Re-Bronte vs. Austen
Posted by Patti on October 15, 1997 at 20:31:27:
In response to bronte v. austen, written by Kate on October 14, 1997 at 22:34:10
] ] He makes the supreme sacrifice (that of risk to his own life)
] ] to save a woman who has been the bane of his existence since first they met. I would say that you have maybe missed his essence. This is a man who longs to be good, to be innocent again, and sees in Jane his way back to some semblance of the youth he once was. Can't you feel a little pity for this man? He is gruff and hard because of his disillusionment with life not because it is his nature to be so in fact it is his nature to be exactly opposite that is what he connects to in Jane. You can not admire Janes soul without admiring Rochesters because they are reflected in each other.
] 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.
But to me, Austen is all ritual. Feeling is human; it's a part of life. Actually I think Bronte's characters were more human, not the good, attractive blameless people that make up Austen's heroines. Jane Eyre was human and admitted her faults, her emotions likewise.
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.