近几年简爱论文英文参考文献

Aimee HowellMs. PorebaWorld LiteratureMay 25, 2004Is Jane Eyre a role model for young girls? Jane Eyre is thought, to some, to be one of the greatest romance novels of all time. Jane Eyre was published in the mid-1800s, which dampens on the aspect of how sexual the book can get and how raunchy it cannot get. The relationship between Jane Eyre and Mr. Rochester is said to be an “unconditional love story”(back cover of book). I believe that this novel makes a young girl, like me, think that everything can turn out like a fairytale. It leads you to believe that if you are in love that everything will work out. Jane Eyre gives the false impression that you don’t have to work hard to be wealthy and you can always count on a rich uncle or marrying a rich man. This book shows that women do not have any good qualities except having rich ties. This leads on to the fact that I have nothing in common with Jane Eyre besides that facts that we are both female and follow Christian teachings. Jane Eyre’s experiences were very unfortunate but not uncommon. Jane Eyre complains that people did not like her, but not everyone is going to like you, that is how life is. Mrs. Reed treated her very poorly like she was not a little girl who had feelings. She always took her own children’s side over Jane’s, in a dispute. I do feel bad for Jane because she is an orphan and the fact that she is living with a woman and her children, who would not have cared less whether she lived or died. Also, Jane's conflict with Mr. Brocklehurst, when he put her on a pedestal and falsely accused her of being a liar, should had made her want to overcome the trap that he set for her. These situations should have given her the leverage to want to show those people that she is more than just an orphan slave child. For instance, when somebody tells me that I am not capable of doing something, it motivates me to prove them that I am more than I seem. In my opinion, life’s struggles give you a ladder to climb on to reach an even higher success. Jane’s relationship with Mr. Rochester is much more complicated. It seems as though Mr. Rochester had some trouble expressing his feelings toward Ms. Jane Eyre. For instance, when Jane asked him for time off to visit Mrs. Reed, he plays a money tug-of-war and says to her “You little niggard! Refusing me a pecuniary request! Give me five pounds, Jane” (228). The fact that Jane refused to give the money back to Mr. Rochester shows one of the only times when Jane actually stands up for herself. As a young woman reading Jane Eyre, situations like this are teaching me to disobey my elders and are giving the impression that I can only stand up for myself when the argument is petty. If I were in that situation and it was my own money, I would have answered just like Jane, instead of being completely rude. But since it is Mr. Rochester’s money (no matter what portion fulfilled her wages), I would have politely told him that I need some form of money for my trip to Gateshead and would have accepted his answer, whatever it was. This is another reason why Jane and I are so different. “I have had more trouble with that child than any one would believe…I wish she had died”(235) Mrs. Reed had said. But instead of speaking what she really felt, Jane Eyre just answered back nonchalantly “A strange wish, Mrs. Reed: why do you hate her so?”(235). I was very disappointed with Jane’s answer. I know that a form of sympathy should be portrayed in this type of predicament, but Jane is facing the same lady, who made her life miserable and continued to tell her that she was inferior to her own kids, deathbed or not. Jane told Mrs. Reed before she left to go to Lowood, that she hated her, so I do not understand why she would give such a cowardly answer, now. Hearing anybody say that they wished you were dead is a very serious request. It is not something that you just hear and let go. I think that Mrs. Reed, delirious or not, is a very selfish woman. She was upset because her husband used to give Jane more attention than his own children. Jane did not have any parents, so I believe that Mr. Reed was trying to fill a gap in her heart that could never really be filled. If I were Jane, I would have spoken my mind. The way Jane reacted portrays to young girls that people can treat them horribly and they are not supposed to do anything about it. In conclusion, I think that should have acted very differently in each one of these situations. I was also dissatisfied and frustrated with the way that the book ended. It seems as though Bronte just needed a way for Jane’s life to turn into the perfect fairytale. I was very upset because the reason she left St. John and his marriage proposal was because she heard Mr. Rochester cry her name in the wind, from so far away. And when she arrived back at Thornfield, there was a fire, which Mr. Rochester’s wife died in and he was left with only partial eyesight. Then they get married, she romantically nurses him back to health, and they live happily ever after. Now back to reality! This is all too unbelievable! After reading Jane Eyre, I don not feel that she can be called “one of the most unforgettable heroines of all time” (back cover of book). She has not proved that she is an independent woman. A heroine should teach young girls that love is something that all should have the chance to experience but not to go searching for it or revolving your life around HugginsEnglish 2Miss LoockBo Duke and Ed Rochester: Similar or Different? When taking two completely different people, sometimes it can seem easy to tell their differences. Sometimes, it can also seem hard to tell find their similarities. It can always be easy to see things like appearance or looks, but what about looking deeper into a person when comparing and contrasting them? For