Thank you so much for sharing this documentary! It was very interesting.
I waited to watch it after i had finished reading Middlemarch, because i didn't want any spoilers, and they go and tell the ending of The Mill on the Floss (or at least part of it, i imagine). Grrr!!! Stupid Murphy and his laws. I supose i can just watch the series now hahaha (Sorry, i needed to say it.)
I find it quite peculiar to run into this documentary, I was hoping to see an upload of "Tom Jones, the foundling" but this came across, now over a month Middlemarch has been at my bedside table, next to Rousseau's "Emile" and an old copy of Gulliver's Travels. Thank you for uploading this documentary, her life is not so unfamiliar to me, meaning that her suffering and her genius seem wedded, as with all great minds.
Middlemarch is a slow but eventually a very rewarding reading. I agree about suffering and genius. The Brontes who are my favorites are a perfect example of that. Perhaps geniuses tend to be less well adapted to the norm (some would say mediocrity).
@Alishhh4 Thank you so much. Having to respond to an 8 month-old comment is like sending letters to New York, 200 years ago. I am now reading Les Belles Images by Simone de Beauvoir. I am in the middle of a mild northern European winter and yearning now, for spring. Vi ses!
Yes, Bingley and Edward Ferras might bore you after a while... ; ) Knightley wants too much to teach Emma lessons that's why I don't really like him and Brandon (apart from being boring) is an old man who complains during the whole book about his problems towards Elinor. I couldn't bear it! Mr Palmer is cool too, he nearly beats Collins ; )! Have you ever read Wilkie Collins' "The woman in white"? You would love Mr Fairly, he's hilarious, a bit like Mr Woodhouse only even more annoying, lol!
Bingley is funny and adoreable somehow, Mr Collins ha, ha, no that was a joke ; )!, Henry Crawford (it's unfair which ending JA gave to him, he was just so adoreable and interesting ; ) and Captain Benwick is wonderful somehow ( I wish she would have given his story more place).
I realize now it's been ages since I read Austen. Many of her secondary men that you mention don't ring a bell at all. I like Brandon for his patience and Mr Knightley for being reliable and discreet and I remember I liked captain Wentworth but why? I remember so little of Persuation. I never liked Wickham from the beginning, Ferrars is quite a coward sometimes and Bingley too mild. I can't stand Collins and Miss bates. They would drive me crazy or make me a serial killer. Lol!
Hi, I certainly am sorry to have missed your interesting discussion on men characters in CB and JA novels. I love to read their books, as I enjoy books by GE. Anyway, thanks very much for uploading, I watched with real interest and nearly came late to work :o)
Hi! You can join our conversation anytime. It is always open :)
That thing with work happens to me a lot too. Sometimes I am afraid I won't catch the bus in time because I get absorbed with answering comments. Lol!
Thanks, I have posted one response to your comment already, but cannot see it anywhere. Anyway, I am going to watch the Bronte documentary now, your discussion have even made me to read Shirley again to remember interesting Mr. Moore again:o) Thanks for your job.
chronical (if one can say so ; ), I'll start with the less interesting ones: Brandon is a bore, Darcy is too proud for my taste, Henry Tilney is witty and funny, but a bit too proud of it, Edmund Bertram is an idiot, Knightley is funny to listen to, when he's jealous, but not a man I would chose as lover, because he's too teacher-like and Wentworth is okay but a bit boring. Now the ones I like, despite...well you'll see: Willoughby (mhm, he's just perfect), Edward Farras (cutie! reliable, loyal)
And if I had been CB I would have married him too : ) But I couldn't imagine doing it myself, nowadays.
I've just seen that I overlooked one of your comments -an interesting one!- the one about which heros of literature you prefer to Rochester. I haven't read the books you mentioned there yet, but Darcy wouldn't do for me either, suprisingly ; ) But now we've started to ad JA to the discussion, we never gonna end it ; )! Okay, let's try to be
Strange. I would never have thought, that you can become so happy in a marriage when the love - at first- exists only on one side. I still couldn't imagine doing it. But I also think she didn't ask for so much and that private little happiness was more to her than all fame and success in her career.
I never had doubt for these two. Charlotte once had told Mrs Gaskell that she would be afraid to love with all the strength of her soul because she felt the feeling would not be reciprocated. Now she had the opposite situation. She had to match his love. So when you put together a passionate affectionate woman & a passionately loving tender man the chances are quite good. And Charlotte was never repulsed physically to Nicholls as she did to Taylor. Fame&success don't keep you warm at night :).
