Today we had our first student-led discussions in A-block and F-block. Louisa B and Caroline B each performed the discussion leader role adroitly.
In the comment box I expect you to participate in extending the discussion beyond today's class.
Here are some of the things we've discussed already.
Both classes discussed Helen Burns in depth. In A-block there was discussion about Helen as a Christ-figure or, at least, a symbol of Christ-like virtue (humble, selfless beyond what is usual; ultimately "sacrificed" but accepting of this fate). It might be worth articulating exactly how Helen contribute to the novel, particularly to Jane's development. It was suggested in F-block that Jane "cools some of [Jane's] fire."
That fire (or passion) seen early in the novel was the subject of some discussion though a lot more could be said about Jane's response to the injustices of the Reeds, about the Red Room scene (and, as was mentioned in A-block, its Gothic elements), about Jane's indignation at the unjust treatment of Helen, etc. Both classes discussed the relationship between passion and restraint at some length; since it's one of the novel's key issues it's worth considering more, especially with regard to particular scenes and passages.
F-block talked about Brocklehurst and his hypocrisy. (This was mentioned in a different manner in A-block too.) We also talked about the competing versions of Christianity dramatized in the book. What does Bronte seem to suggest about these different versions of Christianity?
A-block discussed garden imagery. This imagery was related to issues of security and containment and to issues of life and death.
Both classes discussed the pacing of scenes (speeding up and slowing down the novel's events) & mentioned but just scratched the surface of the meaning behind the arrangement of the scenes (this could be expressed as "the significance of the plot logic"). Both classes also scratched the surface of the ways Bronte hints at what is to come through mood, tone, and the selection of detail.
Both classes talked about the significance of the narrative point of view: the Jane who is narrating has already experienced and observed everything that happens in the book. Jane is looking back and narrating. How is this significant?
Both classes discussed Jane Eyre in relation to elements of Wide Sargasso Sea: nature, rejection vs. acceptance, security and imprisonment, control (of others/of self), restraint (of others, of self), passion, etc.
The entire "Thornfield" section was not discussed much, though A-block discussed Thornfield briefly in relation to the significance of Grace Poole, laughter, and fire. Fairfax, Adele, and Blance were mentioned. How are they significant? How do they contribute to the bildungsroman? F-block mentioned Jane's relationship with Rochester and how its significant. I encourage to spend some time with the Thornfield chapters in your responses.
In your comments on the blog please refer to specific passages. When you do so please write down the chapter as well as the page number you are referring. Knowing the chapter will help because we don't all have the same version of the book. Use your first name, last initial, and class block to help me identify you.
I expect your responses to show an understanding of the relationship between text and meaning through the first sixteen chapters of the novel; to engage the ideas and questions brought up by other students and/or your teacher in class and/or on the blog; to extend what has been discussed in class and on the blog beyond the passages already discussed and the assertions already made.
Louisa B.
ReplyDeleteA block
Christianity and it's different faces is definitely a prevalent theme in the Jane Eyre. Brontë alludes to the Bible multiple times, such as in chapter 3 (p.19) when Jane declares that she “ought to forgive [Mrs. Reed] for [she] knew not what she did: while rending my heartstrings, [she] thought [she] was only uprooting my bad propensities” which references Christ's speech on the Cross “forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34). This is not the only reference to the Bible and Christianity, like we talked about in class, we can infer that Helen Burns is the ultimate Christ figure. However, the way Brontë portrays Helen's perspective on the religion is much different than the way she explains Brocklehurst's. Brocklehurst is an extremist, and uses the umbrella of “good Christian works” to excuse his lack of benevolence towards the orphans. It is very clear that Brontë does not describe Brocklehurst as a role model, instead he is the example of questionable motives in the Christian Church. Brontë has good reason to portray the leader of the school as such, Lowood Institution models the school that Brontë and her sisters attended and where two of her sisters died, perhaps due to the same cause that killed many of the Lowood orphans.
Jacklyn L.
ReplyDeleteF Block
The motif of death is prevalent in the first sixteen chapters. When Jane lived with the Reeds death seemed to be a common topic. Starting with the death of her parents the ones that would have loved her unconditionally and then with the death of her uncle the only other who seemed to love her. It seemed as though these events were always forefront in her mind, such as in this scene, “Unjust! Unjust! said my reason, forced by the agonising stimulus into precocious though transitory power: and Resolve, equally wrought up, instigated some strange expedient to achieve escape from insupportable oppression- as running away, or, if that could not be effected, never eating or drinking more, and letting myself die.” (ch.1,pg.13) In a sense it seems that the idea of death does not effect Jane that much and also because she believed that it was easier to die than live with a family that hates you. This seems to be the case because once she was at school the motif of death seemed to decrease. However as Jane became increasingly more comfortable and even began to make friends the motif of death was once again prevalent. Soon the school was no longer a safe haven for Jane, but a symbol of death where no one knew if they would live to see another day. This is what truly made Jane become more reserved she no longer wanted to make close ties because she no longer knew how long these ties would last. This idea was cemented with the death of her friends Helen Burns and the fact that she accepted so willingly seemed to make Jane shy away from friendship because after that she seems to have no close ties until her arrival at Mr. Rochester’s house.
When Jane meets Mr. Rochester he asks her if she would be willing to do anything for him and she replies that she would as long as she believed it to right. However in this passage the reader sees that Jane has become a shallow character. This is seen because as a child, Jane would have screamed what she thought was right and wrong, but now she does not even mention her morals. Throughout all her interactions with Mr. Rochester she is reserved, such as when he questions if the pictures were really drawn by her and she answers with a meek yes instead of the ferocity that she would have defended herself with had she been a child. Also when she begins to question about Grace Poole she does not dig deeply for answers something that was not uncommon of her when she was a child, but now she simply deals with the fact that no one is willing to tell her anything. In truth it is to believed that Mr. Rochester does this to her because outside of his presence she seems to regain some of the ferocity, but it is scarce and far between.
Chelsea M. - A Block
ReplyDeleteBronte in general uses the Christian church to not only question motives within the church but more specifically the individuals within the church. As Louisa said (post one), Brocklehurst defends himself with an "umbrella" of good works. But in the day that Jane Eyre took place, giving orphans a place to stay and be educated was considered a 'good work.' Historically, death was prevalent, especially diseases such as typhus fever which was extremely contagious, and the cause of her parents death; "...the latter [father] caught the typhus fever while visiting among the poor of a large manufacturing town where his curacy was situated, and where that disease was then prevalent; that my mother took the infection from him, and both died within a month of each other." (chapter 3) Brockelhurst was not about to spend his money on orphans who may die any day. In our time we see this as cruel and unethical, but historically it was the better of two evils: either house them with little or let them starve in the cold on the streets with absolutely nothing.
I find Jane's struggle between passion and restraint to be an interesting battle. In her time, to be passionate was bad. You were considered to be of little restraint, and at times that is true with Jane. In the human mind, your development is very dependent on how often you become frustrated. Jane is very passionate when she becomes frustrated because that is the one time she becomes blocked. She is a very analytical thinker and she feels the need to express and protect herself because she feels she has no one to protect her as a normal ten year old should. This frustration at lack of normalcy and protection leads to the need to almost over do her protective mechanism. This exuberance leads to her aunt's 'in' at telling Mr. Brocklehurst that Jane is a liar and an actress (chapter 4): "Mr. Brocklehurst, I believe I intimated in the letter which I wrote to you three weeks ago, that this little girl has not quite the character and disposition I could wish: should you admit her into Lowood school, I should be glad if the superintendent and teachers were requested to keep a strict eye on her, and above all, to guard against her worst fault, a tendency to deceit." These 'introductions' by Mrs. Reed to visitors brings another issue into Jane's mental well-being: her concern of her image to others. Jane is always questioning how people view her and her character due to the lies that are told about her as a child. She tries to lead a benevolent and pious life, but is continually road blocked by these lies. Her self image issues follow her into Lowood and then onto the beginning of her relationship/meeting with Mr. Rochester. However, Lowood has numbed her to death and protecting herself. She defends herself and her self image, but she is no longer passionate about it because she sees that it is to no avail to try and correct the image that is portrayed to people.
Raised Catholic, I endured and survived nine years in parochial schools; it should come as no surprise that I have heard the “fire and brimstone” speech many a time. Fear and guilt are tools that are used extensively by the church to instill a sense of duty among children and adults alike. Because of this I have always been slightly bitter towards the church and its methods (my church and my church community rather, I do not place the entire Catholic faith under an umbrella of ignorance). Telling children they live to die and that hell awaits those who do not follow the teachings (the teachings of whomever is teaching them to be specific, for theological views vary by each individual) is extremely forward, and is in no way how we should be teaching children religion, or anything for that matter. Everyone makes mistakes, and learning how to deal with them and move on is a pivotal part of childhood. This instead should be the driving force behind what our younger generations are taught; as I recall, repentance and forgiveness play a significant role in the Scriptures, and learning these values as a child serves as a stepping stone to a healthy lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteEdanLABlock
ReplyDeleteThe dream/reality conflict is, I think quite evident so far in the novel, especially when comparing it to WSS. One of the very first things that I noticed when I picked up Jane Eyre was the peculiar drawn-out writing style that Bronte used. I hadn't read much of this eighteenth-century style before, but I quickly became aware of the tremendous description that Bronte crammed into each sentence.
The writing style of Jane Eyre (unlike WSS) is very concrete, based almost completely on reality and fact. While there may be some dreams thrown in, and the supernatural gothic theme, everything is presented in a very clear way. Within the writing-style, the novel can relate. Younger Jane is trained to digest only the information that is evidently fact; she is repulsed by dreams, or anything else that may appear abstract. This perhaps, may be a parallel to Eighteenth-century England, during the brink of the Romanticism movement. At Lowood, she is taught to be submissive, not just to society, but to god as well. This holds a paradox right here. The school is coercing her to worship an idea that is essentially abstract. When worshipping god, she has no fact to cling to other than the words of her superiors. At Thornfield, she relaxes the hold on her eager imagination. The reader begins to see a bit of romanticism within her. Her Lowood upbringing starts to melt away as she develops theories about Grace Poole, and as she develops a relationship with Mr. Rochester. Her imagination is released when she sketches the portrait of Blanche Ingram completely from her mind. This is just one of many of the many changes that Jane is experiencing.
F block
ReplyDeleteWhere I understand the view of Helen as a Christ figure, I would recognize some things which could separate her from such a figure. Primarily, she is almost entirely passive, and while she demonstrates turning the other cheek, she does not widely impart some message, or take on others' sufferings. Her influence, while it should not be underestimated is mainly restricted to Jane. Helen Burns' beliefs, even, do not account for any savior, but for an encompassing love that may bring all to Heaven. Even if this does not remove Helen from the place of Christ figure, I think it is a significant variance, that if explored makes her to be a savior who imparts the news that no savior is needed. Is this Austen speaking, or is this merely something for Jane to consider, adding another influence to her character?
