Log in

View Full Version : Saint John in Jane Eyre



dirac1984
04-19-2007, 10:13 AM
Saint John in Jane Eyre
-----a saint and a john
Metaphor, in fact, is never an innocent figure of speech.
Alain Robbe Grillet, snapshots and towards a new novel, p78

Introduction

I wish you had not sent me Jane Eyre. It interested me so much that I have lost (or won if you like) a whole day in reading it at the busiest period.
Thackeray, letter to W. S Williams, 23 October 1847
Reception of Jane Eyre in the academic circle and public
Jane Eyre has maintained to be a quite popular classic fiction since its publication in 1837. Even in a recent poll about reading classics in Great Britain Jane Eyre is on the third place after only Pride and Prejudice and The King of Rings. Jane Eyre also enjoys a long history of critical reading in academia. Its fame has some ups and downs. After the rise of feminist reading, it has attracted tremendous attention in the literary circle around the world. Much of the critical attention has been attracted to the protagonist Jane herself and her lover Rochester. Even the minor character the famous madwoman Bertha has received a surge of attention after the publication of The Madwoman in the Attic by Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar.
One character, however, doesn't get the deserved attention as other characters in the novel. Saint john-- a key character in the second half of the book is sometimes intentionally or unintentionally neglected. Saint John was sometimes considered by some critics as a minor character and thus doesn't deserve full attention. Another reason for this negligence is in Professor Fang's words that “the second half of the book especially the part contain Saint John is somewhat a failure compared to the first half”.
As neglected as it seems to be, however, we still have some wonderful essays on this subject. The distinguished literary critic and professor Q.D.Leavis points out in her introduction to penguin 1966 version of Jane Eyre that Saint John plays an important role in Jane’s mature process. She even suggests his connection to Mr. Brocklehurst. A paper written by Kayebee in 1997 also makes a good comparison between Rochester and Saint John. Due to his missionary identity, most of critical attention paid to Saint John focus on his role of colonist, such as in Carl Plasa’s paper (2004). Their analyses are persuasive and excellent. However, most of them are not comprehensive or do not focus on Saint John in the original text.
So in this paper I will examine the character of Saint John from different perspectives in a comprehensive way. I will argue that Saint John’s dominating male personality constitutes a test to Jane’s independent standing and his religious belief is also distorted by it. It is not coincident that Bronte names this character as Saint John. For he embodies two tensioned personalities, one is that of a devoted Calvinist saint; the other is that of dominating personality of john reed---the monster cousin Jane has as well as Rochester---Jane’s master lover
Approach and method employed in the paper
In my analysis of the text throughout this paper, I will take feminism approach. The method I will adopt is textual analysis, both interpretive textual analyses and content analysis.

Saint John and Jane Eyre herself------ master turned kinsman
He is "a good yet stern, a conscientious yet implacable man."
CHAPTER XXXV Jane Eyre
The theoretical framework and the intended goal
Halliday (1985) argues that lexical features of texts have three functions. One of them is that they construct and effect social relations ("tenor"). Thus, by analyzing the lexical features of discourses between Saint John and Jane at different points, we can see the social relation between them.
I would argue in the following analysis that Saint John never considers Jane as an equal, at least not before he finds out that Jane is entitled to a large fortune. I would argue that the power relationship between Jane and Saint John is from the start a slave—master one. By slave---master relationship I adopt the following definition from the novel itself: a person is in a position of slave when he/she is “slaving amongst” people who” neither knew nor sought out their innate excellences, and appreciated only their acquired accomplishments as they appreciated the skill of their cook or the taste of their waiting-woman”. According to this definition by Jane herself, saint john is trying to put her in a even worse position, because he not only have no interest in knowing or seeking out her innate excellences, but also have no appreciation for her acquired accomplishments, what he seeks after her is just her physical ability to endure the pain and roughness. However this textual power relationship is changed rather suddenly due his discovery that Jane in fact is his uncle’s legal heiress and thus is entitled to a large fortune which initially is designated to him and his sisters.
Detailed analysis
Saint John first appeared in the book in chapter 28. Before his appearance, we hear his name mentioned by his sisters and the servant Hannah. He made his sound before even appeared on stage. When the servant rejected Jane and Jane mourned in despair, he appeared and did his duty in admitting Jane. He played the role of savior to Jane here, and Jane as we would know later has to pay for it. Jane would always feel indebted to him and thus prone to be enslaved by him.
But even before this first stage, the master-slave relationship is implied in the language of the text. “If I were a masterless and stray dog, I know that you would not turn me from your hearth to-night”. Notice Jane’s diction. She uses “masterless” to describe the state of herself. Then when Saint John asked her to “rise, and pass before me into the house.” she with difficulty “obeyed him”. When Jane first encounters him, Jane was in a state of exhaustion and Famished. Saint John commands everything. She just obeyed. The food is given to her in way like feeding animals. “’Not too much at first — restrain her,’ said the brother; ‘she has had enough.’ And he withdrew the cup of milk and the plate of bread”. This is of course decision based on sense. But we must understand that a literary text is not a just a simple duplication of reality. “Metaphor, in fact, is never an innocent figure of speech”. This commencement in fact can be interpreted as a hint for the relationship between Jane and Saint John.
Then Jane recovered from her coma. During her recovery, the rivers make some comments about Jane. His sisters are very sympathy towards Jane. But Saint John is rather cold. He makes a comment about Jane when he talks about whether they will succeed in restoring her to her home. “I trace lines of force in her face which make me skeptical of her tractability”. Take notice the word “tractability”. It is defined by Roget’s Thesaurus in the following terms: “The quality or state of willingly carrying out the wishes of others”. This also implies Saint John’s attitude towards Jane. After Jane’s total recovery, she could “join with Diana and Mary in all their occupations; converse with them as much as they wished, and aid them when and where they would allow” her. After several weeks of congenial exchange with the female inmates of moor house, Jane took the courage to inquire about the employment he had promised to offer to her. Saint John said the following sentences first: “as you seemed both useful and happy here”, “render yours necessary.” Notice two words in his sentences, “useful and necessary”. Useful is seldom used to describe people except when the person talked about is in a position of servitude which is in essence the same as other material tools in the master’s eyes. Necessary is also diction of servitude. We can see that though Jane has a good relationship with his sisters, Saint John still unconsciously considers Jane in a servitude position. When he offers Jane the job of a school mistress, Jane accepts it with all her heart. The reason for her excitement is that “it was independent; and the fear of servitude with strangers entered her soul like iron.” While Saint John just “seemed leisurely to read her face”
On the other hand, Jane herself is quite aware of this kind of relationship between her and Saint John, for she is very sensitive to distinguish between servant and master. Even before her entry into moorhouse, she succeeds in detecting that Hannah is a servant not the sisters’ relative. After she was admitted into the house, when she mentioned Hannah, she always used servant to describe her. “With the servant’s aid, I contrived to mount a staircase”, “Hannah, the servant, was my most frequent visitor”. In fact before she reached the moorhouse, she had been trying to find a job as a servant. She felt it was degrading. In chapter 28, we find the word servant appears 8 times. When she first asks Saint John to help her find a job, she says the “I will be a dressmaker; I will be a plain-workwoman; I will be a servant, a nurse-girl, if I can be no better”. When her job begins, she is very pleased with finding a home at last. She emphasizes this return of home belong to herself. “My home, then, when I at last find a home”. She understands well that in moorhouse she is in the position of servitude at least in Saint John’s eye. So although her home is a small cottage with little furniture, she cherishes it for now she can be free and honest. When Mrs. Oliver suggests that Jane “is clever enough to be a governess in a high family”, Jane thinks that “I would far rather be where I am than in any high family in the land”. She in fact is asserting her independence.
Now we come to the turning point where Saint John discovers that Jane is in fact Jane Eyre and thus is entitled to a large fortune which in turn would give her power.
The first sentence Saint John uttered is in different tone now. “How very easily alarmed you are”! in the past, he would certainly says it in the following way:”you are easily alarmed”. Exclamatory sentence is emotional and it shows the affection between the interlocutors. And usually it is used between friends. It reveals the power relationship between the speaker and listener is at least equal. Now at least Saint John considers Jane to be his friends. And after he reveals the purpose of his visiting, he shows his affection for a friend by suggesting that he “would send Hannah down to keep you company” because “Jane look too desperately miserable to be left alone”.
While on Jane’s part, she is also aware of the change of power relationship between her and Saint John. In fact, in order to show the change, the author intentionally creates an unusual event. When Saint John finishes his revelation and is to go home, he is stopped by Jane. The narrator explains that “a sudden thought occurred to me”. She demands to know why Saint John would know the solicitor Mr. Briggs. This in fact is rather out of expectation and unreasonable. For she is in a state of excitement and thinking hard after knowing she is bestowed with so much wealth. We may wander where this sudden thought comes from. But if we read on, we would find out the reason is very simple. The narrator wants to show us in a quick and strong way that she is aware of the fact that the power relationship has changed. Jane for the first in their conversation speaks in imperative tone. “Stop one minute!”” she even exclaims:” No; that does not satisfy me!” she demands further, using the following strong tone. “You certainly shall not go till you have told me all,” “You shall! — you must!”
What’s more, Jane at this point mentions her sexual identity with confidence. When Saint John insists on telling her afterward, and says” But I apprised you that I was a hard man,” she claims that” I am a hard woman, — impossible to put off.” We should take notice of this interesting exchange of utterances. When Saint John says he is a hard man, he in fact has some sense of pride in claiming this fact. Jane consciously uses “woman” to counteract his pride. In using woman in parallel with man, Jane is declaring her equal standing with Saint John now. As regards to Jane herself, she has to repress her sexual identity for she is in a position of servitude. Now Jane sees the change of power relationship, she wants to show her side of womanhood with a strong sense of confidence.
However, their war of words doesn’t end at this point. Saint John continues to resist Jane’s demand. They then have the following conversation:
“And then,” he pursued, “I am cold: no fervor infects me.”
Whereas I am hot, and fire dissolves ice. The blaze there has thawed all the snow from your cloak; by the same token, it has streamed on to my floor, and made it like a trampled street. As you hope ever to be forgiven, Mr. Rivers, the high crime and misdemeanor of spoiling a sanded kitchen, tell me what I wish to know.”
Chapter 33
Now Saint John to some extend senses Jane’s claim of her female power, but he doesn’t want to surrender so easily. He wants to “fight” with his cold personality. Unexpectedly, Jane plays this metaphor game with him and claims herself to be the counter of him. In fact their metaphors are not casually put forward, they represent their respective personality. At last Saint John give in, he tells Jane the whole story which connects Jane to him.
Why Saint John assiduously rejects Jane’s demand? The reason behind it is that he would not like to admit the kinsmanship between Jane and him. Because this would mean that Jane would become his equal in all aspects: not only is Jane is wealthy now, but she would also be from the same breed as him. Wealth can vanish, but natural bound is inseparable.
However, he at this point forms another plan, which we shall discuss in the following section. When he learns Jane’s plan of dividing the twenty thousand--- endowment into four pieces, he understands that Jane actually has much affection for him and his sisters. So he decides to carry out his plan of enslaving her by imposing on her his religious ideas.


