LIFE

When it comes to life, one may get confused on whether to think of it as a tragedy or a comedy.

But the truth is life is neither one. Life is simply a journey filled of surprises, some of which are good and enjoyable and some others that aren’t that pleasant but can be overcomed.

I personally prefer to view things the most optimistic way possible, because in my opinion, setbacks and even tragedies will eventually, and to our shock, turn out to be beneficial to our development and maturity. I seriously believe the following saying: “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”. And If I am ever given the chance to change anything that has happened to me so far in my life, I wouldn’t change a thing. The journey I’ve lived, the things I’ve experienced had made me who I am. And I’m happy as I realize how far I’ve gone in life and how wise I became. I would never ask for a life full of happiness and content, because in the absence of tough times one may not be able to realize and appreciate the good moments in life and one may not be challenged to grow, mature and achieve. Life is a beautiful journey that I’ve been lucky enough to experience. It’s not a comedy that one can laugh about and enjoy indefinitely and it’s most definitely not a tragedy. It’s rather a gift and a blessing.

                                                                                                                 

A comparison between the Jane Eyre's movie and novel

      

       To each piece of work its uniqueness and beauty, and thus from the very start, I must be fair and state that both the movie and the book of Jane Eyre were masterpieces.
Most of us, when comparing between the movie and the book search for the key points that either were omitted or were changed in the movie from the real novel (since the book precedes the movie and anyone who had read the story knows every single detail in it). We search and notice these absent or changed scenes probably because we fear that the viewer, one who hasn’t read the story, will fail to understand the point behind the story (including the development of the main characters, their behavior and much more). It’s undeniable that due to the restriction in time, many scenes had to be omitted from the movie. But a small inconvenience was that some of these scenes were very crucial to a complete understanding of the sequence of things. When it was important to realize the reason of Jane’s departure from Lowood School, which is the departure of Miss Temple (a dear person to Jane and the only one she could relate to during both her study and teaching years at Lowood), this scene was no were to be viewed; yet it was very important for the viewer to see, not only to make sense to the sequence of things but also to enhance one of Jane Eyre’s major themes which is the search for home, attachment and oneself. (The above is just one example of important missing scenes).                                          
Although, most of the people would expect that I would go now disadvantaging the novel over the movie in some particular area such as for the successful gothic sets used in the movie, well I won’t. The novel was the fruit of a great mind and only reading the novel would do justice to both the novel and the writter.
However, I will conclude by saying that yes both works were great, but they are not to be compared together. They are just different arts.

?Is Jane Eyre anti-christian

               For some reason, I always find critics trying to destroy some really amazing achievements and remodeling the content to re-shape our vision of it. But I wonder, is it jealousy? Because it seems to me that every time someone comes up with an idea that is different and doesn’t fit into the mold of its time; and by mold I mean the conventionality people create for themselves, this particular idea or achievement is ripped apart by critics saying it’s against religion. And have you noticed that throughout history people have always used religion to protect their personal interest rather than seeking for eternal life? It seems to me that Mrs. Elizabeth Rigby, (a critic of Jane Eyre when the novel was first released) belonged at that time to the high class society, who, fearing a change or reform of the situation after the novel has been read by the population, made her elect Jane Eyre’s novel as being against Christianity (inductively introducing fear to the heart of the people, making them reject every idea offered throughout novel). Jane has done well by saying: “Conventionality is not morality; self-righteousness is not religion.” I don’t really see what opposes Christianity in Jane Eyre’s story; the truth is I feel the opposite so far, I feel that Jane tried to protect Christianity (as a religion not people). To me, the introduction of Helen’s character was no coincidence; it was rather to show that Christianity in its essence is to accept one’s destiny, to forgive those who mistreat us, to love our enemies and to see things always with a good eye. And I believe that however have read the Bible would totally agree with me. I believe that, by introducing Helen to the story, Jane was trying not to erase but to correct the ugly image we saw through Mr. Brocklehurst and some other characters in the story such as Mrs. Reed and her children about Christianity; as it’s not by saying that you are Christian that you become one. If you were born a Christian doesn’t mean you really are one as it is really hard to earn that title. A true Christian would never behave the same manner Mr. Brockelhurst and many others did. Mr. Brockelhurst is a pretentious person rather than a true one. For so many years, as far as I can recall, people have been trying to abuse the title of Christianity and it really infuriates me. People committed murder under religious pretenses, but let’s face it, it has nothing to do with religion and God; it rather has to do with personal and only personal interest. Jane Eyre’s only mistake was that she had awakened the devil from its sleep (she had drawn the high class society’s attention, and fear, she had induced in their hearts from reforms that may be lunched as a result of this novel). Jane Eyre’s story was a fearful one as it introduced to its readers, the poor ones an urge to revolt against injustice and to refuse the social classes and social ranking that have been imposed on them. And I must declare, that deceivers and liars are the people who overpower others the second they’re given the chance to do so. They elect themselves as the most worthy and impose a ranking system so they would become “GOD” and then afterwards state that it’s God who gave them power and authority over the rest (an example is Mr. Brockelhurst). How ironic is that?

