|
|
Post by oliviamccubbins on Nov 18, 2015 23:56:44 GMT
So I realize I already created a thread but this was something that I had to discuss. We haven't even touched on why these books were written. I mean we have touched on the themes and the role of women but why have we not discussed the revolutions that were going on when the books were written. Rhys and Bronte were both in the forefront of these revolutions.
I disagree with the notion that Rhys writes a more realistic portrayal of society than Bronte. I think that Bronte writes a more realistic look at the way things were. Bronte lived in the time and she experienced the way woman were treated in this society. I felt that Rhys wrote through the lenses of looking into the past and that distorts the view. Were women treated poorly in society, yes but were woman also able to find a place were they were happy, of course. I think the one-sided view was characteristic of the time in which Rhys was writing it. Rhys had the freedom and was writing from the perspective of someone who did not truly understand the what Bronte went through. I think James fight for self-identity was important in the society and more in keeping with the day. Bronte wrote the book as a piece of propaganda that showed how women were treated. See depression wasn't uncommon in the day but it is silly to trivialize the fact that many women were happy. Sure they didn't have the freedoms but many of them did not know any different and therefore had nothing to judge it against. I love to analyze how poorly treated the women were back in the day but to say every women was unhappy would be silly. I do not think that Jane is every women she was what every women should look like according to Jane. Something I think we should analyze is what Bronte wants every woman to do. Propaganda goes both way and we haven't explored the option that maybe Bronte was skewing how women were treated as well. Clearly Rhys also is skewing the role of females. Look I know it was the feminist revolution and for that reason we should consider that maybe Rhys was writing this as propaganda to. I love to empower women but also this doesn't necessary show the truth of the matter. Maybe it did but just looking at the feminist literature cannot accurately show the whole story.
I thought this was an interesting topic so I want to know what everyone else thinks. |
|
|
|
Post by ndefilippis on Nov 19, 2015 4:08:21 GMT
I agree with your opinion about Rhys's view being skewed, or at least influenced by writing about a time when she did not live in. However, I think the bias comes more from the fact that Rhys was able to look back and use Jane Eyre as a reference for Bertha. If Rhys had written about a a girl's descent into insanity before Bronte wrote Jan Eyre, then Bronte would most likely draw influence from that. Your views on the pieces being propaganda is interesting, especially Jane Eyre being skewed. I agree that we would have to look at more things to determine if Bronte really did skew how women were treated.
|
|
|
|
Post by briwiegand on Nov 19, 2015 4:23:42 GMT
I like your ideas of how both Bronte and Rhys have skewed views on feminism. It seems that Bronte brushes the subject over while Rhys focuses on it. Also Olivia I like how you pointed out the differences in times between these two stories. Bronte lived in the era and experienced it first hand while Rhys looked back on it and used Jane Eyre as a reference. I think because of this, Rhys is focusing more on current issues of feminism and how ideas have changed especially on mental illness. Brontes views are relevant to that era and show that Jane can still be happy. Could Rhys be saying that it's much harder for women to be happy in current times because of how brushed over they are and be adding propaganda?
|
|
|
|
Post by harleen5 on Nov 21, 2015 14:57:09 GMT
Olivia, I do agree with you that Rhys may not have fully understood what Bronte had gone through at the time. However, I feel that Rhys should not be penalized for trying to make her own point on how hard it is for a women to find her place in a patriarchal society. I believe Rhys only expanded on what Bertha had been facing, as Bronte did not give the reader a chance to sympathize with Bertha. I also agree with you that not all women at that time were unhappy with their lives, but I think Rhys was just trying to make a generalization about if a women was unhappy, it would be difficult for her to do anything about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jesswang on Nov 21, 2015 15:34:02 GMT
Olivia, the whole reason why Rhys' novel is so significant is BECAUSE it was written a century after Jane Eyre. It might not have been a more "realistic" portrayal of society per-se, but it is definitely a more modern version of society. The fact that Rhys was able use characters written over 100 years ago and place them in a novel set a century later shows just how little society progressed over so much time. if Bronte's characters can be relevant in a story in the 1960's, there must still have been an unfair divide between men and women. Personally, I do not see this as a "skewed" view of society, but more as an insight from Rhys that it's crazy that Bertha's story can still apply to society years later, giving people a wake-up call saying "it's wrong that this story should still be relevant a century after Jane Eyre was written". The time gap between the two novels helps strengthen Rhys' point that sexism is still rampant in today's society and that feminism is necessary now more than ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by sydniemarkowitz on Nov 21, 2015 15:45:34 GMT
Olivia, I completely agree. I think that looking back, we need to take the things we read with a grain of salt. They are only coming from one point of view. We haven't read anything from a mans point of view, so it is unfair to put men in the light of hating women. Jane obviously broke through the feminist wall and it is unfair of us to say all women were treated poorly. Obviously there was still a ton of oppression back then but we can't put it all on the men just wanting to be superior. Men back then were just taught to be like that, they didn't know it any other way. Also, women were taught to just want to be the house wife and mom, it is just how life was back then. Now in modern society women have far less set backs then women did back in Victorian England. Roles of women have drastically changed in the past 20 years, it is now unfair to say that women have so many more set back, but women still are looked at a little different.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfarmand on Nov 21, 2015 21:11:55 GMT
Roles of women have drastically changed in the past 20 years, it is now unfair to say that women have so many more set back, but women still are looked at a little different. Sydnie- I agree with you completely on this point. The ways that society has shaped itself into such an egalitarian system is wonderful, and we are most definitely on the track to an even better society. However, I disagree with your point that men should be given some leeway over how they treated women because it was socially influenced. Like you and Olivia said, women were not treated as badly as slaves were, and there were certainly some male feminists, although very few. That being said, I think that socially influenced actions should still have repercussions. Take the example of slavery. Slavery was a social movement so aggressive in its self-proselytism (by means of temptation) that it even caused great free-thinkers and social reformers like Thomas Jefferson to fall victim to its attraction. Does this mean that Thomas Jefferson should be pardoned for the social abominations he committed? Of course not. One can accept that individuals can have good intents, but sometimes fall victim to temptation (and still hold them accountable for the crimes they committed). |
|
|
|
Post by carlsonchris on Nov 23, 2015 2:53:08 GMT
Olivia, I agree with you on how the viewpoints may be skewed but I would argue that a truly unbiased viewpoint does not exist. Nobody just sets out straight facts, especially not in literature. The whole point of talking about a subject is to get people to see your side, and taking a side gives people an inherent bias.
|
|
