More on Getting to Know Anne.

I said in an earlier post that one of my reasons for reading The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, was my desire to educe something of the nature of Anne Brontë. I presumed I would glean insights from her plot points and the way she presents major characters.

But this raises a question: Is there any reason to suppose that an author’s nature becomes manifest in their writing? I gather the academic view is that there isn’t; I disagree. It seems to me that the driving force behind the plot, the choice of which major characters are promoted as good and which bad, and the underlying tone of the writing must betray something about the person who wrote the work. It’s evident, for example, that the whole of the canon of Charles Dickens leaves no doubt that he was a philanthropist.

So what have I ‘learned’ about dear Anne so far (I’m about half way through the book)? I don’t intend to go on at great length here because I don’t have the mental energy these days, but let me illustrate two examples of what I believe to be central to her nature:

Early in the narrative, Helen Graham – the eponymous heroine – is vehemently opposed to Mr Markham’s mother’s assertion that a wife’s first duty must be to the needs and comforts of her husband, her second responsibility is to her children, and the wife herself comes strictly third in line of priority. Helen’s counter position is that marriage partners must be equal and that a woman has as much right to personal freedoms as a man.

Later in the book, but earlier in timescale (we’re reading from her diary now), she berates her new husband for his rabid self-interest in all things. This matches her apparent feminist inclinations. But then she goes on to say that she would forgive him any amount of hedonistic obsession, and even mistreatment of her, if only he would make commitment to the glory of God his first guiding principle in all things. Her major source of disquiet is the fact that he pays mere lip service – and often rather less – to religion and the pre-eminent status of the Church. (I think it reasonable to presume that Anne’s perception of God comes from the writers of the New Testament, not the Old, since the God of the Old Testament is unquestionably masculine, much given to vengeance and even cruelty, and the ultimate proponent of male superiority.)

So what should I make of the author so far? My first tentative impressions are that she is a feminist in outlook and a very devout Christian. It’s also apparent to me that she is highly intelligent, a keen observer of human nature, and has a natural bent for perceiving and appreciating the workings and variable moods of the natural world.

And so to the bottom line: do I like her? Don’t know yet – probably quite a lot, but the God thing bothers me.

Are my tentative deductions accurate? Don’t know that either. I don’t think it’s possible to be sure one way or the other.

In that case, why am I bothering with the exercise? Because it’s more to my taste than most of the other things clamouring for my attention. There’s no stress factor with this one.