emma's Reviews > Jane Eyre
Jane Eyre
by
by

emma's review
bookshelves: owned, favorites-2016, classics, recommend, beautifully-written, slump-worthy, non-ya, school, reviewed, gorgeous-covers, 5-stars, reread
Apr 30, 2015
bookshelves: owned, favorites-2016, classics, recommend, beautifully-written, slump-worthy, non-ya, school, reviewed, gorgeous-covers, 5-stars, reread
Read 2 times. Last read September 12, 2018.
I am a very pretentious person.
I try to seem ¡°hip¡± and ¡°cool¡± and ¡°relatable¡± and ¡°down with the teens¡± - and of course I totally am all of those things - but also I have my tendencies toward pretension. It¡¯s who I am. Just last night I shuddered at the idea of popular music, like some kind of eight-hundred-year-old gremlin.
I am not proud of this side of me, but it¡¯s who I am. And also it is important background information for you, dear Reader, going into this review. (That direct address to you as an audience member was me emulating this book, not an example of my pretension. Or was it???)
Anyway. It¡¯s important that you know my capacity to be pretentious so that I can make this statement:
I don¡¯t get how any reader can say they don¡¯t like classics.
Oof. A doozy, right? Aren¡¯t you glad I warned you? Now you know that that wasn¡¯t just a one-off of self-serious condescension but rather a pattern of my personality and oh sh*t actually my explanation probably made the whole thing a million times worse. Now I¡¯ve painted my insufferability as consistent.
Come back, everyone!!!! Let me explain!
What I need to explain is that this book is excellent, and also a classic. It is very very old but sometimes old stuff is still worth it! (I should know. I have the mannerisms of the type of grumpy old man that gets endearingly profiled in Scandinavian bestsellers.)
This is not the classic I would recommend that someone start with if they¡¯re looking to get into the genre. It is very, very slow, and very wordy, and the language takes some settling in. But also this book is a literal gem.
It was published in 19th century England, which is no one¡¯s idea of Progressive Central. But this book is jarringly feminist when the constraints it (and Jane) were working in are taken into account. Jane is an independent woman, and this book from eighteen freakin¡¯ forty-seven tells her story.
Now, I love Jane Austen books as much as the next girl (if the next girl is pretty damn obsessed with Jane Austen), but that¡¯s something not even all her books can say.
Here¡¯s the thing about this book: I love nineteenth century fiction (or what I¡¯ve read of it), but even if you didn¡¯t you¡¯d probably love this book. So much of this is unique, by the standards of then but also even the standards of today. It¡¯s a romance, yes, which: extremely normal. But it¡¯s a romance between two characters who are not conventionally beautiful, which is unbelievably rare.
It¡¯s also not a romance that acts as basically the sole option for its female character. I love Pride & Prejudice, and I of course think Lizzie Bennet is a feminist (and awesome) character, but there¡¯s no way for that book to end, really, that doesn¡¯t include marriage for her. Three of the five Bennet sisters get married over the course of that book. It¡¯s either that or old maid status, baby.
But not lil Jane Eyre. She does not allow marriage to be the only prospect for her!! She goes away and makes a life for herself and then decides whether she wants to follow that path. We don¡¯t even see that in every 21st century romance.
Plus, Jane is an excellent character, and of a type we RARELY see. She¡¯s serious and upstanding and smart and moral. She has a strong mind and she doesn¡¯t shy away from that. She lacks the requisite features of today¡¯s female subjects of romance: the quirkiness or the humor or the adorkable way she trips and falls/spills coffee/etc. She also lacks the nineteenth-century version of a lot of those traits. And it is so goddamn refreshing I can¡¯t even tell you.
And on top of all that, the language in this book is so gorgeous I want the whole manuscript tattooed on me.
Which would be wild, because this is about a million pages long. And speaking of, yes, it is very slow and hard to get into and basically you have to adjust to a whole new reading experience. So I wouldn¡¯t recommend starting off your nineteenth century fiction binge with this book.
But I would recommend getting into nineteenth century fiction solely for the purpose of reading this book.
Bottom line: IT¡¯S JUST SO DAMN GOOD, YOU GUYS.
-------------
pre-review
hey um...i love this book so stupid much???
if you've got a free few hours over the course of the next few months i HIGHLY recommend rereading this book at a snail's pace. worked out for me very well.
i should probably shout about my adoration of this book for several pages so. full review 2 come
I try to seem ¡°hip¡± and ¡°cool¡± and ¡°relatable¡± and ¡°down with the teens¡± - and of course I totally am all of those things - but also I have my tendencies toward pretension. It¡¯s who I am. Just last night I shuddered at the idea of popular music, like some kind of eight-hundred-year-old gremlin.
I am not proud of this side of me, but it¡¯s who I am. And also it is important background information for you, dear Reader, going into this review. (That direct address to you as an audience member was me emulating this book, not an example of my pretension. Or was it???)
Anyway. It¡¯s important that you know my capacity to be pretentious so that I can make this statement:
I don¡¯t get how any reader can say they don¡¯t like classics.
Oof. A doozy, right? Aren¡¯t you glad I warned you? Now you know that that wasn¡¯t just a one-off of self-serious condescension but rather a pattern of my personality and oh sh*t actually my explanation probably made the whole thing a million times worse. Now I¡¯ve painted my insufferability as consistent.
Come back, everyone!!!! Let me explain!
What I need to explain is that this book is excellent, and also a classic. It is very very old but sometimes old stuff is still worth it! (I should know. I have the mannerisms of the type of grumpy old man that gets endearingly profiled in Scandinavian bestsellers.)
This is not the classic I would recommend that someone start with if they¡¯re looking to get into the genre. It is very, very slow, and very wordy, and the language takes some settling in. But also this book is a literal gem.
It was published in 19th century England, which is no one¡¯s idea of Progressive Central. But this book is jarringly feminist when the constraints it (and Jane) were working in are taken into account. Jane is an independent woman, and this book from eighteen freakin¡¯ forty-seven tells her story.
Now, I love Jane Austen books as much as the next girl (if the next girl is pretty damn obsessed with Jane Austen), but that¡¯s something not even all her books can say.
Here¡¯s the thing about this book: I love nineteenth century fiction (or what I¡¯ve read of it), but even if you didn¡¯t you¡¯d probably love this book. So much of this is unique, by the standards of then but also even the standards of today. It¡¯s a romance, yes, which: extremely normal. But it¡¯s a romance between two characters who are not conventionally beautiful, which is unbelievably rare.
It¡¯s also not a romance that acts as basically the sole option for its female character. I love Pride & Prejudice, and I of course think Lizzie Bennet is a feminist (and awesome) character, but there¡¯s no way for that book to end, really, that doesn¡¯t include marriage for her. Three of the five Bennet sisters get married over the course of that book. It¡¯s either that or old maid status, baby.
But not lil Jane Eyre. She does not allow marriage to be the only prospect for her!! She goes away and makes a life for herself and then decides whether she wants to follow that path. We don¡¯t even see that in every 21st century romance.
Plus, Jane is an excellent character, and of a type we RARELY see. She¡¯s serious and upstanding and smart and moral. She has a strong mind and she doesn¡¯t shy away from that. She lacks the requisite features of today¡¯s female subjects of romance: the quirkiness or the humor or the adorkable way she trips and falls/spills coffee/etc. She also lacks the nineteenth-century version of a lot of those traits. And it is so goddamn refreshing I can¡¯t even tell you.
And on top of all that, the language in this book is so gorgeous I want the whole manuscript tattooed on me.
Which would be wild, because this is about a million pages long. And speaking of, yes, it is very slow and hard to get into and basically you have to adjust to a whole new reading experience. So I wouldn¡¯t recommend starting off your nineteenth century fiction binge with this book.
But I would recommend getting into nineteenth century fiction solely for the purpose of reading this book.
Bottom line: IT¡¯S JUST SO DAMN GOOD, YOU GUYS.
-------------
pre-review
hey um...i love this book so stupid much???
if you've got a free few hours over the course of the next few months i HIGHLY recommend rereading this book at a snail's pace. worked out for me very well.
i should probably shout about my adoration of this book for several pages so. full review 2 come
1393 likes · Like
?
flag
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Jane Eyre.
Sign In ?
Quotes emma Liked
Reading Progress
April 30, 2015
– Shelved
February 12, 2016
–
Started Reading
February 14, 2016
–
55.71%
"oh how i wish i didn't know the ending. as is, there's no better book to read on valentine's day!"
page
322
February 15, 2016
–
Finished Reading
Started Reading
September 12, 2018
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-50 of 102 (102 new)
message 1:
by
Jill
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Feb 15, 2016 01:01PM

