While reading Gilbert and Gubar I found their points interesting and believable. I thought their discussion of Jane and Rochester's first meeting stressed an important point. They do have a semi-typical fairytale first encounter, but still the first time we see Rochester it is when he has fallen and needs to lean on Jane. She supports and rescues him on that first night, immediatly changing their relationship by reversing the accepted gender roles. Rochester, not Jane, is playing the part of 'damsel in distress' so to speak. This inicdent does set up a sort of underlying power struggle that exists between Jane and Rochester. This struggle is seen throught their conversations, Jane's reaction to Rochester's behavior once they are engaged, and her decision to leave after discovering Bertha's existance.
I also thought Gilbert and Gubar's take on the gypsy scene was interesting. I had not previously seen Rochester's inability to fool Jane as an indication of equality between them. I was a little too caught up in the romantic aspects of the situation at the time, but it is possible that the fact that he could not act the part of a gypsy with her is some indication of their intellectual equality.
And of course the descriptions of the symbolism in Jane's dreams, and the connection between Jane's desires and Bertha's actions are not only plausible, but quite hard to disagree with.
One of the points I found to resonate in Gilbert and Gubar was the idea that Bertha Mason and Jane Eyre are essentially the same character, “but on a figurative and psychological level it seems suspiciously clear that the specter of Bertha is still another…avatar of Jane” (p. 359).
Bertha could be viewed as the epitome of Jane’s feelings. Jane fears her marriage to Mr. Rochester, however, never expresses it. Whereas Bertha does, “disliking the ‘vapoury veil’ of Jane Rochester, Jane Eyre secretly wants to tear the garments up. Bertha does it for her” (p. 359). Bertha has the ability to express Jane’s inner feelings that she would never reveal, "Jane's feelings of 'hunger, rebellion, and rage' on the battlements, for instance, were accompanied by Bertha's 'low, slow ha! ha!' and 'eccentric murmurs..." (p. 360).
Bertha’s purpose in the story is not to act as a way to attain insight into the troubled, feminine mind, nor is it to make a point in relation to the treatment of women or the mentally unstable; but rather to act as an instrument for Jane's sufferings.
Gilbert and Gubar, I believed, were absolutely correct in their analysis of Jane and Bertha.
I thought this criticism was pretty cool. I knew Jane Eyre was full of symbolism, but this critism made me realize just how symbollically deep a novel could go.
The symbolism also made me rethink my opinion of Victorian novels. In Victorian novels, it always seems like there is a pompous description of everything without more meaning to it. I usually get bored by the piling up of words, and though we're supposed to "breathe" every time we see a comma, my mind is still breathless at the end of every sentence. Reading a Victorian novel is like...running a marathon or something.
I thought the "animal" symbolism of Jane (and/or Bertha) revealed by Gilbert & Gubar was particularly raw for a Victorian novel. It's so different from what I would expect, and it reveals so much about who Jane Eyre is. Her desire to be equal with Rochester is not just a sign of her intellect. It is animalistic drive for dominance. This also sheds light on her relationship with Rochester. Her "love" for him isn't pure and simple. She loves him for what he brings out in her. She loves him for a greater love of self. This is a lot more realistic than the utter devotion many Victorian writers would imagine of their female characters. Somehow Bronte managed to portray something very real with incredibly gothic and fantastical symbolism.
I found many of Gilbert and Gubar’s analyses to be very persuasive and unique. I agree with almost everything they mention, though I never would have thought of any of it on my own. I particularly enjoyed reading their comparison between Jane and Bertha Mason; I almost want to go back, read the book again, and look to see if Bertha is really portrayed as Jane’s “truest and darkest double.” It’s fascinating that every time Jane feels a negative emotion, Bertha appears in some manner, and I think that Gilbert and Gubar’s observations about Bertha representing Jane’s bad side are irrefutable.
However, some of the things they mention are a bit of a stretch; I’m with them until page 361. They say, “Bertha does (....) provide the governess with an example of how not to act, teaching her a lesson more salutary than any Miss Temple ever taught.” I think that statement is ridiculous; I have a lot of trouble believing that when Charlotte Bronte was planning the character of Bertha, she intended for her to teach Jane a lesson in behavior. Later on page 361, they relate Mr. Rochester’s strange nicknames for Jane like “malicious elf” to Bertha; while I agree they represent the supernatural, I don’t think they relate to his wife.
After that, though, they present many more convincing observations. I like the connection between Jane in the red room and Bertha in the attic, and I agree that Bertha’s plunge from Thornfield may be a metaphor for Jane’s other troubles disappearing. I also appreciate their description of how Jane really isn’t a “disciplined and subdued” character and that Bertha represents her repressed emotions.
First off, I would like to comment on the endless blather that encompassed this article. Gilbert and Gubar rambled on and on about meaningless subtext and stretched the plot into utter senselessness. I must, however, admit that certain valid points were made such as the equality of Rochester and Jane in affiliation with "the gypsy scene" and "Jane's whole life-pilgrimage." But then there were moments such as the entire beginning bit that considered every possible angle on the symbolic theme of fairy tales in the novel. I understand the points that were made, but the reason for their references to "ice" and a "middle-aged version of Cinderella's prince" is unfathomable.