I can imagine & certainly would do it. After so many deaths & searching love from two men who could not give it, but moreover after so much loneliness the warmth of true love was quite inviting. Charlotte told to a friend that she didn't like to let love get lost & that Nicholl's offer was to good to be rejected by such a lonely person as she was. After all she concluded she could make a simple man happy & she stressed that to be the first object of affection with anybody is very important.
And the lacking mother had to be replaced by her father or her aunt (but neither of them was very emotional, showing emotion and talking about it I mean). And very soon she had to be the mother of her younger siblings.That N. convinced her to marry him by showing his affection (wasn't he all upset and nearly began to cry when he proposed to her?) and proving his love for her, seems to be very likely. Also the fact how suprised she appears that he has made her that happy is an indication for it.
Yes his proposal quite shook Charlotte, but he also had a public breakdown when one Sunday she went to church&he was performing the service. He lost his voice&started trembling all white in front of her&the eyes of the whole village. His emotion was so apparent & the opposition of her father so known that some women began to cry, Charlotte with them as well :). She also found him in her door weeping in their separation. She entered the marriage with very low expectations but she became happy.
friend and some men they loved. For example in "The mill on the Floss" the reunion with the brother and his understanding of Maggie's behaviour are the most important thing to be settled. And I pity GE for having been so much dependant on the love of a brother who wasn't worth it. And in all of CB's books to love and to be loved is in fact the main issue, which you can understand, but it's still kind of sad. I hope you get what I mean ; )!
Yes in GE's case it shows very much. In CB's case I think that the lack of a mother is more obvious. Charlotte was always insecure & craved for love & sometimes I don't understand how many people fail to see that the main reason she eventually married Nicholls was the fact that he convinced her for his love. So she may not have married from love but she married for love. For the need to see what it is like to be loved. Of course they were both very sexual women so men played a big role.
Mhm, ok I think I can partly agree on that. You've expressed that very well about Lucy's behaviour ; ).
I liked Shirley for the characters presented there, but I didn' t like how the women always foregave the men and how Shirley was "tamned" in the end. I think she wanted to write a happy ending, because her sisters had just died.
It's strange how emancipated GE and CB wrote in some aspects and in others you could tell how much they were influenced by the rejection from men like father, brother
I like it somehow to read about ppl who feel like me, but act differently.
At least I know I wouldn't fall for Rochester. I enjoyed their conversations in the book, but he was just not my taste.
I think what I like most about books in general (and which appears in both GE's and CB's works) is the fact, that the writer is able to express/describe a feeling, a thought, a scenery which you yourself just imagined like that. Like: I was just thinking/feeling the same, how well she expressed it! : )
Ha,ha! That's one reason I like C. Bronte. My taste in men is really more sedate than hers.We would never really fight over a guy. Lol! Oak from "Far from the madding crowd"or Adam from "East of Eden" are more close to my real taste in men,but thanks to Charlotte I can now better understand power related relationships & I can see what is sexy about it. And then if we are to fantasize why not be as wild as we can. I prefer Rochester to Darcy ;) as long as his character is controlled by Charlotte.
About expression of feelings you should read "Villette" by Charlotte Bronte. A thousand different ways and shades to say I am sorry, I am lonely, I am depressed, I am alienated. Marian admired deeply that book.
I have read it and I know what you mean. I found it sometimes so depressing that I had to put it aside for some time not to get depressive myself... That was kind of scary but also fascinating, as if someone lets you look into the darkest depths of his(her) soul... But that Paul Emmanuel (wasn't that his name?) should die at the end, that was very cruel, I think. And Lucy Snow is somehow also a very cold person, as Charlotte said herself. But yes,I like the descriptive parts about her feelings!
I would not have forgiven Charlotte, had she given a happy ending to Villette. It would just seem unnatural like with Shirley and would change the meaning of this book. It is very difficult to write happy endings when your life is really black. I still wonder how she managed to write Jane Eyre after that devastating love story of hers.
I always liked Lucy. She was not cold to me. She was a lot less optimistic and had less self-knowledge than Jane Eyre. A lot of her coldness is really a defense.
She always seems to say "Well if this is what you see in me then this I will become to you". She is so stubborn she could let others blame her and never confront them, having the secret satisfaction that if you choose to believe them then it is your fault and you don't deserve to really know her.
Ha, ha great answer! ; ) You're strict with Marian's girls. I think it's difficult to say what they rather should have done, but I think their behaviour makes them much more human than heroines in other books, that's what I like about it.
Well I'm not that much addicted to Jane Eyre, but I think it's also difficult to judge her. When I read those books I was just like: "Ah noo! Jane/Dorothea/Maggie what are you doing?!?" and followed the development with an huge interest ; )
I realised, that there's another similarity between Charlotte an Marian - at least for me:
When I read their books I never really agree with most of the heroines actions or their beliefs and their strict way of following the rules they have set for themselves (moral guidelines I mean), BUT I still sympathize a lot with them and admire them for their strength, even if their behaviour seems to make them unhappy and I myself would have acted differently. What do you think about that?
