A Passionate Adaptation of a Classic Novel”

” A passionate adaptation of a classic novel”

Jane Eyre: From a politically charged novel, to a passionate love story

En passionerad version av en klassisk roman Jane Eyre: Från en politiskt laddad roman, till en passionerad kärlekshistoria

Therese Kruse

Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap English 15HP Supervisor Johan Wijkmark Examiner Anna Swärdh 2016-12-03

Abstract

The novel Jane Eyre, written by Charlotte Brontë, is very appreciated and famous. It has been adapted several times into different media, such as films, musicals and theatres. In this essay I will compare the novel with Cary Joji Fukunaga’s film adaption from 2011. I will compare the characters Jane Eyre and Mr. Rochester and examine how they are portrayed, and I will also discuss the difference between Mr. Brocklehurst in the novel and in the film. I argue that the characters and some of the situations are adjusted to fit a modern audience. I also argue that the film is a romanticized, de-politicized version of the novel. Many of Jane’s reflections upon life, love, class, gender and so on are less developed in the film and the film is more of a love story than a story about a young woman’s life in the Victorian era.

1 The Victorian Era was a brilliant era for literature, and many of today’s most famous novels were written at that point in time. More and more female authors wrote novels and were published, although they often needed to use pseudonyms to hide their true identity and their true gender. The general view on women in the Victorian Era did not allow women to write, or at least not to expect their work to be as appreciated and famous as men’s work could be. That is why the three Brontë sisters – Charlotte, Anne and Emily, differ from other authors. They wrote several novels hidden behind pseudonyms and their work came to play a very important role for literature, at that time as well as ever since. They were admired for their honesty, and they often wrote about women in society from different angles. Some people regard their work as the first feminist novels.

In this essay I will focus on the very famous and beloved novel Jane Eyre, written by Charlotte Brontë, the eldest of the three sisters. Charlotte Brontë based what she wrote on her own, and her sisters’, experiences and lives, and this was also the case in the writing of Jane Eyre. There are several similarities between Charlotte Brontë and the main character Jane Eyre. To mention a few, they both attended a school for girls, as well as worked as teachers and governesses (Teachman xiii). That is why many assume that Charlotte Brontë based the novel on her own life. The novel is a fictional autobiography about Jane, a woman in the Victorian Era. Jane grows up as an orphan girl, who lives with her Aunt Reed that is married into the family. Jane was treated badly by her cousins and by her aunt through her childhood, and was early on sent to a charity school for girls. She stayed there for eight years before she starts to work as a governess at Thornfield Hall. Mr. Rochester is the head of Thornfield Hall and it is there that she meets him and falls in love with him. The novel is about romance, passion, gender, class, morals and politics. It is considered a romantic or gothic novel since it contains some horror and gothic elements. The main character struggles through life with a wish to reach independency and equality to other members of society. She needs to live a life that she is satisfied with.

Over the years, Jane Eyre has been adapted into various media several times. There are many film adaptations, radio shows, plays and musicals that interpret the novel. It has also inspired many other authors in their writing and is one of the most appreciated novels that have ever been written. The latest film adaptation is made by Focus Features in 2011. It is directed by Cary Fukunaga, with a screenplay by Moira Buffini. The main characters, Jane and Mr. Rochester, are played by Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender. The aim with this essay is to compare the original novel and the film adaptation from 2011 with each other to show how they differ in certain key respects. I will make a comparison between the two main characters Jane and Mr. Rochester to demonstrate how their characters have changed and been adjusted from the novel to the film. More specifically, I will examine how the film’s selection of material as well as casting and the changing of minor characters are all aspects that contributed to the altered characterization of the main characters. Since the novel not only is about love and passion, but also about politics and morals, I will look closer at those issues as well and show how 1 these issues are given less emphasis in the film. With a basis in this comparison, I will argue that the film offers a modernized and romanticized version of the story whose focus is more on love and passion. My suggestion is that this is the result of the film being adjusted to a modern and contemporary audience.

