I agree, Kate
Posted by Hil on October 15, 1997 at 20:27:09:
In response to bronte v. austen, written by Kate on October 14, 1997 at 22:34:10
] I think this whole discussion is part of the reason why I prefer Austen to Bronte. For Charlotte (and Emily) passions were writ large - everyone felt so much and emoted so much (I mean really, some of the dialogue!!). Rochester is such a BIG character - he has been awfully bad, then he does something majorly heroic, then he suffers terrible injury. And Jane, despite her physical smallness, FEELS things so terribly much.
] Austen I think had a more human perspective on people's emotions. While I dislike Darcy at the beginning, I never fear that he might be violent in his rage or passion. With Rochester, I think Jane IS tapping into the desire for risk that exists within some of us. All I was trying to say is that, with the wrong person, taking that risk could have pretty unpleasant consequences.
I haven't been jumping into the discussion much because I haven't found the time or inclination to re-read, so I am not familiar enough with the details. But I agree with this overall feeling about the book and characters. Jane Eyre herself is beautifully drawn, but many of the aspects of the book are over-the-top and gothic. I quite enjoy that; in fact I was vastly disappointed to see in both the Hurt and Hinds film versions that they couldn't rustle up a thunderstorm sufficiently gothic and violent to cleft the tree in two at the appropriate moment (for what reason do we have state-of-the-art computer animation in movies, if not for such times, I ask you??). But I prefer the subtlty and realism of JA's 'smaller' characters and situations, and what Kate calls her 'more human perspective'.
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.