Help, please... if you have NOT read Jane Eyre.

[mer]

...Or, if you remember what you thought it was about before you read it.

Those of you who have not read Jane Eyre, nor seen the movie, could you summarize in the comments for me what you think the book is about... with specifics regarding plot... and what your occupation is? And how/what other Victorian literature you have read instead?

I realize this is a weird request, but it's research for a book. I promise.


When I asked my husband the question, he said, "It's about women. And there's yammering. Because they can't marry who they want to marry." He's a computer guy. I couldn't even guess what Victorian literature he's read, but I'd suspect it's like one work of Dickens forced on him in school.

Comments

[behindpyramids.livejournal.com]

*gape*
I love Victorian novels. I eat them like buttery snacks, devour them like dirty dirty soap operas.

that said, is the movie any good?

[merriehaskell.livejournal.com]

The movies... well... Hm. Okay, let's talk adaptations, not just movies, but also mini-series.

Of the ones on this list:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/janeeyre/history.shtml

The 1983 one made me doubt my reading of the book. How could something so dull be made from something so awesome? Plus, there's this big distracting zit on Jane's face through most of the Moor House scenes plus some others, so it broke my suspension of disbelief because you could track when they filmed things by the size of the zit.

The 1973 is supposedly the most faithful adaptation and the best-loved by Jane Eyre fans. I'm half-way through it. It's all right. You know how the 1996 Pride and Prejudice was both faithful and fully awesome? This is faithful and only about half awesome. So far... I need to finish watching it.

The 1963 one didn't particularly impress. I watched it a long time ago, though.

Now, the 2006 version (http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/janeeyre/) is not very faithful in many ways, but I think it may be the most successful adaptation. I prefer to judge movie adaptations of classics in regard to how much they bring the spirit through of the original to a modern audience. Like Baz Luhrman's version of Romeo and Juliet... I thought my reaction at the end of that was probably the same reaction that Shakespeare's original audience had: OMFG, Shakespeare, you suck for making me feel this bad, OMFG, you're amazing.

So, in terms of the 2006 version? I think that is the most successful adaptation by that definition.

Of the movie versions I've seen, I'm kinda eh on them all. Orson Welles has the best Rochester voice--well, duh. Ciaran Hinds and William Hurt are meh for Rochesters. My favorite young Jane is without a doubt Anna Paquin in the Zeffirelli version (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116684/).