Was the Victorian treatment of gender dependent on a fixed sense of its meanings and attributes?
Gender is widely considered to be a social construct and, as society is ever-changing, so are these constructs. To say that gender has fixed meanings and attributes is to incorrectly say that Victorian society remained static throughout its existence. It is undeniable that massive social, economic and industrial change occurred during these years, and so the definition of gender, that is masculinity and femininity, saw a progressive upheaval throughout the nineteenth century. Attitudes towards gender developed quite significantly during the latter half of the century as boundaries were pushed and a more powerful feminism emerged, resulting in literature that explored these changes and attempted to challenge the unrealistic and unfair expectations of the past and present. Both Thomas Hardy’s A Pair of Blue Eyes and Mary Elizabeth Braddon’s The Doctor’s Wife are key examples of texts that portray the consequences of gender determined by ‘The Angel in the House’ and the stark contrast between masculinity in the middle and upper classes. Through examining the influences in the maturation of female characters such as Elfride Swancourt and Isabel Sleaford, we can see that there is an obvious challenge of the way in which many Victorian women were encouraged to remain pure, submissive and avoidant of all vices, which inevitably causes issues as both characters are ignorant of experience and the world. Both characters turn to literature for a form of escape and education as they lack a strong maternal figure, with detrimental effects. However, when studying the masculine profiles of these novels, it can be seen that social class creates a significant contrast between two types of masculinity. On one hand, the Byronic hero of an upper-class standing competes with a hard-working and dedicated middle-class rival for the affections of the protagonist, whilst effeminacy and chastity also come into play in creating a mixture of contradictions as to what Victorian masculinity truly was by the close of the century. The study of gender, however, cannot be done without also exploring sexuality as both have a significant influence on one another. The development of a chaste female stereotype into ‘The Girl of the Period’ and eventually the ‘New Woman’ shows us how female sexuality and the treatment of gender had changed by the end of the century.
Throughout Victorian literature there can be found criticism of the early to mid-Victorian attitude towards middle-class femininity and the role of women in society, with Coventry Patmore’s ‘The Angel in the House’ being a perfect example of the ideologies of these gender roles and obligations. The separate spheres of Victorian life were ones that drastically separated the two genders out of biological necessity. The theory of men being katabolic and women anabolic, that is men expend energy and thus can enter the public sphere, whilst women conserve energy for reproduction and so must remain in the private sphere, helped shape the boundaries in which both men and women could operate. Advances in social science throughout the Victorian era began to break down this theory, however, the attitude towards women was substantially engrained until real progress could be seen with the development of the ‘Girl of the Period’ towards the end of the nineteenth century. Women’s place was in the home, and her attributes were specific: ‘…willing to be dependent on men and submissive to them…innocent, pure, gentle and self-sacrificing’ as Deborah Gorham describes.
These attributes are explored in both the novels previously mentioned, through the protagonists, Elfride and Isabel. The start of both novels allows the reader to witness these young women at the start of their adult lives whilst still at home and under the care of their parents, however it is easy to see how both fulfil the beautiful ‘angel’ in physical appearance, and also hold the ignorance of the ‘innocent’ stereotype. Because both women are truly inexperienced in life in a bid to retain the purity of the feminine trope, it results in the hamartia of them both. In the opening page to A Pair of Blue Eyes, Elfride is described as having a manner that ‘was childish and scarcely formed’ as well as being ‘no further on in social consciousness than an urban lady of fifteen’ (7). In this instance, there is an immediate image of the ‘Angel’ described with perfect blue eyes and a beautiful physical countenance, whilst also embodying the ignorant and innocent stereotype of the Victorian woman. Lack of a maternal figure for Elfride contributes to this sense of ignorance, as her father’s often rude and corrupt story-telling offers a vision into her lack of a proper social education, and she is ultimately left a child. According to Gorham, ‘the “majestic childishness” of the ideal woman was a sign of the extenct to which she was removed from the vicissitudes of the public sphere…it was seen as necessary that a woman retain a childlike simplicity’ of which Elfride does embody, making her the perfect female stereotype of chastity. There is no wonder, then, as to why Elfride is immediately taken with Stephen’s boyish charm and similar delicacy without proper assessment of her true desires and feelings, causing much of the rest of her life to unravel before her. The sexually-charged scene with Henry Knight on the cliff where Elfride is forced to shed her clothing in order to save her ‘lover’ is one that hints at the shocking impropriety of role reversal. Elfride is the heroine, and yet she is incapable of filling this role for long as she is exposed and stands ‘with absolutely nothing between her and the weather but her diaphanous exterior robe’ and has to flee, only stating ‘Good-bye till we meet, clothed and in our right minds’ (207). The feminine stereotype is that of female sexual repression to avoid madness, described by Amanda Anderson as a ‘sexless, maternal femininity’ and here Elfride is demonstrating the desire to comply with this and is even making a reference to the hymn ‘Dear Lord and Father of Mankind’ in order to seek some form of religious redemption for her actions. With this, Elfride is forced to keep her innocence and virtue intact in order to meet the stereotype but knows in honesty that she is already a fallen woman in the eyes of Henry Knight.
