Welcome to our discussion of Chapters
29 – 33 of the Read – Along. This week’s questions and my answers are below.
St. John Rivers makes the following very blunt
statement about Jane, in Chapter 29: "Ill or well, she would always be
plain. The grace and harmony of beauty are quite wanting in those
features." What does this tell you about him, especially in light of subsequent
chapters?
This tells us a lot about St. John Rivers as well
as the relationship that he will subsequently form with Jane. He will
eventually propose marriage to her. He will come to have enormous appreciation
for Jane’s morality and character. However, from a romantic, point of view, he
will show no passion for Jane.
St. John Rivers eschews physical and worldly
pleasures. He is so dedicated to this dispassionate coldness; that he chooses
not to marry the beautiful Rosamond
Oliver, who he loves in a more traditional way. His decision not to enter into
the obvious relationship, but instead to propose to the Jane, who he drawn to intellectually
and morally, who he views as “wanting”
grace and beauty, highlights his fanaticism.
Do you think the fact that St. John and his sisters turn out to be Jane's cousins, and that Jane is now an heiress, is much too coincidental?
I do think that that the cousin connection is an unrealistic coincidence. However
this raises a larger issue. I believe that such a coincidence is appropriate in
a novel like Jayne Eyre. Though many of the events in this book are realistic,
there is a larger then life, melodramatic tendency to this work. In light of
this, such coincidences seem to fit well into the narrative.
Having read a lot of nineteenth century English novels I want to ask, my tongue firmly in my cheek, does not every poor young women eventually find that she is an heiress?
This is course unrealistic and
somewhat clichéd. It does serve an important purpose in the plot as it gives
Jane material independence from the very strong men in her life.
Why does Bronte give
Jane three more cousins, and precisely two females and one male, as with her
Gateshead cousins?
It seems
that the two trios of cousins are meant to contrast with one another. The
families are almost a mirror image of each other. The Reeds are cruel, vain and
materialistic. They are so very much the opposites the Moor
House' cousins who are extremely virtuous and not materialistic.
The Moor House clan also embody kindness, even in the case of St.
John Rivers, whose kindness is real but very cold. Alongside all this, St. John
and his sisters exhibit strong Christian virtues as oppose to the hypocrisy and
the wonton immorality of the Reeds.
Why do you think Jane
tries to convince St. John to marry Rosamond, and give up his dream of becoming
a missionary?
There is something frightening and even
potentially destructive (Jane believes that if she marries him that she will be
led into hardships that will lead to an early death) about St. John Rivers and
his zeal. Rosamond represents the one force that may pull him away from this
his fervor and his coldness. Jane, an extremely perceptive person, seems to
want what is right for him understands that such a course might not be the path
to balanced normal life.
How would you contrast the landscape surrounding Moor House with that surrounding Thornfield Hall, and what is the purpose of this?
Thornfield Hall borders a garden that includes fruit trees. Despite the gloominess of Rochester and his mansion, he is a man full of life and emotion. This is reflected in the vibrant foliage that surrounds him. Perhaps the fact that these fertile gardens are surrounded by moors says something about it being an island of emotion in a very grim and dark world.
In contrast The Moors come right up to the appropriately names Moor House. The cold and harsh personality of St. John Rivers is reflected in the country surrounding Moor house.
Bronte dedicates many pages to describing St. John's personality. Why do
you think she does this?
St John is an enormously strong, important, and well
sketched character. His interactions with Jane are instrumental in plot,
character and theme development of the novel. Understanding his virtue,
combined with a determined and cold fanaticism are key to understanding the
later parts of this work. He is a great literary creation that Bronte takes her
time in painting. I am very glad that she spends such time upon him.
Next week we will be
discussing Chapters 34 – 38. Our
questions are below. As always feel free to answer as many or as few as you
would like.
The marriage that St. John Rivers proposes to Jane would be unconventional
from an emotional point of view. What do you think about this hypothetical
match?
In what ways
are St. John Rivers and Rochester alike?
Is it surprising
that someone with the strength of character that Jane posses would be so
influenced by St. John Rivers as to almost accede to his marriage proposal?
What do you
think of the seemingly psychic connection that manifests itself between Jane
and Rochester at a critical moment in the plot?
What do you
think would have resulted if, upon her return to Rochetser, Jane had found Rochester’s
first wife, Bertha, to be still alive?
By the end
of the novel, how has Rochester changed?
How satisfied are you with the ending of this novel?
Since this is the last set of questions for the Jane Eyre Read-Along, we have included an extra, "wrap-up" question at the end. Feel free to answer it or not.
How satisfied are you with the ending of this novel?
Week 8: Nov. 10th
Reading: Chapters 34 - 38
Discussion Questions: Chapters 29 - 33
Discussion Questions for Next Week:
Babbling Books
Week 9: Nov. 17th
Discussion Questions, Chapters 34 - 38
Week 9: Nov. 21st
Book Reviews Posted
Another thought-provoking discussion! I almost feel as if Ive reread this book alongside of you. This novel does seem to skillfully capture psychological complexity.
