Ideologies In Jane Eyre Essay

Dueling Ideologies and Jane’s Quest for Relative Autonomy

In Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre, Jane’s spiritual state is the product of the religious ideologies of her environment. I will focus on the characters of Mr. Brocklehurst, Helen Burns, and St. John. Each character manifests a different mode of interpellation, each of which attempts to hail Jane Eyre into the dominant religious ideology of the novel. Mr. Brocklehurst is a repressive state apparatus (RSA), Helen Burns lives with a false consciousness and acts as an ideological state apparatus (ISA), and St. John is the ultimate ideological state apparatus Jane is hailed by.

Mr. Brocklehurst is representative of a repressive state apparatus, hailing young Jane as a subject of his religious doctrine through force and oppressive tactics. When Brocklehurst first meets Jane, he begins their discourse with the threatening premise that Jane is bound for Hell, “‘No sight so sad as that of a naughty child,’ he began, ‘especially a naughty little girl. Do you know where the wicked go after death?’ ‘They go to hell,’ was my ready and orthodox answer” (Bronte 26). Threat of eternal damnation is followed by public humiliation when Jane is sent to the Lowood Institution. There, Brocklehurst

publicly and wrongly accuses her of being a liar in an attempt to correct her behavior, “‘Teachers you must watch her: keep your eyes on her movements, weigh well her words, scrutinize her actions, punish her body to save her soul: if, indeed, such salvation is possible” (Bronte 56). The Lowood Institute itself, run by Brocklehurst, is another RSA. The girls were starved, clothed poorly, and punished harshly during their stay, all in an attempt to, as Brocklehurst says to Mrs. Reed, “mortify in them the worldly sentiment of pride” (Bronte 28). Brocklehurst’s forceful tactics aimed to conform his students into a mute proletariat that toils for those God deems “deserving” of greater status.
Jane is able to resist interpellation into Mr. Brocklehurst’s ideology because his rod could not begin to overshadow his hypocrisy. One of the most striking scenes with Brocklehurst is when he points out the natural curls of a student in his Lowood Institution as a vain sin, “‘Why, in defiance of every precept and principle of this house, does she conform to the world so openly—here in an evangelical, charitable establishment—as to wear her hair one mass of curls?’” (Bronte 54). The immediate juxtaposition of the plumed state of Brocklehurst’s family contrasts so strongly with the words he had just spoken that even young Jane does not fail to see his hypocrisy, “They ought to have come a little sooner to have heard his lecture on dress, for they were splendidly attired in velvet, silk, and furs…and from under the brim of this graceful head-dress fell a profusion of light tresses, elaborately curled” (Bronte 54-55). It is clear from this passage that Brocklehurst’s use of religion is totally suppressive in nature, and his interpretation of biblical doctrine is subjected to his own whims and advantage.
Helen Burns is often seen as a foil for Jane, and perhaps Jane would resemble Helen quite strongly if she had been unable to resist becoming a subject of Brocklehurst’s forceful, religious ideology. Unlike Brocklehurst, Helen’s religion is fervently genuine. Adrienne Rich, who wrote “Jane Eyre: The Temptations of a Motherless Woman” explores the female characters in Jane Eyre and their shifting roles as mother figures for Jane. Rich describes Helen as, “Severe, mystical, convinced of the transitory and insignificant nature of earthly life…she is consumptive, soon to die, burning with an other-worldly intensity” (473). Helen is certainly convinced of the “insignificant nature of earthly life” to the extreme that no amount of poor treatment can affect her. Helen is a product of her environment; she was not born this way. The world was incredibly harsh to Helen, who was rejected and sent to Lowood by her earthly father. Rich describes how Helen copes: “Helen Burns substitutes a masculine God for the love of earthly men (or women)” (474). Helen is a genuine example of piety. Yet, her piety does not appeal to child Jane, who resists Helen’s submission to the unjust forces of oppression.