Isabel Sleaford in The Doctor’s Wife, a reworking of Flaubert’s infamous novel, Madame Bovary, shows a similar countenance as she is described as not being a ‘woman of the world. She had read novels while other people perused the Sunday papers; and of the world out of a three-volume romance she had no more idea than a baby’ (253) also resulting in an ill-matched marriage to George Gilbert without realising her future unhappiness. Similarly, Isabel has no proper mother figure as her step-mother favours her own children and offers her no guidance, adding to her naïveté, whilst being faced with the role of George’s late mother who she is expected to imitate. As Isabel is knowingly inexperienced, George refuses her the right to manage the household, the domestic sphere that her gender ought to dominate, as his mother has defined it so well and he simply receives ‘her suggestions doubtfully’ (109) with no admission as to why he rejects them. With this unrealistic goal of achieving the same admiration that George’s mother received, Isabel is left entirely controlled by George in both spheres without understanding why and one conclusion can be made; she is so innocent she is a child bride. However, Isabel confines herself to her gender’s Victorian stereotype as the Schroeders note, for she is ‘conventional enough to have assimilates a high percentage of society’s expectations of women…she does not love Gilbert, but she understands her obligation to be dutiful and obedient nevertheless’. To further this, the literature in which Isabel and Elfride surround themselves immerses them in the perfect heroine of Victorian literature and, without the maternal influence to guide their imagination, both young women base their expectations of themselves on these characteristics. Isabel reads romance whilst Elfride writes it, with neither having the experience to own a realistic perspective on the truth of life thus retaining their ‘innocence’ and enabling them to fill the feminine stereotype. As Catherine J. Goldman points out, Isabel’s romantic thoughts from reading so many novels means that she begins to embody the role of a femme fatale or heroine in her engagement to George as she ‘casts herself in matching roles and plays submissive Jane to the dominant Rochester’. Through these examples presented in the two novels, we can see how the Victorian treatment of gender was, at the time when the ‘Angel in the House’ was being challenged, determined by the long-standing attitude of female forbearance, innocence and obedience which ultimately left women ill-equipped to make educated decisions in their lives. This attitude changed, however, with the progression towards gender equality, something seen in the male characters of A Pair of Blue Eyes.
The characters of Stephen Smith and Henry Knight are two that, instead of abiding by the strong, dominant masculine qualities of the Victorian stereotype, they overthrow it and display feminine characteristics, proving that the attributes associated with masculinity were shifting as much as femininity. The general assumption that some Victorian men were unfaithful to their wives as a matter of inherent biological impulse rather than a conscious desire is one that is contested by the character Henry Knight. Knight has strong opinions on the purity of women and advises his own friend on identifying whether a woman is experienced in love or not. Stephen Smith recounts Knight’s advice as being aware of the ‘awkward bungling’ of a first kiss, ‘implying that we are the first who has played such a part with them’ (125), only then are they innocent and worthy. Not only does this scene present Knight’s opinion on the matter of chastity as in sync with the innocent ‘Angel’ previously mentioned, but it reinforces the nature of such an attribute being passed on from ‘master’ to ‘disciple’ in the socialisation of young men. Whilst this imposition upon Elfride and women is not all surprising, what contradicts the male stereotype is Knights implication of this standard upon himself. Such a standard is as much to his detriment as it is to Elfride’s as the lack of experience in romance from both results in a mixture of confusion, guilt and ultimately rejection. This deviance from the early- to mid-Victorian social norm for men is evidence for the progression of gender stereotypes into a modern model. Knight is the upper-class young man with a respectable background and expectations and yet his standards show differentiation and diversity.
