Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre as Adele Varens’ Governess-Feminism, Gender Roles, & the Victorian Era
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 чер 2024
- Analysis of two passages of Charlotte Brontë’s brilliant novel Jane Eyre (1847), one which is celebrated as an example of overt Victorian era feminism & rejection of traditional gender roles, and the other which describes Jane Eyre’s role as Adèle Varens’ governess. The lecture considers two main questions. Is there a contradiction in the way that the narrative voice describes Jane Eyre as a governess to Adèle Varens & Jane Eyre’s (or Charlotte Bronte’s?) cry against custom for herself? If so, what should we take from this contradiction of feminism on the one hand, & conforming to Victorian era gender roles & expectations on the other? The video closes with reference to Bertha Mason/Mrs Rochester (the madwoman in the attic).
OUTLINE OF LECTURE of the novel Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte:
- Analysis of Jane Eyre as a governess to Adele Varens
- Analysis of Jane Eyre’s own feminism & rebellion against Victorian era gender roles
- Reference to Bertha Mason/Mrs Rochester, & what her laugh might symbolise
If you’d like to support the channel, you can here
www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_...
Follow me on Twitter: / droctaviacox
CLOSE READING CLASSIC LITERATURE
#DrOctaviaCox
#UnfamiliarReadings
#CloseReadingClassicLiterature
FOR MORE LITERARY ANALYSIS see my ‘Close Reading Classic Literature’ playlist
• CLOSE READING CLASSIC ...
KEYWORDS
english literature analysis
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
victorian novel analysis
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
jane eyre feminism
adèle varens analysis
victorian literature analysis
adele varens analysis
feminism in jane eyre
adele in jane eyre
gender roles in jane eyre
adèle in jane eyre
gender roles in victorian era
jane eyre governess
victorian gender roles
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
jane eyre victorian era
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
women in the victorian era
english literature analysis
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
victorian novel analysis
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
jane eyre feminism
adèle varens analysis
victorian literature analysis
adele varens analysis
feminism in jane eyre
adele in jane eyre
gender roles in jane eyre
adèle in jane eyre
gender roles in victorian era
jane eyre governess
victorian gender roles
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
jane eyre victorian era
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
women in the victorian era
english literature analysis
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
victorian novel analysis
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
jane eyre feminism
adèle varens analysis
victorian literature analysis
adele varens analysis
feminism in jane eyre
adele in jane eyre
gender roles in jane eyre
adèle in jane eyre
gender roles in victorian era
jane eyre governess
victorian gender roles
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
jane eyre victorian era
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
women in the victorian era
english literature analysis
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
victorian novel analysis
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
jane eyre feminism
adèle varens analysis
victorian literature analysis
adele varens analysis
feminism in jane eyre
adele in jane eyre
gender roles in jane eyre
adèle in jane eyre
gender roles in victorian era
jane eyre governess
victorian gender roles
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
jane eyre victorian era
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
women in the victorian era
english literature analysis
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
victorian novel analysis
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
jane eyre feminism
adèle varens analysis
victorian literature analysis
adele varens analysis
feminism in jane eyre
adele in jane eyre
gender roles in jane eyre
adèle in jane eyre
gender roles in victorian era
jane eyre governess
victorian gender roles
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
jane eyre victorian era
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
women in the victorian era
english literature analysis
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
victorian novel analysis
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
jane eyre feminism
adèle varens analysis
victorian literature analysis
adele varens analysis
feminism in jane eyre
adele in jane eyre
gender roles in jane eyre
adèle in jane eyre
gender roles in victorian era
jane eyre governess
victorian gender roles
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
jane eyre victorian era
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
women in the victorian era
english literature analysis
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
victorian novel analysis
charlotte brontë jane eyre analysis
jane eyre feminism
adèle varens analysis
victorian literature analysis
adele varens analysis
feminism in jane eyre
adele in jane eyre
gender roles in jane eyre
adèle in jane eyre
gender roles in victorian era
jane eyre governess
victorian gender roles
charlotte bronte jane eyre novel analysis
jane eyre victorian era
charlotte brontë jane eyre
If you like the work I do, then you can support it here:
www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=D8LSKGJP2NL4N
Thank you very much indeed for watching.
From the first paragraph there are some super important things I notice as a parent. Adelle's tendencies seemed to derive from neglect and then bouts of overindulgence. No one pays attention to her unless she was acting out for attention. Once Jane comes in
1. All of her attention needs are now met therefore the need to act out dissipates naturally
2. No one is going behind Jane's back to undermine her parenting/teaching therefore Jane's structure is never given a reason to be doubted and children do well in structured environments.
I had a similar train of thought on this.. I was a teacher myself, and I know that children often act out in a plea for attention and affection. Jane gives Adele both these things, but she never received them herself from her Aunt Reid - if the aunt had shown her affection, Jane may naturally have begun to conform to her aunt's standards of behaviour, but she may have continued to lash out as a child there because no matter what she did, her behaviour was never rewarded. When Jane goes to school and Helen and Miss Temple show her kindness and reward her behaviour with praise, attention and affection, she accepts her place in the school and works to continue to keep her place in their affections.
I also thought that Adele needed to learn to "human", just as much as a spoiled little boy would need to. I don't think Jane Eyre disciplines her more than strictly necessary for her to grow up into a person that can find their place in society. Structure and limits are needed, exactly so children can live alongside others succesfully later in life. It doesn't need to be a supression of the self, but rather a shaping of the behavior towards being considerate of the needs of others as well as of one's own.
I agree with all of this. Adele needs to learn to sit down and listen before she can learn anything else. And I love Jane's coolness here: she learned to tolerate being a governess and Adele learned to tolerate having one.
^^ This, my interpretation of the quote about "forgot her little freaks" was more like "she stopped throwing tantrums and we were able to move forward as we ought." and the other one "simplicity, gay prattle, and efforts to please" could easily be, "she liked to talk, and wanted me to like her, and it was hard not to love being with her."
It seems like an unfair comparison to hold up "How Jane treats a girl-child" to "How Jane feels about grown women" and call it a contradiction.
Yes, I always assumed this too, that Adele had been neglected and indulged by turns, and acted out in a desperate attempt to get some much needed attention and structure in her life. Actual affection quickly dissipated her "freaks" and she was able to settle happily into calmer behaviour. I remember even as a thirteen year old smiling at Bronte's description of Adele prattling happily, which seems typical behaviour for a well adjusted child.
I've always understood Adele's becoming obedient, calm and teachable as a result of kind, loving care from her governess. For me, the message here was that children can really flourish and reach their true potential if they are truly loved and accepted for who they are. Jane Eyre stood up to Mr Rochester when he belittled Adele and expected Jane to leave her when she found out about her background.
Yes, I saw Jane's teaching to be a marked contrast to the abuse/being locked up at Gateshead and the brutal, "Christian", poor quality/starvation portions of food/warmth and the abuse - standing on stool - shaming the sinner/walking with placards of sin/beatings.
As a teacher, I’m not sure if I agree fully with the assessment on how Jane “ironed out” Adele. In the section that talks about curbing and controlling her freaks and whims, to me that sounds like one of the first things you have to teach children which is self control. That doesn’t mean that they are oppressed, just that, for their own safety (physical, mental, and emotional), they can’t give in to every whim they have. How many times have children wanted to touch the glowing hot stove and their parent has had to instruct them on self control because it would be harmful for them. Controlling freaks and whims isn’t just a social thing. It’s how we become self controlled enough to keep ourselves safe and able to work towards our goals and dreams. Teenagers are notorious for having poor self control. And how many times have teens died in car crashes because they couldn’t resist driving faster than they should? What about children with tempers who pushed away friends by being too greedy or two demanding and end up alone and unhappy? Having self-control is essential to obtaining what you want in life. You have to work for what you want and can’t keep getting distracted by momentary pleasures. If one were to follow their momentary whims every day they would end up very unhappy in life.
As for the part about Jane encouraging Adele‘s prattle being evidence of conforming to ideals of women’s chitchat… I feel like that’s Jane’s way of teaching Adele self control, but still encouraging her to be herself and express her own opinions. She doesn’t seem to be conforming to the idea that children should be seen and not heard. And yes, women were known to prattle and gossip, but they were also taught to be meek and to not have strong opinions. They should be left pliable so they could be molded into what their fathers and eventual husbands wanted. Jane seems to be encouraging Adele to maintain her personality and express her self in ways that Jane was denied as a child. One of the hardest balances to strike as a teacher is keeping your class quiet enough so that they can concentrate and learn what you need to teach them while also allowing them to develop their personalities and be expressive. It would be way easier to teach a class that was meek and silent the whole time. Lecturing without interruption is easier than group discussions and involving the students in constructive criticism and questioning. Jane not only is encouraging this in Adele, but she actively enjoys this about her student. She gives this is evidence of why they are able to get along well together.
I’m not saying all this because I think Jane is a perfect character without faults. She’s obviously not. And I do think that she probably does teach Adele things that she may not agree with so that her student can find tolerable happiness in society. But I don’t think she was oppressing Adele and molding her into something meek and soft. She was equipping her with the tools to both succeed in life and to be true to herself at the same time.
I think the idea that Charlotte Bronte was alluding to was that because Adele was a girl child, it was necessary that she learn early-on to control herself against being spontaneous. Had Jane Eyre's charge been a young boy, I don't believe this would've been an issue--he would be in fact encouraged to be rambunctious & free-spirited and follow his whims. And, regardless of sex, the children would've expected to be trained to have self-control.
@@cate1657 Boy children would have had tutors instead of governesses by the time they reached Adele's age.
I think there is a thread that explains this. Jane Eyre is feminist/proto-feminist, but also very aware of the society she lives in and the fact that she enters it at least with many disadvantages. She’s a woman, comparatively poor, and without anyone really to advocate for her. Her survival is based on pleasing, and she has learned to do it even if she resents it. She is not going to get away with things a higher status person would, and she knows it. I think she is giving Adele similar survival skills,
Well put.
I think Jane becomes far more confident when she inherits the money from her uncle in Madeira. She is no longer a destitute orphan or governess.
@@annmorris2585 I agree. But, some lessons stick even after a change like that. The adult Jane is someone who has learned to pick her battles.
Well said.
I think that Jane Eyre separated her job, which was to teach Adele how to be in accordance with what her employers expected, and her own ideas and aspirations. She always stresses that it is a double life of sorts - her professional and her personal selves are different.
I think Jane didn't even notice that she was acting contradictory to Adele. Despite her childhood freaks, Jane did comform in the end. She became all the quiet, polite and steady things the world wanted her to be. She kept her true self to herself. And she valued peace and quiet in her environment so it makes sense she tried to fix a french wild child singing rude songs to what best suited her. And because she wasn't cruel in her attempts, it didn't bear an outward resemblance to her own treatment.
Yes, Jane in the end finds the domestic tranquility she yearned for, after being tossed about by various storms her whole young life. Similar to Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz: "There's no place like home." :) Or the old saying, "Home is where the heart is". Or another old, wise saying: "The heart that opens itself to the world opens itself to sorrow."
Right. Jane knew from her own experience that being able to restrain one's impulses (even if the motivations behind them were justifiable) had advantages. You can see from the time she spends back at Gate's Head that her ability to endure and forgive the slights of others is not about people pleasing for its own sake, but it actually empowers her in those relationships, compared to those same relatives being able to ruin her day as a child. And arguably her resistance to the impulse to become Mr. Rochester's mistress (once it becomes clear he can't marry her) is what enables her to ultimately marry him and have a more equal relationship.
And if Adele had been a boy, I'd imagine Jane would be just as eager to train him out of his "freaks." Like...trying to teach a kid who won't sit down and shut up just sucks. It doesn't have to have anything to do with social expectations of "femininity."
I think it's also important to note that the adults in Jane's life as a child were cruel and unloving to her. And Jane's "dis-obedience" stemmed from being treated unfairly and disbelieved.
I think it's unlikely that she used the same methods of coercion to gain Adele's obedience. And we have to remember that she was employed to do a job, you can't teach a child that doesn't want to learn, therefore we can surmise that Adele changed her behavior because she found Jane's company and instruction engaging.
All the Bronte's were ahead of their time. Anne's Tenant of Wildfell Hall about a woman leaving her abusive husband and taking her child away and earning her own living was certainly way ahead of it's time and Jane's independent nature refusing to bow down her tormentors and naysayers is also way ahead of the game. That's why people loved it. I love when Jane later tells the reader that while she loved Rochester and longed to be with her her upbring and her self worth demanded that she make the choice the to leave. It wasn't so much because of society itself. No one cared for her as even Rochester pointed out so she had no one to offend by living with him but she loudly screamed to her but I have to live with myself and according to her own moral code right or wrong she could feel herself right about staying with him as he was married. Powerful.
She always had the Christian morality of Helen Burns in the back of her mind. Helen became her role model in a large way.
I would love for Dr. Cox to have a session or two on Tenant oWH. It is so incredibly modern. It could have been written last year as historical fiction. I love my Jane Eyre, but Tenant doesn't get the love it deserves.
@@Ellerbeetimes100 Agree. I love this book and feel it partly doesn't get enough attention because Charlotte damned it with faint praise, and never really gave Anne her due. The Tenant is more realistic - or perhaps I should say believable - than either Jane Eyre or Wuthering Heights, with more sense of society, rather than isolated individuals. I'd love to see a bit of close reading on it.
I think it's important to remember, in the context of an English novel written by a woman of the English countryside, that Adele is French. At the time, the word "race" was often attached to nationality. Adele was of the French "race," thought to be flighty, emotional, and even morally and intellectually inferior to the rational, stoic, and thoroughly superior English. Handed this "lively" child with her whims -- "freaks" -- Jane Eyre describes her almost as one would describe a puppy, and embarks immediately on behavior training as one would with a puppy -- and with almost as much expectation of intellectual progress. Besides, Adele is a child, and obedience was expected of children. As for Bertha Mason Rochester, she is from Jamaica and not purely white -- and here again, her "race" being other than English, equates to irrational and emotional, and her "freaks" have devolved into literal madness. While Jane Eyre cries out for women's freedom, by "women" she seems to mean white English women, and even then, white English women of the superior social classes.
Anyone who has taught young children successfully knows it is necessary to encourage a degree of compliance in the pupil. This applies regardless of the genders of teacher and taught. The important distinction between the relationships between Jane and Adele and between Mrs Reed and Jane is the motivation of the adult. Mrs Reed is deliberately cruel, Jane simply seeks to get the best out of Adele.
Or perhaps she’s just trying to help her student become capable of learning. There is truth that an unruly child who cannot settle will find tasks insurmountable. It did not say Jane suppressed Adele. She calmed her. I think most teachers will understand why Adele had to learn a bit of discipline.
😁👌💯💯💯 my first thought immediately (I'm a teacher and Mum!)
As an ECE teacher my immediate response was to review Adele's behaviour in terms of attachment theory. A has no secure attachments: Rochester's relationship with her is highly conditional and deeply misogynistic in its ambivalence (you charm me/and I loathe what - and who - it is in you that charms me) fundamentally contemptuous of her due to her origins. Jane provides consistency: in setting behavioral limits, her behavioural and emotional responses to Adele and being a consistently affectionate presence in the child's life. Jane is privy to what Rochester says about Adele's mother, she observes the child's attempts to elicit affection from Rochester by displaying her "charm" or "feminine graces or "accomplishments". Adele has learned very early to be loved she must please and she will only be loved if she gives pleasure. Jane is a proto-feminist because she can see the need for Adele to earn Rochester's respect.. and perhaps that this responsibility lies solely and unfairly with Adele. I have always harboured the impression that Jane sees herself as assisting A to shoulder her burden. Jane Eyre is such a satisfying novel because all the females live lives that invite interrogation from both proto feminist and modern feminist perspectives. The Rochester/Jane romantic relationship is the least interesting relationship in this novel. Thank you Dr Cox for your accessible academicism... and for getting us to re read all these astounding novels👏sorry if I misspelled names
@@siobhancrowley5195 I'm a teaching assistant/nursery nurse of 13 years and I agree with your assessment of Adele, Jane (from what's written in the novel) provides her with what she needs a constant adult in her life that provides stability, boundaries and has a genuine affection for her. I love Jane's response to Rochester after he tells her who Adele's mother is: "No: Adele is not answerable for either her mother's faults or yours: I have a regard for her; and now that I know she is, in a sense, parentless-- forsaken by her mother and disowned by you, sir--I shall cling closer to her than before. How could I possibly prefer the spoilt pet of a wealthy family, who would hate her governess as a nuisance, to a lonely little orphan, who leans towards her as a friend?" X
I too, as a teacher, agree with the idea that Adele needs to be brought to the point where she can, indeed, learn. The teacher-student relationship has to be established in such a way that the student can trust the teacher to be a safe, consistent and kind adult. Only when this connection is established can learning truly begin. In the many times I’ve read this wonderful book, I’ve never perceived Jane Eyre to be suppressing Adele in any way, rather, she’s guiding her to become a vessel that can contain all the knowledge Jane has to impart.
Yes, less academic tripe and more human understanding.
Another thoughtful analysis thank you. Jane was somehow able to emerge from a childhood and an education that was filled with punitive adults and arbitrary rules and punishments ... her ability to not repeat how she’d been treated is remarkable. Adele lived an unstructured world devoid of loving role models. I see Jane’s approach as one that would have been appropriate to either a young boy or girl - to set expectations for listening to adults in a manner that is conducive for learning not just “lessons” but role within society albeit the stereotypical female role for females. Miss Temple’s gentle example lives on.
I like the idea, but I think there are some explanations that may account for Jane's appreciation of Adele being "docile".
In chapter 34, St. John says that "Jane, you are docile, diligent, disinterested, faithful, constant, and courageous". In chapter 31, the narrator, Jane, says "Some of them are unmannered, rough, intractable, as well as ignorant; but others are docile, have a wish to learn, and evince a disposition that pleases me. "
In both examples, the word "docile" is placed alongside the positive ones, and in the second example, it associates with the "wish to learn", education and disposition. In this sense, what Jane appreciates is that Adele is ready to be educated, and to learn something other than what is expected for women to do. And it is her good-mannered behavior that makes Jane enjoy her company.
The word "docile", being both easily controlled and taught, may be an example of Charlotte's play on words, showing both women's yearning for education and women's inferiority of that time.
Maybe I’m just simple minded but I always took Jane’s attitude toward her pupil to mean that she was so spoiled that she was unpleasant and wouldn’t listen. After getting someone who didn’t tolerate that nonsense, she settled down to being less self centered, more pleasing in that she was not throwing tantrums, and more directed. We all have to learn to manage our little freaks when we’re expected to be learning. I never took her instruction to be suppressing or crushing her spirit. I think she just taught her to marshal them so that she could use her intellect. I felt like they both said Adele wasn’t very bright so it was important that she could learn how to behave appropriately given her situation. Jane’s situation is entirely different in that she has no resources whereas Adele will always be provided for. Whether we want to be meek ladies who only care about being pleasing, or we want to be strong mentally strong and intellectual women, we need to learn to control our whims and learn to behave in polite society or you get women like Lady Catherine.
Agreed. I believe Charlotte Bronte had read Mary Wollstonecraft's Vindication of the Rights of Women by the time she wrote JE. I can definitely see the influence of that work on the way that JE harnesses her rational faculties and also teaches Adele to do more of the same within the parameters of her innate faculties. So much of the Vindication of the Rights of Women also seems to inform Jane's vehement assertion that she could not be with Rochester while he had a wife still living- he was certainly not holding up his end of the chaste marriage bargain and Jane was rational enough to see it and live by a higher moral code. she demands it of him in whatever form he can manage it while Bertha is still living. The leaving scene is one of my favourites in the whole book. Jane just Shines so strongly in that section.
Yes I had exactly same impression when reading. Adele had very poor education beforehand and was probably both spoiled and neglected by her mother. Jane seemed to teach her wisely, not opressing Adele with too much sitting and reading as we hear. They have a lot of fun together - Adele really likes her governess and she wouldn't if she was cut in her natural needs and bored to death with too much lessons. Jane became a teacher later for a group of girls and she was able to adapt the education to what the girls could approve and what could be useful to them and I'm sure she did the same wise choice for Adele. But I may not be objective because I truly love Jane Eyre both as a book and character so when she tells us Adele was a nice and happy child I believe. And trust me: not all children in the world need to throw tantrums to "feel free and be happy" and a well behaving child (which means polite and cooperative, not opressed) is nothing bad really. But I'm not from the UK ;)
I always took away the impression that there were other “foreign” elements that were trying to be quashed and suppressed in Adele. With the implication that Adele’s mother was of some loose morals, French (gasp), and eventually the impression that she may have ended up as a sex worker of some sort, I thought theater it was part of Jane’s “job” to suppress any flirtatiousness, foreign-ness and capricious behaviors that would remind Mr. Rochester and polite society of her origins. Even when I was a child, the offspring of women who were considered morally lax, were looked upon as already tainted and destined to follow in the mother’s footsteps. I also always picked up on negative opinions of the French by the English, but this may well be projection, all of it.
That was my impression as well. At one point Jane talks about correcting Adele's 'French defects'. At the end of the novel it's suggested Adele has become a sort of governess for Jane and Rochester's children, the implication perhaps being that because of her origins, this is the best situation Adele can hope for. All JMO of course. :)
Exactly! There is real harshness towards Adele's mother Cecile, whether because she was French, an opera singer with some very dubious behaviors recounted by Adele herself, or even just because she cheated on Rochester. Her defects are frequently seen by Jane in Adele, for example when she is almost pathetically interested in her outfits for the arrival of Rochester's glamorous houseguests... Or the way she begs for a gift when Rochester first comes home, and the creepy over the top way she thanks him?
When you speak of women "colluding in their oppression", in sociology it's known as "horizontal oppression". When the dominant class indoctrinates the subjugated class enough so that they perpetuate those values on each other, without the dominant class having to directly do so. Foot binding in China is a good example - it was women who routinely did the violence against their own daughters. We can see this type of horizontal oppression in many areas geographically and over time.
It still happens today in all aspects of society, women putting other women down. Women become indignant if you point it out to them.
With Adele, Jane takes on a role very similar to the one Helen took with her. At Lowood, Jane felt outraged at the injustices in her past, how her aunt’s spite prejudiced strangers against her in this new place. Helen apparently suffered from benign neglect, with a disinterested father and a mother who felt threatened by her. Helen is the one who tells Jane that they have essentially been abandoned at Lowood, however unjust it may be. There will be no one to look out for them, so they had best take advantage of the opportunities they do have. Alongside Helen, Jane matures and finds more effective ways to defend herself and secure her own position. Jane plays the long game, putting aside her feelings to gain her education, then to gain a position first at Lowood, then as Adele’s governess, and later, a teacher in a village school.
