Talk:Jane Eyre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is part of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the General Project Discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit)

"Characters section" I feel that a section devoted to characters is needed (cf. Pride and Prejudice which has a large section including even minor characters. I was wanting to correct some omissions, such as the fact that Mr Rochester is rather ugly, and Jane rather short, but could only do so if I broke up the flow of the (rather rambling) Plot Summary section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jonstammers (talk • contribs).
Tasks you can do:

Contents

[edit] spoiler location

I believe the "Spoilers end here" portion should be moved after "Background". Read: Helen Burns


Can't anybody get a better image than one from SNL? Really, people. That image detracts from the whole article, even with the caption that states it's satirical. And a screenshot from any other real version of Jane Eyre would probably be more 'fair use' than this one is. --TexasDex 23:13, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

I agree that the image is not informative nor appropriate to be at the top of the article. I have moved it and the caption here to the talk page below. -- Infrogmation 23:22, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I thought the very same thing about a month or so ago and went picture hunting but could not find anything satisfactory. The only thing I like was this painting, but I couldn't find a full size version. Gamaliel 23:42, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I can't belive that the Saturday Night Live comedion would do that weird picture of Jane EYRE ethior.

[edit] Quotes section

Quotes section is too long should go to Wikiquote. Mandel 07:44, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

I have shortened this section and added a link to the Jane Eyre Wikiquote entry, as requested. --Psipes 15:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Musical

It's also been adapted into a (quite nice) musical. I'll try to add something about that later, but anyone who wants to do a little research and help, that'd be great. -- WikidSmaht 19:56, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Breaking Benjamin Video

I have something to add. The music video for "The Diary of Jane" by Braking Benjamin the tomb stone at the end reads Jane Eyre.

(I added the title to break this from the entry on Jane Eyre the musical.) The grave at the end of the BB video looks more like "Jane Bryan" - do you have a source from that band that contradicts this? If not, I think it remains speculation. Thanks! Cabiria 12:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


Sorry it is Jane Brayan sorry to bother you.

[edit] Mesrour

Someone has suggested that the article Mesrour (Rochester's horse) be merged with this article. I'm all for it, since it seems to be inadequately notable for an encyclopedia article and could merge quite neatly into what is already here. Any comments? Onlyemarie 04:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree - go ahead. CarolGray 08:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Uuhhh...sure, but does Rochester's horse really nead mentioning?
I can't help but think that since Mesrour has so very little significance in the story, it should not be added into the Jane Eyre article. It wouldn't really fit comfortably into the article any way. I can't find any logical place it could go when I read it. In and of itself, the horse does have some meaning and some small bit of significance, so I think that if it should be included on Wikipedia at all, it should be any article by itself, not a part of thee Jane Eyre article. 67.141.209.6 14:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Mosier
Someone actually created an article about Rochester's horse? The mane is mentioned no more than a couple of times in the book. --Shayan g 07:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
heh, I don't see why there's an article on Mesrour and not Pilot... it seens to me that Pilot plays a bigger part... ~Sushi 05:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] keep mesrour

There should be an entry for Mesrour, I think, but it should mention the Arabian Nights first, rather than Jane Eyre. Mesrour was originally a character from these tales; the name was widely appropriated in the 19C as a reference to blackness and/or the Orient (in Vanity Fair, the Eastern traveller Bedwin Sands has a black slave named Mesrour; H. Rider Haggard's The Brethren also features a eunuch named Mesrour).


[edit] --- For Place Names

Joes anyone know why there are ----- in the book where there should be place names?

eh, I have no idea, but it's really annoying... I thought it wuz just an error in the book that I wuz reading (like the publishers, not the single book in itself) ~Sushi 05:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

This was a common device used in 18th and 19th century texts, to create the effect of omitting information for propriety's sake. It could be that Jane Eyre might want to conceal information about her exact identity or whereabouts to the reader. Or Charlotte Bronte may have not wanted to reveal that Lowood was in Lancashire because then it would be even more obvious that Lowood was based on the Clergymen daughters school that she attended in real life. So, Lowood is located in -----shire.

This was a really common device. For example in Persuasion by Jane Austen the book is all about Anne Eliot. Austen mentions her name a million times, the Eliots this, the Eliot pride... But when Anne is given a letter it is addressed to A. E---. ChristineD 23:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Industrial Revolution

Can anyone tell me if there are any references to the Industrial Rev. in JE? I know that it was written a bit before the major boom happened but, any ideas?

