The human identity is defined by the perceptions that the environment and past societal pressures have placed on people and those they encounter, or the subjects. In Nathaniel Hawthorne’s short story Rappaccini’s Daughter, the differences between males and females define what each character’s interests and motives are. In “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,” Laura Mulvey writes about gender roles in their relation to the media, and thus explains why the male identity differs from the female identity in terms of how a human is defined. The combination of romance, intersubjective awareness, empathy, and objectification provide a foundation for humanity, but the stereotypical processes and adherence to each element differ for each gender. Mulvey describes men as being the bearers of power, and women as those who serve a responsibility of beauty and submission to the males who are often the main focus, especially in the media. Two different figures of male power are demonstrated in Rappaccini’s Daughter, the sexual and the intellectual; Giovanni misperceives Beatrice’s identity because he is influenced by the power and sexual structures that Mulvey contextualizes as the “gaze” and its object or subject, while Rappaccini is overcome by his own perceptions of self-dominance. Women are not classified in these categories and their beauty is more defining of their personhood than their intellect.
In Plato’s Symposium, philosophical debates regarding love led to assertions that men are in pursuit of fortifying their desires by obtaining the love of another woman to be complete. Symposium includes a collection of rationales regarding love shared at a dinner party among some of Ancient Greece’s greatest philosophers. Aristophanes, typically known as a comical man, shares his perspective by sharing that love occurs in our nature because over time we have evolved from our most primitive forms, “Each of us, then, is a ‘matching half’ of a human whole, because each was sliced like a flatfish, two out of one, and each of us is always seeking the half that matches him. That’s why a man who is split from the double sort (which used to be called ‘androgynous’) runs after women” (Plato 29). By describing the human as a “half,” the process of conjunction requires the body and soul to join and transcend beyond the limits of a platonic relationship. The “double sort” refers to a whole being that has both male and female indicators, thus when separated, they attempt to unify sexually. The definition of love differs within each relationship, but by associating it with human nature, he unifies it across humanity, so every person can share a common definition.
The need for humans to come together in a romantic relationship to complete themselves that Aristophanes shares is influenced by the male complex to fill this natural demand with beauty that prompts sexual desire. Since he suffers from the human tendency to desire fulfillment in love’s mental and physical aspects, Giovanni becomes frustrated by her hybrid nature
By appreciable signs, they loved; they had looked love, with eyes that conveyed the holy secret from the depths of one soul into the depths of the other, as if it were too sacred to be whispered by the way; they had even spoken love, in those gushes of passion when their spirits darted forth in articulated breath, like tongues of long-hidden flame; and yet there had been no seal of lips, no clasp of hands, nor any slightest caress, such as love claims and hallows…On the few occasions when Giovanni had seemed tempted to overstep the limit, Beatrice grew so sad, so stern, and withal wore such a look of desolate separation… (Hawthorne 13)
Although Giovanni appears to appreciate his conversation with Beatrice, they have not incorporated the physical component of love that tempts Giovanni. He struggles with the lack of this element in their relationship, and his reactions in attempting to facilitate it bring Beatrice sadness. Her human appearance grants her the stereotypical female role the Mulvey describes as “to-be-looked-at-ness,” but because they cannot touch, their love cannot progress beyond words and images, thus it cannot satisfy the need to become whole that Aristophanes describes as the core of human nature in relation to love. Mulvey argues that words and images contribute to the “gaze,” men staring at a woman for her physical appearance. Thus, Giovanni is a victim to the complex presented by Mulvey, and in order to fully love Beatrice, he requires of her actions that she cannot commit to without posing a danger to him.
The ability to recognize both oneself and others is the theory of intersubjective consciousness, which Jessica Benjamin describes as a development that can only take place between two humans in her work “Like Subjects, Love Objects.” In this theory, love is recognized as a mutual relationship, which requires the mutual recognition of subjects, so that they can also become aware of themselves and how they present themselves to others,
The occasionally mentioned (perhaps more frequently assumed) ‘love object,’ who would presumably hold the place of outside other, has no articulated place in the theory. Thus, once again, the pleasure in mutuality between two subjects is reduced to its function of stabilizing the self, not of enlarging out awareness of the outside or of recognizing others as animated by independent, though similar, feelings. (Benjamin 33)
Benjamin equates a loving relationship with all other types of relationships. This allows her to affirm that through recognizing another, one can undergo a process of self-recognition. She uses language such as “mutuality” and “stabilizing” to show how their conjunction is necessary to be aware of one’s own human identity. When one tries to establish this connection with objects rather than subjects, the ego becomes unrecognizable because inanimate objects do not have “independent, though similar, feelings” to help facilitate an intersubjective analysis.
Humans are said to become hyper-aware of themselves when they are in the presence of another who is able to judge them, but in Giovanni’s relationship with Beatrice, since she is a hybrid form, he loses his essence of humanity and falls victim to her poisonous nature,
‘Yes, poisonous thing!’ repeated Giovanni, beside himself with passion. ‘Thou hast done it! Thou hast filled my veins with poison! Thou hast made me as hateful, as ugly, as loathsome and deadly a creature as thyself—a world’s wonder of hideous monstrosity! Now—if our breath be happily as fatal as to ourselves as to all others—let us join our lips in one kiss of unutterable hatred, and so die!’ (Hawthorne 18)
In this passage, Giovanni quickly transitions from resentment to passionate love. Before realizing that becoming poison allows him to share in the physical component of love, he characterizes his new nature as “hateful” and “loathsome.” These words differ from how he describes the poisonous Beatrice, because she is a woman her nature is always defined by her superficial appearance, rather than her character. Benjamin’s theory can be applied to explain how Beatrice differs from a human, and how it negatively affects her relationship with Giovanni. Due to the nature of intersubjective consciousness makes one more aware of oneself, Giovanni should be able to recognize and act on the danger that Beatrice presents for him. However, since her subjectivity differs from that of a human and he perceives her differently because of her gender, her “poison” restricts him from this human process.