Adele is indeed an orphan, like Jane…but unlike Jane, she lived with her mother for most of her time in France. (For the moment, I’ll skip over the very likelihood of Adele being used to lure in “protectors” for her mother, as evidenced by her singing and dancing.) unlike Jane, Adele has her own maid, and the bemused benevolence of the housekeeper. The servants are on her side. She is indulged by Rochester. She may not be wanted especially, but she is not suffered in the household. Jane, however, knows the reality of Adele’s situation: orphaned, illegitimate, and the daughter of a woman of “dubious character.” Adele thrives because of Rochester’s sense of responsibility-but Jane is acutely aware that responsibility it a very thin shield. Her uncle had made her his wife’s responsibility, bade her to bring her up as their own child. We all know how well her aunt carried that out.
Adele’s French background is repeatedly stressed. Accomplished ladies may *speak* French, but they’d best not *act* French. Jane’s focus is on protecting Adele, from giving her an education, to reminding her speak English, and behave in a way that will not annoy Rochester, and assuring her that whatever school she goes to, Jane will make certain she is safe. At the end of the novel, Jane reflects that Adele overcomes her “Frenchness” (paraphrasing, I haven’t the text handy) and can navigate English society without difficulty. She has succeeded in protecting and preparing her charge for the world.
Jane Eyre is one my favorite novels, and I very much enjoyed this video.
Great clip as usual! Must say, I'm not entirely in agreement as far as Adele goes: I can absolutely see where you're coming from, but I don't think the text of the book points to this reading in any decisive way. First, we don't have any example of Jane interacting with boys so we can only guess if she'd treat them the same way as Adele or differently. Second, nowhere in the book does the narrator draw a direct connection between the values Jane instils in Adele and feminity - nowhere does it say that Adele became "feminine and docile", "calm as is becoming of a girl" etc. (we DO see this kind of language in other books of the era... mostly those written by men! :-) ) So it's open to interpretation whether Jane teaches Adele the way she does specifically because Adele is a girl (if anything, I'd say it's about the distinction between children and adults, not women and men). We can see from further passages that Jane doesn't squash Adele's personality completely: she does allow her to dress up, doesn't silence her chatter, doesn't berate her when she gets excited about Rochester or his guests (in fact, Adele's innocent excitement and openness is presented in positive contrast to the Ingram family's coldness and fakeness). She just tones them down so Adele can learn to control her initial vanity and tendency to show off (by singing age-inappropriate songs). As for keeping calm - you're right, this one's tricky seeing how Jane herself is so fiery. But I think in a way it's a reflection of Jane's own internal struggle. Jane is clearly attracted to people who, like herself, feel strongly about things. At the same time, she greatly admires the ability to control your passions (two of the people that make a great impression on her, Helen and St John, both feel strongly and are quite analytic about their feelings). I think after her traumatic childhood, when the bursts of emotions were both a reaction to abuse and led to further abuse, Jane honestly thinks that self-control and restraint will serve her better in life, especially in her social position (and she applies it to her student too: Adele can expect a better future than Jane could, but she's still an orphan of a French dancer, which will be to her social disadvantage in the future). The whole book can be read as a study of the tension between passion and restraint (Rochester has to live with the consequences of a life spent on indulging his passions, while St John denies his feelings to the point of inhuman cold. Meanwhile, Jane tries to find a balance: she doesn't sacrifice her values for her passions, but given a chance to follow her heart at the end of the book, she doesn't hesitate for the sake of fake propriety). Wow, sorry for the long essay, that got out of hand! More "Jane Eyre" clips, please! :-)
You said everything I wanted to say, and then went even deeper. Cool!
@@amybee40 aww, thank you! :-)
Yes, yes, and yes! Dr. Cox, you have picked one trait ‘docile’ and taken it out of context.
Consider: Adele is neglected, and has most likely been emotionally abused. (Her mother was a sex worker. She may have gotten pregnant as a way to ‘keep’ Mr. Rochester as her ‘protector’. Think of how desperate her mother might have become loosing Mr. Rochester’s ‘protection’.) Adele has learned to please, to throw ‘freaks’ or tantrums, to gain some sense of stability in her life. She uses her language as a means of control. (She only speaks French near Mrs. Fairfax.)
Jane brings stability to Adele’s life. That is the transformation between ‘freaks’ and ‘docility’.
In Jane’s young life, she had no control. She was physically abused by at least her male cousin. She was emotionally abused by her Aunt. Jane was not like her cousins! Neither in physical appearance, nor in temper. She states that she always tried to be good, but was never seen as good. I believe her Aunt ‘scapegoated’ her. Aunt Reed used Jane as a scapegoat. Aunt Reed projected her fears, and negative emotions onto Jane. There was nothing Jane could have done to be seen as ‘good’ to her Aunt Reed.
Mr. Brocklehurst also, was interested in identifying some people as ‘inherently bad’. This made him more likely to be one of the few that made it to heaven…
So contrasting the care of neglected and abused children to feminist ideals is out of order!
That said, I have enjoyed your deep reads. I love your perspectives, especially with Jane Austen.
Btw have you read “Jane Austen: Game Theorist” by Michael Suk-Young Chwe?
@@charlottewood-harrington8669 Just seen this interesting comment. Would you recommend Chwe's book? I did some (very) quick googling, and I'm wondering if it offers genuine perspectives, or simply maps game theory onto Austen, as could be done with any novel in which characters have to make choices. Always up for fresh insights!
I wonder if there is a deliberate spectrum of behaviour here - Adele is being taught to behave herself, then Jane moves to her own desire for a slightly less conventional life, then it ends with Bertha, the most extreme example of a woman who refused to/was not capable of conforming to social behaviour or standards. Perhaps there is a warning in that - if behaviour becomes too atypical and 'uncalm'
Jane is simply teaching Adele to be able to self-regulate and to be a critical thinker, not necessarily to be “pleasing” to society. Self-disciple is a good thing. I don’t see the inconsistency. Jane’s two greatest influences in her life at this point in the story were Helen Burns and Miss Temple. They would sit in Miss Temple’s chambers and Jane would listen to Helen and Miss Temple converse about books and ideas.
Jane said after the horrors of the typhus epidemic, once Brocklehurst was relieved of his position, the school improved, and she and the other pupils got a first rate education.
Jane values education and critical thinking. She values creativity (her paintings and drawings), she values self-discipline (her cousins teaching themselves German and Hindustani, improving themselves to make themselves more employable).
Jane values self-control and self-discipline. She wants to impart those qualities to Adele. You can’t accomplish much in life without them.
thank you for another opportunity to savor through close reading the work of a master--genius, if you will. I love how, having carefully, subtly contrasted two seemingly diametrically opposite statements on the rights, purposes and behavior of women, Charlotte Bronte (the Narrator rather than Jane Eyre) then, in the chilling moment of Bertha Mason's laugh, makes us LOOK AT Jane Eyre, her dividedness and, perhaps, hypocrisy. (The Brontes are all master dramatists.) About women "policing" women: it seems to me that such policing is part and parcel to any group of people who find or declare themselves "other;" whether by reason of gander, race, religious subscription, political persuasion, sexual orientation or what-have-you. It's amazing to me how any group of people who feel themselves marginalized, suffering from intolerance, will divide and marginalize within their own community. Usually with more intense intolerance than they experience from the "outside world."
I have watched the video and read many of the Comments. It seems to me some people are viewing the relationship between Jane Eyre and Adele from only one narrow angle Currently the feminist angle is popular, but I have lived through the Marxist view and the Freudian view, and a few others. While this can be fun, it shouldn’t be used to the exclusion of a broader view. Jane Eyre is neither a feminist or an upholder of a dominating patriarchy. She is a young English woman of the first third of the 19th century employed to teach her pupil good manners and good morals in addition to reading, writing, and arithmetic. Probably a certain amount of history is expected and included in the reading. She may teach a little sketching and piano, but only the basics. Jane Eyre manages to deal with the world in which she lives, and she also has a great deal of self-respect. She will follow the manners and mores of her world as long as she can retain that self-respect. She also has the beliefs and prejudices of her age, including a deep distrust of the French and anything French. Anyone who has read many Victorian novels is aware this was very common. If someone is not aware of this and wants a good example, I would recommend reading the account of Squire Hamley’s reaction to his oldest son’s marriage to a young French woman in Mrs. Gaskell’s Wives and Daughters.
In my opinion Adele is a pretty child of somewhat above average intelligence. Her upbringing - that crucial first seven years - has been dreadful. She has been left in the care of her nurse a great deal, except for the careful training her mother gave her in the important art of how to recite in public and how to be charming at a party. Her mother clearly expected Adele to have a career similar to her own as actress/demi-mondaine. In these circumstances I do not find it at all wrong for her English governess to attempt to stem the incessant prattle and nonsense. All children have to be taught what is expected of them in the society in which they are growing up.
I always read Jane’s approach to Adele somewhat differently. I think Jane understood Adele as having a very different character to hers and proceeded responsibly to work on refining Adele’s natural strengths (eagerness to please, lightness). Jane was very aware of the realities of her world and would have wanted her charge to be prepared to succeed in it.
The book really seems to be a triptych. One one wing is Bertha, an extreme case of a woman without any prattle or eagerness to please, who violates the serenity of her home just by existing. On the other wing is Adele, utterly disenfranchised and powerless, an actual child, only notable for sweetness and malleability. The center panel is Jane, a whole newly adult person who wants to please and displease, who exercises judgment and has a full inner life.
Rochester does his damnedest to ignore Bertha and Adele, and this drives his life and is nearly his ruination. When he finally engages with Jane, a real person in he central panel of the triptych, everyone in the picture finds repose (even Bertha).
No, she isn’t being a hypocrite in her treatment of Adele. Jane learned at a young age and the hard way that acting on your every whim, emotion and freaks will not get you anywhere in a mans world… which was the world she had to live in. She learned that you can conduct yourself with reasonable composure and all the feminine attributes that a man like Rochester would hold in high regard. Yes, She wanted to teach Adele to conduct herself in a manner that society valued but at the same time she also believed that you could still retain your identity. Basically You can be true to who you are as an autonomous free thinking person without acting a fool. Jane was the prime example of that. Her behavior as a child got her estranged from her adopted family and sent to a boarding school. But she learned from her experiences. I think she also learned how to pick her battles for example when she came back to see her dying excuse for an aunt she composed her self despite her aunt still being the horrible person she’s always been to her which actually must’ve been very satisfying to not stoop to her level I mean her aunt was a prime example of a overly emotional woman who just ask before she thinks. Yet when it came to Jane doing what she thought was right by refusing to live as Rochesters mistress she did in fact “act out”. I mean she literally took off and ran away with no plan she literally ran away from home with a suitcase and almost died and that is a classic little girl Jane move which almost cost her her life. Again it seems that every time she jumped without checking to see if there was a pool beneath her she ended up in a bad situation. But things ended up working out for her because she was always learning and correcting her mistakes. Learning when to stomp her foot and cry and when to hold your head up high and never let them see you cry (like she did when that blond gold digger tried putting her down in front of Rochester. God I wish Bronte would have told us what Rochester said to her when he “read her fortune”.
