The Meaning of Jane Eyre

As always, I’ve decided to start my post with a plot recap. This reading was certainly eventful, so I'll try to keep it to the main events. Major spoilers following...

Jane finds out that the Rivers —St. John, Mary, and Diana— who were so kind to take her in and provide her with work, are her cousins. Simultaneously, she learns that she has inherited 20,000 pounds and decides to split it four ways with her new family. St. John asks her to accompany him to India and marry him. She says no. After magically hearing Mr. Rochester’s voice call out her name, she decides to return to him. She finds Thornfield burnt to the ground by Bertha (who subsequently commits suicide). In this fire, Mr. Rochester was crippled and blinded. She finds him. They marry and have children.


This was a lot to take in. With so much happening, I took a step back and looked for similarities/differences between characters and then motifs. The most telling evidence for the meaning of the book, I think, came through the contrast between St. John and Jane.

St. John Eyre Rivers is a complicated man. He has devoted himself to God fully yet has fallen in love with Miss Oliver. This love would go against the values of the church and thus it is unacceptable. Even he does not accept it. He states, “I scorn the weakness. I know it is ignoble: a mere fever of the flesh: no I declare, the convulsion of the soul. That is just as fixed as a rock, firm set in the depths of a restless sea. Know to be what I am— a cold, hard man” (376).

St. John lives up to this self-description. His devotion to Christ filled this reading with discussions of divine purpose and proper Christian ways. However, Jane comes to realize that St. John’s flaw is that he cannot love whom he wishes to love. While I don’t think that Bronte is criticizing the church, I think she believes that it misinterprets what our divine purpose may be. Because he is so truly cold and hard, resolute towards being a good samaritan, “he lived only to aspire” (393). This is clearly a criticism. He has no enjoyment of life.

In comparison, by the end of the book, Jane is enjoying every single aspect of her life. She has found a family in the River and is overwhelmed with joy. “This was wealth indeed!— wealth to the heart!... This was a blessing, bright, vivid, and exhilarating;— not like the ponderous gift of gold” (386). I found the language of this revelation very interesting because it suggests that there is an alternate meaning to wealth. Rather than monetary aspirations, Jane enlightened me that there is much more wealth in family.

This is where I began to realize that what Jane was finding— what was absent in the conventions that dictated St. John’s actions— were morality and human connection. Moreover, I think the greater meaning of Jane Eyre revolves around finding love. And the greatest question of love in Jane Eyre, I quickly noted, was marriage.

Marriage

Four mentions of marriage come to mind; the first three are loveless.

1. Mr. Rochester’s suggested marriage to Blanche Ingram: Mr. Rochester’s distaste for Miss Ingram (and women of her type) makes it clear that this is a marriage of design, not love. Here, Brontë addresses marriages that result from the custom of bachelor’s marrying themselves to women of suitable wealth come to a certain age. She emphasizes there is zero substance in these relationships. They would be mutually unhappy.

2. Mr. Rochester’s marriage to Bertha Mason: This marriage is a clear failure of arranged marriages. Rochester and Bertha, placed together not by attraction but through their parents, grew apart instantly. There was deceit, disgust, and eventual imprisonment. This relationship didn’t scream to me “happy marriage”


3. St John’s proposal to Jane: Jane is clearly opposed to marrying St. John. While this is in large part due to her heart’s attachment to Mr. Rochester, other reasons for her refusal are evident. Jane realizes that “as his wife— at his side always, and always restrained, and always checked — forced to keep the fire of my nature continually low, to compel it to burn inwardly and never utter a cry, though the imprisoned flame consumed vital after vital — this would be unendurable” (408).

Brontë makes a clear point in this passage. Jane would be very unhappy in this marriage with St. John. In particular, this is because they do not love each other as mutuals. Jane could not be free or herself with St. John, which is very important to being in a loving relationship. Jane is so passionate about what being in an unloving relationship with St. John would be like, that I can’t help but believe that Brontë generalizes this the feelings of all women trapped in loveless marriages, bound to serve a male suitor.


4. Finally, Mr. Rochester and Jane (of course!). Their relationship is unconventional, yes. I’ll admit that it did take me some time to wrap my head around the idea that Jane was less than half his age. But, I think that was part of the point. Jane and Mr. Rochester’s love was real because (to quote Brontë’s preface) “conventionality is not morality.”

Jane is undoubtedly the happiest at the end when she is reunited with Mr. Rochester. She loves him so much that she is willing to serve him. However, they are still mutuals. Jane regards Mr. Rochester as an equal and vice versa. This brings a critical element to the marriage that none of the others had. Through the positivity of Jane’s freedom (which results from equal footing), Brontë praises the loving relationships that provide such opportunities to women.

“I know what it is to live entirely for and with what I love best on earth…. My husband’s life as fully as he is mine. No woman was ever nearer her mate than I am…” (452)

One thing that I enjoyed particularly about Jane Eyre is that love was not the only idea that Brontë touched upon. In her message about unconventional love, she contrasts the wealthy with the poor.

It is clear that penniless as Jane is, she is not any less valuable or undeserving of Mr. Rochester... or an education. When discussed in the beginning, Jane's attendance of Lowood emphasized her outstanding moral integrity and intelligence. However, similar points about education repeat themself in the end when Jane begins to teach the “children of the poor [who] were excluded from every hope of progress” (355).

“I must not forget that these coarse-clad little peasants are of flesh and blood as good as the scions of gentlest genealogy; and that the germs of native excellence, refinement, intelligence, kind feeling, are as likely to exist in their hearts as those of the best-born” (359).

This made me realize that Bronte is really sticking her neck out for greater accessibility of education to all children. She depicts Jane as noble, reforming education and bringing it to the lower classes. Most importantly, Jane acknowledges that these poor children have no less natural ability to learn than those with governesses. She reminds us that the children are flesh and blood, they are human and therefore there is a moral obligation to treat them with equality.

It shocks me that this minimal-compensation type work would not have been common because it comes at an economic cost to those with enough money to help. Then again, even in the 21st century there is a difference in primary education accessibility and quality based on affluence. Furthering the comparison, those with money are still, in my opinion, in a position to help.


There are many more subtle messages I received from Jane Eyre. However, these would contribute to my blog post only in length. I’m impressed by all who made it to the end of yet another lengthy blog post.

Thank you!

I hope you found following along as worthwhile as I found reading.