Dorothea and Maggie are Marian's only heroines that I remember. I would definitely not be Dorothea. And Maggie would be better either elope for good or leave the company of that gentleman.
For Jane Eyre I don't know. I am not sure whether I would be brave enough to love and claim a Mr Rochester. And I am afraid that if I did, I would have stayed with him. But I like JE so much and have spent so much time being her in that book that I can not be objective. I generally approve of her actions.
I don't think that Eliot's books lack in action, it's moreover the other way round. Well, let us agree on that: they both had their qualities and their faults - as simple as this!
I don't think that there are many people who read comments (or actually watch documentaries about past famous authors) but if they do I believe they must share an interest and they are welcome to join the conversation or just follow it or leave it altogether :)
He only always said what he thought and was straight foreward somehow. And I think Charlotte was mainly offended, because he revealled with the text her sex and she wanted to be judged equally to male writers. And he made her suspect with him mentioning they had written "naughty books" that people could think of her to promote immorality in some way, if they considered her books to be naughty.
It's a shame that George Eliot was rejected by so many people for such a silly reason!
Yes it was really a shame that Victorian England (which in reality was a huge secret bed) was so hypocritical as to blame solely Marian as if they were the really pure ones. However I think Charlotte would have been intrigued to meet Marian, not only as a specimen of a fallen woman but also because she liked clever people. She never truly disliked Lewes either despite their argument.
Well I meant the man Charlotte actually married. And then she died in childbirth, which is of course not his fault, but if she had never married, well who knows?
She may have lived another 7 years of loneliness&bitterness, witnessing the death of her father too.But to tell you the truth I believe Nicholls was one of the best things that happened to her.Unconditional, true passionate love was what Charlotte called "the most precious gem life has to offer" & he gave it freely. Nothing nor even fame can substitute that, let alone that Nicholls surely justified in her eyes the male sex showing to her that there are constant loving men out there.
Thanks a lot for sharing! Now after I've finished the biography of Charlotte Bronte, I realise that a good biography of George Eliot has to come next ; ) I love her books and her way of writing. My sister hates it and I really can't understand that. She wrote so brilliantly and truthfull about life and death and everything in between. All her books I've read yet have made my cry for some reason...
Which Charlotte Bronte biography you have read? Did you like her as a person? Maybe we can discuss it through messages.
I believe George Eliot was equally fascinating and has some great sagacious lines in her novels, but emotionally she never moved me the way Charlotte did. Of course I have to read some more of her work to fully appreciate her.
I've read the one by Elisabeth Gaskell and I think it was quite good, because many letters of Charlotte were included etc. I think she was a bit too strict with herself and very depressive, but how could it have been otherwise, being chronical ill and see all your siblings die. But I think her strenght is admireable and I like to read her books.
George Eliot can be very emotional too I think. Especially The mill on the floss moved me very much. If you havn't read it yet, do so soon! ; D
Well the Gaskell biography has the tendency to make Charlotte appear as a sad victim (but in reality she had a lot more humor and was more spirited than that) let alone that Gaskell could not write about her secret forbidden love nor her relationship with her editor. She leaves a lot unsaid about Charlotte and her interesting personality.
Middlemarch and the mill on the floss are the two books I have read by Eliot. The second is indeed more personal but still it is not as intense as Jane Eyre.
Well, I know what you mean, but many annotations by the editor were added, so I am in no doubt about the points you've mentioned. What I like about the biography, is that Gaskell often let's Charlotte speak for herself including many of her letters, so I think it's well done nonetheless. But I think I will read another to see a different point of view. Could you recommend one?
Well Jane Eyre is very intense indeed, but I think this is due to her using much more her imagination than Eliot,
because she was quite young when she wrote it and had less life experience and therefore wrote kind of more romantic (not implying that this is better or worse than Eliot)). Eliot was already "married" when she began to write novels, so I think that's the difference somehow. I hope I've expressed well what I meant to say ; D
It's interesting that Lewes knew Charlotte and was one of her friends before he met G.E, don't you think so? How interesting would that have been if they had met each other!
I liked most Lyndall Gordons, Winnifreds is good too. Barkers is considered a very complete biography of all the Brontes but I doubt if she ever liked Charlotte enough as she presents her too controlling & kind of bitchy (she could be both but not to the extent she presents her).
Charlottes writing is not intense due to imagination but due to reality. That is a great value of Jane Eyre: it is so very personal&true. My guess is Charlotte was more repressed & this is a great force.
The 2nd part of your answer came after mine :). Eliot did not have the urge of the unrequited needs that Charlotte had when she wrote. I really would like them to have met although no one would take a respectable lady like Charlotte to visit a "fallen woman" like Eliot. Smith Charlotte's publisher never ever took his wife to meet Marian.
Lewes was more of a foe than friend to Charlotte. In judging negatively Shirley in an article he said that women can not reach intellectually men which made her
give her famous answer "I can be on my guard against my enemies but God deliver me from my friends". I guess Lewes after Eliot changed his mind about women or else he would not be so supportive to her. I also know him to have said something like: I love the woman who can write but does not. He also teased Charlotte in a dinner that "there should be some sympathy" between them "as they both have written naughty books". Lol! It made Charlotte angry because she thought him really coarse.
Well, I agree on the things you said about Charlotte's repression being a great force to enable her to write like that, but I think imagination still plays a big role in her novels, especially concerning the mysterious things and the love/romance/relationship matters and all the imagery she uses. And yes her books are nonetheless very personal and therefore true and realistic, which involves the reader very much. But I can see that truth also in Eliot's work, in another form, but still dominant.
I never doubted that Eliot's books were truthful. But she was not so very passionate or sentimental as Charlotte, at least in her novels. However what she loses for me in sentiment,she gains in force of arguments. I believe she was a very bright woman&even more widely read than the Brontes & also knew a lot more of society because she broke all the rules & conventions. But while I see that in her life, I don't see it in her novels. Instead the Brontes expressed what they missed in life: action.
Eliot was kind of repressed too, being a social outcast and you could call that as well a great force she used well. I see many paralelles in their lives: falling in love with a man who rejects them, then finding a man who truely loves them, but is somehow their misfortune in some way...only that Eliot was the fallen one and Charlotte the one who was always very strict with herself and would never have allowed herself to live forbidden love.
I am not sure whether Charlotte would be too strict with herself to live a forbidden love. She was never really tempted. Heger did not love her like Lewes did Marian. You may deduce that from Jane Eyre but for me the most difficult part of this book is to claim that Jane is a moral example. After all we don't know what would she do the second time had Bertha still been alive. For me CB had a more modern view of marriage as a companionship between equals.Rochester's marriage was never that thing.
Perhaps Heger's marriage too was not to her eyes what it should be.She considered madame Heger cold&perhaps thought her possessive,not really jealous.But she was so punished in that triangle&felt so astray from her usual self that came to the conclusion that when she acted against her conscience, she would be punished. like she was for her "folly" "with the total absence for 2 years of happiness & peace of mind" in the past. Losing herself or belief in God would not have helped her much then.
'Romola' is prime for a miniseries in my opinion. How fascinating is the Tito character? With the economy in bad shape, we may have to wait many years before it could happen!
Thanks for this fabulous docu, I attached a Middlemarch music video if you want to have a look - Dorothea and Michael Jackson have quite an affinity!
Many people have mentioned "Romola" and I have not read it. It will sure find a place in my reading list.
I watched your video :). I would never have thought that those two would match. But then again in my favorites you will find a humorous video called "Jane Eyre - Crazy", where Charlotte Bronte and Britney Spears meet and the result is quite funny!
You are welcome! I am glad that you liked it. I was wondering whether there were people out there that were interested in George Eliot. But it was a good documentary and I thought to upload it anyway.
I watched a Brontë sisters documentary just before this one and it's stricking how tragic the lives of these authors were .
BurnSheDevil 7 months ago
BRILLIANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Weenybean 8 months ago
Thank you so much for sharing this documentary! It was very interesting.
I waited to watch it after i had finished reading Middlemarch, because i didn't want any spoilers, and they go and tell the ending of The Mill on the Floss (or at least part of it, i imagine). Grrr!!! Stupid Murphy and his laws. I supose i can just watch the series now hahaha (Sorry, i needed to say it.)
mjloca 1 year ago
I have enjoyed this very much and now am about to reread all my George Eliot :o) HARRIET WALTER'S PERFORMANCE IS STUNNING, she IS Mary Anne Evans!!
