Jane Eyre - The Book VS The Film

                One cannot deny that in any literature, when they are made into a film, they tell the story from different perspective and include or eliminate some elements compared to the original novel. It is the same for Jane Eyre; the film revolves around the life of Jane, however, it is told from a very different way from Bronte’s style in the novel. Although the film followed the novel very well, perhaps trying to abridge the almost-450 pages masterpiece by Bronte was challenging. Personally, I thought that the movie was very shallow compared to the original piece.

                First, the film eliminated the entire relationship between Jane and Bessie. Although it may not be the biggest bond in the novel, I felt as if her existence was crucial to Jane’s childhood. It shows how her life was not always shunned from light, and that someone cared for her, despite the adversities she needed to handle during her residence in Gateshead Hall. Bessie was the person who brought Jane up, and showed her what “love” was.

                Second, the image of St. John that I had acquired from the novel contradicted the one from the movie. From the novel, I understood that he was rather a taciturn man with cruel and hard personality – slightly going against the stereotypical image of a religious missionary man.  Bronte describes him as follows.

“Mr. St. John — sitting as still as one of the dusty pictures on the walls, keeping his eyes fixed on the page he perused, and his lips mutely sealed — was easy enough to examine. Had he been a statue instead of a man, he could not have been easier. He was young — perhaps from twenty- eight to thirty — tall, slender; his face riveted the eye; it was like a Greek face, very pure in outline: quite a straight, classic nose; quite an Athenian mouth and chin. It is seldom, indeed, an English face comes so near the antique models as did his. He might well be a little shocked at the irregularity of my lineaments, his own being so harmonious. His eyes were large and blue, with brown lashes; his high forehead, colourless as ivory, was partially streaked over by careless locks of fair hair.” (Jane Eyre)

However, in the movie, he did not appear to be as cold as the novel emphasized. It could be seen that St. John was not as friendly as his sisters from the way Jane Eyre drew him in the movie, but that scene was rather pushed; she illustrated him as intense, but it was right after he rescued her from brink of death – unlike the novel where Jane described his alienation thoroughly, the sudden portrayal of St. John as such intense figure was rather ironic.

                Lastly, the movie’s illustration of Jane and Rochester seemed very unrealistic to what I would have imagined to be their relationship. They were very close in the film; knowing that the story is based in Victorian Era, the intimacy between the two seemed unrealistic. Furthermore, the chestnut tree in the novel is significant in portraying their relationship, but in the movie, its value was not exactly signified. For example, the quote below shows how the tree foreshadows the disastrous conflict that awaits them ahead.

"The cloven halves were not broken from each other, for the firm base and strong roots kept them unsundered below; though community of vitality was destroyed -the sap could flow no more" (Jane Eyre)

Despite the occasional differences, the film was very accurate in many parts. They utilized many significant quotes from the novel in a natural manner unlike the movie based on Shakespeare’s Paradise Lost. Additionally, the portrayal of each character was very accurate. Rochester fit my image of the character, which was passionate, attractive, and free from any “chains” that binds people in society.

Jane Eyre Religion

                Unlike the past two books we’ve read in the class, Paradise Lost and Inferno, Jane Eyre posed us with a break from the deeply religious world. Charlotte Bronte’s book still has the religious aspect; however, it is not as strong of a theme as the others, and also, it portrays the corrupt side of religious beliefs of her time, contrary to other books that portray figures obediently following the bible and common-beliefs. Overall, Christianity and God affect Jane’s life differently from many other protagonists have been influenced in past readings.

Jane Eyre encounters two religious figures that represent Bronte’s distrust in Christian system; Mr. Brocklehurst and St. John. The master of Lowood School, Mr. Brocklehurst, symbolizes the hypocrisy and corruption of a religious individual. Charlotte Bronte casts a sense of irony as he tells Jane how she “has [have] a wicked heart; and you must pray to God to change it: to give you a new and clean one: to take away your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.” (Bronte 32) It is ironic because he is the one who is accused of maltreatment of the Lowood girls and his luxurious living is revealed in Chapter 10.

St. John appears later in the novel as one of the Rivers siblings. He is a minister at Morton who is cold, reserved, and often controlling in his interactions with others. Unlike Mr. Brocklehurst, St. John is very faithful to God, and does not commit any horrible wrongdoings. Throughout the later chapters, he shows his abstinence from emotions and self-desires, which makes him “a statue instead of a man” (Bronte 322-323). Bronte’s portrayal of St. John is unique for a man who is following the bible as it reads. Though he is faithful to the church, and is a respectable minister, he is unhappy. Through the portrayal of St. John, Charlotte Bronte conveys how satisfaction cannot be achieved only through the obedience of religious outlines.

In fact, this idea is backed up by Jane Eyre herself. Although Jane does not appear too religious, she often refers and speaks of the God, such as when she says “there is not a future state worse than this present one – let me break away, and go home to God!” (Bronte 288) as she grieves over the fact that Mr. Rochester had fooled her over his first wife, Bertha Mason. However, her faith in God compared to the other two characters is very different. She follows Christianity and its beliefs; but moreover, she follows her own morale and trusts her own decisions. In Chapter 34, when St. John proposes to Jane, she turns down the offer, even though he mentioned how “it is the cause of God I advocate: it is under His standard I enlist you,” meaning how the marriage would follow the intent of God. Upon hearing this, Jane Eyre rejects marrying him, and she decides to return by Mr. Rochester, who is her true love.

