Just Read: Jane Eyre, A Newly Appreciated Classic

I recently undertook the challenge on Goodreads to read Jane Eyre and watch the latest movie adaptation of the novel. This represented, for me, the closing of a circular saga involving Charlotte Bronte. But I will tell you right now, this story has a happy ending.

I first read Jane Eyre in sixth grade, oddly enough, with my father. (We read books together before bed until I was midway through high school. To this day we generally read the same books and discuss them. This is something I highly value in my relationship with my dad.) I have since come to the belief that I was not ready for this book at this time. At twelve I just don't think that I had the emotional or psychological maturity to appreciate the depth of the book. Also, as an adolescent, I was consumed with ideas of romantic love and perfect, dreamy, fairytale couplings. Needless to say, I was horrified that both the heroes of Jane Eyre were described as unattractive. Who wanted to read a love story about boring, ugly people? So after doggedly pursuing the novel and suffering through it for weeks on end, I put it away in favor of more pat romance novels. And didn't get it out again for about fourteen years.

My long separation from Charlotte Bronte came to a close last year when monster remakes became extremely popular. Though I couldn't quite bring myself to pick up the original Jane Eyre, I did pick up a copy of Jane Slayre, a monster remake in which Jane is a vampire hunter. It was fantastic, and to anyone who enjoys retellings of classic stories I recommend that you pick this book up immediately. After reading this remake I decided that it was enough for me. I didn't need the original! I had found something better. Something I would definitely read again.

Then I was challenged. Goodreads put on a challenge to read the book and watch the movie, and I just couldn't resist. The fact that this coincided with my class in Victorian literature didn't hurt either. So I determined to re-read Jane Eyre  and give it a fair shake. In doing this, all my opinions about the book were changed. I think, after years of dating men for their personalities rather than their looks, I was finally able to appreciate why Jane loved Rochester regardless of his deformities. But more importantly, having gotten a greater education, I was able to locate and appreciate the layers of social commentary embedded in the story. Charlotte Bronte's characterization paints a picture of both conventional and progressive Victorian women. And the brilliant thing is that her argument for female independence is not narrow or one-sided.

Cover of Agnes Grey

Of course the conventionally vapid Victorian female is presented in the character of Georgiana Reed.  She is shallow and useless, and chubby, which is evidence of her heedlessly decadent lifestyle. Bronte's disdain for this type of woman is apparent, but she presents the conventional woman in a more forgiving light when she introduces the characters of Diana and Mary Rivers. They are intelligent, loving, warm women who are confined to the little meaningless chores of running a household and eventually make smart, typical (albeit loving) matches with conventional men. Jane has a lot of affection and respect for them, but they are not the independent, hardworking heroine that she is. Jane represents the paragon of the progressive Victorian woman: she makes her own living, and is determined not to be beholden to either relatives or lovers. She insists on being respected for her intellect and personality, convincing most everyone she meets of her goodness, not through her looks (which are described repeatedly as "plain" and "not at all handsome") but through her discourse. It is fitting that she becomes a teacher, because it allows her the freedom to enrich her mind in a way that women were not typically afforded. And even when faced with separation from the man she loves, she will not reduce herself to live with him, and gives him up so that she can live with who she is. The fact that she goes her own way and ends up happy and prosperous would have and should still serve as a fable for women, inspiring them to stay true to themselves and take pride in their independence, rather than lamenting their lack of fortune or handsome mate. It seems to me that reading Jane Eyre alongside Anne Bronte's Agnes Grey would be a great way to discuss gender roles in Victorian society, as Agnes ends up the governess for a wealthy estate as well, and does not fare nearly as well with her pupils as Jane does with Adéle. So despite the amount of criticism for her contemporary society, it seems that Charlotte still maintained a little bit of idealism. After all, Jane Eyre got her happy ending--Rochester even received some of his sight back, almost like in a fairytale.

The one thing that still baffles me about the story is why Bronte chose to end the book with St. John Rivers. The last passage of the whole novel entails an update about St. John and the peace he would feel upon his deathbed. Given his relatively minor role and the somewhat unpleasant terms that he and Jane left each other on, it seems odd to me that he would be the face we see last in the novel. The whole last chapter I was expecting a "happily ever after" ending, only to be met with, " 'Amen, even so come, Lord Jesus'". This may have been intended to simply be a less conventional ending, an allusion to Jane and Rochester living out their days happily, or any manner of things. It stumped me. Nevertheless, on completing the book I felt, if not rapturous, satisfied, as if I had just eaten a simple but hearty meal. For me, Jane Eyre is like literary pot roast.

Fourteen years ago I would not have recommended this book to anyone. I maintained this view up until about a month ago, when I was goaded in to reading it for the Goodreads challenge. But now, I would recommend it to anyone with an interest in Victorian society, gothic romance, or simply a good story. But I would add this caveat: this book is not for the meek, or shallow. It is hearty, full of layers. and ripe for interpretation. So I would suggest reading it in a group so as to foster a more well-rounded and scholarly approach to a book that can be difficult to digest.

If you are interested, I gave it  4 out of 5 stars on Goodreads. Like I said, I wasn't in raptures, but I did enjoy it. Go read!