I found this trailer thanks to fellow historical romance writer, Aekubo (via FB)!

After a bleak childhood, Jane Eyre goes out into the world to become a governess. As she lives happily in her new position at Thornfield Hall, she meet the dark, cold, and abrupt master of the house, Mr. Rochester. Jane and her employer grow close in friendship and she soon finds herself falling in love with him. Happiness seems to have found Jane at last, but could Mr. Rochester’s terrible secret be about to destroy it forever?

This was the only trailer on YouTube but you’ll find a better one here.

Whose excited?!? I AM! –I’ve watched all the adaptations of this book, from the black & white to the latest BBC version. And I never tire of these remakes. Granted, some adaptations are downright horrible. But still, anything titled Jane Eyre, I will watch.

Sometimes people ask me why I love Jane Eyre so much–why this book is always first to come to mind when asked what my fav book is, why I often reference this book, why I jump up and down when people mention it. The reason is that, to me, Jane Eyre is THE ultimate love story. It’s so passionate! I love how Bronte’s writing draws me so close to the story, allowing me to feel what burns, oppresses, uplifts Jane’s heart. I feel it all. And Rochester!…Don’t even get me started. Not even reading the Wide Saragasso Sea (the prequel to Jane Eyre, revolving around the life of his “mad wife”) could make me hate him.

Also, it’s not just the book itself that I love so much, but the significance of that book in my life. Jane Eyre is like my “first love”. You’re not too sure why you loved that guy, you just did, and because he was the first dude you ever truly cared for–memories of him hold all the more meaning.

This novel has played such a big role in my life because it’s the book that got me into reading classic lit. Heck, it’s what got me to love books in the first place! I wouldn’t be the writer that I am now had my dad not taken me to the bookstore one day to randomly buy me Jane Eyre because 1) it was on sale, and 2) it was published by Penguin, so he thought it was a trustworthy book to buy in his last, desperate attempt to convert his English-reading-writing-hating-daughter-who-nearly-failed-her-English-class into an avid reader .

(My dad buys books like that for me. He bought me this random novel for my birthday. I asked: “Thanks for the book, dad. How’d you come to choose this one though?” He answered: “Well, look. It’s a New York Times bestseller. So I’m sure it’s going to be a great read”).

The first time I read this novel, I was in grade 7, and began reading from ch11 because the first half of the story was booooring. But I fell in love with Mr. Rochester. The second time I read the book, I skimmed through Jane’s childhood. The third time i read it, I read carefully from chapter one to the end and loved it to death. I’ll be read this book again this year for one of my literature classes and I am so excited!

So, tell me about your experience with Jane Eyre and why you do/or do not love the novel!

HISTORY!!! Now that I have your attention…

Note: If you don’t care to read about my Oliver, scroll down to check out the movie poster of an upcoming period movie!

1) I’m researching for a major paper and came across one of the many rare books at my university (can’t wait to touch ’em all *creepy laughter*!). It contained pages so brown with age that I had to be careful as I flipped through, as the paper would literally break between my fingertips. I was enchanted.

The thought that I was holding within my bare hands a book published in 1852…meaning that 158 years ago another person had held this very book… To be exact, that other person had been OLIVER. My heart fluttered reading this name. I became curious about the hand, the MAN, who scribbled down his name. With a quill pen.

Quill pen *swoons* 

1852….that’s like….that’s around when North and South takes place!!! Maybe this Mr. Oliver gentleman was a Mr. Thornton? Hmmmm. *Caresses book* 

  2) Books I’m dying to get my hands on after the deluge of essays and readings comes to an end. Maybe during the winter break:

  • M.M. Bennetts’ Of Honest Fame (It’s by one of my favorite novelist & historian whom I had the honour of interviewing)
  • Michel Faber’s Crimson Petal and the White (Read the first few pages. A very unique voice. And I mean…quite, quite unique)
  • Emma Donoghue’s Slammerkin (Why do I want to read this book? It’s about a prostitute in 18th century. Go figure)
  • James Fenimore Cooper’s The Last Mohican (I loved the movie)

Yes, they’re all historical  fictions. And yes, I’m having a Historical-fic-fetish of late.

While I was in search of supporting evidences for my analysis of this one historical movie, I came across a very interesting passage in Rosenstone’s article “The Historical Film as Real History”. He discusses the difference between historical romance movies and historical movies—and I realized his points very much clarified for me the major difference between the two book genres: historical romance (HR) & historical fiction (HF). So, for anyone interested in a simple and  clear explanation as to the differences in these two genres:

To be considered historical, rather than simply a costume drama that uses the past as an exotic setting for romance and adventure, a film must engage, directly or obliquely, the issues, ideas, data, and arguments of the ongoing discourse of history. Like the book, the historical film cannot exist in a state of historical innocence, cannot indulge in capricious invention, cannot ignore the findings and assertions and arguments of what we already know from other sources. Like any work of history, a film must be judged in terms of the knowledge of the past that we already possess. Like any work of history, it must situate itself within a body of other works, the ongoing (multimedia) debate over the importance of events and the meaning of the past.

3) Check out this poster for the upcoming movie WUTHERING HEIGHTS (2011). “Lindsay Lohan campaigned for the role [of romantic heroine Catherine Earnshaw] but...” another actress replaced her. And then that replacement was eventually replaced. And replaced again. And now I’m not quite certain who the role was given to. Anyway…uhh….thank goodness Lohan didn’t get the role? I can’t imagine her playing the lead role in a PERIOD MOVIE. Maybe it’s because I’ve been exposed to so much bad press about Lohan on tabloids while waiting in line at grocery stores. So if I saw her on-screen as Catherine Earnshaw…I would not see Catherine Earnshaw but the celebrity-in-rehab-and-in-court-and-in-court-again. Gee, I remember the good old days when she was in Parents Trap….

I digress. 

Here’s a photo of Mia Wasikowska (she played Alice in…Alice in Wonderland) from the new JANE EYRE (2011) adaptation! Another adaptation that’ll hit theatres next year. I can see a bit of Alice in Ms. Eyre, peeking into the room without knowing that she’ll soon be tumbling down into a world of romantic madness!



Listening to: