In 1847 The Stereotypes For Male And Female Writers Were Very Rigid. Critics Expected From A Male Writer

In 1847 the stereotypes for male and female writers were very rigid. Critics expected from a male writer strength, passion, and intellect, and from a woman writer they expected tact, refinement, and piety. They depended on these stereotypes so much, in fact, that they really didn't know how to proceed, what to say, or what to look for in a book if they were unsure of the author's sex.

So Jane Eyre created a tremendous sensation, and it was a problem for the Brontës. The name Currer Bell could be that of either a man or a woman and the narrator of Jane Eyre is Jane herself. The book is told as an autobiography. These things suggested that the author might have been a woman. On the other hand, the novel was considered to be excellent, strong, intelligent and, most of all, passionate. And therefore, the critics reasoned, it could not be written by a woman, and if it turned out that it was written by a woman, she had to be unnatural and perverted.

The reason for this is that the Victorians believed that decent women had no sexual feelings whatsoever—that they had sexual anesthesia. Therefore, when Jane says about Rochester that his touch "made her veins run fire, and her heart beat faster than she could count its throbs," the critics assumed this was a man writing about his sexual fantasies. If a woman was the author, then presumably she was writing from her own experience, and that was disgusting. In this case we can clearly see how women were not permitted the authority of their own experience if it happened to contradict the cultural stereotype.

But even more shocking than this to the Victorians was Jane's reply to Rochester, a very famous passage in the novel. He has told her he is going to marry another woman, an heiress, but that she can stay on as a servant. Jane answers him thus:

"I tell you I must go," I retorted, roused to something like passion. "Do you think I can stay to become nothing to you? Do you think I am an automaton, a machine without feeling and can bear to have my morsel of bread snatched from my lips and my drop of living water dashed from my cup? Do you think because I am poor, obscure, plain and little, I'm soulless and heartless? You think wrong. I have as much soul as you and full as much heart. And if God had gifted me with some beauty and much wealth, I should've made it as hard for you to leave me as it is now for me to leave you. I am not talking to you now through the medium of custom, conventionality, nor even of mortal flesh. It is my spirit that addresses your spirit, just as if both had passed through the grave and we stood at God's feet equal—as we are."

This splendid assertion violated not only the standards of sexual submission, which were believed to be women's duty and their punishment for Eve's crime, but it also went against standards of class submission, and obviously against religion. And this sort of rebellion was not feminine at all.

The reviews of Jane Eyre in 1847 and 1848 show how confused the critics were. Some of them said Currer Bell was a man. Some of them, including Thackeray, said a woman. One man, an American critic named Edgar Percy Whipple, said the Bells were a team, that Currer Bell was a woman who did the dainty parts of the book and brother Acton the rough parts. All kinds of circumstantial evidence were adduced to solve this problem, such as the details of housekeeping. Harriet Martineau said the book had to be the work of a woman or an upholsterer. And Lady Eastlake, who was a reviewer for one of the most prestigious journals, said it couldn't be a woman because no woman would dress her heroines in such outlandish clothes.

Eventually Charlotte Brontë revealed her identity, and then these attacks which had been general became personal. People introduced her as the author of a naughty book; they gossiped that she was Thackeray's mistress. They speculated on the causes of what they called "her alien and sour perspective on women." She felt during her entire short life that she was judged always on the basis of what was becoming in femininity and not as an artist.

-Elaine Showalter, ‘Women Writers and the Female Experience’ in Radical Feminism, Koedt et al (eds.)

More Posts from Readingcrafting and Others

readingcrafting

2 weeks ago

“His mind was indeed my library, and whenever it was opened to me I entered bliss.”

– Villette, Charlotte Brontë

Tags

english literature classic literature charlotte bronte book quote villette

4 notes View Post

readingcrafting

5 months ago

That Hamlet post reminds me, people blame Romeo and Juliet for "getting everyone killed", but the text itself very specifically blames the lords Capulet and Montague. If you want to get to the nitty gritty:

Mercutio got himself killed. Romeo was very specifically trying to not have a swordfight, and Mercutio decided to start one because he thought Romeo was being a pussy. Tybalt actually killed him, but if you're talking about who "got him killed," that was Mercutio fucking around and finding out.

Romeo killed Tybalt. This is the one death that I think you can reasonably lay at Romeo's feet. If he had run off with Benvolio and got the Prince's men, Tybalt would have been arrested. That said, if my best friend (no matter how stupid) was killed right in front of me and the killer told me that friend sucked and so did I, I cannot guarantee I would do differently.

Lady Capulet said she hired people to kill Romeo. He beat them to the punch on that, but I think it should be pointed out.

Romeo killed Paris in self-defense. There's a lot of different ways you can play this, and Paris did think he'd broken in to vandalize the tomb of his girlfriend, but once again Romeo specifically begged someone not to fight him and that wasn't enough.

Romeo killed himself because he thought Juliet was dead. Friar Lawrence had a stupid idea and Juliet followed through on it because her father was going to force her into bigamy (and arguably marital rape), so if anyone "got" this to happen it was Lord Capulet.

