The Secret of Charlotte Bronte
The Secret of Charlotte Bronte
by Frederika MacDonald, London,1914
Part 1 - Introduction
In Charlotte and Hager I attempted with the introduction of the Hager Letters, to broaden the perspective that we have of Charlotte as a person and as a writer. While the correspondence lessens some misconceptions, they do not eliminate them. The problem is of completeness of information as much as of objectivity. In ‘Charlotte Brontė’s Letters to M. Heger’ , L. Kauffman takes a perspective 150 years from the events in question and of a profound change in psychological perspective. F. Macdonald's evaluation of the Heger Letters is of a view closer to that of the Victorian era and of first person knowledge of the Hegers.
F. MacDonald begins The Secret of Charlotte Bronte provocatively “We live in an epoch when impressionist methods of criticism, admissible, and often illuminative, in the domains of art and of
imaginative literature, have invaded the once jealously guarded paths of historical criticism, to the detriment of correct standards of judgment.” ..... “But what has to be remembered (and what is constantly forgotten) is, that if these psychological interpretations of people who once really existed are to be accorded any
authority as historical judgments, they must have been preceded by an attentive enquiry, enabling the future interpreter, before he begins to employ psychology, to feel perfectly certain that he has clearly in view the particular Soul he is undertaking to penetrate, with its own special qualities, and placed amongst, and acted upon by, the real circumstances of its earthly career. Where the preliminary precaution of this enquiry, into the true facts that have to be penetrated, and explained, has been neglected, no psychological subtlety, no pathological science, no sympathetic insight, can protect the most accomplished literary impressionist from forming, and fostering, false opinions about the historical personages he is judging
from a standpoint of assumptions that do not allow him to exercise the true function of criticism, defined by Matthew Arnold as : ' an impartial endeavour to see the thing as in itself it really is.' “ [1]
Such a certitude, that she is able to avoid the subjective judgment of 'historical facts', would be hubris for the contemporary reader. However “Frederika MacDonald, in 1859, was herself a pupil at the Pensionnat Heger where 17 years earlier Charlotte had been a student, and later a teacher. She knew from first-hand experience what life was like at the school, and even more interesting, what M. Heger and his wife Madame Heger were like in real life. “[1]
Primarily my interest is that first hand impression have a value beyond the question of historical objectivity. “The first of these impressions is that Charlotte Bronte has painted, not only her own emotions, but her own actual experiences, in Villette ; and that Lucy Snowe, Paul Emanuel, and Madame Beck, are pseudonyms, under which we ought to recognise Charlotte herself, and the Director and Directress of the Pensionnat in the Rue d'Isabelle.” [1]
Second, is that F. MacDonald raises the the connection to Villette - “The period in Charlotte's life that I am speaking of is, of course, the interval of two years (from Feb. 1842 to Jan. 1844) that she spent at Bruxelles, in the school in the Rue d'Isabelle, whose Director and Directress, Monsieur and Madame Heger, are supposed to have been painted in the characters of ' Paul Emanuel ' and of c Madame Beck,' in the famous novel of Villette.”....How far that supposition is justified, and to what extent Villette is an autobiographical reminiscence, thinly disguised as a novel, can be now, but has never been up to this date, satisfactorily decided, by an attentive historical enquiry.” [1]
I strongly disagree with both points. First, that it is possible to draw a linear relationship from Charlotte's experiences to the theme and especially the characters in Jane Eyre and Villette. This is not to contest that the Brussels experience profoundly influenced Charlotte, the Heger Letters are proof of that, rather that the novels are thinly disguised autobiographical narratives of Charlotte's emotions. Example, “that Lucy Snowe, Paul Emanuel, and Madame Beck, are pseudonyms, under which we ought to recognise Charlotte herself, and the Director and Directress of the Pensionnat in the Rue d'Isabelle.” The transformational aspect of memory, of experience, is the genius of Charlotte and the novels stand by themselves, should be read for themselves, and not as an expose of Charlotte. The transformation of experience into art, is not a linear process. That is where the mystery of genius lies.
