Some have interpreted Bertha's "insanity" actually being social mores that contrasted with their current society. Her violent tendencies were actually caused by being locked up in relative isolation for several years. Some of her actions may be seen as hinting at a better nature than Rochester attributes to her: She admittedly does try to kill Rochester (who has kept her locked up in the attic for years) and her brother (who, to the best of her knowledge, sided with Rochester and abandoned her), but she doesn't actually hurt Jane even when she has every opportunity do so, and she only sets Jane's room on fire after Jane has already left.
Between the amount of literary analysis surrounding race and gender as it pertains to how she is depicted and Perspective Flips such as Wide Sargasso Sea, Bertha Rochester has practically inspired an entire cottage industry of Alternate Character Interpretation almost single-handedly.
Is Jane a reliable narrator on an Unreliable Narrator, particularly about Bertha? For example, according to Mr. Mason, Bertha can still speak ("she said she'd drain my heart"), but Jane's narration paints her as an animalistic being who only makes non-verbal noises. Might Jane be exaggerating Bertha's madness in an attempt to justify her own choice to forgive and marry Rochester?
Is Helen an example of Incorruptible Pure Pureness, or is she an Extreme Doormat too concerned with the afterlife to bother trying to accomplish anything in life?note Bronte fans sometimes ask this about Maria Bronte since Helen is known to be an exact portrait of Maria according to Charlotte. In total fairness to Helen, it's heavily implied that she's already dying and knows it even when Jane first meets her, adding a hint of fatalism into her character.
Is it right and admirable of Jane to leave Rochester rather than be his mistress while his wife is still alive? Or does she misguidedly throw away her happiness for the sake of oppressive conventional morality, and does the fact that she goes back in the end show positive growth?
What would Jane have done if, when she came back to Thornfield after hearing Rochester's voice calling for her, she had found it intact and Bertha still alive? Would she have left again once she was assured that Rochester was well, or would she have become his mistress after all?
Did Céline Varens callously abandon her daughter, or was she counting on Rochester to provide a better life for her? She definitely knew he had the means, and possibly understood that while he was too cross to react positively to any direct request made by herself, he would be too conscientious not to come to the rescue if he heard the little girl was in a difficult situation. Adèle herself seems to remember her mother fondly.
Common Knowledge: Contrary to every movie and TV adaptations where they set the story in the Victorian era, Jane Eyre is actually set during the late reign of King George III. This misconception was probably based on the year when the novel was first published.
Designated Villain: Bertha. She's the main obstacle that stands in the way of Jane and Rochester's romance and she gets a Karmic Death at the end, complete with Rochester redeeming himself by trying to save her, yet her only "crime" is suffering from insanity and being understandably furious with Rochester for imprisoning her and her brother for failing to help her. That said, Bertha is portrayed with some sympathy and Jane even calls out Rochester for vilifying her so much, because her mental illness isn't her fault.
Bertha. From what little we see of her (and from what Rochester tells us of her behavior), some symptoms suggest suggests hypermania, some severe dementia, and some is like very severe autism — though that was hardly going to have developed in adulthood. It doesn't help that her description sounds like she's badly neglected- however difficult she is, Grace could at least do something with her hair. Justified, as this was long before any modern language about mental illness was in use even by experts.
Unlike Bertha Mason, whose variety of generically "mad" symptoms challenge modern readers who are trying to figure out what her mental illness would be in modern terms, the way Helen Burns describes her problems with learning map pretty well to ADHD. Specifically, she can only pay attention to subjects she's already interested in, her thoughts "rove", she's disorganized, forgetful, and she reads other books in dull classes. This is likely because Helen was directly based on a real person (Maria Brontë, Charlotte's deceased sister) and kids had ADHD in the 19th century too—it was just imputed to willful misbehavior rather than a legitimate issue.