Overall, in Jane Eyre, Charlotte Bronte illustrated Christianity from many viewpoints. Throughout the long quest, Jane figures out that neither sinning like Mr. Brocklehurst, or taking religion to the extreme, like St. John, produces happiness, but in the end it comes down to his/ her own decision, and their own will to follow their own central beliefs.

Paradise Lost Book I

First thing to say about Paradise Lost is that it overturns common sense and knowledge of Satan. I am not a strong religious person, but even I know, that the bible does not contain biographical information about the fallen angel, Lucifer. While he is usually referred as the evil one, as he contributes solely in negative aspects of a person’s life, Milton’s novel portrays how his downfall from heaven was a failure to reach his goal – which was to be stronger and more significant than what the God had assigned him to be.

Honestly, the book blew my mind. Milton spun the readers’ minds as he conveyed that Lucifer was not full of atrocity. He had a reasonable excuse that made him unsatisfied with the position in Heaven; he could not stand working underneath the God’s son. This envious emotion is what led him to the rebellious war. As I read the book, it almost made me feel as if God, who most society believes to be the flawless, wonderful figure, was the main contributor of turning Lucifer into an evil symbol of Hell. After all, without considering Lucifer’s feelings at all and sticking to the idea of what we call is “monarchy”, the God used his overwhelming power to break Lucifer’s ambitions.

Now the book poses a question. Were Lucifer’s rebellion and the formation of Hell a bad thing? From my point of view, and reading the text, I think Heaven and Hell must coexist. It is like the idea of binary opposition that appears in post-structuralism. Additionally, Lucifer’s will to break the repetitive lives and work for a higher position in Heaven was a very understandable excuse. Now, I’m not saying that war was the best solution in order to solve this problem, but I think the action he took was so much more efficient than sitting as one of the many angels in Heaven, simply obeying what the God says. Otherwise, Heaven would be a Marxist state – very close to the ideas introduced in Brave New World Revisited – loss of self-identification, manipulations by stronger powers, etc.

As I read the book, I figured a strong connection between Paradise Lost and Grendel from Beowulf.  The author wrote the story from a new perspective that is usually ignored – thus through this, the readers can judge for themselves, whether Lucifer was the criminal or actually a victim.

 

The Tempest

ANTONIO (ACT 2 SCENE 1)

Ay, sir. Where lies that? If ’twere a kibe,

'Twould put me to my slipper. But I feel not

This deity in my bosom. Twenty consciences,

That stand ’twixt me and Milan, candied be they

And melt ere they molest! Here lies your brother,

No better than the earth he lies upon,

If he were that which now he’s like—that’s dead—

Whom I, with this obedient steel, three inches of it,

Can lay to bed for ever; whiles you, doing thus,

To the perpetual wink for aye might put

This ancient morsel, this Sir Prudence, who

 Should not upbraid our course. For all the rest,

They’ll take suggestion as a cat laps milk.

They’ll tell the clock to any business that

We say befits the hour.

 

                The above passage is drawn out from the famous last work by Shakespeare, The Tempest. The story revolves around Prospero’s retaliation against Antonio and others who had usurped his throne as a king of Milan twelve years ago. While everyone is sound asleep on the island, Antonio and Sebastian stay awake, as they have their own secret talk. Antonio suggests Sebastian to kill his brother, King Alonso of Naples, in order to attain the position of a king. Sebastian appears to be uneasy about the plan, and inquires Antonio whether he feels the guilt from stealing his brother’s throne, when he answers as above.

 

                In one of the first lines, Antonio states  

“If ’twere a kibe,

'Twould put me to my slipper. But I feel not

This deity in my bosom.”

With this, Antonio compares the act of usurping a throne to an ordinary conduct of putting a slipper on. By making the comparison, Antonio successfully acquires the other’s attention and eliminates the sense of guilt that was residing inside Sebastian, as he explains how he was simply acting for a better future of Milan. Additionally, in the following sentence, Antonio compares Alonso to dirt, and skillfully convinces Sebastian to murder his own brother. This phrase portrays Antonio’s lack of respect for the current King of Naples, as he describes Alonso as “no better than the earth he lies upon.”

 

                 Furthermore, the readers can see how Antonio thinks lightly of the other members from the last two sentences.

For all the rest,

They’ll take suggestion as a cat laps milk.

They’ll tell the clock to any business that

We say befits the hour.

Antonio applies simile as he compares the watches to a cat, an obedient animal, and as he does so, he tells Sebastian the simplicity of convincing the others. The contrast between the two conveys how the others are rather brainless – that they will take the two’s words without question.

                Through the passage, Antonio efficiently convinces Sebastian into killing his own brother to steal the position as a king. The comparisons that he makes prove his cunningness, and lack of respect for others, as he would go to any lengths to attain his objective.