24 January 2009

Jane Eyre

Jane Eyre (1847) is the first lady of Romance. Oh Yes, Eliza Bennett came in before her chronologically, in 1813. But P&P is such a family thing, Eliza is always in a group of females, sisters, aunts et all. Jane Eyre, by contrast, is alone with Rochester most time, they are two lonely birds who are thrown together by fate. All encounters between Roch and Jane sizzle and hiss with anticipation.

Jane is an orphan, penniless, with no prospects at all. All she has is this purity and the hope (inherent in all young people) that life is soon going to get good for them. She has none of the cynicism that age brings. Life is lived by her day to day. Rochester hopes to find redemption for all his 'sins' with a life with her.

There is enough spice in the romance to keep it from cloying in your mouth. Jane is a good girl, but she does not throw the fact in anyone's face. Rochester is the mixture of angel and devil that is simply tantalising, like a bittersweet dark chocolate - yum yum. He is loaded with moolah too, which is a such a must for romance. Whats the fun in falling for a beggar? There is a proper triangle with the glamourous lady, Blanche Ingram, an equal to Rochester in social status, gunning for the position of Lady Rochester.

I dont quite like the fate that Charlotte Bronte metes out to the lovers ultimately, it seems a tad harsh. But better than the lovers melting too soon together like a chunk of warm choclate and vanilla icecream.

All my readers who have been following my recent posts will know by now that Zee Studio is now showing Jane Eyre on the BBC Book Adaptation series. Like the earlier ones, this one too is blessed by great performances and wonderful production values. Toby Stephans is playing Rochester and I wish I could pour melted choclate on him and eat him.... Sigh ! Ruth Wilson does Jane Eyre with great charm. She has just two dull grey dresses to charm Rochester with, and the rosy fresh face. She is a bit quiet in this version, not as feisty as Jane was supposed to be.

I love the whole thing, the beautiful vistas of extended gardens, a castle with dark rooms, candlelights and lanterns, the clothes, the furniture, the language. It brings the book alive.

4 comments:

  1. too right avdi, what's the fun in falling for a beggar!! witness heathcliff!! i thought stephens too good-looking by far to play rochester? i liked this version, all romantic and fluff, much like a bronte-light, but didnt think it was really the same story. there was a version with timothy dalton as rochester where he fits the role perfectly, he even did the gypsy scene so well! i forget the lady who played jane eyre there, but she was so plain and again perfect for the role ..... seen that one?? but of course, have fun watching this one!! i'm in envy :(

    ReplyDelete
  2. hmm toby is good looking, he manages to look a bit less chikna. N he did not do the gypsy thing himself, he hid in the shadows n got a lady to play gypsy.... !!!!!

    nyways is good fun.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't remember clearly but I think I have read this on comp...

    These days am in a mood of reading classics so might pick this one, TV Series to dekhne se rahi..

    Vaise I have started with Q&A though the books is good but I feel that the author was over indulgent....

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jane Eyre is so well known.. no surprises if you read on some form or the other. Do try.. but dont blame me if you get bogged down in archaic lingo.

    ReplyDelete