Maybe his desire to admit his dark secret, but can only hint at it. The burden of secrecy and guilt and wanting to be free of them makes him speak in riddles and charades.
Bridewell, having started off as a royal palace, became a prison. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridewell_Palace. Bridewell became a synonym for a prison. Mr. Rochester, having begun life in palatial circumstances, is now both a prison to and a prisoner of his wife, Bertha née Mason. His marriage to her is a sham. He can undergo only a sham marriage to any other woman. Bridewell's history included usage as a house of correction for wayward and fallen women. Bertha Mason was licentious and an alcoholic - a wayward and fallen woman who is now incarcerated in a house of correction. Bridewell had a resident doctor; Mrs. Poole is the resident nurse to Mrs. Rochester.
Rochester frequently hints the truth to Jane, but it is in terms she cannot understand. During the gypsy interview, Jane states that she does not understand puzzles and enigmas and has never guessed a riddle in her life -- and those are the terms in which he describes it to her. The whole Blanche Ingram/houseguests section is a charade, and it is being performed before an audience of one -- Jane. Note that when he is not performing, he behaves very differently towards Jane. When he is performing, he becomes harsher and more sardonic. For someone who is supposedly not paying attention to Jane, he quickly noticed when she left the room. And as the gypsy, he seemed quite aware that Jane had been watching him courting Blanche. I finally figured out how he did it. You have to go back to when Mrs. Fairfax first shows Jane the drawing room. A full description of the room is provided there. The room is filled with mirrors and glass ornaments -- reflective surfaces; therefore, Rochester never needs to look at Jane directly. He only needs to observe her reflection. Poor Jane thought she was pining unobserved, but he was watching her all along. As for Bridewell, he obviously sees that marriage with the wrong woman is a prison.
@@barbarabrown7974 Interesting how a room full of mirrors would probably be so unwelcome before her arrival. Perhaps the mirrors symbolize how lonely snd unwelcomely self-reflective his situation was before Jane arrived.
As much as Jane and Rochester truly love one another during the first, “sham” marriage attempt, I think your observations suggest that had they been able to marry it would not, then, have been a successful union. Both Jane and Rochester grow and change due to the hardships they are to face while they are apart, and these changes make their ultimate, happy partnership possible. Indeed, Rochester was initially “performing” at romantic love-a subject in which he has little positive experience!-and he expected Jane to conform and obey as a traditional bride (“chain around your neck”). I doubt that his appreciation of her independent mind would have endured once she was his wife and both legally and socially subject to his control. Until he has been humbled (and thus his moral expiation made) and Jane strengthened, by subsequent events, they would perhaps not have been a compatible pair.
Rochester was used to being the one pursued, due to his wealth and old family name. With Jane, it is the first time he ever was the pursuer, and he doesn't know quite how to behave. I think you have to think of Rochester in the terms of a man who is desperate to be loved. Once he has secured Jane's love, he reverts to old habits. He is used to showering women with presents, things, and Jane will have none of it. Jane does not want material things -- she wants his love and his confidence. Note the three things she requests from him after they become engaged: to rescind the order of jewelry from the banker, to know why he let her think he was going to marry Blanche and/or confide in her, and let Mrs. Fairfax know about the engagement. He very much upsets Jane on the shopping trip to Millcote -- he nearly blows it. Perhaps he does blow it, because his behavior compells her to write to her uncle, which begins the whole cycle of events.
@@barbarabrown7974 Wow, I never thought about the fact that the Millcote shopping trip prompts the communication to Mr. John Eyre and ultimately derails the wedding. But that is a very interesting observation.
@@erldagerl9826 IF he referred to her as Miss Eyre (misere), he'd be labelling her French misery. Jane would not have dared calling Mr. R. "Eddie", since that brings up images of Eddie Haskell or diminutive vampires. Those images are much more disturbing.
I could honestly listen to you talk for hours about Jane Eyre and Austen and pretty much anything! I loved this close look at charades and Bridewell. I always thought, as a Palace turned prison, Bridewell symbolised Rochester's opinion on wealth and status and beauty before and after marriage. But loved the more extensive picture you've drawn. I miss uni!
There are interesting parallels with Jane Austen's "Mansfield Park', where a theatrical performance (rehearsal, really) is taking place, and the heroine does not want to participate. It even involves 2 mock romances between 2 couples. One is illicit (Maria and Henry Crawford) and the other is between Edmund and Mary Crawford, where just like Jane Eyre, Fanny has to watch her beloved courting another. Fanny's refusal to join the acting company is an indication of her genuineness and sincerity. There's even a scene later in the book where she's offered jewellery and is reluctant to accept any but the plainest and simplest chain.
Yes, the comparison of Jane Eyre with Fanny Price is rather obvious - both are self-righteous, smug, sanctimonious prigs: there are reasons for each turning out as she has, of course, and they are very different. With the former, we get only the main character's version of events (the whole book is her autobiography, after all) - or rather, what she chooses to believe is a correct version of events, with the latter, the narrator decides what we are told. What is interesting is that neither gives us the outlook of the declared villains of the respective pieces.
I also think Fanny and Jane are similar. Fanny, for me, is like an alternate reality Jane who was a tiny bit more beloved and stayed at Gateshead as a dependent.
Maria & Henry were portraying a mother and son, actually; any 'romantic' intimacy was interjected into their scenes by the actors; but your analogy is still on point.
the Brontës are masters of present metaphor in their novels, the way they use interaction of characters to foreshadow elements creates a symmetry in the stories that is so complex and layered with subtlety and at the same blatantly telling you whats happening in the hidden aspects of the characters. They tell you what you dont know without telling you what don't know.
So true! The ,,Gipsy " hit the nail:,,l see no enemy to a fortunate issue but in the brow; and that brow professes to say- " I can live alone, if self- respect and circumstances require so to do.I need not sell my soul to buy bliss.(...)The forehead declares, "Reason sit firm and hold the reins, and she will not let the feelings burst away and hurry her to wild chasms. The passions may rage furiously (...) but I shall follow the guiding of that small voice which interprets the dictates of conscience". " Well said, forehead; your declaration shall be respected. l formed my plans- right plans l deem them- and in them l have attended to the claim of conscience, the counsels of reason. I know how soon youth fade and the bloom perish, if, in the cup of bliss offered, but one dreg of shame, or one flavour of remorse were detected; and l do not want sacrifice, sorrow, dissolution- such is not my taste."
When you said, “Jane states that she will not act” I was immediately reminded of Fanny Price in Mansfield Park. Thank you for drawing this to my attention.
I would love your take on why Jane continually refers to Rochester’s “kindness” to her. I don’t understand him as being kind to her. I think treacherous would be more descriptive of that situation.
Well, at least for a time Jane is no longer the homeless orphan and she is given free reign to teach Adele as she sees fit, and live without fear of where her next meal will be coming from. For an orphan like Jane Eyre, this would seem a great kindness, despite her misgivings about possible secrets held within the house and Mr Rochester’s heart. All things considered, Rochester is generally seen by his staff as being ‘a very good master’ , as Mrs Fairfax puts it. That’s my take on it anyway :)
He is as close to an equal as she has had in a long time. She's also been essentially abused and neglected a lot. In those circumstances just being humored probably feels amazing.
Wonderful video! I am American and while I knew of “Bedlam” being a lunatic asylum, I had never heard of Bridewell. I can’t count the number of times I have read Jane Eyre and just assumed it was the title of a popular novel known to the guests. Cultural context 1 American reader 0. 😆 Thank you, Dr. Cox!
Well, here's the beauty of the internet: now when you read something that you don't understand, you can take a break and look it up. In the past (pre-internet), if you read something unusual, you just had to gloss over it or make assumptions on the meaning. When I take the time to read novels, I now highlight terms that I don't understand and take the time to look them up. It really adds to the richness of the material. And I wonder how many modern British reads would've known what Bridewell was or its connotation.
@@grittykitty50 Yes, the first few occasions Jane and I spent time together was waaaaaaaaay before the internet, at which time I always thought I’d look up Bridewell later (in the encyclopedia at the library), but i’d always forget to do so. I think after enough repetition my mind quit asking what it was and latched on to the thought it was a novel. Even now, if i’m reading a print book I forget to look things up, but I agree with you that with an ebook it’s easy peasy to do it right away.
It makes me really sad that the bronte siblings had such a tempestuous life and passed on in their youth. If there is an afterlife, then I hope charlotte, emily, anne and their brother found peace.
I read Jane Eyre when I was much younger and didn't know the story from the bible or understand the reference to Bridewell/Bethlehem. Thank you for providing the historical context. It did always seem to me that Mr. Rochester was constantly trying to overwhelm Jane with shows of his wealth and place her under an obligation to him. I was glad that she only marries him when he has been humbled and repented, and she has established her own independence. She marries him as an equal. Also, why are we to think of Blanche Ingram as "prostituting" herself for a sham of a marriage, when as a woman of that time it was her only way of securing her future? Rochester himself married Bertha Mason for her dowry. He tries to buy Jane's love by shows of his wealth and status. He reminds her how she is not a "peer's daughter" as though him loving her despite that makes him superior. I also thought his treatment of Bertha Mason was demeaning. To despise someone because of an illness they have no control over is horrible. Although I am glad he tried to shelter her from the horrors of the lunatic asylum. At least he was kind in that.
Not to disagree with Dr. Cox's interpretation, but I, when reading the book, had a different sense of the themes she talks about in this video. I didn't know the history of Bridewell, but I find that part very interesting as well! First of all, the charade: Blanche Ingram receives only positive things, the things she desired, in each of her scenes. Marriage, and jewels as a result of her marriage. The person who was imprisoned was Mr. Rochester. I think it could be argued he was communicating (to Jane?) that he viewed marriage to Blanche, and Bertha, as only punishment for him. Despite them, and their families, receiving what they had wanted. Bertha, obviously, doesn't live a great life, but it *could* have been much, much, much worse for her in a typical insane asylum. Her family was rid of her, and received their connections and money, etc upon her marriage. I thought/think Rochester was communicating he wasn't fooled the second time around. That he saw through Blanche's charade, and wasn't going to choose her. I think there are themes, as well, of his being unable to choose her because the state of his current marriage to Bertha. He was *already* imprisoned. Much the same as Bertha was imprisoned in her tower. He was chained to her tower just as much as she. I didn't view Rochester as controlling and violent when he talks about "placing, myself, the chain of diamonds around your neck." I view him as remorseful and already regretting the harm he is doing to Jane. Trying to tell her the truth without actually confessing. In the same way he knew she would solve the charade, he was hoping she would solve his cloaked language about his current marriage and assuage his guilt by making her a "willing party" to their marriage. Almost as if Jane were consenting to be his mistress, by understanding the deeper meanings of his words and comments. I also view his offering to Jane of his jewels as a test, of sorts. He likes to challenge and test Jane's opinions and thoughts and devotion. I get the sense, had Jane exclaimed and gloried in his jewels and riches he would not have continued with his sham marriage to her. He wanted Jane because she would refuse his jewels. At his core, Rochester is a deeply scarred and wounded man (physically represented by his injuries at the end of the book). He knows he's not attractive and his money and jewels are his main enticement to those of his class. To put it in a cliche, he wanted someone to love who he was inside, not his packaging. Jane, in her criticism of Blanche's coyness, flirting and exuberance, shows the reader that Blanche didn't know Rochester at all, despite being long acquaintances/neighbors/friends. She was distracted by the packaging and didn't look further. Rochester wants Jane, a woman of few enticements herself, for her heart as well. Which he says after the sham wedding ends, that he was strong enough to capture her body but wouldn't possess her heart, which is his deeper desire. In their desires they are equal. Rochester's money is of no value to Jane, and her lack of it has no value to Rochester. But in all the ways that matter they are equals. Finis
Thank you for this very clarifying discussion! I first read Jane Eyre when I was 11. I found it in my Mother's library, an old, pretty little volume with rice-paper pages, and I couldn't resist it. Needless to say, I didn't understand the references in the charade, but Mum was shocked and impressed when I started asking her questions about it. Dubious suitability aside, that book formed my notions of love and feminism, and led me to read lots of 19th and early 20th century literature at an early age. No wonder people find me strange!
