Personally, I think the central idea or message that is being tried to get across is that Mr. Brocklehurst is not who he seems and therefore hope still exists. While on the outside Mr. Brocklehurst portrays himself as a kind person who is doing the right thing for his community and for the girls, this chapter gives us insight into who he really his. The greatest example of his contrast in this chapter comes when his wife and daughter walk into the room. Moments earlier he had just finished saying that his, "mission is to mortify in these girls the lusts of the flesh; to teach them to clothe themselves with shame-facedness and sobriety" but when his wife and daughter walk in they were, "attired in velvet, silk, and furs". If Mr. Brocklehurst was really working towards a greater good, he would include teaching his wife and especially his own children in the same way. The chapter continues to highlight the insecurity of Jane and the children while showing Mr. Brocklehurst's harsh and wasteful means of punishment and reform. But the strongest example of hope for a brighter future comes when Helen smiles at Jane when she is in the middle of her punishment. Jane says, "it was the effluence of fine intellect, of true courage; it lit up her marked lineaments, her thin face, her sunken grey eye, like a reflection from the aspect of an angel". The tiniest smile can be the true form of revolt and hope for Jane as she faces the unfair punishment for Mr. Brocklehurst.
You bring up valid points about the contrast between what Brocklehurst says and does, but be sure that you look at HOW the author (or narrator) uses language in order to do so. Also, consider social and historical context- it's significant to the passage and thus significant to the question and your response.
ReplyDelete