1979. Choose a complex and important
character in a novel or a play of recognized literary merit who might on the
basis of the character's actions alone be considered evil or immoral. In a
well-organized essay, explain both how and why the full presentation of the
character in the work makes us react more sympathetically than we otherwise
might. Avoid plot summary.
He
lies. He coerced a young girl into becoming his bride, with a wife still
living. He manipulates this girl, making her jealous by pretending to love
another. He’s the only man this girl has ever known personally. He treats those
that displease him with uniform scorn, he lived a life of debauchery for
several years, and he has mood swings. Yet, because we see him through the eyes
of a woman who loves him with all her heart, we cannot despise Mr. Rochester
from Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre.
By
all rights, Rochester should be the villain of the tale. He seduces and coerces
Jane into marrying him, ruining the stability of her life in the process. With
that detail alone, he is a vicious debaucher. However, with Jane as a narrator,
the reader gains a new perspective. Having Jane’s story from the beginning as a
timid young girl, the positive changes that Mr. Rochester brings onto Jane are
apparent. Even before their love is found to be mutual, Jane’s spirits
heighten. She laughs more, is freer to speak, and no longer feels trapped as
she was before at Lowood and Thornfield. Once they become engaged, Jane blooms.
Rochester’s positive affects on Jane endear him to the audience.
Jane
is also very open with Rochester’s faults from the beginning. Even on their
first meeting, when they were strangers in a lane, she noted his brusque
nature. Rochester, for his part, is also frank with his faults to Jane. He
tells her he has not lived as purely as he would have liked. This small
honesty, despite how much it conceals, is still enough for him to earn a
reader’s trust. Beyond even his admissions, though, Jane is perceptive enough
to see that there is a dark secret somewhere in his past. She knows about
Celine Varens, even, and yet as a narrator she only expresses the desire to
delve deeper into Rochester’s past. She makes him appear desirable through her
own desire. In Jane’s eyes, even his faults and foibles are mere ‘seasonings’
that make him more appealing.
All
of the hinting and secrets lead up to the large reveal of Bertha mason at
Jane’s would-be wedding, and Rochester tells Jane his story, from his marriage
to his meeting of her. By then, the reader has felt Jane’s grieving, and is
emotionally connected to her, so Jane’s pain for Rochester’s past also carries
over. Jane doesn’t blame or fault him so neither does the audience. Rather than
anger at a treacherous man, Jane creates a picture of desolation – two people
with the world against them, which invites sympathy for both rather than ire
for one.
The
most obvious reason for this is, of course, that Rochester is Jane’s soul mate,
and a romance doesn’t work if one half of the couple is despicable. However,
the sympathetic portrayal given to Rochester also represents the shedding of
traditional dealings with those who do wrong. If Jane, with her ethics carved
into her heart, can forgive this sinning deceitful man, can still love him
entirely, then why should anyone else not be able to? Jane Eyre is a character
with the ability to love the sinner and hate the sin, the same doctrine that
Helen Burns gave her so long ago. Being put in her shoes invites sympathy for
sinners as a whole. Rochester isn’t inherently evil to Jane, he is a man that
circumstances have worked against. Jane Eyre casts sinners as victims, which challenges the entire morality of the
time period.
Of
course, Jane Eyre is first and foremost
a love story, but it is also a cry for acceptance, change, and for people to
remember what true goodness really is. Jane herself is the perfect example,
loving Rochester for all his flaws. Bronte begs for a more forgiving society in
her novel, and redefines love to allow for it.