reply
|
flag

it's definitely slow going. i reread it over the course of a couple months which was honestly pretty ideal


well put

bizarre but good deal at least!

books shouldn't be allowed to be as good as this one is. it's not fair to the others

books shouldn't be allowed to be as good as this one is. it's not fair to the others"
emma wrote: "s.penkevich wrote: "YES"
books shouldn't be allowed to be as good as this one is. it's not fair to the others"
Really true. As years pass, I think back on this book more and more. It's eternal for sure, I may need to revisit it again.

books shouldn't be allowed to be as good as this one is. it's not fair to the others"
emma wrote: "s.penkevich wrote: "YES"
books shouldn't be allowed to be..."
i reread it very slowly in bits and pieces over a few months and it was really an excellent experience. 10/10 would recommend


Pride & Prejudice can be a good place to start, but still rocky - i think nineteenth-century children's books, like Alice's Adventures in Wonderland or Little Women, can be a great stepping stone. and also they are soso fun so it's a win win

lovelovelove this! the first time i read this i read it mostly in one day b/c it was just that good. which is why it was extra nice to take my sweet sweet time this time around


that's very cool for you


Dracula is great. Sherlock Holmes is great. Emily Dickinson and Walt Whitman are wonderful poets if you're into that. lotta great fairytale-y stuff happening with Hans Christian Andersen and the Brothers Grimm. and then obviously i lovelovelove alice's adventures in wonderland

AGREEAGREEAGREE. totally reread it i'm so happy i did


she rules!

you're right and you should say it!!!



it's cry worthy

RUN WITH THAT FEELING!

i can't think of a reason myself!




As an aside, I remember being endlessly amused by the inclusion of the name ¡°St. John¡± (to say nothing of ¡°Bertha¡±), and by its actual pronunciation¡ And if memory serves, that character was kinda douchey¡

i agree with you and am also pleased as punch to be passing as not pretentious

this could single-handedly be my cause of death.

totally!

lmao "sinjin" was crazy for real! i read the bulk of this in a day as a procrastinated assigned reading as well and was stunned by how much i liked it. such a goodie