{"title":"“Deadly Snares”: Female Rivalry, Gender Ideology, and Eighteenth-Century Women Writers","authors":"Elizabeth Johnston","doi":"10.1353/SLI.2014.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Oh the deadly snares That women set for women--without pity Either to soul or honour! Learn by me To know your foes. In this belief 1 die: Like our own sex, we have no enemy, no enemy! --Thomas Middleton, Women Beware Women 5.2.209-13 Dear sisters, we have met the enemy and she is us. --Marianne M. Jennings A14 The first quotation above is from Thomas Middleton's Women Beware Women, a bloody seventeenth-century tragedy that focuses on a wealthy widow who routinely betrays the women who trust her. The second excerpt can be found in the essay, \"Who's Harassing Whom?,\" in which Marianne M. Jennings argues that twentieth-century women have exacerbated the issue of sexual harassment, muddying the court system with unwarranted complaints. Both quotations represent a significant rhetorical tradition by which social and political conflicts are displaced onto the narrative of female rivalry. The prevalence of this tradition raises pertinent questions: What motivates this long-existing cultural preoccupation with pitting women against women? Moreover, what can we say about the historical specificity of the trope of female rivalry--or of its narrative's ability to trespass historical, cultural, and ideological boundaries? This essay begins with a discussion of the dissemination of eighteenth-century gender ideology in British literature, in particular the construction of the domestic ideal in conduct book literature. I argue that the success of domestic ideology in the cultural imagination depends on exorcising from \"ideal\" femininity any desire not consistent with patriarchy. In conduct book fiction, this means that the positive female exemplar is necessarily contrasted with a negative female exemplar; the hero's choice of the positive female exemplar thus represents society's corresponding rejection of the traits embodied by her rival. I then consider how negative representations of groups of women might also represent anxieties about the threat posed by increasing female authorship to male authority. Finally, given that so many of the authors of eighteenth-century courtship novels are women, my essay then considers how two particular women writers--Frances Burney and Maria Edgeworth--redeploy the trope of female rivalry to interrogate the factors underlying women's vexed relationships with each other. DISSEMINATING DOMESTIC IDEOLOGY AND EXORCISING THE \"WHORE\" The Christian New Testament tells the story of Jesus meeting and healing a man possessed by demons; Jesus does so by casting the demons into a herd of pigs who then throw themselves from a cliff. The eighteenth-century construction of ideal femininity might best be understood as a similar sort of exorcism insofar as, prior to the eighteenth century, it was commonly suspected that all women might contain both sides of the virgin/whore binary. In pre-eighteenth-century literature, female characters tend to take one of two forms: the chaste virgin, existing only as a muse or object of male worship (think Shakespeare's Juliet or Sidney's Stella), or the temptress responsible for men's demise (think Shakespeare's Lady Macbeth or Spenser's Duessa). Rarely do these figures possess any interiority; they are either flatly good or flatly bad. (1) In fact, many early modern texts demonstrate the belief that all women embody both sides of the virgin/ whore binary, their chaste beauty masking a monstrous underbelly. Jacques Olivier's popular 1617 tract, An Alphabet of Women's Imperfections, is particularly vitriolic. He scolds women: \"You live here on earth as the world's most imperfect creature: the scum of nature, the cause of misfortune, the source of quarrels, the toy of the foolish, the plague of the wise, the stirrer of hell, the tinder of vice, the guardian of excrement, a monster in nature, an evil necessity, a multiple chimera, a sorry pleasure, Devil's bait, the enemy of angels\" (qtd. …","PeriodicalId":390916,"journal":{"name":"Studies in the Literary Imagination","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in the Literary Imagination","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/SLI.2014.0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Oh the deadly snares That women set for women--without pity Either to soul or honour! Learn by me To know your foes. In this belief 1 die: Like our own sex, we have no enemy, no enemy! --Thomas Middleton, Women Beware Women 5.2.209-13 Dear sisters, we have met the enemy and she is us. --Marianne M. Jennings A14 The first quotation