ReplyDeleteInteresting insights on question #1, Brian! Yes, Rivers is very cold, and strictly controls his passions. He looks at the prospect of marrying with a detached, objective eye. Instead of marrying for love, he looks at marriage from a purely practical standpoint.
ReplyDeleteWe definitely concur on most of the other answers.
Your answer to question #4 is also very insightful, and brings in a point that I had missed. There is indeed something "frightening and potentially destructive" about St. John, and this is so in spite of his Christian virtues. Although he's not self-righteous, as Mr. Brocklehurst is (and good riddance to THAT character!), he IS very fanatical. Had Jane accepted his proposal, he would have been merciless in his efforts to have her keep up with him, with nothing in the way of sympathy or tenderness. So I believe you're right -- Jane wants to pull him toward a more "balanced, normal life".
I do admire Rivers's missionary zeal, but only to a point. It's great that he has these principles, and feels that he must follow the calling of God. On the other hand, it's not at all necessary to forgo ALL human pleasures in order to follow God's calling, so this is where he's mistaken.
One more thing: being a missionary at that time was also a risky business, not only because of the hardships involved, but also because spreading Christianity was probably seen by the Indians as another aspect of colonialism, and so, something that would have been resented, instead of welcomed.
And so we finish another great week of the read-along!! Thanks for your thoughts! : )
I appreciate your insights on St. John and your answers to the other questions.
ReplyDeleteI really hate that St. John won't marry Rosamond. It's so irksome that his view of sacrificing for God means giving up the very thing God specifically gave man (love and marriage) for a joyful life.
And his view that marrying someone he doesn't love isn't sinful is flat out perverse. Maybe that's too harsh a word but that's how I feel.
I hadn't made the connection between the first set of cousins and the second. That's a great point. I was too busy comparing Jane's cousins and their obvious quality, thought poor with the vain and shallow rich people that were visiting Rochester.
What I like about Rochester is that he too compares Jane and her real vitality with the shallow, empty lives of his social circle.
Thanks for a great review.
Hi Suko - One nice thing about this read along is that I am seeing complexities I would not have seen had I read the book on my own.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the good word Sharon.
ReplyDeleteSt John really is going down an unnatural path. It really is sad how he does forsake his love.
Indeed Jane is such a breath of fresh air to most things in Rochester's life. It is no wonder that he loves her so much.
Credit Maria for making the connection between the two sets of cousins. I would never have picked it up myself.
Thanks for the great comment!
Hi Maria - While there are certainly admirable qualities about St John, I must admit that he disturbs me a little.
ReplyDeleteHis fanaticism is definitely a problem. I dis get the impression from the text that he was headed for some very dangerous places!
Perhaps, despite his enormous flaws, I find myself identifying with Rochester so much, that I am really rooting against St John.
As for my other reasons for disliking him, I will elaborate a little more in next week's answers.
Intrigued by St. John Rivers, he sounds like a fascinating character.
ReplyDeleteHi Brian,
ReplyDeleteAs always, you give such wonderful insights with these discussions. I have to agree that there's a melodramatic theme going on with this book. It's what makes it great :)
Also, I enjoyed reading your description on St. John. He is very instrumental to the plot, especially concerning Jane.
As others have noted, you have made some insightful observations. I agree with your assessment of Rochester's "dispassionate coldness". While I also agree with your comment about the novel's melodramatic tendency; however, the contrast between the two trios of cousins is something that I had not thought about.
ReplyDeleteHi Tracy - The thing about St Rivers is that such an interesting literary creation can exist in within a novel that already contains, what in my opinion are the titans, Jane and Rochester.
ReplyDeleteHi Vonnie - At first I was a little amused by the melodrama. But I see what a key part of this work is.
ReplyDeleteHi James - Defiantly credit Maria for picking up on the parallels and contracts between the sets of cousins.
ReplyDeleteHi Brian. I forwarded your blog post to my sister who has a Master's in English Literature. I'm cutting and pasting her comment to this post:
ReplyDeleteVery well thought out and expressed. The writer brought out aspects of the story I'd never thought about. I haven't read it in a long time, and when I did read it, I was a very young woman more wrapped up in the romance of Mr. Rochester than any more profound meaning, I'm afraid!
Thanks for sharing. After reading such perceptive Commentary, I feel my own mind to be leathery and dull. It was refreshing to read such intelligent and pithy insights.
Shawna
PS My sister homeschools her kids and is exhausted most of the time. That might be why she feels "leathery and dull".
ReplyDeleteHi Sharon - Thank you and thank your sister so much!
ReplyDeleteDespite the books profound meaning, the relationship between Jane and Rochester still draws me into the novel.
Sometimes I feel dull and leathery too!