The uninhibited literary space that the novel genre provided for eighteenth-century authors, opened a new door of speculation into into the mind and motives of women. The subject of female agency is a major preoccupation of the genre, revealing not only the motives of female desire, but more significantly, the sources from which these desires originate. In the period, women did not possess the power nor the right to define their femininity, and thus were subject to the descriptions prescribed by a patriarchal society. Scholar April London explains,
“Representations of women in the eighteenth century are central to the ways in which the culture mediated conflicting interpretations of how identity is made, expressed, refined, and also, when necessary, repressed. The pivotal role they play in the novel follows from the fact that women have existence in fiction both as particularized characters and as points of reference for a range of concerns attaching to the relation of identity to property. Such alignments of women and property in part reflect contemporary legal definitions which virtually equate the two and so establish women’s susceptibility to male definition. But they also, and more intricately, speak to the ways in which eighteenth-century novels textualize male anxiety about social and economic change.”
London 2-3, emphasis added
As London notes, the equation of women with property in this era meant that women were unable to define themselves, and resultantly, all aspects of femininity (including desire) were established by male authorities.
In eighteenth-century literature, the idea of female desire is almost exclusively associated with feminine sexuality. As women were unable to define their femininity, it is interesting that the patriarchal system in eighteenth-century England placed such strong emphasis on sexuality rather than any other form of desire, such as simple yearnings, wants, hopes, or opinions. When observed, however, these simpler forms also appear to be directly linked to the patriarchal sexually-centered definition of desire. Women were “seen not only as naturally sexually undemanding, self-effacing, and tractable but also as naturally, normally undemanding in nonsexual realms as well, such as politics and the marketplace,” and any indication of countering the system on social, economic, or political fronts was ultimately seen as a sexual misalignment, action contrary to the nature of femininity, and therefore justifiably dismissed by the systems of the time (Shaffer 290, emphasis added).
Rather than pursuing an argument within the sexual understanding of feminine desire, this essay will explore areas of eighteenth-century desire not directly associated with sexuality, but instead those which encompass the aforementioned feminine yearnings, wants, hopes, and opinions overtly evident in the novel genre yet significantly overlooked by the period’s obsession with sexualizing women in order to understand them. Thus, in the subsequent pages of this essay, the term ‘desire’ will be used to refer to the simpler and more practical meaning of the word; that which contains the notions of yearning, want, hope, and opinion. It will explore the way in which even this arena of desire is not free from patriarchal influence, but contrarily appears entirely under its control along with the sexual counterpart. As the scholar Theresa Braunschneider notes, the eighteenth-century English culture’s
“conflation of ‘choice’ and ‘husband’…erroneously suggests that women have ultimate decision-making power over their marital destinies, the freedom to consider a broad series of options and select the preferred one…On the other hand, it suggests that women’s power to choose resides most importantly, and perhaps even entirely, in the arena of spousal selection: in this respect, the synonymity of ‘choice’ and ‘husband’ elides all of women’s options and decisions outside the matrimonial realm.”
Braunschneider 98, emphasis added
The female “choice” in spousal selection is ostensibly the only field of decision-making power that a woman possessed at the time, and even within this place of apparent agency, the choice was not without its restrictions as it was chained both by the father’s consent as well as the necessity of pursuing a life of marriage; ultimately, when “faced with an array of options (among consumer goods, public entertainments, admirers), a young women should not, as the coquette does, choose them all; rather, she should choose to become a wife” (Braunschneider 99). Thus, even the apparent arenas of agency, of feminine yearning, want, hope, and opinion, in this society, are ultimately governed by the will of a patriarchal authority.