Saint John and Rochester------ the two male who try to enslave Jane
How much of him was saint, how much mortal, I could not heretofore tell
CHAPTER XXXIV Jane Eyre

Jane Eyre is a novel that explores Jane's growth and maturity. Marriage inevitably constitutes the most important part. So Mr. Rochester's and St. John's offer of marriage to Jane is significant and must be examined carefully for their underlining implications and what prospect they offer to Jane. I would argue in the following analysis that their proposals of marriage are to enslave Jane through the bond of marriage.
Different as they are, they have a significant similarity due to their male aspects. They both have a dominant personality, which is common for male and even is considered to be a male virtue. It is just this personality that frames them to be in a position of enslaving Jane.
However, Saint John and Rochester constitute two tests to Jane’s independence. Rochester symbolizes unbridled passion and St. John represents inhuman religious zeal. Jane is torn between passion and duty. For Rochester, she has strong passion; to Saint John, she senses a strong duty and thus she will guilty if she rejects him for he has saved her when she was reduced to a beggar-woman. Beside her sense of duty and guilty, there is another reason behind Jane’s temporary servitude to Saint John, which her inability to deal with “positive, hard characters, antagonistic” male.
Rochester offers to put Jane in a mistress position, for he actually had a legitimate wife living just in the attic of his own house then. Mistress often has the connotation of indulgence. Rochester in essence is offering Jane the indulgence of love and material wealth. If she marries to Rochester, she will have a large amount of wealth. She will be the mistress of Thornfield. She could have “surrendered to temptation”. Rochester in fact tests Jane’s independence by offering her the physical and emotional indulgence. Jane is well aware of this enslavement. She later reflects that she would “be a slave in a fool’s paradise at Marseilles” if she really married to Rochester at that time. Saint John on the other hand is another extreme. He just wanted a woman who could accompany him to India and be his assistant. He valued Jane in the way a master values a laborer slave. He was just in search for a tool, not a wife. He wouldn’t provide anything like Rochester would to Jane. He can only offer her a life that is as she puts it "this calm, this useful existence." By marrying St. John she would be stifling her passionate nature. Her passionate nature would ultimately die in the loveless and purposeful marriage he offered her. She tells him this also, “Because you did not love me. If I were to marry you, you would kill me." Coincidently, Jane later used the following sentence to describe her relationship with Saint John:” He has no indulgence for me”. Indulgence in fact is what Jane receives from Rochester.
Rochester’s test of indulgence on Jane
When Rochester decided to marry Jane, he wrote to his banker in London to send him certain jewels. He talked about his plan.
“I will myself put the diamond chain round your neck, and the circlet on your forehead, — which it will become: for nature, at least, has stamped her patent of nobility on this brow, Jane; and I will clasp the bracelets on these fine wrists, and load these fairy-like fingers with rings.”
This terrifies Jane. Jane immediately rejects this idea:” I shall not be your Jane Eyre any longer, but an ape in a harlequin’s jacket”. Then on their way to fetch the diamond, Rochester talks more about this theme. When he smiles, Jane “thought his smile was such as a sultan might”. Jane is not alone in thinking him as a sultan, for Rochester himself in fact has the same horrible thoughts.
“Is she original? Is she piquant? I would not exchange this one little English girl for the Grand Turk’s whole seraglio, gazelle-eyes, houri forms, and all!”
By alluding to the Grand Turk and his seraglio, he reveals his intention to enslave Jane after their marriage. This Eastern allusion pains Jane. Jane thinks it is serious enough for her to denounce it. She claims: “I’ll be preparing myself to go out as a missionary to preach liberty to them that are enslaved”. Jane also has her own plan for resisting the enslavement. She thinks about the letter her uncle has written to her and imagines that “she has a prospect of one day bringing Mr. Rochester an accession of fortune”. Then she “could better endure to be kept by him now”. So obviously Jane is quite aware of the enslavement she faces. She even has a plan to counter it. But she surrenders to the indulgence of love. It is until she finds out that Rochester has a wife alive that she escapes from Thornfield. Her escapement from Thornfield signifies her morality wins the battle against indulgence. She has passed her test of physical and material indulgence.
Saint John’s test of duty and guilty on Jane
Then she comes to moorhouse. Here she is first rejected by the housemaid and then coldly received by the master saint john. Of course she is lucky enough to have female cousins in the house who are congenial to her.
There is no hint when Saint John has formed his plan of marrying Jane. But we can be sure it is at least revealed when he reminds Jane that “your aspirations after family ties and domestic happiness may be realized otherwise than by the means you contemplate: you may marry”. It becomes even more obvious when he warns Jane of the danger of turn slothful. When Jane expresses her satisfaction with domestic endearments and household joys, he immediately declares that this world is not for the scene of fruition”, and thus Jane should “look beyond Moorhouse and Morton and sisterly society and selfish calm and sensual comfort of civilized affluence”. He in fact is preparing Jane to take on her errand as a missionary wife.
The he deceives Jane into learning Hindustani. Jane consents. The reason behind her consent is her strong sense of duty and guilty, which are important virtues for Victorian women. Jane values her relations much. When she learned that Saint John and his sisters are actually her cousins, she is quite excited. Actually she thinks it is more important than having got a large fortune. She clapped her hands in sudden joy — her pulse bounded, her veins thrilled. And she remarked: “It seemed I had found a brother: one I could be proud of, — one I could love; and two sisters, whose qualities were such, that, when I knew them but as mere strangers, they had inspired me with genuine affection and admiration.” For this reason, Jane would bear the temporary servitude.
While Jane becomes his student, she found him a very patient, very forbearing, and yet an exacting master. Jane finds herself in thrall. She describes her feeling in the following passage:
By degrees, he acquired a certain influence over me that took away my liberty of mind: his praise and notice were more restraining than his indifference.
Here the narrator herself speaks out the truth. Saint John in fact is trying to deprive her of intellectual liberty.
I never dared complain, because I saw that to murmur would be to vex him: on all occasions fortitude pleased him; the reverse was a special annoyance. ----here we see the similarity between rivers john and john reed. They like to torture others. it is just their means are different.
At last Saint John proposes to Jane in a tactless and passionless manner. He says, "It is not personal, but mental endowments they have given you: you are formed for labor, not for love." Jane after a struggle consents to go with him if she if free. She knows that he prizes her as a soldier would a good weapon. This as I have pointed out in the last section would mean that she becomes a slave of him. She would rather go with him as a sister. She understands that what Saint John need is not a wife, a woman, but in his own words, “a sufferer, a laborer, a female apostle”. As she remarked about his proposal: “I have a woman’s heart, but not where you are concerned; for you I have only a comrade’s constancy; a fellow-soldier‘s frankness, fidelity, fraternity, if you like; a neophyte’s respect and submission to his hierophant: nothing more”. Saint John is in Jane’s opinion trying to suppress her sexuality when he proposes her. She knows quite well that Saint John sees nothing attractive in her: not even youth—only a few useful mental points.
Through these two tests, Jane maintains her independence and grows mature.
But also implies to us her idea of real marriage, which the narrator herself reveals to us in the following sentences:
I hold myself supremely blest — blest beyond what language can express; because I am my husband’s life as fully as he is mine. No woman was ever nearer to her mate than I am: ever more absolutely bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. I know no weariness of my Edward’s society: he knows none of mine, any more than we each do of the pulsation of the heart that beats in our separate bosoms; consequently, we are ever together. To be together is for us to be at once as free as in solitude, as gay as in company.
In essence, the narrator expresses her idea of marriage is for the male and female to have mutual respect and understanding. Indulgence of love without respect and duty without understanding and passion for each other can not be base for marriage.

