Shirley
by Charlotte Bronte
Edition: After starting with one edition, I switched over to Penguin, which has translations of the French and some interesting notes & character/place info. Translations of the French are a must for me--Bronte doesn't always give indication of what things mean, so if you don't know enough French, it can be a problem. The "character/place info" tells what characters (or places) were based on whom, and I really liked having that, too (in fact, I wish all classic books had that feature).
Overall rating: This is tough....it's so close to being 5 stars. I'll give it a 4.8 out of 5 stars.
[If there are any typos in this review, let me know.]
The story: Britain is at war with Napoleon, and English citizens are at conflict among themselves: the mill owners of Yorkshire bring in new machinery to improve their business, which incenses the working class, whose labour has been significantly replaced. Caroline Helstone--the niece of a misogynist Yorkshire clergyman--meanwhile lives in a dreary, tedious, lonely world of her own, half-longing to meet the mother she had been separated from as an infant, and hoping to be loved by the only person who seems to care for her on her own merits: her unsentimental cousin, Robert Moore, who is a Belgian immigrant and now owner of Hollow's Mill. Life is further complicated with the arrival of young Shirley Keeldar, the heiress of the nearby Fieldhead estate. Shirley takes a decided interest in Hollow's Mill...and in her tenant, Robert.
My thoughts: In short, this is another excellent novel by Charlotte Bronte; not quite as admirable or must-read as Jane Eyre, and not quite as good as Villette; but undeniably, Shirley is a good read. It was actually a page-turner; in every chapter that looked like it would be boring, and every time the narrative changed focus to a different character, I kept reading, and almost every time it turned out to be very interesting and absorbing. Charlotte Bronte is underrated these days in comparison to Jane Austen or even Dickens and Gaskell; she is always associated with Jane Eyre--certainly, it is (IMO) her greatest book, but for some reason, her other books are overlooked and largely disregarded. This really is unfortunate, because both Villette and Shirley deserve to be more read, and Shirley would certainly make an excellent costume drama. Why?
In Shirley, Charlotte Bronte not only writes with her own distinctive style, but there are moments of Dickens and Austen as well. Humour is often shown through quirky, interesting, or absurd characters, as in the three curates introduced in the first chapter: Mr Donne, Mr Malone, and Mr Sweeting. The chapter "The Curates at Tea" was hilarious, and rather Dickensian. As for the Austen-esque aspects, the whole story is set in the Regency era; and the two heroines, Shirley and Caroline, are both described as very pretty--something one expects in Sense & Sensibility, P&P, and Emma, not from the author of Jane Eyre. Shirley Keeldar is also quite different in character than Jane Eyre or Lucy Snowe.
But you know, this novel ought to be titled Caroline, instead; she is really the main character, the heroine the reader (this reader, at any rate) can relate to. She might be pretty, but she's also shy; by nature, she's reserved, but when called upon to host a tea when the annoying neighbours come calling, she does her duty with graciousness and cordiality as best as she can. Her uncle, though not in essence a "bad guy", never gave much thought to her education, and never really befriended her; but she doesn't hold a grudge against him. She's a Cinderella character, in that sense. Nor is she entirely timid, either; when insulted by a Mrs Yorke, she defends herself with as much spirit as Elizabeth Bennet. And though she might sound like one of those characters that is "too perfect", Caroline does have faults; one of which is that she can get rather emotional.
Shirley quickly befriends her; Shirley, in fact, is surprisingly not like Emma Woodhouse--Shirley is kindly disposed to everyone, except those of really bad/intolerable character. Though we don't get much background information about her, she seems to be an orphan; she comes to Fieldhead with her governess, Mrs Pryor, and soon is running the place quite easily. Independent is the word that describes her. She's also slightly a bit of a tomboy--her first name, in fact, had been originally meant for what her parents had hoped would be a boy; she likes to be in charge, and have all the responsibilities and privileges of a gentleman. At the same time, she's still quite ladylike and feminine. While I wouldn't call her one of my favourite characters, she is somewhat likeable in way, and I wasn't expecting to like her.
There is something realistic about characters that aren't 100% wonderful or 100% bad; it takes true talent to be able to write characters like that. Bronte not only did that with Shirley Keeldar, but also with Mr Helstone and Martin Yorke, to name a couple of other characters in Shirley.
The plot is pretty good. It's not brilliant, but it's not boringly realistic (a la Wives and Daughters). Somewhere in between. The attack on Robert's mill and the scenes leading up to it were really exciting--but that part concluded rather disappointingly. The book could have used even more history, and it could have focused even more on the mill-owners vs. workers thing, too. The reader instead sees almost everything through the viewpoint of the female characters, who, naturally, weren't very involved in the conflict--there's no Mrs Thornton, unfortunately. ;) Again, though, this is realistic; and since that is a good reason for the book to be less action-packed, I guess it's ok...
So, you could say that this was a mostly "character-driven" book. I liked most of the "good guys", but my least favourite was Robert's younger brother, Louis, who is teaches French. Consequently, my least favourite parts of the book mainly were the ones that focused on him and his love for...you'll see who. Deep down, Louis is a romantic, poetic kind of guy; having to read about his contemplations, agonies, and loving thoughts gets to be annoying. Happily, they don't take up too much of the book.
Happily, too, Robert Moore is not like Louis--Robert is more likeable, in my opinion. He's handsome and hardworking; you like him from the beginning. Or almost like him. He starts out with one pretty bad fault: selfishness. He's relatively poor and his cloth-making business isn't going well, so it's understandable, but it's selfishness all the same. Robert doesn't really care about what will happen to his workers after they get replaced by looms--he's focused on raising his own fortunes and bringing back the family business to the level of prestige it once had. In a way, he's like Mr Thornton (from North and South), although the situation is worse, in a sense: the Yorkshire people don't ask for higher wages, they ask for jobs. Robert eventually goes through character development and "learns his lesson", however; another proof that Bronte was a good writer.
If you're still patiently reading this wordy review, I will now get to the reason why I didn't give it 5 stars. ;) Probably the one main thing I didn't like about this book was the use of Biblical and mythological references & analogies. Don't get me wrong, I am all for Biblical references, but in this book, they were used a lot and sometimes the reference/analogy seemed irreverent. I don't know if that was intentional, and I don't think the author meant any wrong; she was a rector's (clergyman's) daughter herself, and growing up reading the Bible very often, it probably was second nature for her to make Biblical references when talking or writing. [Not to mention, her books are very Christian and moral as a rule--characters pray, forgive, and repent.] Anyway, as for the mythological stuff, I personally find it silly and boring. She probably read a lot of those stories, however--"classics" as they are--so I guess one can overlook it.
As a romantic novel, it's pretty good, though not as good as Villette. Apparently, Bronte wrote this at a point in life where she was felt she wasn't going to end up marrying anybody; maybe this book reflects that. SEMI-SPOILER: Maybe there's also something halfhearted about the happy ending in Shirley. I don't know. In any case, it's good enough to keep you reading, so that's pretty much what counts, in the end.
In summary: I don't necessarily recommend this as a first Charlotte Bronte book, but if you like Jane Eyre and/or Villette, you'll probably like Shirley, too. I think it was definitely worth reading; and while more history would have been nice, it gave enough insight on the Luddite riots & Napoleonic era, that I did feel like I was reading about something new (to me). :)
0 comments:
Post a Comment