Posted by Stolzi on October 19, 1997 at 23:02:12:
In response to Neither, just horribly mixed up?, written by AnneM on October 11, 1997 at 21:54:55
Well, a =real= villain would have hidden from Jane Eyre the fact of her inheriting a fortune -- instead, St John is pleased to give her the news.
I think he is a man wrapped up in his higher calling and ready to sacrifice all to it. Someone said here, why did he not marry the woman he loves (Rosamond)? Simple -- he is smart enough to see that she could never go to the missions and he would have to stay in England and forfeit his calling.
I for my part can never decide if the praise of St John at the end is sincere, or CB's sop thrown to the powerful critical voices that would be raised from the Evangelical wing of the C of E.
I never really noticed before how idiotic is Jane's refusal to find out -anything- about that fortune. Even at Moor House, when they ask her "have you no relatives?" the little simp says "no."
But Jane's rejection of him is based on her own sense of her calling, ie to be true to herself, and not to marry without love.
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.