A Vindication of the Rights of Women

Mary Wollstonecraft's "A Vindication of The Rights of Woman" is a very cunning argument. I use that word for a reason. Wollstonecraft very plainly sees sensibility in a negative light by ascribing the ability to be cunning to sensibilities' skill set. She calls out that this skill set, and its reinforcement, reduces women to something other than human, "she should be governed by fear to exercise her natural cunning, and made a coquettish slave in order to render her a more alluring object of desire"(109). However, Wollstonecraft herself is very cunning in a major point in her argument. That point is whether or not women can be good wives if they are uneducated and only left to their sensibilities. Similar to Smith's Desmond, a major point or factor is articulated around men and their needs, etc. "...men who, considering females rather as women than human creatures, have been more anxious to make them alluring mistresses than affectionate wives and rational mothers" (102). She even plays on a more masculine threat when making her argument, "Or, is it more rational to expect that she will try to please other men; and, in the emotions raised by the expectation of new conquests, endeavor to forget the mortification her love or pride has received?" (111) I think this point of the argument was extremely interesting because of an earlier point she made, "Indeed the word masculine is only a bugbear", an imaginary creature invoked to cause fear (105). I think that Wollstonecraft has a cunning understanding of what men fear: a masculine presence or being that is directly opposed to their own. I thought it very funny that both these 'other men' and the 'bugbear', which is really women acquiring 'masculinity' were imaginary creatures that had the same goal, to inspire fear and, presumably, action. Even though she dismissed the skill set attributed with sensibilities, it is clear that even she understands its value when attempting to align others to your own argument.

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman

Mary Wollstonecraft’s “A Vindications of the Rights of Woman” illustrates Wollstoncraft’s belief that women should be given the chance to become people ruled by rational thought, as well as the opportunity to cultivate lives filled with virtue. Wollstonecraft makes the case that at the time of writing women were resigned to instill in men a sense of fondness in the hope of gaining a comfortable life through marriage. In response to this attitude Wollstonecraft offers an alternative way of thinking that allows for a mutual respect to form between man and woman that ultimately leads to a more successful relationship between the two. Instead of women being taught to rely on their beauty and certain qualities such as blind obedience and gentility to obtain a husband, they should instead be allowed to gain respect by men by “pursue[ing] with vigour the various employments which form the moral character” (113). Wollstonecraft’s argument is that a marriage based on the initial sensation of passion that is taught to be elicited in a cunning fashion by women and that is heavily influenced by beauty cannot last without there being a friendship between the two sexes involved. This friendship can only be obtained by a shared strength of character that breeds respect between the two. But as it is Wollstencraft states that women “…have been stripped of the virtues that have clothed humanity, they have been decked with artificial graces that enable them to exercise a short-lived tyranny. Love, in their bosoms, takes the place of every nobler passion; their sole ambition is to be fair, to raise emotion instead of inspiring respect; and this ignoble desire, like the servility in absolute monarchies, destroys all strength of character” (116).  By teaching women to illicit passion and feeling in men instead of allowing them to cultivate virtues of their own choosing, society forces the loss of character in women and therefore the ability to obtain respect. 

Mary Wollstonecraft : A Vindication of the Rights of Women

Mary Wollstoncraft's "A Vindication..." is quite interesting in how it lays out her argument. She seems hostile towards sensibility, calling it a "turgid bombast of artificial feelings, which, coming from the head, never reach the heart" (pg. 104), which is very different from the other authors we've seen thus far. In fact, her entire introduction is about rejecting passive femininity and women pursuing--or being allowed to pursue--"more masculine and respectable" ways of conducting themselves (pg. 104). Her latter arguments about "cunning" versus "intellect" seem similar (pg, 105). It seems to me that she finds sensibility to be a type of cunning: an underhanded way of applying a woman's intellect to sway people to her cause, as opposed to the more direct and virtuous masculine way. She thus casts off sensibility as a more "feminine" way of arguing and instead uses a much more direct and dare I say logical approach. Rather than appealing to emotions, she calls upon other experts--both contemporary and classical--and presents her arguments as reasonable conclusions anyone who follows they steps she lays out could come to. Vindications thus acts not only as Wollstoncraft's argument, but also her example of how women should be allowed to conduct themselves.