With such restrictions in place, the novel genre provided an outlet for authors, both male and female, to explore more intricately the female persona. The “carnivalesque” nature of the genre, as the critic Terry Castle defines it, enabled the loosening of social constraints for women, opening a door to their genuine expression of sentiment and opinion. She states that “whether rhetorical or actual, the carnivalesque occasion—like the masquerade—is always provocative: it intimates an alternative view of the ‘nature of things’ and embodies a liberating escape from the status quo” (Castle 904). In this manner, eighteenth-century novels explore reality (truth), as they peer past the obstruction of the female body—its objectification and its sexualization—and into the mind instead, seeking out the motives behind female action. Yet what does the novel genre reveal about eighteenth-century women? Power and agency in her inner being? Or a human vessel void of her own desires altogether, possessing merely the necessary desires for her survival in a patriarchal world? In exploring the ostensible motives and yearnings of female characters in Samuel Richardson’s Pamela, Daniel Defoe’s Roxana, and Elizabeth Inchbald’s A Simple Story, it is evident that the desires of these women (desires unrelated to sexual drive) are heavily influenced by patriarchal systems, manifesting within the characters as either entirely absent or rooted in the will of their male authorities. The following pages will explore the strongest expressions of desire and their originating motives within the female characters of Pamela, Roxana, Miss Milner, and Lady Matilda from their respective novels, revealing patriarchal control at the core of each one.
I. Pamela: Desiring the Maintenance of Virtue and Peace through Appeasement
In the first half of Richardson’s novel, Pamela’s greatest expression of desire is her relentless fight to preserve her virtue, her chastity, against the will of her powerful male authority. Through the epistolary structure of the novel, Pamela is able to use her own voice to provide the audience with explanations of the motives behind every action and statement she makes. In doing so, readers gather that her deepest yearning is the maintenance of her virginity. In direct addresses to her master, she clearly states that “I don’t desire to stay [with you here]…all I desire is, to return to my poor father and mother;” and again “how easily you might make me happy, since all I desire is to be permitted to go to my poor father and mother” (Richardson 73-74, 138) Here, Pamela does not speak from a place of obedience or submission to her master, but rather from the honest desire of her own heart, and through it, she openly expresses her opinion on the importance of preserving her chastity. While this resistance appears to be demonstrative of agency, self-will, and power within Pamela, it also reveals a paradox in her fixed position within the confines of the patriarchal system responsible for creating the entrapping necessity of chastity in women. Of course, the desire to avoid sexual assault and rape is entirely valid, however, Pamela’s motive for such abstinence lies more heavily upon the preservation of the patriarchally-established labels, ‘pure’ and ‘virtuous,’ than it does upon the simple preservation of her emotional and physical well-being, which should hold the greatest weight in such a perilous situation.
As the scholar Soile Ylivuori explains, “chastity was forcefully advocated to women as the main ingredient of female honour; in fact, according to didactic books, novels, or other printed eighteenth-century material, it was impossible for an elite woman to be honourable if she was not chaste” (Ylivuori 72). Such was the case for lower-class women as well, and to a greater extent, as they did not possess the connections nor the funds that could possibly redeem their life from such ‘ruin’—a state which would render them unfit for marriage, very often shunned by family and friends, and therefore left with few options for self-provision. It is with this knowledge that Pamela vigorously fights for her life and well-being, not simply to possess the admirable label of ‘virgin,’ but more strategically to maintain the prospect of a good life in the future. It is for this reason that she responds to Mr. B’s mistress-seeking bribery with,
“I know, sir, by woful experience, that I am in your power: I know all the resistance I can make will be poor and weak, and, perhaps, stand me in little stead: I dread your will to ruin me is as great as your power: yet, sir, will I dare to tell you, that I will make no free-will offering of my virtue. All that I can do, poor as it is, I will do, to convince you, that your offers shall have no part in my choice; and if I cannot escape the violence of man, I hope, by God’s grace, I shall have nothing to reproach myself, for not doing all in my power to avoid my disgrace; and then I can safely appeal to the great God, my only refuge and protector, with this consolation, That my will bore no part in my violation.”
