Customer Reviews

Jane Rochester:A Novel Inspired by Charlotte Brontė's Jane Eyre

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Kimberly Bennett begins her "sequel" at the point where "Jane Eyre" leaves off, with a description of Jane and Edward's wedding day and early married life, as they adjust to each other sexually and otherwise. As if to mimic the original, the sequel also includes a crazy lady with murderous intent, although this one is not locked up and is a bit more of a threat to Edward since he is blind. It also expands upon the Rochesters' relationship to her newfound cousins, the Rivers', as Diana and Mary become brides, and St. John prepares for the mission field in India. The little orphan Adele makes a cameo appearance every so often, as she is mostly at school.

Although I enjoyed the "sequel" for the most part, it really didn't convince me that "that's the way it happened." 1. Being a self-proclaimed "passionate" woman, I don't believe that Jane would have the problems adjusting to a sexual relationship that is described in this book. Nor do I believe that Edward would let it go on for so long! (2) I have some real problems with St. John Rivers' passion for Jane, and her own inner glee when he offers to drop all his missionary plans and run off with her to America. That he might feel such passion doesn't surprise me, but that he would act on it just doesn't seem in character. And that Jane would take pleasure in the suffering of another...well, if she did, she'd never write about it. (3) And that leads to my third point: Jane would never write in such detail about her sexual relationship. THAT is quite definitely a characteristic of TODAY'S romance novels. Perhaps it was necessary to capture the attention of today's readers. But I just don't believe that Charlotte Bronte would have done it that way.

In spite of the above, I would have given this book a four-star rating if it weren't for all the annoying typos and grammar errors in it--more than I've seen in ANY book! Doesn't the editor know the difference between "its" and "it's" or "there" and "their" or the error in saying "Edward and I" when it should be "Edward and me". Believe me, the sheer NUMBER of errors is staggering and makes one suspect that this publishing company is less than professional. Also, books this size are difficult to hold with one hand and require that one be sitting up to read it. PLEASE!

If you're a dyed-in-the-wool Jane Eyre fan, you shouldn't miss this one, but I wouldn't call it a romance exactly since it covers mostly what happens AFTER the "happy ever after" ending of the original novel. So if you're looking for romance, read (or reread) the original!

I was excited about this book; 'Jane Eyre' is one of my favorite novels and I was eager to read about Jane and Edward's marriage. Although I was interested enough in it to read it to the end, I do have complaints.

First off, the other reviewers were right in that Jane's voice isn't authentic; she wouldn't be so graphic in her descriptions of the sex scenes. And what's up with Edward? I really don't think he would have returned to being so sullen as he was in Bronte's book. At times he's on fire for Jane (as he should be!) and in other instances he ignores her and acts almost bratty. This certainly isn't the dashing Edward Rochester we all know and love.

If you choose to read this book you'll notice on nearly every page incorrect grammar and misplaced punctuation. The publisher is one I've never heard of, yet *someone* could have taken better care in editing.

All in all, a fair read if you're a true Jane buff (as I am), but don't have high expectations. It's better to buy a used copy or borrow one if possible; at this price you won't get your money's worth. Ms. Bennett *is* a good writer and I believe is capable of a great work, but I think sometimes it's best to leave well alone. Don't mess with a classic!

"Jane Rochester" is a sad excuse for a novel and should have never even been published. Not only is the plot unimaginitive and unworthy of being considered a sequel to a classic like "Jane Eyre," it is the most poorly edited book I've ever read. There's on average one grammar or spelling mistake on every other page. What a disappointment to readers and lovers of "Jane Eyre" everywhere.

