Another angle: Jane's character often serves as a means for Tarzan's personal development. Her presence might make Tarzan more human, but it could also be a case of her being a secondary character, thus the shame in her lack of depth or agency.

I should check if there's a specific story titled "Tarzan and the Shame of Jane." If not, maybe this is a title someone gave to an analysis or essay about Jane's character. The user might be looking for a critical analysis of Jane's role, focusing on aspects that are problematic or evoke shame.

Also, think about possible themes like the civilizing mission, where Jane represents the white, educated society that civilizes Tarzan, thus the shame lies in the colonialist undertones. This ties into the broader critique of colonialism and how such narratives were used to justify imperialist policies.

I remember that in some versions, Jane is more of a supporting character, often paired with Tarzan as a love interest. But could there be a deeper layer or a critique of her role in the stories that is considered "shame"? Maybe in the context of colonialism or how her character represents colonialist ideals, bringing civilization to the jungle, while Tarzan is more connected to nature. That could be seen as a critique, hence a "shame" in modern terms.

Also, consider the cultural context. Jane was created at a time when women were expected to be virtuous and supportive. Her character might reinforce certain stereotypes, which could be seen as a shame now. Or perhaps her character's lack of agency compared to Tarzan's active role is problematic.

In conclusion, the piece should explore Jane's character in the Tarzan series, focusing on possible problematic aspects related to gender, colonialism, and narrative structure, explaining why these might be considered "shame" from a modern viewpoint.