Same here. I was always reading books that most would never pick up unless it was required class reading. While people my age were bar and club hopping I was hopping from one old bookstore to another, to see what treasures I could find. Imagine doing that, rather than binge drinking and hooking up? Not easy being a nonconformist.
I would argue that Adele's mother is a fourth charade wife. She is both Bertha ( overly sexual) and Blanche ( greedy and grasping) and therefore doomed to be a failed marriage because she embodies the reverse of Jane.
Your JE analyses are always so interesting and fun and make me think on the many meaning one can get out of Charlotte’s wonderful story. I never connected the charades they performed to a running charade theme in the novel. Rochester and his 3 charade brides are an understandable analytical conclusion. The jewel talk was interesting as well. In defense of Blanche, women of that time were motivated to marry for money. Until just a little while ago, there were so little opportunities to keep out of poverty on their own. So, yeah she had to put on her charade to survive and the jewels looked great to her--security! Jane, who was fiercely independent and making her way on her own already needed no charade and was not so impressed by jewels or Rochester’s need to “possess” her by them. Rochester probably thought all woman liked jewels as this was his experience. And Rochester can in no way empathize with Blanche’s dilemma. How could he? He did not need dependency on a woman’s wealth. I say this because I take exception to the concept that Rochester’s motivation in marrying Bertha was money and lust. The book explains that this was an arranged marriage by Rochester’s father, brother, and the Masons. In all their deception it was the Masons who wanted to be associated with the “Rochester name”. And Rochester’s father and brother were the ones who “thought only of the thirty thousand pounds” not a young, inexperienced Rochester. Rochester’s father never mentioned Bertha’s money. Only her beauty. Was lust involved? Certainly, but love was what Rochester was thinking. “… I thought I loved her.” Rochester’s desire at the time was to marry a flattering, beautiful, dazzling wife. A supermodel. Lots of guys and woman as well are taken in by such dazzling beauty before examining the character.
Interesting response. I need to read the book again because it's been too long and I have forgotten so much, but would it be reasonable to say Rochester's family threw him under the bus in arranging that marriage? Knowing Bertha's family history? Maybe there were red flags in her behaviour even as a young, beautiful woman. But Rochester agreed bec she still had the loveliness of youth. How mercenary was his family in arranging that marriage? Quite mercenary, I think; maybe very mercenary. Not that this makes Rochester into a victim we can totally sympathize with BUT adds another layer of complexity to a complicated guy. Kind of veering off track here and possibly making stuff up but so enjoy the conversation.
@@deborahgiles8214 Hi. I think you hit the nail on the head about the mercenary aspects of the arranged marriage. Some think Rochester is telling a fairy story to Jane when he explains this to her in trying to get her to stay. Yet, to back him up, early in Jane’s time at Thornfield Mrs. Fairfax alludes to this bad arrangement and how his brother and father did something “not quite right” and that explains Mr. R’s abruptness. I do view Rochester as a victim. Here he was fooled into marrying a deranged person and cannot divorce her. How would anyone feel being in an arrangement like that? Many are victims of spousal abuse because the perpetrator is hiding their true nature. That’s the way I look at Rochester anyway. But I also look at Blanche as a victim. The real villains are the elder Rochester and Mason, Bertha’s father, who knew full well the nature of the situation but only thought of money and prestige and not their children’s happiness.
Thank you for this. I never knew what "Bridewell" meant and, hence couldn't make much of the whole "charades" chapter. This makes that part of the book a lot more interesting now.
Wow I love this. Thank you. Jane Eyre is one of my two most favorite novels (the other one being Pride and Prejudice). This look into the connotations really fascinated me. It was like detective work. Amazing.
Something I find interesting about Mr. Rochester is that even when he is betrayed, he still cares and takes responsibility of others. Betrayed and tricked by the Masons but still takes care of Bertha instead of getting his marriage annulled. Betrayed by the French mistress that he was so fascinated by but still makes her daughter his ward and spoils the child.
It was very difficult almost impossible to anulled or divorce on the grounds of insanity. You need to have proof that it was before the wedding and still (remember the Mason’s never let them talk alone before). And the same to be in prison. Those are very common motives on murder mistery novels of that time era. Just after 1937 you can divorce on grounds of incurable insanity. And you have to wait 2-5 years to divorce your in prison-spouse.
YES!! I've read all of the Bronte's novels, and Tenant is my favorite. I'm aghast that so few people know it, since Charlotte declined to have a second edition published because she thought it was too scandalous.
Mr Rochester is such a rich character, in large part because of his is so flawed. Although I love this book, the love story just hasn’t aged well. He’s borderline cruel by playing with Jane’s feelings before actually declaring his love and proposing. He was willing to jeopardize Jane’s reputation by making her a mistress without her knowledge. When she does eventually come back after Bertha Mason’s death, Jane basically has to “fix” him. Today, if Jane was my friend, I’d say this guy is toxic. Run Jane. Still, every time I read the book, it makes me happy that Jane and Rochester marry.
He had to be so bad, and lose nearly everything, before he became worthy of Jane. But you're right - he was narcissistic in the extreme, and those people don't change, except in fairy tales. Which is why Jane Eyre is my favourite fairy tale.
He is cruel at times, but I think it may be the only way for him to make her come alive romantically , while also protecting himself in a way. I don’t think she has to come back and “fix” him per se. I think she comes back to him on equal footing or in less unequal terms than if she married him in the first ceremony. Women were expected to be submissive , restricted to the male socially acceptable ideas of womanhood and that would have been the role if she married him in the sham marriage . She would have been forever in-debt to him in a way for having married her, and she would have further been isolated w/ him if she her role was as a mistress or fake wife. And others would have speculated Rochester’s money and position were the draw for her - not actual love. Jane has been restricted to submissive roles her entire life- this marriage - the most important relationship in her life will break away from that and demonstrates to others that women are capable of full filling their own destiny and successfully breaking free from social prisons.
I love the book too, but these days I find myself wondering what would have happened if Jane had found St. John and his sisters before meeting Rochester. They were willing to treat her like family, and spiritually they were a better match for her. That’s the part that doesn’t ring true for me. What does Jane see in that obnoxious, lying heathen, and why would she go back to him after she knew of all his lies? Now I have to reread that half of the book. Bother. LOL.
This has given me a lot of food for thought. Jane Eyre is one of my favorite books, but for some reason, I’ve always viewed this scene from Rochester’s eyes. On my next read, I will have to focus on Jane and the points you have discussed in this video! Thanks for your insight!❤️
Being so far apart from the 19th century north of England (I am in Brazil in the 21st century) I didn't understand a thing of that scene. Both times i read the book i rushed through this part. Even when watching films and series, it didn't make any sense. Thank you for throwing a light into one of the darkest episodes in the novel.
This analysis of Mr. Rochester’s charade was so insightful. I thought of two other connections one could draw from the passages you referenced. First, Ch 24 when Rochester speaks of putting the diamond chain around Jane’s neck, he also says he “will clasp the bracelets on these fine wrists.” This has a parallel to the final scene in the charade described in Ch 18. Rochester in his imprisoned disguise is described thus: “as he moved, a chain clanked; to his wrists were attached fetters.” It may be the intention to draw together the symbol of Rochester with chained wrists to Jane with chained wrists (which she rightly rejects.)
My favorite novel of all time (outside of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, by Betty Smith), Jane Eyre is phenomenal and Mr. Edward Rochester happens to be my favorite male character of all time. Yes, even more so than Mr. Darcy, Mr. Knightly, and on and on. I do love Mr. Wentworth from Persuasion though, more so than Mr. Darcy of Pride and Prejudice. Back to Mr. Rochester and Jane's love. I think he fell in love with her the moment he met her. I think at first, she acquired a crush on him but gradually fell in love with him. Whether Jane had left or not, I feel they truly loved one another and other than the elephant in the room (Bertha Mason), the relationship would have worked out. Jane has morals and did the right thing in leaving even though it broke Mr. Rochester's heart but it had to be done. She did not want to be Mr. Rochester's mistress. She learned a lot about herself and also came into some wealth and met her new cousins--all about family. Blanche Ingram though beautiful and educated, and a lady, was after Rochester's money! He was no dummy and dropped her! Loved this novel and the movie (Timothy Dalton as Rochester and Zelah Clarke as Jane Eyre).
Thank you Dr. Cox for providing the historical context. It really helps when trying to understand the novel. As an American, I had never even heard of Brideswell, so your explanation made that whole chapter much more understandable. I also note how Mr. Rochester is constantly acting, pretending to have an interest in Miss Ingraham, pretending to be a gypsy, pretending to everyone that he is single.
One wonders how much syphilis played a role in madness. Syphilis sufferers can develop delusions and decaying mental faculties... The middleclass of the 19th century (the audience of Brontë) was terrified of the ravages of syphilis, especially as it was a desease that was contracted by sex and could and would be inherited by one's children and grandchildren. It seemed like a biblical curse. The horror and public condemnation of out-of-wedlock sex and of prostitution and the linkage of madness to such things must surely lie with the fear for syphilis? (pardon my crappy English - it's not my first language and it's rather late and I'm tired)
Interesting idea! It certainly would have been a possible cause, especially in an era before antibiotics. But don't forget that there are many cause and kinds of mental illness. Given that Rochester wasn't physically ill, I rather think that syphilis isn't the case in Jane Eyre, since Rochester said he was tolerable happy in the first months of his marriage to Bertha Mason.
Really enjoyed this! and it's given me the impetus to get the book out and read it again. Something that only really stood out when you read the words - "he placed the bracelets around her wrist and the rings in her ears". It wasn't until I had to do this for someone else that I realised just how intimate an action that is, putting someone's earrings in....and in those times it seems like an action beyond mere flirtation. The very close proximity to Blanche's lily-white neck for a start....The description of the chain around Jane's own neck made me wonder how long it would have been before Rochester tired of Jane and left her chained to her home while he travelled abroad again; in fact as I recall she was reminded of his former conquests when tempted to stay with him as his mistress and realised her own possible fate. What a remarkable woman Charlotte Bronte was, the spinster daughter of a parson, to have developed such insights into human nature.
I read this book when I was in middle school, and I took this chapter much less symbolically. I just thought Mr. R was trying to see if he could make Jane jealous, or at least to see her reaction to the fake wedding. Same thing with the fortune teller scene...I thought he was just trying to find out if Jane liked him or not. I was wondering why a grown man was acting like a teenager. I never knew there was a deeper meaning, ha ha. 😂
Maybe he was also acting like a teenager. It seems to me that his character development when it comes to having a sincere relationship would have just stopped after he married Bertha Mason.
It was not about just understanding her feelings , but he also wanted to squeeze a confession out of Jane . To show her a kind of despair : " You will be miserable without me , only you ; so , confess me , pursue me " . ( Ironically actually Rochester was the desperate one between the two. )
I haven't read the book in at least a decade, but I always saw this scene as a lesson in class structure. Maybe because that is how Jane views it? She doesn't see herself as a viable candidate for Rochester because he socializes with women of a higher status. She keeps trying to escape notice. Meanwhile, he tries to demonstrate that he considers her just as worthy company as the ladies in jewels.
I thought of another addition to the Bridewell connection (prison, orphanage and hospital/bedlam). Yes, Jane is an orphan trying to find a place to fit in. But like Rochester taking care of Bertha Mason in a more humane way then her mother/bedlam, he also treats Adelle differently as a potential orphan by caring for her himself. Maybe it is these redeeming qualities that protects Rochester from going all out mad from his excesses. Just a thought:+) Thank you for the interesting insights...very rich. I love Jane Eyre:+) God bless~
I just want to say how much pleasure it has given me to find your jewel of a channel. Your videos and analysis have given me a degree of gratification and enjoyment in literature which I have not experienced since my high school days, and I am middle-aged now! I am so happy that your channel appeared in my recommendations, and I shall also advise my teenage daughter to become a subscriber too.