Before I move on to the main argument, it is important to explain the role of women in the early 19th century. When Charlotte Brontë wrote Jane Eyre, men and women had very different positions and options in life from today. Debra Teachman mentions a few examples: Women were supposed to be subordinate to men and they were expected to obey them, both in the laws of nature and in the laws of God. They were not allowed to own their own property, to be in charge of their own money if in a marriage and they were legally possessions of their husbands. Men were considered to know what was best for their women, both in families and for hired women (Teachman, 14). Today this is something that many women in the Western world cannot relate to. There still exists a hierarchy and we still have not attained total equality between women and men, but today women can have what profession they want, they can choose whether they want to get married or not and for what reasons, they can own their own money and their own property without men having a legal right to decide over them. Marriages today in the Western world are not made for practical reasons, but more often of love. It is hard to imagine a world where women had no rights at all, and their only choice was to marry someone rich or to work for someone rich. In the novel, the main character, Jane, deals with several of issues that we might not relate to today. She is an orphan girl which provides her with very few and limited options in life. She has no relatives or other people to rely on. Throughout the whole novel there are male characters that try to take charge over her life and to decide for her. Even though some of them are not actually evil, they believe that they have the right to do so. This is of much importance in the novel, though it is downplayed in the film. I will start this analysis by making a character comparison between the novel Jane Eyre and the film Jane Eyre.

In the novel, Jane Eyre has a strong personality and provides many reflections about life and her role in society. She thinks about how her being a woman prevents her from living her dreams, even prevents her to have dreams at all. To Jane, independency is very important and she needs to be able to stand on her own and to take care of herself without being dependent on someone else. When she was young, she was dependent on her aunt since her parents were dead. She was reminded of this early in her childhood, when her elder cousin John, cognizant of the reigning social order, treated her as if she was worth nothing because of Jane’s need for others to help her survive. In one situation, he tells her, “You are a dependent, mama says; you have no money, your father left you none; you ought to beg, and not to live here with gentlemen’s children like us, and eat the same meals that we do, and wear clothes at our mama’s expense” (JE, 5). Even though Jane is only a child, she does not accept this behaviour and she hits John back. As a result, she is locked up and punished. This scene is kept in the film version, which 2 shows the audience early on that Jane is not acting the way she is expected to considering the circumstances, that she is dependent and not considered as a family member. But the older Jane becomes, the less of this powerful personality is kept in the film.

The following quote is an example of Jane’s thoughts in the novel that are lost in the film. This speech is considered to be the most openly feminist speech in the novel (Brennan, 50).

Women are supposed to be very calm generally: but women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties, and a field for their efforts as much as their brothers do; they suffer from too rigid a constraint, too absolute a stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow-creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making pudding and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano and embroidering bags. It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for their sex. (JE, 110)

This is one example of Jane’s political reflections on the role of women in society that are not included in the film, and the audience does not see this side of her. There is one scene in the film that might be seen as a substitute to this speech, however. Jane is standing at Thornfield, looking through a window. She tells Mrs. Fairfax that she feels limited because of her sex, that she wants action in her life just as men have. This scene is the only scene in the film that actually shows how Jane feels about her sex, but it is quite downplayed considering the strength in the speech above.

It is also clearly stated in the novel that Jane is searching for something, that she cannot stay in one place and be there forever without the possibility to develop. She needs development, and she longs for something more when she decides to leave Lowood: “And now I felt that is was not enough: I tired of the routine of eight years in one afternoon. I desired liberty; for liberty I gasped; for liberty I uttered a prayer; it seemed scattered on the wind faintly blowing” (JE, 84). While this shows the reader how Jane desperately wishes for something else to happen, even though she is aware that she is limited and therefore does not at all have high expectations, it is not mentioned in the film at all. Her feelings about leaving Lowood are left out, in fact you only see pupils saying farewell to her before the film continues with her moving to Thornfield. This might be a result of the narration in the film; it is narrated without any voice-over or anything else that could express Jane’s feelings to the audience. It can also be a result of the adaptation; Jane’s personality is downplayed because her thoughts are not of main importance for the story. In the novel those thoughts have a very central role and to leave them out contributes to a downplayed version of the part of Jane’s character that is political.

