Hannah W. Foster 's The Coquette

Dorothy Z. Baker’s article, “‘Detested Be the Epithet!’: Definition, Maxim, and the Language of Social Dicta in Hannah Webster Foster's 'The Coquette,'" discusses the language used in the letters to, from and regarding Eliza Wharton in Hannah Webster Foster’s novel, The Coquette. Baker finds that Foster intentionally edits the letter’s language, leaving only condemning “social dicta,” and sealing Eliza’s fate as a “coquette” (58). Baker analyzes the conversation language used in The Coquette, and exposes Foster’s subtle choices, which, in turn, condemn Eliza. She notes that Foster omits excessive detail, limiting description to short phrases such as: “Mrs. Richman watches her cousin ‘with a jealous eye’; Sanford appears ‘mortified and chagrinned’; and Miss Laurence's countenance ‘indicates not much soul’” (58). In her article, Baker claims that “[Eliza’s] early expression is relatively free of expected epithets and conventional maxims, because the ideas that she expresses are not aphoristic,” and therefore Foster automatically infers that Eliza is merely a confused, naive individual who is never given a chance to defend herself (59).

The epistolary style of The Coquette allows the reader to see both sides of the story and see things that might not otherwise be apparent. For instance, in The Coquette, we are following the flirtatious excursions of Eliza and occasionally we get an insight into what General Sanford’s views. The trickery of Sanford is hidden until we read his letter to Mr. Deighton where he states, “but I fancy this young lady is a coquette; and if so, I shall avenge my sex by retaliating the mischiefs she mediates against us.” (Coquette, location 407) The theme of correspondence becomes apparent from this point because it shows the reader that women can be naïve to the intentions of others. This plays out throughout the novel in many ways through the actions of Eliza and the reactions of Boyer and Sanford. Eliza spends much of her time writing to friends, attempting to persuade them that she is not a coquette. This is where the theme of sexual freedom and liberation comes into play.

In Hannah W. Foster’s, The Coquette, Eliza Wharton is portrayed as a woman of status, above average intelligence and education, with a flirtatious nature. Though the author does not cast her in an antagonistic light, her manner is painted as foolish, flippant to 18th century social conventions, and lacking in forethought. As such, The Coquette should be viewed as a literary warning for young women of the day, especially those who may have shared undesirable attributes with Eliza. It is the novel’s intent, by way of Eliza’s thoughts and actions, to discourage young women from pursuing a fleeting and non-virtuous lifestyle. Through the novel, Foster acts as a moral guide to young women by persuading them to obey social conventions like entering into dutiful marriage, refraining from political and public

Eliza Wharton’s yearning for freedom is a fundamental underlying theme to Foster’s novel, “The Coquette”. Eliza views freedom as the ability to partake in the pleasures and joys of youth without the restrictions and obligations that come with a commitment to marriage. Furthermore, freedom is the choice to

The life of a lady in the 19th century is painted in a romantic light. Pictured in her parlor, the lady sips tea from delicate china while writing letters with a white feathered quill. Her maid stands silently off in the background, waiting for orders to serve her mistress. What is not typically pictured, is the sadness or boredom echoed on the lady’s face. Perhaps the letter is to a dear friend, not seen in ages, pleading with the friend to visit, in hopes that the friend will fill the void in the lady’s life made from years spent in a loveless marriage; or possiblyk20 the lady isn’t writing a letter at all, but a novel or a poem, never to be read by anyone but her. Edith Warton and Charlotte Perkins Gilman, are 19th Century ladies who dare to share their writing with the world. Through their works, the darker side of a woman’s life in the late 1800’s is exposed. Gender politics in the 19th dictates that a lady is dependent on her husband for her financial security and social standing; that is if she is fortunate enough to marry at all. In Edith Warton’s The House of Mirth, Lily Bart is a beautiful woman in her late 20’s, who fails to marry a wealthy man. The narrator in Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s The Yellow Wallpaper slowly goes insane under her physician husbands misguided attempts to cure her of depression. The downfall of Lily Bart and the narrator of The Yellow Wallpaper is

   In her article, "The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860," Barbara Welter discusses the nineteenth-century ideal of the perfect woman. She asserts that "the attributes of True Womanhood . . . could be divided into four cardinal virtues-piety, purity, submissiveness and domesticity." Furthermore, she adds that "if anyone, male or female, dared to tamper with the complex virtues which made up True Womanhood, he was damned immediately as an enemy of God, of civilization and of the Republic" (Welter 152). In Hannah W. Foster's The Coquette, the characters Major Sanford and Eliza Wharton violate True Womanhood condemning them both to wretched fates.