example, Bo Duke from The Duke’s of Hazard and Edward Rochester from Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre. These two people can look like they have nothing in common, but when looking deeper, many areas can easily be seen that people can compare in, like their job, or even some thing like their attitude. Although looking at Mr. Rochester’s appearance against the appearance of Bo Duke from “Dukes of Hazard,” immediately, the two people have nothing in common, looking deeper though, they have some one thing, Rochester has a numerous amount of money, and he dresses like it. On the other hand, Bo Duke wears a shirt and jeans that he can hood-slide in over his Charger named “The General Lee.” When it comes to their job or occupation, they compare closely because neither of them really do anything. Rochester owns Thornfield hall, while Bo Duke has a job but does not really do it ever or at all. Supposedly he works as a deliveryman for milk with his brother Luke Duke, but they hardly ever deliver their milk. Also, they can compare the two people to each other by looking at their attitude or how they act. For example, Mr. Rochester has a lot of money and he acts like it. Sometimes he can forget about manners and politeness around Jane to accomplish more directness and to the point with her. While Bo Duke can have politeness if he has to but it rarely happens. As Willie Nelson says in his song “Good Old Boys,” he says, “Just the good old boys, never meanin’ no harm.” They do not mean to do harm to people, but they do not want to go to jail either, they try to show politeness and manners sometimes. The appearance of Mr. Rochester and Bo Duke has merely no comparison. Mr. Rochester has no shortage of money and has all he wants, and he wears expensive clothes. Rochester wears the same things that any rich person wears. On the contrary to the appearance of Mr. Rochester, Bo Duke wears a big collard shirt, big belt buckle and a cowboy hat. Looking only at this, the two guys do not seem anything alike, but more comparing and contrasting still needs to happen between the two example of the difference in appearance between Rochester and Bo Duke is that Mr. Rochester keeps his personal hygiene up to date. Mr. Rochester cleans up and never seems to smell that bad or have the need to clean up. Different from Rochester, Bo Duke seems to need to clean up, and he seems like a scraggly person that seems too busy to keep his personal hygiene clean at than their job or their occupation, there are many ways to compare them. Mr. Rochester married into a rich family without knowing the person that he was marrying. They call this crazy woman Bertha Mason. Mr. Rochester married her because he was told that she was normal and rich. It turns out that she only has an abundance of money, and he ends up locking her in the attic and keeping the money for himself and using it for the workers and the house because he works as the Master of Thornfield and he takes charge of the house and what goes on in it and what happens to Mr. Rochester has an abundance of money from Bessie, Bo Duke does not have that much money. Bo actually does have a job delivering crates full of milk jugs to people, but him and his brother Luke Duke spend more time doing illegal things, than delivering their milk. Working as the master of a large amount of land is not really a job because Rochester owns it, but does not work it. Bo Duke does have a job though, but he does not do it, therefore, him and his family do not have a large amount of income. He has to live off the support of the rest of his family and he can only take care of General Lee, because he knows a mechanic that works in Hazard , Bo Duke and Mr. Rochester have mostly different attitudes. For example, Mr. Rochester has politeness most of the time, but when he speaks with Jane, his attitude suddenly changes. Bo Duke seems to know how to act when it comes to attitude. He shows politeness most of the time but he instantly changes when he runs from the cops’. Mr. Rochester does not fall into trouble with the law until the wedding where he almost marries Jane, until Mr. Mason informs all of the people that Mr. Rochester has already married Bertha Mason. This puts Mr. Rochester into a difficult position because it is against the law to have two wives, even if Bertha has been tagged as legally insane. When Bo Duke causes harms or breaks the law, he does not mean to. They mean for the best when they do things. Mr. Rochester also has a passionate personality. He cares overwhelmingly for the people that he loves and cares for. Bo Duke also acts passionate to people, although not as much. He acts polite when it comes to everyday things, but when he runs from the police, he changes completely. Looking back on the appearance, occupation, and attitude, people can see obviously that in some ways, Bo Duke and Mr. Rochester do have some similarities, but in most ways, they show that they are two completely different people with two very different personalities and lifestyles. Their appearance looks different because Rochester has a bundle of money and keeps his appearance clean, and the other does not have money and does not stay clean cut or dress richly. They have similar jobs because neither of them do anything for their jobs. Bo Duke has a job, but he does not do it. Mr. Rochester works as the Master of Thornfield, but that does not require much work. Their attitudes do not seem all that different though. Although Rochester has a good and polite personality most of the time, he sometimes forgets about his manners with Jane and he can speak directly and get to the point with Jane. Bo Duke acts polite most of the time too, but when he has the cops on his tail, he changes completely. These two guys may look very similar, but they can also be very different.