Mary Wollstonecraft

Mary Wollstonecraft's "A Vindication of the Rights of Woman" is a powerful player on feminism. She uses a strong voice to address the education and ideals given to women which I found wonderfully engaging to read. There were points in "A Vindication..." that we seem to have touched on in other works, for example how the women in Smith's "Desmond" were portrayed to have less liberties then men. A moment in "A Vindication..." that I found worth mention was how she states women were brought up to "acquire manners before morals" (pg.108) which allows them to be subjected to ridicule and prejudice from men for being told not to have such strong passions for anything relating to human nature.
"Maria" works well with this issue as we see Jemima cast out and struggling to survive. She is seen as a "wretch" who destroyed an honest family (pg.123) after the master of the house pursues her, but because she is a woman of low standing,  she is seen to have no moral grounding to be innocent of such an act to the wife even though readers understand that she is the victim. It ties into how in "A Vindication..." women "were made to be loved, and must not aim at respect..."(pg. 115).
The way Wollstonecraft argues for women to be equal to men in her work is inspiring and works well in showing how far women have come in how we are seen alongside men and no longer raised to just be a wife and lover.

Mary Wollstonecraft - A Vindication of the Rights of Woman

After reading the excerpt of “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman” I was extremely impressed by Mary Wollstonecraft’s style of writing, tone and the ability to effectively communicate her ideas. Most political writings are not as entertaining as hers was because they have an emphasis on boring details and can be vague. “A Vindication” was not vague but was straight to the point and inspiring. My absolute favorite part was when Wollstonecraft said “My own sex, I hope, will excuse me if I treat them like rational creatures, instead of flattering their fascinating graces and viewing them as if they were in a state of perpetual childhood” (p. 103). Not only was her sarcasm highly entertaining but also she made a valid point about the treatment of women as children. In that time period girls belonged to their fathers and were then transferred over to the guardianship of their husbands, never truly being able to make their own decisions or have any independence as adults. This witty quote shows Wollstonecraft as an effective communicator and a radical thinker for her time. She acknowledges the fact that the stereotype of women is that all they care about is being acknowledged for their physical appearances when in actuality women have way more to offer in terms of intelligence and work skills. I also appreciated her emphasis on women as “rational thinkers” instead of being sex objects with only the purpose to please and allure men; her explanation of pity and weakness (p. 104) really put emphasis on the fact that a man loving a woman because she is weak and frail will lead to her becoming an “object of contempt”. As sad is this is, this is true, in real life application I have seen women that are too codependent on their husbands and they end up resenting them. I felt that “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman” was not only profound but also timeless and relevant.

Black, Joseph. The Broadview Anthology of British Literature. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Pr, 2010. Print.