None that I can think of. Economics enters mainly via the plantation system in the West Indies, and trade via Madeira. Remember, too, that the book is set 20-30 years before it was written, and in the isolated north of England.Exitr 17:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Might I be allowed to add in the Criticism section the common opinion that the book is terribly boring? I can site sources. Of course these sources will range in age from approx. 13 to approx. 45 and be of both genders. I should have no trouble finding many such opinions. --72.12.30.143 07:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I take it this is a joke from someone forced to read the book over the summer. I guess this person doesn't know anyone over the age of 45, or figures that people older than that don't count. --Psipes 19:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Although the book has many fans, I see no reason why it should not be criticised for being boring, so long as it is completely justified with sources. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and although I cannot for the life of me think why, I appreciate that some may find the novel dull and this viewpoint could be addressed in the article. 14.07 11th Aug 06

I don't quite see the significance of a book being criticized for being boring, since this is so common a criticism it can be applied to (really) any book, and so highly objective that everyone has to decide for himself (after all there are some people who seem to actually have enjoyed 'Jane Eyre'). Imagine yourself in the position of an Editor giving reasons why he would want to turn a book down:

Editor self #1: "Well, I think it's boring."

Boss #1:" So, why is it boring ?"

Editor self #1: "Well, it doesn't have pictures or dialogues.."

Boss #1: "I see, books without pictures or dialogues, really..."

Now contrast this with...

Editor self #2: "Well, I think it's boring."

Boss #2: "So, why is it boring ?"

Editor self #2: "You know what boring is, no? B-O-R-I-N-G? As opposed to interesting? I fell asleep at least twice. I wished I could die on the spot, that kind of boring."

Boss #2: "Ah, yes, I see. You mean it's boring. You really have a point there. Send the rejection letter out, telling the author his book is boring, so he sees we really don't dismiss him just so. "

Wouldn't you rather be Editor self #1 ? 15:43 , 13/08/2006


I had the misfortune of reading this book for english class about a dozen years ago. It lasted 500+ pages and NOTHING HAPPENED. It's like sitting in an empty room without the benefit of watching paint dry! Still, I highly recommend it to insomniacs -- it'll put you to sleep faster than an ambien overdose. Should I point out that rating this book as "top priority" is a total joke? -- DragonAtma 71.247.238.133 10:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


Um - I think somebod got me wrong there...the second example was really an example of BAD argumentation (I fell asleep...). NOTHING HAPPENED is really pointless, because Jane grows up, her best friend dies from tuberculosis, she falls for Rochester (who seems to have stepped from a Byron Poem), lives in a haunted hause, gets to the point of almost making vows, when last-minute, it is revealed that the groom already has a wive, who attacks him with tooth and claw the same day, Jane runs away and sleeps in the heath, BY ACCIDENT finds part of her family and makes up some injustice to them and is almost forced to travel to India as Missionary and her Cousin's wife, when finally....I see, that's not really much action. There should also be some explosions, a pirate, a dog, and casual nudity.

Lisalogic 19:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

There IS a dog: Pilot, not to mention the spectral hound which gives Jane a fright on the moors. Colin4C 19:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah, and if you count the scene where Jane saves Rochester's live by pouring water over the sleeping man, there might also be some casual nudity, and some explosions when Thornfield finally falls to ashes.....yet I don't see the pirate coming into the picture...wait, is there not a scene where the lovely Blanche tells Rochester he looks like a robber...if i'm right she also tells him he looks like a pirate, but she lies anyway.

So, the book has everything, and thus is perfect. I think we should also keep our eyes open for a good-looking vampire, I'm sure there is one to be found somewhere - ah yes, the cousin...

Lisalogic 19:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bertha's supposed syphilitic infection

I believe this idea is from the book Can Jane Eyre Be Happy: More Puzzles In Classic Literature by John Sutherland, but I haven't read it myself so I'm not sure if he originated this thought or if he cites other scholars who originated it.

I've removed the entire Critcism section because the issue of syphilis seems just a tiny tangent of the enormous amount of scholarly criticism that exists on Jane Eyre. If someone is willing to tackle a more comprehensive survey of this topic, fine; otherwise it seems odd to focus on this one topic. --Psipes 15:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC) Nice Article


[edit] Reinterpretation of Mr Rochesters Motives

This IS from 'Can Jane Eyre be Happy...' by John Sutherland. I'll put it here for now but I think (with a bit more work) it can go in the article.

