Extend. Explore. Examine. Respond. Revisit. Revise. Analyze. Synthesize. Write.
Walk the landscape of the text. Dig into particulars. Muse on your findings. Put it together. Assert boldly.
As the Violent Femmes song goes, "Add it up! Add it up! Add it up!"
The last chapters of Jane Eyre provided a riveting conclusion to the extraordinary novel. During class, we discussed equality in marriage and equality in love. In the Victorian age, the man always played the dominant role. But there was discussion in class as to whether or not that was the case for Rochester and Jane. Jane had the upper hand when it came to love, and Rochester was dominant concerning social status and wealth.
ReplyDeleteJane had the upper hand when it came to love because Rochester verbally expressed his need to have her in his life, whereas Jane felt the same way, but never really verbally defined her feelings. Rochester was dominant concerning wealth and social status because he had the money and the respectable name, whereas Jane was a poor orphan. Jane ever faced discrimination from Rochester’s guests because she was a poor orphan.
I would like to talk about superficial love and intimate love, and their relations to love and lust. Rochester’s feelings towards Bertha and Blanche were based on beauty, wealth, and social standing. Rochester’s feelings for Blanche never moved past the lust stage. In Bertha’s case, Rochester’s feelings dropped from lust to hate.
However, Rochester’s feelings for Jane weren’t based on looks, money, and respectable name in society. Rather, he liked Jane for her thoughts, feelings, and soul. Eventually, Rochester grew to love Jane. The author, Charlotte Bronte, wants to teach her readers that in order to really love someone, you have to love their soul, not their outer appearance and their money.
During the discussion, we had had a short topic on whether or not St. John's proposal to Jane was incest or not. I thought it was strange seeing as how when Jane rejected his proposal but would agree to accompany him to India as his sister, St. John had compared his marriage to the Christian belief.
ReplyDeleteI think we said that marrying your cousin was basically incest, and therefore, most likely, against Christian belief?
I'd also like to point out that St. John was telling Jane that she was made to follow the Christian belief, not for love. However, Jane, having known love after meeting Rochester, refuses to believe St. John's words.
There was also the fact that although we pointed out that St. John was basically dedicated to his mission. I'd like to say that when he was in love with Rosamond, he had told Jane that she was not fit to be the wife of a missionary because of her character. However, he had brooded when he learned of her engagement.
We had mentioned that St. John, from the beginning was, in a way, planing his death. He had wanted to go to India in order to die there. If that is so, it made me wonder why he wanted Jane to come with him there if he was only planning to die there?
In our discussion I had mentioned that Jane flees Thornfield because she had a dream of her mother telling her to do so. And a dream brought her back. She dreamed of her hearing Rochester’s voice calling to her over the Moore's. Jane had never given in to his word, until that moment. But why that moment? And I think it was because now that she had separated from him, and she had gained some money and moved up in class, she knew she was ready to return. And she came right on time, Thornfield had been burned to the ground, Bertha fell to her death, and Rochester had been left blinded and without a hand.
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of Jane Eyre was to make a point of how love could be equal, and how a woman can still be successful without a man. A theme throughout the novel or a good motif would be equality. Jane and Rochester were polar opposites, and they are constantly trying to dominate over the other. Jane is suggested to be the leader logically, because without her, you see that Rochester is weak. And socially, Rochester had kept pushing Jane to blend in with the same people that have made snide remarks to her. And now that she has proven to herself that she could be successful without Rochester, she decides to come back to him when he needs her most.
To conclude, Jane Eyre was an amazing book with a great story line. Again, Charlotte Bronte I think wrote this story to show how unequal women felt in that time period. The proof of this was, her psudonym, Currer Bell. Women weren’t able to publish works then.
Looking back on the text as a whole, I can confidently conclude that Jane Eyre was about love versus lust, control versus concession, and conformity versus freedom of spirit. It dealt with characters giving in and fighting against each side, and it highlighted the necessity of compromise. Cohesive with Jane's steady and rational personality, Jane was frequently the agent of compromise; in her relationship with Rochester, she allowed him to yield the control that he had previously always desired. He overcame his lust through Jane's love, and an ideal relationship eventually resulted.
ReplyDeleteJane was the primary example of compromise between conformity and freedom of spirit in the novel. She knew the importance of maintaining an outwardly composed and balanced reflection in Victorian society. Even in her relationship with Rochester, she reasoned that having a similar social status would be more conducive to acceptance from the general public than a governess marrying her master. However, she did not let her concern with appearance interfere with her feelings: she found that considering both and going with the stronger of the two was most reasonable, as when she first was engaged to Rochester. Additionally, she held herself confidently when dealing with virtually everyone she came in contact with, but allowed herself to feel how she felt instead of feeling how she "should" feel.