Based on this account, feminism British charlotte Bronte's Jane eyre by identity, from the writer, the heroine of the words in the text, on the basis of the description of trying to prove is certain, and embodies the rebellious in Victorian some ideas in revolt, reflected in balance, the balance of rebellion, namely again revealed work itself article, from the four aspects: Jane eyre by the objectivity of narration. First is the first person narration in historical context, this has certain estabished and author adopts anonymous way to hide in the neutral kohler bell such symbols, avoid face behind the evaluation, and the "reader" narrative calm objective analysis of the language and also helps to hide the female , to rebel against the epistolary novel with regression. In the historical condition at that time, women writer published works, if want to get the right to social authority and established tradition compromise. When the dominant female writing text, with the epistolary an individual who tells the story of the way maximum weakened "freedom" shake the patriarchal society of energy, Jane eyre by using this kind of style, but no text in the "reader" and the call is very similar to the epistolary novel. In this way the managed to established social authority of compromise and , to a governess types of narrative beyond and balance. The female teacher managed before the family story in view of the narrator were the characters in the novel and the distance of moral character, the narrator by the muzzle admonished, Jane eyre by while the narrator in moral character and no difference. People in some cases of words, but the more radical from the whole novel, also there is silence and gradually, both the calm of the Victorian some , the serious novels and achieve a balance between the popular novels. As a wto is not deep but thought rich women, have individual need expression rebelliousness and instinctive desires, But time limitations and individuals in the era under the influence of the ideological state and can choose economic status, forcing her consciously or unconsciously reflect a certain historical environment and the coordination and balance.