John Sutherland reinterpretes Mr Rochesters motives entirely. He claims that his wooing of Miss Blanche Ingram was NOT to make Jane jealous but because he wanted to marry Blanch. Then the relatives of his first wife, Bertha, told him privately that they had heard that he was planning bigamy, that they were keeping an eye on him, so he'd better think again. Thus Rochester got rid of Blanche against his will. The argument continues that, as Mr Rochester still wanted to get married, he had to pick someone obscure enough to fall under the radar of his first wife's family. Thus he picked Jane NOT because he was in love with her but because she was available and sufficiently unimportant. I can't remember if there was more to the argument. The essay then ends on a chilling note, suggesting that once Mr Rochester gets his eyesight back he will be an attractive member of society and he might then have better opportunities than Jane, making her unhappy. ChristineD 23:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beauty of Lowood chapters

Can we get some specific examples of people in the field of literature who believe the Lowood chapters feature some of the most beautiful rhetoric in English, rather than saying "many" hold this opinion in the background section?

[edit] Adélè

At the start of the book (at least, when Jane first meets her) the girl she's suppoz to teach is called Adela. Later this changes to Adéle. In this article, it says Adélè. What's her real name? ~Sushi 05:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Her name is Adèle. In the book, Mrs. Fairfax sometimes calls her Adèla - whether by mistake or on purpose is not made clear. --Psipes 15:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I think 'Adela' is used as the britannized version of 'Adèle'. That's why Jane uses the name throughout, I believe(though am not sure). Since Rochester has learned to disapprove of the gaul spirit, he uses 'Adèle' mostly by way of mockery.

Lisalogic 19:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] infobox location

Infobox added, to the best of my ability. May need some better editing.--Psipes 20:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Wide Sargasso Sea

I've moved the info about Wide Sargasso Sea from the Criticism section to the Related works section. Although it can be read as a criticism of Jane Eyre, it can also be read as coexisting with the ideals of Jane Eyre, depending on how you interpret each work. In any case, discussion of this novel as a critique of Jane Eyre would fit better on the Wide Sargasso Sea Wikipedia entry. --Psipes 19:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming

I don't think this renaming is a good idea. Where there is one name which is by far the most common (as is the case here), it should be under that title. If Jane Eyre (the character) is made into an article, the approprite naming scheme would look like this:

Jane Eyre -the page about the novel

Jane Eyre (disambiguation) -containing links to all the others:

Jane Eyre (character) Jane Eyre (musical) Jane Eyre (opera) etc.

Ziggurat 01:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exactly you have a problem with. As far as the novel being the most common article, I'm sure that's true, but I found many links on the "What links here" page that were for the various film adaptations or the character. I'm following the instructions laid out on the Wikipedia:Disambiguation page for creating a disambiguation page. I, personally, was looking for the film(s) (after having found the novel's page) and was sent directly to the novel; I would rather be sent directly to the disambiguation page and then be able to choose which page to go to. -Shannernanner 01:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to add: upon re-reading, that seemed to come off rather snarky, and that's not how I meant it at all, I was just trying to be clear. :-) -Shannernanner 01:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
No probs, I'm sure I come off as snarky as well :) Basically, given that all the other sources are adaptations of the book, and the book is by far the best-known work under this name (if I asked someone what Jane Eyre was, they're almost certain to think of the book), it seems to obviously qualify as a primary topic, in which case the disambiguation page should be at Jane Eyre (disambiguation) rather than Jane Eyre. This method is the standard, see for example Brave New World, Heart of Darkness, Sense and Sensibility, and lots more. Ziggurat 03:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I see what you're saying, but I'm still not sure I agree. Jane Eyre encompasses the novel, 17 film and television adaptations, the character, two actresses, various comics adaptations, a Broadway musical, a Broadway play, and an opera--and that's just what I've figured out from cleaning up some of the links. Many of those, while "arguably" not as prominent as the novel, are prominent--whereas, just using the examples you listed, the Brave New World disambiguation page contains only one film adaptation and then various other things that people "probably" wouldn't expect to be a main article; Heart of Darkness, the same; and Sense and Sensibility contains only the book and film adaptation. Perhaps someone else should chime in here, because I'm not sure we're going to come to a consensus. :-) -Shannernanner 03:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
That seems like something of an ad-hoc argument to me. I'm offering some examples of what seems to be the standard - if you can suggest counterexamples where the disambig arrangement is the same as the one you've introduced here it'd be useful, because I can't find any from a quick perusal of Category:Novels. But yeah, some more eyes would certainly be appropriate here :) Ziggurat 04:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
If you just want examples, I thought of one while I was posting before that I had just seen, but couldn't remember what it was; I just recalled it--David Copperfield. One other I found with a bit of looking was Sophie's Choice. -Shannernanner 05:00, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Ah, well, David Copperfield I could see, seeing as there are at least two completely different major topics there (the book and the magician). Sophie's Choice not quite so appropriate. Nevertheless, I'm interested in other opinions on the matter! Ziggurat 05:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, you can make fun of me for that one, I was focused on looking up the book at the time and thought it interesting that it went to the disambiguation page. LOL -Shannernanner 05:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Ziggurat. The article about the original novel should be named "Jane Eyre", and film and musicals versions listed at Jane Eyre (disambiguation). Wuthering Heights is a good example to copy here. CarolGray 09:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, we've only got three opinions here, which doesn't exactly qualify as a consensus, but since no one else seems to have an opinion on the issue, and my main goal was just to create a disambiguation page, and I'm eager to go ahead and do that, I'll just go with returning this to its original title. :-) -Shannernanner 06:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Readers would expect to find the novel when they search for Jane Eyre, so that should be in the un-disambiguated form with all others linked from a disambiguation page. Tim! 09:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hat Note