While at Thornfield, Jane has freedom in a new life, and yet finds re-entering Thornfield like a "return to stagnation." She dislikes the thought that she should "slip again over my faculties the viewless fetters of an uniform and too still existence; of an existence whose very privileges of security and ease I was becoming incapable of appreciating." (Chapter 12). With Rochester, too, there is something about Thornfield, whose very name does not conjure up a sense of openness and happiness, which makes it such that he has to say "I dare like it." (Chapter 15). It seems pretty clear that Austen has made the estate not innately pleasant to either Jane or Rochester, but that she has made it enjoyable to both in the other's company.
Furthermore on Rochester, he is shown as prideful and somewhat commanding, as in WSS, yet it is a different sort of pride that Austen is depicting in this book. It is easy to pick up on such a trait in Rochester, and to hold it against the character, but as of yet, he is not fully shown in the novel, and should be viewed as such, rather than have what has been sketched of him so far be filled with another author's colorings. Were The Man to have taken in Adele, what would his motivation have been? What do Rochester's reasons seem to be?
Jane always seems to need an outlet for her passions, which has ranged in the past from open rebellion to bitterness to verbalization, and is finally channeled with her imagination, as Edan points out, in her watercolors and sketches.
Fblock
ReplyDeleteWhere I understand the view of Helen as a Christ figure, I would recognize some things which could separate her from such a figure. Primarily, she is almost entirely passive, and while she demonstrates turning the other cheek, she does not widely impart some message, or take on others' sufferings. Her influence, while it should not be underestimated is mainly restricted to Jane. Helen Burns' beliefs, even, do not account for any savior, but for an encompassing love that may bring all to Heaven. Even if this does not remove Helen from the place of Christ figure, I think it is a significant variance, that if explored makes her to be a savior who imparts the news that no savior is needed. Is this Austen speaking, or is this merely something for Jane to consider, adding another influence to her character?
While at Thornfield, Jane has freedom in a new life, and yet finds re-entering Thornfield like a "return to stagnation." She dislikes the thought that she should "slip again over my faculties the viewless fetters of an uniform and too still existence; of an existence whose very privileges of security and ease I was becoming incapable of appreciating." (Chapter 12). With Rochester, too, there is something about Thornfield, whose very name does not conjure up a sense of openness and happiness, which makes it such that he has to say "I dare like it." (Chapter 15). It seems pretty clear that Austen has made the estate not innately pleasant to either Jane or Rochester, but that she has made it enjoyable to both in the other's company.
Furthermore on Rochester, he is shown as prideful and somewhat commanding, as in WSS, yet it is a different sort of pride that Austen is depicting in this book. It is easy to pick up on such a trait in Rochester, and to hold it against the character, but as of yet, he is not fully shown in the novel, and should be viewed as such, rather than have what has been sketched of him so far be filled with another author's colorings. Were The Man to have taken in Adele, what would his motivation have been? What do Rochester's reasons seem to be?
Jane always seems to need an outlet for her passions, which has ranged in the past from open rebellion to bitterness to verbalization, and is finally channeled with her imagination, as Edan points out, in her watercolors and sketches.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEthan B. A Block
ReplyDeleteI would first like to disagree that Helen Burns is a Christ figure. She may be Christ like but not "the ultimate christ figure" as Louisa put it. Helen did not ancreate a bounty of bread and fish, or bring people back from the dead, nor did she walk on water. Helen is more of a saintly figure that is an ideal character without flaws and accepting of her fate. Another thing that I noticed was the odd names of the settings. Mr. Cook brought this up in class and I took some thought about it. Gateshead in that begining of the book is like the gate for Jane into life. Lowood is the lowest point in her life in which she has to conform to the rigid system of the orphanage and suffer from loneliness while Thornfield she is given more lee way and freedom of expression but is still disturbed by things like the mysterious laughter which no one seems to tell her the truth about. I like the relationship between Jane and Mr. Rochester. It is very casual and straightfoward. He treats her as an equal and they are both seemingly comfortable with each other. He feels that she should not suppress her self in his presence just because he pays her 30 pounds per annum and she clearly does not speak within the limits of common manners when she calls him ugly upon their first meeting. The way the novel is set up as is with the Thornfield estate really reminds me of the Secret Garden. They are both set in large isolated mansions in the country side and they both have a twist of mystery to them. Thornfield has an ominous laughter while the Secret Garden had a mysterious crying. Plus they are both set in roughly the same time period.
Emily Collins
ReplyDeleteA Block
The first thing that I would like to say is in response to the first part of Ethan’s comment. I think he might have taken too literal what Louisa was saying when she called Helen a “Christ figure”. I don’t think anyone believes that Helen was the next coming of Christ on earth, but she was very influential to Jane in the way the Christ was influential to many people. Sure she did not rise from the dead or walk on water, but she was there for Jane when she needed her most. She gave her advice and guided her through her first year at Lowood. Also, it seemed like Helen had wisdom way beyond her years. And the fact that she took dying so lightly and courageous at such a young age shows that she could be more than just a little orphan. I think what Mr. Cook said in his comments were what Louisa really meant by “Christ figure”. But Elizabeth did mention that you should keep in mind that Helen was solely and influence for Jane in the book and did not spread her virtue around to others.
I think another character who might have been overlooked in the discussions and the responses is Miss Temple. I saw a parallel between her and Bessie in the chapters about Lowood. Specifically in Chapter 8, I really noticed the kindness of Miss Temple when she cleared Jane’s name after Mr. Brocklehurst publicly humiliated Jane and made her classmates and teachers shun her. Miss Temple listened to Jane intently when she told her her story. After deciding that the allegations made by Mr.Brocklehurst were false, Miss Temple cleared Jane’s name to the people at Lowood. I believe that if Miss Temple hadn’t done that for Jane, then Jane would have ended up like Helen: whipped and scolded every day for no apparent reason. It also seemed that Miss Temple was kind to Helen as well. The reason she reminds me of Bessie is because they are both older women that are kind to Jane in a situation where she feels neglected or wronged. I feel like Jane feels safe in the presence of both of these women. I think that she looks up to them. You can tell when in Chapter 10, Jane says “her friendship and society had been my continual solace” about Miss Temple. In the following paragraphs she talks about how she changed when Miss Temple left Lowood. You also can see how much Jane cared for Bessie when she reunites with her later in Chapter 10 I think that Miss Temple and Bessie are definitely characters that influenced Jane.
Tom M. Block F
ReplyDeleteContinuing our discussion from class the other day, I remember answering Caroline’s questioning of whether Jane’s reaction to Helen’s death was lackadaisical or not. When I first viewed the reaction of Jane to the loss of her best friend, I saw it as something of a regular rhythm. I had thought that Jane, who had endured enough death, disappointment, and emotional loss in her life before, that this occurrence was simply another mark of the obstacles that have been thrown at her to reap sadness around her. I had thought that her time with the malicious Reed family had prepared her to withstand any type of pain. However, Elizabeth proved that that’s not entirely the case, and by looking at Jackie’s post on here, I can see that maybe there is no real answer. Death in “Jane Eyre” is a common reoccurring motif, which is introduced many a time in the first 16 chapters. However, it hit the hardest during the scene in which Jane was with Helen, while she was on her deathbed, “I am very happy, Jane; and when you hear that I am dead, you must be sure and not grieve: there is nothing to grieve about. We all must die one day, and the illness which is removing me is not painful; it is gentle and gradual: my mind is at rest. I leave no one to regret me much: I have only a father; and he is lately married and will not miss me. By dying young, I shall escape great sufferings. I had not qualities or talents to make my way very well in the world: I should have been continually at fault." (Chapter 9, page 69) Therefore, the question arises, is this reason why Jane was not disturbed by her good friend’s death? Because her friend told her not to. After all, Helen had a valid argument, we all must die one day, she would experience no more suffering, and she was relaying onto Jane that her death would not be that great of a loss to the world. Yet that last fact is what seems to be cemented in my mind the most. Does Jane feel this way too? Does she also see herself as no contribution to the world around her? Would her death mean nothing? After all, she no longer has any family at all that would even care if she was gone, she was on her own now. What would it matter if she was gone? This is what I believe changed Jane’s perspective towards truth and friendship. For after the passing of Helen, Jane seemed to be a completely different person, no longer attaching herself to ideas, constancies, relationships with people, or standards. It seems like she doesn’t even care anymore for what is happening around her; she has lost all curiosity and pride. However, she has gained acceptance. Later on, when she becomes a governess at Thornfield, we see that Jane purely accepts the strange occurrences in the household concerning Rochester’s “secrets”, questions about her past and her nature, Grace Poole’s maniacal laughing, the fire, and many other instances of unusual circumstances. She just accepts Thornfield’s attitude towards her, she just accepts the fact that Grace did not get dismissed from the mansion for the fire she apparently started. It’s very odd behavior, but an understandable sort. Since Jane has endured more than a woman of her being should normally have to withstand, (her treatment in the Reed household, her schooling at Lowood, the death of her parents, her Uncle Reed, and Helen), all other obstacles seem miniscule to her. Not necessarily a walk through the park, but she purely just doesn’t care anymore, she is watching life pass her by and not stemming the tide. I believe this is true because she believes the second she rocks the boat and gets involved, she’ll find herself in a whole separate mess, experiencing loss, disappointment, and tragedy once more. Death appears as more than just its literal sense in “Jane Eyre”, as we have seen so far, Jane has experienced death, being the end of an existence, more times than one should.
A Block
ReplyDeleteI believe, like many of the others, that Helen Burns is an extremely influential figure to Jane throughout her beginning years at Lowood. I feel that Helen kept Jane from becoming bitter and angry, not that Jane is never angry or bitter, but through knowing Helen she is able to better control her emotions and find outlets for them. Jane faces a lot of difficulties growing up in Gateshead then moving to the still harsher environment of Lowood. These kinds of events would traumatize many children, but with the help of Helen, Jane is able to see how someone dealing with the same kind of difficulties as herself is able to not be angry about it. Helen seems to be much older than she actually is because of how calmly she accepted what she could not change such as her death. When she is about to die of typhus fever, she simply says, “We all must die one day, and the illness which is removing me is not painful; it is gentle and gradual: my mind is at rest.” (84) Jane learns from Helens calmness, composure, and wisdom. Through befriending Jane, Helen has a very large influence on her and the person is becoming.
Kelly B
ReplyDeleteF- Block
Looking at the previous comments (from Elizabeth and Ethan), I can see that both have a valid point to their argument. In the way that Charlotte Bronte portrays Helen she places her in the position that has Jane in a state of awe, and finds herself needing to be just like her. When Jane first encounters Helen, it is when she is very young and ready to be molded into an amiable young adult, so anything that she sees will affect her on who she will be in the future. Seeing this girl who takes the scolding with ease and doesn’t give the slightest flinch when being whipped with rods, gives Jane a role model to impersonate. At the beginning of chapter 8 Jane says something that reflects her feelings on who she wants to be in life, “I had meant to be so good, and do so much at Lowood: to make so many friends, to earn respect, and to win affection” (pg. 68). That is who she wanted to be, and when she saw Helen being so poised and rational, she knew she had to be like her in order to get her dream character. Now some religious people think that they have to behave in a perfect manner just as god wants for them to do, while others don’t. For a young girl like Jane, she doesn’t know anything about a greater being like god, but to her, Helen is her idea of someone who is perfect. So to Elizabeth, yes she does think of Helen as god-like, but not in a total sense that she can cure the sick and turn water to wine, but rather someone to impress, someone to prove to that they are worthy enough to be on this earth. And to Ethan, Helen is definitely just a young girl with good morals, but she has that extra something that makes Jane want to be her follower.
