<p>I’m moving right along: should finish Jane Eyre tomorrow and then slide right into Wide Sargasso Sea.</p>
<p>Can you guess where I am in the book with this hint: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p><em>I always want to pronounce it “Saint John” when I see it and then have to correct myself.</em> :p</p>
<p>Since rereading the book, I have watched three film treatments of Jane Eyre* and haven’t thought too much of any of them. One helpful thing about watching a film of the movie was that it taught me how to pronounce “St John,” though!</p>
<p>*the 2006 BBC miniseries, the 2011 version with Mia Wasikowska as Jane, and the 1997 version with Samantha Morton as Jane.</p>
<p>I have the 2011 version here, though I need to finish reading before I watch anything. I saw the BBC miniseries on DVD shortly after it aired in 2006. I also have the Wide Sargasso Sea DVD (BBC version) awaiting me.</p>
<p>I’ve wanted to revisit Jane Eyre for some time now, and this moved my visit from the future to the “now” and I’m glad.</p>
<p>FYI: I’m a sucker for books that take a moment to address me directly, as in “but I cannot expect the reader to have the same intuitive perception, so I must repeat his [St. John] explanation.” I feel like Charlotte Bronte herself (through her character Jane Eyre, of course) has stepped from the 1800s into my room to discuss matters. :)</p>
<p>My edition of Jane Eyre contains several critical essays, and one of them talks about how Charlotte Bront</p>
<p>I do love how Bronte addresses the reader–it creates such a warm feeling!</p>
<p>Ok, I’m fine with it if no one else agrees, but being July, summer, relatives, kids, summer cleaning, gardening, etc., I have managed to finish Jane Eyre and started Wide Sargasso Sea, but there is no way I will finish by Wednesday. Anyone up for begging Mary13 for a few more days before the discussion starts? </p>
<p>If not, it’s fine, I will just wait a bit to join in and catch up on the discussion then :)…</p>
<p>sylvan8798, if you’ve finished Jane Eyre, you are in good shape! I found Wide Sargasso Sea to move very swiftly. </p>
<p>I’ll post the discussion questions on August 1st for those eager to get started, but I’ll happily tilt my initial posts toward Jane Eyre, as there’s more than enough to discuss there while you whip through the rest of Wide Sargasso Sea. And if it makes you feel any better, I, for one, will be posting sparingly for the first few days because I’m driving to Minnesota for the weekend, leaving Thursday (college orientation for my D).</p>
<p>Thanks Mary - that should work!</p>
<p>Welcome to our discussion of Jane Eyre and Wide Sargasso Sea! I hope everyone has enjoyed the selections—and found a cool place to read during this long, hot summer.</p>
<p>Discussion Questions for Jane Eyre
<a href=“There%20are%20two%20sets%20of%20questions—from%20the%20Penguin%20and%20Random%20House%20editions.”>i</a>*</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Why does Bronte juxtapose Jane’s musings about women’s social restraints with the mysterious laugh that Jane attributes to Grace Poole (p. 125-26)?</p></li>
<li><p>Rochester tells Jane, “if you are cast in a different mould to the majority, it is no merit of yours; Nature did it” (p. 153-54). Are we intended to agree or disagree with this statement?</p></li>
<li><p>After Mason’s visit to Thornfield, Jane asks herself, “What crime was this, that lived incarnate in this sequestered mansion, and could neither be expelled nor subdued by the owner?” (p. 237). What crime does Bertha represent? Why does Rochester keep her at Thornfield?</p></li>
<li><p>Does Rochester ever actually intend to marry Blanche Ingram? If so, when does he change his mind? If not, why does he go to such lengths to make Jane believe he does?</p></li>
<li><p>Rochester’s disastrous marriage to Bertha was based on passion, while St. John refuses to marry Rosamund because of his passion for her. What is Bront</p></li>
</ol>
<p>^ I know that the long list of questions above is a lot to wade through. There are a thousand places we could start with these two books. The ideas are flickering about me like so many fireflies, so I am just going to reach out and grab one: My first observation (not particularly deep and not in the discussion questions) is that Jane Eyre has always reminded me of Beauty and the Beast. </p>
<p>Mr. Rochester is the Beast, and just as in the fairy tale, he is cursed for what appears to be eternity—not through a random act of fate, but because of his own bad behavior. Like the Beast, he lives in a castle, where even the staff is hampered by the enchantment. He is gruff, brooding and bitter, but not unkind. Along comes Beauty (with Jane, of course, it is inner beauty), and friendship, followed by love, develops from evenings of conversation. In the fairy tale, Beauty has to leave for a short while to attend to her family and the Beast makes her promise that she will only stay one week. In the novel, it’s the same: When Jane leaves for Aunt Reed’s bedside, Rochester says:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Both Jane and Beauty are conflicted about where their duty lies, but both ultimately choose “true love.” </p>
<p>Compare the end of Jane Eyre to the end of Beauty and the Beast.</p>
