Hate the sin, love the trig

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 coerces a young girl into becoming his bride, without telling her he’s already married. 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 has 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.

Even as the woman who loves him, Jane is open about Rochester’s faults from the beginning. She notes his brusque nature from their first meeting as strangers, and goes on to describe him as sarcastic, secretive, and moody. Rochester for his part, is frank with his faults to Jane, telling her that he has not lived as purely as he would have liked, and about the truth of Adele Varens. 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, and yet as a narrator she only expresses the desire to delve deeper into Rochester’s past. She transforms his negative qualities into a mystery that intrigues the reader, rather than the repellant forces they could be. In Jane’s eyes, his faults and foibles are mere ‘seasonings’ that make him more appealing, and this carries through beyond the pages.

Despite the interest he provides, Rochester’s treatment of Jane should make him the villain of the story, but knowing Jane’s story from her beginnings as a timid young girl, the positive changes that he brings onto her are apparent. Even before their love is found to be mutual, Jane’s spirits heighten after befriending him. She laughs more, is freer to speak, and no longer feels trapped in a dull and pointless life—part of her personality that was proven to be subdued only by worthwhile friends. Once they become engaged, Jane blooms even further, and Rochester’s positive effects on her are cemented. Since the sympathy of the audience lies with Jane, it is impossible to dislike anyone who improves her emotional state, regardless of their moral neutrality.

All of the hinting and secrets lead up to the reveal of Bertha mason at Jane’s would-be wedding, and Rochester tells Jane his story from his marriage to meeting her. They key to Rochester’s absolution in the eyes of the audience then lies with Jane’s reaction; she doesn’t blame or fault him, so neither does the audience. Rather than anger at a treacherous man, Jane paints a picture of desolation, with herself dying to ease his pain and Rochester suffering the loss he knows is inevitable. This sympathy, through Jane’s eyes, allows the reader to understand Rochester’s seeming betrayal in his own words, and while he is still morally wrong, he is not meant to provoke hate.

            The most obvious reason for the balanced portrayal of Rochester as a character is, of course, that he 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 do otherwise? 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 as a novel casts a sinning man as a victim, which challenges the entire morality of the time period and insists that that which is evil can still be redeemed.

           

            

Wish I wa-as... ho-oo-meward bou-ou-ound

2010. Palestinian American literary theorist and cultural critic Edward Said has written that “Exile is strangely compelling to think about but terrible to experience. It is the unhealable rift forced between a human being and a native place, between the self and its true home: its essential sadness can never be surmounted.” Yet Said has also said that exile can become “a potent, even enriching” experience. Select a novel, play, or epic in which a character experiences such a rift and becomes cut off from “home,” whether that home is the character’s birthplace, family, homeland, or other special place. Then write an essay in which you analyze how the character’s experience with exile is both alienating and enriching, and how this experience illuminates the meaning of the work as a whole. Do not merely summarize the plot.

            Defining a home for Jane in Charlotte Bronte’s novel Jane Eyre is difficult in and of itself. Is Gateshead mansion, where she grew up alone and browbeaten, her home? Is Lowood, the school that shaped not only her knowledge but her ideology, her true home? Or is Thornfield, the home of her true love and the first place she experiences true happiness her real home? Of course, one must consider that she only truly suffered when she left Thornfield. Jane departed from Gateshead and Lowood with nary a backward glance or a despondent thought, but she described leaving Thornfield as akin to cutting out her own heart. Truly, then, at least for Jane, Thornfield is her home, because it is where her heart lies. Her exile from Thornfield is self imposed—but that doesn’t make it any less traumatic or upsetting, especially considering her position in the world. When she leaves Thornfield, she leaves behind her source of income, her shelter, and any friends she ever made, but she gains a self sufficiency that is crucial to bringing about her own happy ending, and to emphasizing the moral undertones of the story.

            In the three days directly following her exile, Jane suddenly turns from a respectable governess in a high-class home to a beggar woman, living at the whim of nature and depending on the generosity of complete strangers. In each place she wanders, she is denied employment, but she herself is unsurprised, claiming that because no one knew who she was, they were justified in mistrusting her. Because she left Thornfield so abruptly, she has no proof of identity or character that would aid her in finding the work she needs. Even when she does find asylum in the kind arms of the Rivers family, she still feels a sense of otherness as one who is relatively uneducated, and completely dependent. While she has genuine affection for the Rivers, she is certain that that affection cannot be requited until she is responsible for her own well being.

            The Rivers family, however, turn out to be Jane’s one true blessing. When Jane, who grew up a friendless orphan in a lonely house, discovers that the Rivers siblings are, in fact, her cousins, she is beyond ecstatic. Their initial charity to her is now justified, and there is a legitimate bond tying her to other members of the human race-- something that Jane has always longed for and never truly had. Along with the news of new relatives, Jane inherits an exorbitant amount of money, making her financially independent as well. Had she not set out from Thornfield in order to save herself, none of this knowledge could possibly have reached her. While her exile brought her near the brink of death, Jane gained not only a fresh start, but a renewed sense of self, and an assurance of security in the world that prove invaluable as she decides to return to her old home and see what has become of Rochester.

            Jane’s self imposed exile was not meant to be a reward, in her eyes. She left Thornfield fleeing temptation, rather than seeking a new life, and the sacrifice did not go unfelt. Even as she grew into a self-sustaining person away from her old home, she still mourned the absence of love in her life. The choice to leave Thornfield is the first pivotal choice Jane must make with regards to her own moral code, and because she chose correctly according “the laws given by God and sanctioned by Man” she is rewarded with another choice to make. When Saint John proposes to her, she must chose based on another set of rules- her personal beliefs about love and marriage. Her second pivotal choice, then, is to deny Saint John and return to her home; something she would not have had the strength to do had she not left it in the first place.

