Being a Governess... It Just Works.

Jane Eyre challenges the structure of Victorian society by subverting many of its conventions through the use of Jane's job as a governess.

First off, the titular character is a governess in a very wealthy man's home. By making Jane a governess, Charlotte Bronte gives us an interesting perspective on class in Britain. Jane spends most of the novel very poor. Sure she has rich relations, but none of that wealth reaches her until chapter 30-something. As a governess, the Jane spends most of her time on a much richer man's estate. This allows Jane to comment on the lifestyle of the bourgeoisie from an outsiders perspective. It's much easier for Jane to critique the men and women partying at Thornfield because she wasn't born into a high position. She has no deep connection to the upper class and thus feels free to express her thoughts regarding them. I kind of like to pretend that Jane's some sort of crazy proto-marxist social commentator who speaks for all the poor through her interactions with the disconnected upper class. But maybe I'm reading into things a little too deeply...

Governesses are like wildcards in society due to their close proximity to powerful people. If Jane was just some seamstress in the streets of London she would never run into a man like Rochester. But in the confines of Thornfield, a servant like Jane grows close enough to her employer that he asks her to marry. This marriage is "improper" and tosses all of the Victorian era's rules about class on their head. Interactions like this give Governesses a huge amount more social mobility than anybody else really had at this time.

Where does Jane herself fit in to this whole mess? As a woman, Jane obviously had fewer freedoms than her male counterparts. But, Jane was an educated woman. This allowed her to land a job at Thornfield and have a shot at some upwards mobility. But, Jane was also poor. So who knows if she actually could have broken the cycle of poverty? BUT, Jane also had the power of the plot on her side. Bronte pulls out Huckleberry Finn levels of deus ex machina and reveals that Jane actually had a wealthy family the whole time. This (conveniently) gives Jayne an automatic new level of social standing almost equal to that of Rochester. Thus rendering the whole plot kind of pointless (in my opinion).

In conclusion, Jane Eyre uses the job of governess to portray Victorian class differences using a malleable perspective. But, does any of it really matter when Charlotte Bronte writes a happy fairy-tale ending that relegates all of the social commentary to secondary importance?