How are relationships presented as having a problematic effect on women in 'Emma' by Jane Austen and 'The Blind Assassin’ by Margaret Atwood?
Both Jane Austen, in ‘Emma,’ and Margaret Atwood, in ‘The Blind Assassin,’ arguably present 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; social position is influential upon whom they know and how they marry, and also influences the misunderstandings which shape the novel’s plot, and highlights the mistreatment of those lacking status in Austen’s carefully nuanced portrayal of Regency polite society. This is mirrored in ‘The Blind Assassin,’ where the superior status of some 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 conflicts arise as a result of a character attempting to control their own or someone else’s destiny. While both focus on people as the underlying catalysts for problematic relationships, the contrast between twenty-first-century cynicism and Regency optimism separates the novels. Where Emma’s development as a character arguably represents Austen’s hope for society to evolve into becoming more accepting and liberal, Atwood’s world knows it has failed to deliver this evolution in the way that Feminists would have hoped for and continues to do very little about it.
One of the key reasons women’s relationships become problematic within the novels is their presentation as the driving force of their lives; the most active female role in Austen’s world is courtship. The limited scope of the novel arguably represents the confined nature of a woman in the early nineteenth century. While male writers such as Shelley and Byron possessed the relative freedom to travel and express their individuality, women were largely denied this. Courtship in a small town at this time was a public affair; it was never casual and usually ended in marriage or a relative scandal when proposals were rejected, and is most obviously reflected in the majority of the story unfolding within Highbury and Hartfield House. This has a suffocating effect, representing the lack of escape from the routine of a woman becoming a wife. Despite being reluctant to marry for the majority of the novel, Emma is unable to avoid being absorbed into discussions of marriage. An intelligent, well-educated woman, she has great potential but limited prospects and is forced to dedicate her energy to matchmaking, which could be the catalyst for the majority of the complications within the novel. She later admits to herself “it was adventuring too far … making light of what ought to be serious.” Here she rightly diagnoses what is wrong with her matchmaking; it undermines the accepted 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. Christine Marshall claims that “Austen is a beneficiary of feminist re-reading,” which suggests she did not intend her work to be feminist, but modern interpretations enable it to be read in a feminist manner, meaning 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. However, 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 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. Therefore, the act of marrying gives Miss Taylor her social status, which further demonstrates how marital relationships are not only the central focus of a woman’s life but their only tool for social mobility. Although this benefits Miss Taylor, the negative impact of the focus on marriage is personified in Miss Bates, who “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 ends with the emphasis that her misfortune stems from her marital status, rather than her own wrongdoing. The narrator’s sympathy for Miss Bates is 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 represents the social isolation that occurred towards unmarried women in the Georgian era. Austen is pointing out 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 relationship within the novel is arguably pre-determined 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 they are not worth it, with “dare” implying that love is a threat best avoided. The repetition of “if” shows no one knows what love will bring them – they never learn from their mistakes and always hope for better. A feminist 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 required to make it work. In this way societal pressure has a detrimental impact on the women in both novels. Further, “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: her sister kills herself, her marriage falls apart, her affair ends with death, and her offspring do not return her love. In childhood is Iris’ first failure towards her sister, being 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 that “Mother’s dead.” The use of the imperative alongside the matter of fact tone represents her rapid transition from sibling to carer, but the use of a contraction represents her continued childishness. Of course, she fails to keep Laura safe, immediately afterwards “pushing] her off” a branch. This foreshadows pushing Laura towards suicide, suggesting 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, whilst her failure to notice unintentionally leads to Laura’s death. 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 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 may 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 are presented by Atwood as removing control from the characters and leave women’s relationships in ruins. It is Alex’s death that puts in motion the 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 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, represented by the chapter title ‘the Destruction of Sakiel-Norn’. The lack of an ending for the star-crossed lovers represents how the relationships and lives of some characters have been cut short. Therefore, 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 heighten society’s expectations, especially with immense pressure to marry for advantage or within your class, and not doing so is a key cause of strife for the female characters particularly. Mr Weston’s 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, challenging the tradition of a man being the head of the household. This imbalance suggests class may only be cause harm in relationships when it challenges society’s expectations; class discrepancy alone does not cause problems. Feminists would therefore argue it is the status of women in general, rather than their class, that leads to suffering. However, Mr Weston’s first marriage becomes a cautionary tale about the need for social situations to be similar for love to actually exist. It also foreshadows the unfortunate events that will occur in the other socially imbalanced relationships throughout the novel. Emma 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 shows 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 agricultural breakthroughs and reading novels, it is not enough to earn him a higher status in Emma’s eyes. Politeness and intelligence are not associated with the lower classes, and therefore not associated with Mr Martin. She instead hopes her friend will find a husband who will secure her in a higher social position. However, this ultimately causes harm, showing it is society’s reaction to people going against the norms, rather than the act itself, that causes separation and divisions. Emma believes herself to be exempt from the need to marry, declaring 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 being of a higher class is of more importance than marriage. 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 would use this as evidence of class dividing 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, and 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 affect her social status. In spite of this, Jane is well-rounded and Emma is reprimanded for her jealousy, suggesting Austen does not agree with her main character.