Richardson 190-191, emphasis added
Pamela recognizes Mr. B’s “power” over her through the structures of the patriarchal system which they both inhabit. She acknowledges her vulnerable position within it, and even owns her powerlessness to assert her own desires in the face of the stronger will of man and master. However, she does not surrender her life to the imminent ruin of lost virtue, but forcefully expresses her desire and will to maintain the item upon which all of her future happiness and peace depend. The diction in her statements, “I dare to tell you” and “my choice,” demonstrate strong opinion and yearning on this matter, yet also reveal her greatest desire to be rooted, ultimately, in the obedience to patriarchal rules—the rules of female chastity which dictate her well-being through the entirety of her life. To conclude her thoughts, Pamela calls upon the higher authority of God, intentionally implying Mr. B’s similar position of vulnerability under divine power. Through this insertion, she draws attention to the absurdity of the patriarchal system which, although claiming to exact the will of God through the assertion of authority, ostensibly defies it as God alone is Pamela’s “only refuge and protector,” where man should have assumed such a role as servant to God.
Apart from the desire to uphold the appearance of perfect chastity and ultimately to join the ranks of respectably married women, Pamela expresses no other form of yearning, want, hope, or opinion. When nearing the honored position of ‘wife,’ her desires simply take a new form of patriarchal submission—that of maintaining peace and tranquility in her domestic life by appeasing the desires of her husband, and adopting his will as her own:
“I made bold to kiss his dear hand; and, though unable to look up, said—I know not what to say, sir, to all your goodness: I would not, for any consideration, that you should believe me capable of receiving negligently an honour, that all the duty of a long life, were it to be lent me, will not be sufficient to enable me to be grateful for. I ought to resign myself, in every thing I may or can, implicitly to your will.”
Richardson 325-326, emphasis added
Pamela’s struggle to maintain her chastity does not end with her marriage, but as “women’s sexual honour was not all about perfect abstinence—it was also a lot about perfect appearance,” she begins the process of subscribing to the proper duties of the feminine role, ultimately surrendering her will to her husband (Ylivuori 73). Pamela’s opinions of Mr. B’s goodness, and her expression of gratitude toward him appear to result from her acknowledgement of his superiority both in status and gender, and more significantly, from the acceptance of her allegedly inferior status by comparison. The state of male-dependency to which every eighteenth-century female was bound rendered the only path to domestic happiness as through the appeasement of male desire. Only when the male authority was satisfied could the female dependent be truly at peace, and thus all female desires would sensibly become rooted in the fulfillment of male desires. This is evident in Pamela’s further expressions to Mr. B:
“I said, His will and pleasure should determine mine; and I never would, as near as I could, have a desire after those, or any other entertainments that were not in his own choice.”
Richardson 330
For if she did, she would suffer the consequences of being dependent upon the goodwill of a man with whom she has fallen out of favor. Thus, the only way to maintain domestic peace as a wife (or daughter)—and subsequently the only hope for happiness and a tolerable passage through life as a woman—was through the appeasement of the desires of their male authorities. Here, Pamela adopts Mr. B’s desire and will as her own, and resultantly surrenders her own desire, claiming that all her yearnings, wants, hopes, and opinions will no longer exist apart from his establishment of them.
This surrender of will and desire is the definition of eighteenth-century feminine virtue as “chastity can be viewed as a performative identity, where a person’s inner reality is constantly evaluated through external signs” (Ylivuori 73-74). Once married, Pamela’s demonstration of submission and obedience to her husband becomes the new ‘virtue’ to be rewarded, and the only means of maintaining peace and tranquility in the home. After accepting him as a spouse, her ‘choice’ to refuse him in any way—ultimately the only form of agency she ever possessed—is eradicated. Patricia Meyer Spacks presents that,
“Pamela’s Mr. B asserts his manhood, both before and after his marriage, by emphasizing how much money he has […] both money and phallic force constitute something to give, and both have power only if desired or accepted […] refusals unman […and] reduce Mr. B to helpless pleading. After Pamela’s marriage, on the other hand, her husband reasserts his dominance: she has now accepted his sexual, social, and economic gifts.”
Spacks 59
With this acceptance, she strengthens his dominance and weakens her own position to merely his subordinate, the keeper and exactor of his will. Yet Pamela has few alternatives and none that compare to this level of ‘success,’ as the contemporary culture would label it. As Pamela willingly submits herself to this path of fulfillment that her patriarchal society will allow her to follow, Roxana from Defoe’s Roxana; Or, The Fortunate Mistress, while attempting to intentionally defy the patriarchal system and demonstrate another way for women to succeed, subconsciously surrenders herself to the same system. Her story reveals that female ‘success’ outside of a virtue-rewarded narrative is still impossible without the approving and admiring presence of male power.
