The Tenant of Wildfell Hall: Anne Bronte
I once read an article about children’s thoughts on the Narnia books. When asked which was his favourite, one boy replied ‘whichever one I am reading at the moment’. I feel the same way about the Brontes.
‘The Tenant of Wildfell Hall’ is split into three parts. The first is told by Gilbert, who is smitten with the mysterious tenant, Helen Huntingdon. The second is Helen’s story, told through her diary. The third is what happens next. (Wow, that was an insightful summing up. But really, that’s it.)
I’m sure the ghost of Anne gets bored to tears with the constant comparisons with her sisters. When she’s not going ‘HEY. Pay attention. I wrote books too. Read mine! It’s less hysterical than Wuthering Heights, and there are no dead-eyed missionaries like in Jane Eyre.’ I hear you, Anne. The comparisons are pretty irrelevant. There are no gothic or supernatural goings-on in ‘the Tenant’: just good old-fashioned storytelling applied to the most modern of subjects.
Helen is a much more effective heroine than Jane or Cathy; who seem like they’re all independent and modern, but if you think about it, they are still extremely submissive. Helen might want a man, but she doesn’t need one; and she won’t sacrifice herself in order to get one. She’s a bit boringly saintish at times, but at other times, her desire for revenge is all too human, and that’s what makes her so interesting. Who hasn’t been warned off a man but then been even more determined to stick with him? Who hasn’t been blind to a man’s faults and then believed that they could change him? Oh Helen, the only difference between twenty-first century us and you, is that fortunately, nowadays we at least get the chance to find these things out before we marry them: and if we find out afterwards, most of us have the chance to get out. In this book, the women have the virtue, but the men have the power; and there ain’t no escaping them.
I do wonder what Helen sees in Gilbert. He seems to me to be selfish, impetuous and childish – all traits shared by her husband. She’s clearly much too good for him. You think that she would learn from her mistakes, wouldn’t you? (Well, I guess we don’t.) I also thought the framing of the story in letters and Helen’s diary didn’t really work. Surely the brother-in-law would know the story? And are we really supposed to believe that Helen only writes in her diary once a year, but when she does pick it up, she records everything in minute detail?
Read this and help me rescue Anne from just being ‘the other Bronte’. And check out this other recent review from Shelf Love.
Posted on September 7, 2010, in Uncategorized and tagged 19th century literature, anne bronte, book review, book reviews, books, classics, feminism, reading, the tenant of wildfell hall, women. Bookmark the permalink. 8 Comments.
This was a wonderful book! I didn’t like Anne’s other book at all, but this one was brilliant!
I hate how Anne is always forgotten/ignored. For example I read Jude Morgan’s The Taste of Sorrow about the Brontes which has a different name in the US: Charlotte and Emily, despite the fact that it’s about all of them.
I haven’t had a chance to read this yet but I own it and will maybe crack it open later this year. Have you seen the miniseries? I thought it was pretty good and would definitely recommend it.
I haven’t – but now I’ve put it on my lovefilm list! Do you mean the one with Tara Fitzgerald?
The Tenant is my favorite Bronte book and I’m glad to see it receiving much love on blogs lately.
I’m horrified to hear that Taste of Sorrow is called Charlotte and Emily in the U.S. That’s awful! No wonder I hadn’t seen the book around! And I’m now doubly glad that I bought a copy in England this year.
I really enjoyed this book and am sad that it isn’t read more. I still prefer Jane Eyre and am not sure I agree with you that Helen is more independent than Jane. Equally independent, perhaps, but not more independent. Jane, after all, left Edward and was ready to reject romantic love altogether, just like Helen. I wouldn’t call Jane submissive at all. And Helen’s eventual inexplicable romance with Gilbert, who I agree is not good enough for her, kind of undercuts her earlier independence. (Cathy, on the other hand, is a self-absorbed needy mess.)
What I had in mind was the relationship between Rochester and Jane – she thinks of him as her ‘Master’ and I think she often puts herself in a subservient position to him. And they can only get together when he is weak and needy: they can’t come together as equals, just as they are (aside from the whole mad wife thing). I think it could be a partnership of equals, because she’s obviously more than a match for him intellectually, but it’s not, both because of the social conventions and because she sets him above her in her mind. I think, anyway. But you are right about the stunning act of independence – definitely equal to Helen’s. And Helen does let herself down with the Gilbert thing. So now I don’t know anymore. It’s like a more elaborate literary version of ‘who would win in a fight between….’
Ah, yes, I see what you mean. That makes perfect sense. I guess they’re independent–and dependent–in different ways. I think Jane stands out to me as more independent because at the end she still has her independence, even if, as you say, she’s not exactly in an equal relationship. And we just don’t know what Helen’s relationship will be like, other than it’s not one we’re enthusiastic about. So “who would win in a fight” is quite right!
And on a slightly different note, I wonder if Anne herself saw Gilbert as an ideal man, or if the ending was simply her giving in to the expectation that women get married. I tend to think the former, but maybe not. That’s something I’ll ponder on a reread someday, I’m sure.
Pingback: Anne Bronte – Agnes Grey | amused, bemused and confused