The Bronteblog has an article on Prozac and Charlotte Bronte. It argues for Lucy's Snowe's depression, which is described "poetically" in Villette.

My question is, to what extent can meds be prescribed to people? Lucy wasn't perpetually depressed. She was not a happy child but does that mean that she should have gone on meds?
I wonder about the notion of "prozac nation".
Can feelings not be allowed to be expressed? I suppose one could argue saying that meds would have helped Lucy to not have the urge to end her life. But I got the impression (and I have to re-read the novel to confirm this) that she sunk into depression when she was left alone in the Ponsionnnat. Was Lucy never happy in her own world?

Why should people conform to others' notions of what being "happy" is? I realize that manifestation of depression can, but not always, be very aggressive, such as causing self-harm, and in this case, going on meds and therapy would have helped. However, what if people are born with the tendency to be dejected? Can one not feel dejected and happy in their inner worlds? This seems to me one of the paradoxes in art. In his argument about negative capability, Keats states that it is indeed possible to to never reach one's goal/objective, and still be fulfilled.

If Lucy's problem was that she didn't have many friends, is it reasonable to make her have people like Genevra or Madame Beck for friends? Will they not strip her of her freedom? Especially of her freedom of independence and imagination? Would turning her into a "happier" person give us the Lucy Snowe we know?