Yes, it is true that the themes match up in certain cases, but I simply cannot believe that the Byronic, brooding, burdened Mr. Rochester in any way resembles the white knight of Cinderella's dream. The quintessential fairytale prince has no flaws, is generally contented and is completely focused on the one who he loves. Cinderella's prince, for example, spent days, maybe even weeks, searching for the perfect fit in the glass shoe. Mr. Rochester has a wife, pretends to be with Blanche as a cover, even though he truly loves Jane.
Gilbert and Gubar make many interesting points in their discussion and critical analysis of Jane Eyre. I found their analysis of societal outrage following the novel's release intriguing. People of the time were outraged by Jane Eyre's feminist themes, proving the need for a novel like this in order to shock society content with its sexist societal norms. Literary critics of the time were not bothered so much by Rochester as a Bryonic hero, despite the illicit relationships of his past and possibly a child born out of wedlock. They were bothered by the fact Jane herself seemed to be a Bryonic hero. Her character is exceedingly passionate and at times dark. She finds herself better than the people around her, and she isolates herself from society. A woman like this represented a threat to the ideals of civilized society at the time.
I agree with the analysis of the authors claiming that Bertha represented the extremes of Jane's personality. In my opinion, I believe Bertha is the victim of her situation. Despite the tone of the novel, pointing to her as a mad-woman not deserving of sympathy, I believe that her implantation in English society forced her into a state of cultural shock. Both women are very passionate and deal with high and low emotional extremes, making this an important binary in the novel.
In addition, I agree with the authors that the relationship between Rochester and Jane mirrors that of the general struggle between men and women. Even though, at times, Jane and Rochester seem each others equals intellectually and at the beginning of their interaction, he depends on her for physical aid after spraining his ankle, Rochester still enjoys the societal norms that place him inherently above Jane. Before they marry, Jane must rise to his economic status, which she does thanks to her inheritance from her uncle John Eyre, supporting the strong existence of feminist themes in the novel.
The Gilbert and Gubar article opened my mind up to a totally different view of Bertha in Jane Eyre in a totally valid and justified manner. Most readers consider Bertha to simply be the crazy wife of Rochester and a small group of people notice her possibly symbolic meaning. However, Gilbert and Gubar clearly identify Bertha’s purpose in a manner that very few people probably see. The two authors are able to prove that Bertha is the physical representation of Jane’s true emotions. While many people believe that Bertha is detrimental to Jane’s happiness, it turns out that Bertha takes the actions that Jane wishes she could take herself. I found this to be particularly interesting. I also think that Gilbert and Gubar prove their point very well. First, we see that Jane dislikes the “vapoury veil” and that she secretly wants to tear it up. Lo and behold, one night Bertha enters Jane’s room and takes that very action for her. Then we learn that Jane wants to put off the inexorable “bridal day.” It is the revealing of Bertha that does just what Jane wants. Gilbert and Gubar are able to take these examples and prove that Bertha is the physical representation of Jane’s conscious, which I believe is a very interesting and valid point as well as something I had not thought of when reading the book.
However, I do not agree with a different point that Gilbert and Gubar make in the criticism regarding the equality between Jane and Rochester. I do not believe that Rochester tries to make himself seem like Jane’s equal. In fact, I believe that during most of the novel, Rochester’s arrogant attitude give off the appearance that he thinks he is superior to Jane. One example that Gilbert and Gubar uses is when Rochester commands, “resume your seat, and answer my questions.” This helps to demonstrate Rochester’s belief of superiority because he believes he can command Jane whenever he wants. Even though Rochester compliments the pictures, it does not take away from his superiority complex, because he can still feel superior when saying nice things. Overall, I think that Rochester demonstrates his superiority more often than he compliments Jane or makes them seem equal, which is why I disagree with Gilbert and Gubar on this point.
Like many others, the point that stuck with me the most about their analysis was the idea that Bertha is the manifestation of Jane's inner wants and feelings. It was a point that I had definitely thought about before, because the two seemed to complete each other and balance one another, but I had not thought of it to that extent. Their examples, especially the one about ripping Jane's veil, were spot on. Bertha, because she has been dubbed "crazy" has the freedom that Jane lacks. She can do things like rip up the veil, because she is simply "crazy". If Jane was to do that, her actions would obviously be questioned. Bertha represents the passion that Jane has been quieting since her childhood days.
Although I found Gilbert and Gubar's take on the gypsy scene to be interesting, I thought it was a bit of a stretch. I do not believe that the fact that Jane saw through Rochester's disguise is any implication of their equality.
It seems like most people in our class really enjoyed the article. I really liked it, and believe that the symbolism is great, though I definitely don't think that Bronte intended all of it. Especially since when she did mean to draw parallels, she made it excruciatingly obvious. For example, she not so subtly stated that dreams with children were symbolic of death, and she foreshadowed events, such as the ruin of Thornfield and Rochester's loss of a hand and an eye.