As mentioned above, Jane’s wish for equality, independency and her strong morals do have a role in the film as well, but it is not the foundation of it. For instance, it is included in the film that Jane questions Mrs. Fairfax when she tells her to go and change dresses just because Mr. Rochester has arrived to Thornfield. The fact that she questions this makes clear that she cannot understand why the arrival of 3

Mr. Rochester has something to do with her clothing, and that is questioning the hierarchy. Another example of a conversation that is kept where Jane expresses her feelings is when she believes that Mr. Rochester is about to marry Miss Ingram:

Do you think I can stay and become nothing to you? Do you think I am an automaton? -a machine without feelings? […] Do you think, because I am poor, obscure, plain, and little, I am soulless and heartless? You think wrong! -I have as much as soul as you, -and full as much a heart! And if God had gifted me with some beauty, and much wealth, I should have made it as hard for you to leave me, as it is now for me to leave you. […] It is my spirit that addresses your spirit, just as if both had passed through the grave, and we stood at God’s feet, equal, as we are! (JE, 256)

This part is included in the film and that problematizes for example the meaning of beauty and looks even if it is to a small extent compared to novel. In the novel Jane often feels that she is treated unfairly because of her looks. Jane believes that it would have been harder for Mr. Rochester to leave her if she had been beautiful. She also connects “soulless” and “heartless” with poor, obscure, plain and little. It also shows how Jane thinks that at God’s feet they are equals, regardless of other perspectives. This is something Jane says while she is upset, which makes it passionate and honest. It is also included how Jane defends her rights: “I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free human being with an independent will; which I now exert to leave you” (JE, 256). Jane is not married, and she is not dependent on someone else, which is why she feels that she is free and has nothing that forces her to stay if she does not want to.

Another symbolic event in the novel is the 20,000 pounds that Jane inherits from an unknown relative. The money has symbolic meaning for Jane’s character in the novel, but not as much in the film. When she finds out about the money she is staying with the Rivers family that helps her after her escape from Mr. Rochester. In the novel, she decides to share her money with the three members of the Rivers family, because of their actual kinship she believes that they are just as entitled to the money as she is. In the film she shares the money mostly to show them how thankful she is that they helped her when she was in need. Both situations show how Jane is fair and that she is generous and has strong morals, but their meaning is not the same. In the film it helps her to “pay back” to the Rivers family, but there is not much more to it. In the novel, the money realizes Jane’s wish for independency and equality to others. It is symbolic for her struggle; she is now finally free. In the film the money has no significant meaning. It does not show the audience how the money makes Jane independent and free. For example, in the ending of the novel Jane tells Mr. Rochester that she is now independent “I told you, I am independent, sir, as well as rich: I am my own mistress” (JE, 444).

The proposal that Jane receives from St. John Rivers is also a part that is included in the film, but yet again less developed when it comes to Jane’s character’s reaction, and much of that is because of the

4 loss of Jane’s own reflections about it. She rejects his proposal and tells St. John that she can go with him to India, but only if she can go as a free woman. She refuses to marry him because there are no loving feelings between them, and marriage to Jane is more than duty. She tells him to abandon his idea, and that marrying him would kill her. Jane is very honest and she does not see him as someone that she needs to obey or be subordinate to. In the novel, Jane has many reflections about the proposal and the journey to India: “If I join St. John, I abandon myself: If I go to India, I go to premature death” (JE, 411). She cannot accept that their marriage would be on principle, that he would never love her as a husband. Jane is tempted to go with him, but she cannot do that because it would mean she would surrender herself to him and live with someone who does not love her the way she was loved by Mr. Rochester.