<p>Wikipedia’s summary: “Upon returning, Belle finds the Beast almost dead, and she weeps over him, saying that she loves him. When her tears strike him, the Beast is transformed into a handsome prince. The Prince informs Belle that long ago a fairy turned him into a hideous beast after he refused to let her in from the rain, and that only by finding true love, despite his ugliness, could the curse be broken. He and Belle are married and they live happily ever after together.”</p>
<p>The fact that Rochester continually calls Jane an “elf” or “fairy” or “witch” or “sprite” helps reinforce that fairy tale ambiance.</p>
<p>^ Edited to add: Considering that Jane Eyre has been studied for well over a century, I had no illusions that my above comments reflected original thinking. A little googling proved me right. Here are some links to look at, if you’re so inclined:</p>
<p>[Variations</a> on Beauty and the Beast From Around the World](<a href=“http://anayambaker.hubpages.com/hub/Beauty-and-the-Beast-Stories-From-Around-the-World]Variations”>http://anayambaker.hubpages.com/hub/Beauty-and-the-Beast-Stories-From-Around-the-World)
<a href=“https://sites.google.com/site/challyjaneeyre/allusions/fairy-tales-in-jane-eyre[/url]”>https://sites.google.com/site/challyjaneeyre/allusions/fairy-tales-in-jane-eyre</a>
[url=<a href=“Charlotte Brontë: Jane Eyre: Fairy tale allusions and elements in Jane Eyre - Florian Rübener - Google Books”>Charlotte Brontë: Jane Eyre: Fairy tale allusions and elements in Jane Eyre - Florian Rübener - Google Books]Charlotte</a> Bront</p>
<p>Interesting comparison to Beauty and the Beast!</p>
<p>I would say that one way that Jane Eyre differs from Beauty and the Beast is that, in a way, Jane does not “choose true love.” It is as almost as though the choice is made for her by, shall we say, a higher power.</p>
<p>Jane has very nearly decided that she should in fact marry St John when she hears Rochester’s call.</p>
<p>Note: I did not exactly come to this conclusion all on my own. A critical essay contained within the edition of Jane Eyre I read makes the following statements:</p>
<p>“The narrative strategy seems aimed at the kind of reader who would be shocked if Jane rejected St. John.”</p>
<p>“She appeals directly to Providence for intercession and guidance:…”</p>
<p>“She believes that her prayer has been answered and she believes at this moment that her love for Rochester is now authorized by the extraordinary but natural forces.”</p>
<p>This relates to question #9 in the first set of Mary’s questions.</p>
<p>(I was surprised that I had not even remembered St John from the first time I read the book. He is such an important character! His manipulativeness {bullying?} echoes Rochester’s in so many ways.)</p>
<p>Very striking parallels between B & TB and JE, Mary13. </p>
<p>I think question #3 is very interesting in asking: Why does Rochester keep Bertha at Thornfield?</p>
<p>I always wondered this. With his vast wealth, couldn’t he have ensconced poor Bertha on some remote coast in Ireland or something? I always found it moving that he kept her at his family estate, right in the center of his life, essentially. Hidden away but present is a very intimate way.</p>
<p>One of the points that interested me was that Jean Rhys actually moves the time of Jane Eyre into the mid-1800’s in order that WWS can be set after the abolition of slavery in Jamaica. On a side note, my 5th great grandfather (French) was killed in one of the slave uprisings in Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic - pretty much next door), after which GGF-4 fled to Maryland, and GGM-5 returned to France.</p>
<p>Rochester probably would have felt that it was more efficient to keep Bertha at Thornfield than elsewhere. Before Jane arrived, he was seldom there anyway. And one has to assume that before Jane came, Bertha had never done anything like trying to set Rochester on fire in his bed.</p>
<p>You have to wonder how much Bertha knew about what was going on in the house, and exactly how she found out.</p>
<p>One might also wonder why Rochester installed Adele at Thornfield, and didn’t just put her in a the best possible school* rather than hiring a governess. To what extent was he caring, and to what extent controlling??</p>
<p>Sewhappy, do you think it was kind of Rochester to keep Bertha so close but so hidden? If she had been ensconced in some placid rural location where she could have spent time outdoors, she might have been much happier.</p>
<p>Maybe you can tell that I don’t like Rochester very much! I am firmly convinced that I would have disliked him just as much this time around (the first time I’d read the book since I was a young teen) even if I hadn’t read Wild Sargasso Sea first! :)</p>
<p>*When Rochester did place Adele in a school after the fire, he made a poor choice, and Jane had to find a better school for her later.</p>
<p><a href=“I%20was%20surprised%20that%20I%20had%20not%20even%20remembered%20St%20John%20from%20the%20first%20time%20I%20read%20the%20book.%20He%20is%20such%20an%20important%20character!%20His%20manipulativeness%20%7Bbullying?%7D%20echoes%20Rochester’s%20in%20so%20many%20ways.”>quote=NJTheatreMOM</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I feel like we weren’t supposed to like St. John Rivers, but I really did. I thought he was a complicated, fascinating man. I would have liked a sequel describing his 10 years in India! Would his experiences there have changed his resolute nature and/or softened the heart of this allegedly “cold hard man” (p. 263)? Even though I’m a romantic, I think he was right that he and Rosamond would have made a poor match, with neither of them providing the other with what they craved.</p>