In Jane’s relationship with St. John, she was unable to influence him as she did other characters. She attempted to sway him toward marrying Rosamond, but his rigid conformity to Christian ideals and to his work for God got in the way of his recognized feelings. St. John failed to yield in many other instances which would have been beneficial to him, such as Jane’s acceptance of his proposal to go to India on the condition that they would not marry.
Charlotte Bronte portrayed numerous types of people in Jane Eyre and created a work of literature with richly dynamic characters and relationships that are powerful in influential in any setting. Jane especially, a character that was "as plain and as small as (her)self", offered a well of emotion and perception that I venture is at least in some way relatable to everyone.
The final chapters of Jane Eyre were, to me, completely juxt a posed to the greater portion of the novel. As a reader, I grew to love and understand Jane as the character that she was originally portrayed as. We watched her grow from an orphan into an independent and straightforward woman. As cliche as it may sound, she never failed to stand up for her beliefs and values. When introduced to Rochester, we see her briefly falter and start to give herself over. At just the last moment however, reality steps in and once again, Jane is alone, as an individual; never giving herself over to anyone. From that moment on, and through this final portion, Jane changes.
ReplyDeleteNot only does our main character leave her fiance, she strives to succeed in life by starting a school for young children. Not only does she strive, but she succeeds in becoming a person in the world (on her own). As Jane finds money and the comforts that come with it, she eventually goes back to Rochester.
As it was pointed out in our class discussion, Jane and Rochester re-enter their relationship on equal levels. As she has grown and prospered in the world, he has suffered through many challenges. There love from this point on can be described as 'perfect' or maybe, 'a fairytale ending.'
Why would Bronte add in this sudden shift of both character in Jane and mood of the work as a whole? As Mr. Cook mentioned, could it be irony? Is is possible that Bronte was saying love like this could never occur. When Jane is 'socially' equal to Rochester, why are they suddenly able to marry?
These thoughts frightened and startled me, but at the same time, I found myself naturally agreeing to them. It may be a pessimistic outlook on the novel but I feel as if Bronte was playing on the 'happy ending' scene and really showing the reader what could never be.
Jane's relationship with Rochester is the heart of Jane Eyre, and after the start of the second act, it becomes the driving force of most of the conflict in the book. It's very easy to talk about how Jane spent the final act bringing herself up to be equal (or roughly equal) with Rochester in terms of finances, and societal standing. However, I think it is important to note that Rochester has also been brought down a few pegs, and in more regards than just his personality (though, that is the change with the most significance.) He has lost Thornwood, and along with it some of his standing, and probably wealth. He only has two servants and is in a smaller home. All of this makes sense, given that he has been physically maimed, but that is also an important descent. So what I'm leading up to is this:
ReplyDeleteWhat significance is there that Rochester had to move down a few pegs in order to be equal to Jane, even after all her success?
As empowering as Jane's ascent is, the fact remains that this is Victorian England, a society with the preconception that a woman cannot be equal to a man, even if she has an equal amount of success. Even if Bronte didn't have this view, the (predominantly male) critics probably did, and may not have taken to the book as kindly if the main character had brought herself up to the level of an upper class man without that man himself moving down some steps. Especially after they discovered the author is a woman.
(Disclaimer: Anything potentially sexist is not the view of the writer of this blog post, but is conjecture based upon the nature of Victorian England's gender views.)
During class we discussed the changes that Jane went through leading up to the point were she was able to go through with marrying Rochester, but we only scratched on how Rochester changed. Now i don't argue that the changes that Jane went through allowed her to merry Rochester on equal terms. But her changes were not the only thing that changed in order for it to happen. Rochester changes allowed him to accept jane, even if she wasn't as rich or pretty as other woman he could have married. The first change was when Jane left, Rochester pride was hurt because he was rejected, and left "alone" by Jane. This created room for Rochester to develop as a character, and he started to during the fire started by Bertha. He was freed of the burden of Bertha, but it came at a price, he lost a hand and his eye sight. This turned Rochester into a "wounded lion", allowing him to be more accepting of thing in his life, because he was injured. During this in injured time, The "New" Jane came along and nursed him back to health. But since she did so when he was weak she helped create the new Rochester that she could love. So Both characters had to change for each other before they could get married.