Jane has a very objective way to handle her rivals. She has strong morals and always defends the one who deserves to be defended. In the novel when Mr. Rochester admits that he has been manipulating Miss Ingram Jane asks him, “Did you think nothing of Miss Ingram’s feelings, sir!” (JE, 265). Even though Jane might not think well of Miss Ingram, she still cares enough to point out Mr. Rochester’s selfishness. Jane even defends Bertha when Mr. Rochester speaks ill of her: “You are inexorable for that unfortunate lady: you speak of her with hate – with vindictive antipathy. It is cruel – she cannot help being mad” (JE, 305). In that moment, Jane both disagrees with Mr. Rochester – who is her master and who was supposed to be her husband – and she also defends her rival because of moral reasons. Jane is not selfish at all; she is always trying to be fair to the people around her. This is important to the story, but it follows the pattern and is downplayed and marginalized in the film. The film has much more focus on passion and love, and it does not portray Jane as a proto-feminist who fights for justice. Because of the parts that are changed, abbreviated or less developed, I can make the conclusion that Jane’s character still has some of the key elements of the original character, but is much less developed in the film. The main focus is not on Jane and her character’s morals and political feelings, but more on love and passion between Jane and Mr. Rochester. Her character is not coming through as strongly in the film as in the novel.

The headmaster of the school that Jane is sent to is the first male adult appearance in the novel and in the film that is taking advantage of his position and that is using his power in a terrible manner. I believe his character to be important to the story because of the fact that he is the first appearance and also important because of the overall impression of the society that Jane lives in. In the novel, his first appearance starts with him examining little Jane with his eyes and asks Jane’s aunt, “Her size is small: what is her age?” (JE, 27). He does not speak to her, but about her. In the film, he at least speaks directly to her and asks her, “Do you know, Jane, where the wicked go after death?” He is intimidating and threatening to Jane, but she is, already at that young age, honest with him from the beginning. Mr. Brocklehurst is economically in charge over Lowood, which is the name of the school that Jane attends. 5

Mr. Brocklehurst is the person who provides the girls with supplies, such as clothes, food, a place to stay, school material and other things that are needed. He does not give them anything more than what is necessary. In the film, some of Mr. Brocklehurst’s terrible actions are left out. For example, it is not included how he sees it as his mission to “[…] mortify in these girls the lusts of their flesh; to teach them to clothe themselves with shamefacedness and sobriety, not with braided hair and costly apparel […]” (JE, 62). He demands that the girls have to cut their curly hair off. Mrs. Temple tells him that their hair is curly by nature, but he answers, “Naturally! Yes, but we are not to conform to nature: I wish these girls to be the children of Grace: and why the abundance? I have again and again intimidated that I desire the hair to be arranged closely, modestly, plainly. Miss Temple, that girl’s hair must be cut off entirely” (JE, 61). Nothing of this is kept in the film, and in some way the start of Jane’s experiences of men is left out. The film leaves out this part that clearly shows how exposed the girls are to patriarchy and to men that decide everything for them, that one man could decide exactly everything for them and they had nothing to do about it. Mr. Brocklehurst’s part in the film is much smaller, and even though he is evil – he is not as evil as in the novel. It is included how he calls Jane a liar in front of everyone, and demands the rest of the pupils to exclude her from every activity. But that is only to Jane, the novel shows how he is being rude and unfair to the other girls as well. To not include this in the film might leave out a part that is important in order to keep the political issues central.