II. Roxana: Desiring the Attention of a Masculine Eye
The spiritual-autobiographic structure of Defoe’s novel enables Roxana’s voice and opinions to surface through the emotion and internal struggles she outlines within her narrative. In this manner, the literary form also highlights the motives which drive her actions throughout the plot. It is not through a direct expression of desire that the audience perceives Roxana’s deepest yearnings, wants, hopes, and opinions, but rather through the emotion and the strategic details she includes within the narrative. While under the intimate and observing eye of the Prince, she expresses “I say I was no despisable Shape; and my Prince (I must be allow’d the vanity to call him so) was taking his View of me as I walk’d from one End of the Room to the other” (Defoe 73). The comment she makes about her shape reveals a false humility, as the claim, “my prince” and the justification she gives for it indicate her satisfaction with the fact that she has captivated him through charm she knows she possesses. When he gifts her the diamond necklace, she explains her immediate reaction: “I was all on fire with the Sight, and began to wonder what it was that was coming to me” (Defoe 73). Her blushes reveal internal pleasure with the knowledge that the prince not only admires her beauty but is also so ravished by it that she now possesses a key to his wealth—her own form of power and influence over him. This scene reveals Roxana’s desires as rooted in the accumulation of both the praise of male attention and the wealth that such attention affords. This suggests, as Rivka Swenson extrapolates from Haywood’s Anti-Pamela, the state of “vulnerable ‘subjects’ and empowered ‘objects’” through the influence of female charm on the male gaze (Swenson 28). However, while Roxana possesses this strong influence over the prince, she is still dependent upon him—his presence and attention—for her power to exist.
In the famous masquerade scene, she expresses similar sentiments. In describing the scenery of the ball she states, “The court was exceedingly gay and fine, though fuller of men than of women,” indicating the dense presence of potential male admirers (Defoe 172). In her subsequent thoughts she comments that “a woman that had anything agreeable in her appearance could never want followers,” revealing the true desire at the heart of her former observation—an expansive score of male admirers (Defoe 172). She then proceeds to attract them with her charm, beauty, and talent, further demonstrating her desire to be the object of every man’s admiring gaze:
“I soon found myself thronged with admirers…I was dressed, you may be sure, to all the advantage possible, and had all the jewels on that I was mistress of…[a] gentleman gave me a hint as if the king was among the masks. I coloured as red as blood itself could make a face look, and expressed a great surprise.”
Defoe 172-173
Again, her blushes indicate internal satisfaction with her ability to attract the attention of not just crowds of common gentlemen, but also the powerful figures in society. She places stress upon her appearance, the wealth of her possessions, and her status among the guests, capping it all with the statement “that I was mistress of,” indicating her pride in the agency and freedom she created through her social situation. In this manner, she supposedly uses the power of the male gaze to her advantage by capturing it and making it, in a sense, addicted to her actions and ultimately slave to her vanity. However, this alleged ‘power’ that she holds is still entirely dependent upon the notice and attention of the male figures within her circle. The arrival of the masked king marks the peak of her pride and satisfaction within this scene, and her confession of feeling “a great surprise” reveals the influx of pleasurable emotions which result from the fulfillment of this deepest yearning, want, and hope.
The scene of masquerade in the eighteenth century was condemned by many critics who believed it to be a “morally corrupt event frequented by vain and modish people” (Hunt 91). The physical presence of masked individuals is symbolic of the human nature present at such events as well, as the identity and values of every attendee were veiled by grotesque forms of vain fantasy. Elizabeth Hunt explains that “when individuals disguised their true selves […] the potential for misinterpretation became ever more apparent and the possibility of cultural destruction more immediate” (Hunt 93). It’s interesting that it is in this scene of permissible facades that Roxana receives her false name, the name which finalizes the definition of her attention-seeking character, which leads to the exposure of her true self, and ultimately to her own destruction.