Sensibility in Vol. III

Continuing on the topic of sensibility, I would first like to discuss my opinions on a few of the passages pointed out by Dr. Porter on Tuesday.  In the first passage, Desmond is speaking of politics.  He states, "their great hope, however, is in the confederacy of 'the kings of the earth' against it" (207).  I believe this is satire, as moments like these throughout the book usually are.  It's not uncommon for Desmond to be satirical, however, I suppose it does speak to his sensibility.  Smith is obviously in favor of the Revolution, but I also think she's attempting to progress more radical ideas of sensibility.
In the second passage, Montfleuri is declaring his love for Fanni to Desmond.  He's very openly expressing sensibility and emotion here.  He states, "I have vowed a hundred times never to marry, but this beautiful little Englishwoman who can resist" (236)?  This is interesting to me for a couple reasons.  At first, I found Montfleuri's sentiment to be a little over the top, much like one would see coming from a female character.  But after this line, I realized that while his sentiment was still dramatic, it also wasn't entirely uncharacteristic.  The way in which he refers to Fanni as a "beautiful little Englishwoman" makes her seem delicate and fragile.  Maybe I'm reading into it a little too much, but this statement seems in reference to old-school sensibility. 
I was very interested in Geraldine's reaction to her her husbands death.  On page 327, "I hope not unkindly remark, that Verney does not suffer, as many people do, great irritation of spirits, from excess of sensibility." I'm not sure how genuine this is because after his actual death, she responds with absolute happiness.  Not that she shouldn't be happy, she wasn't in the best marital situation, but this does reveal a lot about both her sensibility and the idea of sensibility itself.  It's interesting that even though she detests her husband, she hopes he does not suffer a death so horrible as one filled with sensibility.  And what does her excitement say about women and their affinity towards emotion and duty? 

Desmond volume III

   Most striking to me in volume III of Smith's Desmond is the representation of the aristocracy, most notably, during Geraldine's departure from Meudon. Desmond, upon learning of Geraldine's hasty departure in search of Mr. Verney, is troubled by accounts from the people in Paris that the route in which Geraldine goes in search of her husband are "infested by associates of aristocrats." Smith then goes on to say on page 382 that the aristocrats "armed those who were content still to remain in vassalage...[and] sent out parties to attack and destroy all whose religious or political creed differed from their own." Smith uses such passages to sway readers into feeling anger at the injustices and evils the aristocracy employ in order to regain their titles and power over the common people by ravaging the provinces and bringing destruction and terror "against the liberties of the country." While the revolutionary forces are portrayed as "armed only in defense of their families and their freedom" Smith wants readers to see the revolutionists as acting in self defense and innocent of blame.

    In Geraldine's letter to Fanny in letter XXIII Smith continues the negative connotations towards the aristocracy and their associates. The further south Geraldine travels the worse the conditions of France become with even the landscape itself appearing "more dreary than the wildest heath in England" and having "hardly any traces of civilization." While the company in which Geraldine finds herself appear "wild and savage," "hideous figures," and in Geraldine's own words she "fancied [herself] surrounded by daemons." Smith's choice of language forces readers to perceive a negative view of the aristocracy in an attempt to further promote pro-revolutionary thought.

    Upon Geraldine's rescue by Desmond and their arrival at the castle of Count d'Hauteville Desmond begins questioning a banditti about the whereabouts of the Count and the other noblemen. The banditti relays that both the Count and the nobleman have fled from the municipal guard despite vowing that they were "determined never to submit." Here Smith cleverly calls out the aristocracy as cowards not able to defend their own homes and property or to risk their wellbeing to attain what they believe is right. This lack of conviction is starkly contrasted by the revolutionist movement exemplified by Montfleuri when he states in letter XXV that in order to destroy despotism and obtain liberty for France he would "sacrifice..life itself." 