ReplyDeleteThe conclusion to Jane Eyre is is one of those “happy endings”, in a way. When Jane and Rochester first were together, Rochester, socially had the upper hand in the relationship. He had the upper hand socially because he was more wealthy than her and more class than her. When she returned to him, he lost a lot, emotionally and physically, he lost his money, his house, his wife, his sight, and his left hand. He was devastated before she returned. Then the upper hand went to Jane. When she returned, his life got back together. Now she had the wealth and popularity to socially have the upper hand.
ReplyDeleteI wanna talk about St. John. I think that before and while Jane was St. John, he was depressed and wanted to die. I think that when his relationship with Rosamond did not work out, he wanted to marry Jane so that he can find happiness and not be depressed. Since him and Jane did not work, he wants to die. As we talked about in class, if he died, he will gain salvation through god.
As the final chapters rolled on, Jane character changed majorly twice. The first was when she left Rochester, she was like Rochester at the end of the book, she had nothing. She was starving and homeless. I think during that period she realized that she missed Rochester and that she needs him. But, she then finds her lost family and does not need Rochester anymore. With her new family, she gets wealthy and becomes less dependent on Rochester. Though she stills needs someone, all throughout the book she has needed someone to survive. Jane can only find happiness when she is with someone, not by herself. Whether when she was in the boarding school, with Rochester, or with her family, Jane needs someone else to be happy.
So when she had Rochester, with money, a child and Rochester finally gets his sight back at the end, I think that qualifies as a “happy ending”.
During class we spoke a decent amount about Jane and how she changed after leaving Rochester. She worked and earned her money, allowing her to be equal to Rochester financially. We also slightly touched that Rochester changed as well. He had became blind and lost his hand. A thought that I had was Jane and Rochester had such a hard time because Bertha was still in the picture. The house was marked by Bertha and her presence was constantly known. Then once the fire happened, allowing the house to burn down and Bertha to pass away, everything was let go. Rochester had lost part of him (ha ha ha) and since he finally let go, it made marriage to Jane much easier. Once Jane came along, she nursed him back to health, and eventually could see again. He was no longer "blind" and could see clearly when they had their first child.
ReplyDeleteAnother topic we discussed was about St. John and his proposal. I found the proposal disgusting, but back then it wasn't frowned on as much. I am happy Jane rejected him, and found St. John to be hypocritical once he compared their marriage to the Christian religion. He just generally gave me the creeps.
Overall, Jane Eyre was a fantastic book. I loved the language and how it showed a woman's point of view during this time period. It was easy to feel for Jane and see through her eyes.
Jane Eyre was a novel filled with plenty of twists and turns, and this was evident in the last portion of the story. Although our in class discussion was wide ranging and covered a good amount of material, there were still a couple things that stuck in my mind after the session that I wish we could have spoken about in greater detail.
ReplyDeleteThroughout our discussions of Jane Eyre, I always enjoyed when Bronte’s ability to contrast characters came up. In the last chunk of the book, Bronte was at it again, when she clearly contrasted Jane and St. John. As a class we talked a bit about how Jane often held emotion above her religious duties and thoughts, and I found this to be very true. Jane was a character that put her logic and passion on display, and was the type that only believed something once she saw it with her own eyes. However, Bronte portrayed St. John as a God loving, cold, calculated man, often comparing him to ice or snow. Stating these facts about St. John makes me wonder if he is more of a contrast, or foil, to Rochester. Bronte seems to display this contrast through Jane’s regard of the two, as marrying Rochester would equate to letting go of principle for the valuable reward of passionate love, but marriage to St. John would mean sacrificing that passion for principle. Bronte’s contrasting characters adds to the underlying tension of their relationships and displays their personalities through contrast very clearly.
Another topic the class touched on was the question of salvation, how life is redeemed, and in what way does Jane find her own. Coupled with talk of indirect biblical references, I think this portion of the class discussion was very enlightening. I completely missed the seemingly obvious Jane and Christ parallels that Sarah and others brought up in class, which spurred a bit of research on my part. But the question of salvation and finding redemption through another person is something that has been in the back of my mind since the discussion. In Jane’s case, she gravitates toward Rochester, instead of religion, as a source of salvation, and I think this speaks to what kind of character she is, and was, throughout the novel Jane Eyre.
In class we discussed a few central questions about the book as a whole including:(How)Did Rochester change?
