nik-jr-lit

"The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid."

[queerhamlet]

tiktokers who say classic lit is bad because its not relatable 1. thats not the fucking point 2. you've clearly never read twelfth night as a trans bisexual

[mist-the-wannabe-linguist]

you've clearly never read Frankenstein as a student

[feathery-dickmuffins-deactivate]

If you're fucked up enough a lot of classic lit suddenly becomes uncomfortably relatable tbh.

[hiddenlookingglass]

This is 100% true, but also: literature is a great way to engage with people you don't actually relate to, and practice feeling empathy for them anyway. I have never been in a battle, but I have cried over the Iliad multiple times because I was suddenly made very aware that every single war has people like Hector in it, who leave their families one day and just never come home to them. Please keep looking for things you find relatable in unexpected places - but not everything has to be relatable for it to be worthwhile.

[bertilakslady]

Not everything has to be about you to be worth reading

[iamnmbr3]

#Not everything has to be about you to be worth reading#Learn to empathize with people you have nothing in common with via @thewinkingbee

[kyraneko]

This is the other half of representation: it's not just about everybody seeing characters like themselves, it's also about everybody seeing characters entirely unlike them and finding the stories worthwhile anyway and gaining some useful understanding in the process.

[bethanydelleman]

People say they can't relate to Fanny Price in Mansfield Park and I thought it was fascinating to experience being an oppressed introvert.

Also engaging with media from other cultures is similar to reading classic literature. You find the everlasting truths of humanity and also things that are very unlike your culture and both are great.

[suburban-critic]

If Jane Bennet was the narrator of Pride and Prejudice, we'd have a new type of unreliable narrator that I can't personally think of any examples of in literature (though they are common in real life) where the person is too nice to describe immoral and/or foolish characters and their motives accurately.

[thatscarletflycatcher]

This is why I think an adaptation of Mansfield Park narrated by Fanny Price would be amazing.

[bethanydelleman]

The Narrator of Rebecca and Jane Eyre of Jane Eyre are so similar in some ways, but in one important thing, completely opposing.

Both come from poor backgrounds, they are women of the fringe of the gentry who must work to live, they believe themselves to be physically unattractive, they fall in love with a much older man, they come to a house haunted by that man's previous wife, and they have a rich imagination (Jane's paintings, The Narrator's flights of fancy). They are also both desperate to be loved.

But then the similarities stop. When Jane Eyre learns that Rochester has a living wife, she chooses morality and flees. She values her immortal soul over earthly love. The Narrator learns that her husband murdered his previous wife and love is all that matters to her. He never loved Rebecca, he loves her. She is willing to risk anything and everything to help him cover that crime. His confession brings her closer instead of tearing them apart.

"I care for myself. The more solitary, the more friendless, the more unsustained I am, the more I will respect myself. I will keep the law given by God; sanctioned by man. I will hold to the principles received by me when I was sane, and not mad—as I am now. Laws and principles are not for the times when there is no temptation: they are for such moments as this, when body and soul rise in mutiny against their rigour; stringent are they; inviolate they shall be. If at my individual convenience I might break them, what would be their worth? They have a worth—so I have always believed; and if I cannot believe it now, it is because I am insane—quite insane: with my veins running fire, and my heart beating faster than I can count its throbs. Preconceived opinions, foregone determinations, are all I have at this hour to stand by: there I plant my foot.” -Jane Eyre

Vs.

Our happiness had not come too late. I was not young anymore. I was not shy. I was not afraid. I would fight for Maxim. I would lie and perjure and swear, I would blaspheme and pray. Rebecca had not won. Rebecca had lost. -Rebecca

It's such a different worldview, and I also didn't feel like Maxim deserved such unlimited devotion given how he had treated her (I mean does Rochester either?), but as a Romantic love story I was down. If it was a real life choice, I have to run for the moors with Jane.

[tell-them-the-north-remembers]

I feel like the major difference between their respective reactions have to do with what has happened up to that point and the fact that Rebecca haunts the narrative in a way that Rochester's wife doesn't and never could.

Jane knows the woman in the attic before it is revealed who she really is, she is alive, she actively tries to sabotage the wedding when she gets into Jane's room to tear up the veil and yet her existence, while a problem for Jane from a moral and legal standpoint, is not something that makes anyone think any less of her, she simply didn't know about him being married. Mr. Rochester's wife is alive in flesh and blood and yet Jane does not have to compete with her for anyone's affection. The decisions she makes have to do with her morals, not her feelings.