Helen is so convinced of the just nature of God that she unquestioningly endures constant punishment from certain teachers. Helen has a false consciousness, believing that her submission is indeed right, and her treatment is deserved. At one point, a teacher named Miss Scatcherd whips Helen publicly for having dirty nails, in spite of the fact that the morning’s wash water was frozen and no one could bathe. Jane is outraged by Helen’s treatment, calling the teacher cruel, but Helen replies, “‘Cruel? Not at all! She is severe: she dislikes my faults’” (Bronte 46). Helen goes on to elaborate on her many faults, “‘I am, as Miss Scatcherd said, slatternly; I seldom put, and never keep, things in order; I am careless; I forget rules; I read when I should learn my lessons; I have no method’” (Bronte 47). Helen is convinced that her abuse is justified, and she fits in perfectly with the religious ideology of the time. Contemporaries of Bronte exalted Helen as the only genuine example of Christianity in the novel, “In [Helen Burns], however, the Christianity of Jane Eyre is concentrated, and with her it expires, leaving the mortal world in a kind of Scandinavian gloom” (Christian Remembrancer 450). Charlotte Bronte was a critical consumer of this ideology, for her young protagonist resisted Helen’s submission vehemently. After Helen is whipped, Jane proclaims rebelliously, “‘…and if I were in your place I should dislike her; I should resist her; if she struck me with that rod, I should get it from her hand; I should break it under her nose’” (Bronte 46). Helen’s “turn the other cheek” mentality does not sit well with spirited, young Jane. However, it is Helen’s dismissal of earthly love that Jane cannot reconcile, and this is demonstrated in one of her most spirited speeches:
‘If others don’t love me, I would rather die than live—I cannot bear to be solitary and hated, Helen. Look here; to gain some real affection from you or Miss Temple, or any other whom I truly love, I would willingly submit to have the bone in my arm broken, or let a bull toss me, or stand behind a kicking horse, and let it dash its hoofs at my chest,’— ‘Hush, Jane! You think too much of the love of human beings…’ (Bronte 58-59)
Young Jane is able to resist Helen, the ISA. But Helen dies early, returning to the Lord. Had Helen and Jane grown up together, I wonder if Jane would have always remained so spirited. I do not have to wonder completely though, because St. John represents the ultimate test and ISA for Jane.
Before I launch into how Jane is able to retain relative autonomy and resist interpellation into St. John’s religious ideology, I must dispel the notion that St. John is another Brocklehurst, and instead liken him to Helen Burns. It is far too easy for the contemporary reader to dismiss St. John’s faith as a tool to forcefully manipulate Jane and others. In Arnold Shapiro’s article, “In Defense of Jane Eyre,” St. John is seen as a suppressor of Jane’s “human heartedness” (681). Shapiro describes St. John’s philosophy as, “an other-worldly life-denying selfish existence nominally carried out in the name of God” (683). He later likens St. John and Brocklehurst by saying, “though St. John’s religion is other-worldly, like Helen Burns, he is closer to Brocklehurst in that he makes no attempt to humanize it, to offer it as a comfort to suffering humanity” (693). I disagree with Shapiro on all accounts and offer that unlike Brocklehurst, St. John’s piety is completely genuine, and he actually lives a lifestyle designed to serve, even if he is not particularly warm or comforting.
I look to Sara L. Pearson’s “‘The Coming Man’: Revelations of Male Character in Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre” for evidence of St. John’s genuine (though life-denying) love of Christ. Pearson argues that the Second Coming of Christ characterizes the male characters in Jane Eyre, “she [Bronte] depicts Mr. Brocklehurst as an antichrist, Mr. Rochester as a false Christ and St. John Rivers as the Bride of Christ” (299). The Bride of Christ is a biblical analogy of the ideal relationship between Jesus Christ and his followers— relationship as devoted, harmonious, and selfless as a perfect marriage. St. John rejected the world; he left family in England, a reciprocated love in Rosamond, and life for an early death in India. His piety was so genuine that he gave up everything for the worldview he believed in.
