Scan barcode
book_concierge's review
2.0
I hated it in high school, I still don't like it. I remember in high school many girls thought it was "so romantic!" Huh? Rochester is an insufferable jerk (what's with the gypsy garb scene?). St John Rivers is even worse. Jane, dear, you are better off alone!
I only re-read it (March 2007) because our book club wanted to read a classic and we chose this one. I actually recommended it, hoping that I'd have more appreciation for it with maturity. I guess I do appreciate it more, and can look critically at the ideas presented (and how radically feminist it was in its day), but I still don't like it.
I only re-read it (March 2007) because our book club wanted to read a classic and we chose this one. I actually recommended it, hoping that I'd have more appreciation for it with maturity. I guess I do appreciate it more, and can look critically at the ideas presented (and how radically feminist it was in its day), but I still don't like it.
rebeccazh's review against another edition
I loved reading this so much. I can't believe it took me so long to read it.
It is rebelliously feminist; way ahead of its time. My favorite thing was the realism with which the novel is written. Jane's emotions/feelings/thoughts are so realistic and detailed. It was so enjoyable to read. I grew to really like, admire, and esteem Jane. She sticks to her morals no matter how hard it is -- the setbacks and misfortunes that she encounters don't knock her down, but refine and strengthen her beliefs. I was overseas when I read the last part where Jane had to go around and beg, and I couldn't help shuddering in sympathy. I found Rochester to be an arrogant asshole but he is a character who is so very intriguing to read about. LOL he's a Byronic hero -- the Byronic hero is the original 'bad boy with a heart-of-gold' trope amirite. Bertha, though. I just did a postcolonial mod this semester and I can almost hear the postcolonialists pouncing on her character -- I'm looking forward to reading [b:Wide Sargasso Sea|25622780|Wide Sargasso Sea|Jean Rhys|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1453021061s/25622780.jpg|142647].
I was talking to my friend about this book, and I was surprised to find that she disagreed with Jane's decision to leave Rochester. My friend thinks that Jane is hypocritically and unrealistically clinging to some perceived moral high ground, because in the end, she goes back to Rochester. Her reasoning is this: no one knows Bertha exists, Rochester is rich and able to support the both of them, and both Rochester and Jane love each other, so there is no reason for Jane to leave him, and that it is kinda stupid of her to, really. What if they both change and can no longer reconcile? He'd be the one that got away, since he was so perfect for her. She's foolish to uphold some perceived moral high ground when she should seize the opportunity/reality.
As we were discussing, I started thinking of Jane Austen's novels. [b:Jane Eyre|10210|Jane Eyre|Charlotte Brontë|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327867269s/10210.jpg|2977639] is written about 30 years after [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926]. I'm amazed. I couldn't think of two novels more different. Aside from the writing and the focus of the authors and everything, I was thinking that in Austen's world, wealth/money/property is a big a reason for marriage -- I mean, Lizzie seeing the Pemberley estates was part of her process of transformation/falling in love with Darcy. Austen also supports social structure, to some extent; she critiques it, but ultimately, she thinks we should keep to it, because it is flawed, but there is still value to it. It made me really appreciate how ahead of its time [b:Jane Eyre|10210|Jane Eyre|Charlotte Brontë|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327867269s/10210.jpg|2977639] is. Jane doesn't care about Rochester's money, and the novel criticizes the social structure in a way that suggests there's little worth in it.
Soooo I really loved reading this book. It was so good.
It is rebelliously feminist; way ahead of its time. My favorite thing was the realism with which the novel is written. Jane's emotions/feelings/thoughts are so realistic and detailed. It was so enjoyable to read. I grew to really like, admire, and esteem Jane. She sticks to her morals no matter how hard it is -- the setbacks and misfortunes that she encounters don't knock her down, but refine and strengthen her beliefs. I was overseas when I read the last part where Jane had to go around and beg, and I couldn't help shuddering in sympathy. I found Rochester to be an arrogant asshole but he is a character who is so very intriguing to read about. LOL he's a Byronic hero -- the Byronic hero is the original 'bad boy with a heart-of-gold' trope amirite. Bertha, though. I just did a postcolonial mod this semester and I can almost hear the postcolonialists pouncing on her character -- I'm looking forward to reading [b:Wide Sargasso Sea|25622780|Wide Sargasso Sea|Jean Rhys|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1453021061s/25622780.jpg|142647].
I was talking to my friend about this book, and I was surprised to find that she disagreed with Jane's decision to leave Rochester. My friend thinks that Jane is hypocritically and unrealistically clinging to some perceived moral high ground, because in the end, she goes back to Rochester. Her reasoning is this: no one knows Bertha exists, Rochester is rich and able to support the both of them, and both Rochester and Jane love each other, so there is no reason for Jane to leave him, and that it is kinda stupid of her to, really. What if they both change and can no longer reconcile? He'd be the one that got away, since he was so perfect for her. She's foolish to uphold some perceived moral high ground when she should seize the opportunity/reality.
