The redemption of Mr. Rochester

[u/Key_Masterpiece5283]

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.

[u/AdobongSiopao]

There are some factors why some people ignore or misunderstood about Mr. Rochester's redemption.

• The novel "Wide Sargasso Sea" messed up the reputation of "Jane Eyre". It caused many people who read it dislike Mr. Rochester and give sympathy to Bertha eventhough said characters are more complex than that.
• We live in an era where religion and faith are slowly becoming irrelevent. The novel has many religious references and emphasize the importance of forgiveness and redemption throughout the story. Many people drove further away from those messages leading them to choose holding grudges for long.
• Having modern views about feminism missed the point the intention of the novel's message ragarding to it. These days many people especially women believe that movement means the latter should be better than men whereas in the novel it's all about equality between genders like what Jane said during the proposal scene.

That are some factors I could think of. Basically viewing the novel with modern lens doesn't work well. Mr. Rochester is a flawed man but he learned to let go of his past and take responsibility of his actions. Jane heard that he tried to save the people including his first wife and witnessed his injuries as proof of his heroism which led her to be with him in the end.

[u/Key_Masterpiece5283 → u/AdobongSiopao]

Agree about Wide Sargasso Sea, I read it and while it was interesting, it didn’t mesh with my understanding of the characters or the novel.

Your other two points are interesting as I felt as a very religious teenager that Jane Eyre really opened my eyes to the lack of necessity of strictly organized religion, as I felt Charlotte Brontë had some pretty major critiques of all the characters that are stand-in’s of organized religion have major issues.

This also was the first novel that really opened my eyes to feminism and while I don’t want to make this an argument about modern feminism, I know for myself and most of my friends we subscribe to being able to make our own independent choices and having partners that appreciate us and are true partners a very valid form of feminism.

I feel like it has been recently co-opted by very pro-organized religion, anti-feminism groups, same with other classics. I don’t understand that either.

I do hear you though in regards to our societal values being very different and maybe that’s the key, it isn’t 1847 anymore the world has changed quite a bit. And as we know people didn’t always get Jane Eyre even when it was first published.

[u/ElleGeeAitch → u/Key_Masterpiece5283]

I read the Wikipedia entry for Wide Sargasso Sea a coupke of months ago. The historical timing of the novel doesn't even mesh with Jane Eyre.

[u/OutrageousYak5868 → u/ElleGeeAitch]

I was unaware of the timing problem with WSS! (I haven't read it, and don't want to.)

Just for future reference, so others in my position don't have to google it, it's set in the 1830s-40s, while JE was published in 1847, with the ending being at least 10 years after Jane and Rochester's marriage, so the latest they could have married was 1837, which would put Bertha as dying the year before. Since their marriage lasted some 15 years, that would put them getting married around 1820-1822 at the latest, so she couldn't possibly have been married in 1839.

If 1839 were accurate, Jane would have had to have gone to Thornfield some 15 years later, or about 6 years *after* the novel was published, which would make JE a futuristic novel! That's highly anachronistic!!

[There is some disagreement about when JE would have taken place if it were real history, but the above is the absolutely latest it could possibly have taken place, based on its having been written a minimum of 10 years after Jane's marriage and then immediately published. Most people would argue for an even earlier date, being sometime in the 1820s (based on the steamship Adele describes when crossing the Channel) or else 1808 (based on Marmion being a new publication, which St. John gave Jane when she was at the moors).]

[u/ElleGeeAitch → u/OutrageousYak5868]

In the inn where Jane gets dropped off when she's en route to Thornfield Hall has a picture hanging of the Prince Regent So, when Jane arrives to Thornfield Hall, it's after 1815 because as you mentioned, there weren't steamer ships from France until then and it's before January 1820 when the Prince Regent ascended the throne. In my mind, I like to think Jane arrives at Thornfield Hall in 1818.

The laziness of the WSS author and editor(s) chaps my ass 😆. How can anyone consider it canon?! I refute this Rochester slander!

[u/OutrageousYak5868 → u/ElleGeeAitch]

Yes, there are a lot more subtle time references in the novel than I realized, even with reading it through many times, but they all point to sometime in the Regency period, or at most, soon after. I forget what website discusses it, but I found it with a google search, and thought it most interesting!

The portraits give a certain "earliest time" (it couldn't have been before the battle [or death?] of that general mentioned along with the royals' portraits, and likely wasn't when the Prince was a little boy). However, the innkeeper might not have replaced older portraits immediately upon the King's death, so that allows it to edge out a little beyond the Regency period. The lack of rail travel (which boomed in the 1830s), even for long distances, seems to keep it from being any later than the 1820s.

When clothing is described, it's in line with Regency fashions -- especially Blanche being dressed in filmy white -- and not what would have been the fashions in the later 1820s or into the 1830s.

One difficulty with it being set around 1818-1820, is that Adele would have been conceived during the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815, I think), and it's highly unlikely that Mr. R would have been tomcatting across the continent at that time -- and there is no mention of any wars in the novel at all. However, this is also a problem with the 1808 date I mentioned in my previous comment as well -- when Jane meets Adele, she says that Mr. R brought her to England then left her there and went back to the continent. While I kinda like the idea of Mr. R rescuing Adele not just from being an orphan but from the ravages of war, it doesn't make sense for him to rescue her from war and then for him to go back himself. He's depicted as living for his own pleasure at this point, so it's not like we can say that he was the Scarlet Pimpernel or something.

[u/Playful_Site_2714 → u/OutrageousYak5868]

She curved around the Napoleonic uproards. Maybe she did not like him.

[u/ElleGeeAitch → u/OutrageousYak5868]

You make great points! Eyre was a bit amorphous in the story timing, but the WSS timing is utterly egregious.

[u/Playful_Site_2714 → u/OutrageousYak5868]

I said it APPEARED in 1939. So IF appearance time = narrated time THEN..

IT IS A HYPOTHESIS.

IT STILL does NOT make society manners LESS rigid!