DO not buy this book. Grammer errors are so frequent that it is almost unreadable. Names are confused. The story line is horrible- brief interludes of attempted murder without motivation or development, just an attempt to seem "gothic"? The entire novel rings as insincere and does not at all follow the personality or motivations of Jane Eyre (or for that matter, Mr. Rochester, Mary and Diana Rivers or St. John Rivers). Did Kimberly Bennett really read the origional book?
Now, for a good sequal to a great book, read "Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife". This was well done, if a little risque'. Having read both books in the same week, makes me wonder what could be done with a Jane Eyre sequal with a different author.

"Jane Rochester" tries to fill in the account of Jane's first 2 years of marriage that is briefly mentioned in the final pages of Bronte's "Jane Eyre." Bennett continues the narrative as Jane and attempts to make it feel like the original. Unfortunately, it falls short.

The stories that fill in the details of what happens to Jane's cousins are interesting, but not entirely compelling. Jane and Edward's relationship just doesn't seem to gel. Edward's disabilities are only mentioned when they are convienent. And I must agree with another reviewer: Jane would never speak of intimacy as she does in this book. (Look back to the original novel at the proposal scene for how delicately things are described.)

All in all, it's interesting to see what "may have" happened to the Rochesters, but if you are looking for something that will even remotely measure up to the original, I would skip this one.

I was intriqued by this sequel to Jane Eyre, but the grammatical errors were off-putting. Can anyone tell me why the price of this book is now so inflated?

After checking out the other customers' rather mixed reviews, I succumbed to intense curiousity and decided to buy it and judge for myself. In 'Jane Rochester', Bennett paints a vivid picture of Jane's trying first years of marriage--her virginal fears, her confusion and pain as her beloved Edward slowly withdraws from her, her shock at her cousin St. John's secret lust for her, and, at last, Jane's shy, yet joyous, discovery and exploration of her burgeoning sexual womanhood..Diana and Mary Rivers put in appearances as well (along with many others) as Mary prepares for her own wedding and Diana meets her future husband, Edward's boyhood friend, Captain Nathaniel Fitzjames. My main problems with this book included the threat of yet another madwoman (obsessed with Rochester!), St. John's behavior (I could see him secretly carrying a torch for Jane, but not openly confessing his desire!), and Jane's rather vivid description of her sexual explorations. I just can't imagine Jane being quite that explicit.Bennett's book comes nowhere near Bronte's wonderful 'Jane Eyre' in terms of quality, but she makes an intriguing effort. If you can take this book as more of a typical gothic romance novel and relish the glimpse it offers of our much-beloved characters, I think you might enjoy this book!

This book certainly entertained me for a couple of hours despite its far fetched plot (yet another mad woman?) and not well developed characters. The author thought a lot about how Jane and Rochester might interact as a married couple, given all that had happened to them, but if you are looking for the technique, vocabulary and "voice" of Charlotte Bronte, don't look here. This book is really a glorified romance novel and as such can be enjoyed as mind candy of the most frivilous sort. None of the supporting characters in this book would have behaved in the manner that the author conceives, if she remained true to the time of the story, but it is interesting to see her extrapolate from the original plot and set out on a modern tack. I am sure she had fun writing this novel, although I don't believe she is as deep a scholar of English lierature as is A.S. Byatt who in Posession totally created the "voices" and different language of the two poets. And all the editing mistakes - if I were the author I'd be embarrased with such an edition.

I read this book, despite all the bad reviews I heard about it. And though some parts were a little off, the book itself was interesting. And it helped passed the time. I do agree with most everybody about the sex scenes. They were a little...un-needed and explicit. The overall plot was okay. Interesting though. I didn't expect it. Whoever would have thought Jane and Rochester would meet up with yet another crazy woman.
The one thing I particularily did not like was the fact that Rochester wore an eye patch over his blinded eye. I just can't imagine him wearing one. Edward Fairfax Rochester was definitely not a pirate!

I was eagerly awaiting someone to write a sequel to one of my favorite books, Jane Eyre. While the narrative wasn't terrible, there were too many editing errors in this book to make it one of my favorites. Also, Jane's estrangement from her husband was not believeable - certainly not within character.