You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.11 AVERAGE
4.11 AVERAGE
hopeful
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
I just re-read this - hadn't read it since high school. I guess I didn't remember it very well! It was pretty shocking. Jane herself has to be one of the most bland characters in literature, but Mr. Rochester has to be one of the most sick and twisted! And her cousin Mr. Rivers is no better. The fact that she ends up with Rochester in the end is not exactly a feminist statement, sadly. But - I guess that's too much to expect.
It ain't no Pride and Prejudice.
It ain't no Pride and Prejudice.
hopeful
mysterious
sad
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
dark
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Reader, I was annoyed throughout this book. And I think that was the point for most of it. Charlotte Brontë did a phenomenal job of writing about politics, self-identity, class structure, and the power struggle of marriage and sexuality. All of those themes are woven throughout the book, and Charlotte’s beliefs shine through in Jane.
Now, Jane. I respected and liked child Jane. She asked questions, challenged the status quo (or at least in a way a child can), and was growing. Adult Jane. Oh my god did she just not ask questions. Or the right ones. What do you mean you aren’t going to ask about the third floor? Or what Grace is doing up there?
Jane clearly has a backbone, and that was definitely unusually for the time. I understand Jane gains her independence and she is her own mistress. But does she actually? She’s marrying him on her own terms which is huge. (You still can’t make me believe their love story) But could their marriage actually work without Rochester’s ailments? Is it not because of his weakness and him being humbled they are now on equal footing?
I guess I’m really struggling with the idea that Jane’s happiness came from the happenstance of Rochester’s injuries. If none of that happened, and she came into her money and still married him when she morally could, would this work out? Would she still be independent?
Now, Jane. I respected and liked child Jane. She asked questions, challenged the status quo (or at least in a way a child can), and was growing. Adult Jane. Oh my god did she just not ask questions. Or the right ones. What do you mean you aren’t going to ask about the third floor? Or what Grace is doing up there?
Jane clearly has a backbone, and that was definitely unusually for the time. I understand Jane gains her independence and she is her own mistress. But does she actually? She’s marrying him on her own terms which is huge. (You still can’t make me believe their love story) But could their marriage actually work without Rochester’s ailments? Is it not because of his weakness and him being humbled they are now on equal footing?
I guess I’m really struggling with the idea that Jane’s happiness came from the happenstance of Rochester’s injuries. If none of that happened, and she came into her money and still married him when she morally could, would this work out? Would she still be independent?