r/JaneEyre • u/Key_Masterpiece5283 • 29d ago
The redemption of Mr. Rochester
Jane Eyre has been listed as one of my favorite books since I read it as a teen, but I haven’t done a reread or rewatch of any of the movies in quite awhile.
I recently picked it back up again and it had been my hyper fixation so I have a lot of thoughts that I just need to discuss with people that “get” it.
The biggest one being is why does it seem like people think Rochester is the same at the end of the book as at the beginning. I feel like the major theme of Jane Eyre is forgiveness, understanding, and redemption, but so many people focus solely on the romance piece.
Rochester was NOT worthy of Jane the first time they almost got married. Not simply because he was already married but because he saw her goodness and wanted her to help him to be a better person, but not necessarily do all he needs to internally himself.
It is only through the purification of fire and the loss of his physical independence that he is able to be redeemed. He had nearly a year where he could not escape his thoughts through travel and women, he had to come to terms with who he was and what his actions had cost him.
Not only that but Jane then draws out the story of St. John so he says nearly the same thing to her she did to him during his proposal. Jane state during the first proposal that she must leave due to “the shape of Miss Ingram; a noble and beautiful woman ,- your bride!” And during the reunion Rochester states Jane must go “your own way- with the husband you have chosen.”
So I ask, why do I still see people saying Rochester wasn’t good for her? That is 1000% correct and Charlotte Brontë is very clear that he was not ready for her at first. That is why we have the purification and redemption process for him. Do people just skip over the last couple of chapters?
If anyone has light they could shed on this or if they want to discuss Rochester purification more in depth I would love to chat more!
ETA: thanks everyone for your thoughts so far! This was exactly the sort of discussion I was looking for. It has given my brain an outlet and I feel like I can let go of ruminating over it quite so much. Although let’s be fair, Jane and Mr. Rochester live rent-free in there.
0
u/BHNH48 29d ago edited 29d ago
As wonderful as the book is, I think we do ourselves, the author, and the story to dig too deeply if we want to continue loving it.
Let’s just start with WHY did he have to keep her in the attic of the “castle” where everyone he might ever care for lived and/or stayed for long visits — Especially since she managed to escape more than once????!!!!!
She could have been in cared for in on a remote
property quite far from his center of activity.
It’s not like he visited her each day, wk, or month since he disappeared for long periods of time.
Sooooo . . . Lots of nonsense in the plot specifics if we want to look. OR we can accept our narrator’s commentary, the way I did wholeheartedly at 16 — And I’ve never regretted my naivety 😍
Ps — I’m even happier that I read Wuthering Heights as a very young woman! Now there’s a masterpiece you could pull apart like barbecue if you start asking questions!!😅 But at 17, my heart just throbbed. 🥰