ReplyDeleteWhen Jane first meets him, he is harsh, blunt, and stern in voice and manner. Due to the fact that we are seeing him through her eyes, as she warms to his stark uniqueness, the words used to describe him, though still honest and clearly showing his immutable persona, seem to be more affectionate. Several times she mentions the attractiveness of his confidence, yet if the reader chooses to examine Bronte's portrayal of Rochester, the confidence Jane sees becomes less prevalent. Jane views his flirtatious behavior with Blanche as fearlessness toward himself, yet the way Bronte has him talk about it later suggests he was merely doing it to evoke Jane's jealousy; afraid he would not be loved without trickery or manipulation. Confident? Maybe not so much. Also, when he is dressed as the fortuneteller, he is constantly inquiring of the nature of her relationship to Mr. Rochester, unsure that his instincts concerning her love are correct. Again, this suggests a lack of self-assurance.By the time Jane returns to him, he is miserable. However, he is well aware of who he is and what he is like, and much more willing to admit it. He expects significantly less from her. Never attempting to twist her logic, morals, or emotions into caring for him. He is confident in his own persona, knowing what he is like without her, and confident that she will choose what is right. He is much more respectful and humble of her abilities and position, for once allowing her to dictate what she should and should not have, and laying down his own disabilities at her feet to spit on or gather up to repair. Prior to her leave of absence he is unyielding in his pleading and self-pity. He is unwilling to shoulder any blame or rely on his own competence to survive. She forces him to accept himself and his falling outs by removing herself as his scapegoat. He derives respect for her selfless action of abandonment and for her more refined morals, while stabilizing enough emotionally to bequeath the control of the relationship to her. Regardless of all of his improvements, Bronte makes it clear that what he has gained in emotional maturity, he balances out with his physical neediness concerning Jane. Though his flaws have been redirected, he still needs her as much as he originally did.
PART 2!
ReplyDeleteOverall, though Jane is clearly the protagonist and focus of the book, it seems that the developments made within Rochester and the juxtaposing of Mrs. Reed, Helen, Mr. Brocklehurst, Mr. Rochester, and St. John to her persona speaks more about human growth and needs than Jane's individual journey ever could. Through Mrs. Reed we see the harshness of lack of perspective and common logic, and Jane's way of side stepping that blow, as well as avoiding that future for herself(by telling off Mrs. Reed and her cold cruelty). Helen allows us a peek at overly individualized passion. She is eccentric and isolated, making it nearly impossible to spread the joys of her passion for Christ with those around her, which is the purpose of the gospel and being a Christian. Jane notices her lack of connection, and establishes bridges for this problem by befriending Helen, as well as digesting the burden of Christianity due to her influence and following her death. She becomes a teacher and spreads the joy of knowledge and connection both at Lowood and later at St. John's school. Mr. Brocklehurst provides the holier-than-thou character who beats Jane down enough to always be humble, and to never wish to bestow such criticism and humiliation upon others due to such a perspective. For the rest of the book she attempts to establish equality and common levels between herself and those around her. Mr Rochester teaches her the benefits of a reasonable passion, and allows her the freedom of an individual choice of influence, forcing her to re-examine her own foundation and determine whether to complete development on her own or accept his total influence. He shows her the down side of being overly attached to people and society(buying her fancy clothes and insisting on his moral collapse without her aid), and solidifies Jane's need to be independent. St. John personifies the passion void of emotion. He assures Jane that Christian duties are always fulfilling, and proves their lack of return on earth. St. John forces Jane to consider which type of servitude she would rather subject herself to, and to appreciate the concept of love in a much less distant fashion. As the book is a love story(to an extent), it is only appropriate to end the novel with the juxtaposing of St. John's service of "love" and Jane's loving service.
It was brought up that religion is used when ever a transition is coming. The best example of this is at the end when St. John is praying and Jane thinks that she hears Rochester calling her. After that she left to go see what she could find out about Rochester. She discovered that Thornfield had burned to the ground. She also learned that Rochester had lost a hand and his sight in the fire. She went to him and he asked her to marry him and she said yes.
ReplyDeleteIt was also brought up that Jane represents Jesus. Many people were redeemed for their sins by Jesus. Rochester committed a sin after he got married to Bertha when he started to have feelings for Jane and then he asked her to marry him. After Jane left Thornfield and Rochester was punished for his sins. He was punished when his home burned down and he lost his sight and also one of hands. Later, when Jane comes back to Rochester and agrees to marry him, he gets redeemed. He starts to regain his sight again when they have their first child. He never really gets his hand back though. It serves as a reminder of the sins that Rochester had committed. Many sins can get redeemed but there always little reminders of what sins was committed. That way, hopefully, the sins will not be repeated.