As we were discussing, I started thinking of Jane Austen's novels. [b:Jane Eyre|10210|Jane Eyre|Charlotte Brontë|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327867269s/10210.jpg|2977639] is written about 30 years after [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926]. I'm amazed. I couldn't think of two novels more different. Aside from the writing and the focus of the authors and everything, I was thinking that in Austen's world, wealth/money/property is a big a reason for marriage -- I mean, Lizzie seeing the Pemberley estates was part of her process of transformation/falling in love with Darcy. Austen also supports social structure, to some extent; she critiques it, but ultimately, she thinks we should keep to it, because it is flawed, but there is still value to it. It made me really appreciate how ahead of its time [b:Jane Eyre|10210|Jane Eyre|Charlotte Brontë|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327867269s/10210.jpg|2977639] is. Jane doesn't care about Rochester's money, and the novel criticizes the social structure in a way that suggests there's little worth in it.
Soooo I really loved reading this book. It was so good.
ketutar's review against another edition
4.0
I am surprised by the feminism in this story. I was expecting a gentle, submissive Victorian flower and get an independent, intelligent woman that wouldn't have difficulties living in today's world.
I also like Charlotte's writing. Easy read.
added 2.9.2020
I just read [b:The Scarlet Letter|12296|The Scarlet Letter|Nathaniel Hawthorne|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1404810944l/12296._SY75_.jpg|4925227] and found that too to be feminist. I went to see the reception of these two books, and read this: "In 1848, Elizabeth Rigby, reviewing Jane Eyre in The Quarterly Review, found it "pre-eminently an anti-Christian composition," declaring: "We do not hesitate to say that the tone of mind and thought which has overthrown authority and violated every code human and divine abroad, and fostered Chartism and rebellion at home, is the same which has also written Jane Eyre." That alone would be reason enough to read this book :-D
I would like to say to Elizabeth Rigby, that one should not obey authorities who are unfair, unwilling to listen, and unjust. One should rebel against such authorities, whether they are parents, employers, friends or God. And every person should support Chartism, because people are created equal and should be treated as equal, and not promoted because they happen to be rich, and hindered because they happen to be poor. Codes Jane Eyre violates need to be violated, broken and discarded, because they are bad, offensive to good sense and truly Christian heart, and destructive, created to raise sheep, slaves, and cannon fodder, degrading human value and deeply chauvinist.
And it is not an "illegitimate romance", because Jane left immediately when she found out that Edward was married, and didn't return until he was a widower.
Added 3/4-23
Now I have read [b:Wide Sargasso Sea|25622780|Wide Sargasso Sea|Jean Rhys|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1453021061l/25622780._SY75_.jpg|142647]. I hate him.
Also, Adèle could be Rochester's daughter. He was having sex with her mother, she says he is, and he took her in. She is about 10 years old. It doesn't much matter if she was or not, she could have been. "Bertha" was locked in the attic while Rochester was having an affair with this French dancer. Just consider [b:The Yellow Wallpaper|8217236|The Yellow Wallpaper|Charlotte Perkins Gilman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1276430319l/8217236._SX50_.jpg|17352354]. Wouldn't you go mad?
Too bad she didn't get him.
I kind of want to read a book about Adèle, where she gets even with her "dad".
I also like Charlotte's writing. Easy read.
added 2.9.2020
I just read [b:The Scarlet Letter|12296|The Scarlet Letter|Nathaniel Hawthorne|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1404810944l/12296._SY75_.jpg|4925227] and found that too to be feminist. I went to see the reception of these two books, and read this: "In 1848, Elizabeth Rigby, reviewing Jane Eyre in The Quarterly Review, found it "pre-eminently an anti-Christian composition," declaring: "We do not hesitate to say that the tone of mind and thought which has overthrown authority and violated every code human and divine abroad, and fostered Chartism and rebellion at home, is the same which has also written Jane Eyre." That alone would be reason enough to read this book :-D
I would like to say to Elizabeth Rigby, that one should not obey authorities who are unfair, unwilling to listen, and unjust. One should rebel against such authorities, whether they are parents, employers, friends or God. And every person should support Chartism, because people are created equal and should be treated as equal, and not promoted because they happen to be rich, and hindered because they happen to be poor. Codes Jane Eyre violates need to be violated, broken and discarded, because they are bad, offensive to good sense and truly Christian heart, and destructive, created to raise sheep, slaves, and cannon fodder, degrading human value and deeply chauvinist.
And it is not an "illegitimate romance", because Jane left immediately when she found out that Edward was married, and didn't return until he was a widower.
Added 3/4-23
Now I have read [b:Wide Sargasso Sea|25622780|Wide Sargasso Sea|Jean Rhys|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1453021061l/25622780._SY75_.jpg|142647]. I hate him.
Also, Adèle could be Rochester's daughter. He was having sex with her mother, she says he is, and he took her in. She is about 10 years old. It doesn't much matter if she was or not, she could have been. "Bertha" was locked in the attic while Rochester was having an affair with this French dancer. Just consider [b:The Yellow Wallpaper|8217236|The Yellow Wallpaper|Charlotte Perkins Gilman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1276430319l/8217236._SX50_.jpg|17352354]. Wouldn't you go mad?
Too bad she didn't get him.
I kind of want to read a book about Adèle, where she gets even with her "dad".
squish93's review
emotional
hopeful
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
janedieadra's review
dark
emotional
hopeful
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
louisexchan's review
challenging
dark
emotional
inspiring
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
gurofl's review against another edition
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
evadis's review against another edition
relaxing
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
mika55's review
challenging
dark
emotional
inspiring
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75