Gabriella (New York, NY)’s review of Jane Eyre

KK this was written by charlotte bronte, not jane austen.

Yojan I agree. I'm having a hard time finishing this book myself but I have a don't-quit-a-book-once-you've-started policy... so yeah.

Kelsey That's exactly how I felt! I was very underwhelmed.

Greg Z Christa wrote: "I think that for the time period during which it was written, Jane Eyre would be considered feminist and even sexually revolutionary. If you look at it from the lens of a much older setting, it mak..."
Christa, that's how I see it, Jane had so much going for her: smart, strong, independently wealthy. To squander everything on Rochester? No, Jane wouldn't do that. Some criticize all the going's on at the end of the book about Jane going to India. Maybe Bronte was forced to add a "happy/wedding/ending" by some editor. Just like Dickens added a "happy ending" to Great Expectations but he didn't want to.

Christa I think that for the time period during which it was written, Jane Eyre would be considered feminist and even sexually revolutionary. If you look at it from the lens of a much older setting, it makes sense as an important book. However, today, it would certainly send the wrong message. I didn't like Rochester one bit. And Jane's ending wasn't the least bit happy; if that were my life, I would scream in front of the mirror every morning.

Greg Z Gabriella, I didn't for a second believe that a strong woman like Jane would wind up independently wealthy and still go back to Rochester. Unless she planned to torture him in revenge for the way he treated her. In which case, congrats Jane!

Demetria So glad to find I'm not the only one not liking this book! I guess you have to be young, impressionable and anglo to enjoy it. Did everyone skip over the part where she says the little girl's education was saved in an English boarding school from the deficiencies of her French upbringing? I'm not French and I was ready to throw the audiobook at the wall...but I had it on my phone and refrained. And what about that after all she went through she decided to stay with her "master," who was not a nice person, and twice her age, and dominating. No, no, no, they should not be making young, impressionable minds read this. I gave it two stars because I kind of like the way the narrator talked to the audience, and the first half, except for the overwhelming amount of religious b.s. but if I keep thinking about it, I might take it down to one star too.

Susana I do notunderstand how one who loves Austen cannot love the Brontes and so on. They are all great writers.
Austen had her own way of making a satire about the society of the time and so did the Brontes. Austen's Pride and Prejudice is a great master piece and it is because of thst her words followed through time.
I believe Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte and Wuthering Heights had their own poetic feeling to it. The way they depict men. There are people among the Bronte's lovers who think feminism was better perserved in Anne Bronte's novels for her men were goody two shoes.
In my opinion, they are amazing...but Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte are amazing.

Bobby Lajayjay I would like to clear something up-
With that whole last paragraph of John Rivers, I believed it wrapped up Jane's character development quiet nicely. This story is about Jane's journey from a disrespected little child, to an intelligent, independent adult. For her, maturity came as being kind to those were not to her, mainly because of her childhood experiences I believe.
At the end of the book, Jane was back with Mr. Rochester, happy with the one she loved. She'd found other relations and struck a womanly bond she'd been unknowingly craving. Everything had come full circle except when it came to Rivers-the one person who'd treated her with disrespect and saw her as property.
Considering Jane's nature and view of men, River's telling her she belonged to a cause she did not feel led to, was one of the biggest offenses to her character.
However, things weren't adequately patched up in the end between them, so I believe the last paragraph dedicated to him was a perfect ending. Here's the one man who she wasn't able to reconcile with, and in the end she's wishing him well, and that God provided for him. The words she writes reveals Jane's humble and forgiving nature more than anything.

Agnes My thoughts exactly!

Krissy I am one of those poor high school students to read this book. Me and a group read it so like 6 people and all of us did not like it. 4 of us didnt even finish the book and for me this will be my first book not finished. Its so weird but I did not like it and none of the people in my group did either. It was good in some spots but others were really dull and couldn't get into also she describes way to much! and lost my groups interest So I agree with you on how its not that great !

Whitney I actually found lots of parallels between this and Jane Austen's stories - and rather found Bronte's characters more believable in their situations. However, I completely agree that it felt contrived she should end up on her relations doorsteps. I also was displeased that the last lines were regarding St John Rivers, because I never developed any respect or fondness or empathy of any kind for his character, and Jane's time around him was her lowest in my eyes, submissive and self doubting. Also, it was too thickly riddled with religion for my personal taste. The batshit crazy wife in the attic was a nice touch though, if an overlooked plot point.

Cindy Van de velde Can you read???

Crystal OK, I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but HOW DO YOU NOT LOVE THIS BOOK??? The romance between Jane and Mr. Rochester is perfect and realistic, and I haven't the slightest idea what you would find hard to believe. Also, St. John did NOT play a SMALL part in Jane's life. He played a very big part. And then the Bronte vs. Austen. Charlotte Bronte is several hundred times better than Austen. Austen writes completely without emotion or passion, and much too cheery. Jane Eyre is realistic, it is perfect, it is amazing and beautiful and strong and powerful and moving and my favorite book of all time. AND HOW DID YOU NOT LIKE THESE CHARACTERS??? I mean, if you disliked St. John and Brocklehurst and the Reeds but liked mostly everyone else, that'd make sense. All of them are amazing, well-developed people. And where'd you get the idea that Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte's writing styles are in any way similar? The only thing I can agree with is that it is pretty coincidental that Jane ended up on the doorstep of the Rivers, but that's it.

Susana To be fairly honest, you can't read the Brontes with the idea you are reading Jane Austen. Although, Jane Austen and the Brontes intended to show more independent females, they had different styles. If you read Anne Bronte or Emily Bronte, you'll see they aren't that similar to their sister...and even less to Jane Austen. Actually, they weren't big fans of JA.
I don't really think the author's idea was not so much to focus on the romance,but to grasp the character's value as an independent women.

Lena Also Jane isn't dull, her actions are deliberately passive and restrained because she has to recoil in order to survive as a woman with a low to ambiguous social standing amongst very many powerful and wealthy men. If you read her internal monologues, she is one of the most complex and interesting characters! :)

Lena Also, St John's "small part" in the novel is one of the most crucial, defining aspects of Jane. The three models of religion in the novel are Rochester, Brocklehurst and St John. They help Jane to find her own version of spirituality that isn't bound in hypocrisy or rules. St John is key, because it is only after meeting him, she is able to reach economic independence and be in an equal partnership with Rochester. Though, it's not about romance. It's about her fulfilling her destiny on her own terms. So I think his presence at the end is fine.

Lena "nor did I buy the coincidence of her happening to arrive on the doorstep of the only relations she has in all of England" I think the point of this was that Jane was hungry for companionship, and when she is treated with warmth and kindness her need for other things in life such as romance continue to simmer, but aren't her main priority in life. Also, the mentioning of St John towards the end is supposed to be ambiguous, kind of implying her and St John have some unfinished/unresolved business. I didn't think that was weird at all, honestly. I read this in high school for the first time, and I honestly did not want to at first but I came to realise the character Jane in this book is one of the best written female characters in history.

cosmicEyre sorry, but what's the connection between Jane Eyre (and consequently, I assume, Charlotte Brontë) and Jane Austen? They were both female writers, that's all. So if you happen to find this book dull and disappointing because you like Jane Austen, I'm affraid you make no sense.

Goddess Of Blah I don't like any of her work. I find it really sexist, but I won't go into why. However, St. John Rivers is a foil against our ugly Mr Rochester.

North & South, Middlemarch and Persuasion are great books by female authors within the classics.

Join Goodreads

and meet your next favorite book!