Saint John and Helen---------two different devoted Calvinists
Saint John and Helen are both two minor characters in the novel. They both appear to be devoted Calvinism. They believe in restraint of worldly pleasure and emotion. They both are “composed though grave”; they both value the Calvinism virtue of self-endurance. These similarities are derived from their common belief---- Calvinism. But they are on the other hand completely different.
I would argue in the following paragraphs that the difference between Saint John and Helen is due to their respective gender. And their different gender leads to their different personality. This turn affect their perception in the novel. Helen can be construed as a female plus Calvinist, while Saint John as male plus Calvinist. I put their respective gender in front of their religious belief because the different gender actually shapes their respective character. I would argue that Helen as a female as well as a Calvinist is perceived as a victim of this inhuman religious belief, while Saint John a male as well as a Calvinist is perceived as an oppressor.
Helen as a female plus Calvinist
We knew little about Helen’s background, we just get a scattered picture from what she tells to Jane. Her mother died and she was sent to this boarding school at a very early age. Some critics have noticed that Jane lost her father and mother, while Helen was still under the rule of her father. That’s maybe part of the reason why Jane breaks the social code of male-dominance while Helen follows this code in extreme. () Helen thus is in conformity with the social expectation of female.
First Helen is very kind. Kindness as we know is often attributed as feminine character. We can see her kindness through the following event. When everyone in the school is taught not to speak to Jane, Helen despises this call and gets Jane some food. When she passed Jane she smiles to Jane. “What a smile! I remember it now, and I know that it was the effluence of fine intellect, of true courage; it lit up her marked lineaments, her thin face, her sunken grey eye, like a reflection from the aspect of an angel.”
Second she is grateful. Grateful is also an important virtue for female. When little Jane looked at the inscription and found she couldn’t comprehend it. She turned to Helen. And Helen told her about the institution. Although they lived a miserable life in the institution, Helen still used “Different benevolent-minded ladies and gentlemen in this neighborhood and in London” to describe the persons who donated to the institution. The idea that the father or a husband bears the burden of a family so that the daughter or wife should be obliged to him and obey his orders is rooted in people’s mind. So in fact, too grateful is to some extent an obstacle to female independence. Remember little Jane never thought that she as an orphan lived in Mrs. Reed’s house and contributed nothing in fact constitute her debt to Mrs. Reed. It is just this absence of gratitude that leads to Jane’s independent standing.
As regards to her religious devotion, Helen closely observes the Calvinistic teaching. She never complains even if the criticism is baseless or from over-scrupulous people who obviously have discrimination against her. Complaining or revenge is in strong confrontation with Calvinistic teaching. Miss Scatcherd often finds fault with her and punishes her in an “ignominious” way. In Jane’s words, if it were she, she would “wept and blushed”. But Helen did neither. “She bears it so quietly — so firmly”. She seldom reveals her real emotion, because she thinks it is the feature of Heathens and savage tribes and is against Christian teaching. After she heard what Jane had suffered in Gateshead, she just tried to smooth Jane, and asked her to forget and forgive. “Would you not be happier if you tried to forget her severity, together with the passionate emotions it excited?” Jane in fact accepted her advice. So when Jane was the governess of Thornfield and she heard the news that Mrs. reed who had been extraordinarily cruel to her wanted to see her, she bore the pain of leaving her lover and to see a woman who had “cast her off ” before. She even addressed Mrs. Reed by “dear aunt”. As she said to herself “I had once vowed that I would never call her aunt again: I thought it no sin to forget and break that vow now”. It is Helen’s influence that helped Jane to transform from a revengeful person into a Christian with forgiveness.
Saint John----- male plus Calvinist
In discussing Saint John, I would like to first address his Calvinist dimension, because his male aspect would seem to be trivial if it is not that fact that he appears to be a faithful Calvinist.
Saint John of course appears to be a devoted Calvinist. “A large proportion of his time appeared devoted to visiting the sick and poor among the scattered population of his parish.” And no weather seemed to hinder him in these pastoral excursions. He is very faithful to his own duty which is an important character for a priest. Another feature of Calvinist teaching is to be restraint from passion. Saint John follows this teaching closely. He is always composed and behaves in a cold manner. When he talked about the state of Jane, he expressed his very rational and brief opinion, and “these opinions he delivered in a few words, in a quiet, low voice”. Even Miss Oliver, his lover remarked that he “is good, clever, composed, and firm”. When he tells Jane the fact that Jane’s father is his mother’s brother, Jane was very excited, but he just “stood before me, hat in hand, looking composed enough”. Still when he proposed to Jane and Jane rejected him, and “during that meal he appeared just as composed as usual”. Even when his lover tried to break the impasse, he still “stood, mute and grave”. John has passion only for what Jane describes as “an austere patriot's passion for his fatherland," and” his stern zeal." He is completely devoted to his religion.
He also tries hard to “control the workings of inclination and turn the bent of nature”, which is an important Calvinist teaching. When he tries to counsel Jane to resist firmly every temptation which would incline her to look back, he tells about his own experience of struggle between natural inclination and the so called God’s errand. Though here he is just trying to impose his religious belief on Jane and thus the purpose of this discourse is to enslave her mentally, we could still see through it his devotion to Calvinistic idea.
