jane eyre is a book i like a lot but also have intense feelings about bc i don’t interpret Rochester as a ‘sweet good guy hiding behind an intimidating shell’ and i dislike adaptations and retellings which try to soften him or make him out to be an aggrieved victim of society. the entire point of the novel imo is that Jane, in grasping her autonomy and personhood, decides to put her personal happiness and passion over expectations of ‘perfect moral womanhood’.
she rejects the virtuous, religious suitor who wants to devote their lives to missionary work and chooses Rochester, the man who treats her like an intellectual equal and who shares her dark sense of humor and fascination with wild things.
Rochester is not a good, upright guy. While he should be commended for not consigning his wife to an asylum where she’d be tortured and abused, he keeps her shut up in a dark attic cell and freely admits he married her primarily for her money and that he never tried to understand her as a person even before her mental illness.
The loss of his hand and the burn scars inflicted on him during the climax are absolutely supposed to carry moral judgment. He lied to and manipulated Jane, imprisoned his wife (who he hates), and just because he comes to see Jane as an equal, it doesn’t mean he suddenly believes men and women should share the same rights and privileges. He is still very much a man of his time and culture. But the point is that Jane’s life is so narrow and so limited that the only real way for her to experience some joy and freedom is to embrace Rochester, even if he’s a bastard. He loves her and she loves him.
Being with him will probably not make her a better person, but it will bring her pleasure, and it will be her choice, not something coerced or demanded of her. It complicates the ending of the book. Rochester’s a beast. But Jane is no angel either, and only by accepting this does she find peace with herself.
amandla
pixelskylines
2087
turnnoffyourmind
gracieabrams
yousharknotpass
tangentwithtanner