above is from Thomas Middleton's Women Beware Women, a bloody seventeenth-century tragedy that focuses on a wealthy widow who routinely betrays the women who trust her. The second excerpt can be found in the essay, "Who's Harassing Whom?," in which Marianne M. Jennings argues that twentieth-century women have exacerbated the issue of sexual harassment, muddying the court system with unwarranted complaints. Both quotations represent a significant rhetorical tradition by which social and political conflicts are displaced onto the narrative of female rivalry. The prevalence of this tradition raises pertinent questions: What motivates this long-existing cultural preoccupation with pitting women against women? Moreover, what can we say about the historical specificity of the trope of female rivalry--or of its narrative's ability to trespass historical, cultural, and ideological boundaries? This essay begins with a discussion of the dissemination of eighteenth-century gender ideology in British literature, in particular the construction of the domestic ideal in conduct book literature. I argue that the success of domestic ideology in the cultural imagination depends on exorcising from "ideal" femininity any desire not consistent with patriarchy. In conduct book fiction, this means that the positive female exemplar is necessarily contrasted with a negative female exemplar; the hero's choice of the positive female exemplar thus represents society's corresponding rejection of the traits embodied by her rival. I then consider how negative representations of groups of women might also represent anxieties about the threat posed by increasing female authorship to male authority. Finally, given that so many of the authors of eighteenth-century courtship novels are women, my essay then considers how two particular women writers--Frances Burney and Maria Edgeworth--redeploy the trope of female rivalry to interrogate the factors underlying women's vexed relationships with each other. DISSEMINATING DOMESTIC IDEOLOGY AND EXORCISING THE "WHORE" The Christian New Testament tells the story of Jesus meeting and healing a man possessed by demons; Jesus does so by casting the demons into a herd of pigs who then throw themselves from a cliff. The eighteenth-century construction of ideal femininity might best be understood as a similar sort of exorcism insofar as, prior to the eighteenth century, it was commonly suspected that all women might contain both sides of the virgin/whore binary. In pre-eighteenth-century literature, female characters tend to take one of two forms: the chaste virgin, existing only as a muse or object of male worship (think Shakespeare's Juliet or Sidney's Stella), or the temptress responsible for men's demise (think Shakespeare's Lady Macbeth or Spenser's Duessa). Rarely do these figures possess any interiority; they are either flatly good or flatly bad. (1) In fact, many early modern texts demonstrate the belief that all women embody both sides of the virgin/ whore binary, their chaste beauty masking a monstrous underbelly. Jacques Olivier's popular 1617 tract, An Alphabet of Women's Imperfections, is particularly vitriolic. He scolds women: "You live here on earth as the world's most imperfect creature: the scum of nature, the cause of misfortune, the source of quarrels, the toy of the foolish, the plague of the wise, the stirrer of hell, the tinder of vice, the guardian of excrement, a monster in nature, an evil necessity, a multiple chimera, a sorry pleasure, Devil's bait, the enemy of angels" (qtd. …
哦,女人为女人设下的致命陷阱——既不怜悯灵魂,也不尊重荣誉!向我学习,去了解你的敌人。就像我们自己的性别一样,我们没有敌人,没有敌人!——托马斯·米德尔顿,女人当心女人亲爱的姐妹们,我们遇到了敌人,她就是我们自己。上面的第一句话出自托马斯·米德尔顿的《女人当心女人》,这是一部17世纪的血腥悲剧,主要讲述了一个富有的寡妇经常背叛信任她的女人的故事。第二个节选可以在文章《谁在骚扰谁?》玛丽安·m·詹宁斯(Marianne M. Jennings)在书中认为,20世纪的女性加剧了性骚扰问题,让法庭系统充斥着毫无根据的投诉。这两句话都代表了一种重要的修辞传统,通过这种传统,社会和政治冲突被转移到女性竞争的叙事上。这一传统的盛行提出了一些相关的问题:是什么激发了这种长期存在的文化关注,让女性相互对立?此外,对于女性竞争这一比喻的历史特殊性,或者其叙事跨越历史、文化和意识形态界限的能力,我们能说些什么呢?本文首先讨论了18世纪英国文学中性别意识形态的传播,特别是行为文学中家庭理想的建构。我认为,在文化想象中,家庭意识形态的成功取决于从“理想”女性气质中驱除任何与父权制不一致的欲望。在行为小说中,这意味着积极的女性榜样必然与消极的女性榜样形成对比;因此,男主角选择积极的女性榜样代表了社会对其对手所体现的特征的相应拒绝。然后,我考虑对女性群体的负面描述如何也可能代表对女性作者身份增加对男性权威构成威胁的焦虑。最后,考虑到18世纪许多求爱小说的作者都是女性,我的文章接着考虑了两位特殊的女性作家——弗朗西丝·伯尼和玛丽亚·埃奇沃斯——如何重新利用女性竞争的比喻来探究女性之间令人苦恼的关系背后的因素。《基督教新约》讲述了耶稣遇见并治愈一个被鬼附的人的故事;耶稣这样做的方式是把魔鬼扔进一群猪里,然后猪从悬崖上跳下去。十八世纪对理想女性气质的建构最好被理解为一种类似的驱魔,因为在十八世纪之前,人们普遍怀疑所有女性都可能包含处女/妓女的二元性。在18世纪前的文学作品中,女性角色倾向于采取两种形式之一:贞洁的处女,只作为缪斯或男性崇拜的对象存在(想想莎士比亚的朱丽叶或西德尼的斯特拉),或者是导致男性灭亡的诱惑者(想想莎士比亚的麦克白夫人或斯宾塞的杜莎)。这些数字很少有任何内在的东西;它们要么非常好,要么非常坏。(1)事实上,许多早期的现代文本表明,所有女性都体现了处女/妓女二元的两面,她们纯洁的美丽掩盖了可怕的腹部。雅克·奥利维尔1617年的畅销书《女人的不完美字母表》尤其尖刻。他斥责女人:“你生活在地球上,是世界上最不完美的生物:大自然的败类,不幸的根源,争吵的根源,愚蠢的玩具,智者的瘟疫,地狱的搅拌器,罪恶的导火线,排泄物的守护者,自然界的怪物,邪恶的必需品,多重幻想,令人遗憾的乐趣,魔鬼的诱饵,天使的敌人。”…