While reading Eric Solomon’s analysis of Jane Eyre, I found that the story began to make more sense. Rather than reading it as just “formless romantic art” as Solomon puts it, I began to interpret the novel as a coming-of-age story. Through Solomon’s eyes, I saw Jane’s internal struggle between her fiery disposition and rational mind. Eric Solomon’s analysis, “The Symbolism of Fire and Water in Jane Eyre”, allows the reader to more clearly interpret and understand Charlotte Brontë’s novel. Eric Solomon’s analysis gave an in-depth look into Brontë’s style of writing. He explains the novel, Jane Eyre, is divided into four acts, which each end with a conclusion. Solomon argues that each act portrays the same scenes: “Jane comes into conflict with authority, defeats it by her inner strength, and departs into exile.” After reading this description, I found that Solomon was correct in his assumption of the basic plot, for it could be applied to many of the…show more content… Solomon claims that Charlotte Brontë’s central idea in Jane Eyre is “the fiery passion of Jane, and later, Rochester must be quenched by the cold waters of self-control — but not destroyed by the ice of repression.” While walking the third floor hall, Jane talks about how she lets her mind wander to “a tale my imagination created, and narrated continuously, quickened with all of incident, life, fire, feeling, that I desired and had not in my actual existence.” Jane’s longing for fire is often what inspires her need to be quenched by the water of rationale. However, when she meets St. John Rivers and he proposes to her, Jane realizes that it is impossible to “keep the dires of my nature continually low, to compel it to burn inwardly and never utter a cry, though the imprisoned flame consumed vital after vital.” To Jane, St. John Rivers was ice that would completely extinguish her