The next character I will analyse is the second main character, Mr. Rochester. His background is the same in the novel and in the film, but his looks and his traits are different. Mr. Rochester is the master of Thornfield Hall. He is in his mid-30s, which means that he is nearly 20 years older than Jane. He is described as a man with “a dark face, with stern features and a heavy brow” (JE, 113). It is mentioned several times that Mr. Rochester is not a good-looking man, based on what is generally considered as beauty. In the film, however, Mr. Rochester is not ugly, rather quite handsome. It is so much of a difference that the director of the film, Cary Fukunaga, was even asked about the reason why in an interview. His answer to the question was simply that he thinks of beauty as something subjective and therefore did not consider his choice of actor from that perspective (Mellor). Since Mr. Rochester’s looks are mentioned several times in the novel, it probably has some meaning to the story, which is does not seem to have in the film. Even if beauty is subjective, there are strong norms in society of what is considered as beauty and what is not. A modern, mainstream film is supposed to reach as many viewers as possible, and they often include handsome actors for many reasons. One of them is how the audience is affected by the looks of the actors. Cases similar to this can be seen in many other films and novels. The mainstream norm is to have good-looking actors.

Compared to the novel, Mr. Rochester’s character in the film is much romanticized when it comes to his personality as well. His personality is tamed and to some extent even changed. In the novel he insults Jane severely several times. For instance, their second meeting starts with him proclaiming, “What the 6 deuce is it to me whether Miss Eyre be there or not? At this moment I am not disposed to accost her” (JE, 120). That situation is reminiscent of the first meeting with Mr. Brocklehurst, who also talked about Jane rather than speaking directly to her in their first official meeting. This signals that Mr. Rochester does not care if Jane is there or not, that she has no significant meaning to him. In the film, Mr. Rochester says, “Let her be seated”, which may not be very polite but at least he notices her and he wants her to be there. In the novel, he insults Jane’s piano-playing skills by saying, “You play a little, I see; like any other English-schoolgirl: perhaps rather better than some, but not well” (JE, 124). Comments like this insult Jane. He also insults her because she has not as much experience of the world that he has and because of her looks. In the film, those mean comments are fewer. To leave them out contributes to making Mr. Rochester’s character romanticized.

The marriage between Mr. Rochester and Bertha happened for practical reasons both in the novel and in the film. It was much more common that marriages were made for practical reasons rather than of love and the laws were much different. It was almost impossible to have a divorce, and sometimes men married women for their fortunes because, after the marriage, these fortunes were legally transferred to the husbands. Mr. Rochester was however forced and tricked into marrying Bertha by his late father. Mr. Rochester had an older brother, and of course he was entitled to the family’s fortune, and therefore Mr. Rochester’s father arranged the wedding between Mr. Rochester and Bertha. He wanted Mr. Rochester to be rich. The relationship between Bertha and Mr. Rochester differs much in the novel and in the film. In the novel, Mr. Rochester speaks very rudely about her and he refers to her as a beast, a hyena and a dog for example. He does not show any particular compassion for her, and he keeps her in the attic because she is dangerous and crazy. He lives as a free man, traveling the world and has given himself the right to pretend that his marriage to Bertha is not real, but his conscience is not totally clean. Mr. Rochester shows deep regrets in the novel that he married her, and he does not speak well of her family either. In the film, Mr. Rochester is much more gentle when it comes to Bertha. He seems to have deeper feelings for her. For instance, the only thing he calls her is “My own demon”, and he says that while holding her in his arms and with a loving voice. He does not speak ill of her, saying that Bertha demands cruelty and that he cannot be cruel. He tells Jane that he locked her up in the attic because he wanted to save her the life of being treated as a beast in a mental institution. This makes Mr. Rochester’s character much more sensitive and loving the film. It seems as if he feels compassion for her, that he actually loved her until she became crazy and that he wants the best for her. The family political and financial aspects of their marriage are barely mentioned, that he did not speak to her before marrying her and that it was mostly because of the fortune is mentioned but it is more of a loving marriage in the film. There are some theories regarding this. Lisa Hopkins, for instance, suggests that Mr. Rochester is tamed in the film because of Bertha’s softening (Grey, 107). Since Bertha is downplayed, Mr. Rochester should be as well. Paisley Mann also argues that the adaptations of Bertha and Mr. Rochester are linked, in order to

