[gmw]

The world is conspiring to prevent me from finishing this book, but it will happen. In the meantime...

Originally Posted by Bookworm_Girl

I believed Helen to be a sincere character, striving to be saintly. She started out naive and learned life lessons through hard experience. I thought that her actions were driven genuinely by her Christian faith and perhaps was reflective of Anne’s own religious upbringing. When you read annotated versions you see many Biblical references in the Brontë works of all sisters. I don’t think Helen flaunted her moral superiority. I just think she was very pious and serious. She was trapped in a bad situation and was trying to rectify it within her Christian code of conduct in addition to society’s expectations. Of course Arthur found her sanctimonious and oppressive because he was a degenerate and was not going to reform. He also had to blame someone besides himself for his bad behavior.

I agree that the religious aspect is very important to this story. Anne/Helen would know that any (intrinsically male) interpretation of the Bible would (at its most mild) frown on Helen's behaviour. Her designated role is to be submissive to her husband - no extenuating circumstances, no ifs, buts or maybes. So the conflict that the oh-so-pious Helen faces is not just the mores of society in that time, but her own very strong religious beliefs.

That she finds a way to make her desires fit with her religious belief is not a surprise, but the struggle to get there feels realistic to me. (Even the long-windedness of it is realistic ).

As Catlady observes, and I agree, Arthur is not the only one to find Helen sanctimonious and oppressive. But, while it may not have been Anne's intention (if we presume she held beliefs similar to Helen's), I think this still works for the story. If anything it works better: Helen is an active participant in her own downfall. From the pride of:

‘Is he a man of principle?’
‘Perhaps not, exactly; but it is only for want of thought. If he had some one to advise him, and remind him of what is right—’

she not only discovers she is inadequate to the task, but that the reverse has happened and she has brought about traits in herself that, as pious as she is, she must find galling. I find it a predictable, but quite well managed, transition from:

‘Nor do I, aunt; but if I hate the sins, I love the sinner, and would do much for his salvation, even supposing your suspicions to be mainly true, which I do not and will not believe.’

to

it is not enough to say that I no longer love my husband—I hate him! The word stares me in the face like a guilty confession, but it is true: I hate him—I hate him! But God have mercy on his miserable soul! and make him see and feel his guilt—I ask no other vengeance!

A very restrained vengeance it may be, but desire for vengeance it remains.

The religious constraints she is under - that she holds herself under - make her return to nurse Arthur (Snr) quite understandable. To be able to live with herself she must make amends for the sin of abandoning him in the first place; her own nature leaves her no other recourse.

I seriously doubt if this book was ever intentionally feminist - not if Anne's beliefs resemble Helen's in an way - but it does remain remarkable for what it elucidates about the situation for (upper class) women of the time, including the implicit prejudices that they hold for themselves: if there is any woman that is truly a "nonentity" (claimed for Miss Millward) in this story, it would have to be Rachel; such loyalty and devotion, but does Helen ever really notice her as a person?