I love the comments section of your videos 😃 It is a thoughtful and well written set of replies to an excellent presentation 👏
N.B. I think it's interesting that these are Jane Eyre's final words on Adele (and suggests that Jane's appreciation of Adele being "docile" extends beyond their time as governess & pupil):
"...and when she left school, I found in her a pleasing and obliging companion: docile, good-tempered, and well-principled. By her grateful attention to me and mine, she has long since well repaid any little kindness I ever had it in my power to offer her." (ch.38)
I always took this to have a cultural aspect to it. In Victorian England, the French were seen as lascivious and debauched. Adele was born and raised in a French theatre- one of the most decadent places in Europe at the time. To display her in public, having only the mannerisms she learned in the French theatre would cause disgrace to Mr. Rochester.
@@lastchancemonicam3948 I agree. I always read it as Jane, based on her own experience, was fitting Adele with the skills to cope as an adult, so that she could either make a suitable marriage, or support herself by whatever work she could (assuming that she would not inherit from Mr Rochester in any way). Jane is a free-thinker but she's also a realist. She maybe wanted to save Adele from following in her mother's footsteps? I would also add that she was being paid to teach Adele!
Has anyone ever thought of this from a parental or teacher's perspective? I am a teacher (and Mum!) and it's almost everyone's dream to have calm still children (not docile... but even then! 🤣). Sometimes you need to look at it from a self control perspective growing from a child into an adult. Learning self control and not saying whatever pops into your head, doing whatever you want, whenever or having no awareness of what is happening around you is perhaps more of a focus here 🤷🏼♀️
Another perspective is that we always discipline and behave to our children the way that we were disciplined ourselves... even against our better judgement or by accident. It is so ingrained. Perhaps Jane was going through the motions without much thought- to "learn" or take in information you must first be still or calm (or for Jane to have quiet for her work of instructing, a clear head). This could be taking place whilst having grander thoughts of her own to feminist ideas.
I am a piano teacher and I absolutely need to have some kind of "calm" in the room. I then see the little personality flourish on my piano stool as they talk about their musings. It makes it more difficult that the girl is a child in a way. I feel this makes it more skewed. I do like your analysis but as a Mum and teacher this part just screams out at me with other motivations 🙈
@@claireconolly8355 I must admit I hadn't, being neither, but you're right (and something my piano teacher says to me often is Relax! and calm your playing) Also our modern view of the word docile may well be different from the usage in Charlotte's day. Charlotte herself knew the trials and tribulations of teaching before writing Jane Eyre so it is highly possible she wrote with that view in mind. Certainly a child blurting anything out while in company, while it might be amusing today, might well have been undesirable or embarrassing back then.
@@denisehill7769 Charlotte, herself, was not known for being docile. I believe it was she who famously asked, "Where do you have the most problem, my size [she was very short], my gender, or my attitude?" Maybe this was to show that Jane didn't always see herself clearly.
I disagree about whether Jane Eyre is promoting Adele's gay prattle. I think that Jane Eyre is characterizing Adele's natural personality in that phrase and that it shows she is not trying to suppress Adele's natural personality, and is instead appreciating what is good in her student even though it is not like Jane's character. I agree with your points about her trying to help Adele to behave with some more decorum, but she still enjoys Adele's natural personality.
I don't think that Jane Eyre engages in gay prattle herself or promotes it as a general feminine virtue. Jane herself is usually solemn or sometimes playfully provacative. However, she values her own cognitive abilities too much to believe that gay prattle would be something for herself to aspire to.
I do agree that Jane is not feminist in the sense of challenging the patriarchy. She wants the patriarchy to give her a little more room to be fully human, but she is in mostly silent revolt, not usually in overt revolt. She does advocate for her own needs and wishes on occasion, but she is not trying to overthrow social norms or the existing power structure.
As usual, a thought-provoking and fascinating post.
You have just caused a great row in this household, which doubtless will continue for the rest of the weekend:
a) my partner has made the point that, as a governess, it was not Jane Eyre's job to indulge Adele in any of her fancies - any more than it would have been her job to indulge any boy who might have come under her charge in any appointment that she might have as a governess; thus there is not necessarily a contradiction with any “feminist” interpretation of the novel;
b) (and here is where my partner and I shall continue to argue for at least the next 48 hours) Rochester’s treatment of his first wife is despicably inhumane and viciously anti-feminist (though possibly not by the standards of the 1850s): we have only R’s word for it that there was anything “wrong” with his wife (apart from the fact that she enjoyed sex, at a time when women were supposed “to lie back and think of England”), much less that she was clinically insane at the time of her marriage. Mrs R’s maniacal laughs and her cutting up of that wedding dress (not to mention her cutting up of her brother) suggest something seriously wrong - but this is after she has been locked up in solitary confinement for 15 years (not even an hour per day in the outside world) so it is hardly surprising that she might be somewhat unstable.
Personally, I thought it really sad that Helen Burns died - she and Jane had so much to learn from each other: Helen could have become less docile, more questioning, and more self-confident, while Jane might have been a little more self-critical - but that, I guess, would have made another novel. As it is, Jane really takes on too much docility when marrying the near-completely disabled Mr R.
I generally agree with your first point. I would like Dr. Cox to explore this subject a little more, in the context of historical education and child rearing. A baby, child, and teenager should learn to civilly conform to the norms of their respective society. I can personally attest to the fact that teaching a children who are spoiled, indifferent, and reckless in their way of living, are very difficult students to teach. Although teaching them acceptable norms, standards, behavior and rules are paramount, it is also through this obedience that the child will learn to discover or develop a personality with traits or ideals they are passionate about. I daresay that even feminism can be taught and instilled in Adele, but only if she is mature, educated, and trained enough to know and speak about it. Jane clearly is.
I thought a lot of the so-called feminism was more about Jane’s Christianity. She won’t become Rochester’s mistress because of her religious beliefs. Somehow that got interpreted as feminism.
This ! YES!! I am sick of the feminist analysis. I think it really misses the point and Charlotte Bronte’s own beliefs. She was a parsons daughter, after all! The novel ends with StJohn’s pious Christian missionary soldier’s death, and this is not a mistake on Bronte’s part, and yet it generally completely overlooked. I am yet to read any really good textual analysis of this fact about the novel, but I suspect I need to dig back into pre World War 2 scholars’ works to find it.
I read this in my 20's when in the throes of college and atheism and whatnot. Read it as anti-christian, or at least deeply suspicious of christianity. And yes Jane was some feminist icon then. I read it last year, as a 47 year old, and found it very different than I remembered. Instead of anti-christian, the novel struck me firmly anchored in the christian worldview. And I have to say, the book was deeply affecting and satisfying read that way. Jane's refusal to go away with Rochester is just heroic, and makes their final union, when she can meet him on equal terms and in good standing before God, so sweet. Far more interesting than whatever crap I was told about Jane while in college.
@@karlanderson2000 yep- there is a hell of a lot of crap disseminated through universities 😂. It is definitely a much more satisfying read once we accept and try to understand Jane’s Christian world view and the full context of her times. It is stupid to think that she thought the same way that we might in a secular and post birth control world. Women’s actions and thoughts on marriage are indelibly tied to their reproductive capacity and this is and entirely different kettle of fish to what we have today when the results of romance and sex can actually be controlled to a large degree. Helen Burns is critical to understanding this Christian world view of Jane’s , as is StJohn- otherwise, they need not feature as main Characters in the plot arc. Truly interesting characters. I need to read the novel again soon :)
Jane is not trying to thwart Adele’s independence or stifle her nature. She’s not trying to make Adele pleasing and docile because that’s what society expects. Yes, Jane was hired to do a job, and that job included educating this little “genuine daughter of Paris,” and teach her to self-regulate. There is nothing wrong with self-disciple, and life can be much easier and more productive and fulfilling when one is self-disciplined. Jane was a critical thinker, her biggest influences in her early life were Miss Temple and Helen Burns. Later, her cousins, Mary and Diana and St. John Rivers. All self disciplined.
And I think you go too far implying that Jane thought Adele’s liveliness was a bad thing. What I suspect is that Adele was overly rambunctious and perhaps shallow, fatuous and scatterbrained. We saw that in Georgiana Reed.
Perhaps Jane's attempt at making Adele obedient is not necessarily gendered, or to stamp out any "freaks" simply because she is a girl. But because Adele is meant to be her pupil, and teaching her would become nearly impossible if she was not calm and focused. Although Jane does become a mother figure to Adele, she is still meant to be her governess and able to do what she was hired for, which is teach Adele. As I recall, Adele had been left to her own devices, growing up in Paris with hardly a parental figure, and didn't really have one even after arriving in England (as Rochester was never home). I believe what Jane was attempting to do was teach her discipline, which is imperative for any child (female or male). I haven't read the book in some time, but I also recall Jane defends Adele, and believes she should be treated with love and respect; specially while Mr. Rochester has guests at Thornfield.
I agree Yanin - that Jane does treat her with respect. But - it seems to me - that she does not especially encourage Adele "to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for [her] sex" (ch.12). In the final chapter, Jane Eyre praises Adele for being "pleasing... obliging... docile... [and] good-tempered":
"As she grew up, a sound English education corrected in a great measure her French defects; and when she left school, I found in her a pleasing and obliging companion: docile, good-tempered, and well-principled." (ch.38)
Presumably "well-principled" here means that she conforms to "sound English[ness]".
@@DrOctaviaCox and not Catholic (of course) , but at least a good Christian.
Jane did spend years of her life cultivating an exterior of calmness, different from the restlessness and rebellion of her child self. Something she admired in her teacher, Miss Temple.
I first read Jane Eyre when I was, I think, about 13 (which would have been in about 1965). I greatly enjoyed it and quickly followed it it up with all her other published works and Mrs Gaskell's 'life'. As time went on, I read any other work I could find on her and 'the Brontes' in general. I suppose it might be wise to re-read at least some of them before commenting, but they made a strong impression on me, so I'll risk it. Even when reading Mrs Gaskell's biography while I was still a teenager, I firmly came to the conclusion that, much as I sympathised with Charlotte's frustration with her life as a schoolmarm, I would never, even though I was a bookish and placid child, have wanted her to teach me. Her exasperation with, you could almost call it contempt of, her pupils showed clearly in the letters she wrote to her family and friends. I don't think this attitude to her intractable pupils is straightforward hypocrisy so much as limited sympathy. A desire for intellectual improvement and economic independence would have won her approval - girlish high spirits not so much, or rather not at all. Of course, there is also a strong moral element at play in the example you give too. Mr Rochester had given Jane an account of his relationship with his ward's mother, which in Jane's mind would have tainted the little girl's dancing, singing and general high spirits.
I had the same reaction when I read Charlotte's letters and Mrs. Gaskell's Biography of her. Jane Eyre is the teacher Charlotte would have liked to be.
I totally agree. I first read Jane Eyre when I was 15, and have loved it ever since. One of my favorite books. But the more I learn about Charlotte the less I think I would’ve liked her as a person. I still get annoyed when I think about the forward she wrote to Wuthering Heights(another of my favorite books!). So yes, I wouldn’t have wanted CB teaching a child of mine either. I would definitely hire Jane Eyre to teach my future children French though 😊
I feel like you've trivialized the passage about "action" and a "field for endeavour" into a need for outdoor exercise, when I believe it's about agency and scope. Consider how many women ran away to pass as male at sea or at war. That's the kind of action and field I think of when I read this passage. A "field for endeavour" is more about the wide world, and all the possibilities for exercising all of one's faculties, not just the physical, which were open to men. Jane would have gone with St. John as a free agent, but not as a wife.
I think you need to keep in mind that Jane was starting with a spoiled child -- a Georgianna Reed. Being allowed to have her own way all the time turned Georgianna into an insufferable brat. And you need to look at the difference between Mrs. Reed's attempts to "tame" the wild Jane and Jane's efforts with Adelle. We need to look at the contrast in how one guides a child's spirit, teaching real discipline rather than using abuse to cow the child.