Then we shall examine the male aspect of him. As devoted as he is, he is not really a saint. “He yet did not appear to enjoy that mental serenity, that inward content, which should be the reward of every sincere Christian and practical philanthropist”. As Jane observed in the church when he gave his sermon, “throughout there was a strange bitterness; an absence of consolatory gentleness”. And Jane remarked that “I was sure St. John Rivers — pure-lived, conscientious, zealous as he was — had not yet found that peace of God which passed all understanding: he had no more found it, I thought, than had I” the cause for his turbulence is his ambition. Ambition turns him into a monster. As Saint John once said to Jane that he never intended to become a priest himself, it is under the order of his father that he became a clergyman. He reveals to Jane that he used to feel that he was intensely miserable, because he burnt for the more active life of the world. Then he combines his clergy career with his ambition. The result of this combination is a missionary③ life. So we can see that his devotion to god’ cause is prompted by his ambition of becoming a great follower of god’s cause. Obviously from colonialism point of view, this indicates his ambition of conquering colonies. And thus many critics have portrayed him as a stern colonist. Saint John himself knows that this is not in conformity with Christianity. So when Jane unintentionally mentions “ambitious”, he is “started”. In fact, it is this ambition that ruins his normal life. He could marry to the miss Oliver as a normal clergyman because her father does not look down upon him. He would also enjoy the delightful household joys of his sisters. But he abandons all this for the sake of his ambition.
His male aspect of dominating personality also pushes him to deviate from real Christian. Even when carries out his clergyman job, he in fact derives pleasure from feeling “his own strength to do and deny”, and is then “on better terms with himself”. It is true Christianity. A clergyman should enjoy his job because he spreads God’s love and care to all its followers.
When a Jane talks to him about giving a portrait of Mrs. Oliver to him, he has the following reaction: “The longer he looked, the firmer he held it, the more he seemed to covet it”. He even remarks “that I should like to have it is certain: whether it would be judicious or wise is another question”. He is not like Helen a real devoted Calvinist; instead he is rather a defective mortal. His religion is distorted by his dominating male personality.

Conclusion

Saint John is a quite complex character. As we have seen above, he plays an important role in the growth of the protagonist----Jane Eyre. On one hand he is so devoted to Christianity as to abandon nearly every sense of indulgence except perhaps the indulgence of endurance. But on the other hand he is to some extent a reflection of John Reed as well as Rochester. He has a dominating personality of commanding others. He tries to enslave Jane through marital relationship. He embodies the mixture of a male master and a devoted priest. He claims to serve only one cause---the cause of God. He doesn't feel it is guilty to deprive others of happiness. He manipulates Jane by her sense of duty and guilty. Everyone else is just a tool for his cause and ambition which he is very reluctant to admit. He evaluates them only by the extent to which they can endure pain.
In creating this character, Bronte to some extent inherits one of the great traditions of western literature-----tragedy. A character that has personalities in tension inevitably will make himself a tragic person. saint john with his calvinistic frenzy and male dominating and ambitous personality makes him a good example.

Newcomer
04-19-2007, 11:59 AM
Saint John in Jane Eyre
In creating this character, Bronte to some extent inherits one of the great traditions of western literature-----tragedy. A character that has personalities in tension inevitably will make himself a tragic person. saint john with his calvinistic frenzy and male dominating and ambitous personality makes him a good example.

Thank you for a very interesting analysis!
As you noted “he plays an important role in the growth of the protagonist----Jane Eyre. “, thus he is a secondary character and perhaps it is unwarranted to suggest that Charlotte Bronte has created a tragedy. I would view St. John only as a means to illustrate Jane Eyre, as a 'Natural woman', in Hardy's sense that Tess was was a “Pure woman”.

dirac1984
04-20-2007, 08:23 AM
I would view St. John only as a means to illustrate Jane Eyre, as a 'Natural woman', in Hardy's sense that Tess was was a “Pure woman”.---i actually agree with you in this point, i am reluctant to write the the last paragraph. but i have to write it, because my teacher suggest it. it is my dissertation. actually my intial idea is to interprete him as a character for bronte to show her dissent view from calvinistic teachings. bronte just wants to express her approval for domestic joys and passion.

Newcomer
04-20-2007, 11:08 AM
I would view St. John only as a means to illustrate Jane Eyre, as a 'Natural woman', in Hardy's sense that Tess was was a “Pure woman”.---i actually agree with you in this point, i am reluctant to write the the last paragraph. but i have to write it, because my teacher suggest it. it is my dissertation. actually my intial idea is to interprete him as a character for bronte to show her dissent view from calvinistic teachings. bronte just wants to express her approval for domestic joys and passion.

I'm troubled by this. Intellectual integrity requires that you are responsible for the opinions expressed, to suggest that you are subservient to your teacher, especially in the feminist context of rebellion against hierarchy, is very strange. Especially if this is for a dissertation, is this for a Ph d ?
I was intrigued by your essay, Saint John in Jane Eyre, however let me be understood, that I disagree with your interpretation. Consequently I'll attempt to rebut the suppositions in your 'interpretive textual analyses', since I view the novel as an artifice of the author' time and experience as imprinted in memory. An attempt to probe the author's subconsciousness, when we do not understand our own, is in my view, presumptuous.
You in “bronte just wants to express her approval for domestic joys and passion.” have it almost right but I would put it as - Bronte just wants to express her approval for personal joys and passion.-
I hope that you shall view my rebuttal in the spirit of a debate, not of an attack. Perhaps it will assist you in writing a better dissertation.

dirac1984
04-20-2007, 11:57 AM
not a phd, but a undergraduating paper. i respect your understanding, but i maintain my own view that saint john in essence plays a role similar to blockhurlst, rochester. my analysis is completely based on the orginaol text. but one thousand people would have one thousand hamlet.
'her approval for personal joys and passion" .-you are quite right in saying this. i write household joys for i want to cite the exact words said by jane herself. i see you are a very serious critic, to whom i must pay my respect.
as regards to the question of me being influenced by my tutor is hard to say, for we have some sub-rules in china here. of course, i accept your advise, and will rewrite the last paragraph.

