them to actually be equals. I have to remind constantly remind myself that for the time Bronte was writing this, when she couldn't even sign her own name because people would never read something by a woman, this was making great strides in feminism. And yet I felt like the relationship with Lizzie and Darcy was equal without all of the complications Bronte went through for her lovers.

While I say I like the story, I can't say I ever started to really like Rochester. Not only is he not particularly nice to Jane while she's living at Thornfield, although Bronte managed to make his love for her genuine, but he locks up his wife Bertha which can't have helped her sanity. I know we're supposed to think he's so good and kind because he doesn't kill her when he leaves Jamaica, but I don't know that deciding not to murder someone necessarily makes the person super great. Divorce may not be an option and his situation may be unfair, but I don't want to like a character based on pity. But Rochester is far better than passive aggressive St. John Rivers, who needs  to quit dragging our last name through the mud by being such a jerk. I think I may have hated him slightly more because of our shared surname.
*Spoilers above.*


I'm happy I finally read this one. I'm considering re-reading The Eyre Affair to see if I now get any of the subtle Jane Eyre jokes I missed when I was a Bronte virgin. But I don't plan on putting Jane Eyre on my re-read list. However, I think I'll give Emily a shot with Wuthering Heights...at some point. I need a little break from them for now.

Title quote from location 1999

Bronte, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. Kindle edition, 2010. Originally published 1847

My future husband was becoming to me my whole world

What I'm about to say is going to annoy some people. My intention isn't to provoke a reaction, but rather record my own. I of course welcome comments and love the discussion they drive, but I just want to make it clear I'm not doing this to cause some stir and thus drive up any traffic numbers. This is also going to be all kinds of full of spoilers so you should skip this if you haven't read Jane Eyre. Here goes

I'm suddenly understanding why Meyers kept talking about how awesome Jane Eyre was in the Twilight series, because the current conversations/actions between Jane and Rochester are sounding more and more like the relationship between Bella and Edward. What the hell???

Image Credit

I'm at the point where Rochester has proposed to Jane and they're going to get married in a month. At this part Jane's self-esteem seems so low that she's decided "he must not actually like me all this much, so I'm going to see if I can piss him off to the point where he breaks off this engagement." Obviously this is up for interpretation, but that is how I'm reading this. For example

I assured him I was naturally hard -- very flinty, and that he would often find me so; and that, moreover, I was determined to show him divers rugged points in my character before the ensuing four weeks elapsed: he should know fully what sort of bargain he had made, while there was time to rescind it. (location 5158)

I get the idea behind what Jane's doing. Mrs. Fairfax told her to be wary, so wary she's being. Or she thinks she's being. Because really it's coming off as someone who is just being whiny and "I'm so awful, clearly this isn't real and he's going to regret his decision so I better make him regret it now while he still has time to bail". Jane seemed so much stronger before. I like her trying to show she's an equal by keeping her position as governess and keeping a salary from Rochester and she'll pay for her things with that, but even that comes off as odd. He's going to be her husband and employer? That doesn't make it sound like an equal relationship at all.

And Rochester is pissing me off too. Jane refuses to see Rochester regularly during these 4 weeks and will only see him when he calls for her during this specific time in the evening. During that time she doesn't want to talk to him, cos you certainly can't get to know someone by talking to them, so she comes up with other stuff to distract him with. On night she asks him to sing instead. She tries to play along on the piano but Rochester kicks her off of it cos she sucks so much. Granted, she says this is what she was hoping would happen, but it doesn't say that she was trying to play badly. Instead she was trying to play correctly but she was just so bad (obviously) that he couldn't stand it.

I did try [to play the accompaniment], but was presently swept off the stool and denominated "a little bungler." Being pushed unceremoniously to one side -- which was precisely what I wished -- he usurped my place, and proceeded to accompany himself (location 5126)

Maybe this is all meant to be playful. Maybe I'm reading it the wrong way. But I have to say, I may be wrong but I 'm think reading this the same way Meyers did. The only difference is where I'm going "The hell is going on??" Meyers went "This is the ultimate love story, except it needs sparkles." But here's the passage that made me put the book down and start writing this:

He continued to send for me punctually the moment the clock struck seven; though when I appeared before him now, he had no such honeyed terms as "love" and "darling" on his lips: the best words at my service were "provoking puppet," "malicious elf," "sprite," "changeling," etc. For caresses, too, I now got grimaces; for a pressure of the hand, a pinch on the arm; for a kiss on the cheek, a severe tweak of the ear. It was all right: a present I decidedly preferred these fierce favours to anything more tender. (location 5177)

Someone please tell me I've read this wrong and this isn't the beginning of an abusive relationship. Or maybe Jane's just into S&M? But seriously, I'm getting a little worried about this girl. Especially when she says "my future husband was becoming to me my whole world" (location 5180).

Before these scenes Jane was kind of dull, but not low self-esteem whiny. And after these scenes she seems fine again. So what was going on? I get that it was a different time and maybe I'm reading too much into this but can someone then explain to me what I should get getting out of this?