Thank you for sharing it here - this way advertising both, the gorgeous documentary/film and the work of an amazing authoress! - Nic in Berlin
Sharkwell 1 year ago
She could speak Italian?
maham21jan 1 year ago
@maham21jan
Yes, and German too, if I remember correctly. She knew Latin and Ancient Greek, so I wouldn't be surprised. She was very educated.
ksotikoula 1 year ago 2
I find it quite peculiar to run into this documentary, I was hoping to see an upload of "Tom Jones, the foundling" but this came across, now over a month Middlemarch has been at my bedside table, next to Rousseau's "Emile" and an old copy of Gulliver's Travels. Thank you for uploading this documentary, her life is not so unfamiliar to me, meaning that her suffering and her genius seem wedded, as with all great minds.
stedetforaske 1 year ago 2
@stedetforaske
Middlemarch is a slow but eventually a very rewarding reading. I agree about suffering and genius. The Brontes who are my favorites are a perfect example of that. Perhaps geniuses tend to be less well adapted to the norm (some would say mediocrity).
ksotikoula 1 year ago
@stedetforaske I share your taste in reading material absolutely.
Alishhh4 1 year ago
@Alishhh4 Thank you so much. Having to respond to an 8 month-old comment is like sending letters to New York, 200 years ago. I am now reading Les Belles Images by Simone de Beauvoir. I am in the middle of a mild northern European winter and yearning now, for spring. Vi ses!
stedetforaske 1 year ago
Thank you for uploading. George Eliot is my fav!
kye909 2 years ago
Yes, Bingley and Edward Ferras might bore you after a while... ; ) Knightley wants too much to teach Emma lessons that's why I don't really like him and Brandon (apart from being boring) is an old man who complains during the whole book about his problems towards Elinor. I couldn't bear it! Mr Palmer is cool too, he nearly beats Collins ; )! Have you ever read Wilkie Collins' "The woman in white"? You would love Mr Fairly, he's hilarious, a bit like Mr Woodhouse only even more annoying, lol!
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Bingley is funny and adoreable somehow, Mr Collins ha, ha, no that was a joke ; )!, Henry Crawford (it's unfair which ending JA gave to him, he was just so adoreable and interesting ; ) and Captain Benwick is wonderful somehow ( I wish she would have given his story more place).
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I realize now it's been ages since I read Austen. Many of her secondary men that you mention don't ring a bell at all. I like Brandon for his patience and Mr Knightley for being reliable and discreet and I remember I liked captain Wentworth but why? I remember so little of Persuation. I never liked Wickham from the beginning, Ferrars is quite a coward sometimes and Bingley too mild. I can't stand Collins and Miss bates. They would drive me crazy or make me a serial killer. Lol!
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Hi, I certainly am sorry to have missed your interesting discussion on men characters in CB and JA novels. I love to read their books, as I enjoy books by GE. Anyway, thanks very much for uploading, I watched with real interest and nearly came late to work :o)
goodstorylover 2 years ago
Hi! You can join our conversation anytime. It is always open :)
That thing with work happens to me a lot too. Sometimes I am afraid I won't catch the bus in time because I get absorbed with answering comments. Lol!
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Thanks, I have posted one response to your comment already, but cannot see it anywhere. Anyway, I am going to watch the Bronte documentary now, your discussion have even made me to read Shirley again to remember interesting Mr. Moore again:o) Thanks for your job.
goodstorylover 2 years ago
chronical (if one can say so ; ), I'll start with the less interesting ones: Brandon is a bore, Darcy is too proud for my taste, Henry Tilney is witty and funny, but a bit too proud of it, Edmund Bertram is an idiot, Knightley is funny to listen to, when he's jealous, but not a man I would chose as lover, because he's too teacher-like and Wentworth is okay but a bit boring. Now the ones I like, despite...well you'll see: Willoughby (mhm, he's just perfect), Edward Farras (cutie! reliable, loyal)
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Fame and success make you lonely in some way : )
And if I had been CB I would have married him too : ) But I couldn't imagine doing it myself, nowadays.
I've just seen that I overlooked one of your comments -an interesting one!- the one about which heros of literature you prefer to Rochester. I haven't read the books you mentioned there yet, but Darcy wouldn't do for me either, suprisingly ; ) But now we've started to ad JA to the discussion, we never gonna end it ; )! Okay, let's try to be
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Strange. I would never have thought, that you can become so happy in a marriage when the love - at first- exists only on one side. I still couldn't imagine doing it. But I also think she didn't ask for so much and that private little happiness was more to her than all fame and success in her career.
