Scan barcode
astraether's review
5.0
I really enjoyed this gender-flipped take on Jane Eyre, with a dash of "Dracula" thrown in. I find myself thinking of it frequently, even a couple years after finishing it. I haven't read much of Mimi Matthews' other work -- this one appealed to me for the Gothic elements, although I may have to seek more of her novels out. But the characters in this were compelling and intriguing, and I loved the unsettling/spooky moments as John delves deeper into the mystery of the children, the house, and who's sneaking into his room at night. For romance fans, it's a "closed door" one, so don't expect any steam, but it's still delightfully creepy!
waclements7's review
4.0
Retelling of Jane Eure
I really enjoyed this gender swapped story, and the gothic elements were nicely done. The writing is engaging, and the character of John is a sympathetic one. Mrs. Rochester was more of an enigma at the beginning of the book, but gradually her character is fleshed out. I liked Stephen and Peter as they became more solid characters through the course of the book as well.
I really enjoyed this gender swapped story, and the gothic elements were nicely done. The writing is engaging, and the character of John is a sympathetic one. Mrs. Rochester was more of an enigma at the beginning of the book, but gradually her character is fleshed out. I liked Stephen and Peter as they became more solid characters through the course of the book as well.
maryannetrengove's review
3.0
3.5 stars for this classically structured spooky tale that was perfect for the Halloween season reading list. I enjoyed the atmosphere of the book ~ the misty moors and gloomy halls of the estate, where the new school master, John, is charged with the care of two very creepy little mute boys. That is where this book really shines. It also gets props for alluding to the sinister and paranormal events taking place ~ the bumps in the dark are so well played. I found myself googling some of the Victorian terms as well which always means I am fascinated by the story. Without giving anything away, the box bed scene was clever and creepy as you know what. Think that the author could have tipped the scale just a bit on the scare level but it was a good read for the season and I would recommend it if you enjoy books like Dracula or Frankenstein.
jesforeverlostinbooks's review
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
5.0
Oh this was just plain fun if you know me I love a good retelling! So a gender swap Jane Eyre & Dracula and I’m here for it! Once you start you won’t want to stop. Combining two famous classical works into an evocative tale of menace & evil while still making it original equals perfection. Each of the two classics are clearly and beautifully represented in the story. A gothic romance dripping with moody atmosphere… it’s eerie & unsettling with just the amount of tension. Thornfield Hall has never felt more frightening, the author's mastery with words provides a dark and bleak environment with the ever present mists surrounding the story. The novel is named for John, but Bertha is the real star of the story, and watching her grow and develop is a fascinating delight. All in all, this was captivating. I didn't want to put the book down and stayed up late to finish.Those who enjoy classic retellings, gothic lit, and the fun of gender swaps should add this to their reading list.
“In most instances, the retellings are borne of a deep and abiding love for the source material. That's certainly true in my case. I love Jane Eyre and I adore Dracula. Spending time immersed in their worlds was enormous fun.” - Mimi Matthews
“In most instances, the retellings are borne of a deep and abiding love for the source material. That's certainly true in my case. I love Jane Eyre and I adore Dracula. Spending time immersed in their worlds was enormous fun.” - Mimi Matthews
iseultofireland's review against another edition
4.0
As someone who read Jane Eyre a very long time ago and remembers almost nothing, I loved this book! It wasn’t too predictable because I didn’t remember the original, and I liked that the author added Dracula into the mix. The audiobook is great!
lectora21's review
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
sadtomato's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
4.0
I have a love-hate relationship with Jane Eyre's retellings because it is one of my favorite books of all time and it was very formative for me when I read it as a teenager. I like the dark side of this a lot, the mix with Dracula (another favorite of mine) is really interesting and I think it works well in the story. I have mixed feelings with the gender change in the characters because although I like to see a strong female character who takes charge of her destiny, John's character inevitably falls a little short and that's not something I felt with the original Jane (maybe because of her leaving Edward and assessing herself, a part of the story not included here). I also miss the playful banter in their relationship, one of the things I love the most on the original book, and the moral dilemma who John here doesn't confront. All in all I enjoy this well enough and it's a commendable effort and an interesting new point of view of a classic.
Note: I enthusiastically recommend reading Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys if the way Bertha is portrayed in Jane Eyre doesn't sit well with you. Beautiful book.
