Victorian masculinity is based on the premise that the construction of male realization must be seen as historically specific. The concept of Victorian masculinity is a different one since it was influenced by various factors such as domesticity and gender roles. Some of these factors seem to be interrelated to one another. Males show a vast amount of pride, protectiveness over their wives. Victorian men either in the public sphere or private sphere felt superior over the women’s subordination. This is a dominant feature of the Victorian society. Despite the fact that England’s monarch was female, Victorian society was very much a patriarchy, and the cultural norms only allowed men to establish moral roles. As it often happens with literature, the social dilemmas of the Victorian period became manifest in literature. The instability of masculine power came to be a fundamental theme in many notable pieces of Victorian literature as in the nineteenth century novels. Victorian masculinity can be realized from two points of view; from men’s point of view and from women’s point of view. Women’s point of view can be estimated as the Victorian man should be gentle in his behaviour and to deal with women with equality. Women’s position in society should be taken into the consideration of the Victorian man. Masculinity is perfomative as Judith Butler proclaims. The masculine behaviour should not neglect the feminine nature of women in the Victorian era.
The concept of Victorian masculinity is a topic of interest in the field of social studies with an emphasis on gender studies as well as the literary studies in order to mirror the human and social changes all over the years. All these fields dovetail the concept of Victorian masculinity. Historically, it is tied to the Victorian period in the United Kingdom. The concept of Victorian masculinity is currently a matter of interest for researchers in the areas of literary criticism, history, sociology and religious studies. Those virtues that survive until modern age are of special interest mostly to all scholars: the dominant behaviour of the Western male over the western female. The concept of Victorian masculinity nurtured during the nineteenth century which witnessed huge changes in both the behaviour and the thought of the Victorian men and women.
John Tosh, in A Man’s Place, argues that education and society values instilled by the educators were important in the construction of the late Victorian masculinity. The purpose of sending a son of middle-class father to a public school might be prejudiced by the faith that the boy would acquire the patina of a gentleman during that period. Learning to rub shoulders with all sorts, to stand on one’s own feet, to have the guts to stand out against the crowd – these qualities were integral to manliness and they were not acquired at home.
Tosh further suggests that:
Domesticity and masculinity were not opposed as our received image of the Victorian period would suggest and that the domestic or the private sphere is integral to masculinity. A poor man may be a true gentleman in spirit and in daily life, if he does his work honestly, is upright, polite, temperate and courageous. A poor man who honestly is engaged in work duties with rich spirit is always superior to the rich man with a poor spirit.
John Tosh attempts to redefine the Victorian masculinity. He explains the gender roles of man as a father, a husband, or a boy in the family headed by the man during the Victorian era. Tosh explains the relationship between masculinity and the domestic is far more intricate than the early concept of separate spheres. He asserts that “home was central to masculinity, as the place where the boy was disciplined by dependence and where the man attained full adult status as a householder.
Thus, John Tosh focuses on the interrelationship between the masculine identity and the role of the domestic to enhance such masculine identity. There is no separation between of the domestic and the man’s role in the society. However, domesticity is the domain of women, man finds his masculinity there.
In Sexual Anarchy: Gender and Culture at the Fin de Siècle Elaine Showalter discusses what the Victorian masculinity was. Showalter argues that “the nineteenth century had a cherished belief in the separate spheres of femininity and masculinity that amounted almost too religious faith”. Kelly Hurley states that during the Victorian period, “emotional tenderness and sentiment, seen as compatible with masculine activity and resolution in the earlier nineteenth century, were considered somewhat effeminate qualities by the century's end, when physical grace, courage, pluck, and toughness were among the highest qualities of manhood”. Accordingly, Victorian masculinity entailed having certain rights that Victorian femininity was not granted. Men can work in a reputable occupation, travel through the city alone, and join ‘men-only’ clubs. Women faced one of the Victorian dictums, ‘no girls allowed’.