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I never had doubt for these two. Charlotte once had told Mrs Gaskell that she would be afraid to love with all the strength of her soul because she felt the feeling would not be reciprocated. Now she had the opposite situation. She had to match his love. So when you put together a passionate affectionate woman & a passionately loving tender man the chances are quite good. And Charlotte was never repulsed physically to Nicholls as she did to Taylor. Fame&success don't keep you warm at night :).
ksotikoula 2 years ago
I can imagine & certainly would do it. After so many deaths & searching love from two men who could not give it, but moreover after so much loneliness the warmth of true love was quite inviting. Charlotte told to a friend that she didn't like to let love get lost & that Nicholl's offer was to good to be rejected by such a lonely person as she was. After all she concluded she could make a simple man happy & she stressed that to be the first object of affection with anybody is very important.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
And the lacking mother had to be replaced by her father or her aunt (but neither of them was very emotional, showing emotion and talking about it I mean). And very soon she had to be the mother of her younger siblings.That N. convinced her to marry him by showing his affection (wasn't he all upset and nearly began to cry when he proposed to her?) and proving his love for her, seems to be very likely. Also the fact how suprised she appears that he has made her that happy is an indication for it.
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Yes his proposal quite shook Charlotte, but he also had a public breakdown when one Sunday she went to church&he was performing the service. He lost his voice&started trembling all white in front of her&the eyes of the whole village. His emotion was so apparent & the opposition of her father so known that some women began to cry, Charlotte with them as well :). She also found him in her door weeping in their separation. She entered the marriage with very low expectations but she became happy.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
friend and some men they loved. For example in "The mill on the Floss" the reunion with the brother and his understanding of Maggie's behaviour are the most important thing to be settled. And I pity GE for having been so much dependant on the love of a brother who wasn't worth it. And in all of CB's books to love and to be loved is in fact the main issue, which you can understand, but it's still kind of sad. I hope you get what I mean ; )!
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Yes in GE's case it shows very much. In CB's case I think that the lack of a mother is more obvious. Charlotte was always insecure & craved for love & sometimes I don't understand how many people fail to see that the main reason she eventually married Nicholls was the fact that he convinced her for his love. So she may not have married from love but she married for love. For the need to see what it is like to be loved. Of course they were both very sexual women so men played a big role.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Mhm, ok I think I can partly agree on that. You've expressed that very well about Lucy's behaviour ; ).
I liked Shirley for the characters presented there, but I didn' t like how the women always foregave the men and how Shirley was "tamned" in the end. I think she wanted to write a happy ending, because her sisters had just died.
It's strange how emancipated GE and CB wrote in some aspects and in others you could tell how much they were influenced by the rejection from men like father, brother
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I like it somehow to read about ppl who feel like me, but act differently.
At least I know I wouldn't fall for Rochester. I enjoyed their conversations in the book, but he was just not my taste.
I think what I like most about books in general (and which appears in both GE's and CB's works) is the fact, that the writer is able to express/describe a feeling, a thought, a scenery which you yourself just imagined like that. Like: I was just thinking/feeling the same, how well she expressed it! : )
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Ha,ha! That's one reason I like C. Bronte. My taste in men is really more sedate than hers.We would never really fight over a guy. Lol! Oak from "Far from the madding crowd"or Adam from "East of Eden" are more close to my real taste in men,but thanks to Charlotte I can now better understand power related relationships & I can see what is sexy about it. And then if we are to fantasize why not be as wild as we can. I prefer Rochester to Darcy ;) as long as his character is controlled by Charlotte.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
About expression of feelings you should read "Villette" by Charlotte Bronte. A thousand different ways and shades to say I am sorry, I am lonely, I am depressed, I am alienated. Marian admired deeply that book.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
I have read it and I know what you mean. I found it sometimes so depressing that I had to put it aside for some time not to get depressive myself... That was kind of scary but also fascinating, as if someone lets you look into the darkest depths of his(her) soul... But that Paul Emmanuel (wasn't that his name?) should die at the end, that was very cruel, I think. And Lucy Snow is somehow also a very cold person, as Charlotte said herself. But yes,I like the descriptive parts about her feelings!
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I would not have forgiven Charlotte, had she given a happy ending to Villette. It would just seem unnatural like with Shirley and would change the meaning of this book. It is very difficult to write happy endings when your life is really black. I still wonder how she managed to write Jane Eyre after that devastating love story of hers.
I always liked Lucy. She was not cold to me. She was a lot less optimistic and had less self-knowledge than Jane Eyre. A lot of her coldness is really a defense.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
She always seems to say "Well if this is what you see in me then this I will become to you". She is so stubborn she could let others blame her and never confront them, having the secret satisfaction that if you choose to believe them then it is your fault and you don't deserve to really know her.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Ha, ha great answer! ; ) You're strict with Marian's girls. I think it's difficult to say what they rather should have done, but I think their behaviour makes them much more human than heroines in other books, that's what I like about it.
Well I'm not that much addicted to Jane Eyre, but I think it's also difficult to judge her. When I read those books I was just like: "Ah noo! Jane/Dorothea/Maggie what are you doing?!?" and followed the development with an huge interest ; )
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I realised, that there's another similarity between Charlotte an Marian - at least for me:
When I read their books I never really agree with most of the heroines actions or their beliefs and their strict way of following the rules they have set for themselves (moral guidelines I mean), BUT I still sympathize a lot with them and admire them for their strength, even if their behaviour seems to make them unhappy and I myself would have acted differently. What do you think about that?