The part that I really focused on was not the parallel between Bertha and Jane but rather the symbolism of equality between Rochester and Jane. When I read the book, I definitely felt as if Jane was his equal. Especially right before their planned wedding, I found it really annoying that she refused to take any of his clothes or jewels. I didn't think she was marrying him for his wealth...but if you're offered it, why say no? But now I realize that it reinforced her as his equal. She would become his financial equal through marriage and the receiving of expensive clothes etc., but she doesn't want to, because she is already his equal through her passion and "unseduceable independence"(353) which attracts him to her in the first place.
One other thing I found annoying was the statement that Adele is definitely Rochester's daughter. Alicia and I talked about this in class the other day. Gilbert and Gubar wrote, "His possession of the hidden details of sexuality, however--his knowledge, that is, of the secret of sex, symbolized both by his doll-like daughter Adele[...]"(355). This bothered me, because even though I always felt like there was more to the story with Celine and Adele, I never saw concrete evidence that she was his daughter. Did anyone get that impression when they read the book? Maybe I missed it.
Apparently like a lot of other people in this class, I found Gilbert and Gubar's comments on symbolism the most interesting. We had previously talked about the correlation between Jane and Bertha in class, but I didn't realize how closely related their characters truly were. Although some parts of this article seemed like a bit of a stretch, the idea that Bertha represented Jane's passionate side made complete sense. I didn't realize how meaningful Bertha's attacks were. I remember wondering why Jane didn't do anything after Rochester dressed up as a gypsy: after all, it wasn't as if she was afraid of him. Then, moments later, Bertha attacked her brother. I hadn't put these instances together, but in light of the article they make perfect sense.
One thing that bothered me, however, was the idea that Jane's passionate side died with Bertha. I understand it is a part of her maturing and somehow symbolizes her equality with Rochester. However, I liked Jane's spunk, as much as she repressed it most of the novel, it was still there. Does this mean that Jane is now as passionate as St. John? And it confused me how this related to their equality, for Rochester is as passionate as they come.
This criticism put my in-class essay to shame. It spoke of Jane’s role as a Byronic hero and her attraction to Mr. Rochester because he’s her equal, although he doesn’t always treat her as one.
It made an interesting point that Mr. Rochester tricks people, especially women. “What secrets are concealed behind the charades he enacts?” When I read the novel his secrecy wasn’t as clear because I read through Jane’s rose-colored glasses, and she didn’t see him as power hungry. The more that we talk about him in class and read criticism, the more I see Mr. Rochester as a masculine, overbearing man who thinks he has leverage over Jane because of his sexual history. In this light, his nicknames for Jane, referring to her as an imp or some sort of spell casting elf, don’t seem quite so endearing. They’re demeaning.
I thought that the connection between Bertha and Jane was exciting. The article speculates that, “what Bertha now does, for instance, is what Jane wants to do.” Jane’s opinion of Bertha is a combination of her run-in with the shaggy haired monster with a purple complexion that tears her veil and Mr. Rochester’s eventual depiction of her as a bride that transformed into a wild animal. I never analyzed her in relation to Jane. But, Bronte’s use of her as a foil makes perfect sense. Gilbert and Gubar state that “every one of Bertha’s appearances…has been associated with an experience (or repression) of anger on Jane’s part.” Now, I sympathize with Bertha because she harbors the same passion that tossed Jane into the red room as a child. Characters like Helen Burns and Mrs. Reed taught Jane to repress her emotions, but Bertha is Jane unleashed, and it makes the reader detest Mr. Rochester for treating her with so much cruelty. Would Mr. Rochester lock Jane away if she became a monster?
The Gilbert and Gubar packet has a lot of information in it. I think a lot of it is not very helpful or interesting but there are some very interesting points in it. I really liked the points on Bertha, because she was such an intriguing character in the novel. Throughout the novel she is portrayed as a maniac who just has to be hidden away. As a reader you are kind of happy she dies so that Jane and Rochester can get married. However, Gilbert and Gubar's point that Bertha and Jane are more similar than different is very intriguing. The idea that Jane and Bertha are so similar makes Bertha a much more important character in the novel for me. Bertha often saves Jane from her own fears. Jane fears being trapped in marriage and Bertha stops it, she also tears up the symbol of the marriage by destroying the veil. Bertha is sort of like an outward manifestation of Jane's inner feelings that she does not express. By examining Bertha's actions one gets a much deeper understanding of Jane's feelings and motivations, which is a very relevant point brought up by Gilbert and Gubar.
The Gilbert and Gubar article made many interesting, if sometimes contradictory, points. Its initial assistance that Rochester demands equality between Jane and himself is somewhat of an obvious point, as, in their initial meetings, Rochester repeatedly insists that Jane drop all formalities when addressing him. However, they go on to prove it in various unexpected, if obscure, ways. One of these examples is his recognition of her Byronic broodings after examining her pictures. However, the article then goes on to gainsay everything it has just been saying by stating that, subconsciously, Rochester wanted inequality between Jane and himself because he relies on tricks so often. Personally, I think that Rochester is just a lonely, maladjusted man with a twisted sense of humor, and he can only express himself through unusual ways, such as dressing up as a gypsy. Yet, maybe his subconscious was contradictory, which would give the article permission to be contradictory, but the net result left me walking away from that section of the piece confused as to what the final verdict was. The parallels between Jane and Bertha were much more straightforward. Bertha represents the pent up rage inside Jane, and, in many cases, does the thinks Jane subconsciously wants to do, like rip up the veil. This is interesting, because Jane’s rebellious nature is exactly what offended so many people when the book was first penned, so one must wonder why Bronte thought it necessary to put in a symbol for Jane’s anger when the symptoms of that fury were strong enough to offend contemporary tastes. Perhaps, Bertha should not be taken as a symbol for Jane’s contempt for social norms, but the destructive aspect of the sentiment. When Bertha died, it was not Jane’s rebellious nature that disappeared, but the obstacle to her happiness. Jane did not really change but nonetheless got what she wanted. Ultimately, the article has some interesting ideas which are ripe for personal exploration.
