Analysis Of Frances Burney 's ' The Perfect Definition Of A Lady '

Women, especially were inclined to be criticized or ostracized if they did not follow society’s gender roles. They were thought to be mothers and the main caretakers of the family. At the time, women were seen as delicate and feminine. Their work was found in the house with domestic duties. Charlotte Temple, by Susanna Rowson describes the ideal women and was specifically targeted to “factory girls” who left their homes in the farms to work in the city (Rowson, xii). Mrs. Temple, Charlotte Temple’s mother, decided not to let her grief consume her and instead focused on making her husband happy and taking care of her father after Charlotte left (Rowson, 56). If a woman was not committed to one man, then she was not the ideal woman. Mademoiselle La Rue, Charlotte’s teacher, was far from a role model. She was scandalous because she “eloped from a convent with a young officer” and she even had to hide it to get a job at the school (Rowson, 26). Moreover, women with no financial fortune were unfit to marry. Marriage was a financial transaction and a man’s success required that he married someone wealthy. Montraville’s father explains to his son that he would be happy if his son were to marry a woman with a fortune, but if he was to marry a woman with no fortune he’d be sticking her into the evils of a small income with a potential

This gender role construct is what often makes women feel powerless/paralyzed to change their role in the domestic sphere due to overriding authority of the “masculine world.” In a literary point of view, the role of the mediocre woman in Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility can describe how women, such as Lady Middleton and Lucy Steel conform to these submissive gender roles in the 19th century patriarchal institution of marriage.

Some critics have advanced the notion that one of the reasons there is such a paucity of women and of strong, beneficent women in particular within this story is due to what they represented in typical Victorian England society. Women were generally viewed as "a social force or a source of authority" which "reinforces this fiction of coherent male identity" (Doane and Hodges 63). This quotation suggests the fact that women were generally the keepers of morality and virtue within Victorian

Women in the Victorian society had two main goals which were to marry a respectable man and to have/raise children. The society had a vision of the “perfect woman” who did what she was told and did not question it. She did what her mother did before her, and her mother did what her mother did before her. They were constricted, as if they lived in a box. They couldn’t go too far forward or backward and they couldn’t tray too far off the sides. There were high standards and a true Victorian woman upheld those standards no matter how she felt about them. Victorian women were not their own; they were property-- property that was owned by their husbands or fathers.

Female gender roles have greatly changed from now and the sixteen hundreds when Shakespeare wrote the popular play Much Ado About Nothing. Women were raised to believe they were inferior to men. Women were taught that men should be the one who brings in money and women should stay home to clean and bare children. Also women were given no choice in who they were to marry or when. Over hundreds of years women realized that they were just as good as men and that they should be treated equally. This essay will cover the analysis of the women’s gender roles in the play Much Ado About Nothing, showing the analysis of Beatrice not following any stereotypes, Hero following all of the stereotypes, and Margaret not getting the same stereotypes as other women because she is a servant.

This shift in how femininity is valued is both literary and historical. In “Gender and the Victorian Novel,” Nancy Armstrong has described a historical shift during the nineteenth century in conceptualizing the dangers of reproduction—from the danger of overpopulation earlier in the century to the danger of degeneration at its end. For Armstrong, this shift coincides with a development in literature that presents “the struggle between femaleness and femininity” (110). Lizzie and Lucy represent this struggle between “traditional femininity” (Lucy) and “female nature” (Lizzie) (108). What I would like to add to this argument is an account of the role Lucinda Roanoke plays in the struggle. As a figure both racialized and “savage,” Lucinda seems to represent the possibility of degeneracy directly. Lucy

Had Louisa immediately left home to marry Joe as a teenager, there might have been tremendous repercussions to the girl’s growth. The social pressure to become a successful wife and mother would have added a great deal of stress to Louisa’s everyday life. Trapped in a life with the overbearing Mrs. Dagget and her son, people who could not understand the unique Louisa, the young woman would have lost her sense of safety. This would be detrimental to Louisa’s development. Instead, the woman found a lifestyle that worked out well with her personality and led to her having “no room for anyone at her side” (Freeman, 442). The growth in strength led to the development of an arsenal of “little feminine weapons” which she used to control her own destiny, by ending her engagement (Freeman, 446). Consequently, she found herself to be “a queen who, after fearing lest her domain be wrested away from her, sees it firmly in her possession” (Freeman, 446). By showing us the life the Louisa forged for herself and hinting at the alternate one she could have shared with the Daggets’, Freeman showcased the importance independence can have on a person’s entire personality and

Kate is discussing the cultural idea of Elizabethan societies women being refined and restrained. The 16th century “was a time dominated by men while women themselves remained meek and submissive — these traits were crucial in their belonging and survival in both their family and society” (Pople, 2015). Kate is denouncing the ability of women as a gender and their capacity to be equals to their husbands - heavily influenced by the Elizabethan cultural idea that women existence is based around serving their husband and being submissive to their dominance.