沙子里

从普通人角度出发，所谓的“现代女性意识”怎么在一个普通女人身上体现建议与易卜生〈娜拉〉对照研究，最好再参看像西蒙·波娃的〈第二性——女人〉这类研究著作别把她当英雄，当成个普通女孩，以这种前提看法再细读，必有收获。....女性独立意识——《简爱》1847年夏洛蒂•勃朗特最负盛名的一部作品——简爱出版了，在那个年代，由女性作家创作的以女性作为主角的长篇小说实属难得，更可贵的是作品中体现出的女性独立意识，虽然这种独立意识在强大的社会价值观念的作用下显得有些无助甚至——在极端的情况下——有些病态。简爱从小就可以称得上是一个桀骜不驯的人物。不论是她小时候寄人篱下时所经受的屈辱，还是女子学校那种冷漠的压抑的环境以及好友亡故所带来的痛楚，都不曾使她放弃心中的信念。她始终认为自己是一个有独立思考能力的人，有选择人生道路的权利和能力。她不愿意做花瓶一般的女人，仅仅将自己的一生供人赏玩。所以当罗切斯特试探简爱的时候，她会几近失态地说出那段具有宣言意味的告白：你以为我贫穷、低贱、难看、矮小就没有灵魂，没有感情吗？我现在同你说话，并不借助习俗、惯例，甚至不借助肉体，而是我的灵魂在同你的灵魂对话，就好像我们都经过坟墓，站在上帝脚下，彼此平等——我们是平等的。习俗和惯例，往往是社会观念的集中体现。而小说也恰恰安排了一个很符合习俗、惯例的人物——英格兰姆小姐，作为简爱的对照。她们一个富有而美丽，一个贫穷而平凡；一个出身名门，一个孤苦伶仃；一个熟稔于一切上流社会的交际手段，而一个却与这一切格格不入。英格兰姆小姐可以被视为习俗和惯例所称羡的女性的典范。这样的念头甚至连简爱都无法抗拒……。简爱并没有骄傲地指出英格兰姆小姐的贫乏和平庸，在最后选择的关头，她所坚守的仍然是她独立思考的权力，捍卫的仍然是她个人的爱与憎。她选择了逃避、离开，或许是因为这次并不像她以往所经历过的苦难——那样的困境一个人还能够熬过去——但这次，等待是无用的。然而简爱毕竟没有选择去争取。这是否暗示着简爱内心的悲观和绝望？如果的确如此的话，那么就可以看到即使对于充满反抗精神的简爱来说，她也始终摆脱不了习俗、惯例以及它们背后的社会观念。进而，这种社会观念更体现在书中的另一位男性角色——圣约翰身上。圣约翰笃信宗教，并以献身于上帝为自己终身的使命。他想让简爱也来参加他的终身事业，觉得简爱会理所应当的接受他的观念，即使暂时还有差异，这差异也会很快被统一到自己这边来，圣约翰以为自己的想法和简爱的想法是完全可以等同的。这种对于女性独立意识的粗暴的侵犯实际上反映出圣约翰并没有认识到或者并不承认简爱可以也应该有自己的想法。这恐怕就是当时社会观念对于女性的态度，换句话说，社会观念中的男权意识的体现。简爱这次坚决地拒绝了，因为这次触到的是她的底线——她已经付出了巨大的代价来捍卫的主体意识。从这个意义上说，简爱可以与《玩偶之家》中的娜拉一起作为女性启蒙时期的典型形象了。小说最终提供了一个解决个人——社会矛盾的方式，也就是桑菲尔德的大火。这场有着诺亚方舟意味的大火将一切都摧毁重来了。正因为这场大火才使得简爱回到了罗切斯特的身边，也算是找到了终生的幸福。但同样也是因为这场大火使得罗切斯特双目失明。从此罗切斯特必须依靠简爱来做他的眼睛。这或许保证了简爱在今后生活中的地位：罗切斯特再也不可能用一种高高在上的姿态来试探她了。但最终的幸福生活本身就是残缺的，因为它必须建立在一个残缺的基础上。这也意味着女性的独立意识只能建立在一个残缺的男性世界中。而真实的世界，仍然没有改变。最后要提一句的是《简爱》中阁楼上的疯女人形象。有论者认为这个形象与简爱实则是同一个人的两面。除去其中语不惊人死不休的夸张外，这种说法颇有可取之处。试想如果简爱最终无法承受来自社会的巨大压力，同时又无法放弃自己的独立意识时，发疯就是唯一能够提供平衡的解决之道了。幸好这不是简爱选择的道路。也不是大多数面临同一困境的人所选择的道路，即使他们要为此付出更大的代价。

[1]刘丽. 追求平等、幸福、自由的女性典范——谈《简·爱》中的典型人物简爱[J]. 辽宁高职学报,1999,(1). [2]龚明德. 李霁野译《简爱》与鲁迅有关吗?[J]. 鲁迅研究月刊,1999,(3). [3]李国源. 《简爱》“妇女解放”主题浅探[J]. 安徽广播电视大学学报,1999,(1). [4]杜焱. 试论《简爱》中伯莎形象[J]. 丹东师专学报,1999,(3). [5]陈姝波. 论《简爱》中的性别意识形态[J]. 外国文学研究,2002,(4). [6]潘红. 夹缝里的风景——谈黄源深先生《简爱》译本的审美特点[J]. 福州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002,(2). [7]芦雪瑾. 试论《简爱》与《藻海无边》中的两位梅森[J]. 杭州教育学院学报,2002,(2). [8]陈小兆,萧好章. 从“失乐园”到“复乐园”——《简爱》故事情节的“圣经”原型意象[J]. 井冈山师范学院学报,2002,(4). [9]宋燕. 简爱:自强与自爱[J]. 