Fair for Its Day: When taught as a proto-feminist work, some readers may find it disappointing, as the broad strokes of the story — ending in marriage — seem unsatisfying. But viewed in the historical context, Bronte's heroine ceaselessly fights for her agency and independence. As a small child she rebukes and corrects Mrs Reed, at a time when this simply was not done.note As in, it would not even have occurred to a child to speak or even think such things, or to an adult that a child could think or speak this way. This is why Mrs Reed says "it was as if an animal that I had struck or pushed had looked up at me with human eyes and cursed me in a man's voice". She runs an ad in the paper to get a job, and when her employer tries to make her his mistress, she gets the hell out of Dodge and slogs through the wetlands, without recourse to known friends or places. When she gets settled, she helps with a school for peasant girls. She refuses to marry a man she's not in love with. And when she does settle down in marriage, it is a match of passion, and intellectual and fiscal equality. Everything Jane does, she does on her own terms, without compromise.
Ensemble Dark Horse: While Bertha Mason is a Small Role, Big Impact, she is more of a plot device than a character, and we know very little about her beyond being mentally ill and Rochester's first wife. But she is ripe for interpretation, even becoming the subject of a prequel novel Wide Sargasso Sea.
Hollywood Homely: Rochester and Jane are described as "unattractive" and "plain", respectively, but both pass up on more attractive potential mates to be with each other. Most adaptations cast attractive actors anyway, with Rochester played by dashing older gentlemen and Jane played by attractive women in somber attire. Charlotte Bronte even wrote Jane as plain in response to Wuthering Heights to prove to her sister that a heroine didn't need to be beautiful.
Iron Woobie: Jane. Her parents died when she was very young and she's initially raised by her horrible aunt, who excluded her from the family and let Jane's cousins (especially John) ruthlessly bully her. And when Jane tries to stand up for herself, she's punished in a highly traumatic way. She is sent away to a school for poor/orphaned girls where she is again bullied by the school's director, who humiliates her in her public and falsely declares her a liar. During an outbreak of typhus, her best friend dies in her arms. At nineteen, she gets a position as a governess and falls in love with her employer, but spends a great deal of time suffering as she believes he doesn't feel the same and he's openly courting another woman. Then she finds out he does love her and is all set to marry him...only to find out he's already married and nearly tricked her into committing bigamy. So she leaves, becomes extremely ill trying to hike across the countryside without adequate food and shelter, and would've died if the Rivers siblings hadn't taken her in. She generally takes all of this in stride and keeps her dignity and self-worth intact.
The "Reader, I [X] him." line from the last chapter is a classic one.
"How am I suppose to breathe with no Eyre?"
Ron the Death Eater: Rochester, who is surly and somewhat morally ambiguous, is often lumped into the same category as Heathcliff. This completely ignores the fact that Rochester is a moral guy who has made some mistakes over the years, and only acts aloof and like a jerk to people who more or less deserve it. To wit, he looks after a young girl despite doubting he's her biological father after her mother abandons her, is respected by his servants, keeps his violently insane wife in the attic, with a caregiver and basic amount of care, where she cannot hurt herself or anyone else, instead of sending her to an asylum (which were not nice places at the time) and risks his life trying to save all the servants and the wife he can't stand in the fire. The worst thing he does is trying to dupe Jane into marrying him whilst he's still married to Bertha which he pays dearly for. Seeing as Heathcliff has committed kidnapping, forced marriage and extreme abuse, Rochester is practically saintlike in comparison. It's also easy to forget that the popular Fanon that Bertha wasn't really insane before Rochester locked her up, and that he only really did it to control her and lies to Jane about it, is pure Alternate Character Interpretation, not actually implied in the novel.
Values Dissonance: While this novel is certainly incredibly progressive for its time, as with anything that's over 150 years old, there are dated social norms that wouldn't fly today:
Possibly the most blindingly obvious instance in 19th century English literature is the case of Bertha Mason being locked up in the attic for being mentally ill because back then people thought mental illness was a result of weak character. Worse, the very first really humane asylums for the mentally ill were being opened at the time and place the book is set (Yorkshire in the 1810-1820 period). Rochester could have afforded to pay for getting Bertha a place in one out of his pocket change with nobody knowing who she was. Granted, "humane" is a relative word here—a lot of nineteenth and even twentieth century institutions still turned out to be pretty grim places. Hence, even if better asylums were starting to open, the impression of asylums basically behind Bedlam House was hard to shake off, and it's not inconceivable that some people would still think it preferable to keep an insane relative at home, though Rochester clearly could have made some more effort into taking good care of her. And there are shades of Jane's thoughts on the way she's treated as being more in line with the modern view that mental illness is like any other illness that isn't asked for when calls him out on his behavior:
"Sir," I interrupted him, "you are inexorable for that unfortunate lady: you speak of her with hate — with vindictive antipathy. It is cruel — she cannot help being mad."
Rochester dressing up as a fortune teller involves him darkening his face with makeup. This detail is removed in most modern adaptations and is a likely reason why the scene is often removed entirely.
There's this casual antisemitic slur:
Jane: What do I want with half your estate? Do you think I am a Jew-usurer, seeking good investment in land?
Mr. Brocklehurst, in his over-the-top way, illustrates a change in how we see child development. He lectures all of Lowood about how Jane is a liar and must be shunned. To modern readers, mendacity in a child, while not good, is not as bad as sadism (which John Reed shows). But to the Victorians, lying was the worst vice that you could find in a child, a marker of an inherently evil character.
A young woman in her late teens marrying her boss who's about forty obviously would be frowned upon today as well. However, women marrying older men was very common for much of human history. It would also make sense for Rochester to marry a much younger woman (Blanche is 25) since he doesn't have any legitimate heirs and someone closer to his own age would have a hard time having children, since 40 back then was very old to have a child at all, let alone a first one. Bronte herself likely died of pregnancy complications from her own late first pregnancy at the age of 38. Mr. Rochester was said to be based on Constantin Héger, Charlotte's former teacher in Belgium whom she had deeply attached with.
Viewer Pronunciation Confusion: St. John Rivers always trips people up: it's pronounced "Sinjin", not "Saint John". It doesn't help that the character's religious nature continually invokes saints.
Helen Burns. She's a young orphan who is humble to the point of self-deprecation. She is verbally and physically abused by Miss Scatcherd, including whipping her for letting her mind wander during class. She never stands up for herself or protests, because she believes in Turn the Other Cheek. And then she gets sick and dies a painful death from consumption in the arms of Jane, her only friend. The main comfort she clung to in her short, miserable life was that things would be better in Heaven.
Poor Julia Severn, another pupil at Lowood. She has beautiful curly red hair, but Mr Brocklehurst decides that she must have curled it herself out of vanity, which to him is one of the biggest sins. Ignoring Miss Temple's protests that her hair is naturally curly, he orders that all her hair be cut off and kept short out of reasons of 'modesty'. Jane then notes his hypocrisy when she sees his own daughters with their artificially curled hair.
Broken Base: Many fans are divided on which Jane Eyre adaptation is the best. There are fans who likes the adaptation where it closely follows the novel, fans who think that following the novel closely leaves little room for creativity and wanted to see something unique, and fans who enjoyed to see adaptations that are close in spirit of the novel.
Some fans prefer the production values and cinematography of 2006 version, while many fans enjoyed the 1983 version for being close to the book.
While many fans considered Timothy Dalton (1983) as the best actor for Mr. Rochester, many people enjoyed the performance of Toby Stephens' (2006) take on the same character.
Opinions differ on which Jane's actresses are better. Ruth Wilson (2006), Zelah Clarke (1983) and Charlotte Gainsbourg (1996) are some of the most popular choices among many fans.
There are some debates between the 1973 version and the 1983 version when it comes to closeness of the book.
Never Live It Down: The 1957 Matinee Theatre version cemented this kind of status because of a scene where Mr. Rochester becomes drunk and tries to flirt with Jane.
Stuck in Their Shadow: Many viewers usually talk about the actors of Mr. Rochester more than the actresses of Jane in many adaptations, to the point where they remember the names of the former first in looking different versions (e.g. Orson Welles, Timothy Dalton, etc.). Zelah Clarke, the actress of Jane in 1983 version sums up the status regarding the actors' popularity there:
Zelah: Everyone remembers the Rochesters; nobody remembers the Janes.
since the 1970 movie version was released there. It is taught in Chinese schools and has adapted in Chinese operas.