I thought Gilbert and Gubar truly gave a new sense of dimension to Jane Eyre. Although alot of it seemed out of reach and verging on exaggeration, most of the points addressed were well thought out, supported, and innovative without a doubt. I think the most resonating feature would be their view on the connection between Bertha Mason and Jane Eyre. The ideas that they came up with really forced me to think and draw similar connections, which ultimately made their criticism more interesting. I also enjoyed reading about the different criticisms that they researched, such as those about the staunch Victorian perceptions; the criticism of Jane's character as a whole, particularly in light of the idea of her as a byronic hero, clearly drew alot of controversy that I did not know existed. Yes, parts of it seemed like a stretch but it was definitely enjoyable to hear a new light shed on the novel.
On a whole, I felt that the Gilbert and Gubar argument on "Jane Eyre" provided new insight into the novel. I felt that all of their notes were valid and they brought up many interesting points. I agree that Bertha and Jane are inherently the same person (Jane); Jane restrains herself and Bertha is essentially Jane's "id", acting out and causing chaos. But there's more to the critique than this comparison. Let's move on!
The comment that really piqued my interest was the parallel between Mr. Rochester and a fairy tale prince. I believe the argument is that as a byronic hero, Rochester has a sexual crime that Jane doesn't know about. However, this "crime" actually makes him superior to Jane because of his repertoire of carnal knowledge. Because he has this sexual crime, he knows what he's doing and, according to society, this makes him superior. The idea is that men should be more experienced then women; men indoctrinate women in manners regarding the boudoir.
I think in a modern sense, this argument can still ignite a response. It can be viewed as a double standard regarding men and women's proclivities in society. I believe this double standard exists today and why many people may question it, the double standard will still go on. For Gilbert and Gubar to make that argument from a 19th century novel is an accomplishment on its own.
I felt that the Gilbert and Gubar piece often stretches the text beyond its limits - a lot of their analysis did not make sense to me, especially the part about Rochester's sexual secret knowledge of male dominance. I wish they would be more straightforward in their explanation.
However, the part that I did understand was the part about the relationship between Bertha and Jane. We have already discussed the fact that Bertha is a manifestation of Jane's inner feelings. What I find interesting is all of the support that Gilbert and Gubar have dug up. It is interesting that "every one of Bertha's appearances - or, more accurately, her manifestations - has been associated with an experience (or repression) of anger on Jane's part." I had never noticed the relationship between Jane's anger and Bertha's appearances.
The Gilbert & Gubar criticism delves directly into one of the themes that I most enjoyed in the book: the conflict between inequality and equality in Jane and Rochester’s relationship. Their comprehensive exploration of the spiritual equality that Jane and Rochester achieve is incredibly deep and well done; I was taken by their examination of the sudden change from a relationship of equal participants to a relationship of unequal participants. After having secured Jane’s love, Rochester tells her, “once I have fairly seized you, to have and to hold, I’ll just – figuratively speaking – attach you to a chain like this.” Their relationship had always been so mystical and almost unreal in its base in equality and consequent social taboo. But society had placed a Rochester figure above a Jane figure so consistently in Rochester’s lifetime that, once their relationship reached marriage, becoming real and no longer stuck in a mystical world that belonged to just them, society’s view finally started to catch up with him.
Another point that they introduced about reader’s perceptions really got to me. This one has to do with the good girl/bad girl perception of women, or as I like to call it, the ‘virgin or vixen’ principle. In past literature, movies, television shows, and plays, women were constantly categorized into two categories: the virgin or the vixen. This categorization was done by the creators of the characters, but also by the perceivers of the character. Considering Jane Eyre, Gilbert and Gubar pointed out that many people in the Victorian Era perceived Jane as a vixen, a bad girl, for not accepting her social fate or being grateful to God for what she did have. But this perception of Jane contradicts another perception of Jane by the people of the Victorian Era that the criticism piece explores. many Victorian readers disapproved of Rochester when he extensively explained his relationship with Céline to Jane, because, as Gilbert and Gubar explain, “coming from a dissipated older man to a virginal young governess,” this came across as “improper.” She is now, of course, perceived as the virgin by Victorian readers. This switch in perception from virgin to vixen and vice versa is seen throughout all of pop culture; the second it suits the reader for the woman to be the virginal victim, she is, and the second it suits the reader for the woman to be the wicked witch, she is.
17 comments:
hey first comment. cool.