I was impressed by a few things in the final part of Jane Eyre. To start, the theme of healing is prevalent and interesting. Following their split, both Jane and Rochester reach low points from which they are mercifully, and in the nick of time, saved and healed. There is an interesting implication to this. As those who saved Jane are portrayed as saints of sorts (pun on St. John? I think so.), is Jane such to Rochester when she similarly saves him? If so, what does this imply? Several things, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteThis is the length to which Jane must travel for equality. Only after she has endured suffering and a year of anxiousness, trusting and adhering always to her immaculate moral standards, can she reach the point where she feels equal to Rochester for the purposes of marriage. And of course, the addition of the money is also a deciding factor in this sense of equality. As many people mentioned, not only does Jane achieve all of this, but Rochester is also “demoted” a few steps. No longer can he manipulate and condescend towards Jane. She could if she wanted to, but seriously, she’s Jane Eyre. Some people have postulated that this grand reversal of respective situations was necessary for the times in which the book was written for such an “equality” to even be mentioned. This may have backfired in the eyes of some critics, who may have seen this as an attack upon the upper class along with an endorsement of class ascension with purity and perseverance. They may have been right – think of John Reed, a purposeful negative example of the opulence, entitlement and moral impurity of the rich. Juxtaposed against the pristine Jane, her rise seems natural and is readily accepted in today’s society. Back when the book was written, however, England operated under what one could liken to India’s Caste System. One did not abdicate their caste. To fall down was dishonorable, to rise was unacceptable. What a lovely match Jane and Rochester must have made in the eyes of the Victorian English readers.
The end to Jane Eyre was filled with twists and unsuspected events. Chapter 27 begins with Jane, searching for food, constantly relaying her famine and fatigue. I find a consistency with Bronte’s food relations and she relates food to different parts of Jane’s life. When Jane meets Bertha, Bronte describes a soup, without vegetables and a lot of meat. To me, this could mean a hardness, or toughness, which could also describe the meeting with Bertha. When Jane is lost and has nowhere to go, she is suffering from famine until she finally meets the Rivers and they provide her with the saving grace that is nourishment. Something I wanted to bring up was the varying types of relationships brought about in Jane Eyre. Bronte seems to use relationships as a way to challenge the traditional view of the way a connection between two people is formed. Jane’s first relationship with Mrs. Reed is not one that is common between relatives: one side pulling for love and the other for just the opposite. As evident in the final chapters, Jane eventually surpasses Rochester in financial standing, similar to the relationship Jane’s mother had with Jane’s father. I think Bronte was challenging the traditional view that the man had to be in charge and be the caretaker of the family. I think that redemption is a major theme depicted in the final chapters. Rochester tries to redeem himself by attempting to save everyone from the fire at Thornfield before saving himself. I believe he was then rewarded later by being ‘given’ his sight back. I think St. John represents sacrifice because he was willing to give up everything he had planned on in his life and awaited death at the end because he had nothing left. Overall, I really enjoyed Jane Eyre and I hope to read more by the Bronte sisters.
ReplyDeleteOur discussion of the end of Jane Eyre focussed on the regilous undertones of the book. We talked abou the concepts of salvation and redemption. In some ways Janes story is one of the very pious, she leaves her desires and takes the harder path she choses to respect herself and her values and make her own way then be mistress to Rochester. She is eventually rewarded and in some ways her goodness redimes Rochester. This bothers me probably because the moral seems mixed. In some ways I would have rather seen Jane grew away from her past with Rochester and made her own way unmarried but happy. I would of liked to see her fulfilled not because she comes in to money or is able to marry Rochester but because she fulfills her potential on her own. Jane is so principled and determined I would of liked to have seen her reject social norms and expectations even further I would of liked to see her create her own fortune leaving her old social status in the dust because of her own accomplishments. In fairness I am looking at this with a modern prospective based on the standards of the times jane could really of been considered a self made women.
ReplyDeleteAnother theme I wish we had discussed was the balance between opposing forces. If something very good happened something very bad followed. Every character had fault in equal measure with good qualities. If Mr. Rochester does the good act of asking Jane to marry him. He does the bad act of lying about his wife. This is a more obvious example but I think Jane Eyre has a lot to say about the need for balance.