I was also thinking this, especially considering Charlotte Bronte's own experience in being a governess. All of the children she would have been working with were extremely privileged members of the upper and supper middle class, and were likely cruel, rude, and very spoilt. I can almost imagine Adele's character as having an element of wish fulfillment, of what it would be like to tutor an ideal child. It may have also been a way for Bronte to "tell" her upper class employers that the way they parented their children was the cause of their bad behaviour.
I also think it's important to highlight Bronte's religiosity. I think particularly in Jane Eyre it is made clear that Jane is a very pious person. Because obedience to God is a important tenant of Christianity, especially at this time, it could even be seen that this disciplined and gentle behaviour was an ideal for both men and women at the time (though to different extents). The evidence that I have for this is that the men who are wild and unruly in the novel are also punished for their behaviour -especially Mr Rochester. The transformation of his character from a confident, brash, and demanding character, to the quiet and dependant man of the final chapter is leagues apart. It's especially telling that he cannot have a happy ending without becoming a balanced and obedient character himself
Really appreciate your interpretations and the knowledge you bring to all these beloved classics. Thank you for all your time and efforts. :)
I had a thought or two when it comes to the way Jane trains Adele to be docile and teachable. In my personal experience as a teacher and mother when children don't have a reliable and caring guardian who creates order and regulations it can increase the "freak outs" or tantrums that generally go away when loved, cared for and guided. Poor Adele was abandoned and parentless which can really affect the psychology of so young a person, let alone any age person. Adele probably struggled with self worth and finding a sense of belonging. These situations can lead to a lot of at risk behavior and definitely make it hard for that person to be dedicated to their own education. I'd like to believe that Jane did by Adele what she wished was done by her and that in just having a more human and personal approach she is being a small spark into the feminist realm but even more so into the child psychology movement. Particularly when she states that children should be treated as though they have feelings.
It's impossible to know but would be very telling if perhaps Jane Eyre's pupil was a male. Would she not also go about taming and guiding a male student to be docile and teachable? To work with a student who isn't such would be fruitless.
I don't think it is right to compare Jane's childhood situation with Adele's. Jane as a small child tried her utmost to please her aunt, but there was no pleasing her, she just hated Jane and showed that to her all the time. After a while Jane rebelled against the constant oppression and gross injustice she was suffering from her aunt and Mr. Brocklehurst. Adele was a spoiled child. I didn't think Jane was trying to suppress her liveliness, but it was certainly her place to work against Adele's waywardness, to be able to teach her anything - just remember, at first Adele simply refused to speak English. And Jane made Adele "forget her little freaks" by granting her attention and rewarding appropriate behavior, basically by making Adele attached to her and WANT to learn, not by use of force or punishment. "Obedient" is not the opposite of "lively", but of "wayward".
On a visit to London quite a long time ago I saw a wonderful dramatic adaptation of Jane Eyre in a small theatre. When Jane is shut up in the attic as a child ( punishment for her passionate rebellion against being treated unfairly by the Reeds), the madwoman appears, dressed in red. She remains on the upper level of the stage until the end of the play, reacting with her body language to everything that happens to Jane and expressing Jane’s repressed feelings. In the final scene, when Jane marries Mr. Rochester, the “madwoman” comes down from the attic and the three of them embrace. It was a very powerful scene.
Jane Eyre, as a governess, has the job of preparing Adele for life; and Jane learned early that being "passionate" got her into a lot of trouble and delivered her into the hands of the powerful Mrs. Reed. She subsequently served an apprenticeship in self-control and self discipline at Lowood School which allowed her to harness her abilities and to choose her own course. I see her as recognizing this training in self-control as the key to her freedom: that which gives those without "rights" a measure of power. Seeing self-control in this way, it is easy to see why she would seek to share it with another person who has no "rights" to recognition by the world.
I think Jane only could teach what she knew. She had learned that being obedient and calm gets you to be accepted and respected. And she really cared for Adèle and was probably worried that she would not find her way in life if she stayed that flighty little girl. And of course after Jane got to know Mr Rochester and saw that he despised frivolity an such in women and that he didn't like Adèle for that reason probably motivated her to form Adèle into a little version of herself because she noticed Rochester valuing these character traits.
Sadly life is never black and white and the line that Victorian women had to walk is a fine example of that. Jane Eyre could most definitely be a feminist on the one hand and instill gender norms in Adele Varens. Thank you for once again starting my weekend with another thought provoking video.
I think it might be an idea to think about how Jane and Adele were treated pre their respective arrivals at Thornfield, remember for most of her 'childhood' Jane was treated horribly by the Reeds (her family, although in the case of John and his sisters' it was likely learnt behaviour from their mother). Contrast that with Adele's pre-Thornfield life where she was often around people who treated her nicely (almost indulgently if you're Rochester or his fellow male admirers of Adele's mother).
Also keep in mind that upon their first meeting Jane is the first person Adele has met in England that can speak fluent French, so of course Adele would have a severe case of verbal diohrea on first meeting Jane
Thanks for this interesting interpretation! I agree there's definitely contradiction in the character of Jane Eyre, fact that contributes to make her even more relatable. As a woman, I sometimes realise that I have contributed to my own oppression, especially when I was a girl. Jane is 18, and was very much focused on survival for much of her life, so it is possible that she still needs time to process her own contradictions. However, I think in a way she might be trying to liberate Adele: I don't think she wants Adele to be "calm" because she wants her to become a domestic decoration, but she wants Adele to be calm so that she can learn what Jane has to teach - math, French, literature. In Jane's own experience, the only way of breaking free is to possess knowledge. That gives you value beyond you gender, and makes you skilled for work, that in turn provides money, the first step towards independence, and action. Before Jane, Adele had been left to herself and so became 100% extrovert and attention seeking. Jane wants that Adele turns her attention to her inner landscape, and become a pupil. Of course that includes compromising on one's own character. Maybe I am seeing things 😅 I just love Jane Eyre, she literally saved me when I was a teenager!
I think your analysis has been brilliant. I have always felt somehow sorry for Bertha Mason. Well, I agree with someone who previously wrote that Brontë is a sort of protofeminist, very aware of the society she lived in. We are not talking about radical vindication of women's rights. It was too early for that I do not know what you think about this particular subject, dr. Cox, but maybe present day critcism as well as modern narrative, including films, make too much use of contemporary values in order to evaluate works and events from the past.
Definitely agree with your last lines here. The text is often taken too far out of its historical context on many, many character and plot points.
I agree with you that Jane was herself a lively and perhaps a wayward child but in a way different from Adele's. Adele is presented as a somewhat superficial person, somebody who cannot feel deeply, or experience real passions as Jane would. Being lively might mean both being noisy or perhaps refusing to study (something that Adele would) but refusing to submit to the whims of others or telling the truth without embellushments( something that Jane would).
I think it is merely a survival instinct. I think it is possible to both conform and rebel at the same time. The rebellion can be in quiet, subtle ways. There is a happy medium in all things. And Adele is in a similar position as young Jane was -- essentially orphans, dependent on others -- although Adele is treated with more kindness than Jane was. It is a tricky feat to master, seeming conformity, while secretly rebelling, but most of us have to do it to a certain extent -- the classic battle of the Id versus the Superego. There are several pairs of feeling/control contrasting characters throughout the book: Georgiana versus Eliza Reed, Rochester versus St. John. Bertha is all Id -- no Superego constrains her. Characters like St. John and Eliza are mostly Superego. Neither extreme gets along in the world very well. Continual yielding to impulse and continual restriction lead to undesirable consequences for both Bertha and St. John.
I believe the true opposite of Bertha is in fact Helen Burns, not Jane.
I think you're reading too much into Jane's assessment of Adele because you're not taking the pupil/teacher and child/adult dynamics into account. Compare Jane as a fictional teacher to Annie Sullivan as a real teacher. In Helen Keller, Annie had a spoiled child who had been allowed to freely exercise her whims. This is not healthy in a child, neither a real one like Helen nor a fictional one like Adele. Here are some excerpts from Annie's letters to her mentor, Dr. Michael Anangos:
"Since I wrote you, Helen and I have gone to live all by ourselves in a little garden-house about a quarter of a mile from her home.... I very soon made up my mind that I could do nothing with Helen in the midst of the family, who have always allowed her to do exactly as she pleased. .... I saw clearly that it was useless to try to teach her language or anything else until she learned to obey me. I have thought about it a great deal, and the more I think, the more certain I am that obedience is the gateway through which knowledge, yes, and love, too, enter the mind of the child."
After the focus on obedience and discipline:
"My heart is singing for joy this morning. A miracle has happened! The light of understanding has shone upon my little pupil's mind, and behold, all things are changed! The wild little creature of two weeks ago has been transformed into a gentle child. She is sitting by me as I write, her face serene and happy, crocheting a long red chain of Scotch wool. She learned the stitch this week, and is very proud of the achievement. When she succeeded in making a chain that would reach across the room, she patted herself on the arm and put the first work of her hands lovingly against her cheek. .... The great step-the step that counts-has been taken. The little savage has learned her first lesson in obedience, and finds the yoke easy. It now remains my pleasant task to direct and mould the beautiful intelligence that is beginning to stir in the child-soul."
One could hardly claim that Annie Sullivan's goal was to turn Helen into a docile, obedient little pet who would always do as she was told. The goal was to unlock the child's potential and set her free to explore the world and thrive in it.
Annie's letters are appended to Helen Keller's autobiography: digital.library.upenn.edu/women/keller/life/life.html
I aalso thought of Helen Keller and Ann Sullivean as I listened to the lecture and Anns teaching Helen to proper behavior
Jane was hired to be a governess to Adele and to teach her to live in English society.
IIRC, in the beginning Adele was behaving somewhat inappropriately, singing risque songs and speeches. Not a habit that would help her in the future.
Well, yes, indeed (depending on what future, of course!). I think it's interesting, though, that there is a great deal of focus on Jane Eyre's strident individuality etc as a child, but no real narrative interest in Adele's.
@@DrOctaviaCox She's the ward of an English gentleman. I'm assuming he would make some provision for her as she grew up, since he took her in and had her educated*.
So she would likely be expected to come out in society at some point.
*Granted, he did it from a distance.*
@@jmarie9997 the ward of a gentleman, but not known to be the daughter of one and known to be the daughter of a (oh, horrors!) French opera dancer, which was seen as next to a prostitute.
She will likely have money, but socially? Could see her having a tough go of it.
@@archervine8064 A pretty young woman with money would probably manage.
@@jmarie9997 Adele also seems to be a fairly cheerful person, as another advantage. My comparison is more between how a hypothetical young Miss Rochester might be treated, and Adele.
Very interesting and you made several points that I made in my final paper at college about Charlotte Bronte.
I had to fight like mad to get my parents to agree to me going to university; it wasn't appropriate for a girl. I was supposed to do an office job. I did go to uni and graduated but there was no argument for my brother going- indeed it was expected. And I went up in the early 70s! 20th C I hasten to add;-)
Oh, thank you!
Just to let everyone know this was not the case in every household, I was born in 1943, was always bookish, and there was never any doubt that I was going to go to college. My parents were entirely supportive. I remember my father told me a friend of his said I should be holding down a job and paying him rent because I was now old enough to do so. My father replied, "She is working steadily toward a worthy goal and I think it's my job to make it as easy as I can for her." So not all families were like yours!