But in Rebecca it is different. Rebecca is dead, has been dead for a long time but she haunts the narrative. The Narrator has to compete with a dead woman for the affection of her husband and respect from practically everyone around her, even people who are supposed to be serving her. And we see how truly tired of it she is. She is living in Rebecca's house, giving orders to Rebecca's servants, she is married to Rebecca's husband. It is maddening. We see her trying to do everything in her power to be loved, to be taken seriously but the person tasked to help her, Mrs. Danvers, further sabotages her instead of helping her. And we see first-hand how it puts her in an awful mental state. She is literally this close to taking her own life in the aftermath of the dress incident, she is quite literally on the edge during her confrontation with Mrs. Danvers. And it is all because of Rebecca, a woman who is dead and gone but she can never quite measure up to. She sees the supposed love for Rebecca from people around her and especially her husband as the one hurdle standing in the way of her happiness. She is put in an impossible position from day one and there is nothing she can do about it, nothing that actually matters as long as Rebecca keeps living in the hearts and memories of everyone else.

We also have to keep in mind that even after months of marriage there is still this coldness, this distance between her husband and her that she simply can't get rid of. Again, she thinks that Rebecca is the reason for it (and she is right, though in a different way than she initially thought). He doesn't tell her everything, it makes her feel like he is treating her like a child (something that doesn't happen to Jane quite in the same way, at least after a certain point despite both couples sharing similar age gaps)

But in that moment, when Maxim confesses that he never loved Rebecca and she was in fact not an angel that the Narrator can never live up to it changes her entire worldview. Even more so than when he confesses he is the one that killed her. Because Rebecca is dead, how she died doesn't change anything for the Narrator. But knowing Maxim hated her, knowing that she is the woman he truly loves makes everything else inconsequential to her. It is also the first time we see Maxim truly level with her, he is honest, he is not looking down on her (and she doesn't think he is looking down on her), he is not cold to her. He is making the sincerest confession someone can make. He looks into her eyes and tells her that he has taken a life. And it leads into a moment where for the first time ever in the book the two are throughly caught up in their love and passion for each other. After he literally makes a murder confession. But the Narrator is way past reason, she is at a point where the only thing she cares about is being loved, she wins, Rebecca loses.

So these two women's backgrounds may be very similar but the things they go through in their respective new homes are fundamentally different. And those experiences make the difference in the choice they make once the twist is revealed.

[warrioreowynofrohan]

I feel like both the original post and the reblog are right in their own ways. Yes, the circumstances are different, but Jane and the narrator of Rebecca are both fundamentally different people in ways that drive their reactions.

Jane has a foundation, she has a sense of self and of self-respect. The narrator of Rebecca feels like she hasn’t put down roots yet, hasn’t figured out her identity; she first falls in love with Maxim de Winter because the identity she feels when she’s with him (exciting, sophisticated) is so much better than the identity she has felt anywhere else, or can imagine feeling anywhere else (awkward, uncultivated, sidelined, gauche, childish). He is giving her an identity. Jane falls in love with Rochester because Rochester recognizes the part of identity that she already has that no one else has recognized before – the wild gothic imagination of her paintings, the fire, the stubbornness, the wit, the self-assertion, that she shows to no one else because no one else understands them. He recognizes that those elements, and Jane the self-controlled self-disciplined quiet unassuming governness, are both integral and authentic parts of the same whole person.

And because Jane has her identity already and know it, when the person Rochester asks her to be – the person she would become if she agreed to be his mistress – conflicts with that identity in ways that she (but not he) realizes, she tears her heart out and leaves. The narrator of Rebecca couldn’t even think of doing that because she hasn’t built a sense of her own identity apart from Maxim.

Would Jane even fall in love with a man who made her feel the way the narrator of Rebecca feels when she’s with Maxim in Monte Carlo? I don’t think so. The narrator never feels like an equal to Maxim; Jane falls for Rochester because she recognizes that, class and wealth and birth and age aside, they are equals and fellows in spirit. The absolute key to understanding Jane Eyre, in my opinion , is that while all the trappings of power – money, status, even physical strength – are on Rochester’s side, all the actual power is on Jane’s, because she knows him and she knows herself, she knows how to rule both him and herself, and he wants to be ruled by her.