Furthering the trend of feminine values in men, the powerful male role of suitor gives way to the effeminate Stephen Smith who is described as quite similar to Elfride herself in physical appearance and in temper. Instead of Stephen’s qualities being much more mature than Elfride’s as a typical suitor would be in Victorian romance fiction, Stephen has an inferior education and is ultimately turned down by Elfride because of this inferiority in knowledge and class. Upon first seeing Stephen, Elfride remarks to her father ‘his face is – well – pretty: just like mine’ (14) and later on he is described as ‘a very blooming boy’ (23). This feminisation of his appearance is one that defies the masculine gender role, and this continues through Stephen’s actions as an only partially-educated young man. His lack of ability to handle chess pieces appropriately, to pronounce latin and to ride a horse all allow for him to be ‘completely subjugated to the more self-assertive though equally inexperienced Elfride’ (xxi) notes Tim Dolin in a new introduction to the text. Through Elfride’s inexperience, she is more confident around Stephen and accepts his affections in a playful manner by forcing him to admit he would rather save her from drowning than his friend, Henry Knight, reinforcing how child-like she is and how inexperienced.
When looking back at the characteristics of the Victorian ‘Angel in the House’, we can see why Stephen’s rejection is to be expected. Elfride chooses Knight over Smith and there is a lot to be inferred from their names alone. Smith is a commonplace, lower-class man whose lack of education makes him interesting to Elfride, and, in her inexperience, she accepts him as her fiancé, however Knight appears as the gentry that his name commands and embodies the Byronic hero Elfride (and Isabel) would have read so much about. In order to fulfil Eliza Lyn Linton’s observations in The Saturday Review in 1868 of ‘The Girl of the Period’, Elfride performs the new stereotype of a woman wishing to marry solely based on his class and his income. Linton states the new woman sees ‘The legal barter of herself for so much money, representing so much dash, so much luxury and pleasure — that is her idea of marriage’, and whilst these may not be Elfride’s full intentions, it is the blending characteristics of the more modernised female gender role that is combined with the traditional countenance that ultimately influences her decision. It cannot be denied that the superiority of a richer, more educated suitor who adorns her with expensive earrings is draw for such an impressionable young woman. Elfride knows little of Knight before they first meet bar the harsh criticism he gives of her novel Knight’s aloofness to any affection at their first meeting, most likely due to his own inexperience of romance, adds to Elfride’s desire to meet the female stereotype of being under the power and care of a superior man and to impress him. Her fall from the parapet of the church tower symbolises her effeminacy in being weak and his masculinity in saving her, reinforcing the concept of Knight being the preferred suitor due to fulfilling the stereotype, yet Elfride was yet to discover the feminine trait of chastity he placed upon both of them. By comparing the two chess scenes in the novel, once with Stephen and twice with Henry, it is easy to see how the two suitors compare when it comes to masculine intelligence and skill. In summary, Elfride’s superiority at chess causes her to allow Stephen to win as he is so poorly skilled from only reading theoretical books on the game. Stephen takes offense to Elfride’s action and yet when playing (and losing) against Henry Knight, Knight attempts the same leniency which also offends Elfride. This presents the gender role-reversal between Elfride and Stephen, and shows how Knight dominates the masculine ideal in this arena, creating more preference towards him as a suitor. In an interesting turn, however, the famous ‘cliff-hanger’ scene in Chapter 22 of the novel turns the gender roles on their heads as Elfride attempts to save Knight from his own death on the cliff-face when his inexperience puts his life in danger. Here we see the beginnings of Knight’s wise and mature façade fade into the reality of being a young man in Victorian society. It can be believed then that Hardy is attempting to highlight the flawed masculine gender role and the passage in which Knight focuses on the fossils embedded in the rock before him. Knight observes the rock ‘traversed by an intelligence worthy of the name’ (200), hinting at the progression in science and the theory of evolution instigated by Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species in 1859. This acknowledgement of Darwin’s theories is a clear indication of scientific and social progress, supporting the concept of gender roles becoming more fluid and interchangeable and not as rigid as many believe them to be in the Victorian era.