@@dorothywillis1 How kind of you to reply and yes, not all families were the same. I was born in 1954 but my parents and, more especially my dad's siblings, thought I was "too big for my boots."
I am glad we both succeeded.
@@annmorris2585 I admire all women who managed to fight for their education when it was not a given, like you! And I'm happy for those who were supported in their goals from the start, like Dorothy! Both of you have paved the way for us in the later generations! :-)
@@annmorris2585 It always irritates me when people make overbroad generalizations. I was never discouraged in any ambition I had. In fact, I remember the principal of my high school calling me in at the start of my Junior year and pointing out that I had the ability to take a Science or Math major in college. I was heading for English Lit, and he wanted to point out to me while there was still time to change, that, "Math and Science are where the money is!"
I always thought of Jane’s (and therefore, Charlotte Bronte’s) attitude towards Adele as being born of prejudice against foreigners. Adele is only pleasing once she adopts English mannerisms and gives up her French-ness.
Hot take: this paradoxical treatment of Adele (And of the wife of Mr. Rochester) by the narrative voice is not due to a lack of egalitarian values but due to exophobia.
Adele is always spoken of with contempt because her mother was a French courtesan, and if you really listen to how Jane Eyre describes Bertha, you can see a hint of disgust when talking about her appearance. I think both Jane Eyre and the Author just doesn’t see foreigners as equal in morality and worth as English people.
Finally, the narrative voice becomes kinder to Adele as she grows up and become more English and “decent”. In fact, the things she criticizes about Adele wasn’t Adele’s femininity but her Frenchness, her French song and dance, her French box and clothes etc.
Jane’s female cousins in both her mother and father side are fully fleshed women with their flaws and characters. Even Mrs. Poole, peculiar as she was in the beginning to Jane, is treated like an individual, so clearly Jane and the Author can see English women as people, but not foreign women as people.
I agree like Bertha she is foreign. Equally one of her cousins becomes a Catholic nun in France and this is also frowned on. A great novel nonetheless but here we see she is without her own prejudices
If this was any of the Brontes, own views,
this would be ironic, but often common,
as the Brontes were entirely of 2 Celtic
backgrounds--- their father Patrick was
Irish, their mother Marcus was Cornish-
they were Celtic--- British, not English. but they seemed rather assimilated as
would-be "English?"?. though reports say
that they at 1st all spoke Irish style, but
the English, but later the siblings spoke
Yorkshire dialect? of English, as they lived among speakers of that dialect,
including their famous greeting, "Aye up"
for hello. National educated S England
origin Received Pronunciation (RP) is
said to be invented in 20th c. , so they had to speak the local Yorkshire dialect
if they dud speak Irish English. There is a report that says that Charlotte Bronte
feared that she sounded too Irish, but It
did not mention the other 3 Bronte s
adult speech styles.
Sorry, Sie haben nix kapiert.😔
But the people whose influence on the child Jane was based on care and love - Helen and Miss Temple - also tame her and teach her to contain her passionate nature. Jane herself says that she always attaches and subordinates herself to stronger personalities that she can value. It makes sense that she would model her teaching on them. And it can be strategic - when her behavior is no longer "freakish" and rebellious, her inner life is free to flourish. Her drawings are her only outward expression of that inner life. However rebellious and radical her thoughts might be, her manner is quiet and submissive. Is she teaching that same stategy to Adele?
Blanche Ingram is an example of Darwin's idea of womanhood, fairly typical of the time. And Jane knows that Rochester scorns that. I always think that his most redeeming feature is his recognition of the inner Jane from the very beginning, and his love for that part of her. He has always before been attracted to the other, but is completely disillusioned with it. The two examples we know of his relationships with women, Bertha Mason and Celine Varens, were painful and unhappy.
I think your analysis of Jane's treatment of her pupil as being contradictory to her own principles was very interesting. I have always felt that Jane Eyre was a series of contradictions in terms of her character. Her relationship to Rochester is very subservient at times, he is after all her master and she seems to enjoy his dominance, even though she rebels against it at times.
I have often been troubled by both Rochester's and Jane's attitudes toward Adele.
I always interpreted Jane's "calming" of Adele was more in the way of, say, Super Nanny, than the treatment she experienced at Lowood. Her cousins, John especially, were spoiled brats who never faced any consequences and reasonably she wouldn't allow that kind of indulgence for her pupil. There's a line between imaginative and delusional that it's important to teach children. I can't help but think of Anne Shirley. She used her imagination to escape her bleak reality but doing so often led to (mostly amusing) mishaps. She never lost that imaginative, dreamy side of herself, but she did learn to be more practical and comfortably inhabit her social sphere.
I think it's telling that Jane doesn't conform for her aunt or Brocklehurst - her conformity is accomplished by Miss Temple, gently, by offering her affection. Thus she turns the same methods on Adele.
Maybe she sees no contradiction, though, between outward compliance with social norms and inward rebellion. If she believes it works for her, she might believe it is equally appropriate for Adele.
Adele was an orphan like Jane herself, so I always thought that Jane was particularly invested in her because she saw her past in Adele. Adele was just brought to this English setting with completely different standards, so she stuck out like a sore thumb. When she was finally taught by Jane, she became a lot more humble and gentle.
I have written a lengthy narrative poem telling the story of Bertha Mason that explores just that cause for her incarceration. My theory was that she was declared mad because she would not conform to the strict English views on the woman's place--being alcoholic and unchaste didn't help matters--and that years of isolation, with the narcotics used to keep her compliant, turned her madness to reality. Clearly, I never fell in love with Mr. Rochester (except when portrayed by Toby Stephens).
I have always wondered at this. The women with whom Jane interacts at Thornfield all lack some vital essence of being considered by Jane as true companions. Even the upper-class: she scorns the gentlewomen as either too harsh or as sort of wilting violets - not that she desired interaction with them in the first place. The only women who she exalts are Helen Burns and Miss Temple, and later Diana and (to a much lesser extent) Mary Rivers. To be fair, she has very little to say on most men, too - we really only see her have a meaningful relationship with Mr. Rochester and St John Rivers (really he serves more as a foil to Mr. Rochester's flexible morality/faith by being too rigid and dispassionate.) There are, as I understand it, three people in the entire novel who Jane esteems and could see as suitable lifetime companions: Helen Burns, Mr. Rochester, and Diana Rivers (as kind of a package deal with Mary.) Her society is limited, but it seems she limits it further, or her nature does. The conclusion that I've come to in reading it over the years is that she is generous to the idea of people in the abstract - women, in the case of this passage - but her judgement allows no practical room for everyday human failings, not unless her strong, individual attachment is involved. She is rigid in her self-restraint and self-recrimination, too. Her cry for the freedom from restraint becomes almost paradoxical, I think, because while she believes that society and men should not hold women in bondage, it's done with the strong implication that women are responsible for policing themselves just as rigidly as society has done, and views any deviation as shameful weakness with moral implications. This is what I think she passes on to Adèle, and later uses to judge Bertha Mason (a woman who failed to police herself and control her own impluses.)
To be fair though Bertha really was insane: a sane person doesn't try to burn a man to death while he sleeps, attacks her own brother, burn a mansion down, or leap from its rooftop to her death.
@@jillkjv3816 Exactly. A woman who lost control of her impulses is scarcely represented as a woman at all. More of a fiend, something that is so wholly bad that she doesn't really get to occupy the space of "woman" anymore.
@@katsmenagerie106 Whether woman or man, those actions would testify to insanity in either case.
@@jillkjv3816 And I'm so interested in how Jane defines/views madness!Unfortunately Jane (and the reader) aren't given a mad man to study, but we do have Mr. Mason who, at least by Mr. Rochester's conjecture, will end up much the same as Bertha one day. However, interestingly, Jane critiques him for being too pliable, too governed by the wills of others, and this betrays his "weak mind." If the sign of a mad woman is to be uncontrollable, the sign of a mad man is to be too pliant. Does it betray a difference in Jane's expectations for the sexes? Or does Mr. Mason serve a more general function as Bertha's equal and opposite, a caution against bending too much to the will of others in the same way that "intemperate and unchaste" Bertha serves as a reminder of where unchecked passions lead? I don't have a ready answer; I just think they're interesting questions worthy of further study. 😊
@@katsmenagerie106 Maybe Charlotte wanted us to come to our own understanding on the issue. In my understanding, based on what I read, Rochester gave Bertha some leeway in the beginning of their relationship but in time during their marriage her congenital tendency to insanity started flaring up too much to be ignored. He didn't want to send her to a mental institution, those were absolute horrors back in Regency and Victorian times, and he thought the best way to contain the situation was to confine her to her own space in Thornfield, watched over by a servant. There really weren't that many alternatives in those days.
A factor at play here may be the role expected of the governess. It is her job to make their charge obedient, compliant etc. So maybe that explains Jane's behaviour. She may not like it but she needs to tow the line to keep her position. So maybe that explains the apparent contradiction?
There is a difference between a child and a woman. Jane had spent years with children as a child and as a teacher. How she treats this student doesn’t reflect her views of grown women. She saw what the child needed : attention and structure. Kids aren’t small adults. Teachers are looking for a student who wants to please because they’re easier to teach. Jane is a working woman who is a teacher. She should not be viewed in one dimension.
Your explanations amaze me everytime. What a fantastic teacher.
I don’t have access to the novel right now so I can’t respond in the way that I would wish to. But I do appreciate your willingness to take a fresh look at the text and the narrative voice. It is an intriguing idea that Charlotte Brontë unintentionally recreates some of the same forces that created her. Isn’t that what happens to all of us? We want to be different. We want to rise above the limitations that we see and feel. But in reality it’s a very difficult thing to do. And maybe we succeed in some ways and not in others. I don’t think your interpretation diminishes Charlotte’s powerful plea to see women differently. I think it may ground her realistically in England of the 1840s. Thank you for the challenge to look more closely!
I do think that Adele Is a child in great need of love and loving attention. And I think Jane herself has been seeking same throughout the novel. I will have to find the book and look back at these passages to better understand them. I do thank you for your insightful & often illuminating commentary. I so enjoy your channel!
I'm probably commenting too soon since I haven't finished the video yet but a woman's mobility in society was largely determined by their ability to perform the feminine expectations, so this too seems to fall in line with the results she would be expected to produce. Sure no one interfered with her methods but if Adele had simply continued her improper behavior Jane would have been sacked and some one new hires to take her place.
I love these close readings you do Dr. Cox! I'm sure you have several video discussions planned, but I think it would be cool for you to do a close reading about a classical horror novel like frankenstein or dracula for halloween. :)
I love your lectures, by the way. Brilliant.
I always felt that, in Miss Bronte's opinion, while Jane's liveliness was meant to indicate her strong spirit and independence of thought Adele's liveness was judged to be flirty, frivolous and rather too French to be completely acceptable.
I've always thought that Jane's repression of Adele had to do with the girl being French; that Jane was Anglicizing her pupil into a model English child, instead of a passionate French grisette.
One that note: the older I get, the more I want to kick Charlotte Bronte in the shins; genius she might have been, but also a censoring, hypocritical prude.
Yes, indeed - there is very, very clearly an anti-French strain in Jane's relationship with Adele. Here are her parting words on the matter: "As she [Adele] grew up, a sound English education corrected in a great measure her French defects" (ch.38).
@@DrOctaviaCox Similar theme in Villette.
Charlotte was a product of her time and background.
I wanted to comment the same, Bronte's views are of her time. I got the impression that Adele is treated by Jane as this frivolous little French girl who doesn't have Jane's intellectual gifts and the best outcome for her is to be corrected and made docile to the degree that she can be married off because otherwise she would inevitably end up like her fallen mother.
