Scan barcode
A review by shannee
The Life of Charlotte Brontë by Elizabeth Gaskell
3.0
The Life of Charlotte Bronte by Elizabeth Gaskell starts out a bit slow. Rather than jumping right into Charlotte’s life, Gaskell introduces the reader to the environment and character of Yorkshire where Charlotte was born and lived. Gaskell wants to make a case immediately that the “coarseness” Charlotte was accused of was a result of her enviroment. Gaskell essential tries to explain to the cultivated Londoners and other critics of urban England, that Charlotte comes from the wild and obnoxious Northern countryside, where people are distrustful, outwardly hostile, and rude but truthful and loyal at heart. It’s an amusing peek at how rich city people see those that live out in the country. Although Gaskell’s description of the people of Yorkshire is obviously skewed, it surely also contains some truth.
As I read the book, I felt like Gaskell was continually explaining why Charlotte was the way she was and almost making excuses for her. Of course, part of an autobiography is to explain a person’s character but I would much rather be shown a personality than told of one. To my modern sensibilities and perspective no excuse is needed for Charlotte. I can draw the conclusions myself that Charlotte came from a wilder, more independent environment and that her isolation left her incredibly lonely. I wished Gaskell would have left off telling me these things over and over and would have spent more time telling me about Charlotte’s artistic side.
The Life of Charlotte Bronte sorely lacks in it’s portrait of Charlotte as an artist. Most of the book is Charlotte’s letters, with Gaskell setting up or filling in between letters. Perhaps Charlotte just did not talk about her artistry, her methods of writing, inspiration, etc. Still I think Gaskell would have done Charlotte a more timeless justice if she would have focused more on Charlotte, the novelist, and less on Charlotte, the faithful daughter and homemaker.
But I do believe the book is written this way on purpose. Another distinct point Gaskell wants to make was that Charlotte did not neglect her…womanly duties, as it were, in favor of her writting. Sad that this point has to be made but I can understand Gaskell, and other friends and family of Charlotte’s, felt it was important to do her that justice. When you read some of the reviews of Charlotte’s work, especially Jane Eyre, you can understand why Gaskell wanted to refute how Charlotte’s character was being drawn. What was then called coarseness and unwomanly in Charlotte’s work we see today as passionate, emotional, strength, and independance. Qualities few, even fellow women, would accept in the 19th century.
"Jane Eyre is throughout the personification of the unregenerate and undisciplined spirit…….It is true Jane does right, and exerts great moral strength, but it is the strength of a mere heathen mind which is a law unto itself. No Christian grace is perceptible upon her.
Altogether the autobiography of Jane Eyre is preeminently an anti-Christian composition. There is throughout it a murmuring against the comforts of the rich and against the privations of the poor, which, as far as each individual is concerned, is a murmuring against God’s appointment–there is a proud and perpetual assertion of the rights of man, for which we find no authority either in God’s word or in God’s providence–there is that pervading tone of ungodly discontent which is at once the most prominent and the most subtle evil which the law and the pulpit, which all civilized society in fact, has at the present day to contend with. We do not hesitate to say that the tone of mind and thought which has overthrown authority and violated every code human and divine abroad, and fostered Chartism and rebellion at home is the same which has also written Jane Eyre"
–Elizabeth Rigby, the Quarterly Review 1847
Gaskell does show us through Charlotte’s letters, how completely unjust this review is. Charlotte was accepting, almost to a fault in my opinion, of her life as laid out by God. She felt is was her duty, and stuck with it tenaciusly even after the success of her books, to stay with her father in complete isolation in Yorkshire. Anyone who has read Villette knows Charlotte’s deep innate belief in the predetermination of God. That He has already decided who shall lead a happy blessed life and who shall suffer. All her life Charlotte live in acceptance of this. Her novels do show a rebellious nature, but it is always a rebellion against man, against a society that would unjustly keep her character down. Not a rebellion against God. Her heroines are in fact searching for the truth of how God, not Man, would have life lived.
Some of the most wonderful parts of The Life of Charlotte Bronte are when Charlotte talks of her books. I almost jumped out of my chair when I read her letter about the ending of Villette. Those of you that have read Villette and have in turns: wondered, been certain, then doubtful, and shook the book in frustration, will finally have your answer. But I will not give it away here.