7 make Mr. Rochester attractive for a modern audience (Mann, 153). He cannot act the same way towards Bertha in the film because there is no reason since she is not as evil as in the novel. Hopkins also argues that portraying Bertha as a black, crazy woman with traits such as nymphomania and mental illness would be very racial and that the political correctness is one reason why her character is often not portrayed as terrible as in the novel (Grey, 107). In the film from 2011, Bertha is only seen one time. She does not look like a beast; she has rough hair but otherwise she is not really looking wild or crazy. She is also played by a white woman. At first she is loving towards Mr. Rochester, but when she sees Jane she becomes violent. The audience probably feels compassion for her rather than disgust, and that could be a result of today’s awareness of mental illness. We would not think that it would be fair to treat Bertha bad only because of that, because she is sick. At that point in time, however, a woman could be considered crazy just by taking another place in society than the one of a wife or a mother, or if she did something unwomanly (Teachman, 112). Emily Griesinger also suggests that modern readers cannot understand why Mr. Rochester just does not divorce Bertha, but that was impossible at that time (Griesinger, 48). That can also be a reason why Mr. Rochester’s feelings are more emphasized, for a modern viewer there is no other reason why he would still be with her since the social premises have changed when it comes to the institution of marriage.

The most central part in the novel and in the film, is the relationship between Jane and Mr. Rochester. James Philips writes that in the novel Mr. Rochester wants to marry Jane because in a marriage they can be equals and he will not take advantage of her (Philips, 203). They are both concerned that their relationship will not be between equals, which is very important in the novel. Jane does not want to be dependent on Mr. Rochester and he does not want to take advantage of her, which makes their relationship political at that point in time. But according to Meghan Jordan, the complex power relationships of the Victorian feminine and masculine are difficult to show because of Fukunaga’s version of Jane, which sets her as a romantic heroine only (Jordan, 83). In the film, their relationship is not very complex from a power perspective, although it is problematized. Jane is more considered about her love for Mr. Rochester than the politics.

As in many other stories there is girl drawn to a bad boy or man, with a wish to be with him. Jane is young and innocent, and Mr. Rochester is experienced and has seen much of the world, which in itself contributes to traditional gender roles. According to Tyson, men are often depicted as strong, rational, protective, decisive and women are often portrayed as emotional, irrational, submissive and weak (Tyson, 85). Jane is breaking those gender roles both in the film and in the novel to some extent. She refuses to be subordinate and dependent on a man because of his money or his role in society and she is not submissive by nature. She is always speaking her mind, as can be seen when Mr. Rochester asks her about her view on his superiority:

Do you agree with me that I have a right to be a little masterful, abrupt, perhaps exacting, sometimes, on the grounds I stated; namely that I am old enough to be your father, and that I have battled through a varied experience with many men of many nations, and roamed over half the globe, while you lived quietly with one set of people in the house? (JE, 134).

Jane responds in a straightforward manner:

I don’t think, sir, that you have a right to command me, merely because you are older than I, or because you have seen more of the world than I have; your claim to superiority depends on the use you have made of your time and experience (JE, 134).

This exchange is not included in the film, however. It is their conversations that awaken Mr. Rochester’s feelings for Jane in the film and in the novel, but this particular conversation shows how Jane does not see them as unequal in terms of experience or age. She believes that he has no right to use that against her, to be superior to her because of that.

Mr. Rochester is manipulating Jane, in the novel for a long time but in the film only in their first conversations. For instance, in the novel Mr. Rochester admits that Miss Ingram only visited him because he wanted her to make Jane realize her feeling for him and that he wanted Jane to be jealous. “Well, I feigned with you; and I knew jealousy would be the best ally I could call in for the furtherance of that end” (JE, 165). In the film version Mr. Rochester never admits why he invited Miss Ingram there, or maybe he does not have the same intentions as in the novel. He simply says that he does not feel for her as he feels for Jane, and suddenly this part of the film makes Mr. Rochester choose Jane over Miss Ingram who is beautiful and wealthy, and therefore should be the obvious choice. The cruelty with which he chooses Jane in the novel when she believes that he is about to marry Miss Ingram is not included, and neither are the painful feeling he exposes her to when she sees him with Miss Ingram. Once again Mr. Rochester and his actions are romanticized.

