Truth in Fiction: The Tenenat of Wildfell Hall and The Brontë Myth

Since middle school I have been fascinated by the Brontë sisters.  It is amazing to me how I read Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights with too much appreciation of wild romantic imaginings and no concept of the multilayer aspects of the novels.  The stories are more than the romances.  In high school and college I read with a heightened sense of snobbery.  I hacked everything to death with my dilettante schooling in Feminist literary theory.  Now -- as a for real grown-up -- I read the Brontës and I have a very full and rich enjoyment of the novels; the writing, the story, the characters, the historical/cultural/feminist aspects all lead to my re-reading resonating with me.  I find myself pondering Villette, Wuthering Heights, and Jane Eyre months after I've completed my reading.  But what about Anne Brontë?

I enjoyed The Tenant of Wildfell Hall in high school, although I would say it was on a superficial level of enjoyment.  This re-reading has been a vastly richer experience.  The plot concerns Helen -- a young woman who falls in love with  a gentleman, Arthur, and marries him against her aunt's wise advice.   What ensues is a classic case of near-domestic violence.  Arthur is a horrid drunk, has blatant affairs, verbally abuses Helen, isolates her, and proceeds in attempting to turn their young son into a drunk.  Literally -- the douchebag encourages his five-year-old son to drink and disobey his mother.  Of course Heathcliff is a jerk in Wuthering Heights, but so is Catherine... so they sort of deserve each other.  Helen is blameless and persecuted by her drunk, lazy husband.  Her attempts at leaving him are thwarted.  Although he doesn't love his son, he is unwilling to have Helen leave with him because he doesn't want people to know his true character.  He blocks her spending and access to money (which is all Helen's money, but of course, Victorian women lost their rights to their own money upon marriage).  I would say this is the most "shocking" of the Brontë novels:  alcoholism, adultery, child abuse -- I think making wee ones drunk constitutes child abuse --, domestic violence, and most shocking of all -- Anne is challenging the laws that rob women of financial independence, custody rights, and she is ballsy enough to have Helen defy Victorian sensibilities and leave her husband. 

Granted, there were a few things that annoyed me about the novel.  Helen is REALLY Godly and preaches quite a bit, but I understand why -- Anne needed her character to be morally above reproach to have her leave and it be slightly less scandalous.  Also, in the end Helen returns to her husband (he conveniently dies soon after), but once again, one can only be so gutsy.  I really wanted Helen to not return, but that is my modern brain thinking.  And lastly, she falls in love with a farmer and I don't care much for him.  He is okay, but still beneath Helen in many aspects (fyi -- said farmer seriously injures someone based on a false presumption because he is tantrumy baby). 

After I finished the novel I eagerly began Lucasta Miller's The Brontë Myth.  This examination of the Brontës in biography (like Elizabeth Gaskell's Life of Charlotte Brontë ), in their writings about each other (like Charlotte's attempt at "re-branding" Emily and Anne), in media (several movies and plays are discussed), and it also gives a history of the PERCEPTION of the Brontës from Victorian times to the present day.  This book also made me want to read Gaskell's biography of Charlotte, re-read all the Brontë novels, pick-up some May Sinclair books, and re-read Stella Gibbons Cold Comfort Farm.  There is even a Muriel Spark essay on Anne Brontë I need to hunt down.  The book is well-written and has a ton of information on Charlotte.  I was enthralled.

Then I got to the chapters about Emily.  While still very through and interesting they seemed a bit sparse, but of course, Charlotte left the most behind and Emily was a near recluse and extremely private.  I especially liked the connection Miller made between Emily and "authoress as goddess" and Sylvia Plath -- good stuff.  I can't remember how many chapters were on Emily, but 3/4 of the book concerned Charlotte.  I eagerly turned the page after the second or third chapter on Emily and the book just ended.  No conclusion and not a damned word about Anne.  Of course, Anne peppered the other chapters, but I REALLY wanted something about Anne or Tenant or some discussion on why Anne is the "forgotten" Brontë.  I definitely think this book is worth a read, especially as a precursor to reading a Brontë biography, but just know that Anne is not to be found. And if you haven't read The Tenant of Wildfell Hall the you are missing out on an intriguing plot and some excellence fodder for thought.  Now I need to go do some more research on Anne Brontë and hunting down that Muriel Spark essay is first on my list.
 

Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier

First of all, I'd like to thank Allie over at A Literary Odyssey for hosting the Rebecca Readalong; I've wanted to reread this book for years and the readalong gave me the perfect opportunity to do so.  Second, I didn't post my first update for the readalong in time.  We were suppose to post on chapters 1-15 by January 14th.  The 14th rolled around and I realized I had read to chapter 17 already and the plot was thickening.  I had to make a difficult decision:  set aside Rebecca and dutifully write a blog post or ignore the deadline and devour the second half of the book.

I chose to consume the remainder of Rebecca.  This was a reread for me (I read Rebecca at least five years or more ago) and I could remember bits of the plot and the outcome, but I had difficulty recalling how everything "went down."  Early yesterday morning I finished the reread and I have to say that Rebecca is even better the second time around.

First, a few things before I begin discussing my thoughts on the novel.  1). I'm skipping a plot summary, because I think most people are generally familiar with the premise of the book.  2).  Do not read ANY FURTHER if you have yet to read Rebecca.  This is one huge plot spoiler.  So I guess what I'm saying is that this post is for Rebecca readers only.  ;)

Several things stood out to me when rereading this book:

1. Having an unnamed narrator/heroine is a most brilliant idea and really made the novel.


2. This is Jane Eyre all over again.

The Unnamed Narrator:

Maxim de Winter's new wife is young, inexperienced, poor, unglamorous and the exact opposite of Rebecca.  The reader never learns her name and this truly helps establish this new wife as less than Rebecca.  Rebecca is able to own things:  this is Rebecca's husband, house, dog, pen, brush.  The nameless heroine can claim nothing of  her own as her namelessness leaves her with out identity.   Rebecca's presence is heavy in the book:  the summer heat is oppressive and thick, flowers droop, doors thud and Rebecca's very name conjures anxiety and fear.  If the heroine had a name (for example, Sally) Rebecca's power would be diminished; Sally would have the husband, house, dog, pen, and brush.  The most the nameless heroine can do is share the title of Mrs. de Winter and Rebecca crowds her out of that title.

A significant scene occurs in chapter 20; after Maxim tells his current wife that Rebecca's body has been discovered he is begging forgiveness and kissing his wife hungrily.  Then the heroine states, "This is what I have wanted him to say every day and every night, I thought, and now he is saying is at last.... He is saying it now.... He went on kissing me, hungry, desperate, murmuring my name (p.252)."  Maxim is saying his new wife's name thereby diminishing Rebecca's power.  However, the reader is still left in Rebecca's thrall because the reader still does not know the new wife's name.  The balance of power has tipped for the characters, but the reader still waits.

Shades of Jane Eyre:

The shades of Jane Eyre one can find in Rebecca are pretty obvious:  a wealthy man with a home full of secrets who marries a young, innocent girl.   Mr. Rochester attempts to marry Jane before disclosing his past (or the fact that he is still married) and Maxim de Winter makes a selfish decision to marry the heroine of Rebecca without disclosing his past (or even telling her anything about his life).  Jane cares for Mr. Rochester in his blindness and the nameless heroine of Rebecca cares for Maxim when there is a chance others may discover he murdered Rebecca.  Heck, we even have burning mansions in both books.

I'm not so much interested in the similarities between the two novels as I am interested in my reaction to rereading the books.  When I read Jane Eyre and Rebecca for the first time I was captivated by the romance.  Maxim and his new wife desperately love each other!  Jane and Mr. Rochester desperately love each other!  On my second readings, I had different reaction.  I found Maxim de Winter and Mr. Rochester pretty much selfish douchebags.  Sorry, but that's my take on it.  Neither man thinks of the impact his past actions will have on marriage and love.  I thought Mr. Rochester especially egregious; attempting to marry Jane while marrying Bertha could have totally destroyed Jane; and he knew this.  Maxim is counting on his new wife to be innocent and young and bring about a freshness to his life.  Neither man views his wife/wife-to-be as an equal and both men underestimate the understanding of the women they love.

Of course, I still absolutely adore Jane Eyre and Rebecca.  In fact, I think I've been inspired to reread Jane Eyre in the next few months.  I'm also certain that Rebecca is a true classic that I'll be rereading for many years to come.