当代电视,1999,(8). [10]毛梅兰,胡宜兰. 论典型形象——简爱(英文)[J]. 抚州师专学报,2001,(1). [11]毛竹生. 简爱的出走与自我实现[J]. 济南教育学院学报,2001,(6). [12]马海英. 金丝鸟、菟丝和简爱——试论南朝艳情诗与“五四”爱情诗[J]. 绵阳师范高等专科学校学报,2001,(1). [13]毛竹生. 简爱的成长之路及其心理机制[J]. 邯郸师专学报,2001,(2). [14]赵敏. 心灵的传承——试论《简爱》对《蝴蝶梦》的影响[J]. 文山师范高等专科学校学报,2001,(2). [15]赵莉. 从杜十娘和简爱的形象塑造比较东西方妇女的女性意识[J]. 新余高专学报,2001,(3). [16]张艳. 走不出困惑——论夏绿蒂在《简爱》中对妇女出路问题的探索[J]. 阜阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2001,(3). [17]王一平. 《简爱》对《圣经》的恪守与反叛[J]. 河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002,(5). [18]本报记者 戴永明. 简爱之困[N]. 贵州民族报,2010-04-09(A04). [19]简i7到简爱7 以爱之名 海尔简爱7全面升级[J]. 办公自动化,2009,(23). [20]孙伟民. 自卑情结造就了简爱鲜明的人格魅力——解析《简爱》[J]. 传奇.传记文学选刊(理论研究),2009,(1). [21]陈淑婷. 献给简爱的一朵玫瑰——简爱和苔丝的人物对比[J]. 文学界(理论版),2010,(7). [22]黄兴军. 《简爱》中的永恒魅力——解析小说《简爱》中女性反抗性格的形成[J]. 牡丹江大学学报,2009,(4). [23]王筠. 再读《简爱》：经典语言与简爱的女性形象塑造[J]. 时代文学(理论学术版),2007,(6). [24]李颖娟. 从英雄、非英雄到反英雄[D]. 兰州大学: 兰州大学,2010. [25]王康英. 论《简·爱》中女主人公简爱对真爱的追求[J]. 科技信息(科学教研),2008,(23). [26]刘丽. 一个时代的女性呐喊与追求——谈《简·爱》中的典型人物简爱[J]. 时代文学(下半月),2009,(5). [27]梁晨. 宿命的选择——对《简爱》中爱与女性独立意识的重读[J]. 安徽文学(下半月),2011,(5). [28]侯静. 浅析简爱与爱德娜的婚姻、爱情、自由观[J]. 安徽文学(下半月),2008,(11). [29]田恩波. 知识决定命运——论简爱作为罗彻斯特爱人的命运(英文)[J]. 中国科技信息,2005,(14). [30]薛瑞东. 挣扎于传统与现代之间的女性——简论简爱[J]. 江苏教育学院学报(社会科学版),2005,(5). [31]时玉珍. 简爱 人见人爱[J]. 电影评介,1996,(2). [32]赵华. 有关李霁野与祝庆英《简爱》节选译文的评述[J]. 湖北经济学院学报(人文社会科学版),2010,(5). [33]易文琴. 《傲慢与偏见》和《简爱》中婚姻观之比较[J]. 北方文学(下半月),2010,(3). [34]胡彦霞. 女性的力量:简爱和郝思嘉[J]. 社会科学战线,2011,(6). [35]赵竹轩. 《简爱》的叙述语言与主人公的个性发展[J]. 安徽文学(下半月),2011,(8). [36]张慧莹. 一场不同寻常的大火——原型批评视角下《简爱》中的火灾[J]. 宜宾学院学报,2011,(7). [37]张默. 商务新标杆——海尔简爱7D笔记本[J]. 消费电子,2010,(12). [38]海尔简爱7G、7D双获“红棉奖”[J]. 消费电子,2010,(12). [39]林丹. 夏洛蒂·勃朗特《简爱》与托马斯·哈代《德伯家的苔丝》之比较[J]. 黑龙江教育学院学报,2010,(12). [40]劲薄新商务——海尔简爱7D笔记本电脑[J]. 微电脑世界,2011,(1). [41]王秀娟. 《简爱》中译本语言风格比较[J]. 科学大众(科学教育),2011,(2). [42]麻秦华. 简爱性格浅析[J]. 科教导刊(中旬刊),2010,(12). [43]薛梦茹. 《简爱》与女性尊严[J]. 才智,2011,(3). [44]海尔简爱7D树立商务轻薄本新标杆[J]. 消费电子,2010,(6). [45]海尔简爱三剑客寒促回馈消费者[J]. 消费电子,2011,(2). [46]尹诗文. 从自卑到自信——解析简爱性格的两个极端[J]. 赤峰学院学报(汉文哲学社会科学版),2011,(3). [47]董睿. 生活在平凡之间——浅析简爱的独立性格及依附心理[J]. 大舞台,2011,(4). [48]吴蒙,贠哲. 我看简爱性格中的自卑心理[J]. 才智,2011,(8). [49]顾国林. 薄而不贵——海尔简爱7哥笔记本电脑测试[J]. 微电脑世界,2011,(5). [50]王若水. 叛逆者简爱[J]. 科技信息,2011,(12).

