(Untitled)

[snowystingray]

It probably has not escaped your notice that I have been watching a ton of Lost lately. In the midst of this I also happened to check out the 1983 adaptation of Jane Eyre from the library. I've had it on request for ages and it finally came through a few weeks ago... so I picked it up, got distracted by Lost, meant to watch it, didn't have a chance

Comments

[crumpeteer]

And yet there's totally a huge chunk of Heathcliff and Rochester fangirls, something I have never been able to fathom. Rochester is a BASTARD and Heathcliff is an INSANE bastard. Now here's the thing, I like Heathcliff, but I like him because he IS an insane bastard, but I'd never want to insert myself in that novel. Rochester I can't even work up that much interest in mainly because he actually is the romantic hero of that book and he ends up with a relatively happy ending. HE LOCKED HIS CRAZY WIFE UP IN AN ATTIC, PEOPLE. THIS IS NOT ROMANTIC BEHAVIOR!

On that note, I just finished reading The Secret Diaries of Charlotte Bronte today, which is an interesting, if pretty light read that sort of tries to show Charlotte's state of mind in chosing the heroes she does for her writing.

[snowystingray]

Heathcliff fangirls have always baffled me, considering that... there is pretty much a Heathcliff fangirl in the text itself and, right, what happens to her? HE HANGS HER PUPPY, GUYS, COME ON. And that's just the start, even. (...Okay. So I fangirl Guy of Gisborne. BUT THAT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT, BECAUSE... UHHH... IT IS. Whatever.)

I think I'm more sympathetic to Rochester, though, because, yes, he's a bastard, but on a manageable, human level? Keeping one's wife in the attic does not a prince among men make, but at the same time I think it is a believable (if absurd) chain of events, and not because he's an exceptional brand of bastard. It's that classic downward spiral -- one crappy thing happened to me in my life, and I'm going to use it as an excuse for all of the crappy things I do hereon out -- which in no way excuses those actions, but it does make for a more complicated chain of culpability. Mid-nineteenth century mental health care? Especially for "hysterical" women? Not the greatest ever. And both Edward and Bertha are

[crumpeteer]

I think that's why I'm not even really interested in Rochester. It IS a human level bastardry, which is why I'm just sort of indifferent to it. He's like that guy your friend dates who you really hate being around and you can't believe she puts up with, but who you don't say anything about to humor her. That doesn't interest me very much. Barn burning crazy does. The minute he started banging his head against a tree, I realized that THIS was a trainwreck worth watching. That's the difference in the books too. Emily isn't asking you to understand the actions of her characters, she's just asking you to sit back and watch some people have a meltdown because they can't keep their crap together. Charlotte, I think, wants her readers to understand why Jane makes her choices and be happy for her. That's why I could understand an updated version of Jane Eyre being made, but I couldn't fathom a modern version of Wuthering Heights (yet there IS one). Unless they completely water down the character, there is NOTHING likable about Heathcliff

[imelda72]

"and, right, what happens to her? HE HANGS HER PUPPY, GUYS, COME ON."

Teehee. So true!

I agree that Rochester is defensible as a character. Especially within the limits of Jane Eyre, rather than in his past history, he is a pretty decent guy. Even the concept of locking Bertha in his attic was apparently supposed to be pretty humane. Most people would've sent her to an institution where she would have withered and died.

You have totally got me wanting to watch the Timothy Dalton version, now. I think my favorite really might be the most recent one, though--yes, the Toby Stephens version. I don't call it that, though, because I thought he was only mediocre. I call it the "Ruth Wilson version", because she has one of the most unique, endearing, and believable interpretations of Jane I've ever seen. Different from how I always envisioned Jane, but in a way that actually improves/deepens my image of her.