In defense of Blanche Ingram-- and I know this will be an unpopular opinion as Blanche is not a likable character-- at the age of 25, she is approaching an age where she might have to accept spinsterhood. She is starting to get desperate. Remember that in Pride and Prejudice, Charlotte Lucus (27), very quickly secures the odious Mr. Collins as a husband, so that she might have an establishment. There were few career choices for women in those days. Jane Fairfax in Emma dreads becoming a governess. A good marriage was a woman's best method for obtaining financial security. The Ingram estate is entailed -- neither Blanche nor Mary have the dowries necessary to attract higher quality suitors. Blanche has not been trained to be anything other than a society wife. Could you picture Blanche as a governess? I don't think so. If she does not marry, Blanche is dependent upon the kindness and charity of relatives. Unlike some of the other characters, we never learn Blanche's fate. So her pursuit of Rochester is a waste of the limited amount of time she has left on the marriage market. I might also add that Bertha Mason, who has good dowry and was equally as attractive as Blanche in her youth, does not marry until the age of 26. Bertha would have been considered a catch -- or was she? Evidently her other suitors in Jamaica already knew about the insanity than ran through the family and would not seriously consider her, so I suspect Bertha was desperate to get married too.
I feel that Bertha was made to feel desperate to marrying Rochester by her family. Rochester similarly was pressured by Bertha's family into the union, which Rochester's father and brother were happily planning on. For both of them they were surrounded by ppl saying that it was in their best interest to marry, when really these ppl had anything but their interests in mind. Her family's history of mental illness doesn't seem to be associated with the men, as her brother seems all too happy to show up to Rochester not for his sister's sake at all but for money, and he shows no inclination of madness, only being greedy. Bertha attacked him, so no familial warmth is felt by her. So why was Bertha made to feel desperate in this way? Because this madness is likely the result of how her family has treated women, which over the years has made it somewhat passed down genetically, but mostly reliant upon the continued tradition of being awful to female relatives. Being from Jamaica, her family were most definitely slave owners, and viscious in all aspects of their life just like their "business". Instead of acknowledging the cruelty they inflicted not just on their "property" but also their relatives, they were dedicated to maintaining steady/increasing profits and status. All of Bertha's life would've been reminders that she will likely go mad if she disobey, that no one will marry her if they knew of that madness in the family, and that she should therefore take any chance she can get to marry who her family wants (regardless of how that affects her), because she wouldn't want to turn out like the rest of the mad women in her family now would she? I can't imagine her saying no to all this, seeing as she's probably witnessed what disobedience results in with the enslaved people on her family's land. So she gives up everything (leaving Jamaica being the least of her worries) for a man who is just as much a victim as her, and when it becomes apparent that her family certainly lied to her about everything turning out fine and sane if she obeys them, she was furious and lost all hope, becoming the unstable and violent woman she is.
@@varshana81 oh I don't doubt that Bertha was already suffering mentally. But I'm thinking that this loveless marriage she was pressured into was the straw that broke the camel's back in regards to more violent tendencies. After all, Rochester said that she tried to kill him on the way back to England, so the violence and aggression appeared early in the relationship. It caught her own brother off guard when he came to visit so likely she was not like this (in terms of violence, not the madness itself) prior to becoming Mrs Rochester.
I have never been a fan of Jane Eyre, but your analysis gave me a greater appreciation for it. I like your comments giving historical context; it really made it much more interesting. The scene that bothers me most in the book is where Mr. Rochester plays the gypsy woman. I'd love to hear your comments/analysis of why he bothers to do this. It seems like such an extravagant and drama-filled choice for a wealthy man to stoop to playacting such a role in order to win the heart of a governess. Thank you!
Thanks for explaining all that. I'd never thought to look into the symbolism of that scene. Can you point me towards something that explains why he acts like a fortune teller to Jane Eyre please? It's a very odd scene that should have gone differently in my mind so I'd like to understand it.
Dr. Octavia Cox-- I LOVE your work and watch your videos all the time, I love sharing them with friends who also love classic literature!! I was wondering if you would consider doing a video on Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys as a companion piece to the videos on Bertha Mason and Mr. Rochester's Charade. I recently read the book and it is remarkably chilling and fascinating. I was really drawn in by its exploration of Bertha as a character and of the West Indies. Please do consider making this video, thank you!!
Thank you for this thoughtful and compassionate look at Mr. Rochester's charade, its implications and its reach. I'd like to add that there is another orphan at Thornfield, Adele. Mr. Rochester relates Adele's background to Jane, and then surmises that Jane will be disgusted by the child's history and leave. Jane replies: “No: Adèle is not answerable for either her mother’s faults or yours: I have a regard for her; and now that I know she is, in a sense, parentless-forsaken by her mother and disowned by you, sir-I shall cling closer to her than before. How could I possibly prefer the spoilt pet of a wealthy family, who would hate her governess as a nuisance, to a lonely little orphan, who leans towards her as a friend?”
I find Jane’s comment interesting in the light of the fact that neither Rochester nor Jane bring Adele back when they get married. She’s not considered a part of their family or their “happy end.” While we’re led to believe that Mrs. Reed acted cruelly and selfishly when she got rid of Jane and sent her to school, Adele’s lot is presented as a completely normal turn of events, despite the fact that her father/guardian is alive and well and her step-mother is supposedly sympathetic towards her.
@@SailorMoon-in-Cancer Thanks for that: I've always found it interesting how the character of Adele is pretty much pushed to the side after a certain point; and yes, she is dismissed to school and then as a companion to Jane after her "French defects" have been corrected. A while ago, I read a novel that looked at the events of "Jane Eyre" from Adele's point of view. I felt the writing and plotting was a little weak, but I liked the idea, and I remember that Adele was not happy with the situation.
@@melenatorr I’ve not heard of such a novel, thanks for bringing it up. Yes, it seems weird that Jane, who should understand Adele’s position best, considers her a foreign element just like everyone else. It seems that for Bronte, Adele’s background as a bastard of a French woman justifies casting her aside, and that she thinks Jane shows enough kindness by merely sending Adele to a “better” school than the one Rochester originally put her in. Crucially, Jane grew up well aware that the she was being mistreated, but Adele would go through life truly thinking she’s inferior, partially because “good” characters like Jane also believe that.
@@SailorMoon-in-Cancer Oh! I just popped into Amazon hoping to find the book; typed in "Jane Eyre Adele" and there seems to be a number of books there that look at Adele. I predict my cashflow is about to ebb a bit.
I think it must have been the Emma Tennant novel; the plot summary sounds very familiar, and the comments sound similar to my own impressions after reading it: www.amazon.com/Adele-Jane-Eyres-Hidden-Story/dp/0060004541/ref=sr_1_6?dchild=1&keywords=jane+eyre+adele&qid=1621706166&s=books&sr=1-6
Hi Octavia! I love your videos. Have you made a video or written an essay on the reason Charlotte Bronte chose a 20 year age gap between Jane and Rochester? I am not a student; I'm just totally fascinated by the story. Many thanks, Judith
I needed this:) I only found this channel yesterday, regarding Pride and Prejudice. Today this vid popped up "by chance" and an interesting thing: I just watched the 2011 version of the movie. I've read it a long time ago in my mother language, and it's not like I did not understand the story, but I always felt I don't get Mr. Rochester 100%. Your analyses of this book and the others are excellent and provide depth and extra dimensions. Thank you. I enjoy your discussions. I subscribed too, and I appreciate that there are no ads in every 5 seconds (people attack me when I mention this, but I wanted to let you know anyway).
By the way, if you’d really like to understand Rochester, check out the 1983 bbc series. Timothy Dalton completely captures Rochester, and helped me understand Rochester immensely. Check it out, you won’t be sorry!
@@S070-g8q thanks. Actually, to me another version was the one I found perfect regarding Mr. Rochester's character. In the 1997 version Ciarán Hinds finally gave me the look (Dalton is simply too handsome for me for this part:)) and the erratic, maybe not always sensible royalty. He was the one that made it clear who is he. All the other versions were great and enjoyable too, but to me this one stands out.
A collection of handwritten poems and notes by Emily Bronte has been discovered after many years according to The Guardian. I hope with all my heart that they remain in England, specifically at Haworth, where they belong. The Brontes were my special subject for my degree at university many years ago and Jane Eyre is a particular favourite.
Rochester could be teasing her with the "diamond chain around her neck". Just four lines later, she tells him "don't be ironical!" . One of their first conversations was about presents: "a present has many faces to it, has it not?".
I have always avoided analyzing literature this way. Now that I hear you do it, I see that it's much more interesting and worthwhile than I'd always thought. But only if it's one of my favorite authors.
I've probably read this story 50 times since I first discovered it in Classics Illustrated (remember those?). The charade scene is one I've never quite understood, and frankly skimmed over it, until now. I will read the book now with a much better comprehension of the whole scene. Thank you, Dr. Cox!
Wow. I recently read this book specifically to watch this video (true). As soon as you said charade his entire character became clear. The charades, the fortune teller, deceiving Blanche (if he actually did), hiding Bertha, and no doubt more. This book will need a rereading in a few months.
Dr. Cox - Thank so much for your very interesting and enlightening look at the classics like Jane Eyre. I have read Jane Eyre many times through the years, but your analysis really deepens my understanding. Time to read it again!!!! Also enjoyed your English pronunciation of "charade." In America we would say "CharAde' with a long "A." Your pronunciation sounds like French, which I am going to assume is the word's original language. Finally, during your video, I kept thinking of that great movie "Charade" with Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant. In many ways the Cary Grant character is like Rochester. He doesn't really reveal his true persona until the very end of the movie when the Audrey Hepburn character puts her trust in him. Haven't seen the the movie for years, but I am going to watch it again soon to see if there are any parallels with Jane Eyre.
Thank you for this video! I first read Jane Eyre at about age 13, and I knew nothing about Bridewell (I'm in the USA). The charades scene makes so much more sense to me now. I have reread the book many times, but frankly just glossed over this episode because I didn't understand it well. 👏👏👏👏
Thank you so much for these videos 🤗 I often wonder what details and nuances I miss out on from not knowing those historical & cultural contexts! I love to know more and more with regards to Austens and the Brontë-sisters litterature in particular (since they are my favourites). Thank you!
I really loved learning these insights of symbolism from you about the charades. I love Charlotte’s use of symbolism in so many other places in this novel but I confess I never fully appreciated the charades scene. I’m going to have to watch Jane Eyre tonight lol Timothy Dalton is such a wonderful Rochester and read it again very soon. Nothing beats the Brontes ❤️ I’m very excited to watch your video/s on Byron soon!! Thank you your videos are such a treat
The "chain around her neck" to me hints of his intent to keep her by his side come what may. He knows he is deceiving her. He knows she will leave him if she finds out his secret. Thus, his subconscious thoughts are unwittingly (or wittingly) inserting themselves into this conversation. The control is born of desperation.
Interesting analysis. While I dislike the narrative of the book (honestly, I thought Jane was a bit dimwitted), I have come to appreciate how well-written and subtle it is.
There is something I would like to know about the fake marriage scene, or rather the whole marriage issue: If Mr. Rochester could prove that he had been wheedled into marrying an insane woman, could not he have asked to have his marriage annulled?
Thank you for this very insightful and academic treatment of a novel I have read at least 20 times, both in translation in my native language and in English. I started out watching this video thinking I would end up being able to tell you a thing or two about Jane Eyre, but in fact the opposite occurred: you giving me a fresh outlook and providing me with a valid excuse to read the novel again. There is one thing that popped up in my mind when you were talking about Bedlam. Far-fetched as it might sound, I nevertheless want to share it with you. Mr Rochester confides in Jane, talking about his adventures on the continent, which actually hint at sexual licentiousness. Indeed, the "prostitution" of Bertha Mason as well as Blanche Ingram have this connotation. Sexual licentiousness might give you syphilis, which was a disease that, untreated (and there was no treatment for it in those days), could eventually affect patient's mental state and confine them to institutions like Bedlam.
Great video! Loved this one. I’d also be so interested if you ever tackle the meaning of Jane’s drawings (v1.ch13) or the sham Gypsy palm reading scene (v2.ch19).
Two video requests: - what on earth is the slapstick framing device at the beginning of wuthering heights all about? - is edmund bertram good for fanny price?
Second, I wondered whether referring to taking on orphaned children at Bridewell as well as at Thornfield would apply to how Rochester views Adele as well as Jane herself. There are striking parallels between these two orphaned females.