简爱与众不同的爱情观19世纪中期，英国伟大的女性存在主义先驱，著名的夏洛蒂·勃朗特创作了她的代表作《简爱》。在作品的序幕、发展、高潮和结尾中。女主人公的自由、叛逆、平等、自尊的个性都是各个章节的主旨。从小就成长在一个充满暴力的环境中的简爱，经历了同龄人没有的遭遇。她要面对的是舅妈的毫无人性的虐待，表兄的凶暴专横和表姐的傲慢冷漠，尽管她尽力想“竭力赢得别人的好感”，但是事实告诉她，这都是白费力气的，因此她发出了“不公平啊！不公平啊！”的近乎绝望的呼喊。在这样一个不公平的生长环境，使得简爱从小就向往平等、自由和爱，这些愿望在她后来的成长过程中表现无疑，而主旨则在主人公的与众不同的爱情观被展露的淋漓尽致。她犹如黑暗中的星星，照亮了未来女性们，追求爱情的道路。所以本书选择孤女的爱情故事。反映拉当时英国女性的追求平等权利的问题，通过一个普通妇女的爱情故事，让我们看到了一个体现新兴阶级的一个自尊自爱的女性形象。《简爱》是一部带有自传色彩的长篇小说。它的作者是夏洛蒂·勃郎特。和艾米莉·勃朗特是姐妹。虽然生活在同一社会，同一家庭环境中的姐妹，性格却大不相同。夏洛蒂·勃朗特显的更加温柔，尽管他从小失去母爱，父爱也很少，加上他自身矮小，容貌不美，但也许就是因为一种非常敏感的自尊，以自尊心作为内心深处自卑的补偿。她描写的简爱也是一个外表不美的矮小的女人。但她和作者一样，有颗极强的自尊心，她坚定不移的追求自由，平等，有尊严的爱，向往美满幸福的婚姻和爱情。简爱从小就生活在一个充满爆力的专横的环境里。姨妈嫌弃她，表姐傲慢冷漠，表哥侮辱毒打。这是对一个孩子的尊严的无情践踏。尽管她想尽力嬴得别人的好感。但事实上告诉她，这些都是白费。因此，她发出拉“不公平啊！不公平的呼喊”，近似乎绝望的喊声，但也正是因为这一切，使她从小就向往自由、平等、尊严和爱，这些愿望也在她的爱情观和她追求爱情的道路上的种种体现。简爱的爱情观，概括起来就是自由、平等、独立、尊严和爱。简爱的爱情理念在当代著名的女诗人舒婷的诗里，可以找到时代的烙印。走遍拉大半个地球的罗切斯特，在自己的庄园里找到拉他理想的爱人。一个与他过去的高大，漂亮，轻佻，浅薄的女人完全相反的 “小精灵”简爱的娇小，庄重，单纯的像一个小修女。简爱在他的粗暴专横面前不卑不亢，落落大方。简爱的自由，平等，独立的个性，成拉她一个不平凡的女孩的不平凡的亮点。像不可战胜的魔力，强烈的吸引着罗切斯特。在平时的谈话中，罗切斯特感觉到简爱是一个与众不同的，简爱重视的是友好和平等。并不是万贯家财和显赫的门第。而罗切斯特也把她放在平等地位，就像文中简爱说的那样：“他的态度随便，我也就不再痛苦的觉的拘束，他用来对待我的那种既不正直又热情的友好坦率，使我想就近她，有时候我觉得他仿佛是亲戚，而不是我的主人”简爱的想法，感受正反映在她渴望于人平等坦诚交流，简爱也同样直言不讳，在富有而傲慢的主人面前完全没有一点媚态，不恭维，不去阿谀奉承。简爱正是用她的坦诚和直率赢得了罗切斯特的心。简爱的独立的人格是强大的魅力，吸引是罗切斯特。当简爱发觉自己深深爱上了主人以后，在地位如此悬殊的情况下，她却敢于去爱，因为她坚信人在精神上都是平等的，一个穷教师斗胆爱上了一个上流人物，在当时的社会等级深严的社会观念看来，无异于乞丐奢望国王的爱情。所以这本身就是向社会及偏见的大胆的挑战，惟其如此，它也就意味着遭受嘲笑和侮辱。只有简爱这样并不把权贵放在心上的人，才能去坦坦荡荡的去爱在罗切斯特假装要娶英格拉姆小姐，从而试探简爱时，简对罗切斯特的表白本身就是平等的宣言：“你以为我会留下来，成为你无足重轻的人吗？