Newcomer
04-20-2007, 12:12 PM
as regards to the question of me being influenced by my tutor is hard to say, for we have some sub-rules in china here.

First, I'm not a critic, only I hope a careful reader.
By means maintain your own view, but I hope that you shall refine it. I think that I understand your reference to sub rules in Chinese academia but you will have to be flexible in understanding that these may not apply when you argue in the Forum where the view point is predominantly Western. (not necessarily right, in my opinion). Good luck and I hope you graduate with honors.

Newcomer
04-20-2007, 02:57 PM
Rebutal of Saint John in Jane Eyre


In my analysis of the text throughout this paper, I will take feminism approach. The method I will adopt is textual analysis, both interpretive textual analyses and content analysis.
........So in this paper I will examine the character of Saint John from different perspectives in a comprehensive way. I will argue that Saint John’s dominating male personality constitutes a test to Jane’s independent standing and his religious belief is also distorted by it. It is not coincident that Bronte names this character as Saint John. For he embodies two tensioned personalities, one is that of a devoted Calvinist saint; the other is that of dominating personality of john reed---the monster cousin Jane has as well as Rochester---Jane’s master lover

I do not question that there is a hieratic social structure inherent in Jane Eyre. No more than such exist in your university: professor teacher or in your family father, daughter. All societies depends on such a structure, in our time as well as in Bronte's. However the valid question is how you characterize it; ie what is the shape of the pyramid, how steep, how flat, how repressive? That is valid even from the feminist perspective that you adopt.
You quote “a saint and a john - a saint and a john
Metaphor, in fact, is never an innocent figure of speech. “
Are you aware of what the colloquialism 'john' denotes?
When you use 'Saint John' vs St. John as in the novel, the denotation between the two is very different. Saint John was one of the twelve apostles of Jesus, thus for Christians a name bearing reverence. It is not a name of a Calvinist saint as you state. While the character in the novel, St. John is used by Bronte ironically and as a contrast to Mr. Brocklehurst, both in contrasts of religious fanaticism vs the seeking of love by Jane Eyre as a young girl and as a young woman. This is hardly, 'analyzing the lexical features' in the text, it is intellectually sloppy.
When you construct the linear progression:Saint John, John Reed and Rochester, 'Jane's master', you have in fact reduced Bronte's complex characterization to the juvenile, “Say, What do you want, Master Reed”, of the social pyramid, as a pillar with Jane at the bottom oppressed by the males above. A convenient feminist ideological simplification, but totally at variance with the text.
Had you played with the denotation of the names John (Reed), St. John and Jane as in Sant Joan (Catalan), Saint-Jean (French), Sant Ioan (Welsh), it would have been original and much more interesting.

Newcomer
04-20-2007, 03:14 PM
.....

dirac1984
04-21-2007, 02:06 AM
Are you aware of what the colloquialism 'john' denotes? --i know it is a common name.
'Saint John' vs St. John as in the novel, the denotation between the two is very different. Saint John was one of the twelve apostles of Jesus, thus for Christians a name bearing reverence. It is not a name of a Calvinist saint as you state. ----- i know that the "Saint John" in bible of course is an important disciple of jesus. but mrs rivers john is a calvinist. i can not agree with you that st john is as "a contrast to Mr. Brocklehurst" in the novel, in fact, i think he is another brocklehurt in a rather deceitful way. brocklehurst is very cruel to the girls in the broading school indeed, but according to many studies published recently, this is normal for these calvinist priest. the calvinist priests think that people who are in the position of receiving charity should endure much pain, while the top of the society can well enjoy their luxury.so mr brocklehurst is not a hypocrite we now consider him to be. this view is from <the cambridge companion to bronte sisters> second edition. as regards to st john, he said that if jane is his real sister, then they can go to india together, so why he does not think about lifting his sisters to the high ground of serving god's cause? he in fact has bias towards jane, as i have ponited out in the analysis, he and his sisters have a noble breed, so he does not think his sisters should endure the sun in india. you may argue that he thinks his sister are not as endurable as jane, but this can be trained, not something born with. you can not ignore my analysis of his tone of speaking to jane changes after jane gets the endowment. still, i admit that bronte herself may not have such strong opposition towards st john as i interprete her to be. but my interpretation is based on her writing. you can even check her letters. she expressed her strong opposition to calvinistic idea. and i notice there is a inconsistence between the st john in britain and in india. jane nearly depict him as a real saint in india. while he is in britain, jane does not consider him to be a real saint.
as regards to 'analyzing the lexical features' , i analyze their conversation in my paper. of course, i did not do this analysis everywhere.
finally, i have to admit that my interpretation of st john is nevertherless influencd by my sense of history of china which had suffered a lot from western bully. so i maybe too sensitivee towards the hierarchy and the feeling of being suppressed. however, i have to say i have no intention to distort the text. i maintain that my analysis is valid.

Newcomer
04-21-2007, 08:26 AM
Are you aware of what the colloquialism 'john' denotes? --i know it is a common name.

In the context of a metaphor, it is not just a common name. As a colloquialism, it is a reference to a toilet and also a reference to a pimp, thus prostitution. When you begin your essay with:
“Saint John in Jane Eyre
-----a saint and a john
Metaphor, in fact, is never an innocent figure of speech.”
it is not just a common name when linked to St.John. Now, if in context of that St. John was a Calvinist and the doctrine of Total Depravity - As a consequence of the fall of man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin - the metaphor assumes a very rich meaning indeed! You are writing for an educated audience and should be more careful in the use of words.

Newcomer
04-21-2007, 10:14 AM
Passion is very important but you must consider the audience that you are addressing. Jane Eyre as a child is passionate, as a young woman, she retains the gift but learns to modulate it where it's appropriate. Had she not learned, she would not have survived Lowood. It is the nuance of passion that is precious, the ability to discriminate.
St. John is a Calvinist while Mr. Brocklehurst is an Evangelist. The distinction is not just theological, a historic western embellishment of colonialism, it is important as faith affects their conduct toward Jane.
As you point out Mr. Brocklehurst is cruel towards the girls, he punishes the body to save their soul, while he lives in luxury. St. John's foremost passion is that of a missionary. He deprives himself of love to serve a sovereign grace of God in the belief of the complete ruin of man's ethical nature and that only by divine intervention in which God must change their unwilling hearts can people be turned from rebellion to willing obedience. St. John lives in an
attitude of absolute dependence on God, which is not identified only with temporary acts of piety rather, it is an all-encompassing pattern of life. In Jean, St. John discourages the memory of Rochester while encouraging her to salvation of the Selected, a view that requires a continual reliance on God to purge the depraved heart from the power of sin.
You are correct that Charlotte Bronte expressed her strong opposition to Calvinism but in the novel she draws an important distinction between Mr.Brocklehurst and St. Jean, and part of this distinction is in the growth of Jean' self respect and independence. Your interpretation of 'master – slave' relationship of St. John and Jean is incorrect since it ignores such distinctions.
By stating: “according to many studies published recently, this is normal for these calvinist priest. the calvinist priests think that people who are in the position of receiving charity should endure much pain, while the top of the society can well enjoy their luxury.”, you destroy your credibility of “I will adopt is textual analysis, both interpretive textual analyses and content analysis.” Such a statement is unalloyed prejudice.