“At the finishing the dance the company clapped, and almost shouted; and one of the gentlemen cried out “Roxana! Roxana! by ——,” with an oath; upon which foolish accident I had the name of Roxana presently fixed upon me all over the court end of town as effectually as if I had been christened Roxana. I had, it seems, the felicity of pleasing everybody that night to an extreme; and my ball, but especially my dress, was the chat of the town for that week; and so the name of Roxana was the toast at and about the court; no other health was to be named with it.”
Defoe 176
It is important to note that while the male audience is won by her charms, falling into her powerful influence, it is also men who give her the title “Roxana.” Just as a father names his daughters and a husband produces a new surname for his wife, calling them as their own to possess, the male figures in Roxana’s life do the same, solidifying her dependence on them as an object of their approval. And with this ‘christening,’ as well as her confession of “felicity of pleasing everybody,” she demonstrates that the motives of her desires are rooted in attracting male attention, and that any other form of desire would not exist apart from this most vital one.
While one may argue that Roxana merely desires the accumulation of wealth and status, even such yearnings in the patriarchal society in which she lives are only achievable through the favor and approval of the male figures who hold the power to bestow them upon her. In this sense, she remains dependent on the system of patriarchy in order to fulfill her desires, although she lives a life that claims to be independent of it. Furthermore, in an alternative ending to the novel (not included in the Oxford World Classics edition), Roxana overtly depicts this dependency on male approval as the ultimate source of her desire, and the only means for her happiness. Once her benevolent husband discovers the treachery of her past, she spends the rest of her life pining over the loss of his approval and trying to gain it back. In her reflections she expresses many sentiments that indicate her yearning for male attention once again: “all my hopes depended on what I might say to him after we were gone to bed at night,” and “all I could do would not persuade my lord to have any free conversation with me” (Defoe [Gutenberg] 547, 559). When he chastises her, she reveals, “these words of my lord’s struck such a damp upon my spirits, as made me unable to speak in my turn” (Defoe [Gutenberg] 536). Ultimately, she confesses,
“My own unhappiness, and his strong and lasting resentment, had kept me at high words, and flowing in tears, for some time; and as I was unwilling anybody should see me in that unhappy condition, I stayed coolly talking to him.”
Defoe [Gutenberg] 569
These expressions reveal an intense desire to be seen, heard, and appreciated, all of which she had ostensibly pursued and cherished throughout the entirety of the novel. Returning to Swenson’s understanding of optic theory within Haywood’s contemporary work, it is evident that this subject of living under the male gaze, as well as Roxana’s dependency and desire for it, was a discourse of vital importance in the eighteenth century. As Swenson observes,
“[Anti-Pamela’s] warning to men against gazing at the falsely fair exploits cultural interest in the vulnerable male gaze…it warns women about the hazards of gazing and it exposes the symbolic and material limitations of the empowerment that contemporary optical theory and creative discourse associated with female objectification.”
Swenson 39
This argument presents two aspects of the optical theory discourse. The first is that female objectification by the male gaze was assumed to empower men and strengthen their state of superiority over women. Contrarily, there is also evidence that this masculine gaze could actually be a vulnerability in males as they could become driven by the influence of female charm. Regardless of either stance, objectified women, although possessing some form of influence over men, were entirely reliant on the notice of such men—the ‘gaze’ of men—in order for their influence to carry any weight within the structures of society. Likewise, both aspects of this critical argument are present in Roxana’s story as she played the charming role of influencing the male gaze for her benefit, but ultimately was subjected to male power by her dependence on masculine attention in order to enact her charm and assert her influence.
III. A Simple Story: Desiring Unconditional Love, Approval, and the Patriarchal Blessing
The form of Inchbald’s story follows an eighteenth-century style which enabled women to author conduct books in the form of narratives. The use of female advocates to promote ideal standards for female behavior proved very beneficial for the patriarchal society. Nancy Armstrong explains that,
“At some point early in the eighteenth century the categories of women, fiction, and labor entered into a uniquely modern combination in the print vernacular. The new narrative form delegated to ordinary women the authority to produce the class of women who would oversee households and the men who would support them economically.”