While reading Jane Austen is a delight and a breath of fresh air, the Brontes are muddied waters and miserable weather...I loathe the overheated atmosphere and the feeling that everything that happens is badly illuminated by one small candle in a dark and dirty room. There is not one ray of light in any of the pages one ploughs through. I have read not only the known novels but also several by Anne which were simply bad, without the atmosphere. Shakespeare has the words to describe what I feel about the Brontes, as he has the words for everything we experience, "A plague on both your houses!"
I have difficulty reading any Bronte outside of Anne Bronte's The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, which was one of the books I had to read for my A-level English Literature donkeys decades ago... I loved that book.
There is one connection in the 19th Century mind between prostitution and madness you have missed and that is syphilis. Syphilis was untreatable at the time and common among prostitutes and seen as a consequence of promiscuity in women (many of whom were actually infected by promiscuous husbands). A symptoms of 3 stage syphilis can be neurological and at the time madness was seen as the ultimate state of the prostitute and rake (the beauty spots the prostitutes and rakes in Hogarth’s pictures use are covering up 2 stage syphilis sores). So the progress is from Bridewell to Bedlam for women and straight to Bedlam for the rakes. The madness of the 1st Mrs Rochester is also talked of as inherited, possibly congenital syphilis, and thus punishment for her mother’s promiscuity (particularly dark to modern eyes if we consider the hints as to the 1st Mrs Rochester being of mixed race). To understand the charades we must think of 5 frames of reference the authors, the readers, Jane’s, Mr Rochester’s and Blanche’s. of these I see Mr Rochester’s as the most interesting as within the novel he is the creative force. As to the symbolism I think it is much more about Rochester’s current state, legally trapped (imprisoned?) in a marriage he sees as dissolved and in a sham courtship with Blanche (who probably interprets these charades as indicating something very different) not his intentions toward Jane. I don’t see Rochester as intending to entrap Jane in a sham marriage in any sense but the legal, he loves her and even at this stage she loves him even if neither has acknowledged it. I think he sees his intention to marry Jane as real in every meaningful sense, remember he does not insist that she play charades showing his intention toward Jane is not a charade in his mind. Charlotte will have come across relationships of the sort Mr Rochester intends for Jane through her farther’s work even if the second partner in such relationships in her own class would more likely be called “housekeeper”, “governess”, “footman” or “tutor” than husband/wife.
I have a question. If Bertha has Syphilis, then wouldn't she have passed it to Rochester since they obviously slept together a few times before her madness was fully discovered? I feel like even though Mr. Rochester was lying about his marriage throughout most of the book, Bronte did intend him to be a reliable and trustworthy narrator of events for the reader, so if he said Bertha was "mad", then he was telling the truth and it didn't have to do with syphilis.
@@victoriawestling She may have done or may not. People with STDs don’t transmit them every time they have sex and how likely that is depends on what stage the disease is at and how active it is. Syphilis is fairly contagious in the primary and secondary phases but less so in early latent phase and not very infectious in late latent or tertiary phases. This is because the infectious organism is present in the lesions and pustules of the early stages but it doesn’t replicate as much in the later stages and isn’t present in the mucus membranes. If Bertha was infected congenitally she would have been in the least infectious stages by the time of her marriage. There isn’t any contradiction in Mr Rochester being a reliable witness in this explanation if he says Bertha is mad then she is mad wether or not the cause of her madness is neurosyphilis. The fact that untreated syphilis sends 5-10% of its sufferers mad 20-30 years after infection has been forgotten in the age of antibiotics where syphilis is rare and easily treated with penicillins.
@@victoriawestling oh when Mr Rochester talks about his life style in France sending him mad if he continued much longer in that he is talking of his becoming syphilitic.
It is so Brontesque, so romantic with all the suffering and "Wuthering." I wonder though at how much alike we all are really. That we find a fallen scoundrel who is in essence going to kidnap Jane by "marrying" her, so relatable. Also the theme of bondage, being chained or kept. Of using illusions to mask truths, but also to further love. The longing to be loved and the need to be known as well as our need of softening and answering to love. Even the untainted Jane is an archetype we all carry. Though she may be "real," I have known women like her who also become cold and mean. They fail to move beyond their just thoughts, pure perceptions and honest words to actual union with anyone. Thank heaven for the Bronte sisters. May true lovers ever find their way.
Thanks :) Jane Eyre is one of my favourites and I always wondered what Bridewell was meant to be, and didn't understand the final charade at all. Thank you for sharing the history!
What a marvelous analytical tool for dissecting Rochester’s machinations with women! Good job-Jane and that fateful firesorted him out. Bronte “got her own back” with men in this one.❇️
I love your videos and am currently binge-watching them. But I have to correct pronunciation of the name of Abraham's servant at the well with Rebecca. He's not "Eliza", he's "Eliezer" (pronounced "Ellie-Ehzer").
The diamond chain also struck me for its chain-ness, but I also think of the chain and necklace in Mansfield Park, in which Fanny much prefers the Edmund's chain to Miss Crawford's necklace. I would love a close reading on that section, and to better understand the difference between a necklace and a chain.
Very interesting! I completely forgot about that scene, so its interpretations are completely new to me. Thanks for your thorough analysis :) On a side note, I was struck by something else while you were reading Jane’s thoughts - how much her thinking reflects the “I’m not like other girls” trope. She finds Blanche too vivacious, too flirty, trying too hard to get attention from a man - unlike the “real” Jane, who sees more virtue in literally not looking at anyone or speaking up, acting like a demure doll of sorts (which is still acting, ironically). I also find it funny how Jane assumes Rochester is such a great prize that Blanche (1) should be the one trying to conquer his heart and (2) must be evil for not truly loving him, but wanting only his fortune. Jane doesn’t think that Blanche’s beauty and talents are also a worthy currency to be exchanged for Rochester’s money (making Blanche his equal), and doesn’t consider the fact that perhaps money is the only thing Rochester can offer to his partner (we know he’s not good-looking, or warm and caring, or distinguished in his career field). So it’s interesting that Jane considers Blanche as some fake viper, whereas Rochester is presented as a mistaken victim of her greedy plans (who just happens to be lusting after the most beautiful and popular woman in his circle, but I’m sure it’s just a coincidence haha).
I just have to say that I read 'Jane Eyre' translated into my language and there is just no way this charade could've been kept the way it was intended; and it should've had a sidenote that's as long as your video! Thank you for explaining this charade and how it's actually an introduction into Mr Rochester's thinking!
At 13:05 - At the repetition of designating a class as having a pantomime for conformity, it isn't completely unfair. We don't see Jane Eyre's Aunt and Uncle Reed in a romantic marriage - according to the behavior of the aunt and the cousins, it was all about class, particularly designating Jane in a LOWER class. And then at school, the people in the higher class who provided for the school, the Brocklehursts... we can't speak for the love that they had for one another, but it was clear that the principles of love of one's fellow man, and kindness to orphans and the poor - which is taught is a Biblical imperative - is ignored. In a pantomime of piety, the money that was barely given to the school wasn't enough to keep the students alive. It was the death of so many students that made the haughty, rich patrons of the school called into account. And even THEN, they weren't called criminal, although they were criminally negligent. They were merely shuffled off somewhere else where they would do less harm. And the teachers who loved the students were then able to give them warm clothes and nourishing food to eat. As such... That class was shown to have a pantomime of proper behavior. Marriage, charity to the poor... It was a sham, it was a travesty. It wasn't unfair for Jane Eyre to make this assessment, based on her own experience. We know that it isn't fair to judge a whole class of people for the actions of a few. But if Jane came to that conclusion, when all she had was anecdotal evidence, it wasn't an unfair conclusion to make.
This is probably way off topic, but the first thing that jumped out at me about the cartoon "The harlot's progress" was the mallet. It reminded me of Harley Quinn in the suicide squad movies.
The name itself, Bridewell, could be symbolic in that Rochester had yet to find a bride who is well suited to true matrimony, and he himself does not understand yet what a "good" bride, in the sense of someone who truly fits and loves him, is.
Interesting video ;) We can also ask if Mr Rochester possibly toed with the idea to marry Miss Ingram at least until his estranged brother in law Mr Mason turned up.! Then realising that miss Ingrams influencial family would have made trouble if his preexisting marriage would have been exposed. Jane Eyre does not have any influencial family that he knows up so he is willing to take the risk with her.!!
It's interesting how Rochester in the Bridewell tableau frames himself as imprisoned by marriage when Bertha is physically immured upstairs. He foreshadows both her appearance as described by Jane - being similar in height to R. physically strong and dark like him but ruined by captivity - and his own appearance, both in the immediate aftermath of the fire, grimy and torn, and when Jane finds him later, unkempt and neglectful of his appearance. This is his divine punishment for his sham marriages. That his coat is said to be hanging from one arm in the Bridewell tableau could even be a hint of his future injury.
The other thought I had is to wonder whether Rochester in fact feared imprisonment for bigamy if he succeeded in marrying Jane (or Blanche). I'd be very interested in your analysis of the later scene where Rochester pretends to be a fortune-teller, and the subsequent scene between him and Jane when he tries to tell her fortune.
Can you see any other symbolism in Mr Rochester’s charade?
Maybe his desire to admit his dark secret, but can only hint at it. The burden of secrecy and guilt and wanting to be free of them makes him speak in riddles and charades.
Mr. Rochester is alerting Miss Eyre that he is a danger to her.
Bridewell, having started off as a royal palace, became a prison. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridewell_Palace. Bridewell became a synonym for a prison.
Mr. Rochester, having begun life in palatial circumstances, is now both a prison to and a prisoner of his wife, Bertha née Mason. His marriage to her is a sham. He can undergo only a sham marriage to any other woman.
Bridewell's history included usage as a house of correction for wayward and fallen women. Bertha Mason was licentious and an alcoholic - a wayward and fallen woman who is now incarcerated in a house of correction. Bridewell had a resident doctor; Mrs. Poole is the resident nurse to Mrs. Rochester.
Rochester frequently hints the truth to Jane, but it is in terms she cannot understand. During the gypsy interview, Jane states that she does not understand puzzles and enigmas and has never guessed a riddle in her life -- and those are the terms in which he describes it to her. The whole Blanche Ingram/houseguests section is a charade, and it is being performed before an audience of one -- Jane. Note that when he is not performing, he behaves very differently towards Jane. When he is performing, he becomes harsher and more sardonic. For someone who is supposedly not paying attention to Jane, he quickly noticed when she left the room. And as the gypsy, he seemed quite aware that Jane had been watching him courting Blanche. I finally figured out how he did it. You have to go back to when Mrs. Fairfax first shows Jane the drawing room. A full description of the room is provided there. The room is filled with mirrors and glass ornaments -- reflective surfaces; therefore, Rochester never needs to look at Jane directly. He only needs to observe her reflection. Poor Jane thought she was pining unobserved, but he was watching her all along. As for Bridewell, he obviously sees that marriage with the wrong woman is a prison.
@@barbarabrown7974 Interesting how a room full of mirrors would probably be so unwelcome before her arrival. Perhaps the mirrors symbolize how lonely snd unwelcomely self-reflective his situation was before Jane arrived.
As much as Jane and Rochester truly love one another during the first, “sham” marriage attempt, I think your observations suggest that had they been able to marry it would not, then, have been a successful union. Both Jane and Rochester grow and change due to the hardships they are to face while they are apart, and these changes make their ultimate, happy partnership possible. Indeed, Rochester was initially “performing” at romantic love-a subject in which he has little positive experience!-and he expected Jane to conform and obey as a traditional bride (“chain around your neck”). I doubt that his appreciation of her independent mind would have endured once she was his wife and both legally and socially subject to his control. Until he has been humbled (and thus his moral expiation made) and Jane strengthened, by subsequent events, they would perhaps not have been a compatible pair.
