Jane Eyre in her day was the epitome of the Biblical Esther, and the Ancient Mythological Antigone. She was a fiesty, headstrong, woman who kept to her confines because she knew that using the boundaries that limited her, would ultimately aid her - using patriarchal power to free herself rather than bind her. In all three women, we see an agenda, fueled by personal allegiances and motives, controlled and confined by political expectations. In modern-day feminism, we argue that personal things risk the cause, that they are liabilities rather than beneficial liberties. However, for these women, the personal was their drive - to defend themselves, their people, their brother. Each of them used their femininity and the gender roles that defined them to control the men that headed their patriarchal societies.
The constant tug-of-war between freedom and restraint, their old world and their new world prevents these women from really belonging to either.
I love how you say that modern feminism fails because they risk to much on the personal, when it is in truth the personal aspect that drives these women for freedom. It is interesting because we talked in class about how women were to attached to men and that is a problem of why women can't start a revolution and rise up to become the "one", because there is a personal aspect involved in revolting against the norms of a family. I also agree with how it is a tug of war that puts these women in conflict with the past, the present and the future desires of the "feminine".
ReplyDeleteI think the point you make about these women using patriarchal society and gender roles in their favor is really interesting--that by conforming, in a sense, to societal expectations they manage to use society for their own means. I think that would be interesting to think about in relation to some of the reading we've done with hooks this week, and the passage that talked about patriarchy being willing to absorb as many feminists as necessary. I wonder if hooks and her references would agree that these women were able to play the system, so to speak, or if they were even successful at all? I think they were, in many ways, but it'd be an interesting argument to consider.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement: "In modern-day feminism, we argue that personal things risk the cause, that they are liabilities rather than beneficial liberties." Furthermore, I love how you say that in these three women's cases, their drive and determination are liberties rather than liabilities. I think that this is true in any action movement. Most who are determined to make a difference and push the movement they are a part of have personal experience, heart-strings, and passion for the cause, making them push for what they believe in and have a better chance to succeed. While these liberties can get in the way and make the person close-minded, they are usually useful if constrained to a certain extent. Jane Eyre has a drive to be a part of a family, which I think enables her throughout her story, not disengages her.
ReplyDelete