Armstrong 2
While the authority to write these books seemed to give “ordinary women” substantial power and influence within their society, their works were confined to patriarchal definitions of femininity. Armstrong further explains that there were “limitations of the self-definition that these women accepted with this newfound authority […and] political cost[s] to both men and women at all levels of society who bought into the idea that a certain quality of domestic life was the reward for their labor” (Armstrong 2). While Inchbald assumes the authoritative role of author to one of these novels, she does not overtly subscribe to the ‘virtue rewarded’ and morality-inducing ideal of the novel genre which her society expected female authors to produce. The two prominent female characters within her story live antithetical lives with respect to their behavior, yet both represent women’s struggle to thrive under patriarchal authority.
While Miss Milner expresses a desire for agency and acts upon it throughout her life, it is evident that this desire is actually rooted in a yearning for unconditional love and approval from Lord Elmwood. In a conversation with Miss Woodley she says “I will do something that any prudent man ought not to forgive; and yet, with that vast share of prudence he possesses, I will force him still to yield to his love” (Inchbald 181). Ultimately, “to prove that she set his love and his ager at equal defiance” she overtly breaks the feminine social standard of conduct by disobeying his will and pursuing her own (Inchbald 186). Yet, her will to attend the masquerade ball against Lord Elmwood’s wishes does not arise from her own natural yearning, want, hope or opinion, but rather from a desire to be possessed by him in such high regard that her actions—whatever they may be—will never alter his love for her. This becomes even more clear when observing her sentiment at the masquerade. While her desire to attend the event is fulfilled, her deepest yearning of being the object of Lord Elmwood’s unconditional love is not.
“She, during this time, was at the scene of pleasure she had painted to herself, and all the pleasure it gave her was, that she was sure she should never desire to go to a masquerade again. Its crowd and bustle fatigued her—its freedom offended her delicacy—and though she perceived that she was the first object of admiration in the place, yet there was one person still wanting to admire; and the remorse at having transgressed his injunctions for so trivial an entertainment, weighed upon her spirits, and added to its weariness.”
Inchbald 193, emphasis added
Her disappointment with the outcome of the masquerade reveals unfulfilled desire, and the confession of “one person still wanting to admire” proves that the subject of her desire is only to be approved, admired, and loved by Lord Elmwood. Thus, at the heart of her apparent yearnings, wants, hopes and opinions lies the motive of attention from the patriarchal authority in her life—the only desire capable of bringing her happiness.
In the same manner, Miss Milner’s downfall is also rooted in this yearning. In Lord Elmwood’s four-year absence “she received his frequent apologies for not returning, with a suspicion and resentment” (Inchbald 223). From her position, it would have been natural to interpret his decision to remain away as evidence of waning love. In the absence of the patriarchal approval which she so desired and evidently could not live without, she sought it elsewhere.
“The dear object of her fondest, truest, affections, was away; and those affections painted the time so irksome that was past; so wearisome that, which was still to come; she flew from the present tedious solitude, to the dangerous society of one, whose every care to charm her, could not repay her for a moment’s loss of him, whose absence he supplied.”
Inchbald 223-224
The indication that her love affair was merely to supply the absence of Lord Elmwood further reveals her dependence upon the attention of a patriarchal figure. It suggests as well that she does not possess an identity apart from the presence of a male authority; that as her desires are defined by the patriarchal system, so is her entire being. Miss Milner’s ability to maintain Lord Elmwood’s love falls apart when she disrupts the patriarchal system. “Lord Elmwood’s love to his lady had been extravagant—the effect of his hate was extravagant likewise” (Inchbald 224) In both of these examples, her self-will and his love are inversely related, revealing that what she desires is unachievable without complete submission and surrender to patriarchal systems—the surrender of her will and identity to societal prescriptions. It also reveals that unconditional love cannot exist within the such a system, as any breach of its confines results in domestic trauma and a revocation of love. Nancy Armstrong touches on this subject as well, explaining that
“managing a household and caring for the lives within that household were tasks that a woman would perform out of love, in return for which she secured the protections that came with property. But should she fail to find a man who could provide that security, or alternatively, should his household fail to cohere and thrive under her management, the blame was all hers for failing to love her work as a wife and mother.”