my understanding of the significance of Helen-Jane conversation when Jane was dying

To understand the significance of the conversation that took place between Jane Eyre and Helen, when Helen was about to die, we must first understand the significance of Helen’s character in the story. The reader can definitely notice that Helen served as a foil to both Mr. Brocklehurst and Jane.  However, in this particular case, we’re not really interested in the correlation between Mr. Brocklehurst and Helen, yet, it’s important to understand the role she played for Mr. Brocklehurst in order to build our arguments on the character of Helen and what she offered to the story. It’s undeniable that Helen had strength and intellectual maturity; yet, she always negated herself rather than assuring herself (“I make no effort; I follow as inclination guides me. There is no merit in such goodness” (page68)) thus highlighting on the other end Jane’s headstrong character. Helen saw no justice in this world and thus never put effort in finding justice on earth: “we are, and must be, one and all, burdened with faults in this world”; she was sure that God’s ultimate judgment was to give her justice (in heaven) (“if we were dying in pain and shame, if scorn smote us on all sides, and hatred crushed us, angels see our tortures, recognize our innocence, and God waits only the separation of spirit from flesh to crown us with a full reward”) (page83). She believed in the presence of God and heaven. Jane on the other hand was constantly in the pursuit of justice on earth; she didn’t have a blind faith such as Jane and was always searching for love and happiness among mankind. It’s important to note that despite the fact that Jane didn’t have a blind faith, she always counted on God for support and guidance in her pursuit of happiness in this world: “I was silent, Helen had calmed me” (page85) (Jane was convinced with Helen’s godly advice and thus, inductively, she approved it). Now, having understood the differences between Helen and Jane’s characters, we can comprehend the significance of what Helen had said as she was longing to die since she believed in God, and in him only did she see justice and everlasting happiness. Also, being Jane’s best friend, Helen’s words had to a certain extent an effect on Jane’s mentality. Helen having a mind on her own and never fearing to express her beliefs provided Jane’s character with a totally new different way of thinking although instantly it didn’t show.

My view to young Jane from the Jane Eyre's novel

                      For me Jane was an adorable child and I extremely sympathized with her. Despite the fact that the Reeds always depicted her as unlovable (first five chapters of the novel), I could see and feel nothing of what they’ve said of her (“bad animal” (page11) by john reed is one example); instead, all my senses got oriented in a totally different direction, which is: the cruelty of mankind. It’s true that some of Jane’s responses and behaviors were blunt, but I could see where they come from as she was always mistreated and grounded for mistakes she never committed. And, if indeed she was guilty, it’s not entirely her fault as there’s no effect without a cause or may I say many causes. Wasn’t it enough for the characters in the story (her aunt, her children and made) not to love Jane, but to sympathize with her as she has lost both of her parents and was a lonely child? But they didn’t. Instead they were so cruel, and one cannot expect a person to be insensitive. Jane had feelings and she pointed it out real well when speaking to her aunt she said: “You think I have no feelings, and that I can do without one bit of love or kindness; but I cannot live so” (page44). I think that Jane was a good hearted kid but the circumstances of her miserable life didn’t help much in showing that beautiful side of her as a kid. However, the beauty of her heart shows well when she repetitively along the story demonstrated appreciation and content to Bessie’s behavior towards her despite the fact that Bessie didn’t always treat her with kindness. But, the thing is that Jane could see and appreciate these tiny little moments where Bessie was good to her, singing to her and caring for her. And a person that manages to ignore people’s defects and admire their strength is an angel rather than a monster; when, sadly we (and by “we” I mean most of us, the grown up generation) are incapable of such an act. But Jane did see it, and just before leaving her Auntie’s house she couldn’t help but hugging and kissing Bessie. Driving Bessie to realize what a great Kid she (Jane) was and making Bessie express her love to her out loud. So, I guess that however considers such a child as a bad child should unfortunately stand corrected.