Another Byronic hero in countenance can be found in the character of Roland Lansdell in Braddon’s The Doctor’s Wife. Isabel’s unhappy marriage to a man she does not love and an obsession with the romantic life of literature that her friend confirms in stating that ‘she’s dreadfully romantic…Novels are only dangerous for those poor foolish girls who read nothing else, and think that their lives are to be paraphrases of their favourite books’ (30) only causes in trouble in the respect of Lansdell. Lansdell represents the wider upper-class gentry, generally considered superfluous in a modern Victorian society as he often admits to his lack of a purpose in life. His writing of literature, his wealth and general mysterious lifestyle are an attraction to Isabel who has engrossed herself with the masculine heroes of the past without realising that Victorian masculinity has changed and in fact, it is her husband who is now considered to be the male stereotype. Lansdell superior knowledge of literature is a massive attraction for Isabel and allows her to form a romantic story in her mind of their lives together, and yet she never wishes to go further than their secret meetings under a tree, as ultimately Isabel is still the innocent child she has been socialised to be and is obligated to remain with her husband who has a moral superiority over Roland through keeping a wife and home and career to embody the more structured Victorian masculine figure.
To expand on the changing attributes associated with masculinity, we must look at the characters who fill the stereotypical masculine role of being the owner and ruler of the home and a responsible role model to children. Stephen Smith and George Gilbert are able to embody this to some extent through their class and through the occupations that they choose. Both are the first choice the two heroines make concerning love before being pulled away by their Byronic heroes after already committing themselves. Whilst Stephen aspires to be a fully-qualified architect, associated with the upper-middle class, his background is humble and his method of being worthy of marrying Elfride lies in his travel to Bombay, India where he can make an income that will allow him to fulfil the masculine model of a man with a solid income who can marry and raise a family. However, the fact that Stephen has not quite reached this middle-class status yet is exactly why Knight becomes the preference for Elfride once her father has made his sentiments clear, and pressed upon her the importance of class through his own example of marrying a wealthy spinster. Before knowledge of his class, Stephen is regarded as the respectable middle-class man with all the ideals of masculinity as Hardy makes the point that ‘professionalism overrules class…by masking it’ (xxi) and after Stephen becomes a respected architect, he is then in ‘the definite position in which he had rooted himself [which] nullified old distinctions’ (338).
George is similar in his choice of occupation; he chooses to be surgeon like his father, and carries the same ideals and expectations when it comes to himself, his wife and his home, indicating that his views are not necessarily part of the changing attitude towards gender. George expects his home to be similar to that of his parents and for Isabel to almost be an incarnation of his adored mother, and he attempts this by adopting the masculine role of dominance in the household. George is described as having ‘took upon himself to lecture Isabel, on sundry occasions, with regard to her love of novel-reading, her neglect of plain needlework, and her appalling ignorance on the subject of puddings…all the young man’s old notions of masculine superiority returned’ (101). George attempts to control his wife and keep her in check about her household duties, and the narrator notes how ‘he succeeded to admiration’ (116) in taming his wife, as a typical early- to mid-Victorian masculine figure ought to, and is why his revered by his patients and those around him.
To conclude, it can be seen that the Victorian treatment of gender roles had multiple facets and was changing with the progression of science, technology and society overall. Both masculine and feminine ideals follow a pattern of change, even to the present day, as more modern concepts are formulated with life’s progression. In Hardy and Braddon’s novels, we can see an array of characters that either fit the stereotype of their gender or overthrow it to reveal perhaps a form of reality or a changing and modernising outward projection of gender. For the female roles of Isabel and Elfride, there is a constant battle between what their society expects of them and the ideal fiction they read and the reality of what they wish their lives to be as ignorance is their primary downfall. Almost all of the characters make poor choices and face struggles as a result of the tropes they believe they must portray and here we can see the criticism both authors make of these social constructions of the perfect subdued, innocent and chaste female, as well as the intelligent, hardworking, dependable male. In all, it can be clearly seen that there is no fixed sense of what Victorian gender is, and thus treatment changed along with expectations, as it does in the present day. [3701 words]