[nerdyrevelries]

Jane Austen heroines exist on a sliding scale of "You are always right, and no one ever listens to you" (Fanny Price) to "You are never right, and everyone always listens to you" (Emma Woodhouse.)

[wonderstruck]

If you see this you’re legally obligated to reblog and tag with the book you’re currently reading

[emeraldspiral]

So another interesting thing about Jane Eyre is it's take on relationship inequality.

Like, Jane is 18 at the beginning of the story and Rochester is said to be something like 35-38. And it's not casually brushed aside like that was normal back in the day. It wasn't. Concerns about the age gap are raised within the text. But the story emphasizes that Jane feels comfortable accepting Rochester's proposal, despite the age difference, the class difference, and him being her boss, because Jane feels that Rochester regards her as an equal. When they converse, Jane doesn't feel any tension, like she has to impress him or try to read his mind and say whatever he wants to hear. She feels that he respects her and values her thoughts and isn't compelled to use his power against her if she says something to displease him. Around the midpoint of the story, Jane believes that Rochester is going to marry another woman, and resolves to leave because she's heartbroken, believing that because she is poor and plain Rochester can't possibly be as hurt by their parting as she is, and he'll forget her and move on long before she does. But it turns out to be the opposite. After finding out about Bertha, Rochester begs Jane to stay and insists he'll be miserable forever without her, while Jane, still thinking she's too poor and plain to ever attract someone like him again, resists all temptation and leaves him. And she does this specifically because she feels that if she were to compromise her morals and self-respect to be Mr. Rochester's mistress, then he would lose respect for her and the relationship would fall apart. It was only by maintaining her integrity that the relationship could stay in-tact when the reconciled at the end.

St. John Rivers on the other hand, I don't think is given a definite age, but I think he's intended to be a much younger man, probably in his early 20s. He is poor and without relations aside from his sisters or any other connections, just as Jane. Jane finds out they're actually cousins at the same time she learns she's come into a vast fortune that was willed to her rather than the Rivers, but decides to share her fortune equally with them. So she arguably had more social capital, even though she made an effort to put St. John on equal footing with her, because the money was hers by right and she could've presumably cut him off at any time, just as easily as Rochester could've terminated Jane from her job.

And yet, Jane's relationship with St. John is vastly more unequal than her relationship with Rochester. Even though Jane practically worshiped Rochester but only cares for St. John as a brother and is acutely aware of his faults, she still finds herself desperately craving his approval in a way she never did with Rochester. And St. John is willing to exploit that intentionally. He asks her to do things she doesn't want to and make sacrifices for him just because he knows she'll do anything to please him, and that's why he thinks she's the perfect wife for him. Where Rochester tries to explain himself and persuade Jane not to leave him by addressing her concerns, St. John basically tries to command Jane to marry him and refuses to accept her "no" as final. He withholds affection from Jane as a tactic to get her to compromise in order to reconcile with him when he's the one who should be apologizing to her and considering her needs and not just his own. Jane knows that she can't ever be happy with him because he doesn't respect her and his lack of respect only makes her want to seek his approval, which he is all too happy to exploit for his own benefit.

But Jane ultimately stays firm and rejects St. John's proposal of a loveless marriage, just as she rejected Rochester's proposal of an unlawful marriage, because both situations were doomed to fail if she didn't put her own self-respect first.

So this novel from 1847 was really saying that power dynamics aren't pure black and white. Age and class and wealth and status can be a factor in making a relationship unequal, but you can also be equal on pretty much all social axis and still have inequality in a relationship. What's really important is that there's mutual respect.

[nik-jr-lit]

"Besides, I've done enough bad things in my life. I keep telling people I've repaid my debts, but I can't tell that same lie to you. I know I've caused a lot more pain than I've ever had to feel myself. A lot more by a long shot."

Die a Stranger, Steve Hamilton

[sonseulsoleil]

here, have some bad Emma memes I made

[gauchogf]

jane austen writing a man who said "there is no reason why you should not be important where you are known" to a woman is why my standards are so high

[somethoughtseeds]

[constantvigilante]

Look, I actually like Edmund Bertram but it's kind of hilarious how wrong he is in this book. He thinks Maria just isn't a romantic person. He sees Mary Crawford's sketchy morals and wants to, like, save her basically? And "[Henry Crawford] has no faults but what a serious attachment would remove." Bro? Really??