While reading Gilbert and Gubar I found their points interesting and believable. I thought their discussion of Jane and Rochester's first meeting stressed an important point. They do have a semi-typical fairytale first encounter, but still the first time we see Rochester it is when he has fallen and needs to lean on Jane. She supports and rescues him on that first night, immediatly changing their relationship by reversing the accepted gender roles. Rochester, not Jane, is playing the part of 'damsel in distress' so to speak. This inicdent does set up a sort of underlying power struggle that exists between Jane and Rochester. This struggle is seen throught their conversations, Jane's reaction to Rochester's behavior once they are engaged, and her decision to leave after discovering Bertha's existance.
I also thought Gilbert and Gubar's take on the gypsy scene was interesting. I had not previously seen Rochester's inability to fool Jane as an indication of equality between them. I was a little too caught up in the romantic aspects of the situation at the time, but it is possible that the fact that he could not act the part of a gypsy with her is some indication of their intellectual equality.
And of course the descriptions of the symbolism in Jane's dreams, and the connection between Jane's desires and Bertha's actions are not only plausible, but quite hard to disagree with.
One of the points I found to resonate in Gilbert and Gubar was the idea that Bertha Mason and Jane Eyre are essentially the same character, “but on a figurative and psychological level it seems suspiciously clear that the specter of Bertha is still another…avatar of Jane” (p. 359).
Bertha could be viewed as the epitome of Jane’s feelings. Jane fears her marriage to Mr. Rochester, however, never expresses it. Whereas Bertha does, “disliking the ‘vapoury veil’ of Jane Rochester, Jane Eyre secretly wants to tear the garments up. Bertha does it for her” (p. 359). Bertha has the ability to express Jane’s inner feelings that she would never reveal, "Jane's feelings of 'hunger, rebellion, and rage' on the battlements, for instance, were accompanied by Bertha's 'low, slow ha! ha!' and 'eccentric murmurs..." (p. 360).
Bertha’s purpose in the story is not to act as a way to attain insight into the troubled, feminine mind, nor is it to make a point in relation to the treatment of women or the mentally unstable; but rather to act as an instrument for Jane's sufferings.
Gilbert and Gubar, I believed, were absolutely correct in their analysis of Jane and Bertha.
I thought this criticism was pretty cool. I knew Jane Eyre was full of symbolism, but this critism made me realize just how symbollically deep a novel could go.
The symbolism also made me rethink my opinion of Victorian novels. In Victorian novels, it always seems like there is a pompous description of everything without more meaning to it. I usually get bored by the piling up of words, and though we're supposed to "breathe" every time we see a comma, my mind is still breathless at the end of every sentence. Reading a Victorian novel is like...running a marathon or something.
I thought the "animal" symbolism of Jane (and/or Bertha) revealed by Gilbert & Gubar was particularly raw for a Victorian novel. It's so different from what I would expect, and it reveals so much about who Jane Eyre is. Her desire to be equal with Rochester is not just a sign of her intellect. It is animalistic drive for dominance. This also sheds light on her relationship with Rochester. Her "love" for him isn't pure and simple. She loves him for what he brings out in her. She loves him for a greater love of self. This is a lot more realistic than the utter devotion many Victorian writers would imagine of their female characters. Somehow Bronte managed to portray something very real with incredibly gothic and fantastical symbolism.
I found many of Gilbert and Gubar’s analyses to be very persuasive and unique. I agree with almost everything they mention, though I never would have thought of any of it on my own. I particularly enjoyed reading their comparison between Jane and Bertha Mason; I almost want to go back, read the book again, and look to see if Bertha is really portrayed as Jane’s “truest and darkest double.” It’s fascinating that every time Jane feels a negative emotion, Bertha appears in some manner, and I think that Gilbert and Gubar’s observations about Bertha representing Jane’s bad side are irrefutable.
However, some of the things they mention are a bit of a stretch; I’m with them until page 361. They say, “Bertha does (....) provide the governess with an example of how not to act, teaching her a lesson more salutary than any Miss Temple ever taught.” I think that statement is ridiculous; I have a lot of trouble believing that when Charlotte Bronte was planning the character of Bertha, she intended for her to teach Jane a lesson in behavior. Later on page 361, they relate Mr. Rochester’s strange nicknames for Jane like “malicious elf” to Bertha; while I agree they represent the supernatural, I don’t think they relate to his wife.
After that, though, they present many more convincing observations. I like the connection between Jane in the red room and Bertha in the attic, and I agree that Bertha’s plunge from Thornfield may be a metaphor for Jane’s other troubles disappearing. I also appreciate their description of how Jane really isn’t a “disciplined and subdued” character and that Bertha represents her repressed emotions.
First off, I would like to comment on the endless blather that encompassed this article. Gilbert and Gubar rambled on and on about meaningless subtext and stretched the plot into utter senselessness. I must, however, admit that certain valid points were made such as the equality of Rochester and Jane in affiliation with "the gypsy scene" and "Jane's whole life-pilgrimage." But then there were moments such as the entire beginning bit that considered every possible angle on the symbolic theme of fairy tales in the novel. I understand the points that were made, but the reason for their references to "ice" and a "middle-aged version of Cinderella's prince" is unfathomable.