你以为我是一架自动的机器吗？一架没有感情的机器吗？能让我的一口面包从我嘴里抢走，让我的一滴活水出我的杯子里倒掉吗？你以为我穷，低微不美，矮小，我就没有灵魂没有心吗？你想错拉！我的灵魂和你的一样，我现在跟你说话的并不是通过我的习俗，惯例，甚至不是通过平凡人的肉体，而是我的精神在和你的精神在对话，就像两个都经过拉坟墓，我们站在上帝的脚跟前，是平等的......因为我们是平等的！”简爱的爱情观是非常明确和超前的现代爱情观。男女平等基础上的相互敬爱，对待爱情，简爱重视的是平等！她渴望爱但她决不乞求爱，也决不因为爱情的来之不易而委屈求全。罗切斯特被他彻底征服了。这个强悍的男人被这个柔弱的小女子强大的人格魅力所征服。在简爱看来婚姻的基础只能是爱情，而真正的爱情不取决于外在的条件考虑，利害的支配，相反，他能冲破门第，财产，资力的种种障碍，达到男女双方精神的契合和心灵的沟通，这就是她的爱情价值观。简爱宣布，婚姻不应该是商业的契约，而是，心灵的自由平等的结合。一个女人活在这个世界上应该为争取独立自主，平等相待生活权利而斗争。当罗切斯特给她置办婚礼穿的衣服时，简爱说：“哦！先生，别去管他什么珍宝！我不喜欢听人家提到它。给简爱珍宝，听上去不自然而且还感觉怪怪的，我宁可不要，我是你的，不美的教徒似的家庭教师。我要你的一半田产有什么用途呢？你以为我是一个放高利贷的犹太人吗，想在田地上找一个好的投资吗？我宁可要你完全跟我推心置腹的。”我只想要一颗舒坦的心，先生，一颗没有被大量的恩惠压倒的心。”简爱不在乎罗切斯特能给她买多少的礼物和多少的漂亮饰品，更没有把他当作跨入贵族社会的阶梯。作为罗切斯特的未婚妻，她依然保持这清醒的自我。坚持着自己独立的人格。拒绝接受未婚夫的奢侈礼物。并且还要继续履行家庭教师的职责。从中可以看到简爱所追求的不是物质上的财富。而是真正意义上的纯洁的爱情。不含半点虚假造作。她不想成为罗切斯特的附属品。渴望用诚实的劳动自食其力。以保持人格和经济上的独立。充分体现拉她追求平等的反叛信鸽然而，天有不测风云，人们万万没有想到，简爱与罗切斯特在教堂上举行婚礼的时候，一个意外的事实被揭露了出来。在婚礼上梅森揭发拉罗切斯特尚有发妻，无权再婚的隐情，这个妻子就是被锁在桑菲尔德庄园顶楼的疯女人。这个噩耗使来之不易的爱情瞬间被判了死刑。这个事实使简爱面临着严峻的考验，得知这个事实后简陷入拉痛苦和绝望的境地，她非常痛苦，因为她受到了莫大大欺，自尊心受到了捉弄，因为她深深的爱着罗切斯特，哪个女人能够承受住被最亲的人最信任的人所欺呢？简承受住拉。而且做出了一个非常理性的决定，在这样一种非常强大的爱情包围下，在美好的富裕的生活诱惑下，她依然坚持维护一个女人的尊严，最后，选择了离开。罗切斯特要求简不要离开，他说：“这种违法并不伤害任何人，因为你既然没有亲戚又没有熟人，不用担心跟我同住会 触怒他们。”简说：“先生，你的妻子还活着。这是你今天早上还承认的事实。要是我向你希望的那样跟你在一起住，那么我就成了你的情人，不。我不要这样。这样就是诡辩......就是虚伪。我得离开阿戴勒和桑菲尔德。我得一辈子离开你 。我得在陌生的脸和陌生的环境中开始一种全新的生活。我关心我自己，我越是孤独，越没有朋友，越没有支持，我就越尊重我自己。我将尊重上帝的颁发，世人认可的法律，我将坚持我的神志正常。