Now I want to leave with one last addition to my ideas, this one has to do with Jane’s fire in her soul. She is such a tenacious and aggressive girl that her forwardness needs to be cooled by someone or something that can influence her well. “And if I were in your place I should dislike her; I should resist her; if she struck me with that rod, I should get it from her hand; I should break it under her nose”… “Yet it would be your duty to bear it; if you could not avoid it” (pg. 55-56). This dialogue is between Helen and Jane, and it says so much about each character. While Jane wants to take persistent initiative, Helen knows that the moral thing to do is receive what you deserve and learn from it. In that way, Helen cools Jane’s burning fire, slowly mind you; to make her that person Jane aspires to be in the future.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAndrew M.
ReplyDeleteF
Brocklehurst hypocritical and cruel attitude regarding Lowood School allows Helens character to fully take charge. As everyone knows Mr. Brocklehurst preaches something he does not follow. He takes religion and rules and pushes it beyond its limits. In chapter 7 pg 65, Brocklehurst preaches to Miss Temple his cruel intensions to the school. “Madam, allow me an instant. You are aware what my plan in bringing up these girls is, not to accustom them to habits of luxury and indulgence, but to render them hardy, patient, self- denying.” To me, with every sentence and intension he preaches Bronte brings you closer to Helen. Agreeing on what Elizabeth M. stated regarding Helen as a Christ figure I feel her character developing more and more. Helens ability to take blows and remarks without any response compares her directly to Jesus. Jesus knew that what the Romans were doing to him was unacceptable and cruel. However Jesus’ ability to control what he could control and to control his emotions to what he couldn’t makes him out to what he is today. Helen in the story shows the reader and Jane what religion is truly about. Jane’s confusion with religion is solved not with the hours of church services but by Helens appearance. Jane viewed Helen as an authority figure and with her death and last words Jane becomes closer to her religion. She began to see light in the eyes of religion for the first time. God was not a man that punishes you to church every Sunday but a man that creates you and in the end destroys you. Chapter 9 pg 84, “Where is God what is God? My maker and yours, who will never destroy what he created.” Helens last words develops a new look in the eyes of religion to Jane.
Moriah O.
ReplyDeleteF Block
Like many so far have analyzed; I too believe that Helen, though only a minor character played a major role in changing Jane’s life. Though I do not see her as the “ultimate Christ-like” character as some have already portrayed, I do agree with Elizabeth when she says that the view of Helen being so is understandable. Throughout much of Helen’s life, she was optimistic in her ideas and took to heart the feelings of other characters. However like Elizabeth stated, Helen never took on the burdens or sufferings from other characters, but mainly her attention and most of her “Christ-like” dialogue was directed towards Jane. Helen was a friend to Jane in whom she could find comfort. That being said if she was the “ultimate Christ-like” character she would have demonstrated this to every character; not just Jane. In the Bible, when Christ is being mocked by the pharisees, He still showed love to them by dying for their sins. Yet, Helen does not exhibit this aspect of being “the All” that Christ displayed during His life. Furthermore, I do believe that Bronte intended for Helen to be a religious influence on Jane but there is also the question of: Is Charlotte Bronte herself a Christian?
A final idea that I would have liked to expand or contribute up on in class was the significance concerning the narrative point of view. At first, it took me a few chapters to even realize that this is Jane re-telling her story. Jane, who has already experienced and observed everything, would like any human subconsciously have changed accounts or ideas of her story. Because such life-changing events have already occurred, looking back for Jane would enable her to recollect different things then if she were to write it at the time of occurrence. For example at the beginning of chapter 10 page 86-87, Jane states, “I am only bound to invoke memory where I know her responses will possess some degree of interest. Therefore I now pass a space of 8 years almost in silence –a few lines only are necessary to keep up the links of connection.” The fact that she wrote this later on in life reveals that she couldn’t bring herself to expose everything. The eight years that she left out being the years of transfer from adolescence to adulthood, she could not reveal the change in her life entering into adulthood. As of now, the reader doesn’t see the influence Helen had on Jane due to the large gap in the novel. Due to Jane composing her story later on in life, her ability to recollect it is significant because you don’t know at this point how her life has truly changed.
Moriah O.
ReplyDeleteF Block
Like many so far have analyzed; I too believe that Helen, though only a minor character played a major role in changing Jane’s life. Though I do not see her as the “ultimate Christ-like” character as some have already portrayed, I do agree with Elizabeth when she says that the view of Helen being so is understandable. Throughout much of Helen’s life, she was optimistic in her ideas and took to heart the feelings of other characters. However like Elizabeth stated, Helen never took on the burdens or sufferings from other characters, but mainly her attention and most of her “Christ-like” dialogue was directed towards Jane. Helen was a friend to Jane in whom she could find comfort. That being said if she was the “ultimate Christ-like” character she would have demonstrated this to every character; not just Jane. In the Bible, when Christ is being mocked by the pharisees, He still showed love to them by dying for their sins. Yet, Helen does not exhibit this aspect of being “the All” that Christ displayed during His life. Furthermore, I do believe that Bronte intended for Helen to be a religious influence on Jane but there is also the question of: Is Charlotte Bronte herself a Christian?
(cont.)
ReplyDeleteA final idea that I would have liked to expand or contribute up on in class was the significance concerning the narrative point of view. At first, it took me a few chapters to even realize that this is Jane re-telling her story. Jane, who has already experienced and observed everything, would like any human subconsciously have changed accounts or ideas of her story. Because such life-changing events have already occurred, looking back for Jane would enable her to recollect different things then if she were to write it at the time of occurrence. For example at the beginning of chapter 10 page 86-87, Jane states, “I am only bound to invoke memory where I know her responses will possess some degree of interest. Therefore I now pass a space of 8 years almost in silence –a few lines only are necessary to keep up the links of connection.” The fact that she wrote this later on in life reveals that she couldn’t bring herself to expose everything. The eight years that she left out being the years of transfer from adolescence to adulthood, she could not reveal the change in her life entering into adulthood. As of now, the reader doesn’t see the influence Helen had on Jane due to the large gap in the novel. Due to Jane composing her story later on in life, her ability to recollect it is significant because you don’t know at this point how her life has truly changed.
Megan K
ReplyDeleteF Block
Before yesterday’s discussion in F block I came up with a few questions that read, ‘Jane makes Rochester seem so ugly and unattractive in a way that makes us as readers believe that we should dislike him, but at the same time she begins gaining feelings for him. Where exactly did these feelings come from? Was she hiding them all along and trying to mask them by making Rochester look bad or did they just come from out of the blue?’ Unfortunately the question wasn’t able to be asked during the block, but after class I found myself still pondering the questions and wondering what other people thought.
In the novel once Jane and Rochester start to get to know each other she makes it evident that she finds him very unattractive. Not only does his physical appearance dissatisfy her because of his oddly disproportionate frame, but his attitude is not to appealing either. Much of the time Rochester only speaks to Jane when he feels inclined to and during those times his personality often changes abruptly. Never is there a time when I can clearly see that Rochester makes himself worthy of Jane’s love, especially when he admits that she isn’t the prettiest girl he has ever seen in reply to her implying that he wasn’t very handsome. Before I found out that Jane had feelings for Rochester I could only guess that Bronte was writing these things to warn of us Rochester. I believed he was supposed to be an enemy and someone to be feared, especially because he seemed so secretive with the fire/Grace Poole incident. I never would have guessed that they would have become lovers since there were little to no signs of the feelings before.
I know love never has a clear beginning point in any text or in real life, but in ‘Jane Eyre’ Jane’s feelings really do seem to begin out of nowhere. Their conversations, when they do have any, always seem to confuse Jane or leave her wondering what Rochester’s motives were and I find it hard to believe that she could fall in love with someone who she barely knows. Was Bronte trying to make a point by making this love spontaneous or did I miss something? Because I only have questions and the answers seem so vague and far away from me I can’t write more, but I really hope we can talk more about this in class if we find the time.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading Jane Eyre I became interested in a motif that Bronte uses throughout the first sixteen chapters. The motif was similar to one that I remember from “Lord of the Flies”. I can’t remember exactly what this motif represented, but Simon the passive boy who saw the world differently than the others looked through “windows” or other ways looking through things. In Jane Eyre; chapter one, page 14 Jane sits by a window reading a book. “To the left were clear panes of glass, protecting, but not separating me from the drear November day. At intervals, while turning over the leaves of my book, I studied the aspect of that winter afternoon.” It is clear that Bronte uses weather to convey the cold and unwelcomed feeling in Jane’s life right now. I believe that Jane by reading books is able to temporarily escape the world she lives in as of now, she can be absorbed into a fantasy world rather than dwell on her misfortunate life. By having Jane sit in a window and look out into the cold bleak weather, I think Bronte wants us to realize Jane can read books and partly escape her misfortune for a while, but cannot escape it totally. The dreary November weather will still be on the other side of the window even if she is reading a book and not paying attention to it. By looking out into the weather I feel she is thinking about her life, like she does later when in the red room. On page 22, Jane is locked in the room, and once again is trapped. Just like before when she couldn’t get away from the weather that would stay outside the window, she is locked in a room. “Returning, I had to cross before the looking glass; my fascinated glance involuntarily explored the depth it revealed. All looked colder and darker in that visionary hollow than in reality.” Once again it seems that by looking through glass Jane is looking into the sad truth of her life. Also when in the room she questions her misfortune, and also herself. I believe that the motif of windows and looking glasses shows the relationship of Jane Eyre looking into her environment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Edan that there is many changes and I think that is why this book starts with Jane as a young girl so you can see all of the changes she goes through. In the beginning she is full of opinions unable to control her passion of what she thinks is right and wrong. I think we all can see that Helen is a symbol at least for Jane to follow, to befriend or to better understand herself. Jane sees right away how Helen does not fight back when she is ridiculed but finds this upsetting. But Helen eventually effects Jane and as discussed “cools some of [Jane’s] fire.” She also became a part of Jane as a way to get away from isolation (“I stood lonely enough: but to that feeling of isolation I was accustomed” pg.51, ch.5) that she had become accustomed too. But what I was concerned about as I saw this relationship developing was that maybe Jane’s fire should not be cooled for it should never be taken away. I feared that her voice might be lost and that the thoughts against those in power and the actions of good against actions of evil will be gone or depleted from becoming part of the women she is becoming. When is it a good time to NOT speak up against something evil, wrong, or that you disagree with?
