Thread: Charlotte Bronte Jane Eyre

Those first chapters gained her some notoriety at the time because scandals over the running of schools were in the news and she had had a favourite sister who had died in similar circumstances. However, although the book may have influenced public opinion in the debate she was not an initiator of debate on injustice in the way that Dickens was.
Jane Austen is so toweringly superior in her insight and wit I find it hard to understand why anyone bothers with this, it struck me as the "chick lit." of its day.

I first read jane eyre when I was 13, this book became another world for me, one that I lived in for weeks, and I swear i get memories of junior high mixed up with scenes from that book. since jr. high i've read it about a hundred and twenty times I'm sure.

Originally Posted by Roxane

Yes Jane Eyre is amazing (though I agree about the first couple of chapters)! I love Wuthering heights too. Walkio, obviously the language reads more slowly than todays literature, but I think there is so much beauty, style and class over it too.

Another classic must read, though it isn't originally in English is "La dame aux camélias" (Alexandre Dumas), otherwise I can think of "An ideal Husband" (Oscar Wild), and "Persuasion " (Jane Austen).

Jane austin? Never really liked her...*looks around, realises no other guy has read JA*

Hello.

Jane Eyre is a favorite of mine, and perhaps the first book of classical literature that I have ever read with any zeal.

Since I have first read her work I have read other authors from her general time period, and regardless of gender or setting or location, I have yet to read someone who uses such a bountiful sort of language.

It is almost as if her style makes her words feel beyond the English language.

Originally Posted by Olly Buckle

Jane Austen is so toweringly superior in her insight and wit I find it hard to understand why anyone bothers with this, it struck me as the "chick lit." of its day.

Whoa there boy!

Austen wrote about an idealised two dimensional world where the poor only existed within her own context - you were poor if you had to downsize slightly and let a couple of the servants go. The working classes only appear in her books when they're serving tea. The greatest hardship that she could imagine was marrying someone less than wealthy.

Certainly she's witty and insightful, but she lived and wrote in a bubble. The Brontes were grounded more in the real world.

I have two favourite books and Jane Eyre is one of them. When I read it, I felt absorbed into her world. I loved the language and I deeply identified with Jane, so I didn't even notice if parts of it were slow-moving. I agree that Mr Rochester should have been in it more! Well, I wanted him in it more...but if he was, maybe we wouldn't have wanted him as much?

Just a quick comment about the chances of stumbling upon her cousins' house: In those days, the world was a lot smaller. Generally, people didn't move far from where they were born. Also, communities were small and so people could be related to a lot of people in the area, by marriage and in-laws' in-laws and such. So, while it is quite random, it could have been possible and it isn't as ridiculous as it would be in a modern story. And, for the record, I was so caught up in the story that I never noticed if it was plausible or not.

I think that Jane's supposed lack of feeling when she hears that Mr Rochester is already married is to do with her exceptional self-control and the shield that she has created to protect herself from all the hardship she's experienced. At that point, where the worst thing imaginable has occured, she doesn't allow herself to feel all the emotion that would naturally occur because it is just too devastating. She gets the hell out of there and deals with the emotional consequences later on. That's what I think anyway.

I love most "classic" stories (ie. English class staples), but I've always hated Victorian literature.

I read Jane Eyre this year for my first English class in college. I absolutely do not grasp what people see in it. The writing's droll, the characters are thin, the plot is sadly full of contrivances which hinder what might have been a good story. Seriously, Jane goes through a long journey (prompted by the most absurd coincidence ever), meets parallels of herself in characters like St. John, only to end up Rochester's equal, which Bronte had to symbolize by literally making Jane his eyes and right hand?

That's laaaaaaaame. That's about thirty different flavors of lame, and not even the most aggregious example in the book. I still wrote a grad A analytical paper on the novel. I understood it. I just really, really hated it.

Looks like it turned you on to some seriously good books though.

I've heard a lot about this book, recently bought it, and will be reading it soon. Looking forward to it. Can anyone tell me how it compares to Wuthering Heights? I love that one to death.

I loved Jane Eyre, I've read the novel and used to have it on audio-cassettes, listened to it quite a few times walking to work. I've of course much enjoyed Emily's Wuthering Heights and I also highly recommend the novels of Anne Bronte, Agnes Grey and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. From the same period, George Eliot's Middlemarch is a definite must-read. Then I suggest Thomas Hardy's Far From the Madding Crowd and Return of the Native etc. Really, the list is endless.

I loved Jane Eyre. It's my favorite book as of yet. I read Wuthering Heights first, but personally I think the former is way better. Wuthering Heights was good because it had a lot of crazy drama, but I don't think there was a real point to it. I saw the Jane Eyre movie about a week ago. Wasn't too disappointed with it. The actors were decent enough, and at times I cried, sappy as I am. I'm waiting for the Wuthering Heights movie at the library.

Oops, this thread has been on her a long time. I first wrote something, and then realized I've already responded!

Okay, just read Jane Eyre, and I'm more inclined to agree with Olly - sorry ladies. Thought it was pretty damn good at parts, especially the beginning in the school and the early encounters between Rochester and Jane, but not the second half.

The second half got weird, religious and sappy. Weird cause it turned out Rochester has a freaken lunatic wife hiding in his closet, and weird because for some reason that was never really elucidated, Jane just freaken abandons him at the wedding bit. Her dream guy who is ultra rich? Just up and walks into the blue? WTF. She sort of pleaded "moral principals" having to do with him already having a wife or something, but come on. Didn't buy that at all, I was literally screaming at the book, "Get back there Jane, crazy bitch! So what, they can spike the quazimoto wife's gruel with some fucking arsenic." But then again, maybe that's a sign of a gripping story? Screaming at the book?

And then, hahahhahahahahahhahahhahaha, okay. Total bullshit was her wandering across the random countryside and running into her cousins. When she was begging for bread and shit right before that, I was actually like, "Yeah, you deserve this bitch. Abandons poor Rochester. He couldn't help the fact he has a psycho spouse in his closet who haunts the place at night. Just abandons him." And then way later, when I found out Rochester's eyes were knocked out . . . grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. I wanted to punch Jane out. I'm surprised Rocky took her back. At least his sight sort of came back. The last hundred pages of the book I just skimmed.

Also, I felt gipped that there wasn't a Rocky vs. Jane sex scene. Are there any existing classic lit sex scenes? Probably wouldn't be very hot with all the victorian words, but then again, it could be.

I think Wuthering Heights is better, but I loved Jane Eyre's portrayal of a "go-getter" woman who defied norms - very brave. When I found out Charlotte Bronte actually went to a school like that, I was seriously irked out. Freaken nazi ass headmaster. Kids should have mutineed and gone children of the corn on that dictastor.

I live Jane Eyre, it is one of my favourite classics. The descriptive parts are compelling and there is so much suppressed emotion. If you have ever visited Haworth you can quite imagine that living there might have been one of the reasons that the Brontes wrote the way they did. It is on the outskirts of Keighley now but then it must have been way out on the moors and the Parsonage is right in the middle of the graveyard! The TB might have also helped.

I first read the book 35 years ago and have often returned to it since, actually not as often as I have re-read Arthur Ransome though. Sadly one simply could not get away with calling ones heroines Cissy and Titty these days though.

I would recommend Rebecca as it is an excellent read but very dark. Lots of undertones which echo du Mauriers own life.

Not a fan of Jane Austen personally. I rather like Thomas Hardy though. Can't bear E M Forster, A Passage to India was desperate with the film on fast forward.

WOuld really recommend absolutely anything by Evelyn Waugh especially Decline and Fall. Also do read Lucky Jim by Kingsley Amis.