Jane Eyre and the Illogical Outcome

As an autobiographical narrated novel that is meant to be written from the perspective of someone reflecting on their own life and therefore should be a sound logical argument leading to a logical conclusion. But the book Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte mocks logic and so should be banished back to the eighteen hundreds from where it came, and where it belongs.

Lets looks at how the plot is set up before the pending outcome. Firstly we are introduced to Jane Eyre as a child where the first critical event happens (chpt. 1 - 4). After being unjustly and severely punished Jane explodes in a empowering manor at her auntie, displaying her awakening as a feminist and independent modern woman.

The next part of the story is based in the orphanage where again we are led to believe that Jane is being more and more empowered to be an equal in a hierarchical society (chpt. 5 - 10). This scene concludes with Jane leaving for employment she arranged by herself and is her first step into the real world with her mind made up on life, that she is a lady and no body can hold her back.

Although she doesn't step into a role as chief campaigner for the pro-abortion movement she does step into being master of her own world, employed, free, and obviously a great role model for all feminists to be. This is also where we see the gradual nonsensical change take place, the one that does not logically conclude from expectations set up from past events (chpt. 11 - 26). Maybe it is the achilles heel of females, or maybe it is everyone's strong belief in ghosts, but the introduction of the mature, rich, worldly, and absolutely stunning in her own eye, Mr Edward Rochester, exposes her as a very typical female, eighteen hundred's character of little interest to the new liberated readers of following centuries.

The book could have concluded at the two thirds mark quite easily without to much disruption to the over all outcome by not having the unsuccesful marriage of Jane and Edward. But fortunately we are given hope that Jane still has that independent spirit burning as she rejects him at the last moment because of not wanting to be the subordinate of a polygimist.

Hooray, Jane you are free, look at her escape the Rochester mansion and become all the woman she was born to be. But wait! After a number of chapters about her finding out she is rich, has a family and a cousin who cooks up some half baked plan to marry and move to India as a missionary with her as a way of legitimately having sexual relations with her, we find out that actually all she wants is what she had back at said two thirds mark (chpt. 27 - 35).

The conclusion of the book is, without surprise, her finding the long lost Mr Rochester and extinguishing that feminist flame within her once and for all. A quiet marriage and soon enough she is where she wants to be, back at a man's side giving in to his every wish. This we are meant to believe is actually love because Mr Rochester is now severely disabled and has nothing to do with Jane's subconscious connection to a safe, controlled, simple life as being ones house wife.

Oh! How the book set up the want to a radical ending where Jane moved to London became a prostitute and eventually somehow ended up as the first female president of the USA. But to think a woman eventually live a life unmarried and without a protector, Treason! Therefore Jane Eyre, never rear your head again in a modern movie, you are a let down for the entire modern age of liberty.

Manipulating your way to happiness: The Rochester Doctrine

Jane Eyre Spoilers alert!

Last month, book club discussion focussed on Jane Eyre, Charlotte Bronte's classic gothic romance telling the story of a young orphan girl who rises to be a governess. This week, I disagreed with the group on the subject of the romantic content of the book.


Jane Eyre and Rochester is one of the most satisfying romances that I've ever read in a novel. The age gap is immense, the 40 year old dates the teenager. Rochester is not attractive and neither is Jane. Jane is very intelligent, quick witted and a competent intellectual, Rochester is also endowed with mental prowess although has a darker past.

Jane's chief crime, although it is never really portrayed as a crime, is an outburst at her cruel adopted mother. Rochester screws his way round Europe after his wife goes crazy, cruelly manipulates Jane's emotions to love him and most of all, tries to fool Jane into marrying him when he is already married! Yet there is some Darcyness to the character, he sacrifices his vision and fitness to try to save his wife at the last and there is the underlying theme of love for Jane that isn't broken. Far more interesting and annoying is Jane's character. Haunted by a sense of inferiority, she seems to avoid anything approximating happiness until satisfying that Christian message that sneaks in, the "trust God and everything will be ok".

Yet, somehow through all of this, a consistent theme seems to be love. I always felt the Pride and Prejudice witty diatribe seemed a bit silly. The Darcy and Bennett characters are contrived and idealistic even with their weaknesses. The power games of Rochester seem to better approximate the age, with Jane Eyre still retaining and exercising her ability to choose.

In 1966, R.B. Martin called Jane Eyre "the first major feminist novel".

"Only equals like Jane and Rochester dare to speak truth couched in language of unadorned directness."

Nowhere in the novel is change promoted or expected. The woman's place in the world is accepted. Eyre in fact does not appear overly surprised by Rochester's betrayal, scarcely believing that such a man would deign to shower her with affections. It is only when he is emasculated that she accepts him, where he ceases to have power. Yet it is in this subtle and seemingly submissive attitude that the novel betrays its feminist fervour. Eyre is the one who pursues power, she wishes to make her life mean more than the blueprint of the age. She does not want to accept her position but at the same time, she knows that to rebel too openly is to lose everything. Instead the silliness of the God aspect allows Jane to take her own path. And that path is love.

Ah.