Yes, it is true that the themes match up in certain cases, but I simply cannot believe that the Byronic, brooding, burdened Mr. Rochester in any way resembles the white knight of Cinderella's dream. The quintessential fairytale prince has no flaws, is generally contented and is completely focused on the one who he loves. Cinderella's prince, for example, spent days, maybe even weeks, searching for the perfect fit in the glass shoe. Mr. Rochester has a wife, pretends to be with Blanche as a cover, even though he truly loves Jane.
Gilbert and Gubar make many interesting points in their discussion and critical analysis of Jane Eyre. I found their analysis of societal outrage following the novel's release intriguing. People of the time were outraged by Jane Eyre's feminist themes, proving the need for a novel like this in order to shock society content with its sexist societal norms. Literary critics of the time were not bothered so much by Rochester as a Bryonic hero, despite the illicit relationships of his past and possibly a child born out of wedlock. They were bothered by the fact Jane herself seemed to be a Bryonic hero. Her character is exceedingly passionate and at times dark. She finds herself better than the people around her, and she isolates herself from society. A woman like this represented a threat to the ideals of civilized society at the time.
I agree with the analysis of the authors claiming that Bertha represented the extremes of Jane's personality. In my opinion, I believe Bertha is the victim of her situation. Despite the tone of the novel, pointing to her as a mad-woman not deserving of sympathy, I believe that her implantation in English society forced her into a state of cultural shock. Both women are very passionate and deal with high and low emotional extremes, making this an important binary in the novel.
In addition, I agree with the authors that the relationship between Rochester and Jane mirrors that of the general struggle between men and women. Even though, at times, Jane and Rochester seem each others equals intellectually and at the beginning of their interaction, he depends on her for physical aid after spraining his ankle, Rochester still enjoys the societal norms that place him inherently above Jane. Before they marry, Jane must rise to his economic status, which she does thanks to her inheritance from her uncle John Eyre, supporting the strong existence of feminist themes in the novel.
The Gilbert and Gubar article opened my mind up to a totally different view of Bertha in Jane Eyre in a totally valid and justified manner. Most readers consider Bertha to simply be the crazy wife of Rochester and a small group of people notice her possibly symbolic meaning. However, Gilbert and Gubar clearly identify Bertha’s purpose in a manner that very few people probably see. The two authors are able to prove that Bertha is the physical representation of Jane’s true emotions. While many people believe that Bertha is detrimental to Jane’s happiness, it turns out that Bertha takes the actions that Jane wishes she could take herself. I found this to be particularly interesting. I also think that Gilbert and Gubar prove their point very well. First, we see that Jane dislikes the “vapoury veil” and that she secretly wants to tear it up. Lo and behold, one night Bertha enters Jane’s room and takes that very action for her. Then we learn that Jane wants to put off the inexorable “bridal day.” It is the revealing of Bertha that does just what Jane wants. Gilbert and Gubar are able to take these examples and prove that Bertha is the physical representation of Jane’s conscious, which I believe is a very interesting and valid point as well as something I had not thought of when reading the book.
However, I do not agree with a different point that Gilbert and Gubar make in the criticism regarding the equality between Jane and Rochester. I do not believe that Rochester tries to make himself seem like Jane’s equal. In fact, I believe that during most of the novel, Rochester’s arrogant attitude give off the appearance that he thinks he is superior to Jane. One example that Gilbert and Gubar uses is when Rochester commands, “resume your seat, and answer my questions.” This helps to demonstrate Rochester’s belief of superiority because he believes he can command Jane whenever he wants. Even though Rochester compliments the pictures, it does not take away from his superiority complex, because he can still feel superior when saying nice things. Overall, I think that Rochester demonstrates his superiority more often than he compliments Jane or makes them seem equal, which is why I disagree with Gilbert and Gubar on this point.
Like many others, the point that stuck with me the most about their analysis was the idea that Bertha is the manifestation of Jane's inner wants and feelings. It was a point that I had definitely thought about before, because the two seemed to complete each other and balance one another, but I had not thought of it to that extent. Their examples, especially the one about ripping Jane's veil, were spot on. Bertha, because she has been dubbed "crazy" has the freedom that Jane lacks. She can do things like rip up the veil, because she is simply "crazy". If Jane was to do that, her actions would obviously be questioned. Bertha represents the passion that Jane has been quieting since her childhood days.
Although I found Gilbert and Gubar's take on the gypsy scene to be interesting, I thought it was a bit of a stretch. I do not believe that the fact that Jane saw through Rochester's disguise is any implication of their equality.
It seems like most people in our class really enjoyed the article. I really liked it, and believe that the symbolism is great, though I definitely don't think that Bronte intended all of it. Especially since when she did mean to draw parallels, she made it excruciatingly obvious. For example, she not so subtly stated that dreams with children were symbolic of death, and she foreshadowed events, such as the ruin of Thornfield and Rochester's loss of a hand and an eye.