Exactly. Also she seems the kind of feminist that would shame other women for being sexualised.
I’m in agreement here with everyone else who doesn’t think Jane is quashing Adele’s character-she’s simply kindly and firmly teaching limits to a child who had never been taught anything at all. I believe Jane would have taught a boy in her charge similarly. (And a quibble, off topic: I interpret Bronte’s use of the word “field” in the passage quoted to be figurative, not literal-as in a field of studies or interests, rather than a patch of ground to run around on.)
My comments below are based on the fact that a governess like Jane (in sole charge of a single child, with no supervision) is essentially acting in two roles: as a teacher and as a parent -- two parents, in fact (father [disciplinarian] as well as mother [nurturer]).
Jane has no experience of child-rearing except for Mrs. Reed and perhaps some of the teachers at Lowood School after it was reformed. What can she do except make it up as she goes along, and maybe try to do the opposite of everything Mrs. Reed did? Jane is also very young (about 18) and, although she acts mature, she can hardly help being unsure in trying to make up an entirely new (to her, anyway) form of parenting.
[Actually, having just now read Wikipedia to refresh my memory, in both places she had *someone* in a semi-parental role. There was Mr. Reed (long dead) and Bessie (a powerless servant) in the Reeds' house, and then Miss Temple (who was probably more of a mentor than a parent, though).
Also, deliberately teaching Adele to be a feminist would be quite dangerous to Jane's job. It would be entirely too likely to explode in Jane's face when -- not if, when -- Adele repeats some of Jane's radical ideas to anyone else. Adele wouldn't even have to tell anyone who she learned those ideas from. Jane is damned if Adele does tell (because a governess must not hold unacceptable views, let alone teach them to her pupil) and damned if Adele doesn't tell (because a governess is supposed to beat unacceptable ideas out of her pupil). Possibly, out of his fascination with Jane and from his own unconventional life, Mr. Rochester might forgive Jane for teaching Adele feminist ideals. No one else he has introduced Adele to (at least in England) would forgive it.
One other point. Jane spent several years teaching at Lowood School. She knows how to teach girls in whatever way the reformed Lowood School thought was appropriate. She has enough experience that this kind of teaching may be second nature by now. The teaching that Jane was doing had to have included docility, elimination of "freaks," encouragement of calmness and discouragement of running around, and general "teachableness". Of course that's how Jane teaches Adele -- probably less strictly than at the school, as I suspect a group of girls is less easily "teachable" than just one.
Thank you for your analysis.
I love the fact that many comments mention the importance of a healthy hierarchy between a child and a parental figure. Without it kids feel like the parent can't really protect them. Also, behaving properly is still a requirement today even for men if they want to be taken seriously in university or at work. That's an important soft skill and Jane was doing Adele a favour by opening more social lifts for her.
There is another aspect to this discussion. Up until today we don't have a language to describe parenting accurately. It's true that many women can say the same things about their own parenting practice that will sound decent and reasonable for many parents. Yet behind these words there will be some horrible things like those the author of the video explains: policing your child, punishing them for being lively, forcing them to be obedient. It's not the case with Jane Eyre but it's the case with many modern day mothers.
I think an interesting element to consider is Adele's and Bertha's foreignness. Taking a post-colonial reading here may shed light on why Jane believes that rejecting traditional gender roles is appropriate for her but not these other women/girls. Her role for Adele is not only to break her of her caprice but also her French-ness and Bertha is in situated in start contract to Jane as being inherently non-English.
Yes, I completely agree here. I have always interpreted the "freaks" of Adele as a result of being French and her "irresponsible" French up-bringing, and that it is Jane's task to make her more "English." In Bertha's case, she is portrayed as racially less than "pure" and genetically mad. In Chapter XXVII Rochester states that Bertha's mother AND younger brother were both in institutions, and that Richard Mason may end up the same.
Jane never becomes passive and compliant. She is aware of her inferior and precarious position without money or connections, but she is always truthful and honest, expressing her opinion even in the daunting presence of Mrs Ingram who regards her like some detestable insect. Her outburst when Rochester tells her that she must leave because he is getting married is remarkably brave and passionate for a reserved woman of inferior status towards her employer. Her prior experience with her spoilt, wayward, capricious cousins and their freakish behaviour is something she wants to prevent in Adele. We know how those overindulged children ended up as adults, so Jane is keen to smooth out these flaws rather than encourage them. We also see Blanche Ingram as an example of overindulgent and unrestrained upbringing. Adele wants to attract attention with her looks and wiles because this is what she has learned from her French maid perhaps. Jane teaches her to cultivate other attributes, and rightly so.
Wow, this analysis was so powerful! What a thought provoking ending: How are we as women inadvertently working towards the further suppression of other women.
I wonder if part of Jane’s desire to make Adele more compliant was about her being French. Bronte had a strong dislike of foreigners (something she made more obvious in Villette). Jane often seems to blame Adele’s faults on her French upbringing. She mentions at the end of the book that going to school corrected Adele’s “French defects”. Jane must have believed Adele would never make her way in the world unless she needed to act like a proper English lady. Besides, Jane was rebellious, but she defied the world quietly. She would sneak off and read books. She would sit quietly and make observations about people (both Mrs. Reed and Mr. Rochester note how Jane watches people). Even Helen notes that Jane is an attentive student in class. Adele likes to sing and dance and is extremely vain (and sings inappropriate bawdy songs). I think those are the things Jane most hopes to educate out of Adele.
What an interesting point, as always. I hadn’t thought of this when I read the novel myself, but of course you're right: while it would be Jane's job to "tame" Adele as her governess, the amount of pleasure she seems to take in it doesn't speak merely ot professionalism.
Overall, I think Jane Eyre has a lot of proto-feminist ideas clashing with what I would call internalized misogyny. As an example: while a fuller and taller figure was evidently in fashion, the narrative treats the conventionally beautiful women of Georgiana Reed, Blanche Ingram, Celine Varens and (of course) Bertha Mason rather poorly. Even Mr. Rochester's dialogue at one point seems to mock Blanche's size, something along the lines of "and what an armful she would be", if I recall correctly? It seems almost juvenile to have them all be shallow, stupid, cruel, mad, or a combination of all the above, but of course I think one would struggle to find a woman who hasn't felt insecure in the ways in which the normative bounds of beauty shut her out. Brontë must have been surrounded by novels wherein only beautiful women were allowed inner worlds, were allowed to be protagonists, or were allowed to be loved and desired at all. I can hardly blame her for wanting to give a plain heroine a voice, too, but I do think it a pity that she seems sometimes to pit Jane against other women.
Maria Temple, Helen Burns and of course both the Rivers sisters are wonderful, though. Even Rosamond Oliver seems to be allowed depth that the four mentioned earlier simply is not-- perhaps because Jane is not in love with St. John, already receives attention and affection from Mary and Diana, and so there is nobody for whom Rosamond is competition?
I'm only a grad student and it's been a while since I read the novel, so please forgive me any misremembrances or missed points!
This was an interesting analysis. I think my previous take on this seeming contradiction has been to assume that, even though Jane is fierce & independent, she is also developing feelings for Mr. Rochester and wants Adele to be especially well-behaved to impress him. Like many women, she is anticipating what the (primary) man in her sphere wants and trying to shape reality to meet that, so she will be viewed in a positive light. I think most of us have done this before, if we're honest, even if it meant undercutting someone else.
Jane Eyre is my favorite novel and I enjoyed your ruminations on the relationship between Jane and Adele. I think it's wise to consider Jane's young age during most of the story: she was only a teenager and was finding her way in the world for the first time, independent of the Reed's household and Lowood Institution. I don't really feel that Jane was a feminist character at all, at least not as we consider feminists today. She was a young woman who simply wanted to be appreciated and loved for herself. In regards to Adele she was receiving a salary to take care of the child so if she gave the child too much freedom to run wild it probably wouldn't please her employer Mr. Rochester in the long run.
I agree with Jane Eyre reaching out for love in her life and that the novel is not really about her being any sort of proto- feminist. Jane Eyre is much more forcefully a book about Christian morality (with some very odd spins into the ‘science’ of phrenology!!). We forget thus because our culture is no longer so connected to the Christian framework of being in the world. On another note, Personally, I am just about sick to the back teeth with feminist ( and post colonial) readings of the novel, having had these be the predominant takes on the novel as I studied it (inadvertently twice due to two different lit. degrees I did at university! ) .
However, It is still my absolute favourite novel ever (well,… so far!)
:)
@@virginiacharlotte7007 Excellent! You show exceptional taste. :) It's always made me sad that all the filmed versions of Jane Eyre basically rip the Christian ethics which Jane strives to live by out of their productions. A novel that ends with "Even so, come Lord Jesus" should not have those Christian underpinnings ignored. The only production that kept it in was Jane Eyre: The Musical. There's a song that Helen Burns sings to a grieving Jane Eyre called Forgiveness that blew me away by its beauty. Someone obviously snuck a camera in to film it in the theater because they put it on UA-cam. Not sure if it's still on here, they might have removed it for copyright, but it's worth checking out. Very powerful song and sums up Helen Burns perfectly.
@@jillkjv3816 I totally agree about the last line of the novel and the refocus on StJohn. I need to research some older scholarly critiques about this to get any further insights as it still interests me a lot and yet most modern literary criticism totally ignored it. My current thinking is that Bronte did this to juxtapose two equally valid means of living a Christian life - a Christian marriage that has become fruitful with children now that Rochester has been scourged by fire, his eye plucked out and his right hand given up for him to be to be able seek God’s and be redeemed; and, with Jane framed in a blue gown like some sort of Madonna of caring for the now more pious but infirm Edward and their own children. Then, St John is shown to have sacrificed himself in order to spread the good word but dies in a heat of fever on the subcontinent.
I agree Re the lack of this aspect of the novel in any of the films. That said, 1983 with Zelah Clarke snd Timothy Dalton is my all time favourite. ( although the forgiveness Jane offers Aunt Reed in that version seems to not ring very true- Jane comes across as still being angry and not really very forgiving at all! )
Michael Jayston does a very good job with a Rochester in the 1972 tv series to but Sorcha Cusac was a bit of a let down as Jane.
I did see a filming of Jane Eyre the musical during lockdown. The UK National Theatre streamed it for a short window of time. Sadly, I cannot actually recall the song from Helen Burns. I might try to find it again somewhere. And sadly, Here is where I part with you, perspective-wise! Sadly, I think I cannot recall that song because I ABSOLUTELY ABHORRED the whole live show! I Hated it from go to woe, I am afraid. It had some of the worst acting of those characters that I have ever seen- Rochester, in particular. I Hated the staging, the set, the lighting, the Re use of actors for multiple roles in Too many cases . Bluuk! It was just an awful experience for me. Sorry. It was just such a post modern overblown mess and a total letdown- I found it “soulless and heartless”, as our hero Jane opines :/
But I will try to find the bit with Helen Burns dinging once again . :)
Regards,
VC
@@virginiacharlotte7007 I didn't see the lockdown filmed version of the musical, sounds awful. What I did see was the original cast on Broadway because I flew to NYC to see it when it premiered. I went with two girlfriends, neither of whom were Christians, and imagine my shock when the Christian gospel was loudly proclaimed in that dark theater filled with (probably) mostly non-Christians watching. I had no idea what I was in for and never thought I'd see the day the gospel was proclaimed in a Broadway show! Yes, there was Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell, but those were rock musicals and even at times cast doubt on Christ's diety. The original cast recording of Jane is one of my favorites. Beauty personified.
