I read it a while ago, but Barker seemed to take an overtly judgmental tone about Charlotte's very evident flaws (including being quite judgmental herself! and socially being more of a Lucy Snowe than a Jane)--especially in terms of her not being dutiful enough or having a bad attitude. In trying to veer away from the Gaskell hagiography…
I read it a while ago, but Barker seemed to take an overtly judgmental tone about Charlotte's very evident flaws (including being quite judgmental herself! and socially being more of a Lucy Snowe than a Jane)--especially in terms of her not being dutiful enough or having a bad attitude. In trying to veer away from the Gaskell hagiography and the tragic Bronte mythos, Barker goes far enough in the other direction as to seem like Lady Eastlake or Matthew Arnold or another Victorian critic impugning Bronte's "hunger, rebellion, and rage." She was a genius who wanted to write; teaching was definitely not her vocation and her discontent is understandable. Emily did much less teaching and was even more antisocial, as Barker does acknowledge, and yet she does not seem to reproach her for not working enough in the same way.
Sorry, this excellent post has opened the Bronte Feelings Floodgate!
No apologies necessary! This is an excellent and helpful thought as I formulate my own thoughts towards the book. I think you're right about the thread of overcorrection as Barker tries to cut against Gaskell, etc. I'd hate for anyone to judge me disproportionately by my frustration with my own crummy jobs in my early 20s.
I read it a while ago, but Barker seemed to take an overtly judgmental tone about Charlotte's very evident flaws (including being quite judgmental herself! and socially being more of a Lucy Snowe than a Jane)--especially in terms of her not being dutiful enough or having a bad attitude. In trying to veer away from the Gaskell hagiography and the tragic Bronte mythos, Barker goes far enough in the other direction as to seem like Lady Eastlake or Matthew Arnold or another Victorian critic impugning Bronte's "hunger, rebellion, and rage." She was a genius who wanted to write; teaching was definitely not her vocation and her discontent is understandable. Emily did much less teaching and was even more antisocial, as Barker does acknowledge, and yet she does not seem to reproach her for not working enough in the same way.
Sorry, this excellent post has opened the Bronte Feelings Floodgate!
No apologies necessary! This is an excellent and helpful thought as I formulate my own thoughts towards the book. I think you're right about the thread of overcorrection as Barker tries to cut against Gaskell, etc. I'd hate for anyone to judge me disproportionately by my frustration with my own crummy jobs in my early 20s.