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Dorothea and Maggie are Marian's only heroines that I remember. I would definitely not be Dorothea. And Maggie would be better either elope for good or leave the company of that gentleman.
For Jane Eyre I don't know. I am not sure whether I would be brave enough to love and claim a Mr Rochester. And I am afraid that if I did, I would have stayed with him. But I like JE so much and have spent so much time being her in that book that I can not be objective. I generally approve of her actions.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
I don't think that Eliot's books lack in action, it's moreover the other way round. Well, let us agree on that: they both had their qualities and their faults - as simple as this!
We gonna bore all the viewers of your vid! ; )
But some might be interested too! ; D
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I don't think that there are many people who read comments (or actually watch documentaries about past famous authors) but if they do I believe they must share an interest and they are welcome to join the conversation or just follow it or leave it altogether :)
ksotikoula 2 years ago
well, there you are very, very right! ; )
And I like to read comments (when my laptop is slowing down... ; )
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Yeah I believe you're right there. But it's so sad that her joy and happiness only lasted so briefly...
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
He only always said what he thought and was straight foreward somehow. And I think Charlotte was mainly offended, because he revealled with the text her sex and she wanted to be judged equally to male writers. And he made her suspect with him mentioning they had written "naughty books" that people could think of her to promote immorality in some way, if they considered her books to be naughty.
It's a shame that George Eliot was rejected by so many people for such a silly reason!
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Yes it was really a shame that Victorian England (which in reality was a huge secret bed) was so hypocritical as to blame solely Marian as if they were the really pure ones. However I think Charlotte would have been intrigued to meet Marian, not only as a specimen of a fallen woman but also because she liked clever people. She never truly disliked Lewes either despite their argument.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Well I meant the man Charlotte actually married. And then she died in childbirth, which is of course not his fault, but if she had never married, well who knows?
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
She may have lived another 7 years of loneliness&bitterness, witnessing the death of her father too.But to tell you the truth I believe Nicholls was one of the best things that happened to her.Unconditional, true passionate love was what Charlotte called "the most precious gem life has to offer" & he gave it freely. Nothing nor even fame can substitute that, let alone that Nicholls surely justified in her eyes the male sex showing to her that there are constant loving men out there.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Thanks a lot for sharing! Now after I've finished the biography of Charlotte Bronte, I realise that a good biography of George Eliot has to come next ; ) I love her books and her way of writing. My sister hates it and I really can't understand that. She wrote so brilliantly and truthfull about life and death and everything in between. All her books I've read yet have made my cry for some reason...
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Which Charlotte Bronte biography you have read? Did you like her as a person? Maybe we can discuss it through messages.
I believe George Eliot was equally fascinating and has some great sagacious lines in her novels, but emotionally she never moved me the way Charlotte did. Of course I have to read some more of her work to fully appreciate her.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
I've read the one by Elisabeth Gaskell and I think it was quite good, because many letters of Charlotte were included etc. I think she was a bit too strict with herself and very depressive, but how could it have been otherwise, being chronical ill and see all your siblings die. But I think her strenght is admireable and I like to read her books.
George Eliot can be very emotional too I think. Especially The mill on the floss moved me very much. If you havn't read it yet, do so soon! ; D
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
Well the Gaskell biography has the tendency to make Charlotte appear as a sad victim (but in reality she had a lot more humor and was more spirited than that) let alone that Gaskell could not write about her secret forbidden love nor her relationship with her editor. She leaves a lot unsaid about Charlotte and her interesting personality.
Middlemarch and the mill on the floss are the two books I have read by Eliot. The second is indeed more personal but still it is not as intense as Jane Eyre.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Well, I know what you mean, but many annotations by the editor were added, so I am in no doubt about the points you've mentioned. What I like about the biography, is that Gaskell often let's Charlotte speak for herself including many of her letters, so I think it's well done nonetheless. But I think I will read another to see a different point of view. Could you recommend one?
Well Jane Eyre is very intense indeed, but I think this is due to her using much more her imagination than Eliot,
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
because she was quite young when she wrote it and had less life experience and therefore wrote kind of more romantic (not implying that this is better or worse than Eliot)). Eliot was already "married" when she began to write novels, so I think that's the difference somehow. I hope I've expressed well what I meant to say ; D
It's interesting that Lewes knew Charlotte and was one of her friends before he met G.E, don't you think so? How interesting would that have been if they had met each other!