ReplyDeleteJane also discusses her appearance and how it is effecting her and the person she wants to become. She talks to Helen, the person she wants to be like, in chapter 8. “No; I know I should think well of myself; but that is not enough: if others don't love me, I would rather die than live” (pg. 72). She explains that she wants to be identified as a good person by others and that her identity of herself is not enough, that she defines herself by what others define her as. I feel this can easily be related to Invisible Man as he tried to find his identity from others and his environment but in the end defined himself by himself. Helen explains to Jane that if Mr. Brocklehurst “had treated you as an special favourite, you would have found enemies,” (pg. 71) and that many things you think people identify you as, are false and that the surrounding people and the environment is what they are identifying as bad not the actual person they dislike.
Am I missing something with the Helen BURNS last name, I feel like that has to do something with fire. But what exactly?
Alea C.
ReplyDeleteA Block
We see in Jane Eyre something which has been brought up in the novels we have previously read; How does one's surroundings shape their identity? Jane allows others to influence her disposition and attitude through out her lifetime. When Jane was ill-treated by the Reed's at Gateshead, she was a bitter and angry little girl. Who could blame her? The only affection or hint of kindness shown to her was from Bessie, and even then, it was not shown often. In most orphan tales, the child is rebellious and seen as a problem to the rest of the family. I believe this is just a result of the child being misunderstood. Jane knew that Mrs. Reed was caring for her against her will. She was unwanted, alone, and mistreated. How could she be expected to accept this form of abuse?
This brings me to another point of influence in the novel. Helen Burns quickly changed Jane's aspirations. Helen was a role model to Jane, and she was carefully chosen by Bronte to initiate change. While Jane was at Lowood, she was introduced to kindness, respect, and proper discipline. Helen showed Jane that she must not always want to argue with athority. Sometimes it is best to just accept one's punishment. She also teaches Jane to be reasonable. Helen was selfless, and so very intune with her vibrational energy. There was no resistance in Helen's life. She knew, right up until the very end, that everything happens for a reason. Helen knew exactly who she was, and what her purpose was. This allowed Helen to truley be happy. I believe, like many others, that Bronte introduced Helen to the novel as a higher, enlightened being (whether it be Christ, a spirit, ect.). Life is not all about what is happening now, and each little crisis does not define who we are. For example, in chapter eight, Helen calms Jane down after she is publicly humiliated and tarnished. Helen says, "Hush, Jane! you think too much of the love of human beings; you are too impulsive, too vehement: the sovereign hand that created your frame and put life into it, has provided you with other resources that your feeble self, or than creatures feeble as you." (Bronte 72). It is explained here that we are far more than what others make of us. Helen did not allow others to shape who she was, and she tried to enlighten Jane with the same knowledge.
Alea C.
ReplyDeleteA Block
We see in Jane Eyre something which has been brought up in the novels we have previously read; How does one's surroundings shape their identity? Jane allows others to influence her disposition and attitude through out her lifetime. When Jane was ill-treated by the Reed's at Gateshead, she was a bitter and angry little girl. Who could blame her? The only affection or hint of kindness shown to her was from Bessie, and even then, it was not shown often. In most orphan tales, the child is rebellious and seen as a problem to the rest of the family. I believe this is just a result of the child being misunderstood. Jane knew that Mrs. Reed was caring for her against her will. She was unwanted, alone, and mistreated. How could she be expected to accept this form of abuse?
This brings me to another point of influence in the novel. Helen Burns quickly changed Jane's aspirations. Helen was a role model to Jane, and she was carefully chosen by Bronte to initiate change. While Jane was at Lowood, she was introduced to kindness, respect, and proper discipline. Helen showed Jane that she must not always want to argue with athority. Sometimes it is best to just accept one's punishment. She also teaches Jane to be reasonable. Helen was selfless, and so very intune with her vibrational energy. There was no resistance in Helen's life. She knew, right up until the very end, that everything happens for a reason. Helen knew exactly who she was, and what her purpose was. This allowed Helen to truley be happy. I believe, like many others, that Bronte introduced Helen to the novel as a higher, enlightened being (whether it be Christ, a spirit, ect.). Life is not all about what is happening now, and each little crisis does not define who we are. For example, in chapter eight, Helen calms Jane down after she is publicly humiliated and tarnished. Helen says, "Hush, Jane! you think too much of the love of human beings; you are too impulsive, too vehement: the sovereign hand that created your frame and put life into it, has provided you with other resources that your feeble self, or than creatures feeble as you." (Bronte 72). It is explained here that we are far more than what others make of us. Helen did not allow others to shape who she was, and she tried to enlighten Jane with the same knowledge.
Sean D.
ReplyDeleteF block
I agree with Alea in the way that Jane is influenced by her surroundings; however, while Jane's "disposition and attitude" are influenced by others throughout her life, I feel she does not necessarily "allow" this to happen. In fact, she actually opposes their influence through her misbehavior, which is fueled by her status as an orphan. Her status, or identity, is her major problem. Like the Invisible Man and Antoinette, Jane is constantly isolated from society throughout her life due to her position in society. She is isolated by her own relatives, in the orphanage school, and because of her position in the lower class, she feels isolated in Rochester's mansion.
Mac, if you were to read Alea's post concerning Helen Burns I believe you would better understand the nature of her name. In essence she suffers in order to maintain her position in the society of the orphanage. In her I see the character Tia from Wide Sargasso Sea. Both characters in a way act as a sort of companion or acquaintance to the main character, but in the end do more harm than good.
Though most have been focusing on the religious figures in relation to the characters in Jane Eyre, I am more interested in Rochester’s characterization in terms of his relationship with Jane thus far. As Mr. Rochester is introduced in chapter 12, Bronte casts an eerie light on his character as Jane associates him with the “‘Gytrash’; which, in the form of horse, mule, or large dog, haunted solitary ways, and sometimes came upon belated travellers”. And in relation to the general analogy, Mr. Rochester, though uncanny as he seems, appears in more relatable forms, just as the Gytrash. Rochester first comes off as distanced and harsh, but then he progressively warms up to Jane (no foreshadowed pun intended). What caught my attention particularly was Rochester’s relationship with Adele’s mother. This struck a note towards his character development in Wide Sargasso Sea. Rochester embodies adultery when he sleeps with Amelie in Wide Sargasso Sea. In Jane Eyre, role reversal takes full force as he becomes a victim of infidelity with Adele’s mother, Celine Varens. Thus Jean Rhys’s take on infidelity in relation to Rochester opposes Charlotte Bronte.
ReplyDeleteThere was little discussion in class on Rochester and the edifice of conversation centered around Helen Burns, I would like to bring to light a second incendiary case: the mysterious incident of Rochester’s room set ablaze. As we all know or should at least have suspicions that Antoinette was the fire starter in this instance. Rochester blames Grace Poole for the incident and though it is a near-death experience for him, all at Thornfield brush it off with the obvious exception of Jane. Thus far, has this raised any questions to Jane about Rochester’s marital status? And if so, what stance will she take if incidents of this sort persist at Thornfield? Lastly, will further incidents insinuate to Jane about the inexplicable third floor? `
I think one of the most influential people in Jane’s life as she was growing up was Helen Burns. When she first came to Lowood, Jane was really lost and confused. She didn’t understand the rules or why Mr. Brocklehurst had found so much fun in torturing and embarrassing her all over a broken slate. She felt truly alone and like everyone hated her and thought she was a liar. When Helen comes and comforts her, Jane, asks the question, “Helen, why do you stay with a girl whom everybody believes to be a lair?” (pg. 83). She is looking for Helen to reach out to her and tell her that everything will be ok. She needs someone like that in her life, someone who is always on her side no matter what. Jane needed Helen and they were able to connect so well with each other because they both understood that they needed each other; they were both orphans and had none else in their lives supporting and looking out for them. I think Helen was put in the book by Charlotte Bronte, to show that Jane was capable of loving someone after her miserable childhood. Jane needed Helen in her life to show her how to love and care about someone. As Helen is about to die, Jane knows that she must see her. She needs to say goodbye to Helen so she can have some closure in her life, it is the end of a time period at Lowood School for her. When Jane goes to see Helen as she is about to die she does not fully understand death, she asks questions about where she will be going, what heaven is and who God is. I think she asks these questions because, even as a small child, she needs to make sure that Helen is going somewhere good, somewhere better than where she is now. While some people in class may argue that Jane was not affected by Helen’s death and used it as a way to distance herself I do not agree. I think that Helen’s death changed her entire life. I agree with what Megan said in class that the quote, “Her grave is in Brocklebridge church-yard; for fifteen years after her death it was only covered by a grassy mound; but now a gray marble tablet marks the spot, inscribed with her name and the name “Resurgam”.”(pg. 98), is applying the fact that Jane was the person that put the tablet there in memory of her friend Helen. This shows that she cared deeply about Helen and that she played a major role in Jane’s life, because she was still thinking of her fifteen years after her death.
ReplyDeleteHilary E.
ReplyDeleteF Block
While both sides have been arguing whether Helen Burns was the ultimate “Christ-like figure” I am glad to say I have discovered a happy medium. I don’t think that she was exactly “Christ-like”, but she was more of a guardian angel sent for Jane Eyre. We can find support of this angelic figure throughout the chapters of 7, 8, and 9.
Helen isn’t mentioned anywhere before Jane is denounced in front of her teachers and peers. She gives Jane strength through her comfort while Jane is erect on the stool for half an hour, and is there to continually provide support once she is released. Immediately after Jane speaks with Miss Temple, there is a question of Helen’s health. At this point it seems as though Charlotte Bronte is showing that things are getting better for Jane, and Helen’s purpose is no longer needed on Earth.
Once Jane begins to excel in school and in the arts the question appears on page 80, “And where, meantime, was Helen Burns? Why did I not spend these sweet days of liberty with her? Had I forgotten her?” Once again Bronte is showing a link between the increase in Jane’s mental and social stability and the decrease in Helens appearance, and as we can assume, also a decrease in her health.
Once Helen is gone, Jane is left to fend for herself and build on the character she has become. As Michelle had pointed out, Helen was a key part to Jane’s development as a character. However I believe Jane’s character was affected more by Helen’s life, than death.
(E+G)/2=F^3
ReplyDeleteMiss Megan, here is my hopefully coherent response: There is chemistry between Jane and Rochester, and I think that this is visible in that each keeps the other questioning, as neither one is like anyone the other has known (yet both are very like each other). Jane doesn't try to show off to Rochester by pretending either he is something he is not ("'You examine me, Miss Eyre,' said he: 'do you think me handsome?'...'No,sir.' Ah! By my word! there is something singular about you,' said he: 'you have the air of a little nonnette; quaint, quiet, grave, and simple, as you sit with your hands before you, and your eyes generally bent on the carpet [except, by-the-bye, when they are directed piercingly to my face; as just now, for instance]; and when one asks you a question, or makes a remark to which you are obliged to reply, you rap out a round rejoinder, which, if not blunt, is at least brusque.'")and she doesn't pretend to be something that she is not (Mr Rochester speaking: "'It would please me now to draw you out -- to learn more of you -- therefore speak' Instead of speaking, I smiled; and not a very complacent or submissive smile either. 'Speak,' he urged. 'What about, sir?' 'Whatever you like. I leave both the choice of subject and the manner of treating it entirely to yourself.' Accordingly I sat and said nothing: 'If he expects me to talk for the mere sake of talking and showing off, he will find he has addressed himself to the wrong person,' I thought."). (Chapter14).
