Once upon a time there was a fictional girl named Jane. To many others she would have been deemed inhumane, because she was not really insane but rather the appearance of a societal stain. You see she was severely outspoken and a woman of her heart, a trait that her society would call a mistake. She had will power and would act upon her will.
So with that brief identification let me ask you this question, if you could travel back in time, when would you go back to? I have to say that if a woman named Jane Eyre, living our modern world, was given that question and said that she would go to the Victorian Era, and we were somehow able to document her in that time period our results would indeed be Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre.
Now I understand that some of you may be lost or puzzled at this point with my first paragraph so please allow me to ever so clearly explain. I believe that Bronte’s ambition in writing Jane Eyre was to convey that women of that time period had a voice, that they were not only made to posses talents such as singing, painting and the ability to play music. They did not only posses the ability to be a great arm candy of wealthy suitors or breeders to carry on the family lineage in servitude to their husbands. And they most certainly were not be stereotyped, characterized and placed into the box of social position because of the family they were born into or the wealth they achieved in life. No, she tried to illustrate in Jane Eyre that women can be the equals of men.
She attempted to convey that women had a mind that was both sensible and fully capable of anything that a man may be asked to undertake. In a time that a Queen was the ruler of England and not a man, a Queen that went on to explore new worlds and enlarge the British Empire instead of acting as a consort to her husband and her country. In England progressive modernization, I would say that Bronte portrayed Jane as the modern women; a woman that fulfilled her role as a governess in its simplest form but also went above and beyond, a woman that explored her thoughts and feelings and exerted them in the correct context.
Jane Eyre is the modern woman; not only for the mid 1800’s but also for 2010. If we were to teleport a random woman off the streets into Jane time ( let’s assume that this woman happens to be familiar with all the customs and roles of Jane’s time), how do you think she would behave? I believe that she would be just as Jane was, of passion and spirit and vigor, not complacent to only live without full expression. To have a voice and say that I am a person too! I have feelings and emotions! I have intelligence and sensibility! I am not cattle! I am not a play thing that you can order as you please, decide to rape me with no qualms and treat me inferiorly simply because I was born with less wealth than others! I am a woman and I am your equal! Bronte attempted to convey all of this without having to uses some of the words I used.
One of the largest examples is with Jane’s relationship to Mr. Rochester and St. John. In both relationships she was dependant on these men for her lively hood until the later part of her relationship with each when she inherited her fortune. The strong rift lays with her gender role being enforced by St. John, even when she was no longer dependant of him, however in order to please St. John she had to be compliant to him, she had to immediately drop German and learn Hindustani with him. She could not have much leisure over her mind and freewill with him. With Mr. Rochester, she was a governess in his house, however within employee lines to an extent she was free, happy and completely herself. Not held back because she had a uterus and he did not. In the end Jane chose Mr. Rochester and as far as we know lived contented for at least ten years.
This is not an in-depth view of this semi-triangular relationship however does begin to paint of picture of Bronte’s anti-gender control outlook.
“She attempted to convey that women had a mind that was both sensible and fully capable of anything that a man may be asked to undertake.”
ReplyDeleteI like your choice of wording for this. A common misconception in both reading and writing is that there’s a huge implication under “women being equal to men” without first qualifying what you mean. There tends to be an underlying work of semantics when a reader sees “equal to men” without qualifying it as an ideal, and not physical attributes. There’s a notion that, without clarifying, women are as competent as men physically. Which is false, and I hope no one would argue with that, as it would be irrational. Having those “exceptions” does not equal a “norm,” and on average men are far superior in strength.
I appreciated that you [maybe unintentionally?] steered us away from any sort of absurd trail of thought that might stem from that.
---------
But, as a side note: “Now I understand that some of you may be lost or puzzled at this point with my first paragraph so please allow me to ever so clearly explain.” Odd way to go about having confidence in your reader. You cannot fairly explain tidbit’s the way you have and then treat your audience [if not only the pointedly “few”] as an incompetent. Especially when you use this language in the following, but then choose to not follow up on your statement with solid example or quotes: “…I would say that Bronte portrayed Jane as the modern women; a woman that fulfilled her role as a governess in its simplest form but also went above and beyond, a woman that explored her thoughts and feelings and exerted them in the correct context.” Particular attention being paid to the “exerted” and what not. You don’t back up any of your claims with any examples after you’ve just insulted the reader.
I really like the way you organized this blog, it was very interesting. I love the sort of imagery when you said “I have to say that if a woman named Jane Eyre, living our modern world, was given that question and said that she would go to the Victorian Era, and we were somehow able to document her in that time period our results would indeed be Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre.” I believe that Charlotte Bronte made the character Jane Eyre as a form of expressing herself, and what she as well saw in the lives of women, and their wishes to do what Jane Eyre does. I found Jane Eyre to be a very inspirational character, especially in her time. I believe if there really was a woman like Jane Eyre in the old days, and she documented her life and women followed it; the suppression of women would have ended a little faster. Alternatives were not possible for a woman back in the old days. In the old days, a women’s job strictly was to be raising their children and being a loving at-home-wife. Women had to overcome many obstacles to get to where they are today, imagine what else they can accomplish. Women are just growing stronger as time goes by, and are leaving men behind.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I commend Jane for not falling for St. John. For being in love with her, he went through great lengths to control her mind by calling her sinful and attempting to have her as an intellectual goon. He couldn't accept that she had a mind of her own and had her own needs.
ReplyDeleteI can kind of see the comparison now between Rochester and St. John. Obviously Mr. Rochester was trying to control her economically and sexually while St. John only wanted to make her a submissive intellectual being, not so much a colleague but his disciple or someone allied to him not only in her work but her day to day existence. Of course he wouldn't want a fellow male evangelist, he wanted someone that was an extension of himself. This is exactly how women married to academics were expected to be, an extension of the man's mind, a helpmate for his theories, not possessing her own opinion but constantly sacrificing herself for his work and his ideas.
Yes, Jane would have none of this-- she still wanted her mind- if not her body and physical and/or economic independence then at least the independence of her mind. Her fortune would not have helped her in the jungle; she would have been a prisoner to his beliefs and ambitions.