The body and the mind are opposing forces which are influenced in conjunction because they inhabit the same matter, thus creating tension between bodily desires and intellectual pursuits. Socrates analyzes the differences between these two agencies by arguing on behalf of the soul, “There now, it looks as if some sort of track is leading us, together with our reason, astray in our inquiry: as long as we possess the body, and our soul is contaminated by such an evil, we’ll surely never adequately gain what we desire—and that, we say, is truth, because the body affords us countless distractions—owing to the nature it must have” (Plato 12). Knowledge is misguided because the body is constantly influenced by what its senses perceive from its environment. The body is equated with desire, the “evil,” the Socrates describes as the factor leading one away from their soul.
Giovanni allows his bodily temptations for love and human interaction to distract his curiosity, as Socrates describes in Plato’s Phaedo, thus allowing for the feud between Rappaccini and Professor Baglioni to kill Beatrice. Giovanni is misguided by his craving to be with another and instead of questioning the indications of Beatrice’s nature, he disregards them,
True, there were ugly recollections connected with his first glimpses of the beautiful girl; he could not quite forget the bouquet that withered in her grasp, and the insect that perished amid the sunny air, by no ostensible agency save the fragrance of her breath. These incidents, however, dissolving in the pure light of her character, had no longer the efficacy of facts, but were acknowledged as mistaken fantasies, by whatever testimony of the senses they might appear to be substantiated. (Hawthorne 16)
This passage regards the senses as methods of deception that allow for valuable opposition to the concerns that Giovanni first associated with Beatrice. Her beauty is the first aspect of her that is mentioned, above her destructive power, which confirms the argument that Mulvey presents regarding women in media serving the function of providing scenery. Her body is more powerful than her true nature, and it deters Giovanni from questioning her personhood, despite the obvious signs of duality. Socrates’ explanation allows for the positive mystification of Beatrice’s poor qualities, described in this passage. If the soul is not fully committed to knowledge, then it will always be misguided by sexual satisfaction.
In The Island of Dr. Moreau, Moreau removes all forms of distractions by moving to a remote island to devote himself to his studies, where he is able to solely portray the male identity of the intellectual, disconnected from emotional processes. His devotion is characterized in his appeal to Prendick when he explains how he is able to practice vivisection on live animals,
‘But you see I am differently constituted. We are on different platforms. You are a materialist.’ ‘I am not a materialist,’ I began hotly. ‘In my view – in my view. For it is just this question of pain that parts us. So long as visible or audible pains drive you, so long as pain underlies your propositions about sin, so long, I tell you, you are an animal, thinking a little less obscurely what an animal feels.’ (Wells 73)
Moreau believes that he is greater than others because he has discovered how to disconnect his body and soul, in relation to physical and mental pain. Pain determines power, and it is the basis for the hierarchy that Moreau establishes. He applies his understanding to his studies to justify torturing animals in pursuit of knowledge because they are weak beings that have not conditioned themselves to understand that pain resides within the mind, and thus can be overcome through critical thinking. Through Moreau’s definition, intellectual thought is the power that Mulvey establishes as an attribute reserved for men because their appearance is not perceived in the same sexual manner that a woman’s physicality is.
The idea of male-dominance in 19th century literature is demonstrated through the perceived intellectual hierarchies of Dr. Moreau and Rappaccini because they are willing to sacrifice the aspects of their lives to isolate themselves with their creations. The value that Rappaccini denotes to cognition is described in Baglioni’s critique,
‘But as for Rappaccini, it is said of him—and I, who know the man well, can answer for its truth—that he cares infinitely more for science than for mankind. His patients are interesting to him only as subjects for some new experiment. He would sacrifice human life, his own among the rest, or whatever else was dearest to him, for the sake of adding so much as a grain of mustard-seed to the great heap of his accumulated knowledge’…‘Are there many men capable of so spiritual a love of science?’ (Hawthorne 4)
The description given to Rappaccini by Baglioni is focused on the sacrifices that Rappaccini is willing to make in order to provide a scientific service. Pain and empathy are connected because empathy requires one to feel as another would in situations of both pleasure and pain, but because Rappaccini lacks this process, he cannot cognitively develop the correct feelings. Moreau’s explicit hierarchy is applicable to how Rappaccini interprets his environment and those around him. Since he is contributing advancements, he considers himself greater than others and thus grants himself the authority necessary to mutate humans and threaten the natural progression of life. Any experiment that may yield a positive result, which Baglioni exaggerates through the metaphor of a mustard seed, holds more worth than a human life.
In the 19th century, the strictness revolving gender roles led to a decline in humanity for both genders because women were objectified as objects of beauty and men were overcome with intense passions for either sexual desire or science, which made them lose focus on the other aspects of their identities. However, the overcompensation of one aspect of humanity does not create a rational being; to be a human requires a balance of the definitive virtues. Gender roles have led to a desensitization of men which is exaggerated in Hawthorne’s short story. Beatrice is placed, as an accessory, in the center of both forms of manhood to show the power that men in this time period hold. Mulvey’s interpretations of women and men in the media provide a foundational understanding regarding the importance of her death as a love interest who cannot share in the intersubjective relationship that Giovanni requires, as well as the experiment that Rappaccini seeks gain from. Her hybrid nature allows her to fulfill multiple categories, dictated by pleasure and pain. These factors contribute to both the intellectual and the sexual desires of man because they explain how humanity is perceived differently for each gender in accordance with beauty and cognition.