Rochester was used to being the one pursued, due to his wealth and old family name. With Jane, it is the first time he ever was the pursuer, and he doesn't know quite how to behave. I think you have to think of Rochester in the terms of a man who is desperate to be loved. Once he has secured Jane's love, he reverts to old habits. He is used to showering women with presents, things, and Jane will have none of it. Jane does not want material things -- she wants his love and his confidence. Note the three things she requests from him after they become engaged: to rescind the order of jewelry from the banker, to know why he let her think he was going to marry Blanche and/or confide in her, and let Mrs. Fairfax know about the engagement. He very much upsets Jane on the shopping trip to Millcote -- he nearly blows it. Perhaps he does blow it, because his behavior compells her to write to her uncle, which begins the whole cycle of events.
Tbh , if they married then and there , it would have given Rochester too much power over Jane.. very unbalanced relationship.
@@barbarabrown7974 Wow, I never thought about the fact that the Millcote shopping trip prompts the communication to Mr. John Eyre and ultimately derails the wedding. But that is a very interesting observation.
I’ve always been disturbed by him calling her “Jane” or even “Janet “ while she continues to refer to him as “Mr. Rochester”‘or “sir.”
@@erldagerl9826 IF he referred to her as Miss Eyre (misere), he'd be labelling her French misery. Jane would not have dared calling Mr. R. "Eddie", since that brings up images of Eddie Haskell or diminutive vampires. Those images are much more disturbing.
I could honestly listen to you talk for hours about Jane Eyre and Austen and pretty much anything!
I loved this close look at charades and Bridewell. I always thought, as a Palace turned prison, Bridewell symbolised Rochester's opinion on wealth and status and beauty before and after marriage. But loved the more extensive picture you've drawn. I miss uni!
There are interesting parallels with Jane Austen's "Mansfield Park', where a theatrical performance (rehearsal, really) is taking place, and the heroine does not want to participate. It even involves 2 mock romances between 2 couples. One is illicit (Maria and Henry Crawford) and the other is between Edmund and Mary Crawford, where just like Jane Eyre, Fanny has to watch her beloved courting another. Fanny's refusal to join the acting company is an indication of her genuineness and sincerity. There's even a scene later in the book where she's offered jewellery and is reluctant to accept any but the plainest and simplest chain.
I drew a comparison to Emma and Jane Eyre, where Emma plays a similar role to Blanche Ingram as far as Frank Churchill is concerned.
Yes, the comparison of Jane Eyre with Fanny Price is rather obvious - both are self-righteous, smug, sanctimonious prigs: there are reasons for each turning out as she has, of course, and they are very different. With the former, we get only the main character's version of events (the whole book is her autobiography, after all) - or rather, what she chooses to believe is a correct version of events, with the latter, the narrator decides what we are told. What is interesting is that neither gives us the outlook of the declared villains of the respective pieces.
I also think Fanny and Jane are similar. Fanny, for me, is like an alternate reality Jane who was a tiny bit more beloved and stayed at Gateshead as a dependent.
Maria & Henry were portraying a mother and son, actually; any 'romantic' intimacy was interjected into their scenes by the actors; but your analogy is still on point.
the Brontës are masters of present metaphor in their novels, the way they use interaction of characters to foreshadow elements creates a symmetry in the stories that is so complex and layered with subtlety and at the same blatantly telling you whats happening in the hidden aspects of the characters. They tell you what you dont know without telling you what don't know.
So true!
The ,,Gipsy " hit the nail:,,l see no enemy to a fortunate issue but in the brow; and that brow professes to say- " I can live alone, if self- respect and circumstances require so to do.I need not sell my soul to buy bliss.(...)The forehead declares, "Reason sit firm and hold the reins, and she will not let the feelings burst away and hurry her to wild chasms. The passions may rage furiously (...) but I shall follow the guiding of that small voice which interprets the dictates of conscience".
" Well said, forehead; your declaration shall be respected. l formed my plans- right plans l deem them- and in them l have attended to the claim of conscience, the counsels of reason. I know how soon youth fade and the bloom perish, if, in the cup of bliss offered, but one dreg of shame, or one flavour of remorse were detected; and l do not want sacrifice, sorrow, dissolution- such is not my taste."
When you said, “Jane states that she will not act” I was immediately reminded of Fanny Price in Mansfield Park. Thank you for drawing this to my attention.
I would love your take on why Jane continually refers to Rochester’s “kindness” to her. I don’t understand him as being kind to her. I think treacherous would be more descriptive of that situation.
Maybe their long talks when they discuss nature and opinions?
Well, at least for a time Jane is no longer the homeless orphan and she is given free reign to teach Adele as she sees fit, and live without fear of where her next meal will be coming from. For an orphan like Jane Eyre, this would seem a great kindness, despite her misgivings about possible secrets held within the house and Mr Rochester’s heart. All things considered, Rochester is generally seen by his staff as being ‘a very good master’ , as Mrs Fairfax puts it. That’s my take on it anyway :)
But you must understand that Jane has received little kindness in her life.
He is as close to an equal as she has had in a long time. She's also been essentially abused and neglected a lot. In those circumstances just being humored probably feels amazing.
Compare the description of Agnes Grey‘s life as a governess.
Wonderful video! I am American and while I knew of “Bedlam” being a lunatic asylum, I had never heard of Bridewell. I can’t count the number of times I have read Jane Eyre and just assumed it was the title of a popular novel known to the guests. Cultural context 1 American reader 0. 😆 Thank you, Dr. Cox!
Well, here's the beauty of the internet: now when you read something that you don't understand, you can take a break and look it up. In the past (pre-internet), if you read something unusual, you just had to gloss over it or make assumptions on the meaning. When I take the time to read novels, I now highlight terms that I don't understand and take the time to look them up. It really adds to the richness of the material. And I wonder how many modern British reads would've known what Bridewell was or its connotation.
@@grittykitty50 Yes, the first few occasions Jane and I spent time together was waaaaaaaaay before the internet, at which time I always thought I’d look up Bridewell later (in the encyclopedia at the library), but i’d always forget to do so. I think after enough repetition my mind quit asking what it was and latched on to the thought it was a novel. Even now, if i’m reading a print book I forget to look things up, but I agree with you that with an ebook it’s easy peasy to do it right away.
Yep! Came here to say basically the same!
I too am American and knew about Bedlam but was ignorant what Bridewell was. Now I know thanks to Dr. Cox!
It makes me really sad that the bronte siblings had such a tempestuous life and passed on in their youth.
If there is an afterlife, then I hope charlotte, emily, anne and their brother found peace.
NGL I hope Anne got to yell at Charlotte about quashing The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. IMO it's the best book any of them wrote!
I watched a PBS movie about the Brontës and was horrified that their brother made all of their lives so absolutely miserable including their father
@@BlackCanary87 Anne is my favourite of the Bronte sisters.
I read Jane Eyre when I was much younger and didn't know the story from the bible or understand the reference to Bridewell/Bethlehem. Thank you for providing the historical context. It did always seem to me that Mr. Rochester was constantly trying to overwhelm Jane with shows of his wealth and place her under an obligation to him. I was glad that she only marries him when he has been humbled and repented, and she has established her own independence. She marries him as an equal. Also, why are we to think of Blanche Ingram as "prostituting" herself for a sham of a marriage, when as a woman of that time it was her only way of securing her future? Rochester himself married Bertha Mason for her dowry. He tries to buy Jane's love by shows of his wealth and status. He reminds her how she is not a "peer's daughter" as though him loving her despite that makes him superior.
I also thought his treatment of Bertha Mason was demeaning. To despise someone because of an illness they have no control over is horrible. Although I am glad he tried to shelter her from the horrors of the lunatic asylum. At least he was kind in that.
Not to disagree with Dr. Cox's interpretation, but I, when reading the book, had a different sense of the themes she talks about in this video. I didn't know the history of Bridewell, but I find that part very interesting as well!
First of all, the charade: Blanche Ingram receives only positive things, the things she desired, in each of her scenes. Marriage, and jewels as a result of her marriage. The person who was imprisoned was Mr. Rochester. I think it could be argued he was communicating (to Jane?) that he viewed marriage to Blanche, and Bertha, as only punishment for him. Despite them, and their families, receiving what they had wanted. Bertha, obviously, doesn't live a great life, but it *could* have been much, much, much worse for her in a typical insane asylum. Her family was rid of her, and received their connections and money, etc upon her marriage. I thought/think Rochester was communicating he wasn't fooled the second time around. That he saw through Blanche's charade, and wasn't going to choose her.
I think there are themes, as well, of his being unable to choose her because the state of his current marriage to Bertha. He was *already* imprisoned. Much the same as Bertha was imprisoned in her tower. He was chained to her tower just as much as she.
I didn't view Rochester as controlling and violent when he talks about "placing, myself, the chain of diamonds around your neck." I view him as remorseful and already regretting the harm he is doing to Jane. Trying to tell her the truth without actually confessing. In the same way he knew she would solve the charade, he was hoping she would solve his cloaked language about his current marriage and assuage his guilt by making her a "willing party" to their marriage. Almost as if Jane were consenting to be his mistress, by understanding the deeper meanings of his words and comments. I also view his offering to Jane of his jewels as a test, of sorts. He likes to challenge and test Jane's opinions and thoughts and devotion. I get the sense, had Jane exclaimed and gloried in his jewels and riches he would not have continued with his sham marriage to her. He wanted Jane because she would refuse his jewels.
At his core, Rochester is a deeply scarred and wounded man (physically represented by his injuries at the end of the book). He knows he's not attractive and his money and jewels are his main enticement to those of his class. To put it in a cliche, he wanted someone to love who he was inside, not his packaging. Jane, in her criticism of Blanche's coyness, flirting and exuberance, shows the reader that Blanche didn't know Rochester at all, despite being long acquaintances/neighbors/friends. She was distracted by the packaging and didn't look further. Rochester wants Jane, a woman of few enticements herself, for her heart as well. Which he says after the sham wedding ends, that he was strong enough to capture her body but wouldn't possess her heart, which is his deeper desire.
In their desires they are equal. Rochester's money is of no value to Jane, and her lack of it has no value to Rochester. But in all the ways that matter they are equals.
Finis
Thank you for this very clarifying discussion! I first read Jane Eyre when I was 11. I found it in my Mother's library, an old, pretty little volume with rice-paper pages, and I couldn't resist it. Needless to say, I didn't understand the references in the charade, but Mum was shocked and impressed when I started asking her questions about it. Dubious suitability aside, that book formed my notions of love and feminism, and led me to read lots of 19th and early 20th century literature at an early age. No wonder people find me strange!
Me too 😜💕 growing up I reading tons of Alcott, Montgomery, Kipling, and many other older novels. Resulting in an older era’s vocabulary 😜🥰💕
I completely understand. My mother taught me to read with the McGuffy Readers, published in 1830.
@@elisabonetti408 😍😍😍😍😍📚
Same here. I was always reading books that most would never pick up unless it was required class reading. While people my age were bar and club hopping I was hopping from one old bookstore to another, to see what treasures I could find. Imagine doing that, rather than binge drinking and hooking up? Not easy being a nonconformist.
@@diamondtiara84 lol, I managed to do both! However, I'm more proud of my reading than my carousing.
I would argue that Adele's mother is a fourth charade wife. She is both Bertha ( overly sexual) and Blanche ( greedy and grasping) and therefore doomed to be a failed marriage because she embodies the reverse of Jane.
15 years after i can finally understand what this means
Your JE analyses are always so interesting and fun and make me think on the many meaning one can get out of Charlotte’s wonderful story. I never connected the charades they performed to a running charade theme in the novel. Rochester and his 3 charade brides are an understandable analytical conclusion.
The jewel talk was interesting as well. In defense of Blanche, women of that time were motivated to marry for money. Until just a little while ago, there were so little opportunities to keep out of poverty on their own. So, yeah she had to put on her charade to survive and the jewels looked great to her--security! Jane, who was fiercely independent and making her way on her own already needed no charade and was not so impressed by jewels or Rochester’s need to “possess” her by them. Rochester probably thought all woman liked jewels as this was his experience. And Rochester can in no way empathize with Blanche’s dilemma. How could he? He did not need dependency on a woman’s wealth. I say this because I take exception to the concept that Rochester’s motivation in marrying Bertha was money and lust. The book explains that this was an arranged marriage by Rochester’s father, brother, and the Masons. In all their deception it was the Masons who wanted to be associated with the “Rochester name”. And Rochester’s father and brother were the ones who “thought only of the thirty thousand pounds” not a young, inexperienced Rochester. Rochester’s father never mentioned Bertha’s money. Only her beauty. Was lust involved? Certainly, but love was what Rochester was thinking. “… I thought I loved her.” Rochester’s desire at the time was to marry a flattering, beautiful, dazzling wife. A supermodel. Lots of guys and woman as well are taken in by such dazzling beauty before examining the character.
