In a video, I saw Mr. Dai Jinhua explain the 2011 version of "Jane Eyre" with the two themes of "light and shadow". I was curious about what she would say, so I came to see it, of course, without having seen her explanation.
I happened to be reading Tang Yonghua's literary theory again, and he said that "modernity" in a philosophical sense is a "historical" and "cultural" trend of thought. In short, those universal spirits that are close to eternity. To put it in a phrase I forgot where I saw it, it is: "I can still see Du Fu in the crowd in front of me." "Crowd" refers to the migrant workers huddled in the morning subway in Beijing. In this way, Du Fu's creations are There is a sense of "modernity".
Regarding "Jane Eyre", I have always felt that the existence of the famous novel just shows that we still have many problems that have not been solved. For example, when I read Turgenev, I would think of the dead fields I saw when I returned to the countryside during the Mid-Autumn Festival. "Jane Eyre" is about how to deal with the contradictions between self, passion, possession and suspicion in love. "Falling in love with someone you shouldn't love" still happens every day; "Choose to succumb to love, or choose your infinite self", this contradiction is always resurrected by those who like to invoke "lowly to dust". Love and devouring, this topic, Lu Xun stood on the pessimistic side in his "Death", and "Little Women" was completely happy. "Love is just an event," and where the choice ends, sets the tone. In this way, Jane Eyre is a comedy, but preciously, it is a sad comedy story. Because of the inconsistency in the interpretation in the middle, people who are in love are often dealt a fatal blow. This is "modernity".
For ordinary readers/viewers, after Jane fled, she hid in the distance, but expected Mr. Rochester to come suddenly, expecting him to find his own mentality, maybe after breaking up with him and blocking the other party's WeChat, insomnia all night waiting for him to call ( He even imagined that he had the same mentality as he borrowed someone else's mobile phone to make a call. Sometimes it only takes one reason, or a little imbalance between contradictions, to have all the conditions for a fall. Reason in love can always be ignored. As for Jane's "suddenly rich" plot, I don't think that, as other critics have said, the literary value lies in her being neither humble nor arrogant, and in the spirit of self-respect and self-love even though she is poor. Once a literary character is made a saint, the work seems to be elevated. For famous works, the reasons for gaining the status in the literary world are stronger and more understandable, but in fact, this also simplifies the characters and dilutes the real literature. People are complicated, the people who write about them are complicated, and the people in the book should be even more complicated. I prefer to replace the plot of Jane getting rich to today. Jane is not only hesitant in love because of poverty, but she is hesitant to face everything in life. (Otherwise, she would not have written to her uncle who wanted to give her inheritance from afar to clarify that she was not dead. Of course, after she became rich, she generously shared her wealth with those she liked, which showed that she had a kind heart, that is, she I know that poverty makes life trapped, and I want others to get out of the predicament with me.) Jane, who is trapped in poverty and is always hesitant, seems to be the previous life of those who are hesitant to live. I also often fantasize about what would happen if I suddenly won the lottery? If I am rich, will I become beautiful, rich and happy? The value of this plot is the empathy of "modernity", the care and compassion of literary works. Ordinary readers will pay homage to the "sage plot" far away, but will also think silently at the moment of reading about themselves. The "modernity" of the latter would be more classic.
Speaking of movies, text-based movies should have an angle to show that they are different from the text. You have to give a reason not to read the book to watch this film, or why you still watch this film after reading the book. Many famous movies seem to focus on obedience, such as "Little Women", such as "Young Victoria"... Maybe this point is the easiest to operate. The 2011 version of "Jane Eyre" did not avoid this fate, but the surprise is that, as Mr. Dai Jinhua said, it also did other things. Even if you don't see Mr. Dai's words, it's hard to ignore the light and shadow in the movie. Mainly, it's too peculiar and deliberate, but not offensive or pretentious. After thinking about it for a while, it is probably related to the text itself. What moves people in "Jane Eyre" is actually emotional and psychological, not a huge narrative of the times or a paradoxical plot. In movies, light and shadow are simply the spokespersons for the characters' emotions, and they are also the masters of manipulating the audience's thinking. The manor is pitch-dark at night, and Jane is exploring her own destiny, as well as her subconscious vigilance. The poor little yellow candle, which is so fragile, is her love and reason that gradually disappears. The manor is always sunny during the day. Except for the attic incident, Jane wandered between a small road surrounded by trees on both sides. The road was divided into two visual planes because of sunlight and tree shadows. One side was full of sunlight, and the other side was The trees cast shadows, and it is easy to walk and think between the two. It's hard not to associate the contrast between the two sides of this road with Jane's inner tangle, and even to assume that this is an omen of fate.
I'm probably here, I'm going to see Teacher Dai's class. (and, prepare to die without preparing those papers?)
View more about Jane Eyre reviews
