pixel skylines
dirt enthusiast
Three Goblin Art
Sweet Seals For You, Always
Discoholic 🪩
Cosmic Funnies
occasionally subtle
tannertan36
PR's Tumblrdome
hello vonnie
🪼
titsay
Sade Olutola
cherry valley forever
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Jules of Nature
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
seen from Greece
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from Belgium
seen from Lithuania
seen from India
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from South Korea
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Belgium
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Spain
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@budsbooks
I appreciated how some "Jane Eyre" adaptations like the 1973, 1997 and 2006 versions included the scene where Jane interacts with Pilot in Thornfield Hall then later in Ferndean Manor. It signifies how Pilot would later recognize and accept Jane as the mistress of Rochester family.
"Jane Eyre" 1973 version:
"Jane Eyre" 1997 version:
2006 version:
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Duomo Milán
This is absolutely gorgeous
5th of april '26
I love hitting that sweet spot of a book where you get hooked
stack challenge: Matching Sweaters & Books
Check out books by order
This is more of what I've missed since leaving booklr and bookstagram!!!! So much joy!
friday | may 15
rereading frankenstein as a real-life scientist instead of a high schooler is slightly alarming because victor and i have a similar approach to work-life balance in the chemistry lab.
Years ago I left Tumblr for Instagram, but then I left Instagram because of all the reels and algorithms - but this is what I've missed. This is what I've come back for!
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
“I advise you, Hastings, to go to bed.”
“No,” I said. “Not unless you do. I’m not going to leave you.”
“Most faithful of dogs! But see you, Hastings, you cannot assist me to think. That is all I am going to do-to think.”
I still shook my head.
“You might want to discuss some point with me.”
“Well-well-you are a loyal friend. Take at least, I beg of you, the easy chair.”
-Peril at End House, Agatha Christie
I will never be over this book. I will never be over this exchange. I will never be over these two.
And then Hastings immediately proceeds to fall asleep in the armchair for the night. So precious!
books I’ve read in 2025 📖 no. 104
Peril at End House by Agatha Christie
“Evil never goes unpunished, Monsieur. But the punishment is sometimes secret.”
AGATHA CHRISTIE'S POIROT - 02.01b PERIL AT END HOUSE (1990)
DAVID SUCHET and HUGH FRASER as HERCULE POIROT and CAPTAIN ARTHUR HASTINGS
Currently reading!
also another reading tip: rereading books counts as reading. you are allowed to do it. i often find that reading a book i loved at least a second time allows me to appreciate it more and dig deeper into it.
Katabasis is on my list!
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I was asking because people always point to the sequence where Jane and Rochester go to town as the nadir of their relationship. I guess because he’s ignoring her protests. So I wanted to get your scholarly thoughts on it.
...I am a scholar, but I'm not a Jane Eyre scholar, and though you say that "people always point" to the London trip as the nadir of the Jane/Rochester relationship (not the scene that Rochester describes as the "mouth of hell"? not the scenes where they are both trembling on the verge of madness and parting? okay) that's not a pattern I've observed.
Anyway. Much as I love Jane (as she deserves) and her Edward (as he does not) I think that it really matters, in this sequence, that Charlotte Brontë is doing things. There is Thematic Narrative Work™ happening. Jane keeps imagining herself as a kept woman, the mistress of the man she describes as her lover and master, a sultan's houri, and -- most tellingly -- "an English Céline Varens." This is not what is happening from Rochester's perspective. He is buying clothes for his wife. And she is resisting what he would lavish on her ("so gloomy to have your bride, however bigamous, insisting on grey alpaca or merino or whatever it was, and damping to a lover's feelings," as Sayers' Dowager Duchess of Denver observes.) But we might also view this as Narrative Foreshadowing™ as, from Jane's perspective and a legal one, marriage is, in fact, not what this is heading towards.
Meanwhile Rochester, in heartbreakingly high spirits, asks her what she will be doing while he -- in her analogy -- is buying up women in Istanbul. She responds coolly that she will become a missionary. More narrative foreshadowing, we might say, as precisely this path will lie open before her! But Rochester's only response is to say that if she feels that way, perhaps she would like some add-ons to the marriage vows, and terms of her own. I think it's insanely hot, parenthetically, to suggest that a woman might set the terms of her own union. Insanely hot. Also really interesting given the narrative position of Bertha. Jane says that she wants an easy mind and mutual regard. And these terms, as we know, she will have when (reader) she finally marries him.
Few more Jane Eyre characters, these huge skirts are real fun to draw 🌻
I’ve been discussing Jane Eyre a lot lately and wanted to get your opinion on something. During the engagement period, why was Rochester all of a sudden trying to shower Jane with fancy gifts and clothes? Was spending money on someone just his weird way of showing affection, or did he have other motives?
...Sometimes people like getting gifts for those they love.
Also Jane genuinely does not own anything appropriate to her new station.
Also this is the first time that he's had the power to do this for a wife; his father was still alive and in charge for negotiation with the Masons (who would, I think, have been in charge of Bertha's trousseau anyway.)
I think there's absolutely a lot to take out of this sequence about the dynamics of their relationship at this point in the narrative, particularly regarding Jane's reticence and withdrawal in the face of his slightly manic generosity. But I don't see why Rochester's behavior reads as "weird" to you here.
I saw an earlier post (maybe it inspired this ask, I don't know) where in one of the comments, someone accused Rochester of "lovebombing" by doing this.
Since then I've been pondering whether or not that accusation is fair.
"Lovebombing," if I understand it correctly, is a manipulation technique. It means purposefully showering a romantic partner with excessive affection, attention, and sometimes gifts to gain power over them.
Now we know that Rochester can be manipulative. There's the whole Blanche Ingram episode, the fortune teller disguise, and of course the methods he uses to hide his ultimate secret, Bertha. And Jane is uncomfortable with his attempts to shower her with expensive gifts and flattery, for all the reasons that lovebombing is uncomfortable. The flattery she feels is dishonest (she adores Rochester yet still admits he's not handsome, so why should he be suddenly calling her beautiful?), while the gifts make her too aware of the social difference between Rochester and herself and make her feel too much in Rochester's debt and power. When he describes his plan to give Jane a diamond necklace as putting a "chain round your neck," the wording was clearly intentional on Charlotte Brontë's part.
So the question is worth asking: is Rochester doing it on purpose? Is he trying to increase his power over Jane to try to ensure that she never leaves him, not even when she inevitably finds out about Bertha?
I'd like to think not. I prefer to think he's genuinely trying to give her love in the way he's been taught. Like the OP said, his marriage to Bertha was arranged, so he's never really courted a woman before. The only other women he's had relationships with were mistresses, who wanted him to spend money on them – for them, that was the whole purpose of being with him. Based on his past and on social expectations, Rochester assumes it will make Jane happy to have gowns and jewels lavished on her, and to be doted on and called a "beauty" and an "angel" for the first time in her life. After all, it made his mistresses happy and it would have made Blanche Ingram happy. He also wants to force other people to acknowledge Jane's worth and "beauty" by dressing her in the height of fashion, and to teach Jane to "value herself" too. When she resists, I assume that at first he thinks she's just being modest and self-doubting, which is why he won't stop.
(And now I'm thinking of the debate I've seen in the Wicked fandom about whether in the song "Popular," Glinda is doing the wrong thing by trying to give Elphaba a makeover that's isn't true to her character and is uncomfortable for her, or doing the right thing by helping Elphaba become more confident and more fashionable so that everyone will finally see her natural beauty. And I'm imagining Rochester singing a baritone rendition of "Popular" to Jane.)
I remember reading a post a long time ago which said something like "Jane and Rochester are both autistic, but Jane talks like an autistic person, while Rochester tries to talk like a neurotypical person." Of course that wasn't Brontë's intent, there was no concept of autism in her time. But there's truth in it. Jane and Rochester are a pair of eccentric misfits, which draws them together, but Rochester tries imperfectly to follow the rules of upper class society, while Jane, who's always been shut out from upper class society, makes no such effort.
I think I agree with this. While I was at university they tried to relate the gold chain to enslavement, but while I think it was intentional, I think it points less to Bertha and more to Celine Varens. Jane is a breath of fresh air to the materialistic performative world he knows, but equally it's all he knows. It points more to the truth that Rochester will essentially be making her his mistress without her knowledge and trapping her into an illegal marriage.
"Do you remember what you said of Céline Varens?—of the diamonds, the cashmeres you gave her? I will not be your English Céline Varens. I shall continue to act as Adèle’s governess; by that I shall earn my board and lodging, and thirty pounds a year. I’ll furnish my own wardrobe out of that money, and you shall give me nothing."
So literary-wise, there are lots of connotations, but just judging from Rochester's character, I think it's just a case of falling on old habits of how to show love - he's just had some sad and twisted formative experiences.
Young Cathy and Heathcliff find a half staved unconscious Jane Eyre on the moors and poked her with a stick to see if she's dead. She isn't roused by their proding and they don't care enough to try and help her so it isn't mentioned in either book.
headcanon accepted!
I'd take it if it was Cathy and Heathcliff's ghosts instead!
Nerding out a bit, Wuthering Heights was set around the 1770s, whereas Jane Eyre was set around the 1810s. The date isn't as clear for Jane Eyre, except that in Chapter 32 she references a Walter Scott text which would date it no earlier than 1808. Because the novel mentions events in the life of King George III, the book must end before 1820, technically making it a regency story rather than a Victorian one! But, being published in 1847 and exploring many Victorian themes, it's still a pretty great example of a Victorian novel!
