![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
and on to the next Bronte.
Things I knew about Jane Eyre before I read it:
Things I didn't know but saw coming about a thousand words before Jane did
All in all, I liked it (and now I will have less guilt about going to see the movie, which I think I will do on Saturday). But I did continue to think, as I thought after the first half-dozen chapters, that it was All A Bit Much. Sign of the times, I suppose? Also, I keep hearing things about this being all full of the feminism, and I have to say I'm not sure I saw it?, but maybe I'm looking for the wrong things. I did applaud Jane's refusal to marry Rivers because she knew he didn't actually love her; but her general doormattery, refusal to marry Rivers notwithstanding, made it hard for me to see her as a feminist icon. (Okay, I also see where she was more satisfied with Rochester when she could be of some practical use in the relationship instead of just living off his millions. So okay: two things.)
I've now read one chapter of Wuthering Heights, and so far I think the narrator is even more of a jackass than he wants us to believe Heathcliff is. Are we supposed to find Lockwood sympathetic at all?
- who was living in the attic
- fire bad
- "Reader, I married him."
Things I didn't know but saw coming about a thousand words before Jane did
- that Rochester was the gypsy fortune-teller
- that the Rivers kids were Jane's long-lost cousins
All in all, I liked it (and now I will have less guilt about going to see the movie, which I think I will do on Saturday). But I did continue to think, as I thought after the first half-dozen chapters, that it was All A Bit Much. Sign of the times, I suppose? Also, I keep hearing things about this being all full of the feminism, and I have to say I'm not sure I saw it?, but maybe I'm looking for the wrong things. I did applaud Jane's refusal to marry Rivers because she knew he didn't actually love her; but her general doormattery, refusal to marry Rivers notwithstanding, made it hard for me to see her as a feminist icon. (Okay, I also see where she was more satisfied with Rochester when she could be of some practical use in the relationship instead of just living off his millions. So okay: two things.)
I've now read one chapter of Wuthering Heights, and so far I think the narrator is even more of a jackass than he wants us to believe Heathcliff is. Are we supposed to find Lockwood sympathetic at all?
no subject
Not AFAIK - the man is presented as an intensely repressed snob and more or less a laughing stock. Fortunately his narration gives way very soon to that of Nelly, who is awesome.
I love Wuthering Heights.