Jane Eyre - somewhat withering?

[kev67]

I have to say this about Jane Eyre: I am not sure I would like to be the subject of one of her character assessments. She is withering about people she does not like and it does not take her long to make up her mind. For example, she's only just met Mr Mason, but has already discerned by his sallow complexion and the lack of command in his eye that he's a weak, ineffectual person. Others are deemed lifeless or listless, or pious or self-centred or shallow. Sure, she's usually correct, but she seems quick to dismiss someone as a rubbish person. "Nobody's perfect," does not seem to be one of her stock phrases.

[supergran]

:D

To be fair to Jane, I think we all tend to make snap judgements about people. It doesn't mean that we have to allow those judgements, adverse or otherwise, to influence the way we treat people - and I don't think Jane does either. It's my understanding that she's quite amiable. But most of us go through the same thought processes, don't we?

[Delta40]

Good point supergran. Heed the following example:

Kev67 SNAP JUDGEMENT(God not another one. Is that his Mummy's arm around his shoulder? I wonder after his phd, if he will still actually live at home with her while she calls him her widdle Kevvy Wevvy, hoping one day, he'll get a job instead of posting here on Lit-Net about who is more withering - Jane Eyre, Aesop or his chin?)

I agree that we're all guilty of snap judgements. That's mine and of course it's probably completely wrong and naturally I would always be courteous to Kev67 since I have no reason not to be. I just wanted to highlight the point.:D

[cacian]

I have to say this about Jane Eyre: I am not sure I would like to be the subject of one of her character assessments. She is withering about people she does not like and it does not take her long to make up her mind. For example, she's only just met Mr Mason, but has already discerned by his sallow complexion and the lack of command in his eye that he's a weak, ineffectual person. Others are deemed lifeless or listless, or pious or self-centred or shallow. Sure, she's usually correct, but she seems quick to dismiss someone as a rubbish person. "Nobody's perfect," does not seem to be one of her stock phrases.

Very good point actually and it makes you think about how some appear to rely on appearances to form judgments they know nothing about. It makes one think about the main character in this book and how she appears to be the light of perfectness never to be judged if at all.
It reminds of Jane Austen in the fact that she goes on through her heroines about how they despise the upper class and their riches only to end up marrying one them.
Double standards?!

[kiki1982]

Apart from the natural points those above have made (it is indeed a little easy to judge a book by its cover), please bear in mind that Charlotte Brontë was very big on physiognomy and phrenology (as one of her characters). She had inherited it from Scott, who is a bit less obvious in describing it meticulously, but still constructs his characters' outsides with physiognomy in mind. In The Professor and her early stories, she was even more explicit than in Jane Eyre, which is difficult to see how that could be done, as she is the most explicit of her sisters.

Physiognomy and its fellow pseudo-science phrenology involves judging someone's character by his acial features. A nasty indentation or a scar denotes total absence of or serious problems with the quality in that part of the face. Certain types of noses mean certain attributes. Hence why all bad guys usually have a hooked nose... This stems from earlier beliefs that pre-date these 'sciences' that ugly people are necessarily bad (devoid of God's love the reason is, Iexpect).
You might laugh at this, but there are still people who do this and some emloyers in America still use it to assess candidates, I have heard.

So, you can see why Jane judges so quickly and easily. She deosn't need to speak to the person, because everything he is, is on his face. So you can be sure where she is staring intently at Rochester's face in the beginning, she has seen his strong points and weaknesses in one glance. Particularly noted the absence of benevolence on his forehead (worrying).

It's all tosh of course, but reading up about it clears up a lot of enigmas in some characters. Bearing in mind it's all tosh at the end of it, of course :D. For them it was dead serious.

Please read more here (http://books.google.de/books?id=9nYAAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA316&lpg=PA316&dq=deformity+phrenology+sign&source=bl&ots=ghdx8EQHHD&sig=T1TVsfZn3SQfG5jLDjL14la0czg&hl=nl&ei=wcORSeCCIdiS_gaT58mwDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=deformity%20phrenology%20sign&f=false) (phrenology) and here (http://books.google.de/books?id=o8IgMTr6--QC&dq=physiognomy+manual&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=zEK-UvYgM2&sig=kSX5Um2wtMgL-mV-V5DDgTr-c_w&hl=nl&ei=I56NScjMCZXC0gW-_8mZCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=physiognomy%20manual&f=false) (physiognomy) if you want to have a laugh and want to see what the fuss is about. I tell you, it is very informative for nineteenth century lit.

[Delta40]

That's a good point kiki1982. Wasn't phrenology very popular at that time? Now that my fever has finally broke, consider my snap judgment post nothing more than delirious overflow. Sorry Kev67 I was really withering when I posted....

[kiki1982]

It was very popular, yes. Charlotte herself was once assessed by a phrenologist.

Let's see...

You can find it in full here (http://research.plattsburgh.edu/brontesite/default.asp?go=219). Done in 1851 and 'like the life itself,' according to Charlotte herself.

Oh, and anything black is also very worrying (black horses, black hair, black curly hair is even worse).

[kev67]

That's a good point kiki1982. Wasn't phrenology very popular at that time? Now that my fever has finally broke, consider my snap judgment post nothing more than delirious overflow. Sorry Kev67 I was really withering when I posted....

In that case I'll take you off my ignore list.

(Ignore lists don't work if you're not logged in, I've just found out.)

[kiki1982]

Haha, for me they don't work because I get too curious :D.

I only have one person on that list, though, and he has long gone...

[Delta40]

Gee I upset people needlessly yesterday. Group hug anyone? :)

[kev67]

Gee I upset people needlessly yesterday. Group hug anyone? :)

I am not really a tactile person, but ok http://img.cyclechat.co.uk/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/smiley-hug006.gif

[kiki1982]

aah

:grouphug:

[mona amon]

I have to say this about Jane Eyre: I am not sure I would like to be the subject of one of her character assessments. She is withering about people she does not like and it does not take her long to make up her mind. For example, she's only just met Mr Mason, but has already discerned by his sallow complexion and the lack of command in his eye that he's a weak, ineffectual person. Others are deemed lifeless or listless, or pious or self-centred or shallow. Sure, she's usually correct, but she seems quick to dismiss someone as a rubbish person. "Nobody's perfect," does not seem to be one of her stock phrases.

I kinda agree. The number of people she actually likes can be counted on the fingers of one hand - Bessie, Helen Burns, Mr Rochester, Diana and Mary Rivers. :D She's fond of Mrs Fairfax and Adele, but complains that they're too humdrum. Ah, I forgot Mrs Temple.


Charlotte herself was once assessed by a phrenologist.

Let's see...

You can find it in full here. Done in 1851 and 'like the life itself,' according to Charlotte herself.

Her publisher, George Smith took her, and they both had their characters assessed. They gave their names as Mr and Miss Fraser. She made this comment "a sort of miracle--like--like--like as the very life itself." about George Smith's phrenological estimate, not about her own.

Sorry for being so nit-picketty, but I'm a huge Charlotte Bronte geek. :p

[kiki1982]

Her publisher, George Smith took her, and they both had their characters assessed. They gave their names as Mr and Miss Fraser. She made this comment "a sort of miracle--like--like--like as the very life itself." about George Smith's phrenological estimate, not about her own.

Sorry for being so nit-picketty, but I'm a huge Charlotte Bronte geek. :p

Nono, that'll teach me for only reading half of what the introductory text said.. Never ump to conclusions. :hand: :p