Available today! (March 22, 2016)

(I received an ARC of this title from the publisher via Netgalley, in exchange for an honest review)

I’ll admit to being both intrigued and very nervous when I requested an advance copy of Jane Steele. The ad copy touts it as “a reimagining of Jane Eyre as a gutsy, heroic serial killer” and a “satirical romance.” I was afraid it was going to be along the lines of Jane Slayre and Pride and Prejudice and Zombies; in other words, lazy, zeitgeist-straddling pastiche. I’m happy to report my initial suspicions were wrong.

The story is certainly inspired and influenced by Jane Eyre. There are direct references to the novel throughout, as well as story beats that follow along with the rhythm of Jane Eyre: Jane Steele is an orphan who is unwanted by her family, goes to school under a cruel, self-righteous headmaster, and eventually becomes a governess. Aside from these little signposts and some direct references to the book, Steele’s story is fundamentally different from Eyre’s. Frankly, it’s amazing what 21^st century sensibilities will allow you to do with Victoriana. And yet I can almost imagine Bronte taking a similar tactic, had the idea of a sympathetic female murderer been possible in her day—she got enough flak for simply making Jane Eyre a complicated human woman; imagine what the fallout could have been if she also killed people.

The term “serial killer,” in the modern Dexter-era parlance, suggests pathology and pattern. Describing Jane Steele as a serial killer is accurate—but the assumptions that title provokes are misleading. So unless we consider necessity and love pathology, we must take the word serial at face value, as a series rather than a psychosis. Yes, Jane is a killer. But Faye writes her in such a way that, while you can spot her victims and motivations, you don’t dread the event. In fact, you relish it, as her chosen victims are all horrible, monstrous people. And she is not remorseless; she simply doesn’t give her victims any more thought than they deserve.

Jane has the spirit of her Bronte inspiration. Despite frequently speaking of herself as cold or evil, it’s never in a self-flagellating way. She admits to her faults with honesty and sometimes pride and Faye creates a voice for Jane that is distinctive and alluring. Jane is a survivor and, while she offers reasons for her actions, she doesn’t make excuses. One could make the accusation that the surname Steele is a bit on the nose, but there can be no denying that it’s apt. Her spine is made of the stuff, tempered with a soft heart. I think of the story as a bit like Pretty Woman, if Julia Roberts was a serial murderer rather than a prostitute: Jane is tough on the outside, soft on the inside, and fiercely loyal to those who show her genuine affection and friendship. Only someone made of stone could consider her a villain, or even an anti-hero.

The only (very minor) complaints I can bring concern the style rather than the substance. Like Jane Eyre, the story starts out heavily character-driven and in the mold of a bildungsroman. The second half is becomes more of a mystery, a blend of Gothic sensibility and a straight-up whodunit. Since the first half is so focused on Jane alone, Faye has to spend a lot of time in the second half of the story dropping large chunks of exposition into conversation to provide backstory. It gets the job done, but it also creates a few instances where it feels like the characters are reciting monologues. Faye also has a tendency to foreshadow disaster with phrases like “if only I’d known….”, which works for the suspense, yet gets a little overused as a technique.

Returning to that ad copy I mentioned at the start, specifically the “satiric romance” part, I have to wonder if the person who wrote that read the book, or simply assumed (as I did at first) that this is another mash-up style riff on a classic. I didn’t find this to be a satirical take on Jane Eyre at all, just a mystery that uses the Bronte classic as a stepping off point for something very different. It could maybe be argued that Steele exaggerates the basic premise of Jane Eyre, but it really says little about the novel, and borrows little from it except a few early set pieces, some brief passages used as epigrams for the chapters, and the occasional reference by the heroine. No, Jane Steele is not satire or pastiche. I wouldn’t even consider it among the glut of retellings that have been published lately (Re: Jane, etc). It’s simply a rollicking good story with recognizable literary roots and a spirit all its own.