Jane Eyre and Wide Sargasso Sea

[Emmy Castrol]

Wide Sargasso Sea made me see Rochester's character in a completely new light and I have to say that after reading it, I can't help but despise Rochester's character completely.

Anyone else read Wide Sargasso Sea and feel the same as me?

[Peripatetics]

While Literature Forum is an open forum, anybody can post, there ought to be a minimum comprehension standard in literature. Something like a course list, that you have to take the preliminaries before going on to advanced subjects.
For Charlotte Bronte, specifically post on Jane Eyre, I would suggest the question whether you consider Wide Sargasso Sea a prequel to Jane Eyre. If the answer is yes, you should be directed to a page of Harlequin Romances.
Unfortunately the copy right has limited applicability and unscrupulous people write books that attempt to piggy-back on dead authors, and we have to suffer with such as Linda Berdoll - Mr Darcy Takes a Wife or Jean Rhys – Wide Sargasso Sea. Neither has anything to do with the original characters or even less with the stylistic standards achieved by the original authors.
In the meantime take a dose of Castor oil and purge your mind.

[sciencefan]

Yes, I have read that many women feel that way after reading it.
That was probably the goal of the writer since it is feminist literature.

[Niamh]

I think the point of it was to make him look bad. Obviously the writer didnt like the concept of him locking her up in the attic because she was mad. The whole book is sympathic to Bertha. Although i enjoyed it, i did find it biased.

[Emmy Castrol]

Originally Posted by Peripatetics

While Literature Forum is an open forum, anybody can post, there ought to be a minimum comprehension standard in literature. Something like a course list, that you have to take the preliminaries before going on to advanced subjects.
For Charlotte Bronte, specifically post on Jane Eyre, I would suggest the question whether you consider Wide Sargasso Sea a prequel to Jane Eyre. If the answer is yes, you should be directed to a page of Harlequin Romances.
Unfortunately the copy right has limited applicability and unscrupulous people write books that attempt to piggy-back on dead authors, and we have to suffer with such as Linda Berdoll - Mr Darcy Takes a Wife or Jean Rhys – Wide Sargasso Sea. Neither has anything to do with the original characters or even less with the stylistic standards achieved by the original authors.
In the meantime take a dose of Castor oil and purge your mind.

It's a good thing that many great writers didn't take that advice or they'd be too afraid to write, mistakenly deluded that they require some Literature 101 before they dare to understand what it is they are reading.

There is no set system on how one ought to read, although some people may, to gratify their sense of self-superiority, treat literature as if it is elitist, exclusive and narrowly rigid.

Personally, I congratulate Jean Rhys that she dared to explore an unconventional view of Rochester. It is not as if she transformed Rochester into a completely different being; everything she created had an original strain in the Rochester of Jane Eyre. In my humble opinion, there is a huge thematic difference between Wide Sargasso Sea and 'Mr Darcy takes a wife' (which I feel is much more contemporary).

As long as one has money to purchase books, or a library card to access books, and are able to read to at least the seventh-grade level there is nothing that should stop them from reading whatever they like. What they don't initially understand they will ponder on and I have always thought that the act of thinking about and reflecting on a novel is much more important than the novel itself.

Otherwise, it's just Professor Literature 101's opinion, isn't it?

I actually feel that experience and sensitivity offer more to the understanding of literature than conventional education.

[wessexgirl]

I've read WSS by Jean Rhys. I have to say that I didn't actually like it. I know it's highly critically regarded as a very good novel, but it just didn't do it for me.

[kiki1982]

I haven't read Wide Sargasso Seaand I do not intend to, but there was one thing right (apparently) in Rhys's interpretation of Rochester: his bad streak. Although she took it very far indeed and she might have taken it too far, there is still the fact that she might turn good opinions of popular readers about Rochester around. That is at least one merit.

Other than that, to me, it is fan fiction and it should not be read as a prequel. Brontë put enough in her book so as to not mistake Rochester's character...

I don't think a reader's list is required to read properly, unlike other people. It is not what you have read that determines your ability to pick up on things, but it is your intuition. Knowledge does not atomatically lead to wisdom...

One can read Wide Sargasso Sea apart from Jane Eyre. Essentially, it is not more Jane Eyre, than Bridget Jones's Diary is Pride and Prejudice (although echoes filter through, it is not the same). Can we also remark that Rochester was never named in Wide Sargasso Sea (if I am right)?

[AuntShecky]

I've read both and I prefer Jean Rhys's earlier works (about single girls suffering poverty in Paris) to the Wide Sargasso Sea.
I also have to say that since Rochester is never named in the later work, I wouldn't have readily known that it was a prequel
to Jane Eyre.

[RobinHood3000]

I've read both, and enjoyed both, the tacked-on happy ending to Jane Eyre notwithstanding.

I think that Wide Sargasso Sea offers an interesting perspective on the events of Jane Eyre that very nicely parallels Brontë's own cultural biases. Notice how the Frenchwoman and German woman who captured Rochester's attentions in his younger days are really nothing more than mistresses, while the delicate and humble English heroine captures his heart. Jean Rhys flips this on its head with the opposite perspective (one informed by her own childhood), viewing the characters with a reversed filter.

I think it's a little too uncharitable to say that writers can't extend or write further about the work of other writers. While there are strong points to be made in favor of originality, it isn't as if they're banning or burning the original work. They're just adding new perspective, even enriching the canon. That's just my opinion, though.

[GX4146]

i never liked Jane Eyre, but Wide Sargasso Sea is awesome, and short. lol

the same goes to mr rochester, in bronte's book he reminds me of a stock male character in a sleazy female pocket book: silent, rich and old, aside from wearing a gypsy costume.

in rhys' book he's a completely different person, he even has his own narrative. but i can't really see him as THE bad guy in Wide Sargasso Sea. in that book it seems as if everything's going to end bad just by reading the first page.

[AuntShecky]

Originally Posted by RobinHood3000

I think it's a little too uncharitable to say that writers can't extend or write further about the work of other writers. While there are strong points to be made in favor of originality, it isn't as if they're banning or burning the original work. They're just adding new perspective, even enriching the canon. That's just my opinion, though.

You're absolutely right there. If later writers could not take
inspiration for earlier works then our literature would be bereft of Ulysses by James Joyce, who is in my thoughts on this Feast Day of St. Patrick.