Saying Jane Eyre redirects here when the page is names Jane Eyre, is, IMO, both redundant and confusing. I stronly suggest a different hat note. Eluchil404 20:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed; 'Jane Eyre' does not redirect here, so the old notice is incorrect. I've changed it back. Ziggurat 21:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I don't have anything ivested in a particular wording, but the redirect claim is simply not accurate. Eluchil404 21:10, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What DID Helen die of?

The article says:

"Helen accepts earthly sufferings, including her own premature death from consumption (now known as tuberculosis), with calmness and a martyr-like attitude."

http://www.19thnovels.com/janeeyre.php?c=9 (an online version of the book) says:

"That forest-dell, where Lowood lay, was the cradle of fog and fog- bred pestilence; which, quickening with the quickening spring, crept into the Orphan Asylum, breathed typhus through its crowded schoolroom and dormitory, and, ere May arrived, transformed the seminary into an hospital."

What, truly, did Helen Burns die of? --Marudita

I believe the book says that she died of consumption, during a typhus outbreak. Here:
"But Helen was ill at present: for some weeks she had been removed from my sight to I knew not what room upstairs. She was not, I was told, in the hospital portion of the house with the fever patients; for her complaint was consumption, not typhus..." Shannernanner 11:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, just checking. =P 72.185.89.72


[edit] Currer Bell

I don't think this part of the article is true:

It was also after the publication of Jane Eyre that Charlotte decided to reveal the true identity of Currer Bell, which put an end to some great public effort to pinpoint the book's author (even Thackeray himself had been among the nominees, and it may be noted here that Charlotte's dedicating the book to him was to cause her some greater embarrassment, when she found out about the parallels between the book's plot and Thackeray's domestic situation).

As far as I'm aware Charlotte Bronte used the pseudonym 'Currer Bell' for all the novels she wrote and published after 'Jane Eyre' (her first book). What she DID do was disassociate 'Currer Bell' from the novels produced by Ellis and Acton Bell (aka Emily and Anne Bronte - her sisters) which an unscrupulous publisher intimated were all produced by the same author, i.e. 'Currer Bell'. Some of the literati, such as Thackeray and Gaskell, eventually discovered that Currer Bell was in fact a woman called Charlotte Bronte, but this was not revealed to the general public until after her second novel. Colin4C 16:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

According to Juliet Barker's 'The Brontes' (1994) Currer Bell's true identity as 'the daughter of the Rev P. Bronte' was revealed by the Bradford Observer on 28th Feb 1850, after the publication of 'Shirley': her second novel. But even despite this her third novel 'Villette' was still ascribed to 'Currer Bell' as the author. Charlotte Bronte did not want her true identity revealed to the public. Colin4C 20:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

==> pertaining to: Currer Bell

I have NOT claimed that Charlotte actually stopped using the pseudonym of 'Currer Bell', but it is well true that Currer's true form then became known to people other than family and (eventually) publisher. For the contents of the paragraph I referred to Lucasta Miller's book "The Bronte Myth", just this book is currently at home, where I'll get tomorrow. It also describes, how, after the revelation, Charlotte was circled among the literati as a dinner party guest, but still failed to turn out some witty comebacks. After all, she was Charlotte Bronte, not Dorothy Parker.

