Last year, the National Center for the Performing Arts had two runs of Jane Eyre. It dawned on me this tale really strikes home today. Jane is not beautiful, she is not rich, the man who is willing to marry her has a castle. Yet she walks away from the wedding because he has a wife.
Now, contrast it with Dwelling Narrowness, a recent TV show so popular it was banned - a woman uses her beauty to become a concubine for the sole purpose of getting a decent apartment. What would she think of Jane Eyre? Nuts, probably. Edward Rochester could have got a full house of concubines.
You see, Jane Eyre is poignant because it is a perfect counterpoint to Dwelling Narrowness and the harsh reality it depicts. In both Avatar and Jane Eyre, you can detect the real issues that grip China - an emerging middle-class, made up of those in their late 20s and early 30s, blocked out from affordable housing, and an army of property owners in a losing battle against developers and the interests they represent. More irony: The latter group is robbed so that more houses can be built and the former gourp has to buy them at prices so high they are essentially robbed, for life.
With house prices skyrocketing across the country, housing is such a big problem that even a domestic release was reinterpreted through this prism. The Founding of a Republic, an epic made to celebrate the 60th anniversary of New China, was ruthlessly dissected by irreverent young writer Han Han. He pointed out that Madame Soong Ching-ling's support of the Communist Party hinged on her ability to retain her mansion in downtown Shanghai, a point partly supported by a line in the movie that a Communist leader said she could keep her house.
Book review:"Becoming Jane Eyre," by Sheila Kohler, is a tale of the creation of Charlotte Bronte's 1847 novel, "Jane Eyre."
The story begins with Bronte sitting vigil by her father's sickbed. She uses the long, silent hours to craft an amalgam of experience and imagination, dreams and disappointments, which becomes "Jane Eyre."
Kohler also crafts an amalgam of fact and imagination. In her story, Bronte is beset - with financial concerns, with an addicted sibling and with the quest for a distant parent's affection.
"Jane Eyre" won acclaim for its unstudied tone; Kohler's story pays homage to its predecessor in atmosphere and cadence, but the lack of artifice -
of structure - here is not without cost.
A: She was a voice and a sensibility - a kind of young everywoman, I believed, at least.more Moore
Q: Did you find it easy to sustain her voice?
A: Well, sustaining her voice, when she is the narrator, is simply writing the novel. And, of course, as with all novels there were good days and bad days. But mostly, once I got going, I felt I knew her pretty well and enjoyed spending time with her. I felt sad to leave her at the end, frankly.
Q: The nanny is a stock literary figure. Were you conscious of the pitfalls in creating such a heroine?
A: There are pitfalls? Uh-oh. Now you tell me! I think the nanny/governess is a kind of tried and true narrative device. And, of course, I wanted to allude to “Jane Eyre’’ a little bit while writing this. So I feel I was operating in a kind of tradition, rather than employing a stock character.
more here
Jane Eyre: ...A light shone through the keyhole and from under the door; a profound stillness pervaded the vicinity. Coming near, I found the door slightly ajar; probably to admit some fresh air into the close abode of sickness. I put it back and looked in. My eye sought Helen, and feared to find death. Close by Miss Temple's bed, and half covered with its white curtains, there stood a little crib. I saw the outline of a form under the clothes, but the face was hid by the hangings. I advanced; then paused by the crib side: my hand was on the curtain, but I preferred speaking before I withdrew it. I still recoiled at the dread of seeing a corpse.

What's so right about Wilson's Jane and Toby Stephens' virile, tormented Rochester is that their mutual erotic charge is matched by the teasing, bantering rapport of intellectual equals.
...He says 'if "Jane Eyre" be the production of a woman - she must be a woman unsexed.'
In that case the book is an unredeemed error and should be unreservedly condemned. 'Jane Eyre' is a woman's autobiography - by a woman it is professedly written - if it is written as no womn would write - condemn it - with spirit and decision - as it is bad - but do not first eulogise and then detract. I am reminded of the 'Economist.' The literary critic of that paper praised the book if written by a man - and pronounced it 'odious' if the work of a woman.