Rochester is unlike any Jane has known before, either. Ellie, you brought up in class today the suggestion that Rochester attracts Jane due to an association with what could be her view of masculinity as defined by John and possibly echoed in Rochester's gruffness. I believe, however, that it is Rochester's contrast to the hypocritical, abusive male-type that has hitherto been all Jane has known, which is initially attractive. Rochester does not play strictly into the role of Master of the house, despite his authority and habits of ordering people around, and even states in chapter 14 that he does not want to treat Jane as inferior any more than age and experience make her to be. As a secure, though by no means perfect or self-satisfied, character, perceptive of her ability to internalize what he says &c. he is open with her, enjoys her company and lets her know this, and even, through his unpredictability, puts Jane in situations where she can react in a way unique to her, not merely conventional. Rochester, like she, is perceptive. He is mysterious, but doesn't distance himself from her. He is strong, and consistent and intelligent like Jane.
ReplyDeleteMegan, you asked particularly why Rochester is portrayed as ugly &c., and posed the possibility that this was to mask Jane's emotions, but I think that this was because of Jane's honest nature. She is frank not only in response, but in narration as well, and I think that what are signs of attraction earlier on are easily overlooked by being mentioned in simple terms. In chapter 15, for instance, Jane begins: "And was Mr. Rochester now ugly in my eyes? No, reader. Gratitude and many associations, all pleasurable and genial, made his face the object I best liked to see; his presence in a room was more cheering than the brightest fire." Ostensibly, Rochester happens to be around when Jane is in a pleasurable situation, but this also hints that Rochester's presence is pleasurable to Jane, again hinting at chemistry. Later on in the same paragraph, Jane says "I cannot deny that I grieved for his grief, whatever that was, and would have given much to assuage it." It is not as though Jane falls in love dramatically, so much as she begins to find herself there.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSean, you state that Helen suffers "in order to maintain her position in the society of the orphanage," but Helen is shown to be a girl who is separate from the care of what her position is and what others think of her, beyond that she act equally to all. She isn't absorbed by the society of Lowood because she's not focused on life before death except in the light of her beliefs. Thus she can endure the suffering (Helen thus burns), knowing that it isn't permanent, and separating the pain caused from the people causing it.
ReplyDelete“Though I had now extinguished my candle and was laid down in bed, I could not sleep for thinking of his look when he paused in the avenue, and told how his destiny had risen up before him, and dared him to be happy at Thornfield” (Chapter15)
ReplyDeleteDirectly preceding Jane’s unease and the subsequent fire, this passage is aptly placed, suggesting a question to be answered in the even following. What was this destiny that had risen before Rochester? What was at Thornfield which dared him to be happy?
The way this event is related to the reader sets him or her out of ease, as Jane uses a mythological register which recalls nighttime illusions and fears. In her dark room, already unsettled, there comes a “demoniac laugh – low, suppressed, and deep – uttered, as it seemed, at the very key-hole of my chamber-door. The head of my bed was near the door, and I thought at first the goblin-laughter stood at my bedside. . . where as I gazed, the unnatural sound was reiterated. . .something gurgled and moaned.” So there is a sense of the supernatural, but low supernatural, enhanced by the by no means fancy words, such as “gurgled.”
There is also an element of fate repeated, as though Rochester’s and Jane’s fates are concurrent, as Jane says she was not fated to sleep that night.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete“And spreading out her dress, she chasseed across the room till, having reached Mr. Rochester, she wheeled lightly round before him on tip-toe, then dropped on one knee at his feet, exclaiming –
ReplyDelete‘Monsieur, je vous remercie mille fois de votre bonte;" then rising, she added, "C'est comme cela que maman faisait, n'est-ce pas, monsieur?’” (Chapter 14)
On a new level of accuracy, we now bring to mind Bronte’s use of diction thus far. “The Main Elements of Style”, a set of notes we have taken in class, allow us to further our insight into Bronte’s word choice. Bronte uses diction to communicate a certain aesthetic to the reader. As she describes Adele’s entrance at the end of Chapter 14, words such as “chasseed”, which is a ballet term used to describe an elegant flounces so to speak. And as we know, ballet terminology is French. To add, to say that “she wheeled lightly” into the room adds to her prance as a character and as an entrance to the scene. In reference to the levels of diction, Bronte generally never falls below the standard level, or academic writing, but at times uses slang in dialogue in reference to particular characters. For as we know Rochester is so fond of “What the deuce”, which could also be considered taboo for the time.
She also plays with languages of origin, or particularly her use of the French language in the novel. As I mentioned before, the use the verb “chassee” in the quote above is of French origin. Bronte will use soliloquies entirely in French, that when translated can be important to the text. In the quote above she asked Mr. Rochester (pardon my Google translation), “Sir, I thank you a thousand times for your kindness, "then rising, she added," That's how mom did, is not it, sir?” So why does Bronte do this? As diction reveals characters, it can also veil it.
And as to the French monologues... Thanks Bronte we non-Francophiles thoroughly appreciate it.
Caroline B.
ReplyDeleteF Block
Throughout the first 16 chapters Jane goes from some resistance to her oppressors to a humble selflessness. Jane, at one point, protested the ill intentions directed at her. When she lived with the Reed family she protested against Mrs. Reed’s son John’s abuse. Very quickly over the passage of time her sense of self-defense against verbal and physical abuse was extinguished. “Who would think that the evil one has already found a servant and agent in her? Yet such, I grieve to say, is the case.” (Ch. 7 Pg. 68) Mr. Brocklehurst says to Jane and all those in the vicinity. Mr. Brocklehurst is just one of her oppressors. He publicly humiliates Jane in front her peers and potential allies. What is surprising is that, compared to the reaction she displayed against the Reed’s—somewhat a violent retaliation—Jane does not react at all to defend herself. Jane’s passion, her indignation, starts to fade away from her personality at an early age.
Like Ethan from A block said, Lowood is a low point in her life. When Jane meets Rochester, he does encourage her to have her self-confidence bloom. I think subconsciously, Jane is attracted to Rochester because he promotes her to be herself—something she had repressed all her life. Jane had originally, as a young child, wanted/planned to tell the truth of what the Reed’s did to her, tell her story. I think Rochester is the window that allows her to reflect back on her life and tell us the story of her life, which is this very book we are reading.
Ethan B.
ReplyDeleteA-Block
Okay. After reading the numerous comments i feel that it is hard to post something with out beiung repetitive or redundant. One thing I have to say is what is going on the equation Elizabeth M put up. (E+G)/2=F^3 What are we cubing and dividing half? Very confusing to me. Another thing I wonder about is how much of the book is related to Bronte's life and how much has been made up. We do know from the basic biography synopsis we discussed in class that Bronte did go to a strict boarding school where a number of her sisters died (can't remember how many exactly), and she was a governess for a short time. Was she harshly treated as a child? Did she fall in love with anyone similar to Mr. Rochester? I'm sure some scholar did research on this. One side note. Why aren't we getting that many first names in Jane Eyre? For example Mr.Rochester or Mrs.Fairfax. Why don't we ever find out their first names? Maybe I missed them in the reading.
Ethan I really like that you pointed out the pattern with names, this also struck a chord with me reading this book. In all of the books we have read this year names have played a major role. They are used by different authors in different ways to give a certain depth and meaning to the characters. In Jayne Eyre the names seem to be associated with status. It is a mark of status to be regarded by ones last name, for example Mr. Rochester and Mr. Brocklehurst are obvious figures of status and authority. Characters like Bessie and Adele, who are addressed by their first names, are, whether by profession or youth, considered of a lower status. There are instances where the line between upper and lower status characters is blurred. Mrs. Fairfax, for example, is a housekeeper, so you would assume following this pattern that she would be referred to by her first name, but she is still consistently called Mrs. Fairfax. She comes off as a higher class person, in part due to her mannerisms and role of authority in Thornfield as head of housekeeping. When Mr. Rochester is away (which is frequently) Mrs. Fairfax is, in essence, the head of the estate, managing all of its affairs in the master’s absence. Jane is actually convinced for quite some time that Mrs. Fairfax is the mistress of the estate and mother of the girl she is tutoring. Mrs. Fairfax’ character is afforded an honorary status despite her lack of wealth or family status (though she is apparently distantly related to Rochester) and is therefore referred to as Mrs. Fairfax. Jane Eyre herself, is the biggest in-between example. She was born into an esteemed family but was orphaned and has no actual money. She is brought up among wealthy and reputable people, but is not counted as one of them. So should she be addressed as Jane or Miss Eyre? Earlier on in the book, Jane Eyre is merely a child, and like most children, is addressed solely by her first name. During her time in Lowood she comes of age but is still only referred to as Jane when she is a student there. When she goes to Thornwood she introduces herself with both names, calling herself Jane Eyre. She is still an in-between and sees herself thus. During her stay there she becomes Miss Eyre, showing the transition from a young low caste orphan girl, to a respectable young woman. It is also important to point out that first names are not always used to indicate lower status or a lack of respect. They can also indicate familiarity between two people. As the relationship between Jane Eyre and Rochester grows he begins to call her simply Jane. This is not belittling her. In fact it is quite the contrary. By using her first name he is acknowledging their close relationship and familiarity, and in so doing establishing equality in status between the two of them.
ReplyDeleteEthan I really like that you pointed out the pattern with names, this also struck a chord with me reading this book. In all of the books we have read this year names have played a major role. They are used by different authors in different ways to give a certain depth and meaning to the characters. In Jayne Eyre the names seem to be associated with status. It is a mark of status to be regarded by ones last name, for example Mr. Rochester and Mr. Brocklehurst are obvious figures of status and authority. Characters like Bessie and Adele, who are addressed by their first names, are, whether by profession or youth, considered of a lower status. There are instances where the line between upper and lower status characters is blurred. Mrs. Fairfax, for example, is a housekeeper, so you would assume following this pattern that she would be referred to by her first name, but she is still consistently called Mrs. Fairfax. She comes off as a higher class person, in part due to her mannerisms and role of authority in Thornfield as head of housekeeping. When Mr. Rochester is away (which is frequently) Mrs. Fairfax is, in essence, the head of the estate, managing all of its affairs in the master’s absence. Jane is actually convinced for quite some time that Mrs. Fairfax is the mistress of the estate and mother of the girl she is tutoring. Mrs. Fairfax’ character is afforded an honorary status despite her lack of wealth or family status (though she is apparently distantly related to Rochester) and is therefore referred to as Mrs. Fairfax. Jane Eyre herself, is the biggest in-between example. She was born into an esteemed family but was orphaned and has no actual money. She is brought up among wealthy and reputable people, but is not counted as one of them. So should she be addressed as Jane or Miss Eyre? Earlier on in the book, Jane Eyre is merely a child, and like most children, is addressed solely by her first name. During her time in Lowood she comes of age but is still only referred to as Jane when she is a student there. When she goes to Thornwood she introduces herself with both names, calling herself Jane Eyre. She is still an in-between and sees herself thus. During her stay there she becomes Miss Eyre, showing the transition from a young low caste orphan girl, to a respectable young woman. It is also important to point out that first names are not always used to indicate lower status or a lack of respect. They can also indicate familiarity between two people. As the relationship between Jane Eyre and Rochester grows he begins to call her simply Jane. This is not belittling her. In fact it is quite the contrary. By using her first name he is acknowledging their close relationship and familiarity, and in so doing establishing equality in status between the two of them.