The part that I really focused on was not the parallel between Bertha and Jane but rather the symbolism of equality between Rochester and Jane. When I read the book, I definitely felt as if Jane was his equal. Especially right before their planned wedding, I found it really annoying that she refused to take any of his clothes or jewels. I didn't think she was marrying him for his wealth...but if you're offered it, why say no? But now I realize that it reinforced her as his equal. She would become his financial equal through marriage and the receiving of expensive clothes etc., but she doesn't want to, because she is already his equal through her passion and "unseduceable independence"(353) which attracts him to her in the first place.
One other thing I found annoying was the statement that Adele is definitely Rochester's daughter. Alicia and I talked about this in class the other day. Gilbert and Gubar wrote, "His possession of the hidden details of sexuality, however--his knowledge, that is, of the secret of sex, symbolized both by his doll-like daughter Adele[...]"(355). This bothered me, because even though I always felt like there was more to the story with Celine and Adele, I never saw concrete evidence that she was his daughter. Did anyone get that impression when they read the book? Maybe I missed it.
Apparently like a lot of other people in this class, I found Gilbert and Gubar's comments on symbolism the most interesting. We had previously talked about the correlation between Jane and Bertha in class, but I didn't realize how closely related their characters truly were. Although some parts of this article seemed like a bit of a stretch, the idea that Bertha represented Jane's passionate side made complete sense. I didn't realize how meaningful Bertha's attacks were. I remember wondering why Jane didn't do anything after Rochester dressed up as a gypsy: after all, it wasn't as if she was afraid of him. Then, moments later, Bertha attacked her brother. I hadn't put these instances together, but in light of the article they make perfect sense.
One thing that bothered me, however, was the idea that Jane's passionate side died with Bertha. I understand it is a part of her maturing and somehow symbolizes her equality with Rochester. However, I liked Jane's spunk, as much as she repressed it most of the novel, it was still there. Does this mean that Jane is now as passionate as St. John? And it confused me how this related to their equality, for Rochester is as passionate as they come.
This criticism put my in-class essay to shame. It spoke of Jane’s role as a Byronic hero and her attraction to Mr. Rochester because he’s her equal, although he doesn’t always treat her as one.
It made an interesting point that Mr. Rochester tricks people, especially women. “What secrets are concealed behind the charades he enacts?” When I read the novel his secrecy wasn’t as clear because I read through Jane’s rose-colored glasses, and she didn’t see him as power hungry. The more that we talk about him in class and read criticism, the more I see Mr. Rochester as a masculine, overbearing man who thinks he has leverage over Jane because of his sexual history. In this light, his nicknames for Jane, referring to her as an imp or some sort of spell casting elf, don’t seem quite so endearing. They’re demeaning.
I thought that the connection between Bertha and Jane was exciting. The article speculates that, “what Bertha now does, for instance, is what Jane wants to do.” Jane’s opinion of Bertha is a combination of her run-in with the shaggy haired monster with a purple complexion that tears her veil and Mr. Rochester’s eventual depiction of her as a bride that transformed into a wild animal. I never analyzed her in relation to Jane. But, Bronte’s use of her as a foil makes perfect sense. Gilbert and Gubar state that “every one of Bertha’s appearances…has been associated with an experience (or repression) of anger on Jane’s part.” Now, I sympathize with Bertha because she harbors the same passion that tossed Jane into the red room as a child. Characters like Helen Burns and Mrs. Reed taught Jane to repress her emotions, but Bertha is Jane unleashed, and it makes the reader detest Mr. Rochester for treating her with so much cruelty. Would Mr. Rochester lock Jane away if she became a monster?
The Gilbert and Gubar packet has a lot of information in it. I think a lot of it is not very helpful or interesting but there are some very interesting points in it. I really liked the points on Bertha, because she was such an intriguing character in the novel. Throughout the novel she is portrayed as a maniac who just has to be hidden away. As a reader you are kind of happy she dies so that Jane and Rochester can get married. However, Gilbert and Gubar's point that Bertha and Jane are more similar than different is very intriguing. The idea that Jane and Bertha are so similar makes Bertha a much more important character in the novel for me. Bertha often saves Jane from her own fears. Jane fears being trapped in marriage and Bertha stops it, she also tears up the symbol of the marriage by destroying the veil. Bertha is sort of like an outward manifestation of Jane's inner feelings that she does not express. By examining Bertha's actions one gets a much deeper understanding of Jane's feelings and motivations, which is a very relevant point brought up by Gilbert and Gubar.
The Gilbert and Gubar article made many interesting, if sometimes contradictory, points. Its initial assistance that Rochester demands equality between Jane and himself is somewhat of an obvious point, as, in their initial meetings, Rochester repeatedly insists that Jane drop all formalities when addressing him. However, they go on to prove it in various unexpected, if obscure, ways. One of these examples is his recognition of her Byronic broodings after examining her pictures. However, the article then goes on to gainsay everything it has just been saying by stating that, subconsciously, Rochester wanted inequality between Jane and himself because he relies on tricks so often. Personally, I think that Rochester is just a lonely, maladjusted man with a twisted sense of humor, and he can only express himself through unusual ways, such as dressing up as a gypsy. Yet, maybe his subconscious was contradictory, which would give the article permission to be contradictory, but the net result left me walking away from that section of the piece confused as to what the final verdict was.