Excellent addition
Interesting response. I need to read the book again because it's been too long and I have forgotten so much, but would it be reasonable to say Rochester's family threw him under the bus in arranging that marriage? Knowing Bertha's family history? Maybe there were red flags in her behaviour even as a young, beautiful woman. But Rochester agreed bec she still had the loveliness of youth. How mercenary was his family in arranging that marriage? Quite mercenary, I think; maybe very mercenary. Not that this makes Rochester into a victim we can totally sympathize with BUT adds another layer of complexity to a complicated guy. Kind of veering off track here and possibly making stuff up but so enjoy the conversation.
@@deborahgiles8214 Hi. I think you hit the nail on the head about the mercenary aspects of the arranged marriage. Some think Rochester is telling a fairy story to Jane when he explains this to her in trying to get her to stay. Yet, to back him up, early in Jane’s time at Thornfield Mrs. Fairfax alludes to this bad arrangement and how his brother and father did something “not quite right” and that explains Mr. R’s abruptness. I do view Rochester as a victim. Here he was fooled into marrying a deranged person and cannot divorce her. How would anyone feel being in an arrangement like that? Many are victims of spousal abuse because the perpetrator is hiding their true nature. That’s the way I look at Rochester anyway. But I also look at Blanche as a victim. The real villains are the elder Rochester and Mason, Bertha’s father, who knew full well the nature of the situation but only thought of money and prestige and not their children’s happiness.
Thank you for this. I never knew what "Bridewell" meant and, hence couldn't make much of the whole "charades" chapter. This makes that part of the book a lot more interesting now.
Wow I love this. Thank you. Jane Eyre is one of my two most favorite novels (the other one being Pride and Prejudice). This look into the connotations really fascinated me. It was like detective work. Amazing.
This was really interesting. I also thought that Bridewell might reflect Rochester's fate as a potential bigamist, punishable by being imprisoned?
He'd never have avoided prison if he hadn't been so wealthy.
Note that Briggs commented that no blame was attached to Jane. He's a lawyer and thinks in those terms.
Something I find interesting about Mr. Rochester is that even when he is betrayed, he still cares and takes responsibility of others.
Betrayed and tricked by the Masons but still takes care of Bertha instead of getting his marriage annulled.
Betrayed by the French mistress that he was so fascinated by but still makes her daughter his ward and spoils the child.
It was very difficult almost impossible to anulled or divorce on the grounds of insanity. You need to have proof that it was before the wedding and still (remember the Mason’s never let them talk alone before). And the same to be in prison.
Those are very common motives on murder mistery novels of that time era. Just after 1937 you can divorce on grounds of incurable insanity. And you have to wait 2-5 years to divorce your in prison-spouse.
I would love to see one on Anne Bronte’s Novel “the tenant of wildfell hall” one of my favorites
YES!! I've read all of the Bronte's novels, and Tenant is my favorite. I'm aghast that so few people know it, since Charlotte declined to have a second edition published because she thought it was too scandalous.
Oh yes! Wildfell is my favorite of the Bronte stories
Mr Rochester is such a rich character, in large part because of his is so flawed. Although I love this book, the love story just hasn’t aged well. He’s borderline cruel by playing with Jane’s feelings before actually declaring his love and proposing. He was willing to jeopardize Jane’s reputation by making her a mistress without her knowledge. When she does eventually come back after Bertha Mason’s death, Jane basically has to “fix” him. Today, if Jane was my friend, I’d say this guy is toxic. Run Jane.
Still, every time I read the book, it makes me happy that Jane and Rochester marry.
He had to be so bad, and lose nearly everything, before he became worthy of Jane. But you're right - he was narcissistic in the extreme, and those people don't change, except in fairy tales. Which is why Jane Eyre is my favourite fairy tale.
@Dexy Nash Classic "Beauty and the Beast" - fairy tales told by women.
He is cruel at times, but I think it may be the only way for him to make her come alive romantically , while also protecting himself in a way. I don’t think she has to come back and “fix” him per se. I think she comes back to him on equal footing or in less unequal terms than if she married him in the first ceremony.
Women were expected to be submissive , restricted to the male socially acceptable ideas of womanhood and that would have been the role if she married him in the sham marriage . She would have been forever in-debt to him in a way for having married her, and she would have further been isolated w/ him if she her role was as a mistress or fake wife. And others would have speculated Rochester’s money and position were the draw for her - not actual love.
Jane has been restricted to submissive roles her entire life- this marriage - the most important relationship in her life will break away from that and demonstrates to others that women are capable of full filling their own destiny and successfully breaking free from social prisons.
@@megwilcox9774 "True love reforms the Bad Boy" Yeah, some of us are still drinking that bit of Kool-Ade.
I love the book too, but these days I find myself wondering what would have happened if Jane had found St. John and his sisters before meeting Rochester. They were willing to treat her like family, and spiritually they were a better match for her. That’s the part that doesn’t ring true for me. What does Jane see in that obnoxious, lying heathen, and why would she go back to him after she knew of all his lies? Now I have to reread that half of the book. Bother. LOL.
This has given me a lot of food for thought. Jane Eyre is one of my favorite books, but for some reason, I’ve always viewed this scene from Rochester’s eyes. On my next read, I will have to focus on Jane and the points you have discussed in this video! Thanks for your insight!❤️
That was very interesting, thank you very much! I never knew what Bridewell was, never having read any annotated versions.
Being so far apart from the 19th century north of England (I am in Brazil in the 21st century) I didn't understand a thing of that scene. Both times i read the book i rushed through this part.
Even when watching films and series, it didn't make any sense.
Thank you for throwing a light into one of the darkest episodes in the novel.
This analysis of Mr. Rochester’s charade was so insightful. I thought of two other connections one could draw from the passages you referenced. First, Ch 24 when Rochester speaks of putting the diamond chain around Jane’s neck, he also says he “will clasp the bracelets on these fine wrists.” This has a parallel to the final scene in the charade described in Ch 18. Rochester in his imprisoned disguise is described thus: “as he moved, a chain clanked; to his wrists were attached fetters.” It may be the intention to draw together the symbol of Rochester with chained wrists to Jane with chained wrists (which she rightly rejects.)
I love the pictures illustrating the presentation!
My favorite novel of all time (outside of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, by Betty Smith), Jane Eyre is phenomenal and Mr. Edward Rochester happens to be my favorite male character of all time. Yes, even more so than Mr. Darcy, Mr. Knightly, and on and on. I do love Mr. Wentworth from Persuasion though, more so than Mr. Darcy of Pride and Prejudice. Back to Mr. Rochester and Jane's love. I think he fell in love with her the moment he met her. I think at first, she acquired a crush on him but gradually fell in love with him. Whether Jane had left or not, I feel they truly loved one another and other than the elephant in the room (Bertha Mason), the relationship would have worked out. Jane has morals and did the right thing in leaving even though it broke Mr. Rochester's heart but it had to be done. She did not want to be Mr. Rochester's mistress. She learned a lot about herself and also came into some wealth and met her new cousins--all about family. Blanche Ingram though beautiful and educated, and a lady, was after Rochester's money! He was no dummy and dropped her! Loved this novel and the movie (Timothy Dalton as Rochester and Zelah Clarke as Jane Eyre).
Do you like the 2006 and 2011 adaptations? They are my favorite, especially 2006
Thank you Dr. Cox for providing the historical context. It really helps when trying to understand the novel. As an American, I had never even heard of Brideswell, so your explanation made that whole chapter much more understandable. I also note how Mr. Rochester is constantly acting, pretending to have an interest in Miss Ingraham, pretending to be a gypsy, pretending to everyone that he is single.
One wonders how much syphilis played a role in madness. Syphilis sufferers can develop delusions and decaying mental faculties... The middleclass of the 19th century (the audience of Brontë) was terrified of the ravages of syphilis, especially as it was a desease that was contracted by sex and could and would be inherited by one's children and grandchildren. It seemed like a biblical curse.
The horror and public condemnation of out-of-wedlock sex and of prostitution and the linkage of madness to such things must surely lie with the fear for syphilis?
(pardon my crappy English - it's not my first language and it's rather late and I'm tired)
Interesting idea! It certainly would have been a possible cause, especially in an era before antibiotics. But don't forget that there are many cause and kinds of mental illness. Given that Rochester wasn't physically ill, I rather think that syphilis isn't the case in Jane Eyre, since Rochester said he was tolerable happy in the first months of his marriage to Bertha Mason.
That's a very good point, and I wish I had thought of it. No need to apologize for your English, which is not crappy at all.
There are some modern medical articles suggesting that Bertha's symptoms - as described in the book - point to Huntington's disease.
Dr. Cox you are a treasure. I'm so glad I found your channel, I did not know I needed it 😊
Really enjoyed this! and it's given me the impetus to get the book out and read it again. Something that only really stood out when you read the words - "he placed the bracelets around her wrist and the rings in her ears". It wasn't until I had to do this for someone else that I realised just how intimate an action that is, putting someone's earrings in....and in those times it seems like an action beyond mere flirtation. The very close proximity to Blanche's lily-white neck for a start....The description of the chain around Jane's own neck made me wonder how long it would have been before Rochester tired of Jane and left her chained to her home while he travelled abroad again; in fact as I recall she was reminded of his former conquests when tempted to stay with him as his mistress and realised her own possible fate. What a remarkable woman Charlotte Bronte was, the spinster daughter of a parson, to have developed such insights into human nature.
I read this book when I was in middle school, and I took this chapter much less symbolically. I just thought Mr. R was trying to see if he could make Jane jealous, or at least to see her reaction to the fake wedding. Same thing with the fortune teller scene...I thought he was just trying to find out if Jane liked him or not. I was wondering why a grown man was acting like a teenager. I never knew there was a deeper meaning, ha ha. 😂
Maybe he was also acting like a teenager. It seems to me that his character development when it comes to having a sincere relationship would have just stopped after he married Bertha Mason.
It was not about just understanding her feelings , but he also wanted to squeeze a confession out of Jane . To show her a kind of despair : " You will be miserable without me , only you ; so , confess me , pursue me " . ( Ironically actually Rochester was the desperate one between the two. )
@@subratanandy2142 That's a great point.
@@esm1817 That's true, I never thought about it that way.
I haven't read the book in at least a decade, but I always saw this scene as a lesson in class structure. Maybe because that is how Jane views it? She doesn't see herself as a viable candidate for Rochester because he socializes with women of a higher status. She keeps trying to escape notice. Meanwhile, he tries to demonstrate that he considers her just as worthy company as the ladies in jewels.
I thought of another addition to the Bridewell connection (prison, orphanage and hospital/bedlam). Yes, Jane is an orphan trying to find a place to fit in. But like Rochester taking care of Bertha Mason in a more humane way then her mother/bedlam, he also treats Adelle differently as a potential orphan by caring for her himself. Maybe it is these redeeming qualities that protects Rochester from going all out mad from his excesses. Just a thought:+) Thank you for the interesting insights...very rich. I love Jane Eyre:+) God bless~
Always was fascinated by Mr. Rochester's melancholy attitude.
I just want to say how much pleasure it has given me to find your jewel of a channel. Your videos and analysis have given me a degree of gratification and enjoyment in literature which I have not experienced since my high school days, and I am middle-aged now! I am so happy that your channel appeared in my recommendations, and I shall also advise my teenage daughter to become a subscriber too.