The Life of Charlotte Bronte was published just 2 years after her death. Because many of the people mentioned in the book were still alive, almost all names are abbreviated to an initial. This really disturbs the narrative and prevents you from sinking into the story. Also for privacy, and the risk of lawsuits, very little is told of the people in Charlotte’s life. Although Gaskell gives us a glimpse into Charlotte’s personality and a detailed history of her life, it feels one dimensional without those people around Charlotte fleshed out. In the end, I’m left wanting more detail and more truth about Charlotte, her books, and the events that impacted her life. Luckily, I have Juliet Barker’s massive The Brontes already on my shelf to, hopefully, fill that void.
As I read the book, I felt like Gaskell was continually explaining why Charlotte was the way she was and almost making excuses for her. Of course, part of an autobiography is to explain a person’s character but I would much rather be shown a personality than told of one. To my modern sensibilities and perspective no excuse is needed for Charlotte. I can draw the conclusions myself that Charlotte came from a wilder, more independent environment and that her isolation left her incredibly lonely. I wished Gaskell would have left off telling me these things over and over and would have spent more time telling me about Charlotte’s artistic side.
The Life of Charlotte Bronte sorely lacks in it’s portrait of Charlotte as an artist. Most of the book is Charlotte’s letters, with Gaskell setting up or filling in between letters. Perhaps Charlotte just did not talk about her artistry, her methods of writing, inspiration, etc. Still I think Gaskell would have done Charlotte a more timeless justice if she would have focused more on Charlotte, the novelist, and less on Charlotte, the faithful daughter and homemaker.
But I do believe the book is written this way on purpose. Another distinct point Gaskell wants to make was that Charlotte did not neglect her…womanly duties, as it were, in favor of her writting. Sad that this point has to be made but I can understand Gaskell, and other friends and family of Charlotte’s, felt it was important to do her that justice. When you read some of the reviews of Charlotte’s work, especially Jane Eyre, you can understand why Gaskell wanted to refute how Charlotte’s character was being drawn. What was then called coarseness and unwomanly in Charlotte’s work we see today as passionate, emotional, strength, and independance. Qualities few, even fellow women, would accept in the 19th century.
"Jane Eyre is throughout the personification of the unregenerate and undisciplined spirit…….It is true Jane does right, and exerts great moral strength, but it is the strength of a mere heathen mind which is a law unto itself. No Christian grace is perceptible upon her.
Altogether the autobiography of Jane Eyre is preeminently an anti-Christian composition. There is throughout it a murmuring against the comforts of the rich and against the privations of the poor, which, as far as each individual is concerned, is a murmuring against God’s appointment–there is a proud and perpetual assertion of the rights of man, for which we find no authority either in God’s word or in God’s providence–there is that pervading tone of ungodly discontent which is at once the most prominent and the most subtle evil which the law and the pulpit, which all civilized society in fact, has at the present day to contend with. We do not hesitate to say that the tone of mind and thought which has overthrown authority and violated every code human and divine abroad, and fostered Chartism and rebellion at home is the same which has also written Jane Eyre"
–Elizabeth Rigby, the Quarterly Review 1847
Gaskell does show us through Charlotte’s letters, how completely unjust this review is. Charlotte was accepting, almost to a fault in my opinion, of her life as laid out by God. She felt is was her duty, and stuck with it tenaciusly even after the success of her books, to stay with her father in complete isolation in Yorkshire. Anyone who has read Villette knows Charlotte’s deep innate belief in the predetermination of God. That He has already decided who shall lead a happy blessed life and who shall suffer. All her life Charlotte live in acceptance of this. Her novels do show a rebellious nature, but it is always a rebellion against man, against a society that would unjustly keep her character down. Not a rebellion against God. Her heroines are in fact searching for the truth of how God, not Man, would have life lived.
Some of the most wonderful parts of The Life of Charlotte Bronte are when Charlotte talks of her books. I almost jumped out of my chair when I read her letter about the ending of Villette. Those of you that have read Villette and have in turns: wondered, been certain, then doubtful, and shook the book in frustration, will finally have your answer. But I will not give it away here.
The Life of Charlotte Bronte was published just 2 years after her death. Because many of the people mentioned in the book were still alive, almost all names are abbreviated to an initial. This really disturbs the narrative and prevents you from sinking into the story. Also for privacy, and the risk of lawsuits, very little is told of the people in Charlotte’s life. Although Gaskell gives us a glimpse into Charlotte’s personality and a detailed history of her life, it feels one dimensional without those people around Charlotte fleshed out. In the end, I’m left wanting more detail and more truth about Charlotte, her books, and the events that impacted her life. Luckily, I have Juliet Barker’s massive The Brontes already on my shelf to, hopefully, fill that void.