Juliet killed herself because her husband was dead, her cousin was dead, her parents had turned on her, the woman who she thought of as a second mother abandoned her, and she was in a room with one guy stabbed and another guy poisoned right as the law was about to break in. Once again, I don't know what I'd do in her situation.

My Shakespeare professor said that Romeo and Juliet is the only Shakespeare tragedy not caused because of anyone being evil- Lord Capulet and Tybalt (and Mercutio) are dicks, but they're not Iago or Richard III. None of them wanted the play to end in a pile of bodies. You can't even point to one specific act and say 'that was the specific action that caused all of this.' It's a surprisingly modern (as opposed to mythic) play in that regard.

1K notes View Post

readingcrafting

1 month ago

I've been thinking about the fact that some readers of Sense and Sensibility don't believe Willoughby truly loved Marianne, even though everyone in the book believes it and the narrator makes it clear how much he cared for her, at the end. And I think this reading of him takes away from one of the messages of the book, which is that love is not enough.

Willoughby loves Marianne, but that's not enough to stop him from hurting her, it's not enough to make him give up his cushy lifestyle and marry her, and it wouldn't have been enough to keep him happy with her long-term. Marianne loves Willoughby, but it wouldn't have been enough for her to be happy with him long-term either.

Edward loves Elinor, but that's not a good enough reason to break his promise to Lucy, because integrity and honor and responsibility are just as important to him. Brandon loves Marianne, but that's not reason enough to court her, because he knows her feelings lie elsewhere and she doesn't respect and esteem him yet.

Love is important to all these characters, and is a vital part in making the marriages that they ultimately end up in strong and happy, but it's not the only thing that makes them work.

Of course, Sense and Sensibility is hardly the only Austen novel to make the point that you need more than love or romance or passion to make a relationship work. But I think it's interesting how we get to see this play out in the villain of the novel. Willoughby does some truly horrific things, but his character shows that even really bad guys are capable of feeling love and guilt and remorse. But none of these feelings are ultimately strong enough to change him. Because love is not enough.

1K notes View Post

readingcrafting

6 months ago

I love the duality of Jane Eyre & Crime and Punishment because I can read both in a very serious philosophical/religious view while analyzing the literature thematically and admiring the poetic storytelling/character building and masterful writing by Brontë and Dostoevsky that strikes me to my core.

Then I can take these exact same two books and view them as a silly goofy, feel good comedic reads. Taking the same exact characters I just wrote an essay on analyzing the complexity of their layers/hardships and now I’m calling them drama queens, babygirls and poor little meow meows. The duality… the duality!!

20 notes View Post

readingcrafting

5 months ago

It just struck me why Professor Bhaer in Little Women uses «thou» instead of «you» - it’s because as a German he’ll consider «you» equivalent to the formal «Sie» and try to avoid it with people with whom he is on friendly terms, so instead he translates «du» to «thou». This is supported by the fact that he uses «you» when he speaks to Jo at their first meeting, when they’re still strangers. Little Women from Professor Bhaer’s perspective is just a bunch of Americans insisting on being distantly formal in their address while he thinks they’re on «du» terms.

396 notes View Post

readingcrafting

4 months ago

a small pastiche about shyness

Secretary (2002) / Ask Polly: I’m So Shy And It’s Ruining My Life! / Ask by The Smiths / ‘Morning Sun’ by Edward Hopper (1952) / Jason by Perfume Genius

878 notes View Post

readingcrafting

6 months ago

I’ve Been Influenced™️ By New England Autumn

I’ve been influenced™️ by new england autumn

linocut prints on bfk rives & lokta papers

140 notes View Post

readingcrafting

2 weeks ago

Forgive me if I don't state this as clearly as I might.

I'm watching pride and prejudice 1980, when lizzie visits pemberley. This is where it seems that she first truly realizes her feelings for darcy, as she later admits.

We see through the housekeeper that darcy is respected and respectable, his house is well run, his servants and tenants like and admire him.

This responsibility must be especially attractive to lizzie after the way she had grown up with her father - call it "daddy issues". Mr Bennet routinely shows he cannot handle his finances wisely, has little control over his household, and puts in little effort to manage anything in his or his family's life.

It is my supposition that it is not necessarily how grand the estate is, or even darcys marked improvement in gentlemanliness, that truly impacts lizzie. Rather, it is his abilities in contrast to her father, to be a responsible landlord, brother, friend, and potential husband, that first turns her feelings.

She realizes he is truly dependable, and it is that which makes him lovable in her eyes

Thoughts?

166 notes View Post

readingcrafting

1 month ago

Can’t believe Jane Austen wrote Pride and Prejudice in the 2000s

And in 2015 Emily Brontë released literary clsssic Wuthering Heights

Thank God someone paved the way for them…

134K notes View Post

readingcrafting

1 month ago

“How often, while women and girls sit warm at snug firesides, their hearts and imaginations are doomed to divorce from the comfort surrounding their persons, forced out by night to wander through dark ways, to dare stress of weather, to contend with the snow-blast, to wait at lonely gates and stiles in wildest storms, watching and listening to see and hear the father, the son, the husband coming home.”

– Vilette, Charlotte Brontë