Reinterpretation of Jane Eyre-part 51.

This novel uses a narrator from the first-person protagonist perspective. In novels, the third-person perspective conveys events relatively objectively, while the first-person perspective conveys events subjectively. If the reader directly witnesses the event from the third-person perspective, the narrator first witnesses the event, and the reader receives the narrator's feelings and evaluations of the event from the first-person perspective. (If the author wanted to convey the event objectively, he/she would have used a third-person perspective.) Between the event and the narrator, it is mostly the narrator that has a greater influence on the reader. The narrator can turn even a small kitten into a demon. So we have to be careful when reading a novel from a first-person perspective.

However, Charlotte Bronte's novel Jane Eyre is in a special place among novels from the first-person protagonist perspective. In most novels, the story is told in the form of the reader peeking into the character's thoughts and actions. And there is a virtual wall between the two. The reader can see the person through the wall, but the person cannot see the reader. This is called the '4th wall.' (It is an implicit promise between the reader and the character.)

However, there is no 4th wall in this novel. In other words, the story is told in the form of a narrator named Jane confessing her past to the reader. Jane often speaks directly to the reader, saying, 'Reader!' to call their attention.

In this novel, Jane calls out her readers a total of 41 times. In other words, there is a direct conversation between the reader and Jane. This makes the emotional distance between the two closer and makes the reader trust Jane's story more. And this prevents the reader from objectively understanding the situation.

Let's refer to the sentences below.

"And was Mr. Rochester now ugly in my eyes? No, reader: gratitude, and many associations, all pleasurable and genial, made his face the object I best liked to see; his presence in a room was more cheering than the brightest fire."

"I have told you, reader, that I had learnt to love Mr. Rochester: I could not unlove him now, merely because I found that he had ceased to notice me??because I might pass hours in his presence, and he would never once turn his eyes in my direction."

"Reader, I forgave him at the moment and on the spot. There was such deep remorse in his eye, such true pity in his tone, such manly energy in his manner; and besides, there was such unchanged love in his whole look and mien??I forgave him all: yet not in words, not outwardly; only at my heart's core."

"Perhaps you think I had forgotten Mr. Rochester, reader, amidst these changes of place and fortune. Not for a moment. His idea was still with me, because it was not a vapour sunshine could disperse, nor a sand?traced effigy storms could wash away; it was a name graven on a tablet, fated to last as long as the marble it inscribed."

"And, reader, do you think I feared him in his blind ferocity???if you do, you little know me. A soft hope blest with my sorrow that soon I should dare to drop a kiss on that brow of rock, and on those lips so sternly sealed beneath it: but not yet. I would not accost him yet."

From the reader's perspective, two different information collide. One is objective information about Rochester's abuse and the other is subjective information about Jane's description. Then, why have readers so far believed only Jane's description? Because it is easier for us to accept subjective information. Analysis is needed to properly accept objective information. But reading literature falls into the category of entertainment, doesn't fall into the category of labor. (Unless it's a special case like me.) Readers have ignored objective information and trusted Jane's description more. And as a result, Jane has created a fictitious character called Rochester, a kind and romantic.

Isn't it plausible when Jane is speaking in the novel, and isn't it also plausible when you read my posting now? Reader, that is the power of the narrator. The expectation that the narrator will only deliver the truth to you comes from your laziness. And some narrators take advantage of it. And I hope that you will become a reader who transcends narrators. (Don't forget that I am also a kind of narrator in this posting.)