Thoughts on the book.
Read the preface to the second edition. Here she (Charlotte Brontë) defends herself against those that would call her impious. This leads me to believe that the initial reaction to the book was not shock at the power of her lead female character, but rather at the manner she portrayed and contrasted the clergy of the time.
Moreover in her preface to The Professor one of the examples she uses is that the calm exterior of a person does not mean that there is a calm interior.
There are two thing too notice here. Firstly Charlotte uses the story as a tool to make a point. This is in contrast to J.R.R. Tolkien who’s purpose is the story and makes points along the way. Secondly the point is the value of consistency or authenticity of a person, and, moreover, the lack of this in her culture at that time.
I propose that her purpose in writing is four fold: Firstly she contrasts Jane, quite and reserved, with her cousins, noisy and pampered. The conclusion of that comparison is her success and their decline. I propose that this is spoken against over pampering of the “elite” while pointing out the value in the poor.
Secondly there is the three way comparison between Mr. ?Brandingham?, St. John and ?Emily?. Here she shows three differing forms of conviction, namely pious resolve (Pharisaical?), passion for God’s Glory, and passion for God. She shows the first to be useless, hollow and damaging. The second to be akin to steel: resolving into perseverance, but at the cost of love and tenderness. The third is shown as a consuming fire. Deeply moving, inspiring to perseverance and motivating love.
Thirdly there is the contrast between the nobility and the common. This is seen as the contrast between Miss ?White? and Jane. Here her purpose is to show the insincerity of this society and to contrast it with the authenticity which comes from love.
Fourthly, and most importantly, Charlotte uses Jane and Mr. Rochester to show the importance of being authentic and passionate. Charlotte depicts this as valuable in contrast to the hollow ways of the accepted norm.
The structure of the discussion:
Is she making a point.
Yes. See prefaces, and some quotes (if possible).
What is the point?
Promoting authenticity and passion while protesting its absence in society.
Is it not feminism?
No that is a tool to emphasis the aforementioned point. See …
Result
Has society moved on? What can we learn of ourselves? What should we seek?
Conclusion
Jane Eyre is a story of passion and authenticity emphasised through trial and contrast with the opposite. Society is not authentic, perhaps it should be.
NOTE: There is a much value in the religious and moral points raised by this story. As far as the point of the book is concerned they are thee to further emphasise the point by showing the different forms of motivation and contrasting their effect. I think in the context of the book they are not there to be religious, but as tools. However they do raise an interesting point which the church should consider: what motivates us? Are we mealy pious? Or are we authentic? Furthermore in our authenticity are we focussed on God or His glory? The latter misses the former, but the former can achieve the latter. Do we love God?
There are several instances of oppression represented in this book. They each offer an evil and a response. Moreover many of them have a conclusion for both parties.
There is the oppression by the Aunt. This is through neglect favouritism. The response is a despairing of pleasing, which results in a acceptance of the fact. It also results in hatred and rebellion. However later there is also forgiveness. The result of on the Aunt is a challenge to her honour, a sending away, and later a refusal of forgiveness.
There is oppression by the son. This is through raw force and teasing. This results in hatred and avoidance. Coupled with the unfairness imposed by the aunt this results in desperate action to try and avoid. Jane responds firstly by avoiding where possible and bearing through where not. Finally, however, she resorts to violent self defence, which results in total seclusion, a better thing. The son ends up in a bad way and dies of it.
The sisters? They end up self contained and not caring to the point where they deny the assistance and sympathy of Jane.
The school headmaster. He oppresses for Religious reasons. His oppression takes the form of sparsity/neglect/forced little food, resources. The result is a general dislike verging on hatred. Moreover it results in the sickness and death of many of those in his care. However it does allow space for the generosity and kindness shown by the headmistress. Jane’s response to him is dread and avoidance, and eventually a mater’s defiance. His end is expulsion and some disgrace.
Jane then breaks free from all oppression for a time and makes her own way in life. At her new work there is no oppression until she meats Mr. Rochester.
Mr. Rochester oppresses her primarily through her love for him. It is not a bad oppression rather it rises from within Jane and clouds, confuses and frustrates her being. Her response is initially one of defiance and resistance. She refuses to accept it and tries to live around it. This causes much turmoil in her life. When she eventually yields to this oppression there is joy and happiness.
The oppression comes from within and so it has no other party to comment on. However it does relate to outside phenomenon. When she has fully given in and embraced this oppression and decided to marry Mr. Rochester she is happy. However the result when she discovers the he still has another wife it terrible. She cannot deny herself and lower herself even for this love she has, and so channels the passion into fleeing. This she does with singular success and foolishness.
Next she is physically oppressed by the elements and hunger. Her response is a tireless attempt to overcome, to the point where she nearly walks herself to death. Again there is no direct oppressing party but the outside world plays a significant role. This leads to the interesting part where she is forced to beg, even though she would rather not. The lack of help she is given sheds lights on some other topics. Her response to this is not resentment but rather sympathy. Eventually she teaches at a school in the town.
She is not oppressed by the sisters, rather she is built up. However she describes the brother as oppressive in will. He speaks well and has such a deep conviction, with which she can sympathise, that she is compelled to do as he asks.