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 being able to support each other. This relates to the changing role of women, from objects of fascination and housekeeping, to key players 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 the war had on dividing them. Iris’ assumption her “Grandmother Adelia would never have allowed the marriage” reflects society in ‘Emma,’ but her recognition that that was how “such things were accounted then” shows Iris now believes class does not overly affect relationships. However, this is proven not to be the case through Alex; his radical views are designed to shock the characters and emphasise 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 “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 lessen its importance. Such awareness means he is somewhat reluctant to love Iris, deliberately telling 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. His hatred for the upper class who have so mistreated him affects his ability to successfully have a relationship with Iris. 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, is the real victim as the blind assassin has taken 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, their treatment of by the Griffens represents the upper-class control of those beneath them. Iris appears accepting of the necessity of marrying Richard, but when Laura challenges this she becomes upset. She reminds her sister “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 violent lexis such as “thrown” imply Iris is in fact deeply upset at being forced into the marriage, but has resigned herself to its unavoidability. Throughout the novel, class is presented as problematic for women, and relationships are the key way 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 is an extension of the wider theme of women being fated to be harmed by their relationships.
In ‘Emma,’ misunderstandings and miscommunication drive the plot and create the majority of the conflicts which harm women. Mr Knightley is used as an example of the ideal approach to relationships in that he is honest, and speaks his mind clearly yet kindly; he proposes with “sincere, decided, intelligible tenderness as was tolerably convincing.” In response to his openness, the narrator declares that “seldom can it happen that something is not a little disguised, or a little mistaken; but where, as in this case, though the conduct is mistaken, the feelings are not.” This summarises the novel; it claims almost all human speech holds something back. This is seen in the insincerity and pretentiousness of Mr Elton’s compliments of Emma, and Frank and Emma’s light, elaborate flirtation. Though the artificiality of both gentlemen is condemned, and Emma is gently corrected for encouraging their behaviour, the word “can” suggests misunderstandings are somewhat inevitable. However, Mr Knightley is an example of where a character is honest and direct about their feelings, and as a result, there is no confusion about his intentions. Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar argue in The Madwoman in the Attic (1979) that "for all her ladylike discretion . . . Austen is rigorous in her revolt against the conventions she inherited." Mr Knightley may therefore be considered a tool of this ‘revolt,’ as he is evidence that poor communication is responsible for the problems in women’s relationships. The relationship between Frank and Jane embodies both these forms of confusion. Frank’s word puzzles produces “a blush on Jane's cheek which gave it a meaning not otherwise ostensible”; showing only those with inside knowledge can crack Frank’s intentions. When he then gives Emma the word “Dixon” she laughs, but Jane becomes “evidently displeased” and has an “angry spirit” for the remainder of the evening. This may suggest it is the secrecy of their relationship that upsets her, but Frank's games reveal that in his fun-loving daringness he can be callous and reckless, and this is ultimately what hurts Jane. In Jane Austen and the War of Ideas (1975), Marilyn Butler claims that ‘Austen's novels belong decisively to one class of partisan novels, the conservative. Intellectually, she is orthodox.’ A typical conservative view would suggest it is women’s inability to decipher the codes given them by men that causes problems for them. However, the riddles are condemned by the narrator, with the letters being described as “the vehicle for gallantry and trick.” This shows such behaviour plays on others’ lack of knowledge and therefore is cruel and unnecessary. Frank later admits such pain would have been “impossible for any woman of sense to endure,” showing character development and self-awareness; albeit unfortunately too late for Jane; she had felt enough pain and as a result calls off the engagement. He describes his shock upon finding his “letters all returned!” with the exclamation mark highlighting that he had not expected her reaction. Austen uses the intelligence and independence of her female characters – in this case, Jane Fairfax’s ability to call off the engagement due to Frank’s treatment of her – to critique the ways society fools people into believing women are mere accessories in a man’s world. For women, the penalty for sexual freedom was social ostracism, poverty, and worse. When Frank sees “how ill [he] had made her,” he finally takes responsibility for his actions and confesses his love. George III suffered from insanity from 1788 until his death in 1820; this brought mental health into the public consciousness. Jane was not mad, but her depression after breaking up with Frank was significant and Austen intended the reader to sympathise with her. Frank is presented as a villain, but his remorsefulness redeems him, as he attempts to resolve the damage he has done. He asks that the Westons “do not pity” him for his ordeals, and puts her feelings first and repairs their relationship. He becomes the most like Mr Knightley as ever in the actions described in the letter, and in this way becomes a worthy husband for Jane. Thus Austen may be calling on other men to put aside the shamefulness associated with emotional honesty, and avoid causing unnecessary problems through miscommunications.