ReplyDeleteThe majority of the responses here have been focusing on the theme of religion and how Helen Burns plays a short lived, but long impacting role in Jane Eyre’s life. I don’t think Helen is as important as everybody thinks she is. Yes, I think she does have an effect on Jane’s life. When Jane was a child, she idolized Helen, thought she was the greatest person in the world. But Helen’s character plays such a small role in the story of Jane Eyre as a whole, she appears only in a few chapters. My question is, what about Mr. Rochester? In Chapter 12 his character is introduced, and his character is present for the rest of the story. From Chapter 12 (in my opinion) is when the book starts to take off and get really interesting. Jane first meets Mr. Rochester outside the Thornfield Estate, but they only met briefly. The first real time they meet, exchange names, and spend time with each other is much more important and interesting. In Chapter 13, Mr. Rochester requests that Jane and Adele spend tea time with him. Mr. Rochester has a very, hard personality; almost like he’s built up a wall of security around him. He is very inquisitorial and judgmental about Jane’s upbringing, her life at Lowood, and how she ended up at the Thornfield Estate. After their meeting, Jane is taken aback by his strong personality. Charlotte Bronte intentionally makes Mr. Rochester’s character this way; Mr. Rochester’s physical appearance and personality are so intense, that it gives him an allure. Jane doesn’t realize it at the time, but she is magnetically drawn to him. He is mysterious to both Jane Eyre and the reader, and this is why over time Jane wants to learn more about Mr. Rochester and spend more time with him. In class one day, Mr. Cook said something along the lines of, “You can’t choose what you desire.” Jane at first does not like Mr. Rochester at all, she despises him. She goes out of her way to talk about how much she dislikes Mr. Rochester., but at the same time, she can’t help but be fascinated with and drawn to his elusive personality. Mr. Rochester is unlike any person she has ever met. On the other side of things, Mr. Rochester views Jane the same way. She is not beautiful, and she is incredibly ordinary. Her answers to his questions seem to amuse him and are not what he expects. Jane’s view on life is unlike any that Mr. Rochester has encountered. Although Jane is ordinary in her appearance, the way she looks at things fascinates him, and so he also desires Jane’s company.
ReplyDeleteGoing back to the “wall of security” that I mentioned earlier, in Chapter 15 we learn of Mr. Rochester’s relationship with Celine Varens. He experiences infidelity and the event affected him greatly. I believe this is why Mr. Rochester puts up such a front all the time, because he is afraid that he will experience that pain again. Also in Chapter 15, Grace Poole attempts to set Mr. Rochester and his bedroom ablaze. Jane saves his life, and she tells him that she thinks she heard Grace Poole. Mr. Rochester says that it is Grace that made the attempt, and he instructs Jane not to tell anybody about what happened. Since over the summer we read Wide Sargasso Sea, most of us should assume that the culprit is not Grace Poole, but it is actually Antoinette who started the fire. This should raise some questions for Jane. Why did Mr. Rochester brush the experience off like it was nothing? Will these near-death events continue in the Estate?
Louisa B.
ReplyDeleteA-Block
Chap 17-27
In our class discussion on chapters 17-27, Mr. Rochester's name was brought up quite a few times. I think we can successfully label Mr. Rochester as a Byronic hero, he exemplifies many of the characteristics needed such as a high level of arrogance, a troubled past, and a struggle with his personal integrity. He also posses the intelligence and perceptiveness needed to fill this character. However, this is not the only side of Mr. Rochester. Brontë makes many illusions to his role as a figurative shepherd. Mr. Rochester's house guests, especially Blanche Ingram, rely on him to entertain them and when he leaves “a perceptible dullness seemed to steal over the flesh of his guests: and his re-entrance was sure to give a fresh impulse to the vivacity of the conversation.” (chap. 18). Mr. Rochester plays the part of shepherd when it comes to Jane too. Often he refers to her as his “little lamb”, and takes a protective role towards her happiness and health.
But, we might wonder, is there yet another side to the infamous Mr. Rochester? His appearance certainty does not coincide with the image of a shepherd, nor does his often brisk tone. Instead we might make a connection to a beast, as mentioned today in class. We might even draw a connection to the well known fairy tale, Beauty and the Beast. Although Jane obviously cannot fulfill the role of Beauty appearance wise, she carries out the character in other ways. Jane learns how to tame Rochester, in a way that other people fail. We can use Blanche Ingram's failed attempts as winning Rochester's heart as a comparison and sharp contrast to the methods that Jane uses. Jane even admits “ Because, when she [Blanche] failed I saw how I might have succeeded.” (chap. 18). Jane does succeed in taming the Mr.Rochester, the beast. We can see an example of this towards the end of chapter 27, when Jane leans about Bertha Mason. Rochester's temper is climbing out of control but instead of being afraid, Jane writes “I felt an inward power; a sense of influence, which supported me. The crisis was perilous, but not without it's charm...I took hold of his clenched hand; loosened the contorted fingers; and said to him soothingly...”. Jane uses her knowledge and love for Rochester not to tame him,but instead calming his passion much like Helen Burns taught Jane to control her own.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEdanL(ABlock)
ReplyDeleteFirst off, Louisa, that's some brilliant insight. I completely agree that Mr. Rochester is essentially a Byronic hero. He is portrayed as a strong and noble character, but has a tendency to succumb to his inner demons. I also love that you included Jane's taking on a Helenesque role with Rochester in chapter 27.
Anyway, one thing that I found interesting while reading these chapters was the depictions of Mrs. Rochester (aka Antionette "Bertha" Mason). Wide Sargasso Sea supplied me with avenues into both Antionette's and Rochester's consciousness'. While reading WWS, I found myself understanding rationals behind both character's views, even though their beliefs were contradictory at times. Bronte refuses to give Bertha any sort of self-defence in her novel, portraying her as a malicious monster. All accounts of Bertha are delivered solely by Rochester or Jane. Unlike WWS, the reader can visualize Bertha only with the aid of Rochester's verbal (often cruel) descriptions, and not by his internal thoughts and emotions. Upon Jane's first few encounters with Bertha, she mistakes her for Grace Poole, whom she despises. After discovering the identity and backstory of this monster in the attic, she sticks up for her, telling Rochester "you are inexorable for that unfortunate lady: you speak of her with hate-with vindictive antipathy. It is cruel-she cannot help being mad."(ch27). It is peculiar that Jane switches from hating the figure into defending it in such a short span. Maybe the older Jane views it as her possible fate, and thus takes it upon herself to defend it. Another point: Jane frequently expresses her feelings of isolation, but after traveling to Gateshead and yearning for her friends back at Thornfield, she sees the invalidity of these feelings. Bertha is TRULY isolated, and maybe Jane can feel for that.
A quick minor point: I'm noticing a theme of birds; Bronte actually uses animals frequently in her descriptions (lambs, birds, ferries, elves, bears, beasts, hyenas, ect.). I really like this quote: " 'Jane, be still; don't struggle so like a wild, frantic bird, that is rending its own plumage in its desperation.' 'I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free human being, with an independent will; which I now exert to leave you.' ”(ch23). Jane really expresses some of her tenacity here; she shows something that is central to her, something that makes it difficult to bind her to anything, something that allows her to be an aggressive woman's figure. A bird represents freedom, something that Jane yearns for. She sees Bertha trapped in the attic and Georgianna's canary forever sentenced to it's cage, and Jane doesn't want to share a similar fate. In chapter 1, she talks about being attached to a birdwatching book, longing for some freedom. I remember a nightinggale singing during Jane and Rochester's intimate moment; the cry can be determined as a Jane's euphoria at that moment, or an oppressed cry for help, just like the many cries that she hears coming from the attic.
Arica Aiello F block
ReplyDeleteJane Eyre can be thought of as the journey of a poor orphan girl searching for a place to call home and a place for her social stature to rest and no longer fluctuate. In other words, Jane is searching for permanence in her life of unpredictability. She begins living at Gateshesd, the Reed household, after the death of her parents. This is technically where she calls home, but she is not welcomed here and is even considered as lower than a servant. Chapter 1 page 6, "No, you are less than a servant, for you do nothing for your keep." After living at Gateshead, Jane is sent to school at Lowood where (as Edan said) she spends the lowest times of her life so far. Jane searches for permanence and finds it in a very special friend named Helen Burns. This friend is no longer permanent, but temporary when she passes away in Jane's arms. Again, Jane is left "homeless" in the send that there is no where whee she feels comforted by her surroundings.
When Jane arrives at Thornfield, she finally finds a certain amount of security that leaves her wanting more to be a part of this family, so to speak. Her first meeting with Rochester seems to us, to make Rochester look sloppy and informal in the way he speaks. We must remember, though, that the book is being narrated from Jane's perspective at the end of the novel looking back on what had happened. At the time, Jane seemed to have a sense of Rochester's past that she longed to discover. She connected her situation with his, leaving behind a fatal attraction to this man. Rochester begins treating her with a higher status than a mistress, which gives Jane a sense of importance that no one ever let her feel.
Kelly B
ReplyDeleteF-block
Talking about Mr. Rochester would cause me to go into a funnel of rage and love. I could talk about his offensive appearance or his tongue which sometimes makes him seem ignorant. Yet I’ll just talk about how this man is peculiar to me and I just can’t seem to pinpoint him. Not to mention this man is all about games, especially mind games. When he first meets Jane a while back, he is somewhat crude and harsh to her, giving her the sense that he is superior to her on any given day. Yet the next time they encounter, he is cheerful and kind to her, not so much that I want to love him but enough to surpass the first appearance. On and on he grows on me, showing Jane more interest day by day. And that is just what a girl with no family needs, someone who she can converse with and enjoy her time with. At the point where Rochester beings inviting her to his little after dinner gatherings, I begin to fall off the bandwagon again because I know where this will lead. Referencing back to WSS, I can see a pattern beginning to evolve. Mr. Rochester will show Jane all his love and dignity just to have her hand in marriage, nearly the same thing as Antoinette (Bertha). Even though this time he is doing this whole marriage charade for true love rather than money, he could quickly repeat his marriage with Bertha yet with Jane instead. Now as a reader, I was overjoyed when he proposed and she was full of glee, until a few chapters rolled by and I found out what he had been hiding. When Jane found the locked away looney, she was more than intelligent to hightail it out of that place before she ended up like Mr. Rochester’s first victim.
I want to end with one more thing, Mr. Rochester’s games. As you saw he loved the charades and he loved quizzing her every night, he even went so far as to dress up as a gypsy and find out how Jane really felt about him. He is very mind controlling and wants every bit of Jane’s mind. Now I fear for Jane because of what I know about him before he met her. He controlled Bertha so much that she went off the deep end (whether she was heading there regardless of him or not doesn’t matter), and I would never want that for such a strong woman such as Jane. Who knows what this man could be up to next.
