I'm a very 'umble person, Master Copperful
Posted by Helen on October 21, 1997 at 13:33:17:
In response to Equal before God, written by Erin on October 17, 1997 at 20:08:29
] Will you stop with "IMO" (or "IMHO" if you're being nice)?! Sheesh, you're doing it all over the place, Helen. As if everything posted was not of our singular or collective 'opinion(s)'. ;-p
Sorry, I was in a particularly grovelly mood. Won't happen again ;-)
(It's just a recognition of the impossibility of ever comprehending absolute truth: I would hate you to think I had defined meaning for all time ;-) )
] But I do agree with your claims. ;-) (You started this agreeing stuff).
] So the ending, taking the focus away from their relationship and to a wider spiritual context, means that we don't end seeing Jane Eyre subsumed into a relationship, but as part of a great spiritual world.
] Yes, she transcends the ethical/social sphere, by identifying with a context that is not contingent; rather it is absolute.
Yes, that's why for me JE is so much more than a mere romantic novel: it conforms, rather, to the Pilgrim's Progress model, of Jane starting at the beginning of her life, finding salvation, and contemplating infinity. A very interesting stage in the secularizing of the novel, and the transfer of our search for the great explanatory text from the Bible to literature...
] ...women in particular have often found religion a great empowering force for that reason - because it allows them to think of themselves as beings equall before God
] I think you're right on here. As I choose to understand it, the individual's relationship with God essentially isolates the self; that is take the individual out of an everyday social context. (Ontologically, I think this is unprovable and extremely problematic, but that's another issue.)
] It is interesting to note that I've rarely (if ever) read about woman's sense of self in relation to God, in such away that makes the relation even more crucial and potent. Hmmm...many stalled feminists could use this, but they probably won't; it's not a post-modernist idea (ie. agnostic or atheist enough in tone) that they find viable --I would suppose.
It is true, though: in the Renaissance, it seems that the actual Renaissance didn't do much to liberate women - in fact, socially speaking, they ended the period further constrained than they began it - but the radical concept of every soul as an isolated self (you say this so well, my dear) opens up the possibility of spiritual liberation. Unfortunately, this spiritual model doesn't do anything about changing the social model of the good, submissive woman... we're working on it... ;-)
] Helen, getting dangerously near her thesis topic
] Well at least you've managed to unite your activities; or maybe this just an attempt to rationalize the amount of time you spend here. ;-) Well I'm in your corner kid.
Rationalization is impossible! But as for uniting my activities... just wait for my "Darcy as Coriolanus" post (I kid you not) ;-)
Helen
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