Armstrong 3, emphasis added
The line is very thin for an eighteenth-century woman to maintain a coherent and thriving domestic life. The only way for her to achieve it, and therefore achieve general peace and happiness, is to surrender her will, adopting the yearnings, wants, hopes and opinions of her husband as her own.
Inchbald further reveals this through the antithetical life of Lady Matilda, Miss Milner’s daughter. Lady Matilda is the epitome of filial reverence and devotion—the image of virtuous femininity as the patriarchy defines it, exemplarily demonstrating the lauded piety and submission toward her authority, Lord Elmwood, which her mother had lacked. Yet, although she represents the ideal standard of femininity in eighteenth-century England, taking an opposite behavioral stance to that of her mother, she appears to be driven by the same desire of Miss Milner—the notice, acknowledgement, and admiration of her authority figure. Although Lady Matilda spends the majority of her life physically separated from patriarchal influence, she remains emotionally attached to it as all of her yearnings, wants, hopes and opinions center on its restoration. Her actions in her father’s home demonstrate this internal yearning to be accepted by him:
“she leaned over those seats with a kind of filial piety, on which she was told he had been accustomed to sit. And, in the library, she took up with filial delight, the pen with which he had been writing…a hat, lying on one of the tables, gave her a sensation beyond any other she experienced on this occasion—in that trifling article of his dress, she thought she saw himself, and held it in her hand with pious reverence.”
Inchbald 265
It is evident here that a yearning for her father’s acknowledgement consumes Lady Matilda’s thoughts and emotions. The objects he touched are shrines in her opinion and the manner in which she worships him with filial piety equates her father’s position of authority to that of God. She demonstrates that she cannot live without his presence and acknowledgement, as many would say about their religion and God. Lady Matilda’s yearning for her father becomes her religion in this sense, and all of her ensuing desires express the same sentiment. When he rescues her from captivity under Lord Margrave she assumes the posture of a religiously pious servant under God, revealing the power of his presence and the intensity of her desire for it.
“Her extreme, her excess of joy on such a meeting, and from such anguish rescued, was, in part, repressed by his awful presence…she feared to speak, or clasp him in return for his embrace, but falling on her knees, clung round his legs, and bathed his feet with her tears.——These were the happiest moments that she had ever known—perhaps, the happiest he had ever known”
Inchbald 334, emphasis added
The fact that this moment of acknowledgement by her father is the happiest of her life highlights the dependency she has for his patriarchal influence. She is terrified by him, yet apart from his notice, she is not only unhappy but also seemingly incomplete, sub-human, and broken. She cannot thrive without his presence although it is “awful” to behold from her lowly position. She cannot feel peace or happiness without his affirmation although it can only be achieved through complete submission to his will, even if it means his enforced absence from her. Yet Lady Matilda does not express any other form of desire apart from that of gaining her father’s approval and carrying out his will. All her desires center upon appeasing his anger and keeping him satisfied so that she may live a peaceful and fulfilled life as well. Unlike her mother, she is able to achieve the approval of her patriarchal authority, enabling her domestic happiness and peace. However, it is clear that this achievement is only a result of her complete submission to Lord Elmwood’s will and the revocation of her own. Lady Matilda recognizes—whether consciously or subconsciously—that unconditional love is unrealistic in the patriarchal system, and that the only way to achieve the love, approval, and paternal blessing which she so desires is to surrender to his conditions.
“On arriving at the house, there was no abatement of her felicity: all was respect and duty on the part of the domestics—all paternal care on the part of Lord Elmwood; and she […] at that summit of her wishes which annihilates hope.”