On that account, another important aspect that the novel brings to our attention is the way in which women were becoming objects of display. Again Blanche’s example epitomizes the upper-class women that Victorian society was encouraging: “Creatures so absorbed in care about their pretty faces, and their white hands, and their small feet”, considered to be their “legitimate appanage and heritage!” (Brontë, 340), that made them give no second thoughts to their role as free, intellectual human beings. These were the expectations of nineteenth-century aristocratic women, and as Brontë clearly points out, Blanche embodies perfectly such qualities that endeavor her to become an object. Her time at Thornfield was never spent with productive activities that would enrich the mind, such as reading or writing, but in idle amusements. Constantly we see how Blanche exhibits her qualities and value through forms of self-display, so as to make herself more attractive to men: “both her words and her air seemed intended to excite not only the admiration, but the amazement of her auditors: she was evidently bent on striking them as something very dashing and daring indeed.” (Brontë, 339)

Jane is taught at a young age to look down on people not of her caste, and to oppress them the same way that she herself is oppressed as a female orphan. Though Jane is not influenced directly by social status at all times, it is still a constant factor which Brontë makes evident. In Victorian England, a female must either be born or married into her social class, and this is what defines her. The character of Jane served to undercut the popular female stereotypes of fiction: the angel of the house, the invalid, or the whore (Brackett, 2000). Brontë creates Jane as her own force, in which she is neither the angel, invalid or whore, but a young lady who is intelligent and has pride and dignity. In this Victorian society, her unsubmissiveness and independence is her social fault, which Brontë pokes fun at (Brackett, 2000). Male Victorian writers cast women during this time as social, finagling creatures whose goals are to obtain as many friends as possible and throw the most elaborate parties. Brontë opposes this by creating Jane as an opposite of these “defining” characteristics, by making Jane a female who could are less about how many people adore her, a female who would actually enjoy a life with few companions. As mentioned before, Jane’s sense of dignity is evident. As Jane became Rochester’s governess, she is faced with the

Failure to abide by gender roles in Victorian England could have a variety of consequences from the minor to the extreme. Blanche Ingram is a good example of this. Blanche is the rude materialistic daughter of one of Mr. Rochester’s neighbors. At one point she says, in front of Jane , “we all know them: danger of bad example to innocence of childhood; distractions and consequent neglect of duty on the part of the attached” (Brontë 337). In this scene, Blanche and some of Rochester’s other guests are discussing the various downsides of having a governess while Jane is present.

During this time, women were often looked at as less than men in reference to intelligence, capability, and overall strength. Reading this work from the perspective of a woman during that time presents an interesting thought, which is the importance of self-expression. Later on as the wife continues to get worse, she expresses again of her desire to write to ease her mind and pain, “I think sometimes that I were only well enough to write a little it would relieve me the press of ideas and rest me” (420). Had the perspective been altered in any way, the readers would not have discovered the same message because the other character is a man, and men were free to express themselves however they wished. Women were limited, which is why the point of view used developed this central

With Jane’s character we see more of an importance places on womanly independence. Her’s satisfaction on not being dependent on Rochester creates a sharp contrasts to the traditional role in Victorian

At the beginning of the Victorian Period, both single and married women’s rights were limited. The changes during this era in the identity of genders are represented in the characters the author Wilkie Collins describes. For example, Marian Halcombe is characterized as strong and predominant. She is Laura’s voice when regarding to her husband and protects her throughout the story. Although Marian knows her role as a woman in society, she disapproves with the beliefs of the era. On the other hand, Laura personalizes the conventional quiet woman that obeys customs. To emphasize this, in Collin’s novel, he lets the reader know that Laura is marrying the man that her father approved even though he is now dead. When she marries, her rights legally belong to her husband and is treated with the laws and customs of the Victorian era. Throughout this period, the distinction between classes was also notable. Comparatively, The Woman in White presents how the middle class as Laura and her uncle refer to the working class, Fanny the maid. Even though Fanny has always been their maid and is the only person they trust, they only communicate with her at their convenience. Moreover, Mr. Fairlie does not even call the maid by her name, but refers to her as “Young Person”. Certainly, the Victorian Period was a significant impact in the novel where

Shakespeare and the members of the Elizabethan era would be appalled at the freedoms women experience today.  The docility of Elizabethan women is almost a forgotten way of life. What we see throughout Shakespeare’s plays is an insight into the female character as perceived by Elizabethan culture.  Shakespeare’s female characters reflect the Elizabethan era’s image of women; they were to be virtuous and obedient and those that were not were portrayed as undesirable and even evil.