2.4. Victorian Gentleman:
The gentleman is an ideal that has been developed through History, with characteristics either added or lost. To become the one ‘gentleman’, we know today, men were influenced by different mentalities, countries and eras such as the Greeks and Romans in antiquity, the Middle Ages ideals. The concept of a “Gentleman” during the 19th century was a complex one. However, it is necessary to analyse the Victorian ways of thinking especially their understanding of the concept of ‘gentleman’. Victorian people were not certain of the essence of the concept of the “gentleman”. This concept reached its finest moments in the Victorian period. Some Victorians were gentlemen by birth, whereas other people designated as gentlemen as a natural consequence of their growing wealth and influence.
The word ‘gentleman’ is one of the few words in the English language that has been the subject of continuous debate. Adopted into the language, in its etymological sense in the nineteenth century the term ‘gentleman’ was used to mean a man related to “an ancient family”. By the 19th century, the word has anther meaning which it is easier to feel than to define. Adopted in English from Old French “gentilz hom” in its original signification the word “gentleman” denotes a man belonging to a ‘gens’ or ‘stock’ . The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term ‘gentleman’ as “a man of superior position in society, or having the habits of life indicative of this; often, one whose means enables him to live in easy circumstances without engaging in trade, a man of money and leisure”. According to the New English Dictionary, in England the term was already used by the fourteenth century people to indicate that “A man in whom gentle birth is accompanied by appropriate qualities and behaviour; hence, in general, a man of chivalrous instinct and fine feelings”.
In Brad’s The Compleat English Gentleman, Karl Bulbring says in the introduction of this book: “it is curious to observe here that all the instances of medieval literature where the word ‘gentleman’ is used, it either directly refers to a man of gentle birth, or it is accompanied by an analysis of a true gentleman’s qualities”.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1929) says that: “the word ‘gentleman’, used in the wider sense with which birth and circumstances have nothing to do , is necessary incapable of strict definition . For , ‘ to behave like a gentleman’ may mean little or much , according to the person by whom the phrase is used ; ‘to spend money like a gentleman’ may even be no great praise; but ‘to conduct a business like a gentleman’ implies a stand at least as high as that involved in the phrase noblesse oblige . Thus, in such a case, a person of culture, character and good manners the word ‘gentleman’ has applied a gap in more than one foreign language”.
The notion of the gentleman was not only a social or class term. There was also a moral element inherent in the notion which made it difficult and vague even for the Victorians to define. Sir Walter Scott defines this notion of the gentleman repeatedly in his extremely influential Waverley Novels, and the code of the gentleman appears repeatedly in Victorian fiction. “The essence of a gentleman,” John Ruskin writes, “is what the word says, that he comes from a pure gens, or is perfectly bred. After that, gentleness and sympathy, or kind disposition and fine imagination come”. Ruskin also suggests that Gentlemen have to learn that it is no part of their liability of pleasure to live on other people’s labour, but many ‘gentlemen’ did exactly that.
John Henry Newman, one of the most famous Victorian critics, has layered the description of the gentleman during the Victorian era in his book The Idea of a University. Newman suggests a list of characteristics of a gentleman: “a cultivated intellect, a delicate taste, and candid, equitable, dispassionate mind, a noble and courteous bearing in the conduct of life” . It is clear that he considered this catalogue admirable for the ideal gentleman. In great details he further illustrated the definition of a gentleman as:
It is almost a definition of a gentleman to say he is one who never inflicts pain. He is mainly occupied in merely removing the obstacles which hinder the free and unembarrassed action of those about him.The true gentleman in like manner carefully avoids whatever may cause ajar or a jolt in the minds of those with whom he is cast.
Newman’s descriptive definition appears an exemplary idealization of the British gentleman. He defines the gentleman in his relations and dealing with others. The gentleman, according to Newman, is unobtrusive. He concurs with their movements, he avoids “whatever may cause ajar or a jolt,” he abstains from slander and gossip. In the face of misfortunes he is submissive. In controversy he is clear-headed, forcible, decisive, and fair to his rivals. The Gentleman annihilates his soul for the sake of others. He is mostly humble and self-effacing. True gentleman is not a source of disturbance for other people of any social rank.