When Eliza meets Boyer and Sanford, each seeks to win her affection, even though she admits marriage isn’t appealing to her. For the time, this was abnormal. Women were expected to marry early on and give up most of their autonomy to fulfill the role of wife and mother. Just by exploring her options, Eliza goes against what was expected for 18th-century women. When she finally does choose to marry Boyer, he decides that he is sick of waiting and that he does not trust her around other men such as Sanford. Here, Foster seems to argue that if Eliza had made her decision sooner, she would have avoided this fate. On a larger scale, The Coquette emphasizes the gender norms of the time. Women who read the book will feel pressure to marry so that they do not have the same fate as Eliza. At a time when the fear of promiscuity was so prevalent, this book served as a way to enforce traditional

In the works of Hannah Webster Foster’s “The Coquette”, there are characters who present themselves as morally ambiguous. During the time of the late eighteenth century, Feministic actions and attitude were not the social norm, and was almost looked down upon. Most men were still seen as superior to women, just because of their sex. Although now that is known to be false, Women were deemed to be subservient to the man. The role women were supposed to play during this time was the “housewife”. Free time for women was not supposed to be spent socializing but doing other things related to the maintenance of the family, from sewing socks to laundry.

It is another example of where men were still considered superior to women. However, women were gaining equity in legal, education, professional and personal aspects of their lives. In this story the roles of men and women start becoming less distinct than in previous time periods. One thing that did not change was the fact that men were still responsible to obtain the household and to provide for their families. Elizabeth, main character, was not afraid to stand up for herself and speak whatever came into mind. She did not think like her mom and her dad, Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, who still strongly believed in traditional gender roles. Mrs. Bennet believed if Elizabeth married Mr. Bingley, he would be able to support her with all the income

to admit that Granby knows what she is talking about when it comes to virtue, even as she sees it from Wharton and Sumner’s side. Often times, emotionally balanced characters in Gothic novels do not exist, but there is still that knowing and that necessity of a balance. Thus, the two genres once again mesh into each other in The Coquette.

Against this backdrop, to assert that Lucy's conduct regarding her suitors is meant to be read as immoral means that one must hold Lucy as an exception to general trends in Stoker's larger body of work and that one must believe that the vast majority of Victorian reviewers were either unable to identify Lucy's promiscuity or were too reticent to make mention of it. The most compelling piece of evidence as to Lucy's words regarding her multiple suitors being benign, however, lies within Stoker's working notes for the novel. Here, in what appear to be the earliest outlines of the novel's plot, we find out that Lucy didn't initially have multiple suitors. The notes include two character lists that name Dr. John Seward as Lucy's lover or fiancé

Higgins tries to take all of the credit for Eliza’s transformation into a lady. In his mind, Eliza did nothing and without him, she would not have been able to accomplish this task. Mr. Higgins continues to express his dominance by telling Eliza what to do even though she does not work for him. Eliza does not like the way that Mr. Higgins treats her and leaves his house, angrily. After searching for Eliza, Mr. Higgins finally finds her and tells her that he paid for her services and she needs to finish her job. In this way, he treats her as if she is

In Persuasion, the last of Jane Austen’s works, the readers are immediately intrigued by the autumnal tone of the piece, and the mellowness of the main character, Anne Elliot. Anne, a twenty-seven year old upper middle class woman, met and fell in love with Captain Frederick Wentworth at the age of nineteen. She was however, forced to break off the relationship at the time because Wentworth was deemed an unsuitable match. Eight years later, they meet again and by that time Captain Wentworth has made his fortune in the navy and has become an attractive catch. Anne was now uncertain about his feelings for her. Persuasion examines English society’s view of marriage and

She is there to take lessons for her speech. Colonel Pickering offers to pay full expenses for Higgins to tun Eliza into a lady and pass her off as a duchess. Higgins accepts.

Eliza, in the climax scene vulnerably asks Higgins, why he made her a sophisticated Duchess if her never cared for her, and why did not he thought of the trouble it would make for her, on which Higgins shocking reply says: