Jane Austen, writer of ‘Emma,’ and Margaret Atwood, author of ‘The Blind Assassin,’ can both be seen to present both romantic and platonic relationships as having a negative effect on their female characters. In ‘Emma,’ it is a woman’s status that influences the complex circumstances that occur within and surrounding their various relationships. Not only is position reliant upon who they know and how they marry, but it influences how the characters speak to and act around each other, which can lead to the misunderstandings which shape the plot of the novel, but can also be seen to allow certain characters to mistreat those who are socially beneath them. This is mirrored in ‘The Blind Assassin,’ in which the superior status of some individuals enables them to take advantage of others. However, in Atwood’s novel it is the theme of destiny that is explored most thoroughly; women’s relationships are presented as destined to fail, and many of the conflicts that occur within the novel’s various plotlines occur as a result of a character attempting to take control of their own or someone else’s destiny. Both authors use mistakes and misunderstandings to suggest that human flaws are a key underlying factor in the problems that arise in women’s relationships, however their presentation of these mistakes differs greatly. The misunderstandings in ‘Emma’ belong to the characters and the reader is in on the joke, whereas the untruths in ‘The Blind Assassin’ can also trick the reader and prove to be more dangerous for characters. Although human mistakes and ‘fate’ are blamed for their wrongdoings, male and female characters alike are held responsible for the negative effect of relationships on women. However, the problems are mostly resolved by the end of ‘Emma’, with the promise of a ‘happily ever after’ for each of the couples, while in Atwood’s novel the relationships regularly end with death or divisions. This can be explained contextually in that ‘Emma’ was written in the midst of the industrial revolution, a time of relative prosperity and optimism, with the expansion of the upper and middle classes swelling the ranks of those who considered themselves part of society. In contrast to this period of development and stability, Atwood’s novel is largely set in the tumultuous inter-war period in a Canadian state struggling to define itself, and was written at the turn of the millennium in a time of pessimism, dissatisfaction and satire, as well as under the influence of a greater awareness of the struggles of women. The structure of the novels also relates to the differing contexts in which they were written. ‘Emma’ is very closed and limited, with one narrator telling a single story in a small time frame in on village, which reflects the limited transport and travel options and a society in which privacy was rare, and highlights that the culture created issues for women. ‘The Blind Assassin’ is much more varied; letters, newspapers, memoirs, and a book-within-a-book build four narratives across various time periods, generations and locations. Atwood uses this broad storytelling method in order to slowly reveal that human beings are destined to fail, and by extension so are their relationships. While both choose to focus on people as the underlying catalysts for problematic relationships, it is the contrast between twenty-first century cynicism and Regency optimism that separates the novels. Where Emma’s development as a character represents Austen’s hope for society to evolve to become more accepting and liberal, Atwood lives in a world that knows it has failed to deliver this evolution and continues to do very little about it.
One of the key reasons that women’s relationships become problematic is that they are the driving force of their lives; their most active role in the society built by Jane Austen is courtship. The limited scope of the novel, both in terms of plot and setting, represents the confined nature of a woman living in the early nineteenth century. The novel’s structure has three clear parts; the introduction of the characters and various relationships between them, Emma’s meddling in these relationships, and finally a ‘happily ever after’ as the couples either get married or plan to. Courtship in a small town at this time was a very public affair; it was never casual and usually ended in marriage or a relative scandal when a proposal was rejected. This is most obviously reflected in that the majority of the story unfolds within the village of Highbury, mostly in the Woodhouse’s home, Hartfield House. This has an suffocating effect, representing how there is little to no escape from the pressure surrounding women to become a wife and settle down, as they are constantly exposed to other women taking part in this almost ritualistic routine. Despite being reluctant to marry for the majority of the novel, Emma is unable to avoid being absorbed into the discussions of marriage. An intelligent, well-educated woman, she has great potential but limited prospects, and is forced to dedicate her energy into matchmaking. Emma takes considerable pride in her new-found role, boasting to Mr. Knightley that she “made the match … four years ago.” Her claim may reveal a deeper desire to be acknowledged for her mind and influence, with her excitement upon being “proved in the right” emphasising that this may be her only way to receive it. This yearning may draw Emma further into the part of matchmaker, which can be considered to be the catalyst for the majority of the complications within the novel. She later admits to herself that “it was foolish, it was wrong, … it was adventuring too far, assuming too much, making light of what ought to be serious.” Here she rightly diagnoses what is wrong with her matchmaking; it undermines what is considered to be the correct process of courtship. In this way, the damage done by Emma’s obsession becomes clear; not only has she caused upset amongst her friends by taking “so active a part” in their relationships, but she has to an extent threatened the natural process of falling in love. This suggests that a lack of engaging outlets for her energy and intelligence had forced her to become too invested in the only venture available to her. Arguably, had a wider variety of things to do been available, she would not have felt the desire to get involved. However, Christine Marshall claims that “Jane Austen is a beneficiary of feminist re-reading,” which can be understood to mean that Austen did not intend her work to be feminist, but modern interpretations enable it to be read in a feminist way, meaning that there is weight to support the argument that by attempting to go beyond her restrictions Emma herself is to blame for the problems that arise. Growing up, Austen was given unlimited access to her father’s libraries and it is thought that during the time in which she was homeschooled she used the same books as the boys that her father taught. With this in mind, Marshall’s argument cannot apply to this part of the novel, and the damage caused by Emma’s meddling may be a criticism of the limited options available to women, and that these limitations are responsible for much of what is problematic with their relationships. On another note, Emma’s boasting of her matchmaking skills reveals the impact that a relationship can have on a woman’s life. She says it is a “comfort” that her governess and friend now has the support and stability of a marriage. Through marrying Mr Weston, Miss Taylor finds herself in “a house of her own”, hosting parties and playing a more central role in the Highbury social circles. “The event had every promise of happiness” for Miss Taylor, as marrying him represented her fulfilling her expectation to become married as well as her accomplishment of finding financial and social security. Miss Taylor was able to graduate from Emma’s governess to a gentlewoman and an equal through marrying a wealthy man with status. However, there is may be an implication within this quotation that her “happiness” was reliant upon her marrying well. Despite being well respected as a governess, she is unlikely to have had equal standing to the family she lived with. During the wedding of her friend, “Emma first sat in mournful thought of any continuance,” revealing that she is less concerned with Miss Taylor's new happiness than her own loss of a companion. Although the two were described as friends, Emma realistically saw Miss Taylor almost as a possession to entertain her, until, of course, she married. It can thus be assumed that is the act of marrying that gives Miss Taylor her social status, which further demonstrates how marital relationships are not only the central focus of a woman’s life, but also their only tool for upward social mobility. Although this benefits Miss Taylor, the negative impact of the focus on marriage is personified in Miss Bates. The narrator notes that she “enjoyed a most uncommon degree of popularity for a woman neither young, handsome, rich, nor married.” Emma appears to be alone in disliking Miss Bates, however the modifier “uncommon” reveals that in wider society a woman in a similar position would be unlikely to find similar degrees of sympathy. The tetrapartite sequence ending with emphasises that her misfortune stems from her marital status. Therefore, pointing out that she “no one named [her] without good-will” was a necessity in order to humanise her character, and this is furthered when Frank declares that she “must not be forgotten.” The narrator’s sympathy for Miss Bates can be linked to how Austen herself lived her life unmarried, with a few unsuccessful relationships in her youth. Despite this, Miss Bates represents why women need to get married, as she lacks social or economic security and “stood in the very worst predicament in the world.” Emma’s treatment of her may be cruel, but it represents the social isolation that commonly occurred towards unmarried women in the Georgian era. Emma comments that Miss Bates may struggle to limit herself to saying “only three” dull things, implying that she is stupid. In this way, society’s expectations can prove problematic not just for women who fail to find a husband, but also for her relationships with other women, in particular in other women’s attitudes towards her. Mr Knightley’s sympathy towards Miss Bates shows that Emma goes against the narrator and her friends when she is cruel to her. The Box Hill picnic, and in particular this exchange with Miss Bates, is a turning point in the novel; it causes Emma to evaluate her behaviours and eventually apologise to her. This could suggest that valuing a woman based on her marital status is unfair, and treating her according to this judgement is even more unjust. Therefore, it is likely that Austen is pointing out through the behaviours of Emma towards Miss Bates, Miss Taylor, and the other couples, that the huge amount of emphasis that society places on marriage and romantic relationships causes problems to arise not only between spouses but between friends.
The main theme of ‘The Blind Assassin’ is destiny; regardless of the problem or its source, each of the relationships within the novel is guaranteed to fail. One of Iris’ final statements in her novel is that “if you knew everything that was going to happen next … You'd never love anyone, ever again. You'd never dare to.” Her character now sees what was clear throughout the novel, that relationships are painful. She concludes that they are not worth it, with “dare” implying that love is a threat that ought to be avoided. The repetition of “if” shows that no one knows what love will bring them – they never learn from their mistakes and they always hope for better. Love continues to cause heartache and pain, and despite seeing evidence of this, people cannot let go of it. However the confession that “they’d loved to cut themselves on each other, taste their own blood” implies that the couple deliberately went back to each other, time and time again, despite knowing the pain that these decisions held for them. They were fated for each other, and addicted to the harm they caused each other. The shocking description of tasting blood makes the characters seem savage and animalistic, as though they do not have the mental capacity to make healthy decisions. This could suggest that fate is in control, but their self-proclaimed love for the pain shows that they chose it. A feminist critic may argue that these decisions have a greater destructive effect on the woman in the relationship, as the patriarchy compels women to stay in unhealthy relationships because they feel they are required to make it work. In this way societal pressure can be seen to have a detrimental impact on the women in both novels. In the original quote, “anyone” shows that it is not just romantic relationships that become problematic; becoming attached to anyone risks unescapable heartbreak and pain. This relates to Iris’ own experiences, in that her sister killed herself, her marriage fell apart, her affair ended with death, and her offspring do not return her love. Her observation of failing relationships began in her youth, with the collapse of her parents’ marriage. Mr and Mrs Chase’s relationship failed due to the effect that the war had on them. When he returned they were “strangers” and it became clear that “he’d had other women.” This was to be expected given the circumstances, and she was “supposed to understand.” The apparent inevitability of Mr Chase’s choices implies that their actions were no longer under their control; their relationship failed because destiny made it so. It was an unavoidable failure, and in her retelling of the story, Iris recognises that it “seemed inevitable” to her childhood ears. Also in her childhood is Iris’ first failure towards her sister. Iris was forced to care for her sister since before her mother’s death, but her responsibility for her increased dramatically after this. She not only tells her that she “shouldn’t sing”, but tells her that “Mother’s dead.” The use of the imperative forms a command, while the matter of fact tone represents her sudden growth from sibling to carer in a matter of days. Of course, she fails to keep Laura safe; she immediately afterwards “pushed her off” a branch. This foreshadows pushing Laura towards her suicide, suggesting that even from youth the sisters were destined to destroy each other. By marrying Richard she brings horror into Laura’s life, revealing that even the relationships of another woman can cause problems for one woman, and her failure to notice while she was alive prevented her from saving her life. In this way, Iris’ actions lead to the problematic nature of her relationships, but, due to the unforeseen nature of these consequences, a similar level of sympathy is given to her as is given to Miss Bates, who is also not entirely responsible for her situation. However, the loss of the family fortune and the Great Depression’s impact on the family business in the 1930s can be seen to be the starting point for the real failures in Iris and Laura’s relationship, as this is what caused Iris to marry Richard. In this way, external factors remove control from the characters and leave women’s relationships in ruins. Her regretful tone when saying that “even then I could have changed course” shows that by telling Laura of Alex’s death and their affair, she can be seen to have caused her death, and she believes this to be the case. His death is revealed through Iris’ novel in the chapter ‘“The Destruction of Sakiel-Norn.” abruptly ending his relationships with both Iris and Laura. This is a repetition of how war led to the demise of Mr and Mrs Chase’s relationship, and shows that for the Chase women many of the problems in their lives come as a result of events outside of their control. It is Alex’s death that puts in motion events that lead to Laura’s death, Iris and Richard’s separation, and Winifred’s possession of Iris’ child. In this way, war and conflict are presented as the main tool used by Atwood to represent fate undermining the relationships of the women in her novel. Furthermore, when he is killed, his story dies with him. The lack of an ending for the star-crossed lovers represents how the relationships and lives of some characters have been cut short. The blind assassin was completely controlled by a higher power, both within his universe and as a character in a story, which can be a reflection of how the characters in Atwood’s novel are also without total control of their lives. The deliberately pessimistic message that disaster is inevitable within female relationships is common both of the time period and of Atwood herself; the late twentieth and early twenty-first century are known for their dystopian literature and the influence of third wave feminism, and Atwood’s most famous novel, The Handmaid’s Tale, is a feminist dystopia. Although the main story line is far from a dystopian setting, it contains a story which is a sci-fi dystopia, and is a microcosm of the other relationships within the rest of the novel in that their fate is decided for them – or, as it turns out, never is. Therefore, in ‘The Blind Assassin’ relationships are destined to have a damaging impact on women, as they are repeatedly sabotaged by outside factors such as war, society and unforeseen consequences. This shows that it is a lack of autonomy that ultimately leads to problems for women, which is represented similarly in ‘Emma’ by the women’s inability to escape from the pressures of courtship.
Characters’ class can further the impact of society’s expectations seen in Austen’s novel. There is immense pressure to marry for advantage or within your class, and not doing so is a key cause of strife for the female characters in particular. Mr Weston’ previous marriage is described as “an unsuitable connection” which “did not produce much happiness.” It was “unsuitable" because the wife was rich and the husband poor, which contrasts the tradition of a man being the head of the household. This imbalance suggests that class may only be able to cause harm in relationships when it goes against society’s expectations; class discrepancy alone does not cause problems. Feminists would therefore argue that it is the status of women in general, rather than the class of an individual woman, that leads to suffering for women. However, Mr. Weston’s first marriage becomes a cautionary tale about the need for social situations to be similar in order for love to actually exist. It also foreshadows the unfortunate events that will occur in the other socially imbalanced relationships throughout the novel. Emma’s reaction to Jane and Frank represents society’s view on similar relationships. She calls their engagement “a very abominable sort of proceeding,” and believes Miss Fairfax allowed her affection to “overpower her judgment.” Although by the end of the novel Emma is much more kind towards Jane, it is clear that she does not approve of the match. This may be due to Frank Churchill’s character, although given that she is far more forgiving towards him that Mr Knightley, it is more likely that she disapproves because it is not sensible to marry so outside of your position. “Soon after … Box Hill, … Mr. Churchill had sent his nephew a few lines” demanding that he return home. After the drama and flirtations at the Box Hill party there is more evidence that Jane and Frank are connected, and suspicions begin to grow. Mrs Churchill calling Frank home further represents that it is society’s reaction to people going against the norms, rather than the act itself, that causes separation and divisions. Emma also disapproves of Mr Martin for Harriet. She encourages her to reject him, declaring that while he “be a very rich man in time” he will still be “illiterate and coarse.” Emma’s backhanded compliment sums up that potential is not enough; class is based on current achievements, long-earned riches and family status. It also shows that despite him being an educated man, up to date on the latest agricultural breakthroughs, and reading novels, it is not enough to earn him a higher status in Emma’s eyes. Politeness and intelligence is not associated with the lower classes, and therefore not associated with Mr Martin. She instead hopes that her friend will find a husband who will secure her in a higher social position, showing that marriage is a way for women to have some control over their lives, however this control is limited and the imbalances that arise can cause further problems. Emma, however, believes herself to be exempt from the need to marry, declaring that she “shall not be a poor old maid; and it is poverty only which makes celibacy contemptible to a generous public! … but a single woman, of good fortune, is always respectable.” Emma believes that being of a higher class is of more importance than whether or not she marries. Miss Bates is only so undesirable to her because of her poor economic status – if she were to remain unmarried as she hopes to, she believes that she would be protected from the stigmas surrounding single women. Marxist critics would use this to argue that class divides people more than marital status; those socially above others are able to assume the futures of those beneath them while remaining exempt from the same fate. Similarly, they are also able to divide people of similar marital status according to their finances and class. For example, Emma considers Harriet to be a respectable single woman, while Jane has no family fortune or status and has had to make her own life. Although the reader may see Jane as more intelligent, independent and respectable than Harriet, Emma treats Harriet far better due to her assumed superior status. Austen may therefore be seen to consider class as a far more problematic factor in women’s relationships, as it is what separates Harriet and Jane in the eyes of Emma and prevents Jane from being liked by many other characters. Marxists would argue that in ‘Emma’, women’s relationships are made problematic due to huge conflicts and divides between the classes – if the characters were equal they would be protected from this. On the other hand, while Emma sees herself as socially above the need for marriage, Harriet and Jane are not. They are beneath Emma and therefore still need to marry, so a woman’s need to marry still controls their choices. Therefore, feminists would contest that it is the patriarchal nature of society that causes problems in women’s relationships. It is not just the difficulty of marrying within their class that causes problems for women; their platonic relationships are also affected. Jane receives a cold reception from Emma, who, despite being charitable towards the poor, shows little initiative in befriending the orphaned and talented Jane. Her reasoning for this, however, is “difficult” to explain, though “Mr. Knightley had once told her it was because she saw in her the really accomplished young woman, which she wanted to be thought herself.” As Austen’s mouthpiece and Emma’s moral compass, Mr Knightley’s view that Emma is jealous of Jane is likely to be correct. In the world of the gentry, women became governesses because they were unable to find someone to marry or some way to be interesting. Becoming a governess means that Jane has failed in the marriage market. A governess might be a gentlewoman, but Emma believes that Jane’s economic and marital status should interfere with her social status. In spite of this, Jane is well-rounded and Emma is reprimanded for her jealousy, suggesting that Austen does not agree with her main character. Instead, Mr Knightley’s actions are the mold that Austen wishes society would fall into. After she is snubbed by Mr Elton at the dance, he is seen “leading Harriet to the set!” The use of an exclamation suggests that such behaviour is surprising, however Mr Elton is seen “looking very foolish” after witnessing it. He had implied that he would have to be “at a loss” to marry Harriet due to her unknown history, which shows that the expectation to marry within one’s class does not just harm women currently in relationships, but also those who desire to be in one. Here Mr Elton is painted as a villain due to his disagreeable treatment of Harriet, and this is also seen in Mr Knightley’s reaction to Emma’s treatment of Miss Bates. He appears shocked and upset, asking “how could you be so unfeeling to Miss Bates? How could you be so insolent in your wit to a woman of her character, age, and situation?” The use of repetition and an accusational tone emphasises that Emma should not be cruel to those ‘beneath’ her, and he questions her morality, suggesting that she has caused harm to Miss Bates. Further, the word ‘insolent’ implies that she is abusing her superior status, as he may fear she is setting a bad example to those who look up to her. In contrast, Mr Knightley’s actions can be seen to be a commentary on the ‘normal’ behaviours of the other characters, putting them to shame with his ability to view a person for who they are, rather than their class and social position. When Austen was writing her novel, the Prince Regent allowed her to dedicate Emma to him. Prince George set the standards of "gentlemanlike" behavior during his time. According to him, fashionable men were dandies; the sort who would ride sixteen miles to London just to get a haircut, and he was by all accounts dissipated, drunk, and superficial. Mr Knightley is his opposite and ironically shares his name. This can be seen to be a deliberate criticism of the typical behaviours of the upper classes, and therefore Austen may be suggesting that it is elitist classism that is a key catalyst for the problematic impact that relationships have on women.
Class also influences the problematic nature of relationships in ‘The Blind Assassin. Similar to Mr Weston’s previous marriage, Mr and Mrs Chase represent the damage caused by social discrepancy in a marriage. Iris’s “mother was below [her] father’s level socially,” but he married her anyway as he wanted “someone he could depend on”. This shows that expectations had begun to shift from couples being socially balanced to them being able to support each other. This relates to the changing role of a woman, from a object of fascination and housekeeping, to a key player in the structure of the household. However, it does suggest that there was likely some imbalance in their relationship; they had different religious backgrounds, different upbringings, different ideas about charity, which is seen to have been an underlying cause of the huge impact that the war had on dividing them. Iris’ assumption that her “Grandmother Adelia would never have allowed the marriage” reflects Mrs Churchill’s disapproval of Frank and Jane’s relationship, however her recognition that that was how “such things were accounted then” shows that Iris now believes that class does not overly affect relationships. However, this is proven not to be the case through the reaction of Reenie and Iris to the developing relationship between Laura and Alex. They joke that “if things went on in this fashion we’d have a little Bolshevik on our hands.” Although Alex is an extreme example of someone from another class in that he is a Communist sympathiser, the disgusted tone used to describe shows that the Chase household have no desire to have anyone who may undermine their position, career or factory in their midst. This may imply that relationships with people of lower classes leads to problems for women because it affects their reputation. Reenie’s warning that “people are talking” shows that a fear for Laura’s honour, rather than elitist arrogance, is responsible for their dislike of Alex. He can also be seen to threaten the stability of the Chase’s lives; his radical views are designed to shock the characters and emphasis the damage done by classism. When told by Callie “ “You shouldn’t pick on those weaker than yourself,” he excuses his behaviour with the claim that “everyone else does.” Alex sees that only the rich are allowed to be cruel; they can get away with it due to their monetary influence and social ability to smile and wave it off. His awareness of this means that he is somewhat reluctant to love Iris. He deliberately tells her a story that reveals how she has benefitted from her position, which upsets her. The blind assassin “hates them all … and anyone involved in their doings, as this girl is,” which represents how Alex feels conflicted over Iris. In this way, his hatred for the upper class who have so mistreated him affects his ability to successfully have a relationship with Iris. She tells him “you’re vengeful – no, you’re jealous,” which suggests that she struggles to understand him as she has corrected herself. She is cannot see why he couldn’t be jealous of her social standing, and he is unable to understand why she would want to be associated with them. In this way, class divisions have a deeply negative impact on their relationship which continually causes arguments and strife throughout their relationship in Iris’ novel. As the representation of Marxist theory within the novel, Alex’s story of the blind assassin is an attempt to reveal to Iris the way that her class have systematically taken advantage of those beneath them. The use of “slave children” upsets Iris, but Alex assures her that “they are required,” representing the way that businesses exploit workers because it is necessary to make profits. The characters are also a representation of the couple themselves. The blind assassin was an underclass fugitive, while the virgin was both a monument and a victim of the system he hates. Both are irreparably physically and emotionally damaged by their experiences. However, the girl, and by extension Iris, can be seen to be more of a victim as the blind assassin has been able to take on a role that allows him to enact vengeance upon his oppressors, while she has been forced to support them. Marxists may argue that while the Chases are far from working class, the treatment of them by the Griffens represents the upper class control of those beneath them. Iris appears to be accepting of the necessity of her marrying Richard, but when Laura challenges this she becomes upset. She reminds her sister that ““what I want isn’t the point … We don’t have any money, or haven’t you noticed? Would you like us to be thrown out on the street?” Her own desires are set aside because she has no money or fortune of her own; she is only useful as a way for Richard to become involved in the family, which relates to how women’s lives focus on marriage in Emma. The cutting tone and the use of violent lexis such as “thrown” implies that Iris is in fact deeply upset by being forced into the marriage, but has resigned herself to the fact that it is unavoidable. When Laura forces her to question this, she lashes out at her, admitting that she speaks “harshly,” which shows that upper class control also causes indirect harm to women as it damages their relationships with others. The use of rhetorical questions implies that marrying Richard is the only viable answer to their problems, and in this way the marriage can be seen to be problematic from its conception as it was based purely on necessity. This makes the more pressing point that due to their superior financial status, the Griffens are able to control the Chases. This is further shown in that the wedding itself was held at Winifred’s barn as it would be “less embarrassing for my father, who could no longer afford the kind of wedding Winifred felt was her due.” It is clear that she had high expectations for her brother’s marriage, and as the Chases would be unable to afford this, it would be ‘only right’ for her to take over. Traditionally, a woman was married from her own home, or in her hometown, and in the interwar period, such traditions were key to maintaining normality in Canada. Breaking from this tradition would not have been outrageous, but certainly will have been noticed by those attending the wedding. Although Norval Chase will have been more embarrassed if the guests had been invited to a mediocre wedding at Avilion, it is unlikely that the family were saved all embarrassment by this decision. In this way, the needs of the established socialite is put above the wants of Iris and her family, which shows that status enables manipulation and abuse by the wealthy. Throughout the novel, class is presented as causing problems for women, and relationships are the key way that this is done. Both directly and indirectly, upper class domination of their society causes emotional and physical harm to the Chase women. As many of the characters were born into their status, this can be seen to be an extension of the wider theme of women being fated to be harmed by their relationships.