Newman argues that “The gentleman has too much good sense to be affronted at insults, he is too well employed to remember injuries, and too indolent to bear malice”. Newman focuses on the praise of moral superiority which can be practised in the social atmosphere. Basically, Newman’s definition is built around the actual examples taken from everyday life inside the society. Newman aims at presenting the prominent factors that must rule the behaviour of the gentleman towards others and to feel a sense of equality with them neither superior nor inferior.
In 1583, Sir Thomas Smith offers a comprehensive overview of what a gentleman was. He explains that:
For whosoever studieth the lawes of the realme, who studieth in the universities, who professeth the liberall sciences, and to be shorte, can live idly and without manual labour, and will beare the port, charge and countenaunce of a gentleman.
The definition of Smith is slightly different from that of the nineteenth century scholars. However, it has some relation to that of mid-Victorian England. He focuses on the social uprightness of the gentleman, which he has gained from his education. Sir Thomas Smith also has focused on the significance of the ability of the gentleman to live idly without indulging himself into manual labour.
So far as the concept of gentleman is concerned, it must be remembered that there was never one ‘ideal’ concept of the gentleman and rival construction of the gentleman can be divided into two categories; one based on the merit of birth, land and breeding; the other based on personal merit.
The gentleman does not necessarily and needlessly remind a doer of a mistake he may have committed against him at any time. He is forgetful of others’ mistakes, he can forget; and he strives for that nobleness of self and mildness of character which conveys sufficient power to let the past be but the past. Tolerance and forbearance are his main attributes.
Robin Gilmour, in his study of gentlemen in Victorian literature, attempts to place the concept of gentleman within the social structure of eighteenth- and nineteenth century Britain:
In the traditional social hierarchy, the gentleman ranked beneath the baronet, the knight and the squire, but above the yeoman; and between the gentry and the aristocracy, […] bound together by a common interest in the land and a similar way of life […] Moreover the rank of gentleman was the point of entry for those seeking to penetrate gentry society.
Accordingly the gentry were constantly being filled up and energized by the arrival of new families from trade, finance, farming and other jobs. Historically, a gentleman belongs to the gentry which is one type of class hierarchy in the Victorian society. Nevertheless, Gilmour points out that all aristocrats were gentlemen, but a gentleman was not necessarily an aristocrat. Gentlemanliness developed a connotation of good character that made the label desirable to the higher ranks. However, prosperous middle-class members of Victorian era hoped to be called gentlemen and thus emphasised the word’s origin in the gentry. If the concept was based on morals rather than ancestry the title was obtainable. Unlike in the aristocracy, membership in the gentry did not require a certain heritage (Gilmour 4-6). Robin Gilmour is of the opinion that the gentleman’s position inside the social hierarchy is between the middle class and the aristocracy. The gentleman was a moral distinction and not a social one. This is because a gentleman was thought to have good manners.
Robin Gilmour adds that masculinity was connected with the emerging definition of gentlemanliness. Gilmour explains that manliness is a basic Victorian idea. It signifies a new plainness and sincerity, a new sincerity in the realms of social affairs.
Robin Gilmour agrees that the Victorians were drawn to the idea of the gentleman and gentlemanliness partially as the outcome of the important highlighting on the morality of the ideal and true gentleman. Gilmour argues that it was this appeal of morality that led many of the notable Victorian novelists -including the female novelists – to support the popularity of the concept of the gentleman. Gilmour argues that Trollope, Dickens, and, Thackeray [were] all rapt by the image of the gentleman. Moreover, gentleman’s relation leads to the real possibility for the morality in society. Thus, The Victorian people had a range of different understandings in regards to what composed a gentleman and a variety of definitions of the English gentleman have been proposed. Each stresses in varying degrees on the importance of the gentleman’s merits of birth, land, and breeding; personal privileges and morality.