In defense of Blanche Ingram-- and I know this will be an unpopular opinion as Blanche is not a likable character-- at the age of 25, she is approaching an age where she might have to accept spinsterhood. She is starting to get desperate. Remember that in Pride and Prejudice, Charlotte Lucus (27), very quickly secures the odious Mr. Collins as a husband, so that she might have an establishment. There were few career choices for women in those days. Jane Fairfax in Emma dreads becoming a governess. A good marriage was a woman's best method for obtaining financial security. The Ingram estate is entailed -- neither Blanche nor Mary have the dowries necessary to attract higher quality suitors. Blanche has not been trained to be anything other than a society wife. Could you picture Blanche as a governess? I don't think so. If she does not marry, Blanche is dependent upon the kindness and charity of relatives. Unlike some of the other characters, we never learn Blanche's fate. So her pursuit of Rochester is a waste of the limited amount of time she has left on the marriage market. I might also add that Bertha Mason, who has good dowry and was equally as attractive as Blanche in her youth, does not marry until the age of 26. Bertha would have been considered a catch -- or was she? Evidently her other suitors in Jamaica already knew about the insanity than ran through the family and would not seriously consider her, so I suspect Bertha was desperate to get married too.
I feel that Bertha was made to feel desperate to marrying Rochester by her family. Rochester similarly was pressured by Bertha's family into the union, which Rochester's father and brother were happily planning on. For both of them they were surrounded by ppl saying that it was in their best interest to marry, when really these ppl had anything but their interests in mind. Her family's history of mental illness doesn't seem to be associated with the men, as her brother seems all too happy to show up to Rochester not for his sister's sake at all but for money, and he shows no inclination of madness, only being greedy. Bertha attacked him, so no familial warmth is felt by her. So why was Bertha made to feel desperate in this way? Because this madness is likely the result of how her family has treated women, which over the years has made it somewhat passed down genetically, but mostly reliant upon the continued tradition of being awful to female relatives. Being from Jamaica, her family were most definitely slave owners, and viscious in all aspects of their life just like their "business". Instead of acknowledging the cruelty they inflicted not just on their "property" but also their relatives, they were dedicated to maintaining steady/increasing profits and status. All of Bertha's life would've been reminders that she will likely go mad if she disobey, that no one will marry her if they knew of that madness in the family, and that she should therefore take any chance she can get to marry who her family wants (regardless of how that affects her), because she wouldn't want to turn out like the rest of the mad women in her family now would she? I can't imagine her saying no to all this, seeing as she's probably witnessed what disobedience results in with the enslaved people on her family's land. So she gives up everything (leaving Jamaica being the least of her worries) for a man who is just as much a victim as her, and when it becomes apparent that her family certainly lied to her about everything turning out fine and sane if she obeys them, she was furious and lost all hope, becoming the unstable and violent woman she is.
I believe Bertha wasn't desperate. Her family was more desperate to get rid of her .
Bronte sister’s mother was 29 when she married, so I don’t know if the author would have considered a 25 year old being nearly a spinster.
I think the same of Miss Bingley. What is enjoyable at 23 is a different story by 35. Money is far from the only consideration.
@@varshana81 oh I don't doubt that Bertha was already suffering mentally. But I'm thinking that this loveless marriage she was pressured into was the straw that broke the camel's back in regards to more violent tendencies. After all, Rochester said that she tried to kill him on the way back to England, so the violence and aggression appeared early in the relationship. It caught her own brother off guard when he came to visit so likely she was not like this (in terms of violence, not the madness itself) prior to becoming Mrs Rochester.
I have never been a fan of Jane Eyre, but your analysis gave me a greater appreciation for it. I like your comments giving historical context; it really made it much more interesting.
The scene that bothers me most in the book is where Mr. Rochester plays the gypsy woman. I'd love to hear your comments/analysis of why he bothers to do this. It seems like such an extravagant and drama-filled choice for a wealthy man to stoop to playacting such a role in order to win the heart of a governess. Thank you!
That was so interesting, especially the possible allusion to Bedlam & Bridewell! Thank you
I absolutely loved reading this book and one of my favorite things about finishing some of the Brontë novels is getting to watch your videos after :)
Thanks for explaining all that. I'd never thought to look into the symbolism of that scene. Can you point me towards something that explains why he acts like a fortune teller to Jane Eyre please? It's a very odd scene that should have gone differently in my mind so I'd like to understand it.
Just wanted to say thank you for making these videos! I genuinely enjoy them and look forward to them every time!
Dr. Octavia Cox-- I LOVE your work and watch your videos all the time, I love sharing them with friends who also love classic literature!! I was wondering if you would consider doing a video on Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys as a companion piece to the videos on Bertha Mason and Mr. Rochester's Charade. I recently read the book and it is remarkably chilling and fascinating. I was really drawn in by its exploration of Bertha as a character and of the West Indies. Please do consider making this video, thank you!!
Thank you for this thoughtful and compassionate look at Mr. Rochester's charade, its implications and its reach. I'd like to add that there is another orphan at Thornfield, Adele. Mr. Rochester relates Adele's background to Jane, and then surmises that Jane will be disgusted by the child's history and leave. Jane replies:
“No: Adèle is not answerable for either her mother’s faults or yours: I have a regard for her; and now that I know she is, in a sense, parentless-forsaken by her mother and disowned by you, sir-I shall cling closer to her than before. How could I possibly prefer the spoilt pet of a wealthy family, who would hate her governess as a nuisance, to a lonely little orphan, who leans towards her as a friend?”
I find Jane’s comment interesting in the light of the fact that neither Rochester nor Jane bring Adele back when they get married. She’s not considered a part of their family or their “happy end.” While we’re led to believe that Mrs. Reed acted cruelly and selfishly when she got rid of Jane and sent her to school, Adele’s lot is presented as a completely normal turn of events, despite the fact that her father/guardian is alive and well and her step-mother is supposedly sympathetic towards her.
@@SailorMoon-in-Cancer Thanks for that: I've always found it interesting how the character of Adele is pretty much pushed to the side after a certain point; and yes, she is dismissed to school and then as a companion to Jane after her "French defects" have been corrected. A while ago, I read a novel that looked at the events of "Jane Eyre" from Adele's point of view. I felt the writing and plotting was a little weak, but I liked the idea, and I remember that Adele was not happy with the situation.
@@melenatorr I’ve not heard of such a novel, thanks for bringing it up. Yes, it seems weird that Jane, who should understand Adele’s position best, considers her a foreign element just like everyone else. It seems that for Bronte, Adele’s background as a bastard of a French woman justifies casting her aside, and that she thinks Jane shows enough kindness by merely sending Adele to a “better” school than the one Rochester originally put her in. Crucially, Jane grew up well aware that the she was being mistreated, but Adele would go through life truly thinking she’s inferior, partially because “good” characters like Jane also believe that.
@@SailorMoon-in-Cancer Oh! I just popped into Amazon hoping to find the book; typed in "Jane Eyre Adele" and there seems to be a number of books there that look at Adele. I predict my cashflow is about to ebb a bit.
I think it must have been the Emma Tennant novel; the plot summary sounds very familiar, and the comments sound similar to my own impressions after reading it: www.amazon.com/Adele-Jane-Eyres-Hidden-Story/dp/0060004541/ref=sr_1_6?dchild=1&keywords=jane+eyre+adele&qid=1621706166&s=books&sr=1-6
Hi Octavia! I love your videos. Have you made a video or written an essay on the reason Charlotte Bronte chose a 20 year age gap between Jane and Rochester? I am not a student; I'm just totally fascinated by the story. Many thanks, Judith
I needed this:) I only found this channel yesterday, regarding Pride and Prejudice. Today this vid popped up "by chance" and an interesting thing: I just watched the 2011 version of the movie. I've read it a long time ago in my mother language, and it's not like I did not understand the story, but I always felt I don't get Mr. Rochester 100%. Your analyses of this book and the others are excellent and provide depth and extra dimensions. Thank you. I enjoy your discussions. I subscribed too, and I appreciate that there are no ads in every 5 seconds (people attack me when I mention this, but I wanted to let you know anyway).
By the way, if you’d really like to understand Rochester, check out the 1983 bbc series. Timothy Dalton completely captures Rochester, and helped me understand Rochester immensely. Check it out, you won’t be sorry!
@@S070-g8q thanks. Actually, to me another version was the one I found perfect regarding Mr. Rochester's character. In the 1997 version Ciarán Hinds finally gave me the look (Dalton is simply too handsome for me for this part:)) and the erratic, maybe not always sensible royalty. He was the one that made it clear who is he. All the other versions were great and enjoyable too, but to me this one stands out.
A collection of handwritten poems and notes by Emily Bronte has been discovered after many years according to The Guardian. I hope with all my heart that they remain in England, specifically at Haworth, where they belong.
The Brontes were my special subject for my degree at university many years ago and Jane Eyre is a particular favourite.
Rochester could be teasing her with the "diamond chain around her neck". Just four lines later, she tells him "don't be ironical!" . One of their first conversations was about presents: "a present has many faces to it, has it not?".
I have always avoided analyzing literature this way. Now that I hear you do it, I see that it's much more interesting and worthwhile than I'd always thought. But only if it's one of my favorite authors.
I've probably read this story 50 times since I first discovered it in Classics Illustrated (remember those?). The charade scene is one I've never quite understood, and frankly skimmed over it, until now. I will read the book now with a much better comprehension of the whole scene. Thank you, Dr. Cox!
Wow. I recently read this book specifically to watch this video (true). As soon as you said charade his entire character became clear.
The charades, the fortune teller, deceiving Blanche (if he actually did), hiding Bertha, and no doubt more.
This book will need a rereading in a few months.
Dr. Cox - Thank so much for your very interesting and enlightening look at the classics like Jane Eyre. I have read Jane Eyre many times through the years, but your analysis really deepens my understanding. Time to read it again!!!! Also enjoyed your English pronunciation of "charade." In America we would say "CharAde' with a long "A." Your pronunciation sounds like French, which I am going to assume is the word's original language. Finally, during your video, I kept thinking of that great movie "Charade" with Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant. In many ways the Cary Grant character is like Rochester. He doesn't really reveal his true persona until the very end of the movie when the Audrey Hepburn character puts her trust in him. Haven't seen the the movie for years, but I am going to watch it again soon to see if there are any parallels with Jane Eyre.
Thank you for this video! I first read Jane Eyre at about age 13, and I knew nothing about Bridewell (I'm in the USA). The charades scene makes so much more sense to me now. I have reread the book many times, but frankly just glossed over this episode because I didn't understand it well. 👏👏👏👏
Thank you so much for these videos 🤗 I often wonder what details and nuances I miss out on from not knowing those historical & cultural contexts! I love to know more and more with regards to Austens and the Brontë-sisters litterature in particular (since they are my favourites). Thank you!
I really loved learning these insights of symbolism from you about the charades. I love Charlotte’s use of symbolism in so many other places in this novel but I confess I never fully appreciated the charades scene. I’m going to have to watch Jane Eyre tonight lol Timothy Dalton is such a wonderful Rochester and read it again very soon. Nothing beats the Brontes ❤️ I’m very excited to watch your video/s on Byron soon!! Thank you your videos are such a treat
HOPE PASSENGERS NOVEL ANALYSE: ruclips.net/video/KoSbB9x0NXk/видео.html
The "chain around her neck" to me hints of his intent to keep her by his side come what may. He knows he is deceiving her. He knows she will leave him if she finds out his secret. Thus, his subconscious thoughts are unwittingly (or wittingly) inserting themselves into this conversation. The control is born of desperation.
Very excited for this! Love your uploads 🥰
18:30 I noticed that diamond "chain" right away, too.
Interesting analysis. While I dislike the narrative of the book (honestly, I thought Jane was a bit dimwitted), I have come to appreciate how well-written and subtle it is.
There is something I would like to know about the fake marriage scene, or rather the whole marriage issue: If Mr. Rochester could prove that he had been wheedled into marrying an insane woman, could not he have asked to have his marriage annulled?
He has to prove she has been insane before the wedding.
Could you possibly find time to discuss Middlemarch? Maybe some aspects of reform(ation) in the novel?
Thank you for this very insightful and academic treatment of a novel I have read at least 20 times, both in translation in my native language and in English. I started out watching this video thinking I would end up being able to tell you a thing or two about Jane Eyre, but in fact the opposite occurred: you giving me a fresh outlook and providing me with a valid excuse to read the novel again. There is one thing that popped up in my mind when you were talking about Bedlam. Far-fetched as it might sound, I nevertheless want to share it with you. Mr Rochester confides in Jane, talking about his adventures on the continent, which actually hint at sexual licentiousness. Indeed, the "prostitution" of Bertha Mason as well as Blanche Ingram have this connotation. Sexual licentiousness might give you syphilis, which was a disease that, untreated (and there was no treatment for it in those days), could eventually affect patient's mental state and confine them to institutions like Bedlam.