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I liked most Lyndall Gordons, Winnifreds is good too. Barkers is considered a very complete biography of all the Brontes but I doubt if she ever liked Charlotte enough as she presents her too controlling & kind of bitchy (she could be both but not to the extent she presents her).
Charlottes writing is not intense due to imagination but due to reality. That is a great value of Jane Eyre: it is so very personal&true. My guess is Charlotte was more repressed & this is a great force.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
The 2nd part of your answer came after mine :). Eliot did not have the urge of the unrequited needs that Charlotte had when she wrote. I really would like them to have met although no one would take a respectable lady like Charlotte to visit a "fallen woman" like Eliot. Smith Charlotte's publisher never ever took his wife to meet Marian.
Lewes was more of a foe than friend to Charlotte. In judging negatively Shirley in an article he said that women can not reach intellectually men which made her
ksotikoula 2 years ago
give her famous answer "I can be on my guard against my enemies but God deliver me from my friends". I guess Lewes after Eliot changed his mind about women or else he would not be so supportive to her. I also know him to have said something like: I love the woman who can write but does not. He also teased Charlotte in a dinner that "there should be some sympathy" between them "as they both have written naughty books". Lol! It made Charlotte angry because she thought him really coarse.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Well, I agree on the things you said about Charlotte's repression being a great force to enable her to write like that, but I think imagination still plays a big role in her novels, especially concerning the mysterious things and the love/romance/relationship matters and all the imagery she uses. And yes her books are nonetheless very personal and therefore true and realistic, which involves the reader very much. But I can see that truth also in Eliot's work, in another form, but still dominant.
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I never doubted that Eliot's books were truthful. But she was not so very passionate or sentimental as Charlotte, at least in her novels. However what she loses for me in sentiment,she gains in force of arguments. I believe she was a very bright woman&even more widely read than the Brontes & also knew a lot more of society because she broke all the rules & conventions. But while I see that in her life, I don't see it in her novels. Instead the Brontes expressed what they missed in life: action.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Eliot was kind of repressed too, being a social outcast and you could call that as well a great force she used well. I see many paralelles in their lives: falling in love with a man who rejects them, then finding a man who truely loves them, but is somehow their misfortune in some way...only that Eliot was the fallen one and Charlotte the one who was always very strict with herself and would never have allowed herself to live forbidden love.
I don't think Lewes meant to offend Charlotte.
moonstruckfaye 2 years ago
I am not sure whether Charlotte would be too strict with herself to live a forbidden love. She was never really tempted. Heger did not love her like Lewes did Marian. You may deduce that from Jane Eyre but for me the most difficult part of this book is to claim that Jane is a moral example. After all we don't know what would she do the second time had Bertha still been alive. For me CB had a more modern view of marriage as a companionship between equals.Rochester's marriage was never that thing.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
Perhaps Heger's marriage too was not to her eyes what it should be.She considered madame Heger cold&perhaps thought her possessive,not really jealous.But she was so punished in that triangle&felt so astray from her usual self that came to the conclusion that when she acted against her conscience, she would be punished. like she was for her "folly" "with the total absence for 2 years of happiness & peace of mind" in the past. Losing herself or belief in God would not have helped her much then.
ksotikoula 2 years ago
'Romola' is prime for a miniseries in my opinion. How fascinating is the Tito character? With the economy in bad shape, we may have to wait many years before it could happen!
Thanks for this fabulous docu, I attached a Middlemarch music video if you want to have a look - Dorothea and Michael Jackson have quite an affinity!
AdArmand 2 years ago
Many people have mentioned "Romola" and I have not read it. It will sure find a place in my reading list.
I watched your video :). I would never have thought that those two would match. But then again in my favorites you will find a humorous video called "Jane Eyre - Crazy", where Charlotte Bronte and Britney Spears meet and the result is quite funny!
ksotikoula 2 years ago
This was wonderful... Thank you so much for all of your hard work. It is much appreciated.
annabodhi38 2 years ago 2
Thank you for rewarding me with your comment! :)
ksotikoula 2 years ago
George Eliot was a genius. Thank you for uploading this, it was a fascinating documentary.
27rattle 2 years ago 7
Thanks for posting this! Fascinating life!
Thank you! ƙarolyn
weeknightingale 2 years ago 5
Great documentary.
Many thanks for posting.
Was disappointed there was no mention of Eliot's underrated masterpiece, 'Romola'.
TS50ER 2 years ago 4
You are welcome! I am glad that you liked it. I was wondering whether there were people out there that were interested in George Eliot. But it was a good documentary and I thought to upload it anyway.
I have not read Romola :( yet :) .
ksotikoula 2 years ago