My sympathy towards Rochester, the animal.

Perhaps it’s the masochist in me, but I find the withholding assholes in literature quite fascinating. The unnamed male narrator/Rochester in Jean Rhys’ Wide Sargasso Sea is no exception. I agree wholeheartedly that he is in fact a “douche” as we discussed in class. But at the same time, I kind of want to get to know him. The last time I was this intrigued with a male character written by a female author was Howard Roark in Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead, also a bit withholding and opportunistic.

Spivak suggests that “Bertha’s function in Jane Eyre is to render indeterminate the boundary between human and animal.” (WSS 241) I actually find both Rochester and Roark’s characters balancing between the idea of man and animal in these two pieces of fiction. Spivak states that “Critics have remarked that Wide Sargasso Sea treats the Rochester character with understanding and sympathy.” (WSS 243) Perhaps it’s due to the animal personification that these critics, as well as myself, find their actions to be excusable.

I have been exposed to a fascinating article written by Donald Pizer entitled ‘Frank Norris’s McTeague: Naturalism as Popular Myth.” He discusses Norris’s portrayal of his protagonist, McTeague, as a human beast and explains that it was a folk-based “fear of the presence of the animal in man” (Pizer) that led to Naturalistic literature. He touches on four main principles imbedded in naturalistic writings: “the fear of the animal in man because of its destructive force, the fear of sex in its uncontrollable and unselective animalistic form because it drives individuals into harmful relationships, the fear of greed because its mix of animality and sexuality results in uncontrollable obsessions, and the fear of the outsider that leads the animal to protect its turf.” (Pizer) Not all of these principles can be applied to Roark, but I feel that Rochester’s behavior throughout WSS can be linked to all four.

I’ll begin with the idea of the fear of animal in man because of its destructive force. Rochester is opportunistic and he’s on survival mode. He has the idea that marrying a woman with wealth will increase his comforts, not dissimilar to nesting before hibernation. This marriage was also a way to separate himself from, pardon this terrible metaphor, the pack. Obviously, this was not a healthy relationship for Rochester or Antoinette, and I feel comfortable defining it as “destructive.”

Next, the fear of sex in its uncontrollable and unselective animalistic form because it drives individuals into harmful relationships is certainly present.

“’You are safe,’ I’d say. She’d liked that-to be told ’you are safe.” Or I’d touch her face gently and touch tears. Tears-nothing! Words-less than nothing. As for the happiness I gave her, that was worse than nothing. I did not love her. I was thirsty for her, but that is not love. I felt very little tenderness for her, she was a stranger to me, a stranger who did not think or feel as I did.” (WSS 55)

This is a perfect example of a harmful sexual relationship. Later on, Rochester’s physical relationship with Amelie is nothing but animalistic. He refers to her as “another complication” and even displays some thoughts of his disgust (and racism if you ask me) when he says “her skin was darker, her lips thicker than I had thought.” (WSS 84)

The fear of greed and the fear of the outsider are both prominent. Rochester can’t divorce his wife, regardless of her mental state, because it would damage his reputation and he wants her family money. He also fears the islands and the inhabitants. He doesn’t understand his current surroundings and constantly is ready to fight for what he feels is rightfully his. Spivaks reference to Christophine’s interaction with Rochester describes it as an “analysis..powerful enough for the white man to be afraid: “I no longer felt dazed, tired, half hypnotized, but alert and war, ready to defend myself” (WSS 95, 245).

Maybe I’m working too hard to disregard the cruelty in Rochester because of my slight crush on him, but regardless, the naturalistic elements stood out to me so I thought I’d write about them.