Newcomer
04-21-2007, 02:19 PM
Rebuttal 3
Slave-Master Power Relationship.



I would argue that the power relationship between Jane and Saint John is from the start a slave—master one. By slave---master relationship I adopt the following definition from the novel itself: a person is in a position of slave when he/she is “slaving amongst” people who” neither knew nor sought out their innate excellences, and appreciated only their acquired accomplishments as they appreciated the skill of their cook or the taste of their waiting-woman”. According to this definition by Jane herself, saint john is trying to put her in a even worse position, because he not only have no interest in knowing or seeking out her innate excellences, but also have no appreciation for her acquired accomplishments, what he seeks after her is just her physical ability to endure the pain and roughness........I would argue that the power relationship between Jane and Saint John is from the start a slave—master one. By slave---master relationship I adopt the following definition from the novel itself: a person is in a position of slave when he/she is “slaving amongst” people who” neither knew nor sought out their innate excellences, and appreciated only their acquired accomplishments as they appreciated the skill of their cook or the taste of their waiting-woman”. According to this definition by Jane herself, saint john is trying to put her in a even worse position, because he not only have no interest in knowing or seeking out her innate excellences, but also have no appreciation for her acquired accomplishments, what he seeks after her is just her physical ability to endure the pain and roughness. However this textual power relationship is changed rather suddenly due his discovery that Jane in fact is his uncle’s legal heiress and thus is entitled to a large fortune which initially is designated to him and his sisters.

You stated that “In my analysis of the text throughout this paper, I will take feminism approach. The method I will adopt is textual analysis, both interpretive textual analyses and content analysis”
However in justifying the 'slave-master' you claim a definition from the novel itself, yet the quotations do not illustrate Jane's subservience to St. John.
1)“slaving amongst” -chp 33 pg.582
"Jane, I will be your brother--my sisters will be your sisters--
without stipulating for this sacrifice of your just rights."

"Brother? Yes; at the distance of a thousand leagues! Sisters?
Yes; slaving amongst strangers! I, wealthy--gorged with gold I
never earned and do not merit! You, penniless! Famous equality and
fraternization! Close union! Intimate attachment!"

Slave---master relationship? On the contrary the passage describes the warm family concern that Jane feels toward St. John.

2) “...... their waiting-woman”,chp 30 pg. 528-529
“Meantime a month was gone. Diana and Mary were soon to leave Moor
House, and return to the far different life and scene which awaited
them, as governesses in a large, fashionable, south-of-England city,
where each held a situation in families by whose wealthy and haughty
members they were regarded only as humble dependants, and who
neither knew nor sought out their innate excellences, and
appreciated only their acquired accomplishments as they appreciated
the skill of their cook or the taste of their waiting-woman.”

The description is of Diana's and Marie's situation as governess and again not related to the master – slave thesis of St. John and Jane.
This is very sloppy work! You just can't pick and chose words, phrases, from the novel and claim that they relate to a principle that you are attempting to justify. Context matters.

To illustrate that Jane feels no subservience to St. John, I use the following from chp 35, pg. 626.
“"What makes you say he does not love you, Jane?"
"You should hear himself on the subject. He has again and again
explained that it is not himself, but his office he wishes to mate.
He has told me I am formed for labour--not for love: which is true,
no doubt. But, in my opinion, if I am not formed for love, it
follows that I am not formed for marriage. Would it not be strange,
Die, to be chained for life to a man who regarded one but as a
useful tool?"
"Insupportable--unnatural--out of the question!"”
Not only does Jane maintain her will against that of St. John but even his sisters support Jane's decision. This is a dispute amongst equals.

dirac1984
04-22-2007, 05:57 AM
Jane, I will be your brother--my sisters will be your sisters----when he said this? in what circumstance?

anyway, you have your evidence, i have my evidence. currently, i have some other business to deal with, i will make a revision of my paper next week. thank you for your helpful exchange.

Newcomer
04-22-2007, 08:17 AM
Chp33. pg.582 (Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte, 2000 Modern Library edition.)

"And you," I interrupted, "cannot at all imagine the craving I have
for fraternal and sisterly love. I never had a home, I never had
brothers or sisters; I must and will have them now: you are not
reluctant to admit me and own me, are you?"

"Jane, I will be your brother--my sisters will be your sisters--
without stipulating for this sacrifice of your just rights."

The context is of St. John revealing Jane's inheritance of 20,000 pounds and his relationship to her. He is stressing the options that the new found wealth opens to her, while she is stressing her happiness of new found family.

I am glad that you are contemplating the revision of your paper, as that was my intent in the rebuttals: to help you to sharpen your arguments before submitting the thesis. This is not a question of 'my evidence' vs. 'your evidence', rather of textual analysis. Meaning is embedded in context, words have a denotation as well as a connotation. While connotation is culturally dependent and open to interpretation, you must respect the authors intent, the context in which an idea occurs. To support a particular ideological viewpoint by taking a phrase out of context is not permissible for an academic, such is the work of a demagogue.

Newcomer
04-22-2007, 11:26 AM
Rebuttal 4
Slave-Master Power Relationship.


Saint John in Jane Eyre
“’Not too much at first — restrain her,’ said the brother; ‘she has had enough.’ And he withdrew the cup of milk and the plate of bread”.

But even before this first stage, the master-slave relationship is implied in the language of the text. “If I were a masterless and stray dog, I know that you would not turn me from your hearth to-night”. Notice Jane’s diction. She uses “masterless” to describe the state of herself.


Metaphor – a figure of speech in which an expression is used to refer to something that does not literally denote in order to suggest a similarity
where is the metaphor?
Chp 28 pg506, the text where the 'masterless and stray dog' occurs:
“I looked at her. She had, I thought, a remarkable countenance, instinct both with power and goodness. I took sudden courage. Answering her compassionate gate with a smile, I said--"I will trust you. If I were a masterless and stray dog, I know that you would not turn me from your hearth to-night: as it is, I really have no fear. Do with me and for me as you like; but excuse me from much discourse--my breath is short--I feel a spasm when I speak." All
three surveyed me, and all three were silent.
"Hannah," said Mr. St. John, at last, "let her sit there at present, and ask her no questions; in ten minutes more, give her the remainder of that milk and bread. Mary and Diana, let us go into the parlour and talk the matter over."

Masterless in the full text has a connotation of compassion, hardly of a 'master-slave' relationship. To interpret that this is how Jane view herself, is a deliberate misreading of the text. When you state “The food is given to her in way like feeding animals. “’Not too much at first — restrain her,’ said the brother; ‘she has had enough.’ And he withdrew the cup of milk and the plate of bread”. This is a gross misinterpretation; Jane was starving and St. John recognizing her condition knew that food had to be given in small quantities, else she would be sick. This is compassion, hardly “ like feeding animals”.
If this is how you interpret “In my analysis of the text throughout this paper, I will take feminism approach.”, you are doing feminism a disservice.
“But we must understand that a literary text is not a just a simple duplication of reality”. Text is the most accurate representation of the authors intent. To assume that you have a better insight into Charlotte Bronte's mind, is in my view, presumptuous.

Newcomer
04-30-2007, 02:29 PM
Rebuttal 5
Servant and Servitude.

Permit me to disagree with the meaning in your 04-22-2007 note:


....anyway, you have your evidence, i have my evidence.
Evidence as fact is the text of Jane Eyre, only the words and phrases, in context, not suppositions what Charlotte meant. Interpretation of the text is but opinion and unless very carefully buttressed by example, displaying the prejudices of the interpreter.
You wrote that your interpretation of St. John and Jane Eyre is based on “interpretive textual analyses and content analysis” however all the examples that you cited were taken out of context and at variance with the meaning of the phrases in the full text. Let me illustrate by example of a bedtime story – A fox was very hungry when he spied a duck. I shall jump into the pond, kill the duck and have a good meal. But the fox couldn't swim as fast as the duck and the duck escaped. Did you like the story? –
If I claim that “I shall kill you” as textual analysis, I would be laughed at in an academic environment. I will use a last example from your note of Saint John in Jane Eyre, 04-19-2007.
The interpretation is on the relationship of servant and servitude between St. John and Jane. “We can see that though Jane has a good relationship with his sisters, Saint John still unconsciously considers Jane in a servitude position.” and you quote the following as justification, “Saint John said the following sentences first: “as you seemed both useful and happy here”, “render yours necessary.” Notice two words in his sentences, “useful and necessary”. Useful is seldom used to describe people except when the person talked about is in a position of servitude which is in essence the same as other material tools in the master’s eyes. Necessary is also diction of servitude.”
Chapter 30,
"Yes; I wish to know whether you have heard of any service I can offer myself to undertake?"

"I found or devised something for you three weeks ago; but as you seemed both useful and happy here--as my sisters had evidently become attached to you, and your society gave them unusual pleasure--I deemed it inexpedient to break in on your mutual comfort till their approaching departure from Marsh End should render yours necessary."

To take the connotation of “useful” as implied of servitude is a gross misreading of the text where it is used to suggest sympathy for Jane's desire of independence. The same applies to “necessary” as taken out of context.
To read into Jane's opinion that Hannah position as a servant was degrading as per:
“Hannah, the servant, was my most frequent visitor”. In fact before she reached the moorhouse, she had been trying to find a job as a servant. She felt it was degrading.”.....” She understands well that in moorhouse she is in the position of servitude at least in Saint John’s eye.”
is to overlook that in 19th. century England a servant was a free man/woman and under no legal obligation to the employer. He/she was paid a wage, and while it was minimal, the position was not viewed as degrading, where a beggar is, as stated in the novel. This is the social context in which Charlotte wrote. To project the status of a servant to Imperial Rome, where a servant was a slave or to historic China, where a servant at best was an indentured person, is misleading, especially writing for a thesis.
In the incident where Jane demands of St. John the source of the letter of legacy, “Jane for the first in their conversation speaks in imperative tone. “Stop one minute!”” she even exclaims:” No; that does not satisfy me!” she demands further, using the following strong tone. “You certainly shall not go till you have told me all,” “You shall! — you must!”
What’s more, Jane at this point mentions her sexual identity with confidence. When Saint John insists on telling her afterward, and says” But I apprised you that I was a hard man,” she claims that” I am a hard woman, — impossible to put off.” We should take notice of this interesting exchange of utterances. When Saint John says he is a hard man, he in fact has some sense of pride in claiming this fact. Jane consciously uses “woman” to counteract his pride. In using woman in parallel with man, Jane is declaring her equal standing with Saint John now.”
I quite agree that the exchange between St. John and Jane illustrates her sense of equality but what has changed in the previous view of Jane's servitude? The newly inherited wealth? Unlikely as the knowledge was but recently acquired. This inconsistency emphasizes that dirac1984's reading is unsound. Jean Eyre experience of social hierarchy is complex and that of Mr. Brocklehurst, Rochester and St. John can not be equated under the premise of Slave-Master Power Relationship. Brocklehurst and St. John are very different characters and can not be interchanged in Jane's chronology of growth as an independent woman. While both are religious caricatures, St. John's position is that of a pastor, hieratic in the sense that of a parent or a teacher, not that a tyrant, while the conflict between Jane and Rochester is primarily in the view of bigamy. Rochester's view is that he is exempt from the constrain while Jane feels the full force of social approbation. It is important to note that at the conclusion Jane rejects both St. John's norms and those of Victorian society when she goes in search of Rochester not knowing that Bertha is dead. The famous words: “I married him.”, and not 'I was married' or 'He married me' emphasizes Jane's going past the Victorian norms, while the acceptance of the wife/husband relationship, the willing acceptance of the same norms.
I will close with the cited argument of colonialism as per 04-21-2007 post:
“finally, i have to admit that my interpretation of st john is nevertherless influencd by my sense of history of china which had suffered a lot from western bully. so i maybe too sensitivee towards the hierarchy and the feeling of being suppressed. however, i have to say i have no intention to distort the text. i maintain that my analysis is valid.”
The word colonialism or colonial does not occur in the text. The concept is not in Charlotte's conception of Jane Eyre. It is though often cited in connection with Wide Sargasso Sea, often cited by feminists as a prequel of Jane Eyre. It is ironic that Jean Rhys view was:”Toward the West Indian mulatto and Black Others, the Creole demonstrates a sense of proprietorship that allows for the appropriation and recruitment of "race" as an accessory of power and a trope of otherness.” and “An unidentified black is a source of menace and a threat to Antoinette.. . .in much of Rhys's writing there exists only the Manichaean division of "good blacks"--those who serve--and "bad blacks"--those who are hostile, threatening, unknown. . .. the relationship [between Tia and Antoinette] is based on the production of difference through the racialist stereotypes of the hardy, physically superior, animallike, lazy negro. . .[lazy black--sleep after eating] and the sensitive whilet child, on the other hand, contemplates nature, seduced by the "reve exotique." “, and not that of Charlotte Bronte.
To view the injustice of English colonialism of the 19th. century, and nobody will dispute the Opium War, from the Chinese historical perspective and to ignore the 20th. century colonialism of occupation of Tibet, the whole scale destruction of the cultural heritage, is in my view rather selective to say the least. This subject has no place in analysis of Jane Eyre.
Virginia Woolf had it correct - “.In other words, we read Charlotte Bronte not for exquisite observation of character--her characters are vigorous and elementary; not for comedy--hers is grim and crude; not for a philosophic view of life--hers is that of a country parson's daughter; but for her poetry.”

sciencefan
05-01-2007, 07:03 AM
Well-said, Newcomer.

cubertfilm
07-24-2007, 07:55 AM
It would help read such a long essay if you could please (in the future) indent. I am sure more people would read it if it were easier to read from the computer screen.

xoLOVExo
11-05-2007, 10:00 PM
how is st.jone's sense of duty different from janes?

sciencefan
11-05-2007, 10:16 PM
how is st.jone's sense of duty different from janes?In a nutshell, I think both of them have a sense of duty based on what they believe is right in the sight of God, yet St. John's obedience is sort of robotic and logical, while Jane's is more real and passionate, in my opinion.