To such critics I would say - 'To you I am neither Man nor Woman - I come before you as an Author only - it is the sole standard by which you have a right to judge me - the sole ground on which I accept your judgment.'

The title of this post is a query seen more and more frequently from visitors to this web site. Most likely they are not asking about our upcoming theatre production of Jane Eyre but rather the planned movie starring Ellen Page, which was reported by the Bronte Blog and others back last May and there's been hardly a peep about it since then.No mockery in this world ever sounds to me so hollow as that of being told to cultivate happiness. What does such advice mean? Happiness is not a potato.- from Charlotte Bronte's Villette
Accept my congratulations on the arrival of the 'New Year' every succeeding day of which will I trust find you wiser and better in the true sense of those much-used words. The first day of January always presents to my mind a train of very solemn and important reflections and a question more easily asked than answered frequently occurs viz: How have I improved the past year and with good intentions do I view the dawn of its successor? these my dearest Ellen are weighty considerations which (young as we are) neither you nor I can too deeply or too seriously ponder...
He pouts, broods and beats his way into our hearts, riding around the moors in leather boots and furry coats, looking ripe for rescue by our Jane.
He is clever, tortured and besotted, and Jane follows him around the house and calls him 'Sir' and 'Master' in scenes which, if I were not so well bred, I would consider rude.
A typical one goes like this: "You examine me, Miss Eyre," said he. "Do you find me handsome?" Jane has a ponder and comes back (no pushover she): "No, Sir".
It's a struggle, a battle, an epic; and when he finally declares his love to her (after naughtily pretending he was going to marry someone else), a tree gets struck by lightning in the garden. (This doesn't happen in my love-life, although I dearly wish it would). But ? and most people forget this ? Jane Eyre is a fantasy too rich for one hero. Charlotte wrote us two.
After she leaves Thornfield (to nearly die of exposure), she meets St John Rivers, who is later revealed to be her cousin. (In some ways, Jane Eyre is a lot like Dynasty.)
St John is a prim, sexy blond. (She probably cut a third hero, a red-head this time, from an early draft.) And, sometimes - particularly on winter Sunday afternoons - I find him more beguiling even than Rochester.
St John is a priest - a "cold hard man" he tells Jane - but he falls for Jane like an orange rolling off a fridge. She fancies him, too, watching him admire a picture of a beautiful girl and drooling: "He breathed low and fast; I stood silent."
That's two-love to lonely Miss Bronte. How spoilt she was in her head. But it's back to Rochester and his marvellous flaws, and the beautiful cry: "Reader," - say it with me - "I married him." Aaah.
That is when I collapse prostrate on the floor, like a piece of toast waiting for some Rochester-flavoured jam.
In Rochester, Charlotte wrote a hero no real man can ever touch. Jane Eyre should be subtitled Revenge Of The Parson's Daughter because she spoilt real love for us all.
He is the man in every film, book or TV series you ever wanted; the dark darling you can save from himself. Plus Thorn-field would be fab to redecorate.
And Jane is so ordinary, "poor, obscure, plain and little", that anyone could get him. He chucks the glamourous beauty Blanche for Jane. He falls, like a god, into our laps.
What about Jane Austen, you may squeak. What about Pride And Prejudice? Shaddap is my answer. Charlotte herself sneered that Jane Austen "ruffles her readers with nothing vehement" (ouch!) and tidy Miss Austen is a pastel to Bronte's lustrous crimson.
She's John Lewis to Charlotte's Selfridges. Who wants to hear about the city of Bath when you can have the wilds of Yorkshire? Who wants drippy Darcy ? a man so wet you could do backstroke in him ? when you can have Rochester and Rivers?
So Jane Eyre isn't the first book in the canon of love-starved fantasy. It is the canon. The only thing I can say against it is that it is indirectly responsible for Dame Barbara Cartland getting published.