Title quote from location 5180

Bronte, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. Kindle edition, 2010. Originally published 1847

Restlessness was in my nature

I'm finally getting around to reading Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. You'd think I would have been shamed into reading this one sooner. I've gone on ad naseum about how much I love the Thursday Next series which begins with the book The Eyre Affair. And if you can't figure it out from the name, Jane Eyre plays a pretty large role in the book, with characters from Jane Eyre interacting with Thursday and Thursday actually jumping into Charlotte's masterpiece and becoming part of the story. While I have no doubt I missed many subtle jokes because I wasn't already familiar with the Bronte piece, it never bothered me enough to actually pick up the book. After my success with Pride and Prejudice I figured I could read some of the other literature of roughly that era.* Yet I was still apprehensive. Perhaps it's the social norms of the time, so uptight and prude, that makes me back away slowly. But I gave in and besides, it's a free copy for my Kindle, which certainly makes reading the classics easier.

I haven't finished Jane Eyre yet. Actually, I'm only 36% of the way done (yeah Kindle!) but I wanted to get my initial thoughts out there. Jane's just made it to Thornfield, but I've lost reading steam since she got there. I really liked the early chapters of Jane at Mrs. Reed's and Jane at Lowood. I had assumed I'd get a story of a kid who is good and perfect and obedient and yet is constantly berated and tormented and you feel nothing but pity for her. Thankfully that's not what Bronte provides. Jane is certainly mistreated by Mrs. Reed and her kids but she's not meek and mild, just a character to pity. When Mrs. Reed tells her kids Jane is "not worthy of notice" and that they shouldn't associate with her, Jane yells down "They are not fit to associate with me" (location 431). That's not a meek kid, that's not a kid you just pity. When she finds out she's going to leave Mrs. Reed's and go to Lowood school, Jane lets Mrs. Reed have it

I am not deceitful: if I were, I should say I loved you; but I declare I do not love you: I dislike you worst of anybody in the world except John Reed...I am glad you are no relation of mine: I will never call you aunt again as long as I live. I will never come to see you when I am grown up; and if anyone asks me how I liked you, and how you treated me, I will say the very thought of you makes me sick, and that you treated me with miserable cruelty. (location 604-611)

*A few spoilers below. I already knew most of this before reading and it hasn't ruined the story for me, but if you're worried*
I miss that spark from Jane because so far while at Thornfield it hasn't shown itself. She's been kind and good and not taken advantage of but she's just kind of bland right now. There's a crazy lady, laughing maniacally and setting people on fire, and Jane's just very eh. She's trying to figure out what's going on, but so far she's been so quiet. Plus Rochester is kind of an ass and not in the fun way Darcy was so I don't get why he's supposed to be the great love interest.

I wish there was another Helen Burns, Jane's friend from Lowood, at Thornfield. I couldn't help but think of Luna Lovegood from the Harry Potter series when I read her character. Something about the daydreaming while being punished for whatever small infraction she had committed and not getting angry at anyone. Knowing death was on her heels made her more forgiving, more relaxed and she dealt with it in a way that was years beyond her age. Perhaps I dislike the chapters after her death because I miss her. I'm holding that against subsequent chapters and should probably just get over it.
*Spoilers contained. You're safe now*

Here's to hoping things pick up in the story. So many people list this among their favorite, desert island reads, so I'm sure there is something of substance and intrigue here to latch on to.

*Wikipedia just told me Austen is part of the Regency era and Bronte isn't but I think of them as one in the same.

Title quote from location 1992

Bronte, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. Kindle edition, 2010. Originally published 1847

Sweet Madness

I finished The Eyre Affair on my way home from work.  Thursday changes the ending to Jane Eyre by calling to Jane in Rochester's voice and thus leading Jane to return to the now burned down Thornfield and finish the narrative the way it is know in our world.  In an excerpt from Thursday's diaries she mentions that changing the ending of Jane Eyre violates "[her] training...[and] everything that [she] had sworn to uphold" but that she "acted out of compassion, not duty, and sometimes that is no bad thing." (351) Obviously this works for the story.  Throughout the novel various characters talk about what a let down the "real" ending to Jane Eyre is so having Thursday change the ending is natural and it leads to some nice symmetry when Thursday's own ending is saved by a similar deus ex machina.  I wondered, are there stories I would want to change?

The first thing that comes to mind are Shakespeare's tragedies.  I think one of the many things that make Romeo & Juliet, Hamlet and Othello so great is that even though I know from the beginning how the story will turn out, I always kind of hope something will happen to engineer a happy ending.  But if that were to happen, it wouldn't be the powerful story it is and I wouldn't enjoy it.  Same thing with Lamb by Christopher Moore.  You go into that book knowing how it's going to end, yet by the time I get to the ending I keep hoping things will turn out differently.  But I suppose my emotion at reading one of these tragedies is different than the dissatisfaction everyone felt for the "original" Jane Eyre ending.  I'm at a bit of a loss as to finding a book I enjoyed all of except for the ending.  I can think of books I would change, but it would mostly be to make the story itself not exist.  I can't say I'd be too upset if someone were to jump into American Psycho and kill off Bateman in the first couple chapters.

Are there any books you would change if you could?  

I was thinking I should review The Eyre Affair, but there seem to be plenty of places to find reviews so instead I'll just say I love this book and would recommend it to anyone I think will enjoy the literary humor.  If you want to read an actual review CurledUp.com and The New York Times both have reviews I find helpful.

Fforde, Jasper. The Eyre Affair. Penguin Group, New York. 2001