Philip Mason also argues that the reputation of the gentleman was based upon the vagueness associated with the use of the term. One of the reasons why the concept of the ‘gentleman’ gained such reputation was that no one was really sure who was a gentleman and who was not. There were no fixed or greed standards of what was called ‘gentleman’. Mason suggests that the term gentleman had “different meanings in different mouths and the same person would use it in different senses. But it did stand for an ideal of conduct that was widely admired and this was one of the ties that unified the nation”. Mason raises two valuable points; as he pinpoints it, the gentlemanly persona was admired, and useful as a means of uniting the English nation.
For Mason, the actual behaviour of the gentleman is of little importance. Popular perception is what comforts him. As previously stated, Mason believes that a degree of the popularity of the gentlemanly concept was the result of the inability to be sure of who exactly was a gentleman. Mason focuses on the society in which the gentleman lives. It is not the person himself who decides to be a gentleman. It is the nation or the society that comprehend the gentlemanly behaviour of the gentleman. Mason’s conception of the ‘gentleman’ is the opposite of Newman’s. Newman’s focus is on the persona of the gentleman and his gentlemanly behaviour. For me as a researcher, it is found that both the society and the persona of the gentleman who make the gentleman. The society has a great role in the perception of a gentleman since it is seen from his manners with other people in the society. Also, the gentleman places himself in the gentleman position through his behaviour.
James Eli Adams explains the concept of the gentleman differently. Adams claims that the idea of the gentleman was attuned with the concept of masculinity only if that masculinity was understood to represent a “strenuous psychic regimen, which could be affirmed outside the economic arena, but nonetheless would be embodied as a charismatic self-mastery akin to that of the daring yet disciplined entrepreneur”. It is agreed that England during the Victorian period saw a more dramatic degree of change than any previous period. The Industrial Revolution led to a great fear of the erosion of masculine identity; many men wondered about the position they would take in this rapidly changing world. Adams believes that the gentleman served the purpose of encouraging the idea and the ideal of ‘manhood,’ and strengthening the social status of men in Victorian society. Adams argues that the various masculine identities in the Victorian period are linked by an ascetic discipline which is an attribute of soldiers, priests, clergymen and gentlemen. This ascetic discipline is another form of masculinity. Adams adds that masculinity can be seen as alluring self-mastery similar to that of the business man which was a part of the manliness of men who were thought to be brave and self-disciplined. This is the pure gentleman. So, James Eli Adams finds that the true sense of gentlemanliness starts from within not from the outer atmosphere, namely the society.
As well as highlighting the significance of the concept of the gentleman in strengthening Victorian masculinity, Adams, as do many other researchers who employ literary sources to understand the Victorian gentleman, stresses the importance of the view of the gentleman as a moral ideal. Adams likens the concept of the gentleman to that of a secular sainthood because he is focusing on the moral side. The gentleman was rejoiced as a moral model open to all those who ascertain worthiness. Yet, the real gentleman is seen by the lack of self-consciousness. The aspiring gentleman is negating the self and focussing on the other. That is the real meaning of being a gentleman. However, many intellectuals explain the appeal of the gentleman in terms of the frankness of the notion to social climbers. Adams suggests that the fact of being ideal caused a big deal. This is because the term ‘gentleman’ remains socially inspiring. Thus, the real assertion of the ideal gentleman is the annihilation of the self-consciousness.
To conclude, this is the construction of the concept of the gentleman with regards to some Victorian critics and social thinkers of that period. Victorian gentlemen are defined by their adherence to the ‘English’ morality tied to the sense of the Englishness that is regarded as the very England’s ideal form of masculinity. So, the concept of the Gentleman is the best form of masculinity. The Victorian gentleman is revered especially because he is highly associated with being English, which implies a certain expression of masculinity. The Victorian novelists portrayed the concept of the gentleman as a more refined and emotionally controlled version of masculinity compared to the men of the working class portrayed as an overtly degenerated version of masculinity. Thus, the concept of gentlemanliness is the most sophisticated form of masculinity. This is because it is the moral self-discipline of men anywhere.