![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Enter Mr Rochester
The first thing he does is fall off his horse. It's a Don Quixote moment. In the movie- as I remember- it's the apparition of Jane in the darkening lane that makes the horse shy and rear. Ooh gothick!. In the book the horse trots past Jane without incident, then slips on ice. Bump, He comes off. And swears a lot.
Bronte knows how to mix it up. A romantic setting, twilight, the rising moon, intimations of the supernatural. is the dog a gytrash? is the horse a gytrash? Then whoopsadaisy- there's a man down. Is he badly hurt? Naah, it's just a sprain. .
Bronte breaks down even as she builds up. She adores the gothick. She thinks the gothick is silly. She blends gothickism and silliness into a smooth even paste.
Mr Rochester takes the book over. It used to be Jane's book; now it's his. He lounges and declaims- with his foot up on a stool because of the sprain. He's very romantic, very Yorkshire- half Lord Byron, half Geoff Boycott. He balloons with magnificently wordy self-contempt- and cool Jane slips under his guard with a hat-pin. No wonder he falls in love.
One expects a Victorian novelist to be coy. I don't know why but it's a prejudice we've been encouraged in. Some of them are coy- Dickens for instance; he never saw a prossie he couldn't find a euphemism for. He hates the evangelicals but he's been infected with their cant. Bronte ain't that way; she grew up in a vicarage so she's worldly-wise; she calls a French mistress a French mistress and no beating about the bush. The story of Rochester's Parisian amour is as tough minded as anything in Balzac. She's frank, she's sensual, she's withering. She has none of the Victorian whimsy about children either. Adele is nothing special, not very bright. If it were now she'd be dressing up as a Disney princess. The child is mother to the woman- nice kid; don't expect too much of her; her Daddy certainly doesn't. If this was Dickens (again) Rochester would be in awful trouble for this attitude of his. Bronte and Jane are far too sensible for that.
Here comes the madwoman. Demonic laughter at the keyhole. So far so ghastly. Now Mr Rochester is on fire! O no! So Jane puts him out with a jug full of water. Mr Darcy wet shirt moment! Mr Rochester forbids Jane to look. Does he have a boner? "Don't leave me Jane". "Sorry but I have to." Firm manly handshake. Oh, but this is wonderful stuff.....
Bronte knows how to mix it up. A romantic setting, twilight, the rising moon, intimations of the supernatural. is the dog a gytrash? is the horse a gytrash? Then whoopsadaisy- there's a man down. Is he badly hurt? Naah, it's just a sprain. .
Bronte breaks down even as she builds up. She adores the gothick. She thinks the gothick is silly. She blends gothickism and silliness into a smooth even paste.
Mr Rochester takes the book over. It used to be Jane's book; now it's his. He lounges and declaims- with his foot up on a stool because of the sprain. He's very romantic, very Yorkshire- half Lord Byron, half Geoff Boycott. He balloons with magnificently wordy self-contempt- and cool Jane slips under his guard with a hat-pin. No wonder he falls in love.
One expects a Victorian novelist to be coy. I don't know why but it's a prejudice we've been encouraged in. Some of them are coy- Dickens for instance; he never saw a prossie he couldn't find a euphemism for. He hates the evangelicals but he's been infected with their cant. Bronte ain't that way; she grew up in a vicarage so she's worldly-wise; she calls a French mistress a French mistress and no beating about the bush. The story of Rochester's Parisian amour is as tough minded as anything in Balzac. She's frank, she's sensual, she's withering. She has none of the Victorian whimsy about children either. Adele is nothing special, not very bright. If it were now she'd be dressing up as a Disney princess. The child is mother to the woman- nice kid; don't expect too much of her; her Daddy certainly doesn't. If this was Dickens (again) Rochester would be in awful trouble for this attitude of his. Bronte and Jane are far too sensible for that.
Here comes the madwoman. Demonic laughter at the keyhole. So far so ghastly. Now Mr Rochester is on fire! O no! So Jane puts him out with a jug full of water. Mr Darcy wet shirt moment! Mr Rochester forbids Jane to look. Does he have a boner? "Don't leave me Jane". "Sorry but I have to." Firm manly handshake. Oh, but this is wonderful stuff.....
no subject
So true!
no subject
no subject
no subject
falling across the broad forehead- just like Ted Hughes.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Re:
no subject
That's my excuse, anyway and I'm sticking to it! :o)
no subject
no subject
Far better book than Wuthering Heights in my opinion.
no subject
I've read W H a couple of times. It never did anything for me. Maybe I should try again.
Have you read Villette? That's amazing too. I don't understand why it isn't better known.
no subject
no subject
all on the outside. She's funny but subtly so. Her prose is gorgeous in a richly coloured, mid-romantic manner that puts me in mind of de Quincey. Her descriptions- of places, scenery, weather, times of day- are wonderfully precise.
no subject
Not all, perhaps. I've recently reread Great Expectations, and find Pip's Bildungsroman at least as psychologically subtle as Jane Eyre's.
no subject
I wouldn't want to give the impression I'm dissing
Dickens- whom I adore. No writer ever created a greater number of unforgettable characters.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Yes, that's the only film version I know.
no subject
As an adaptation, it didn't work for me entirely, but this was one of the currents the recent (2011, Mia Wasikowska/Michael Fassbender) film got right.
no subject
no subject
I liked very much the 2006 version with Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens. Thoughts on the 2011 film here. You might still find it worth trying, to see how it matches or differs from the version inside your head. What is the Welles/Fontaine lke?
[edited for confusing the two actresses who play Jane at different ages]
no subject
no subject
Her replies are mechanical and spare; she doesn't understand the nuances, having a laser eye for the truth instead. The non-committal, droidlike nature of her answers (betraying a deprived childhood, a state Morton knew a lot about) only makes Rochester all the more determined to break her down. Samantha Morton is the only Jane I know who deeply, instinctively gets that.
Hinds as Rochester is a bit overacted - he could ease off on the shouting - but has the packed intensity of the character in the novel and his large presence. His presence is very sensual and powerful, making it clear why Jane tends to adopt "shields up" in his presence.
no subject
I'll look out for that line about her being an automaton.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I read Jane Eyre for the first time when I was 12. I think I re-read it again at 24, so perhaps now at 34 it might be a good time to read it for the third time. With your notes in mind...
no subject
I'm glad I didn't read it as a kid. I think I'd have found it way above my head.