@@jillkjv3816 that sounds very different to the uk version. Now that I think of it ( which I generally try not to!) the uk one was not actually a musical- so I have done fairly well with blotting it out of my memory it seems! I will definitely look for the Broadway version now. The USA certainly seems less afraid to talk about and display their ideas about religion in the public sphere. thanks for the heads up :)
I don’t think that there is too much issue with guiding Adele to start curbing her more childish flights of fancy as she moves towards adulthood. Miss Temple taught Jane to curb her flightier emotions and tell the truth and analyse situations in a more rational manner. Miss Temple did not submit to Brocklehurst’s unreasonable demands and I think Jane saw the benefits of utilising a more stoic approach to walking through the world and trying to affect change within it, despite the reality of the restrictions on her life as a woman in that era. Personally, I think that Becoming an Adult Triggly-Puff (or Bertha Mason) serves no man or woman very well even today. I maintain that Bertha had a genuine mental illness that was beyond her ability to control, even if it was somewhat exacerbated by her role as a bartering chip into a respectable British family because of her dowry and lily-livered and scheming family.
I found it fascinating that you brought up Sarah Stickney Ellis. I have not read Daughters of England, but I do own an American first edition of Wives of England and have read it. In that book as well she does talk about the greater and lesser sexes, but she also says that women need to be in charge of the household finances because men don't have the discipline to do so.
Mrs. Ellis also states that if the husband is a spendthrift, the wife will be blamed no matter what she does. If she allows her husband to buy anything he wants, she will be condemned for allowing the household expenses to be ruined. If the wife carefully manages their expenses, then she will be condemned for not allowing her husband to buy anything he wants.
I would really like to see videos on your reviews of Wives of England and Daughters of England in the same manner as your review of Fordyces's Sermons for Young Women.
Jane is a rebel herself but she knows it's not wise, and perhaps not right, to impose her own views on others. As far as I understand Adele is a simpler creature than Jane and perhaps Jane can see it. Why should Jane teach Adele be like herself. She should teach Adele be a better version of Adele, not some version of Jane. And Jane does this.
I grew up wanting so badly to be the angel in the house. But alas that was not to be. Society changed all the rules. I've been confused about who I am for the last 40 years. Is that weird? I was a stay at home mom but I was divorced with 3 children and was only able to be home due to the generosity of my parents.
I am now reading Jane Eyre, and am well past this part so no spoilers to me. Thank you for your insight to this portion of the book. I thought it just showed how young and untried by the world Jane is but it's a bit more than that. Thank you for including the part about Bertha, that didn't enter my mind at all.
Fantastic! I loved your analysis. Reading Jane Eyre filled me with mixed feelings... on one hand, it is absolutely extraordinary how relatable Jane's plight is even today, her inner world, and what that means for a novel written in the 19th century. On the other, Jane ending up with Mr. Rochester is the one element that sticks out like a sore thumb if we judge it through our modern point of view.
This is a marvellous analysis. I always 'overlooked' Adele, although it did bother me a little that Jane's affection for her pupil is so very tepid. Even before the arrival of exciting Mr Rochester Jane is hardly interested in her.
But I put it down to Adele's being both French and illegitimate. At some point in the novel Jane refers to her 'French faults' and I attributed her wish to remodel Adele to a desire to make the girl more English.
In the past illegitimate children were often considered untrustworthy and prone to sexual licentiousness. After all, weren't their parents the same?
Jane was and is one of my greatest heroines, but perhaps she is more like my mother than I realized. I always cast my mother as Mrs Reed, but perhaps I'll reconsider.
My favorite book!
Brilliant discussion 😊
I think an important context to consider in Jane's opinions of Adele is that Adele is FRENCH. There was very, very much prejudice against French "looseness of morals" in England at that time, and the narrative voice conveys this by how sexual the song is that Adele performs, learned from her mother. I think talking about the feminism of the times is fascinating, but there was also the "racism" (French vs English) which should be considered. I think it wasn't just "high spirits" that Jane was trying to train Adele away from, but her "French-ness," which was considered unacceptable in English society at that time.
Earlier in Jane Eyre, the saintly Helen Burns instructs Jane in Christian meekness, and that is portrayed in a positive light. It seems to be a case of the means justifying the ends. Mrs. Reed, Bessie, Mr. Brocklehurst, Miss Temple and Helen Burns all want to make essentially the same changes to Jane's spirit. If it's taught with a spoonful of sugar then the novel portrays this as positive, if not, it is condemned.
I do agree, though perhaps with a caveat. Jane Eyes' own nemeses were deliberately cruel and mistaken in their understanding of Jane Eyre. I believe I recall Jane not pushing against her teacher Maria Temple who was kind and loving in the same way she did with her Aunt and Mr. Brocklehurst - her aunt who hated her for selfish reasons of not wanting to share her home with the child and Mr Brocklehurst being an out and out women hater - so perhaps Jane was fighting against both those behaviours? I'm not sure where to go with that argument beyond pointing out that Jane behaved with Miss Temple as Adèle did with Jane - perhaps for Brontë’ both arguments were valid - that a lady ought to meet all sorts of ideals to be considered worthy and that they also needed more than what society allowed them?
The view you take of the reIationship between AdeIe Varens and her governess sheds some Iight on her [CharIotte Brontë's attitude towards Anne's noveI 'Tenant of WiIdfeII HaII'. I find CharIotte's character enigmatic and inconsistent but I suspect that this enigma is a function of 'woman' on the moraI cusp of Victorian attitudes towards women. It is one of the ironies of CharIotte's criticism of Jane Austen, because in most of Jane Austen's works the quaIity of the woman's character is the attraction and why a Miss BingIey and a Mrs Eiton are comic characters. 'In 'ShirIey' we have a more defined view of CharIotte in one of the most eIoquent passages in aII her writing.'The Iast bIue stocking...'I think 'ShirIey' CharIotte' s work, and perhaps her retrospections on her two sisters. That it was entitIed 'ShirIey' is significant. One thought on EmiIy appears in 'The Beethoven Companion' {Faber and Faber} where CharIotte rearks on EmiIy pIayig Beethoven Sonatas. If EmiIy had ben Geran she might hvehad career as a soIoist Iike Cara Weick . CharIotte was very good when writing of her sisters. HeIen Burns' is bases on her sister Marie I think
How do you interpret the seeming contradiction in Jane Eyre’s treatment of Adèle Varens and her own rebellion against custom?
I don't think we'll be able to separate the author from the narrative voice or Jane Eyre here. I would love to think that Brontë did this deliberately to show how people can act against their own virtues without realsing, but it's also entirely plausible she just didn't see how teacher a girl the costum manners contribute to what she was writing against. I think we all experience this. My parents never wanted me to hold back from anything just because of me being a girl, but I got the dolls and my brother the car toys. I never wanted to hold myself back from anything but I lack skills in many traditionally male dominated areas simply because I didn't deem the skills necessary for me. I do think the passage is historically feminist and I give Brontë the benefit of not being a miraculously woke person with the same insight today's society has a few hundred years later; similarly, today's society could really take some lessons from a few hundred years before. Knowledge is a dubious thing. So are customs.
Isn't she just teaching Adele to behave as she does? Jane was a headstrong child, but she left Lowood as superficially meek and well behaved as anybody could possible expect. She learned to hide her feelings, suppress her anger and bite her tongue - pretty much how she taught Adele to behave. Only the people who know her very well realise that she isn't as meek as she appears (first Rochester, then the Rivers). I blame that Helen Burns for all of it!
I’ve read the novel several times and as a non-native speaker I always assumed Jane's stance on educating Adele and tempering her nature had more to do with Adele being French than her gender. There are several passages that allude to Adele's nationality like a character flaw. So my interpretation was that this might be a case of xenophobia more so than of misogyny.
@@heatherrobertson6110 She was a woman making her way in the world alone. She did her job teaching Adele because it was her job.
She rebelled against her aunt because her situation was intolerable. She showed her true self to Rochester because she was in love, and she stood up to St John because he was a threat and a bully to her.
(Also, by then she was independently wealthy.)
I don't believe the passage in question has anything to do with Jane repressing Adele at all. Jane is simply explaining that Adele is a lively child who has had no disciplined habits. This can make for very difficult teaching if you try to take such a child, and make them sit down and focus on a boring lesson. Jane is simply saying that she is helping Adele learn self-discipline, self-control, a love for learning, and listening to those in authority over her.
The comparison with Jane's childhood doesn't hold up, because Jane is described by Mrs Reed as being too quiet and serious; unlike Adele who is lively and loquacious. Jane also strives to be obedient, and only rebels because she rightly perceives her unjust and unfair treatment, in spite of her compliance.
Jane/Charlotte are feminist, but as her commentary on Bertha Mason shows, women with no self-discipline, no self-control, and no moral principles are dangerous.
Will you do an analysis of Col. Brandon and Marianne? Their relationship is puzzling to modern readers. Austen seems to advocate a father figure for the teenage girl.
Thank you!
For me, the story was magical and i had to think and analyze a lot. My heart was calmer when i got the result.
Mr. Rochester character is like human, Adele's character is like a culture and Jane is like a holy spirit. They are related.
Berta is like an evil spirit that pulls a person down a bad path. There are words in the Bible - if the eye and the hand tempt you to sin, cut it a away.
Just a great story, love wins and saves.
I wonder how you think Charlotte Bronte’s negative experiences as a governess affected her portrayal of Jane as governess. Was Bronte really able to remove herself from the Adele-Jane relationship to implicate Jane in the subversion of Adele.? Very thought provoking !
I disagree. Jane's guardians didn't just want her to behave, they wanted to crush her spirit, that spirit which wanted to do more than her feminine lot allowed. It wasn't just her liveliness they disliked, it was her spirit. The first cruelty we see inflicted against Jane is for the simple sin of reading a book, i.e., educating herself, and I must add it was a very calm activity. Mr. Brocklehurst detested her unsubmissive spirit, but Jane also did well under the kind tutledge of Miss Temple, whom she wanted to please. There is nothing wrong with disciplining a child in how to act and how to think, and this is what I think Jane does with Adele. I see her maneuvering Adele away from her attention-seeking "freaks" into much more calm behavior. Jane herself is very calm, yet her spirit is not broken (quite an accomplishment having been at Lowood). I don't see her doing anything with Adele to break her spirit. In fact, I think Adele is not a very intelligent person and has very little spirit of her own, but perhaps that is because it is not important to the story.
Dearest fans of Jane Eyre, if you want to experience an even more wonderful work of Charlotte Bronte's, then read Villette. I am on a one woman mission to encourage the reading and analysis of this masterpiece so please give it a shot. Trust me. You won't regret it! Or you might regret it. But you'll never forget it!
I wonder if Jane Eyre’s attitude towards Adele isn’t more a reflection of generalized attitudes towards children (male and female). This doesn’t negate the contradiction, because as a child Jane Eyre rejected characterizations of herself as disobedient or bad. But it might be interesting to look at it not only as her attitude towards a girl, but also to look at attitudes towards children in general. Anne Brontë in Agnes Grey says more about children and that could perhaps inform this discussion. Just a thought!
Dr. Cox. Thank you this attention to Charlotte Bronte but how can you ignore Villette? Dare I hope that one fine morning I will visit UA-cam and find that you have done a Close Reading of Villette, the most underrated, unrecognized, and uncelebrated of works? Please give me hope! Bless you!