As a result of fate removing power from the characters, women are often harmed by their own or others’ battles to gain control over their lives. In the novel within ‘The Blind Assassin,’ the teenage assassin has control over the girl he was sent to kill. He takes time “deciding whether to cut her throat or love her forever,” which shows that although he has been commissioned to kill her, he chooses to disobey the orders of his employers and take control over his actions. However, the girl is not given a choice in the matter; when he spares her life, he “takes” her, implying that although she may not have objected to being rescued, she did not consent to it either; not only is she mute physically, but she is muted in expressing her wishes. The girl is essentially forced into freedom suggesting she is controlled by the assassin’s desire to command his own life choices. Due to Alex’s death, we never discover if the couple survives their escape, but this in itself suggests their lives end. This shows a woman’s relationship can be damaged by the actions of her partner, through no fault of her own. Laura’s desire to take back control from other people may be rooted in her history of abuse by authority figures. Mr Erskine’s abuse of Laura in her childhood foreshadows Richard’s abuse in her young adulthood. Iris is blind to both abusers, with Laura informing her they do “it when you’re not looking.” By not learning to recognise the signs from the first, she allows Richard to continue abusing Laura, effectively acting as her assassin. Laura’s knowledge that Iris did not initially believe her story about Mr Erskine means she felt incapable of going to her sister for help. After she dies, it is too late to help, but Iris finally understands what Richard did and attempts to rescue herself and her daughter from his grip. She claims “I see that now. He couldn’t keep his hands off her.” The word “couldn’t” may imply that Richard was unable to control himself. Whether it be human weakness or fate that undermines his self-control, Richard’s ability to use his position as a man would be interpreted by feminists to be evidence of the patriarchy using relationships to cause harm to women. In response to this, some of the women cause harm to themselves in their attempts to overcome men’s domination over them. Further, the use of a first-person narrator throughout Iris’ retelling of her life further suggests that she had control over her decisions. Atwood explains that she chose to “give Iris full rein,” implying her authorship, and how she uses it against Richard, is a representation of her role in controlling her affair with Alex and its role in allowing her to take back power from her husband. This control, however, leads to her interfering in her daughter’s life, which causes huge harm for both women. Despite Iris having the best intentions, “Aimee was still resentful of [her] for having dragged her away”, showing that by attempting to control her daughter she damaged their relationship, eventually leading to a “lengthy struggle with drug and alcohol addiction.” Iris may begin this downward spiral by taking her away from her ‘comfier’ lifestyle. However, by writing her life story, Iris is able to give Sabrina the choice to make her own decisions, free from the baggage of the people who raised her. In the early 2000s, fourth wave feminism was beginning, a movement of liberation from systematic and emotional oppression after economic and political sexism have been legally removed and Sabrina represents this next generation. Iris has learnt not to attempt to control others, which may represent society changing, and she teaches her granddaughter not to fall into the same mistakes. By developing Iris’ character to this point of self-correction, it presents her previous actions of controlling others’ lives and allowing others to do the same as responsible for the harm caused to them. In this way, women’s relationships bring problems to their lives because they can enable them to be controlled.
Overall, both ‘Emma’ and ‘The Blind Assassin’ present relationships as having negative impacts on the women involved in them. The underlying cause of these problematic circumstances is presented to be society, but failing to fulfil the expectations is more common, complex and drastic in ‘The Blind Assassin.’ One of the crucial differences in these novels is the extremity of the problems that women suffer; although both novels feature women attempting to take control of their situations, Jane simply returns Frank’s letters to show the effect he has had on her, while Laura kills herself, reflecting changing attitudes towards women’s rights to protest against men. Another of the key ways that relationships are presented as problematic in both novels is they take their power from women. The theme of destiny and fate in ‘The Blind Assassin’ is one of the crucial forms of power being removed from them, and both novels feature human errors and the erroneous societies which they form as the underlying cause of problems in relationships. Upper-class elitism becomes problematic for women through cruelty from richer people and excessive pressure to marry correctly. Criticism of patriarchal society is portrayed through its influence on women and men alike, and the problems this influence causes. Women having too much power and influence over other women who look up to them can also be dangerous, with the main characters in both novels bringing dependent women into harm’s way. However, Emma and Iris both eventually learned the errors of and corrected their controlling behaviours, showing the authors’ hopes for the future generations of women that are to follow them.