The parallels between Jane and Bertha were much more straightforward. Bertha represents the pent up rage inside Jane, and, in many cases, does the thinks Jane subconsciously wants to do, like rip up the veil. This is interesting, because Jane’s rebellious nature is exactly what offended so many people when the book was first penned, so one must wonder why Bronte thought it necessary to put in a symbol for Jane’s anger when the symptoms of that fury were strong enough to offend contemporary tastes. Perhaps, Bertha should not be taken as a symbol for Jane’s contempt for social norms, but the destructive aspect of the sentiment. When Bertha died, it was not Jane’s rebellious nature that disappeared, but the obstacle to her happiness. Jane did not really change but nonetheless got what she wanted. Ultimately, the article has some interesting ideas which are ripe for personal exploration.
I thought Gilbert and Gubar truly gave a new sense of dimension to Jane Eyre. Although alot of it seemed out of reach and verging on exaggeration, most of the points addressed were well thought out, supported, and innovative without a doubt. I think the most resonating feature would be their view on the connection between Bertha Mason and Jane Eyre. The ideas that they came up with really forced me to think and draw similar connections, which ultimately made their criticism more interesting. I also enjoyed reading about the different criticisms that they researched, such as those about the staunch Victorian perceptions; the criticism of Jane's character as a whole, particularly in light of the idea of her as a byronic hero, clearly drew alot of controversy that I did not know existed. Yes, parts of it seemed like a stretch but it was definitely enjoyable to hear a new light shed on the novel.
On a whole, I felt that the Gilbert and Gubar argument on "Jane Eyre" provided new insight into the novel. I felt that all of their notes were valid and they brought up many interesting points. I agree that Bertha and Jane are inherently the same person (Jane); Jane restrains herself and Bertha is essentially Jane's "id", acting out and causing chaos. But there's more to the critique than this comparison. Let's move on!
The comment that really piqued my interest was the parallel between Mr. Rochester and a fairy tale prince. I believe the argument is that as a byronic hero, Rochester has a sexual crime that Jane doesn't know about. However, this "crime" actually makes him superior to Jane because of his repertoire of carnal knowledge. Because he has this sexual crime, he knows what he's doing and, according to society, this makes him superior. The idea is that men should be more experienced then women; men indoctrinate women in manners regarding the boudoir.
I think in a modern sense, this argument can still ignite a response. It can be viewed as a double standard regarding men and women's proclivities in society. I believe this double standard exists today and why many people may question it, the double standard will still go on. For Gilbert and Gubar to make that argument from a 19th century novel is an accomplishment on its own.
I felt that the Gilbert and Gubar piece often stretches the text beyond its limits - a lot of their analysis did not make sense to me, especially the part about Rochester's sexual secret knowledge of male dominance. I wish they would be more straightforward in their explanation.
However, the part that I did understand was the part about the relationship between Bertha and Jane. We have already discussed the fact that Bertha is a manifestation of Jane's inner feelings. What I find interesting is all of the support that Gilbert and Gubar have dug up. It is interesting that "every one of Bertha's appearances - or, more accurately, her manifestations - has been associated with an experience (or repression) of anger on Jane's part." I had never noticed the relationship between Jane's anger and Bertha's appearances.
The Gilbert & Gubar criticism delves directly into one of the themes that I most enjoyed in the book: the conflict between inequality and equality in Jane and Rochester’s relationship. Their comprehensive exploration of the spiritual equality that Jane and Rochester achieve is incredibly deep and well done; I was taken by their examination of the sudden change from a relationship of equal participants to a relationship of unequal participants. After having secured Jane’s love, Rochester tells her, “once I have fairly seized you, to have and to hold, I’ll just – figuratively speaking – attach you to a chain like this.” Their relationship had always been so mystical and almost unreal in its base in equality and consequent social taboo. But society had placed a Rochester figure above a Jane figure so consistently in Rochester’s lifetime that, once their relationship reached marriage, becoming real and no longer stuck in a mystical world that belonged to just them, society’s view finally started to catch up with him.
Another point that they introduced about reader’s perceptions really got to me. This one has to do with the good girl/bad girl perception of women, or as I like to call it, the ‘virgin or vixen’ principle. In past literature, movies, television shows, and plays, women were constantly categorized into two categories: the virgin or the vixen. This categorization was done by the creators of the characters, but also by the perceivers of the character. Considering Jane Eyre, Gilbert and Gubar pointed out that many people in the Victorian Era perceived Jane as a vixen, a bad girl, for not accepting her social fate or being grateful to God for what she did have. But this perception of Jane contradicts another perception of Jane by the people of the Victorian Era that the criticism piece explores. many Victorian readers disapproved of Rochester when he extensively explained his relationship with Céline to Jane, because, as Gilbert and Gubar explain, “coming from a dissipated older man to a virginal young governess,” this came across as “improper.” She is now, of course, perceived as the virgin by Victorian readers. This switch in perception from virgin to vixen and vice versa is seen throughout all of pop culture; the second it suits the reader for the woman to be the virginal victim, she is, and the second it suits the reader for the woman to be the wicked witch, she is.
Post a Comment