时而不是像现在这样发疯时候所就手的原则，法律和原则并不是在没有诱惑的时候，而是用在像现在这样的时候，肉体和灵魂不能违反，要是我自己方便的时候就可以打破他们，那么定法律还有什么价值呢？”她不愿意践踏自由的人格，爱情而做一个没有尊严的情妇。为了尊严她抛弃了爱情，简爱勇敢的跨出了桑菲尔德的大门。冲破拉世俗的樊笼，另人敬佩。在一个多世纪前，对于没有什么社会地位和金钱的女子，做出这样的选择无疑是惊世骇俗的。而这也正是简爱独特的各心个性决定的。面对着忍辱偷生还是个人的尊严时，简爱毫不犹豫的选择拉后者。经过一夜的思考，简爱毅然离开。她知道，再也不会有这样的一个人爱她了。简爱每吐的一个字都像重拳一样敲打着我的心坎之上。这就是要求平等的呼声。一个自由女神的形象！圣约翰是一个知识渊博，长相英俊的传教士，他明明知道自己喜欢上了年轻貌美的罗莎蒙德，同样，罗莎蒙德也十分爱慕地他，并且罗莎蒙德的父亲也十分的赞同这份亲事，尽管圣约翰不是很有钱，但是他的才华和出身可以弥补这样的缺陷。然而，圣约翰为了他的伟大事业—到东方印度传教十分痛苦地压抑了这份欲望。、他将简爱作为上帝服务的工具，向她求婚。虽然，简爱对他的献身与圣教的精神表示过敬佩。并对他的关怀和照顾深怀情谊。但简爱和圣约翰对于爱情的观念截然不同。圣约翰认为工作高于一切，甚至高于自己的生命和爱情，他同简爱的结合也是为拉工作，为了完成他的职务，而不是为了纯粹的爱情和自己。他把简爱看作是完成他到异地工作的工具。他对简爱说：“上帝大自然让你做我的传教士的妻子......我有劝要求你不是为了我的快乐，而是为了我主的工作。”而简认为，夫妇结合应该以爱情为基础，感情必须真实，否则不应该结合。而且婚姻必须是平等的，任何一方不能以另一方为工具。去达到某种目的。圣约翰向简爱求婚，只是想取得忠实的共同传教的女伴，在这里表现的冷冰冰的利己主义，简爱拒绝了。她说：“我蔑视你的爱情观，我瞧不起你的奉献，这种不真实的感情，由于他们在爱情观上有严重分歧，对简这样一位有丰富的内在情感，追求平等的女性来说，是根本不能够接受的。简爱就决绝了。此时她对于罗切斯特的思念让她决定回桑菲尔德看望他。再次来到桑菲尔德。这才发现一切都已经发生拉变化。由于疯女人纵火，桑菲尔德庄园已经成为一片废墟。疯女人死了，切斯特也由一个富有的绅士变成了一个残疾人。简爱与罗切斯特在经济上，地位上，已经取得拉平等地位。然而，简却不顾一切的回到了罗切斯特身边。她宁愿做他的胳膊和眼睛，在她看来，爱情不是以金钱，容貌，年龄来衡量的。她认为：“只要他没有丧失生活的理想和生活的勇气就不是一个残废人。”即使罗且色特一贫如洗，简爱也不认为自己做出了牺牲，在这样的条件下，简爱获得拉爱的同时也不失尊严。小说光明的结局告诉我们。人在追求爱情的过程中，也要有自由、尊严、平等、在当今社会。要将人的爱情观等于尊严加平等这道公式上。付之实现往往离不开金钱的帮助，人们都疯狂的为了金钱和地位而淹没爱情，在穷和富有之间选择富，在爱与不爱之间选择不爱，很少有人会像简爱一样，为拉爱情和人格抛弃所有。简爱展示给我们的是一种反朴归真，化繁为简的感觉。是一种不计较得失的简化感情。它犹如一杯白开水，净化读者的心灵，同时引起读者。特别是女性读者的共鸣。作者通过描述女主人公的平等、自由、尊严的爱情观。表达了争取美好，幸福生活努力追求自身在社会上的独立和尊严。作者大胆的提出了具有资产阶级民主主义的进步思想，建立平等、独立、尊严基础上的爱情理想。抨击拉力一切世俗的陈规陋习，因而在当时的英国社会引起了极大的反响，使那些与作者处于同一社会的女性深受鼓舞。指出拉妇女谋求自身幸福的道路。