Happy International Women's Day!

[lokifan_import]

Happy International Women’s Day!

I encourage you all to make a contribution to Amnesty International, who fight for women’s rights around the world – for the prosecution of rapists, the protection of mothers and an end to female foeticide. (If anyone wants to suggest other charities aimed at helping women – especially ones related to education – please do so in comments.)

Since I’m thinking about Jane Eyre anyway (I’m about to do an essay on it) a question for you – do you consider Jane Eyre to be a feminist or proto-feminist book? What sort of statement do you think it makes for its time? If you do consider it feminist, I’d love to know why. And not just because I can use arguments for/against in my essay. ;) I don’t, truthfully; although its protagonist is a woman, and its status as the first English bildungsroman about a girl matters, I don’t see much feminist cred there. “Women feel just as men feel” was not a revolutionary statement to me: the ‘women feel, men analyse’ paradigm was well-entrenched by 1847.

...Heh. I am SUCH an English undergrad today!

Comments

[lokifan]

I can see that, absolutely; Gothic lit is my FAVOURITE EVER partly because of its monsters/Others, so I'm familiar with that. And obv the moment when Bertha rips the veil is pretty ragey. But I dunno... it might not have been published otherwise, but Bertha's death does a lot to negate that for me. Jane's rage is extinguished and she marries.

Heh, I wonder if you've also done the psychoanalytic-reading-of-JE class? Again it's a sort-of for me. Rochester's clearly deliberately brought down a bit to make them equals, but... It may just be the way it's phrased (particularly since it brings Biblical parallels to mind) but the fact that Jane becomes his "eyes" feels a bit 'oh look she has married and become subsumed'.

[vaysh11.livejournal.com]

I've read Jane Eyre years ago, sometime in the early 90ties - hm, now I wonder whether I actually read it in an English Lit class. :) But The Mad Woman in the Attic by Susan Gubar and Sandra Gilbert has been one of the seminal texts of feminist literary criticism. I was graduating in history, using works of literature as historical sources, and their argument was a must-read. I am sure it is out-dated now, but back then, their book was a first step away from a very predictably 20th century-feminist interpretation of 19th century women's literature.

Not sure if it's so easy to interpret the ending of Jane Eyre as simply reinforcing gender stereotypes of the 19th century. Women back then believed very strongly in "separate but equal", with each sex having their specific qualities and their specific roles to fulfil - as you surely know. For me it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to look for our feminist ideals in 19th century books and judge them by standards that are ours today. I am more interested in the ways Charlotte Bronte could express something as a writer and a woman that her age barely had the words and concepts for. Are you familiar with the work of historian Carrol Smith-Rosenberg? Her writings were a revelation to me. Good luck on your paper!