Also, St. John was kind of an ass. I know he's supposed to be this deeply religious man whom Jane admires a lot - but he's such a no-fun prig. Every time I read the book, I really dislike him. At least Rochester had a sense of humor.
Literary Buffistas 3: Don't Parse the Blurb, Dear.
There's more to life than watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer! No. Really, there is! Honestly! Here's a place for Buffistas to come and discuss what it is they're reading, their favorite authors and poets. "Geez. Crack a book sometime."
I also think his desire for an assistant is much greater than his desire for love. And he squashes any joy out of his life. IOW, Maysa, AGREED.
Pix - I just finished the Fevercrack and I blame you!
And it was totally cracktastic.
BTW Katha Pollitt loves the new JE movie.
Upon reread (I hadn't read JE since my teen years) I was mostly struck by how much of a selfish manipulating a**hole Rochester was. Also, I apparently blocked out much of the St. John stuff since I had no memory of it being almost a third of the book.
I was mostly struck by how much of a selfish manipulating a**hole Rochester was.
Well, yeah. He was within minutes of committing bigamy before Jane learned the truth about his wife. Not exactly a fine, upstanding human being.
Yeah--not sure how close the movie was to the book, but he came across as very manipulating of a naive young girl. Rather than touched by the ending, I was rooting for her to take the damn inheritance and have some fun and meet other people who were less emotionally abusive than him!!
I don't know -- I thought part of the point was how St. John was this upstanding missionary do-gooder, but really, as Maysa said, a joyless prig.
And while Rochester was, in fact, ready to commit bigamy, he was also trying to make everyone happy, within certain parameters. He wouldn't commit Bertha to an asylum, which I give him points for, and he knew Jane wouldn't live in "sin," as it were. Rochester was deeply flawed, but he was also kind and generous in his own way. Adele is an example, too. Many other men would have had nothing to do with her, or at least not had her in their home.
It was interesting-- I just read a novel that was a retelling of Jane Eyre set in 1929 Hollywood against the backdrop of films transitioning from silents to talkies. The trick here was that Jane was transformed to the male character and Mr. Rochester was female.
I had actually looked forward to the gender switch, especially given the setting, but unfortunately, this book played it poorly.