Summative Assignment 1, Feminism and Austen’s Lady Susan
Letter 7
When looking at Austen’s Lady Susan from a feminist perspective, it is quite easy to pick up on the techniques of manipulation this heroine uses to get what she wants from the men in her lives. Her ‘superficial charm, adequate intelligence, absence of anxiety, insincerity, lack of remorse or shame, antisocial behavior, and poor judgment’ are not unlike that of a psychopath, according to Beatrice Anderson.
To a modern reader, Lady Susan’s character is quite the Machiavellian villain (or heroine), but what strikes the reader as most callous is the relationship she shares with her only daughter Frederica.
The sentiments she has against Frederica, and possible reasons for them, can be examined through a close reading of letter 7, from the lines ‘My dear Alicia’ to ‘insufferably dull’, through which Lady Susan relates her concerns for Frederica’s future to her close confidante and friend Mrs. Johnson. Barbara Horwitz recognizes that ‘Lady Susan blames Frederica for making herself ridiculous when she writes to her confidant, Mrs. Johnson’ by referring to her in her letters as ‘stupid’, ‘tiresome’ and having ‘nothing to recommend her’. However, in conversations with Reginald or Mrs. Vernon, Lady Susan is careful to take the blame for her daughter’s shortcomings.
Mrs. Johnson is a crucial character when it comes to looking past this duplicity and understanding Lady Susan’s intentions for Frederica, because she is the only other character in the novella to know Lady Susan’s true motives. It is through this friendship and outlet of true emotion that the reader can ascertain what shapes Lady Susan as a woman. Tess Coslett, in her book ‘Female Friendship in Victorian Fiction’, points out that, more often than not, women in these friendships ‘operate[d] to assimilate one or both of the women into marriage’ . This can be seen through Mrs. Johnson’s constant support (“a mark of your friendship”). Her advisory role with regard to Frederica’s security, but mainly Lady Susan’s possible suitors and prospects of marriage signify her loyalty and the bond of trust they share.
This letter serves as an example of Austen’s silent revolt against the societal expectations for women of her time, and she expresses these opinions subversively through the controversial character of Lady Susan. While discussing Frederica’s need for an education, Lady Susan gives a strong view about how little skill and craft can help you if you lack charm (“throwing time away to be mistress of French, Italian, and German: music, singing, and drawing, &c., will gain a woman some applause, but will not add one lover to her list—grace and manner, after all, are of the greatest importance.”). While she regrets not having had a proper education herself, this somewhat belittling view of a woman’s required education goes decidedly against Jacques Rousseau's famous statement about women’s education- ‘the women’s entire education should be planned in relation to men. To please men, to be useful to them, to win their love and respect, care for them as adults… these are women’s duties in all ages and these are what they should be taught from childhood.’
A feminist reading of this statement brings attention to the fact that Lady Susan not only challenges this notion of an ideal education but also proves it wrong by enchanting multiple men through her wit and charm is Austen's way of undermining society's limited expectations of a woman's skill. The respect Lady Susan commands besides her having a title subversively points to the fact that these ‘accomplishments’ are of no consequence if you don’t have the right frame of mind to exercise them. As a woman with no formal education (“I was so much indulged…without the accomplishments”), Lady Susan goes remarkably far on merely her intellect and language and almost manages to slip through her schemes unscathed until her delicately spun web begins to unravel as the truth about her is revealed (“Facts are such horrid things”, letter 32).
It is possible that Lady Susan regrets this lack of education on her own part, and therefore does not wish Frederica to have a similar setback. By sending her to Miss Summer’s for schooling, she wants her daughter to have the exposure to skills that she herself is unable to possess. While there is no doubt that Lady Susan compensates for this and is known for her wit (“a woman of high intellectual powers”, letter 14), she is confident that Frederica’s timidity will not allow her to do so (“neither has she any of that brilliancy of intellect…”, letter 24).
As Patricia Spacks suggests in ‘Female Resources: Epistles, Plot, and Power’, Lady Susan feels ‘contemptuous toward her daughter, who indulges in feeling rather than exercises control.’ On the other hand, Lady Susan suppresses emotion in favour of action as seen through her multiple manipulations to her final goal- Frederica’s marriage as well as her own.
At the time that Lady Susan was written, there was a convention in Victorian novels of the story ending in matrimony. Frederica as a character embodies this convention, as her role in the novella is to be wed to Sir James according to her mother Lady Susan, and in her own heart to Reginald. In her attempt to draw Reginald’s attention to herself (letter 21), she uses what Virginia Woolf refers to as a ‘man’s sentence’ , placing herself entirely in his hands.
This plea is starkly different from the strength and independence of character that Lady Susan displays, and her disgust at Frederica’s call for help is apparent through her scornful comment (“heroine in distress”, letter 24).
However, Lady Susan does acknowledge the similarities she shares with her daughter in letter 7. One can notice an ‘ideological polarity’ , as Tess Coslett points out, that existed for mother-daughter relationships in novels of this era, saying that they heroine was motherless, an unprotected female, or that her identity replicated her mothers. It is interesting how, through Lady Susan, Austen steps out of both these boundaries, yet represents them in her own way. Frederica is not, in the true sense of the word, motherless, but the lack of attachment between her and her mother presents her as a young female that has never felt any maternal affection. While her surface identity is divergent to that of her mother’s, it can be said that their lack of education brings them under the same identity of a typically ‘unqualified’ woman not possessing what is ‘necessary to finish [her]’. Lady Susan also admits that her daughter mimics a few of her own qualities (“she has my hand and arm and a tolerable voice”).
Even so, Austen’s Lady Susan is an unlikely character to play devil’s advocate to the standards of the era. There is, to an extent, a lens of parody employed in this novella, as Austen uses Lady Susan to contradict and mock the expected traditions and instructions shown in books of the time. Barbara Horwitz remarks ‘It is possible that Jane Austen is trying to show the reader the worst possible mother as the writers of the conduct books tried to describe the best possible mother.’ This parody, too, reflects much of Austen’s subversive technique as Lady Susan does not merely contradict what is expected of her, but uses words and language prescribed to motherhood to justify her otherwise unfeeling actions.
One could argue that this near cruel treatment of her daughter stems from her disregard for expression of emotion (Spacks, 1987) and her wish for Frederica’s security. In a society in which women largely depended on men for their survival, a mother’s urgency in wanting an advantageous marriage for her daughter was not uncommon (“it was the sacred impulse of maternal affection, it was the advantage of my daughter that led me on”, Lady Susan to Mrs. Johnson, letter 2). Additionally, as Lady Susan clarifies to Mrs. Vernon (letter 20), Frederica’s father did not leave her much on his passing, as opposed to Mrs. Vernon’s daughter Catherine (“Catherine will be amply provided for, and not, like my Frederica, indebted to a fortunate establishment for the comforts of life."). Her insistence on Frederica’s marriage to Sir James Martin could arise from her want for Frederica’s safety and financial security.
Ultimately, as phrased by Geneviève Brassard, ‘Lady Susan can be read as a transgressive heroine, and the novel as a subversive text, because Austen applauds her heroine’s pursuit of freedom and rewards her maternal indifference.’ Reading Lady Susan from a feminist perspective does require crossing some hurdles, as the complexities in her character present her as a heroine that is absolutely despicable yet convincingly charming at the same time. As a mother, she has little to no regard for maternal affection, yet her sheer will for stability propels her manipulations forward. She is an ‘independent spirit who resists the self-sacrifice domesticity and motherhood demand’ , and sees no harm in looking out for herself in a man’s world.