The second point of disagreement is with F. Macdonald's characterization of Charlotte in the following: “What is established securely to-day, and cannot be removed from the foundation of documentary evidence that serves as the basis upon which all future theories must rest, is, that it is in this period that Charlotte Bronte not as an enthusiastic and half-formed school-girl, as some reckless modern impressionist critics, careless of the evidence of facts, would have us believe, but as a woman, profoundly sincere, impassioned, exalted, unstained, and unstainable, who, between twenty-six and twenty-eight years of age, had long left girlish extravagance behind her underwent experiences and emotions, that were not transient feelings, nor sensational excitements. “[1]
An emotionally mature woman, ' between twenty-six and twenty-eight years of age, had long left girlish extravagance ' would not have have written the Hager Letters. Nor would she have continued writing for XX years after C. Hager had unambiguously indicated that her tone was inappropriate and had terminated the correspondence.
F. Macdonald's characterization of Charlotte as “ profoundly sincere, impassioned, exalted, unstained, and unstainable” bears an uncomfortable resemblance to “Although Mrs. Gaskell refers to “poor Charlotte”, as if her passion for Hager had absolutely no basis in reality, the real situation was far more ambiguous, for she is a “threshold figure” whose very role as a student-governess-teacher makes her status ambiguous sexually, economically, and emotionally.”[3]
“Mrs. Gaskell's method of dealing with this momentous period could not satisfy an attentive student who compared her account with Charlotte's correspondence : and also with eloquent impassioned passages
in Villette and the Professor^ where the authoress is plainly painting emotions and impressions she has herself undergone.
And the effect that was left upon thoughtful readers of the Life of Charlotte Bronte was that the biographer was, not negligently, but deliberately, altering the true significance, by underrating the importance, of Charlotte's experiences in Bruxelles, and of her relationships with Monsieur and Madame
Heger.
A preview into The Secret of Charlotte Bronte. [2] will give a flavor into the two parts of F. Macdonalds critique. I hope to cover the sections in separate postings.
Part I; CHARLOTTE BRONTĖ’S LETTERS TO M. HEGER
(These Letters supply the Key to the Secret of Charlotte Brontė)
She ends this part by quoting Charlotte’s last desperate letter to Constantin Heger. She writes:
“ The Letter obtained no answer.
And thus the end was reached. We now know
where in Charlotte Bronte's life lay her
experiences that formed her genius and
made her the great Romantic whose
quality was that she saw all events and
personages through the medium of one
passion: the passion of a predestined tragical
and unrequited love.”
Part II; SOME REMINISCENES OF THE REAL MONSIEUR HEGER
Frederika MacDonald gives us a marvellous insight into her life at the Pensionnat and her own personal view of the teacher she and Charlotte both shared. She writes:
“ But Monsieur Heger had one really beauti-
ful feature, that I remember often watching
with extreme pleasure when he recited fine
poetry or read noble prose : - his mouth,
when uttering words that moved him, had
a delightful smile, not in the least tender to-
wards ordinary mortals, but almost tender
in its homage to the excellence of writers
of genius.
In brief, what M. Heger 's face revealed
when studied as the index of his natural
qualities, was intellectual superiority, an
imperious temper, a good deal of impatience
against stupidity, and very little patience
with his fellow-creatures generally ; it
revealed too a good deal of humour ; and a
very little kind-heartedness, to be weighed
against any amount of irritability. It was
a sort of face bound to interest one ; but
not, so it seems to me, to conquer affection.”
References
1. The The Secret of Charlotte Bronte, by Frederika MacDonald, London,1914
2.The Brussels Bronte Blog,
http://brusselsbronte.blogspot.com/2...tte-bront.html
3.Discourse of Desire by Lind S. Kaufman.