            

My Type is Byronic, Can You Tell?

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.

            

It Builds Character

1980. A recurring theme in literature is the classic war between a passion and responsibility. For instance, a personal cause, a love, a desire for revenge, a determination to redress a wrong, or some other emotion or drive may conflict with moral duty. Choose a literary work in which a character confronts the demands of a private passion that conflicts with his or her responsibilities. In a well-written essay show clearly the nature of the conflict, its effects upon the character, and its significance to the work.

            Living in sin is an outdated concept to those of us living in the present, but back in the days of corsets and feathered bonnets, the idea of living as man and wife without being actually married was shocking to say the least. To a young girl raised from birth to be devoted to the Christian faith and doctrine, the very idea would be synonymous with degradation and an assurance of hell in the afterlife. To a young girl hearing this proposal from a broken man who needs her, and the one man she’s ever been close to, the idea is far more tempting. This very scenario, the choice to throw her principles away or cling to them and suffer, is presented to Jane Eyre on the very day she was meant to be married to the same man, and the choice she makes defines her character and sets the moral tone of the novel that shares her name.

            Jane was taught at Lowood, a charitable school for orphans comparable in its rules to a nunnery, from the age of ten to sixteen. In her first year there, she met everyone who would come to shape her mind from then on, most notably a girl called Helen Burns. From Helen, she learned much of Christian morality that escaped her childish mind. Doubtless, more of her religious morals sprung from Helen than from the mandatory church service the girls attended and the scrimping man who ran the institution strictly on the principle of debasement. Helen, a soft, gentle, forgiving girl, is far more likely to capture the affection of a ten year old girl than a freezing cold church and a freezing cold man. When Helen dies, she achieves a near sainthood to Jane, further cementing her importance to Jane’s moral fiber.

            Also at Lowood, Jane meets Maria Temple, who takes on a motherly role in her life. Ms. Temple is serene, compared to the moon on her introduction, and Jane uses her as a role model in all she does. As long as Ms. Temple is at Lowood, Jane is content to be there also, through her six years of training and two of teaching. Then, however, Ms. Temple is married (notably to a minister, whom Jane describes as being ‘the only man worthy of such a woman’) and leaves the school, leaving Jane alone. Without a calming influence, Jane becomes restless and eager to explore the world, and her true character shines through. Jane is still young, and still eager to taste all that the world has to offer her. She is daring, not the docile pale thing she appears to be. With Ms. Temple gone from Lowood, it is not long before Jane follows her, getting a post as a governess and making her way into the rest of her life alone.

            With her new job, Jane meets new characters, and the most important person to come into her life- Mr. Rochester, master of Thornfield, and a harsh, sardonic sort of man. He represents more than he seems, though, because Mr. Rochester has traveled. He’s seen all of Europe: France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and he’s more than willing to share and discuss this knowledge with Jane. Through Rochester, she finds a freedom she had never had before. She grows closer to her actual self then, inquisitive and sharp. Not only that, but she becomes Rochester’s confidante and moral center as he comes to depend on her more and more. Despite her better interests, she falls in love with him, but the way she handles her affection is very telling. At the ‘legal bar’ of her brain, she allows her emotions to rage and pine, but then she carefully allots herself a ‘punishment’ to ground herself in reality. Her inner will is stronger than her inner passion, and it is a strong hint at what is to come.

            To Rochester’s earnest and true proposal, Jane gives a hesitant yes, sure that he is tricking her in some way. Once she is assured otherwise, their honeymoon phase is radiantly happy, but on her wedding day it is discovered that Rochester has a living wife, and for Jane to marry him would be sinful and unlawful, to the custom at the time as well as to Jane’s own principles. After the day has unfolded, and Jane has suffered her grief alone, Rochester makes her his offer. He gives his story of grief and wrong, and pleads Jane to take pity on him, and live with him. This presents Jane with a conflict of interests. Does her responsibility to herself and her moral fiber outweigh her desire to comfort and soothe the man she loves? Is her real responsibility not towards Rochester, rather than herself?

            Jane would not be Jane, however, if she bent ‘the laws given by God and sanctioned by Man’ to her own desires. The choice breaks her, and she compares it to ripping her own hearstrings, but she chooses to hurt not only herself but the man she loves in order to keep herself true to the teachings that had been pressed upon her over her entire life. The decision to leave doesn’t stop at hurting her physically. It sets her homeless once more, and almost kills her. Better a death as a righteous woman than a ruined one, however. She makes her peace with God on death’s door, and she is rescued. The people she meets and the freedom she earns on her own merit convince Jane that her choice was the correct one. Instead of being drunk on love but completely degraded, she becomes a schoolteacher, helping country girls to better themselves and making her own way in the world free of outside influence. Because of the choice she made- to leave Rochester and keep true to herself- she finds her own family and her own fortune. Instead of being Rochester’s woman, she is her own woman, so when she returns to him, she comes as an equal rather than a dependent.

            Jane’s happiness at the end of the work is the true indicator of the moral nature of Jane Eyre. It carries the idea that those who make the right choices will always be rewarded, as well as throwing a strong bone towards feminism. Had Jane chosen the path that Rochester wanted, she would have become subservient. Instead, she made her own way with her own life and job, and came back an independent woman and an equal contributor in her own marriage. Not only did she maintain her responsibility to herself as a human being, she also kept her own values, and was rewarded for it. Jane’s choices are indicative of her will as a character, and her choice to leave Rochester turns the entire book into an argument about willpower, morality, and marriage in an era where those concepts were seemingly set in stone.