I often wondered if a medical condition, most likely treatable nowadays, led to Bertha's madness. However, there some conditions still not treatable.
Great video! Loved this one. I’d also be so interested if you ever tackle the meaning of Jane’s drawings (v1.ch13) or the sham Gypsy palm reading scene (v2.ch19).
That gypsy scene has me stumped.
Two video requests:
- what on earth is the slapstick framing device at the beginning of wuthering heights all about?
- is edmund bertram good for fanny price?
HOPE PASSENGERS NOVEL ANALYSE: ruclips.net/video/KoSbB9x0NXk/видео.html
Thank you for this analysis, I have overlooked this little scene and you have proved it has a larger significance in the larger story.
Second, I wondered whether referring to taking on orphaned children at Bridewell as well as at Thornfield would apply to how Rochester views Adele as well as Jane herself. There are striking parallels between these two orphaned females.
Seconded. I commented on an earlier comment just to this effect too.
I read Jane Eyre as a teenager and I think I need to revisit it with all this commentary.
You'd be shocked at how manipulative, abusive and lying Mr Rochester was.
I think the Bridewell charade also reveals that Rochester is still 'chained' in his legal though hidden marriage to Bertha Mason.
Thank you for yet another beautiful analysis! Dr Octavia always delivers :D
So much that is to be found in that single scene. Thank you so much for this brilliant analysis!
This was very interesting, rewarding, and enriching. I had missed this wealth of meaning when I read the book, thank you for pointing it out.
Your lessons are so enlightening. Thank you.
This is truly fascinating. "Jane Eyre" is one of my favorite books, and this adds another dimension.
While reading Jane Austen is a delight and a breath of fresh air, the Brontes are muddied waters and miserable weather...I loathe the overheated atmosphere and the feeling that everything that happens is badly illuminated by one small candle in a dark and dirty room. There is not one ray of light in any of the pages one ploughs through. I have read not only the known novels but also several by Anne which were simply bad, without the atmosphere. Shakespeare has the words to describe what I feel about the Brontes, as he has the words for everything we experience, "A plague on both your houses!"
I have difficulty reading any Bronte outside of Anne Bronte's The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, which was one of the books I had to read for my A-level English Literature donkeys decades ago... I loved that book.
I always thought that Rochester was actually sending up himself. He felt that he himself had been pimped out and then trapped in a prison of marriage
There is one connection in the 19th Century mind between prostitution and madness you have missed and that is syphilis. Syphilis was untreatable at the time and common among prostitutes and seen as a consequence of promiscuity in women (many of whom were actually infected by promiscuous husbands). A symptoms of 3 stage syphilis can be neurological and at the time madness was seen as the ultimate state of the prostitute and rake (the beauty spots the prostitutes and rakes in Hogarth’s pictures use are covering up 2 stage syphilis sores). So the progress is from Bridewell to Bedlam for women and straight to Bedlam for the rakes. The madness of the 1st Mrs Rochester is also talked of as inherited, possibly congenital syphilis, and thus punishment for her mother’s promiscuity (particularly dark to modern eyes if we consider the hints as to the 1st Mrs Rochester being of mixed race).
To understand the charades we must think of 5 frames of reference the authors, the readers, Jane’s, Mr Rochester’s and Blanche’s. of these I see Mr Rochester’s as the most interesting as within the novel he is the creative force.
As to the symbolism I think it is much more about Rochester’s current state, legally trapped (imprisoned?) in a marriage he sees as dissolved and in a sham courtship with Blanche (who probably interprets these charades as indicating something very different) not his intentions toward Jane. I don’t see Rochester as intending to entrap Jane in a sham marriage in any sense but the legal, he loves her and even at this stage she loves him even if neither has acknowledged it. I think he sees his intention to marry Jane as real in every meaningful sense, remember he does not insist that she play charades showing his intention toward Jane is not a charade in his mind.
Charlotte will have come across relationships of the sort Mr Rochester intends for Jane through her farther’s work even if the second partner in such relationships in her own class would more likely be called “housekeeper”, “governess”, “footman” or “tutor” than husband/wife.
I have a question. If Bertha has Syphilis, then wouldn't she have passed it to Rochester since they obviously slept together a few times before her madness was fully discovered?
I feel like even though Mr. Rochester was lying about his marriage throughout most of the book, Bronte did intend him to be a reliable and trustworthy narrator of events for the reader, so if he said Bertha was "mad", then he was telling the truth and it didn't have to do with syphilis.
@@victoriawestling She may have done or may not. People with STDs don’t transmit them every time they have sex and how likely that is depends on what stage the disease is at and how active it is. Syphilis is fairly contagious in the primary and secondary phases but less so in early latent phase and not very infectious in late latent or tertiary phases. This is because the infectious organism is present in the lesions and pustules of the early stages but it doesn’t replicate as much in the later stages and isn’t present in the mucus membranes. If Bertha was infected congenitally she would have been in the least infectious stages by the time of her marriage.
There isn’t any contradiction in Mr Rochester being a reliable witness in this explanation if he says Bertha is mad then she is mad wether or not the cause of her madness is neurosyphilis. The fact that untreated syphilis sends 5-10% of its sufferers mad 20-30 years after infection has been forgotten in the age of antibiotics where syphilis is rare and easily treated with penicillins.
@@victoriawestling oh when Mr Rochester talks about his life style in France sending him mad if he continued much longer in that he is talking of his becoming syphilitic.
It is so Brontesque, so romantic with all the suffering and "Wuthering." I wonder though at how much alike we all are really. That we find a fallen scoundrel who is in essence going to kidnap Jane by "marrying" her, so relatable. Also the theme of bondage, being chained or kept. Of using illusions to mask truths, but also to further love. The longing to be loved and the need to be known as well as our need of softening and answering to love.
Even the untainted Jane is an archetype we all carry. Though she may be "real," I have known women like her who also become cold and mean. They fail to move beyond their just thoughts, pure perceptions and honest words to actual union with anyone. Thank heaven for the Bronte sisters. May true lovers ever find their way.
I'm loving your Bronte and Austen videos. They are the English major I couldn't fit into my degree 😄
That is a great deep dive review. Thank you.
Thanks :) Jane Eyre is one of my favourites and I always wondered what Bridewell was meant to be, and didn't understand the final charade at all. Thank you for sharing the history!
Dr Octavia Cox, thank you for the eye-opening talk! May I ask you if you have published any papers on this topic?
What a marvelous analytical tool for dissecting Rochester’s machinations with women! Good job-Jane and that fateful firesorted him out. Bronte “got her own back” with men in this one.❇️
I love the term "sorted out". So polite and yet . . .
I love your videos and am currently binge-watching them.
But I have to correct pronunciation of the name of Abraham's servant at the well with Rebecca. He's not "Eliza", he's "Eliezer" (pronounced "Ellie-Ehzer").
Another great video. Really interesting xxx
The diamond chain also struck me for its chain-ness, but I also think of the chain and necklace in Mansfield Park, in which Fanny much prefers the Edmund's chain to Miss Crawford's necklace. I would love a close reading on that section, and to better understand the difference between a necklace and a chain.
Very interesting! I completely forgot about that scene, so its interpretations are completely new to me. Thanks for your thorough analysis :)
On a side note, I was struck by something else while you were reading Jane’s thoughts - how much her thinking reflects the “I’m not like other girls” trope. She finds Blanche too vivacious, too flirty, trying too hard to get attention from a man - unlike the “real” Jane, who sees more virtue in literally not looking at anyone or speaking up, acting like a demure doll of sorts (which is still acting, ironically). I also find it funny how Jane assumes Rochester is such a great prize that Blanche (1) should be the one trying to conquer his heart and (2) must be evil for not truly loving him, but wanting only his fortune. Jane doesn’t think that Blanche’s beauty and talents are also a worthy currency to be exchanged for Rochester’s money (making Blanche his equal), and doesn’t consider the fact that perhaps money is the only thing Rochester can offer to his partner (we know he’s not good-looking, or warm and caring, or distinguished in his career field). So it’s interesting that Jane considers Blanche as some fake viper, whereas Rochester is presented as a mistaken victim of her greedy plans (who just happens to be lusting after the most beautiful and popular woman in his circle, but I’m sure it’s just a coincidence haha).
That stood out to me as well
If it was 2020 , it would have been called a 'pick me' mentality.
Thank you for another amazing video! I had no idea of the historical context, having heard of Bedlam but not Bridewell before.
I just have to say that I read 'Jane Eyre' translated into my language and there is just no way this charade could've been kept the way it was intended; and it should've had a sidenote that's as long as your video! Thank you for explaining this charade and how it's actually an introduction into Mr Rochester's thinking!
Fascinating! Thank you!
I find St.John Rivers more threatening than Edward Rochester.
This couldn’t have come at a better time! Thank you:)
Excellent video. Thank you.
At 13:05 - At the repetition of designating a class as having a pantomime for conformity, it isn't completely unfair. We don't see Jane Eyre's Aunt and Uncle Reed in a romantic marriage - according to the behavior of the aunt and the cousins, it was all about class, particularly designating Jane in a LOWER class.
And then at school, the people in the higher class who provided for the school, the Brocklehursts... we can't speak for the love that they had for one another, but it was clear that the principles of love of one's fellow man, and kindness to orphans and the poor - which is taught is a Biblical imperative - is ignored. In a pantomime of piety, the money that was barely given to the school wasn't enough to keep the students alive. It was the death of so many students that made the haughty, rich patrons of the school called into account. And even THEN, they weren't called criminal, although they were criminally negligent. They were merely shuffled off somewhere else where they would do less harm. And the teachers who loved the students were then able to give them warm clothes and nourishing food to eat.
As such... That class was shown to have a pantomime of proper behavior. Marriage, charity to the poor... It was a sham, it was a travesty. It wasn't unfair for Jane Eyre to make this assessment, based on her own experience.
We know that it isn't fair to judge a whole class of people for the actions of a few. But if Jane came to that conclusion, when all she had was anecdotal evidence, it wasn't an unfair conclusion to make.
This is probably way off topic, but the first thing that jumped out at me about the cartoon "The harlot's progress" was the mallet. It reminded me of Harley Quinn in the suicide squad movies.
I live for your posts!
Thank you very much for this fascinating presentation. Could we hear more lectures about Jane Eyre or possibly Middlemarch? I love both books
Thank you! This was so informative and interesting.
The name itself, Bridewell, could be symbolic in that Rochester had yet to find a bride who is well suited to true matrimony, and he himself does not understand yet what a "good" bride, in the sense of someone who truly fits and loves him, is.
Yeah, this brings up a good point. Does Rochester even know what love is? Maybe he now wrongly associates love with being tricked or played.
Interesting video ;) We can also ask if Mr Rochester possibly toed with the idea to marry Miss Ingram at least until his estranged brother in law Mr Mason turned up.!
Then realising that miss Ingrams influencial family would have made trouble if his preexisting marriage would have been exposed. Jane Eyre does not have any influencial family that he knows up so he is willing to take the risk with her.!!
Very interesting...and now that I think about, entirely plausible.
It's interesting how Rochester in the Bridewell tableau frames himself as imprisoned by marriage when Bertha is physically immured upstairs. He foreshadows both her appearance as described by Jane - being similar in height to R. physically strong and dark like him but ruined by captivity - and his own appearance, both in the immediate aftermath of the fire, grimy and torn, and when Jane finds him later, unkempt and neglectful of his appearance. This is his divine punishment for his sham marriages. That his coat is said to be hanging from one arm in the Bridewell tableau could even be a hint of his future injury.
The other thought I had is to wonder whether Rochester in fact feared imprisonment for bigamy if he succeeded in marrying Jane (or Blanche).
I'd be very interested in your analysis of the later scene where Rochester pretends to be a fortune-teller, and the subsequent scene between him and Jane when he tries to tell her fortune.