In the novel, the proposal from Mr. Rochester is surprising. Since the readers only have access to Jane’s feelings and her thoughts, the readers do not have a clue that Mr. Rochester has feelings for Jane. In the film, the viewers can suspect this for quite a while. His facial expressions, the way he looks at her and because of his caring attitude towards her. In the novel, Jane is very hard on herself not to change herself because of their engagement and upcoming marriage. She refuses to wear the jewels that he wants to buy for her, she does not want other dresses and she does not want to dine with him because she has never done that before. She says “I am not an angel, and I will not be one till I die: I will be myself. Mr. Rochester, you must neither expect or exact anything celestial of me-for you will not get it, any more than I shall get it of you: which I do not anticipate” (JE, 263). Jane demands her right to continue to be herself, to still be the one she is without feeling pressure that she needs to change herself for his pleasure or because she “has” to, not even if it is to her advantage. Since this is not included in the film, it yet

9 again indicates that the film is primarily conceived as a love story rather than something else. When Jane finds out about Mr. Rochester’s marriage with Bertha, she cannot stay with him and she leaves, mostly for political and religious reasons. She is tempted to stay with him, but she cannot do that. She refuses to be Mr. Rochester’s mistress and cannot be with him while knowing about his first wife. In the film, on the other hand, it seems as if the main reason why she leaves is because of Mr. Rochester’s dishonesty, that he has lied to her. When he asks her who would care if they were together, she answers “I would” and then expresses her need to respect herself. She runs away in both the film and the novel. In the film, when Mr. Rochester discovers that she is not there, he desperately screams “Jaaaaaaaane!” after her. It makes her disappearance very passionate. In the novel she does not hear anything of him after she leaves. Since the film is basically a love story, the audience need to wish for Mr. Rochester and Jane to be happy, and maybe that is why Mr. Rochester has this desperate and passionate side.

Another example of a passionate scene in the film is when Jane lives in her own little cabin after running away from Mr. Rochester. Someone knocks on the door, and when Jane opens it Mr. Rochester is outside. She pulls him into the cabin, kissing him passionately. She then realizes that it is St. John outside, and that it was not real. Mr. Rochester only exists in her dreams. In the novel she thinks of him, and maybe this is a way to show that she has not forgotten about Mr. Rochester, that she still feels for him. It is clear though that with scenes as this one, that the film emphasizes the romantic and passionate.

The ending in the film and in the novel completes the feeling of the film as a story about love rather than a story about a woman’s life. Jane hears Mr. Rochester’s voice in her head as in the novel, calling for her. In the film, Jane finds out that Thornfield Hall was set on fire by Bertha, who committed suicide. She is at first afraid that Mr. Rochester is dead, but she finds him in the yard where he is sitting alone with Pilot, his dog. He has lost his sight in the fire, and at first he does not realize that Jane is there. After a while he feels her, and he is very happy that she is there. The film ends with the two of them kissing each other lovingly. The novel’s ending is more developed than that. For a starter, Mr. Rochester has not only lost his sight, he also lost his right hand in the fire. His face is filled with scars from the fire and he is totally dependent on others. Jane tells Mr. Rochester that she is now independent because of the inheritance, and that she can now do what they think is best. There is a summary included that covers the following ten years of Jane’s life, mentioning details such as that they are living in a happy marriage, that they have at least one child and that Mr. Rochester has regained his sight after a while. Since this is not included in the film, it strengthens the view on it as a love story with a happy loving ending, with focus on the relationship between Jane and Mr. Rochester rather than focusing on Jane’s individual life and how it turned out. The film shows how they both became happy together while the novel is more about Jane becoming happy and independent.

