Posted by CAroline on September 02, 1998 at 13:40:58:
In response to Jane Eyre, written by Emma Elizabeth Anne on September 02, 1998 at 07:00:23
] I'm sure that a lot of people who visit this page will have read Jane Eyre (Charlotte Bronte) and enjoyed it,
Have you peeked in the Archives? We did it as a group read last year, and watched the movie, too!
Is it better to have the central characters always physically beautiful, or is a story improved when the heroes and heroines are, as Jane Eyre describes herself, "poor, little, obscure and plain"??.......
] I found that I could love Mr Rochester and Jane and feel more for their story because they were different from your standard hero and damsel. I could identify with their insecurties, and get closer to the characters, because they were not perfect.
Exactly. In P&P, although Lizzy is attractive, she's not "beautiful" or "stunning" and Darcy falls for her personality as much as her dark eyes. And although Darcy is described as "very tall" , the only one who actually says he is "handsome" is his doting housekeeper! JA doesn't give you lots of physical description, so you find your own level of comfort with ehr characters.
Other books and movies run as though passionate love is/was restricted to the rich and beautiful.
Boring, aren't they?
I think that perhaps Charlotte was right - it should not be "a matter of course" that romantic heroes and heroines be beautiful, clever and talented.
] Are there any other opinions on the subject? =)
- I am sorry, but he is handsome Constanza 15:17:42 9/03/98 (0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.