I’m only halfway through the book but i vaguely remember watching the BBC movie adaptation a while ago. I’ve always found Mr Rochester to be creepy and uncomfortable (sometimes). The way he calls Jane “little friend” feels odd to me. I know it was normalised for much older men to marry younger women at the time the book was written but “little friend” just feels weird. I also find it unbelievably creepy how his wife is just living upstairs the entire time and she has no idea until they are married.
by betterbeaM1rrorball
11 Comments
I mean, It is a famous Gothic romance novel featuring many themes and traditions of the genre: manipulative older master of the house with dark secrets, a ‘ghost’ haunting the house, madness and obsession. And you are asking ‘why is this creepy…?’
The whole story is meant to be generally creepy, but his pet name for her is not that big of a deal. It’s of its time, just like “Baby” or “Honey” or “Sweetie” or whatever other pet names between lovers have gone into/out of style over the years.
Yeah, it’s creepy, but that’s the whole point. It’s vampire romance for it’s time – the creepy-as-romantic/sexual is the vibe. I also think it touches on the “I’m so special” troupe as well. Jane has always been “plain” and forgettable, but here comes this older man with a dark secret, and SHE ALONE can COMFORT and HEAL him. His age and worldliness is part of the appeal, in this case. He could marry anyone but he chooses little ‘ole Jane. It’s not “healthy” by today’s standards, but it’s a very common romantic theme.
No, I think many books from that time are creepy
it’s not supposed to be a traditional romance. He is supposed to be the “anti-hero” to her “anti-beauty”.
A couple of unlikely, “homely”, lonely misfits who miraculously found each other and found love.
It’s not Elizabeth Bennett and Mr. Darcy.
That’s sort of the point… The romance between Jane and Rochester is complex, and definitely not supposed to have the purity of most of Austen’s couples, for example. That said, I do actually like Jane and Rochester’s relationship quite a bit, when you read it the right way. When you recognize the level of sarcasm in their exchanges, they become a lot more endearing — otherwise you might get the impression they’re only tolerating each other. But wondering if you should be rooting for these two, and being slightly on edge the entire time, is exactly the goal of a gothic romance — similar to Rebecca or Phantom of the Opera.
Rochester is a lying, manipulative jerk but Jane just happens to be lucky and sensible enough to not be manipulated by him. She refuses to be with him until he is actually single and she has her own independent wealth.
No, that is the point I think
Brontë couples are always creepy.
Cosigning everything everyone else has said re the gothic romance genre (it’s great, isn’t it?!), but I remember being annoyed, when I read it the first time at age 19, that she didn’t “get” him until he was disfigured. 😂 What can I say? I was—and remain—shallow.
I’m seeing a lot of comments that say ‘duh’ and I just want to say: perfectly valid question, perfectly valid conclusion to come to; it’s actually a debate that rages on in Romantic scholarship – I recommend [this book](https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Is-Heathcliff-a-Murderer-by-John-Sutherland/9781785782992) if you want to get hip to the stalwart controversies of classic literature.
I hope you enjoyed Jane Eyre. If it’s your first Romantic-type book, feel free to ask for recommendations – you started in a really great place, it’s one of the most compelling – a classic for a reason.
Also, now you get to enjoy one of the great literary moments of our own century for (presumably) the first time: [Hark A Vagrant on The Brontës](https://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=202)