Ethan, don't worry about the equation -- it's just the average of e and g (f) cubed (block).
ReplyDeleteTori, you mention that Jane "despises" Rochester at first, but I don't think this is the case. Jane says, in fact, that his harsh manner puts her at ease, and it is this that allows her from their first encounter on, to speak more freely with him than high airs would have made her comfortable doing.
Edan, I really like your observation about the birds, and am glad you mentioned that quote. you called Jane an "aggressive woman's figure," a remark which I think has significance also where Jane refuses tears many times, and plays the role of comforter to Mr. Rochester, without giving in to his entreaties, before she leaves. Yet this is also simply natural to someone in love, and does not imply any extensive trading of classic gender roles in their relationship.
Kelly, I'd just like to comment that when Jane runs away in chapter 17, I cannot see that it is for herself. She wants nothing more than to stay with Rochester, "There was a heaven -- a temporary heaven -- in this room for me if I chose: I had but to go in and to say -- 'Mr. Rochester, I will love you and live with you through life till death,' and a fount of rapture would spring to my lips. I thought of this." (Chapter 17) But she must "flee temptation!" That Rochester has a wife still living is the issue, not that her fate would be Bertha's, even as confirmed by Rochester, who tells Jane he would love her were she even as insane and violent. Mr. Rochester, to be sure, has not proved the most honest creature so far, but one of the tragic circumstances of Jane's fleeing -- that she leaves behind one who is, overall, a good man, and "dread[s] to be the instrument of evil to what [she] wholly love[s]" --is only made tragic by the moments the reader is intended to take Rochester's word as truth. More prominent in this chapter than Rochester's deception of Jane, is that Rochester himself is deceived, and trapped from where honor forbids him and Jane to escape.
On Rochester's changing attitude from day to day in the firsts of the Thornfield chapters, this he explains. It is not as though he was trying to manipulate or use Jane, so much as he was trying to fathom her, and to play off her traits. "I was for a while troubled with a haunting fear that if I handled the flower freely its bloom would fade -- the sweet charm of freshness would leave it. . .Moreover, I wished to see whether you would seek me if I shunned you. . .I wondered what you thought of me -- or if you ever thought of me; to find this out I resumed my notice of you. . .I permitted myself the delight of being kind to you." (ch.17).
Lastly, as we mentioned once more the supernatural in class, I think it is worth mentioning the chestnut tree which the lightning strikes down, and the clear parallel/foreshadowing with the two ashy halves of the tree still connected though sundered. Would I had more time to explore this before heading off to school in two minutes. Yet I was wondering about Jane's dreams -- that a baby or child bodes ill is odd, and I didn't know if anyone had any insight into this. Perhaps Eyre is playing on the significances of an old omen and a present pertinence to Jane's situation?
Jacklyn L.
ReplyDeleteBlock F
Upon reading chapters 17-27 the reader realize there are parallels between the story of Bertha and Jane. A similarity between the two stories is that Mr. Rochester calls them by names that are different than their own. However for Jane he does it in a sincere a fashion where for Bertha he did it so that he could control her. When the wedding comes around, Bertha seems to sneak out more. This is due to the fact that she is reminded of her wedding. The veil reminds her not only of her own wedding, but the masks that both her and Mr. Rochester wore in their wedding and the mask that Mr. Rochester is about to wear in the wedding to Jane. It seems as though she comes to warn Jane to escape while she still can, but Jane does not heed the warning and remains blinded by her love.
This leads to another point is that Charlotte Bronte writes the book in order to gain sympathy for Jane from the reader. The reader must in fact realize that Jane puts herself in most of these situations herself and is not as smart as the author gives her credit for. First of all she finds out in earlier chapters about Mr. Rochester’s infidelity. After this she finds out about the fact that Mr. Rochester was using Ms. Ingram’s affection to see if Jane was jealous. Finally when Mr. Rochester asks Jane to marry him she says yes with little thought about the situation. She knew about some other infidelities so the question becomes why did she say yes to him so easily. At this point it it is due to the fact that she has never felt love from a person of the opposite sex. This is what influenced her to say yes so quickly. The other thing is that she is so young and plain that she believes that no one will really ever see potential in her. She takes comfort in the hostility she gets from Mr. Rochester because she sees that is how men like with examples like her cousin and Mr. Broklehurst. She also never truly questions about what happens with Mr. Mason instead remaining silent and do nothing that would protect her against any coming danger. Jane also does not make a good decision when she is leaving because she does not think ahead and gives all her money to the coachmen for the ride. This in turn leads me to believe that Jane is not as smart as Charlotte Bronte would like to betray her as.
Then there is also the fact that certain characters seem to pop up at the right moment. Mr. Mason enters the story right after Mr. Rochester has left. This done puposelly because upon further reading and the reaction the Mr. Rochester elicites it is clearly seen that if he had been home he would have sent Mr. Mason away to better protect his secret being found out by Jane. Then when they are to wed once again Mr. Mason shows up again and this time Bertha is found out about. The perfect happy ending is strategically ruined for Mr. Rochester and Jane. However it leads to the true feelings that Mr. Rochester held for Bertha and how his feelings differ so greatly for Jane. However one must question are these just superficial feelings that he feels towards Jane. Anyways Jane learns that he would feel the same he feels now if Jane was crazy. Yet that is hard to believe because he felt the same lust towards Bertha when they first were married and now he hates her because of what she became what she could not help but become. Jane even says this in passing and this is the only moment that I believe she is actually smart.
Moriah O’Neil
ReplyDeleteF Block
Elizabeth -- I thought I would try and do my best to briefly provide for you, some kind of insight pertaining to your final question; for I myself find that to be a very interesting topic or assumption as well. Many times in novels and movies, the dreams that the characters have often foreshadow possible upcoming events, or they cause the reader or watcher to determine a possible conjecture of there own in which the character will eventually undergo. (That statement might sound awkward, but it sounded good in my head) Anyway, that being said, I feel like Jane’s dream of her future children taking ill and dying would make one think that her life with Rochester will not end up to her liking. It is obvious to us that Jane has uncontrollable feelings towards the mysterious Rochester, which I will further expound upon later, and like any future bride would want to someday have children with. Yet when she has the dream about having children, this I assume would instantly cause her to second –guess her feelings to Rochester and would cause us to make that inference that maybe this won’t turn out so good. Furthermore in chapter 21 when Jane encounters Bessie Leaven again, she says to Jane “…to dream of children was a sure sign of trouble, either to one’s self or one’s kin.”
On a small side note, I would also like to briefly talk about a major topic discussed in previous chapters concerning why Jane even loves the deceitful Rochester. To explain this I thought I would talk from personal thoughts. The question was, how could Jane love or have feelings for such a man? A man who has been sending her signals, and hiding a great part of his life? With this, I have come to label Rochester as a mysterious and unknown character yet we soon know so much about him. Getting back on point, my insight on this is that Jane simply loves Rochester because she just loves him. Like any teenage girl the feelings we have towards guys are often uncontrollable. The guy who causes the butterflies to flutter about in our stomachs is who Rochester is towards Jane. I often think that girls tend to go for the “mysterious” guy or the one who is potentially the hardest to get. Moreover, in chapter 17 Jane goes into great detail when describing Rochester and her feelings towards him. She ends in saying, “…and yet –while I breathe and think I must love him.” What I’m basically trying to say is that Jane loves Rochester simply because she just does. I think the question about love is a question that can be analyzed, however never completely fathomed.
Throughout Jane Eyre, Bronte focuses heavily on the issue concerning freedom as opposed to safety/security. She conveys that it is impossible for anyone to possess both, that they are two separate entities, unable to exist at the same time. Windows are among the motifs presented by Bronte to further enhance this point. During one particular scene, Jane is depicted gazing out one of Thornfield’s top floor windows at the horizon, a clear allusion to freedom and the mysteries that come with it; in essence, Jane thirsts for freedom and is curious of what the outside world can bring her. This harkens the question of why she holds herself back? Why does she not take life by the horns and get what she wants? Maybe it could be stability she feels within Thornfield, or maybe her love for Rochester, but either or, it brings about a profound question; is true happiness a risk worth striving for, or is it simply an unrealistic desire that we must suppressed within ourselves? Suppressing inner desires can drive someone insane, so perhaps this is a foreshadowing of Jane’s fate? I digress. My main point being that the windows represent Jane’s temptation, a daily reminder of what she wants, what she needs, out of life. The horizon seems so close to Jane; only a pane of glass separates her from sweet release. Temptation that powerful cannot be held down forever and I feel as if Bronte is insinuating that we all reach a crossroad someday between freedom and stability, and that our choice there determines our fate.
ReplyDeleteAndrew M.
ReplyDeleteF
Upon concluding chapters 17-27 I composed a series of questions and opinions regarding Jane’s clash regarding Ms. Ingram. In class I felt I could not fully support my opinion regarding Ms. Ingram’s Jealousy to Jane. Before the introduction of Ms. Ingram I pictured the stereotypical wealthy mistress. I imagined her as intelligent and elegant. However, after reading her first introduction to Jane my opinion drastically changed. The way she boasted herself was almost un intelligent. I felt that this was the reason for Bronte changing the tense of the story. I felt that in order to describe a character without being biased you must do it in the present tense. I felt that Jane was not describing Ms Ingram from a past tense in which her description could have been biased. With the present tense you are almost put into the story more vividly allowing for you to make your own opinions and not be affected by Bronte. Ms. Ingram first walks in and is not one the ladies that addresses Jane formally. I believe she walked in last with the woman who just stared at Jane. Her attitude towards just I felt was not proper and unintelligent. To me I feel superiority is intelligent regarding any subject. In the case of Ms Ingram and Jane I feel that the subject is formality and maturity. Ms. Ingram’s immature attitude towards Jane provokes tensions between the two. The scene that points out to me the most is the scene regarding the play. After dinner the group acts in a play and Rochester asks Jane to join but Ms. Ingram immediately states that the game is too intelligent for her. Many questions were brought up during the interactions between Jane and Ms Ingram. Could Ms. Ingram’s attempt to belittle Jane be a sign of weakness? This question can be answered in any way. With Ms. Ingram’s weakness growing with each day spent with Jane I feel that the reader can predict more of a relationship between Rochester and Jane. After discovering that the Gypsy was actually Rochester one can predict the winner of the battle. I feel that a huge theme in this story is love conquering money and family connections. Rochester’s first relationship with Bertha I feel was similar to the relationship with Ms Ingram. A relationship based solely on the aspects of power and money. Today in this world I feel many people are faced with the same problems. It comes down to money or happiness. A choice that can leave you with nothing or everything.
Grant Weaver
ReplyDeleteA Block
I agree with Josiah about the common issue of safety and security. I do think that they are not two separate entities. How can you be secure but not safe? Dictionary.com defines safety as the state of being safe; freedom from the occurrence or risk of injury, danger, or loss. Security is defined as freedom from danger, risk, etc. These are essentially the same definition. Now I do know that in Jane Eyre safety and security are not physical issues, but they are emotional. I still feel the definition applies.