Sofia102
11-07-2007, 03:21 AM
how can you write such a very long piece on a character you don't even know the name of??????????

it's ST JOHN not SAINT JOHN, and it's pronounced completely differently. When St John is a name it's not 'Saint John' it's 'Sin-jin'

jeez even i know that

and no offense to everything you've written, but he was such a douchebag. i hated him. Mr Rochester was way cooler.

dissenter
03-25-2008, 07:28 PM
Rochester was a heartless (remember how little illegitimate hurting Adele is starving for fatherly affection, and he's a jerk who brushes her off just because she is a bastard when he could have well fathered plenty himself?), hypocritical (you know how he picks on his wife for being of questionable character....and he had 3 lovers--whom he promptly abandoned...different rules for rich men, though...), and terribly selfish. And I thought he loved Jane BECAUSE she was pure, and good-hearted, with a steel spine (good moral character) and a sharp mind. He wasn't attracted to her because of "chemistry"!!@#$@# That was what his OTHER 3 girlfriends were---they should make a movie on THEM if they want "chemistry"!!! And Rochester's total odiousness comes out in the scene after the aborted wedding, when he talks so disparagingly and heartlessly about the mistresses he dumped (the nice one, not Adele's mother) and his horrible wife--and so self-pityingly of himself--giving himself every excuse. He's a total wretch. If Jane let him (as he has had for the past 10 years) have his way, she would have damned him.
For the first time, he loved someone (again in his self-devouring ravenous selfish love) that had a grain of real love in it--something bigger than chemistry--actually seeing the value in a human soul. (He isn't attracted to her body but to her soul!! There was no "chemistry"!!!!) If this had gone the way of his past 3 loves, he would have just sunk deeper into his byronic and totally bratty (devilish) misery. He'd have cut a fine figure in (CSLewis's THe Great Divorce) Hell, full of the remains of people who are eaten up with their own selfish narcissic misery--with not one last spark of real love left (and plenty of stuff they call "love" that is just torment and cruelty).

Anyway, Jane loves him more than she loves herself--and is the first girl willing to put Truth before her own passion or happiness or pity for him. (He even works off of woman's pity---and I think in the story, Charlotte Bronte made a point that all his "mean" and shallow mistresses and wife are only portrayed that way---through his eyes. With the exception of Adele's mother, the rest of them were probably much like Jane, and fell for him out of love and attraction and pity. He probably pulled the whole "I can't live without you" card before on the other woman as well--and doubtless meant it then.)

That is what makes that scene so dreadful. It is like he is burying himself in more and more lies, and begging Jane out of all her compassion and love to destroy herself with him. Its lies from hell that are coming out of his mouth. All blameshifting and denying the sacred personhood and humanity of the girls (2 other mistresses) he's ruined, as well as the wife he has wronged. She sinned like him, but was probably as tormented as him, and probably was once as he was.

Anyway, I think Jane pitied him very much, because she KNEW he wasn't as victimized as he made himself out to be. It is like watching a drowning man cling to a lead weight as he sinks down. I mean he was victimized--by his own sin and the Devil, but most of all, by himself.
Charlotte Bronte was following the Gothic tradition of the Byronic Hero, but here she turned it on its head a little by showing us how his "byronicness" is an odious thing, and his soul is chained to it and he is sinking.


Interlude: St. John Rivers. Its a very interesting twist here. First you think, "Oh, he's the opposite of Rochester". And of course no one can stand him, and modern audiences think "See! Priggish Moral Pastor v. Byronic debauched Hot guy! Cool movie!" That wasn't the point. In Charlotte's world, St. John Rivers would be considered very attractive, so she went to greater lengths to show his sin than she would have today in our culture.
As the story progresses, you realize the St. John RIvers and Rochester are very much alike. Neither of them has repented, and Rochester with his Byronic guilt-shifting and Rivers who thinks God must agree to his will.... They both have, at root, pride and unrepentence. Rivers wants someone who will think his ideas&wishes are God's (which he wholeheartedly believes himself. That is his greatest sin. Remember when he is turning down the cute girl who likes him and he is struggling? There is no mention of being obedient to Christ's will or loving CHrist. It is "MY noble goals and MY heroism and MY missionary feats....")

They are really the same. Rochester wants to kill God (by rejecting morality) for "love" which he destroys in his very ravenous devouring. St. John has recreated God as his means to glory, and mistakes his own voice for the ALmighty.

So St. John Rivers wants to use Jane as well, by having a docile wife-worker who thinks he's God. She refuses that too. (Remember how she says, "I'll obey GOD! and give him my heart...I'm not giving it to you" and he's like "Give me your personhood and I'll reshape it. My will is GOD'S will....")
St. John is also killing God.

And Jane refuses that too. She refused both the Godless "Love" and the Loveless "God". (Neither of which are Christ, and both of which were very present in that age.)

Now comes Part Two: Repentance
1. Rochester thinks he's killed Jane. Finally for once in his life he realizes how destructive his own wonderful love is, and how he has been destroying all those he "loves". It is no accident that he is running after the madwife and shouting her name. Through Janes refusal and (what he thinks) death, he has come to realize his blindness and selfish devouring. He has recognized his madwife's personhood, and is treating her as a human again. The sad part is that she is lost, her soul is eaten out by hatred to him (which was partly his fault as well as hers) and commits suicide. He almost dies trying to rescue her. But it is too late. This is one of the saddest parts of the book. It recognizes that though we may come to repentance, those WE have helped "push over the edge" may not. Rochester's repentance is too late to save Bertha. (If he had repented earlier and taken care of her out of christian love--his first few years didn't count, that was stoic "poor little me, she DISGUSTING in her sin, I'm so good and taking care of her...." What can be more insulting than that?!---anyway, if he had repented and acknowledge her value as a human being earlier, she may have come to a peaceful end...probably still crazy, but peacefully so.). So Rochester damned Bertha, in a way, though of course it was her choice in the end.

Anyway, Rochester has finally realized his own sin, and his evil. He actually has finally repented. Before that, all his "repentance" was the sham fake kind, the byronic self-deprecating guilt (I'm sure the Devil has that) that is not repentance (recognizing the precious sanctity and the image of God in other human beings).

So Jane comes back. He's no longer cool and byronic, but a doddering, blind, impoverished man. But he's changed. He's lost all that stupid glamor which was his cage. He is free now--free from the prison of his old self. He is repentant.

Jane marries him, though he had fallen more passionately in love with many other women, and has alot of problems and psycho stuff from all his years of selfishness. He is only beginning to be good. But he is sincere for the first time in his life, no longer trapped in himself and his own self-pity.

2. And finally, we get a hint of St. John's Rivers repentance. It must have been a hard blow to him that the "degenerate" but repentant Rochester was more worthy than him. Jane, by her actions and her words, made it clear to him that he was not GOd. It took him a long time to swallow, and we are not sure if he ever did. But in the end he has finally become weak--wasted away. And he still writes letters to Jane....making us begin to wonder if perhaps under all his bloated egoism, he actually did love her in his cold way though choked by pride. And in the end, he is weak, and dying, with no fan club. ANd he says, "come lord Jesus, come quickly". He's finally calling out to Christ while in utter weakness. Perhaps he didn't repent of his pride....but the earnestness of his last letter seems to suggest that he has. I felt in it, a submission. He has come a long way.

kiki1982
03-26-2008, 10:28 AM
@dissenter

That's what I thought! Arguing that the locking up-thing was not meant to be a good thing, and that Rochester was just wallowing in self pitty and making it seem like he 'could have done much worse'. But I didn't get any further than the locked-up-wife-in-the-attic-thread because someone was apparently of another opinion and seemed to be out to get me, even suggesting I had something against Brontė's work. Good Luck.

Indeed all episodes are kind of in the same 'format'. The aunt repenting on her deathbed, Rochester repenting in that year Jane is gone and St John repenting at the end.

myra
06-23-2010, 11:35 AM
very interestering. thank you What is your explaintin for ending the book with St John