In conclusion, after looking more closely at the novel and the film, and after comparing the two of them, it is clear that the novel and the film differ on several crucial points. The political issues of the contemporary time, in the Victorian Era, are much downplayed in the film, which rather focuses on romance and passion and love. Topics such as gender, class, marriage, race and independency are marginalized and downplayed. In the novel, these topics are very central and are very important to the story. The title of the article about the film from the production company’s webpage proclaims that the film is “A passionate adaption of a classic novel”, which we have seen is certainly an accurate description. Even though this version of the film might be more faithful to the novel than other adaptions, for example it includes all main steps in Jane’s life and the key elements are kept, it has lost a lot of Jane’s thoughts and feelings that are important to the original story. The characters still have the foundation of their personalities in the film, but they are not developed to the same extent. Mr. Rochester’s harshness and Jane’s wish for independency are examples of that. I do not consider their characters to be totally different, but less developed.

The reason why gender, race and class are not problematized to the same extent can be that even though they still exist today, individuals are more free now. It might be hard for a modern audience to understand Jane and the problems she deals with. The laws have changed, it is now possible and even common to divorce and a woman has the right to own her own property and fortunes. A mainstream film is supposed to reach a broad audience, because the more money it brings in to the production company the better. Therefore, it is made so people from all categories will appreciate it. The expectations on a film are often different from the expectations of a novel, which is supposed to provide us with deeper reflections and thoughts. This is the case with the novel, which was written to explain to its readers what life was like for a woman in the Victorian Era. It is partly based on Charlotte Brontë’s own life, and it is written as an autobiographical novel, which is not the case in the film. To adapt a famous novel like this one to reach as many viewers as possible is not an easy task. People familiar with the original might find it a betrayal of the source, but to not make any changes at all is impossible when adapting the story to a different medium and to a different audience. The producer, Paul Trijbits, says that “We wanted to move this interpretation forward into the 21st century whilst maintaining the story’s haunting beauty”. If this statement was one of the main ideas they had in mind while making the film, it is not surprising how the result turned out to be. The film is a modernized, romanticized and downplayed version of the novel.

Works cited

"A Passionate Adaptation of a Classic Novel." Focus Features, 5 jan 2011. N.p. Web. 4 dec 2013.

Brontë, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. 1847. London: Collins classics, Harper press, 2010. Print.

Brennan, Zoe. Brontë’s Jane Eyre, A Reader's Guide. London: Continuum International Publishing, 2010. Print.

Focus Features Jane Eyre. Focus Features, GB. 2011.

Grey, Philip. Defining Moments: A Cultural Study of Jane Eyre. Umeå: Print and media, 2004. Print.

Griesinger, Emily. "Charlottë Brontë’s Religion, Faith, Feminism and Jane Eyre" Christianity and Literature Vol. 58, No. 1". 2008. Web. 19 dec. 2013. p29-.31.

Jane Eyre. n.p Internet movie database. n.d. Web. 4 dec 2013.

Jordan, Meghan. “Dislocated Heroines: Cary Fukunaga's Jane Eyre, Romantic Love and Bertha's Legacy.” Neo-Victorian Studies; 2014, Vol. 7. Web. 2 dec, 2016. p79-103.

Mann, Paisley. “The Madwoman in Contemporary Adaptations: Depictions of Rochester and Bertha in Recent Jane Eyre Television and Film Adaptations” Brontë studies, Vol. 36 No. 2. Web. 2 dec, 2016. p.152-162.

Mellor, Louisa. "Cary Fukunaga Interview: Jane Eyre, Michael Fassbender, Judi Dench's Shadow Puppetry and More" Denofgeek. 9 march 2012. Web. 20 Oct 2013.

Philips, James. “Marriage in Jane Eyre: From Contract to Conversation” Brontë Studies, Vol. 33. Web. 2 dec, 2016. p.203-217.

Teachman, Debra. Understanding Jane Eyre : A Student Casebook to Issues, Sources & Historical Documents. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001. Print.

Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today A User-Friendly Guide. 2nd edition. New York: Routledge, 2006. Print.