I mentioned this in a previous blog post, and I feel the need to come back to it, as it is one that really intrigues me. This is the fact that at Thornfield Jane has a relatively ambiguous position. On one hand she is a servant, or maybe the description of just another employee fits better, and is expected to do what her master tells her. She does do this, often fetching things for Mr. Rochester. Yet the proper employee does not fall in love with her employer. This is further complicated by the fact that she is able to ask things of the servants and get a polite, appropriate response, yet she doesn’t get ma’am(ed) so her position of superiority is no solidified.
I think an interesting relationship in chapters 17-27, is the one between Jane, Mr. Rochester, and Miss Ingram. Rochester is using Miss Ingram, to test Jane to see if she really wants and loves him. He spends weeks entertaining Miss Ingram among other guests. They spend a lot of time together in the drawing room while Jane is forced to watch their relationship unfold as Ms. Ingram practically throws herself at Mr. Rochester. As Jane watches them together, jealously gets to her and she begins to realize that she wants and needs Rochester in her life. At one point as she watches Ms. Ingram and Rochester she realizes that she can not charm him and does not have him, and says “If she had managed the victory at once, and he had yielded and sincerely laid his heart at her feet, I should have covered my face, turned to the wall, and (figuratively) have died to them.” (pg.220). With this quote alone, Jane is saying that if Ms. Ingram has succeed in winning Mr. Rochester’s heart she would have died to them and would have slowly disappeared. The fact that she knows that Ms. Ingram failed keeps her hanging on. Later in chapter twenty three when Jane returns from her aunts, she and Rochester are talking under a tree and he is telling her that he will soon have a bride. Jane fears the worst (since she has been away for a month), that Rochester will marry Ms. Ingram and she will be forced to leave. Then Rochester takes her by surprise and says “Because my equal is here, and my likeness. Jane, will you marry me?” (pg. 298). This is the moment where Jane realizes that she might get what she wants and that Ms. Ingram was the person who helped her and Rochester realize that they both wanted each other and needed to love each other. I believe that Bronte placed Ms. Ingram in the story to allow them both to realize that they were meant to be together. Without Ms. Ingram, neither pair might have realized that their destinies were supposed to connect.
ReplyDeleteTom M.
ReplyDeleteBlock F
Reading Josiah’s comment, I can clearly see the connection, or rather the division, between security and freedom throughout much of “Jane Eyre.” Whether it be concerning her time staying with the Reed family, her schooling at Lowood, or her experiences at Thornfield, Jane has constantly battled with deciding whether sticking close to the stability she knows is worth risking her potential freedom from most situations. This in turn relates to a protruding theme I have seen arise in the novel, decision-making. In most bildungsromans, there seems to be a lot of instances including making important decisions concerning life choices. This same concept is true for Bronte’s novel. Jane has to make many important decisions concerning the value of her security versus the benefits of her freedom throughout the novel. One of the most influential scenes concerning this matter would have to be when Jane makes her final decision to leave Thornfield, due to the circumstances concerning the discovery of Bertha. The decision Jane made, to leave her lover, her home, the greatest and most clear sense of security and stability she has ever known had to have been the hardest thing she has ever done. Many who have read “Jane Eyre” and have seen the pain it struck in her heart have questioned her motives. Why did she leave, wasn’t there any other way? Did she really love him? In my opinion, I believe that the whole reason Jane left is because she loved him in the first place. Jane loved Rochester very much, the compassion she felt for all that he stood for in her life was very present. However, Jane was a woman of morals and values, a woman of substance. And Jane knew in her heart, that her staying with Rochester was simply not doing anyone any good and was in most aspects, morally wrong. Therefore, Jane once again must take the lead towards being independent, self-sufficient, and for all intents and purposes, alone again. Through her words,”‘ I care for myself. The more solitary, the more friendless, the more unsustained I am, the more I will respect myself.’”(pg. 270), we can see how Jane believes her decision to leave Thornfield is one she believes that is right for her own benefit. She believes that she must continue her routine of keeping to herself, for by becoming involved with Rochester she has lost her ways of maintaining her composure for all things valuable in life. And so, her decision to leave also is one based off of what she believes to be right in all senses. We all make important daily decisions in our life, and we all have the power to change our lives with one wrong decision. In our decisions, most of us, though clearly not all of us, decide what is “right” in relation to morals and values. Jane took this route as she was a woman of God in all rights. However, even though it was right concerning her values, her heart told her it was not. Jane still loved Rochester, and the great pain she endured from leaving Thornfield, shows just how much her heart believes it was the wrong decision to make. So there lies the question, was it the wrong decision? Was there another way out? Or was leaving the only possible option for Jane? Are we the judges of that answer, or is Jane? In my opinion, it’s up for grabs. Really, I believe the honest answer is whatever the reader themselves believe to be “the right decision”.
F Block
ReplyDeleteIn many novels, television shows, movies etc. authors and writers often come to road blocks where they find they cannot connect the pieces of their story in order for their original plot to work out the way they would have liked. Instead of reworking the story completely or just coming to a dead stop they decide to work in something completely out of the blue. Although I haven’t notice this often in Jane Eyre, I have noticed it one time in particular. When Jane and Rochester’s wedding was interrupted by Mr. Briggs he claims that he had a letter from John Eyre explaining that the two should not be wed because of Rochester’s current wife at the time. Supposedly John Eyre was a close acquaintance with Mr. Mason who had just had a recent stay at Thornfield and while he was visiting with him Jane’s announcement that she was getting married to Rochester arrived to Mr. Eyre simultaneously. Mason was only going to be stopping in at John Eyre’s for a brief period of time before going back to Spanish Town, but by some sort of crazy luck he just happened to be at John’s when the letter arrived and John ended up somehow making it known to Mason who then relayed the information so that the wedding wouldn’t commence. For obvious reasons I find this hard to believe. Although I know Bronte had to find some way to connect these events in order for the wedding not to happen and for her original plot to go on in the way she intended, I just didn’t like how blatantly obvious it was that she just came up with something off of the top of her head that would only happen under extremely rare circumstances. What are the chances that Mason and John Eyre are friends and that Mason had just finished visiting John’s niece who he hadn’t even seen himself? And then the letter arrives and it’s then that I figure that in reality this sort of thing could only happen in one in a million circumstances. Maybe Bronte meant it to be this way, like it was fate. Because Rochester and Jane weren’t meant to be united in this way maybe Bronte was just trying to exaggerate how it wasn’t meant to be. I suppose I will never truly know, but I do know that this situation will continue to bug me just because of the sheer chance of it all.
Ethan Bergeron
ReplyDeleteA-Block
Well first off I would like to focus on Mrs. Fairfax. She is a character that is somewhat important and hasn't been discussed very much. I believe she looks out for Jane and is concerned for her love for Mr. Rochester. In chapter whatever I can't remember she warns Jane to look beyond men's fronts and be more cautious with her feelings because there maybe more to him then meets the eye. I think Mrs. Fairfax knows about Mr. Rochester's crazy ass wife but doesn't want to betray Mr. Rochester by snitching on him to Jane. But at the same time she doesn't want Jane to enter marriage so quickly with an already married man. So Mrs. Fairfax compromises with herself and decides to simply advise caution to Jane. Later in the book Mr. Rochester says however that Mrs. Fairfax didn't really know about his wife in the attic. But I think that Mrs. Fairfax was bound to find out due to all the screaming and such and she played dumb as to not upset the established system in the house.
There were many comments that I felt were worth mentioning but I'll just respond to one I found most interesting. It was Moriah's argument of Jane simply loving Mr. Rochester just because. Although I do believe that some immature teenage girls fall in love without reason with other attractive men this is not true with Jane and Rochester. One Rochester is not a attractive man at least not initially and Jane seems to be more mature than having a small crush. Besides looks start a relationship but personality keeps it going. For example Mr. Rochester treats Jane as equal and as a result Jane finds solace in him.
Alea C
ReplyDeleteA Block
While reading the previous chapters of Jane Eyre, themes of blindness and deceit have come to my attention. Mr. Rochester introduces seemingly dignified ladies and gentleman of status to Thornfield, and Jane is forced to be a part of the excitement. She tries to keep herself busy and go about unnoticed. At this time Jane is very observant and descriptive of the ladies who have come to stay at Thornfield. Bronte has kept this trait of Jane’s consistent through out the book, perhaps to help the reader truly understand what Jane is thinking. Jane is always very observant to Mr. Rochester and his actions. It is through her thoughts that Jane realizes her affection for Mr. Rochester. Jane is not blinded by his physical appearance, and she understands who he is as a person. Jane keeps quiet about her love towards Mr. Rochester, and sits back quietly as Miss. Ingram quickly acts upon him. Mr. Rochester uses a disguise to get the truth out of Jane, and when they finally come clean, both characters discover that their love was shared. Their blindness to the other’s feelings was now gone.
Deceit is also evident as Mr. Rochester tries to conceal Bertha from the rest of the world. He believes that if he can manage to keep her contained and out of the way, she will cause no problems and just disappear. As we all know, there is faults in this logic, because Bertha is eventually revealed. This breaks up Jane and Rochester, and turns their worlds upside down. I felt sorry for Mr. Rochester, because there was really nothing he could do about his situation. He would be forever stuck in his position. This brings up the idea of freedom vs. safety that both Tom and Josiah have discussed. Mr. Rochester could never truly be free if he could not find a way to disobey his morals and sully his reputation.
In Jane Eyre, Charlotte Bronte plays with Jane’s character in certain scenes. Jane’s character is poised and always in control of her emotions and herself. Sometimes, Bronte sheds this image and shows a mre lively and free-spirited side of Jane’s personality, but then Jane reels in or harnesses this freedom and regains herself. A good example of this behavior is noted in the scene when Jane is looking out the window to the horizon. In Chapter 23, Mr. Rochester asks Jane for her hand in marriage, and Jane gladly accepts his proposal. The whole scene causes Hane to act (in a way) like a young girl living out the prince/princess fairytales dreams, naïve and giddy. Actually, the firstline of Chapter 24 reads, “As I rose and dressed, I thought over what had happened, and wondered if it were a dream.”
ReplyDeleteShe gets up and is so happy still that she starts giving away everything she has in her purse to beggars on the street. Mr. Rochester tells her that they will be married in four weeks time. This only adds to her already giddy attitude. After this part in the Chapter, jane begins to reel herself back in. Mr. Rochester speaks of spoling Jane rotten with material goods, but Jane comes back to reality and sees that is not who she is. “I will put the diamond chain round your neck, and the circlet on your forehead, - which it will become; for nature, at least, has stamped her patent of nobility on theis brow, Jane; and I will clasp the bracelets on these fine wrists, and load these fairy-like fingers with rings.” “No, no, sir! Think of other subjects, and speak of other things, and in another strain. Don’t address me as if I were a beauty; I am your plain, Quakerish governess.”
I just think it is interesting how Bronte continually plays with and changes Jane’s character. She gives her a little leeway and freedom and then takes it all back.