Austen and Bronte in the Room

I had read an exerpt from a “A Room of One’s Own” several years ago, and it interested me and continues to interest me even more now. It focused on Virginia Woolf’s character, Judith or Shakespeare’s sister, who could never be given the opportunity that her brother had. She could have equal intelligence and talent, but no one would ever discover this. “To have lived a free life in London in the sixteenth century would have meant for a woman who was poet and playwright a nervous stress and dilemma which might well have killed her” (50). I think this still rang true for women in later centuries. However, there were some, despite the depressed conditions of women writers, who were seemingly less affected and, therefore, admired by Woolf.

The author of her essay (in addition to several of her other essays) pointedly acknowledges her fondness and admiration for Jane Austen in the fourth chapter. She also pays respects to Charlotte Bronte—just not as wholly. Although the two authors stemmed from similar conditions, both writing within their nineteenth century confines, they wrote differently. She states, “…all the literary training that a woman had in the early nineteenth century was training in the observation of character, in the analysis of emotion” (67). Austen prevails over Bronte because how their ultimate truths through fiction were depicted. Austen had to “hid[e] her manuscripts or cover them with a piece of blotting paper,” yet her “circumstances were not “harmed in the slightest” (67-8). Woolf parallels Austen to Shakespeare. Austen was able to convey, clearly, human truths based on her observations without intertwining the irrationalities of emotion. I believe Woolf felt that if one mixes her personal emotions into her work, it will be discredited. “She will write foolishly where she should write wisely. She will write of herself where she should write of her characters” (69-70). This is the very problem that she has with Charlotte Bronte.

Bronte was not rational; she acted impulsively and seemingly incorporated too much of herself into her writings. “In other words, we read Charlotte Bronte not for exquisite observation of character—her characters are vigorous and elementary; not for comedy—hers is grim and crude; not for a philosophic view of life—hers is that of a country parson’s daughter…” (Gilbert and Gubar 1330). She failed to separate her emotions to convey a sense of truth to her reader. She contends that Villette is Bronte’s “finest novel,” which connotes her respect for Bronte. I have to wonder, however, if Woolf knew that Bronte’s ending was altered because of her father’s wishes—regardless of her own wants. “Mr. Bronte was anxious that her new tale should end well, as he disliked novels which left a melancholy impression upon the mind; and he requested her to make her hero and heroine (like the heroes and heroines in fairy-tales) ‘marry, and live happily ever after’ (Bronte 538). Bronte, it seems, was easily influenced and affected, which made her a better (romantic) poet than writer in Woolf’s opinion.

Although this was not included in her essay, Woolf was not alone in her opinions of Austen. One of her Bloomsbury male counterparts also held Austen in high regard—E.M. Forster. I bring this up because of some of the assertions Forster was included in Jane Marcus’ “Sapphistry: Narration as Lesbian Seduction.” She contends that “E.M. Forster, Lytton Strachey, Goldsworthy Lowes Dickinson, and their friends were misogynist in their lives as well as in their writing. Virginia Woolf, already exacerbated by her own sense of sexual difference was, I think, confused and disturbed by the woman-hating of her male homosexual friends….” (177). I am certain that there is truth to Forster’s misogynistic tendencies based solely on his preference for men, but Austen was influential in his writing. If he hated her, he would be either hypocritical or unconscious of his writing behaviors. He admits fully that he enjoys Austen’s humor. He even refers to himself as a “Jane Austenite” in a review published in 1924. He further explains in the same publication that he has “read and re-read” Jane Austen. He hasn’t done this in an attempt to deconstruct and destroy Austen as a woman writer. If anything, I believe he connects with her points of view on human nature and common observations—despite the 100-plus year difference. Possibly, we can see Forster just as much of a manx cat as any of the women—not that he lacks the “tail,” but he is different from his male heterosexual or bisexual Bloomsbury companions. He is an outsider on the Isle of (hetero)Man. Just as much as Austen had to hide her manuscripts from a busy room, I believe Forster had to hide his sexual preference from a busy hetero-man driven world.

To end, I believe there was an unforeseen foreshadowing to Woolf’s statement concerning Judith in relation to the author’s own life. Although she wrote as more in Austen’s steady and effective likeness versus an emoting Bronte, her society and emotional mentality created the “stress and dilemma” which led to her untimely death. I wonder how she would feel about the progress that has been made in the literary world today.