Review: NT Live screening of Jane Eyre

Before I start, I have to make a premise that Jane Eyre is one of my favourite books. For me this means that when it comes to adaptations be it a play, film or TV series, I turn into a pest. Each detail different from the book is like a shot in the heart. I become obnoxiously annoying, pointing out at whoever is so unlucky to be near me that ‘in the book, they were in a garden with flowers. And it was raining.’ Or ‘Jane did not say this at this point. The context is all wrong’. My point of no return was ‘Fassbender will never be good at playing Rochester with his blue eyes. Rochester’s eyes must be black’ (I know, there is probably a place waiting for me in hell for criticising Fassbender and his eyes).

All this being said I know mine is not the right attitude, adaptations are allowed to and sometimes should add something new to the original work, so I tried to approach this performance with a less fussy disposition. It was of some encouragement to read that the original version of the play, which was presented at the Bristol Old-Vic in 2014, was a two-night performance of four and a half hours, therefore likely to be meticulous. When Sally Cookson, the director, was asked to bring her play to the National Theatre, she agreed to reduce it to a three-hour performance.

the creation of her personality is the real protagonist of the performance

The first thing we notice on stage is a number of stairs and platforms which despite looking bare at first, render perfectly the main characters’ restlessness and reveal to be very versatile. They swiftly change from setting the terrible Lowood institution, which resembles a Dickensian workhouse, to the more hospitable Thornfield. A piano, double bass, classic guitar, drums and other instruments are located in the centre of the action and to produce live music, enhancing the dramatic moments and the perception of feelings and passions. This exists alongside the lyrical songs which encourage their internalisation. A good example of the combination of stage and music devices is when Jane has to leave Thornfield: the stairs she had first jumped on with ease, suddenly become harder to climb and the music dramatizes her inner struggle.

The thing I appreciated the most, however, is the depiction of the characters. Jane Eyre (Madeleine Worrall) is not obfuscated by her love story, as sometimes happens in adaptations, but the creation of her personality is the real protagonist of the performance. We first hear her cry as a newborn, and we follow her in her journey of personal development, coming to know her as we would know a close friend, which is one of the many gifts the book gives to its readers. Interestingly, her conscience is personified by part of the cast, creating a real on stage self debate. What she learns from her friend Helen (‘love your enemies’, ‘we are all burdened by faults’), she applies to her own experience, and the audience share each decision with her, feeling an outburst of pride and empathy when she states the independence and freedom of her own will in front of an astonished, madly-in-love Rochester.

The main, undoubted source of fun in the play is Pilot, Rochester’s dog interpreted by a hilarious Richard Hurst

Felix Hayes successfully manages to reproduce Edward Rochester’s peculiar traits and weird behaviours: making the audience giggle at his sharp comments and succeeding to portray his spirit. In relation to this, it is important to say that most of the lines used are taken from the novel’s dialogues as they are so powerful and engaging they could not be expressed otherwise. The main, undoubted source of fun in the play is Pilot, Rochester’s dog interpreted by a hilarious Richard Hurst.

I rate the performance with four stars out of five, because I think the adaptation did justice to Charlotte Brontë’s novel and to Jane Eyre’s character, who refuses to become an object or a means to an end. The only duty she feels is a moral one towards herself, not even towards the man she loves the most. She is a great example of determination, perseverance and dignity, who still compels readers and audience today, as much as in 1847. In addition, coming out of the cinema I heard someone saying that she would ‘definitely read the book’, which I think is the best goal an adaptation can achieve. One regret about the play is its ending, which is abrupt and has no hint of the sweetness of the final meeting between Jane and Rochester. I like to think it is a consequence of the abridgement of the play. Oh and, by the way, in the book Jane’s baby is a boy, not a girl. Sorry, I had to say it.