Inchbald 336 emphasis added
“Paternal care” comes as a result of her “respect and duty,” and it cannot come apart from it. Thus, her motives for every other expression of desire, even her marriage to Rushbrook, are rooted in her greatest desire to be approved and accepted by her father, because apart from the fulfillment of that desire she cannot achieve happiness. While one may argue that her desires to be accepted by her father and to marry Rushbrook are genuine and honest yearnings from her heart, we must not forget that she intimately knows the consequences of defying her father’s will—the secluded life that she was forced to live as a result of her mother’s disobedience. Should she express any opposing desire to that of her father, she understands that the result would be seclusion and a lack of provision. Her own physical safety and overall well-being would be jeopardized without her father’s approving involvement. Thus, whether she consciously acknowledges it or not, her desire for the acceptance of her patriarchal authority figure is the source of all of her yearnings, wants, hopes, and opinions as well.
Through the narratives explored in this essay, each female character reveals a possession of desires unrelated to sexual matters. However, like the patriarchal attribution of sexual desire to femininity, many other forms of female desire appear to be directly influenced by the patriarchy as well. The preservation of virtue, the appeasement of an authority figure’s will, the acquisition of male admiration, the maintenance of unconditional love, and the achievement of patriarchal blessing, are all female desires evident within the novels explored in this essay. The common ground of each of these desires is the necessity of their fulfillment for the women to maintain general happiness and well-being in life. Without the pursuit of yearnings, wants, hopes and opinions centered upon these thematic desires, it would be impossible for women to achieve any form of fulfillment in this eighteenth-century, patriarchal society. Thus, as their hope of happiness depended on their submission to the patriarchy, so do the desires expressed by these female characters. Theresa Braunschneider argues that characters such as these are “heroines defined by their unruly desire […and that] these novels propose that the story of modern marriage is fundamentally a story about the constitution of female desire” (Braunschneider 101). Ultimately, as revealed through the analyses in this essay, the constitution of female desire within this period is ostensibly made up of societal restrictions designed to maintain the hierarchal and patriarchal order. Without female support of these systems and submission to the restrictions in place the patriarchy could not survive. Inversely, without male acknowledgment and support which resulted from female submission to the system of patriarchy, women in this period could not thrive within their society.
9 December 2019
Works Cited:
Armstrong, Nancy. “Disavowal and Domestic Fiction: The Problem of Social Reproduction.” Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, Vol. 29, No. 1, Brown University, 2018.
Braunschneider, Theresa. Our Coquettes: Capacious Desire in the Eighteenth Century, University of Virginia Press, 2009.
Castle, Terry. “The Carnivalization of Eighteenth-Century English Narrative.” PMLA, Vol. 99, No. 5 (Oct., 1984), pp. 903-916, Modern Language Association.
Defoe, Daniel. Roxana: The Fortunate Mistress. Edited by John Mullan, Oxford University Press, New York, 1996.
Defoe, Daniel. Roxana: The Fortunate Mistress, Parts 1 and 2, Project Gutenberg Ebook, 2009.
Hunt, Elizabeth. “A Carnival of Mirrors: The Grotesque Body of the Eighteenth-Century British Masquerade.” Lewd and Notorious: Female Transgression in the Eighteenth Century, Edited by Katharine Kittredge, The University of Michigan Press, 2003.
Inchbald, Elisabeth. A Simple Story. Edited by Anna Lott, Broadview Press, 2007.
London, April. Women and Property in the Eighteenth-Century English Novel. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999.
Richardson, Samuel. Pamela. Edited by Thomas Keymer and Alice Wakely, Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, 2001.
Shaffer, Julie. “Ruined Women and Illegitimate Daughters: Revolution and Female Sexuality.” Lewd and Notorious: Female Transgression in the Eighteenth Century, Edited by Katharine Kittredge, The University of Michigan Press, 2003.
Spacks, Patricia Meyer. Desire and Truth: Functions of Plot in Eighteenth-Century English Novels. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990.
Swenson, Rivka. “Optics, Gender, and the Eighteenth-Century Gaze: Looking at Eliza Haywood’s Anti-Pamela.” The Eighteenth Century; Spring 2010; Vol. 51, No. 1-2; ProQuest pg. 27-43.
Ylivuori, Soile. “Rethinking Female Chastity and Gentlewoman’s Honour in Eighteenth-Century England.” The Historical Journal, 59, 1 (2016), pp. 71-97, Cambridge University Press, 2015.