[taciturn-nerd]

Seriously. It's like HOW? How is Edmund so bad at reading people???

[bethanydelleman]

Edmund Bertram 🤝 James Morland

Could you be any worse at reading people?

[triflesandparsnips]

Accidentally started rereading Northanger Abbey, and was sudden reminded all over again that Jane Austen is, in fact, fucking hilarious.

NA is her parody/satire of Gothic novels at the time, and she starts the book by choosing violence-- she describes the "tragedy" of the main character, Catherine Morland, a girl Determined to be a Heroine even though ALL ODDS are against her: she has a sane father who doesn't lock up his daughters, a healthy mother who didn't die in childbirth, no preternatural talent for music or drawing through which to reveal her Deepest Soul, and-- most shockingly of all-- absolutely zero love interests for whom she can wander the hills mourning their starcrossed fates until she wastes away from the sheer Sentimentality of it all.

But don't worry! She's got this FIGURED OUT. She KNOWS why she has not yet found her TRUE LOVE:

There was not one lord in the neighbourhood; no—not even a baronet. There was not one family among their acquaintance who had reared and supported a boy accidentally found at their door—not one young man whose origin was unknown. Her father had no ward, and the squire of the parish no children.

But when a young lady is to be a heroine, the perverseness of forty surrounding families cannot prevent her. Something must and will happen to throw a hero in her way.

(SPOILER: She is introduced to a mysterious young man who lives in an ABBEY, which everyone knows means he has a DEEPLY MYSTERIOUS SECRET PAST and is maybe a TRAGIC HERO or even a ROMANTIC MONSTER and either way this is IT this is Catherine's TIME TO SHINE she is going to get a good grade in DOOMED LOVE, a thing that is normal to want and--)

(...meanwhile Henry Tilney-- an ordinary guy who never expected "get cast as the Hero in some Grand Gothic Romance" to show up on his bingo card-- starts wondering when exactly he started finding Catherine's attempts to locate bloody daggers in his linen closet charming.)

[bethanydelleman]

you um... accidentally started reading a novel? How does this happen? nevermind, Northanger Abbey is just as good as you say!

The first chapter where the narrator mourns that Catherine's life hasn't been a montage of misery is delightful.

[bethanydelleman]

Life is full of extremely difficult choices:

Though sometimes you also have to do the laundry, which is THE HORRORS

[nik-jr-lit]

top 3 favorite books i read in 2023!

3. Mansfield Park by Jane Austen

timid, shy, insecure protagonist who does NOT try to get between her crush and the girl he's going for, has a wonderful relationship with her older brother, and ultimately just wants to be loved and accepted by those around her.

her return to her parents' home is realistically heartbreaking. it isn't that anyone is mean to Fanny - they ignore her.

the entire play fiasco is so juicy and fun to read!!

we get to witness the romantic interest go through his own fall and redemption arc & we as the audience have to sit back and just watch him grow and find himself rather than be alongside him, which is simultaneously frustrating yet a unique experience :)

i honestly thought that henry could have his own redemption arc & was surprised when he instead fell again...this time harder than before...the drama.......

2. Villette by Charlotte Brontë

sad, lonely, traumatized protagonist who is also such a badass. she will not tell us what tragedies she has had to face....so mysterious... i love her

she literally moves to a foreign country where she doesn't speak the language & doesn't have credentials to teach and she just....learns the language and becomes a teacher. she gains respect from the students and staff even if she is still a bit of an outcast

the nun subplot.....so fun and supernatural and the truth of who the nun is was just so damn funny

the graham reveal!!!

the way lucy is treated when she experiences depression, loneliness, and anxiety is so necessary and realistic for her character & all that she's gone through. the way others react to her sucks but is true to the time; it allows us to see how mental health (especially that of women) was treated. no, happiness is not a potato, graham!

the banter & dialogue is so funny and realistic - i love the black cat x delusional vain sunshine dynamic of lucy and ginerva. also the reading shakespeare scene, the 'call me your friend' scene, the whole getting shut up in the attic for hours to practice acting scene, the drug trip, the time she refused to give paul his gift in order to piss him off, and the showdown between lucy and madame beck are such memorable moments that make me laugh out loud or gasp or smile :)

i sobbed at the end. literally sobbed.

1. Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier

yet another protagonist who is insecure, paranoid, wants so badly to be loved and preferred and noticed, and has a massive inferiority complex.

identity, names, influence, public perception, and reputation are unbelievably important. maxim vs. max, who the "real" or "true" mrs. de winter is, the fact that everything in the house (from meals to portraits to how a desk is arranged) has rebecca's touch all over it, down to the fact that we don't even know the protagonist's first name!

omfg the mystery and suspense and drama and tension is unbelievable. every time she turns a corner, every time she answers the phone, every time she goes outside or visits a family member or talks to a servant or her sister-in-law or even brushes her hair there is so much tension and anxiety and self-consciousness

du maurier's writing is immaculate; i could read her describe paint drying and it would be beautiful

the evening of the costume party is so fucking amazing. the initial rejection and drama is so so good, but i love the rest of the evening even more i think. the way her soul seems to truly die while she keeps a smile on her face and greets her guests, so anxious to be as good of a host as rebecca.....i've never read anything like it. and the morning after...she's so sure that everything is over with maxim & there is no hope and i can feel her despair...

the confession...so incredible. i didn't see it coming and i had no idea what the narrator was going to do, how she'd react. "time and tide wait for no man"...

once the boat is found and there are people suspecting there may be foul play and rebecca's cousin is there and mrs. danvers is suspicious and the narrator faints and they're calling the doctor that rebecca went to - the tension and suspense was so good.

this book got me thinking about perception for days. we are told details that allegedly describe the same story, but many aspects don't line up & we are never given the full, perfect truth. what was rebecca really like? was she really as hedonistic and vain and self-serving as we're told? did maxim ever love her? did she ever love him? did she plan to run away with favell? did strangers think her lovely and wonderful simply because of her beauty or because she actually was a good person? even if she wasn't a good person, did she deserve what happened to her? was maxim justified in getting upset with her and/or putting up with her alleged behavior? who is rebbeca truly?

i'm obsessed.

[nik-jr-lit]

"A funeral shouldn't take place on a perfect day. I've had a strong feeling about that for most of my life. No, funerals should happen only when it's raining. Or when it's freezing cold. Or preferably both. It should hurt to be there, is what I mean. It should hurt right down to your bones when you're standing there on the edge of a grave site, as you're looking down at the box being lowered into the ground. You should have to hold your coat tight around your neck as you stand there taking the physical punishment for still being alive, for still being able to feel anything at all. While the man says ashes to ashes, dust to dust, the wooden top of the box should be splattered with rain and mud. Instead of tears drying fast on a perfect sunny day."

Steve Hamilton / Die a Stranger

[earththings]

[dubiousculturalartifact]

do you ever think about how darcy's perspective of the visit to rosings is just... a completely wild time. so like. he and his favourite cousin goes to visit with his weird aunt, and ends up running into this hot girl, that he's really kinda increasingly into? she's staying in the area for a while with her bestie. so like. he was expecting a boring social obligation visit & getting pressure into marrying his other, less favourite cousin. instead, he watches the hot girl hold her own with his aunt in conversation. she banters with him over the pianoforte and they have a Moment™. he keeps going over to the house she's staying at, just to awkwardly chill there, even though he doesn't like the other people there. has a whole conversation with her about how she wouldn't mind living far away from family, as long as she could afford the travel. he extends his visit so he can keep seeing her. when he runs into her on a walk, she makes a point of detailing the exact route she prefers to take while out walking, clearly encouraging him to join her, so he does. he has a really nice time on these walks, they spend a lot of time in companionable silence, but he manages to flirt a little by implying some stuff about the future & what their married life could be like, and they have some conversations about that. and sure, she has some family baggage, but none of them are around so it's a lot easier to ignore, y'know? so eventually he just can't take it anymore, and he shoots his shot. she clearly values honesty so he explains his scruples as well, but he thinks she's been dropping some favourable signals, so he's got a good chance, right?

and then not only she turns him down she ROASTS THE FUCK OUT OF HIM. she insults him. she insults his honour as a gentleman. she flips the fuck out about... oh yeah crap the sister thing, turns out his cousin blabbed, and then I'M SORRY YOU SAID WHAT? ABOUT WICKHAM? THIS IS ABOUT FUCKING WICKHAM, MY FUCKING NEMESIS? HE FUCKING SAID WHAT ABOUT.... OH MY GOD. oh fuck. I've fucked up so badly I need to reevaluate my entire life & risk sending a letter to an unmarried woman who hates my guts, just so i can explain shit. fuck.