St. John may not be tender and affectionate to Jane, but that is hardly a reason to render his religion as void of comfort to humanity. Jane says it is hard to become intimate with St. John because, “he was comparatively seldom at home: a large proportion of his time appeared devoted to visiting the sick and poor among the scattered population of his parish. No weather seemed to hinder him in these pastoral excursions” (Bronte 299). We must not forget that St. John dies in India serving as a missionary. Perhaps Shapiro does not consider the populations of India as “humanity,” but I do.
Helen foreshadows the latecomer to the novel, St. John. St. John is what Helen Burns would be if she weren’t a woman and dead. I find their likeness to be most profound in the similarity of their final words. Helen, on her deathbed from consumption declares, “‘My Maker and yours, who will never destroy what he created. I rely implicitly on his power, and confide wholly in his goodness: I count the hours till that eventful one arrives which shall restore me to him, reveal him to me’” (Bronte 69). St. John’s final words also end the novel, and are famously, “‘My Master,’ he says, ‘has forewarned me. Daily he announces more distinctly, -- ‘Surely I come quickly!’ and hourly I more eagerly respond, -- ‘Amen; even so come, Lord Jesus!” (Bronte 385). Both Helen and St. John find no value in earthly life, to the extreme that they beckon their coming deaths. St. John is Helen in her most evolved and influential form: a man offering her marriage, a purpose, and spiritual salvation.
St. John pays critical attention to Jane. He teaches her Hidostanee, pushes her to work through any conditions, and encourages a serious demeanor from her at all times. Slowly, but without force, St. John draws Jane in:
I found him a very patient, very forbearing, and yet an exacting master: he expected me to do a great deal; and when I fulfilled his expectations, he, in his own way, fully testified his approbation. By degrees, he acquired a certain influence over me that took away my liberty of mind. (Bronte 339)
His influence over Jane increases until he offers her a final choice that would signal her complete interpellation into his religious ideology, “You are formed for labour, not for love. A missionary’s wife you must—shall be. You shall be mine: I claim you—not for my pleasure, but for my Sovereign’s service” (Bronte 343). Only by God’s Providence is Jane able to resist him: “‘I could decide if I were but certain,’ I answered: ‘were I but convinced that it was God’s will I should marry you, I could vow to marry you here and now—come afterwards what would!” (Bronte 357). After Jane proclaims this, the supernatural call of Rochester reaches Jane’s ear, and she is convinced that God has approved of her returning to her earthly beloved.
In his article “St. John’s Way and the Wayward Reader,” Jerome Beaty explores the possibility that St. John is not wrong, but is wrong for Jane,
That Providence leads Jane, when she asks for guidance, back to Rochester, away from St. John, does not mean that St. John’s way is wrong or anti-life… His path to salvation lies through self-denial, self-sacrifice, martyrdom. His is the life of agape. Jane’s way to salvation—as the leadings and her experience and Rochester’s indicate—lies through everyday, domestic life, the life of Eros. (Beaty 499-500)
Pearson questions the divide between Eros and agape.

She responds to Beaty’s article by saying, “Beaty suggests that St. John’s way is the ‘life of agape’ while Jane’s is that of Eros. But St. John’s way is also that of Eros: it is simply that his erotic impulses are devoted to Christ” (Pearson 302). I disagree with Pearson. It is an overstatement leaning towards the dramatic that St. John has ‘erotic impulses’ towards Christ. I argue that the ideologies that Helen and St. John represent are based in the total rejection of Eros as Beaty describes it. In their ideology, there is only room for the love of God, or agape. Jane rejects this; she refuses the false consciousness of a world without love already in it, a world with

Eros.
It is too easy now to say that Jane rejects the interpellation of Helen and St. John’s ideologies and reaches a new level of individuality. Her worldview is already congealed by their ideology. Remember, it is only after Providence’s approval that she rejects St. John’s proposal of marriage and returns to Rochester. Beaty is right when he says, “the real center, which in the world of Bronte’s novel, is always and everywhere God” (500). Jane does not have a false consciousness, but she is also not ruled by her individuality. She has merely become a critical consumer in her world that is formed by its religious ideology.