<p>Re the bullying: I agree with you. Rivers and Rochester share this trait, and Jane recognizes this: “I was almost as hard beset by him now as I had been once before, in a different way, by another” (p. 295). She says that it is her nature “to bend, where my conscience and self-respect permitted, to an active will” (p. 243). She admits about herself, “I never in my life have known any medium in my dealings with positive, hard characters, antagonistic to my own, between absolute submission and determined revolt” (p. 282).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It always seems like Rochester is condemned for the way in which he imprisons Bertha, but I don’t see it that way. (Of course, I’m defending him assuming that his wife really is violently and hopelessly insane and that he did not have a hand in “making” her insane, as WSS suggests.) </p>
<p>From the perspective of the 21st century, Rochester’s behavior is at minimum disturbing, if not downright cruel, but 200 years ago, it might have been the kindest solution possible. Under Rochester’s watchful eye, Bertha could not be neglected or abused like the inmates of Bedlam. Remember, he wouldn’t even send her to his Ferndean estate:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The less kindly, more twisted view would be the one from Wide Sargasso Sea: that he kept her close to satisfy his own kind of madness:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t realize that. So in Charlotte Bronte’s version, young Rochester would have married Bertha around 1800, but in Jean Rhys’ version, the marriage takes place about 35 years later. Phew! Now it makes it easier for me to convince myself that the prequel story could never have happened…’cause I really loathed THAT Rochester. :)</p>
<p>Mary - I like the Beauty and the Beast comparison.</p>
<p>Mr. Rochester wanted to keep his marriage to Bertha a secret in order to keep his family name in a positive light. I think he kept her hidden at his house to insure that secret.</p>
<p>I liked St. John when he was first introduced. I appreciated his kindness to Jane and his willingness to help her. I didn’t like him later. His calling as a missionary kept him single minded. He was bullying Jane when he was trying to convince her to marry him and join him as a missionary. He wanted it and wasn’t too concerned about what she wanted.</p>
<p>Okay, what bothered me most about reading both books was the character of Mr. Rochester. I didn’t dislike him in Jane Erye. He was odd and at times a little pathetic, but I never saw him the way Jean Rhys presented him in Wide Sargasso Sea. In Jane Erye he seemed a victim of his family. His behavior after his marriage to Bertha was certainly questionable at times, but I never felt like he was a innately mean person. In Wide Sargasso Sea I didn’t like him at all. He wasn’t a good person.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Mary - I read your post after I wrote my post. I agree with you about loathing THAT Rochester!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, although I would modify it a bit by saying that he had convinced himself that it was what GOD wanted, and he believed that to submit one’s will to the Lord is the only right path, regardless of personal desires. </p>
<p>This is the kind of thinking from St. John that I liked (this was to Hannah after she turned away the starving Jane): “You have done your duty in excluding her, now let me do mine in admitting her” (p. 236). It shows both understanding and tolerance of Hannah, and at the same time, compassion for Jane. And what follows sounds very much like one of Jesus’ miracles: “Young woman, rise, and pass before me into the house.” As Jane said of St. John, “His is the exaction of the apostle, who speaks but for Christ” (p. 321).</p>
<p>BUandBC82, I agree very much with your take on the difference between Rhys’ Mr. Rochester and Bronte’s. I always felt Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre was complex and off-putting but essentially someone in pain trying desperately to find a little grace in life. The portrayal in WSS is much harsher. I read WSS a very long, long time ago and was not struck by this difference in the portrayal of him then. Maybe I’m older now and more given to cutting the old guy some slack.</p>
<p>No quotes or evidence to back this, but I always felt St. John actually was very attracted to Jane, physically and spiritually, but couched his courtship of her entirely in terms of religious service because of innate discomfort with his physical desires.</p>
<p>I so loved the pairing of these books! I got so much out of reading Jane Eyre again-and I loved Wide Sargasso Sea. It did change my feelings for Mr. Rochester.One question I could not figure out is what turns Mr. Rochester against Antoinette-the letter? It seems so insubstatial.
Reading Wide Sargasso Sea certainly put the incident of the Rochester impersonating the old Gypsy woman in a different light for me.
Also, was it ever explained what happened to Bertha’s face in Jane Eyre?</p>