It is possible (i cannot check this now) that 'Shirley' was published before the revelation was made, yet this would still place the event 'after' the publication of Jane Eyre. The way Miller describes it, there was a huge bustle about the book in general and its author especially. It's not like people were looking for the author of 'Shirley'.

That being said, tomorrow I shall give you all the quotes you could possibly want, but maybe it should be added that Charlotte bronte kept using the pseudonym. I hope we'll be able to agree on this one, since I also have the Barker biography, and it diverts from the Miller book already on the first pages, when we learn about the creation of the Bronte name (Branty -> Bronte). there's nothing like two books on the same topic to make you dissatisfied.

Lisalogic 19:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

If Charlotte Bronte had wanted to reveal who Currer Bell was why did she not put her name on ANY of the novels published in her lifetime? The whole point about a pseudonym is that people won't recognise who you are. Charlotte Bronte was, in fact, severely embarrassed when AFTER the publication 'Shirley' the Bradford Observer connected 'Currer Bell' with 'the daughter of P. Bronte': so much so that she wanted her next novel 'Villette' to come out completely anonymously so that it wouldn't be connected to her through the now blown identity of 'Currer'. Her publishers however overruled her: 'Currer Bell' was a big draw for their readership. Charlotte even wrote an (unpublished) introduction to Shirley in the name of Currer Bell, under a male guise as the aforesaid Currer was imagined by many to a man: the 'naughty' and 'coarse' nature of 'Jane Eyre' proved as much...Colin4C 19:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Colin is right in that Bronte did not want her identity revealed to the general public. In a letter quoted by her biographer Elizabeth Gaskell, Bronte wrote "The most profound obscurity is preferable to vulgar notoriety: and that notoriety I neither seek nor will have." The secret began seeping out when a clever Howath man recgonized the local dialect in Shirley and became convinced that the author lived in the vicinity. He could not imagine who in the village could have produced such a work apart from Charlotte Bronte and published his suspicions in a Liverpool newspaper. When Bronte visited London to meet her publishers for the first time in 1849 her identity became definitely known, although she continued to publish under a pseuydonyn. It is true that Bronte was embarrased buy her dedication of the novel to Thackeray, as unknown to her his wife had been commited to an asylum. Perhaps this information should be included in the Charlotte Bronte article. I have just enjoyed a nice cuppa thank you! Natalie West 00:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Calm, there. I never claimed that she WANTED it in the first place. I will check everything tomorrow, and if you're right, you shall be given right. In the meantime, I suggest a cup of tea; I see no point in arguing about things I cannot verify.

Lisalogic 22:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

o.k., this is bad - got home, no books. Either books are lost in stack (I have quite a lot) or possibly abduction of Bronte Myth and Entourage from apartment by brother(who has bad book-stealing habits). I'd go for the second, since there seems not a scrap of secondary Bronte left. Since I am at the moment not in the position to quote, let Colin change what he will, on the whole I believe to disagree with him considerably less than he obviously thinks, and neither wanted to state that Charlotte actively dropped her incognito or stopped using her alias. Let me just point out that the logic is not completely flawless in

"If Charlotte Bronte had wanted to reveal who Currer Bell was why did she not put her name on ANY of the novels published in her lifetime? The whole point about a pseudonym is that people won't recognise who you are."

all the while admitting that her identity HAD been revealed at some time, and Charlotte kept using the pseudonym

"As far as I'm aware Charlotte Bronte used the pseudonym 'Currer Bell' for all the novels she wrote and published after 'Jane Eyre' (her first book)."

maybe there are, after all, reasons for using the pseudonym, apart from anonymity. (as soon as the name 'sells')

"What she DID do was disassociate 'Currer Bell' from the novels produced by Ellis and Acton Bell (aka Emily and Anne Bronte - her sisters) which an unscrupulous publisher intimated were all produced by the same author, i.e. 'Currer Bell'[..]" Have a good night out there, and probably one more cup of tea, thank you for the discussion, which was quite lovely.Lisalogic 20:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/a/n/Talk%7EJane_Eyre_01b1.html"