Note: I enthusiastically recommend reading Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys if the way Bertha is portrayed in Jane Eyre doesn't sit well with you. Beautiful book.
camivasquez's review
2.0
I knew going into this I wouldn’t have a new favourite, but I at least thought I’d enjoy it. To be fair, that was mostly true until we neared the second half. The thing is, I found everything bland and boring. I know this is a retelling, and I usually love them IF they bring anything new. From the Mrs Rochester’s first letter it’s made obvious what Mr Rochester’s secret is, so there wasn’t even a little bit of intrigue on that front. I didn’t care for John, and I didn’t care for Bertha either. I do wish there were more scenes between John and the children. I feel that would have been nice to explore. See how their relationship developed and how the children grew to trust him despite their initial warines. Tbh, everything felt a bit underdeveloped.
amelia990's review
3.5
This book has left me conflicted. There are things I really liked and things I really did not.
Let's start with the "this just did not work for me" stuff. It was hard for me to become invested in any plot line because we jumped between the past plotline in Bertha's letters and journal and the current plot line with John. Every time it jumped, it pulled me out of the story. Epistolary stories are already hard to read; flipping between that style and regular fiction did not work for me. I think the story would have worked better had Bertha's writings been provided to us at the time John receives them. (Honestly, we are smart and live in 2023; we know what a vampire is without the journal). The other issue is the...well, vampire. I have no issue with the vampire per se. I actually have a lot of thoughts on the vampire in a positive manner. My issue was more - if someone has read Dracula, this is just way too similar. There was a way to pay homage without having literally the same story details as those between Jonathan and Dracula. I know Matthews can do homage - she has other stories where she does it brilliantly. I don't know if she didn't feel comfortable enough with the horror that she clung to Stoker too much or she had no idea how to write a vampire story.
The things that I liked, and what really saves the book, are the discussions of gender and how Matthews uses the gender reversal in John Eyre to critique both Bronte and the Victorian world. Bronte's Rochester is a jerk with a lot of power and privilege. By casting the role as a woman, however, the character reads very different - Bertha /doesn't/ have power. Legally, she belongs to her husband, even if she is wealthy and has this big house and these servants and what-not. Her locking up her (admittedly much more dangerous) spouse is an act of survival - both for herself and for the two boys. Bronte's Rochester's act of locking up his spouse was selfish. Similarly, Jane's passivity grates on me because she already has no power as a penniless, orphaned woman; when John behaves in a more passive manner, it makes him read as a kind, thoughtful man. John lives in a society where he has power purely because he's a man; he isn't helpless the way Jane is. I also appreciate Rochester as the villain (mainly because I find him villainous in both works). The symbolism there is [chef's kiss].
Let's start with the "this just did not work for me" stuff. It was hard for me to become invested in any plot line because we jumped between the past plotline in Bertha's letters and journal and the current plot line with John. Every time it jumped, it pulled me out of the story. Epistolary stories are already hard to read; flipping between that style and regular fiction did not work for me. I think the story would have worked better had Bertha's writings been provided to us at the time John receives them. (Honestly, we are smart and live in 2023; we know what a vampire is without the journal). The other issue is the...well, vampire. I have no issue with the vampire per se. I actually have a lot of thoughts on the vampire in a positive manner. My issue was more - if someone has read Dracula, this is just way too similar. There was a way to pay homage without having literally the same story details as those between Jonathan and Dracula. I know Matthews can do homage - she has other stories where she does it brilliantly. I don't know if she didn't feel comfortable enough with the horror that she clung to Stoker too much or she had no idea how to write a vampire story.
The things that I liked, and what really saves the book, are the discussions of gender and how Matthews uses the gender reversal in John Eyre to critique both Bronte and the Victorian world. Bronte's Rochester is a jerk with a lot of power and privilege. By casting the role as a woman, however, the character reads very different - Bertha /doesn't/ have power. Legally, she belongs to her husband, even if she is wealthy and has this big house and these servants and what-not. Her locking up her (admittedly much more dangerous) spouse is an act of survival - both for herself and for the two boys. Bronte's Rochester's act of locking up his spouse was selfish. Similarly, Jane's passivity grates on me because she already has no power as a penniless, orphaned woman; when John behaves in a more passive manner, it makes him read as a kind, thoughtful man. John lives in a society where he has power purely because he's a man; he isn't helpless the way Jane is. I also appreciate Rochester as the villain (mainly because I find him villainous in both works). The symbolism there is [chef's kiss].