Desmond Volume III

The representation of high society in 18th century England is that of two groups in Charlotte Smith's "Desmond". The first group represented is that of the overly worried by appearances and material things as many of the relatives and acquaintances of those writing the letters are. On the other hand, Smith paints the seemingly enlightened and almost removed members of the society who believe in notions such as love and equality. These people tend to be the actual letter writers, specifically Desmond, Geraldine, Bethel, and Fanny. Another feature of these characters in their sorrow in being stuck in their societal expectations, such as Desmond's dread of marrying someone he does not love or Geraldine's obligation to do what her husband and mother want despite wanting the opposite. This stark difference between types of people is meant to paint a jarring picture that brings pity to the writers and a dislike of those they are forced to spend their time with. It also builds a repertoire for these characters by showing the writers as able to comment on important matter while their counterparts are vapid and worried only by things that affect their honour.
One of these examples in the third volume is that of Mrs. Waverly's gossip in contrast with Desmond's musings on the French Revolution. The audience is made to be frustrated by Miss Elford's story of Geraldine and Desmond being together as mistress and master. It is horrific to Mrs. Waverly's that her daughter should be unfaithful to her husband and deceitful to her family not due to concern for the girl or her grandchildren, but due to her actions "destroy (ing) the honour of my family" (353). Not surprisingly, Fanny is worried about how it may affect the emotions of her sister. Again the audience sees the stark contrast between the material mother and her sensible daughter.
This is also a comment on the problems with aristocracy as a group if people worried only by trivial matters. The issue with this us that it is also the group of people in charge of the affairs of regular men. These are the lords and ladies of the land who have a majority of the money while doing little labor. It is a satirization of an entire class of people as being unfit to rule. This is, of course, with the exemption of the few enlightened persons who pave the way forward through things like the French Revolution. In fact, it could be argued that Smith is commenting on the need to get rid of the aristocracy and is celebrating the French for doing just that. This is actually discussed in the first volume between Desmond and Miss Fairfax where Desmond sees the fall as a good thing (73). Overall, the contrast is definitely meant to show the folly of the material upper class while also raising the esteem of the writers.

Volume II: Differing Viewpoints, New Characters, and Sensibility

What I have found most interesting from the switch of narration being mostly Mr. Desmond to a variety of others are the skewed and dramatized accounts of each character. Smith’s decision to frame each character’s views and writing styles as diverse makes the reader mistrust the narration provided. Overall, the epistolary novel choice Smith made for this book creates a more interesting and real account of this time period.

I thought perhaps only the first volume was to build up a slightly untrustworthy narrator, just so we can have an understanding of the sensibility and romanticism that Mr. Desmond represents, but as I read volume ii I noticed that several others show different sides to the character Mr. Desmond described them as.

From the beginning, you can sense a deeper personality to Geraldine than Desmond describes. She shows sensibility and intense emotion, whereas earlier we have mostly viewed her as a victim to her husband’s misdemeanors and as the object of Desmond’s affections. Even as the object of Desmond’s affections, his narrative more describes his longing for her and her adorableness and perfection. The first volume shows almost no semblance of a genuine account with Geraldine. The second volume reveals letters written by Geraldine, which allow the reader to understand and sympathize with the character better than before, when she was a rather 1-dimensional character, simply by being a mystery to the reader. Her real, very intense emotions are shown, even the ones about Desmond, who before this point, there was no indication she was particularly interested in. However, we do see that the main reason she is concerned about him is because she “involved him in this fatal affair, and that whatever ill consequences finally attend it, will be imputable solely to [her]” (80). It becomes obvious that Geraldine has the most riding on her in this volume, and that she experiences the most anguish.

Fanny Waverly was introduced briefly in the first volume, but volume ii allowed the reader to get to know her character better. Similar to Geraldine, she shows sensibility very deeply when it comes to the health of others. She shows great concern for Desmond’s health after the duel and hopes for the best for him. But perhaps the strongest representation of her personality is the strength in which she cares for her sister. She warns her that her “husband really [doesn’t] care where [Geraldine is]” (69). Fanny’s love for her sister allows her to throw out any sense of duty a woman should have for her husband during this time and plea for her sister to leave Verney.

Something that I find interesting, and kind of confusing, is that Bethel’s character throws a wrench into the reader completely believing each character. He tries to send several wake-up calls Desmond’s way, and continues to fail, as Bethel insists that Desmond is not entitled to feel any romantic way towards Geraldine because she is not the type of woman to have an affair with him. This put an unease in the truthfulness of Desmond’s accounts of Geraldine, and how he feels he should pursue her. Another instance is when Bethel describes Fanny’s account of Desmond as “inconsistent and incoherent” (15). This means that either Bethel has a skewed view of others, or that he is the ultimate voice of reason. Because of his wisdom and rationality, he is able to foresee the true feelings of Geraldine towards Desmond – that she is not interested in Desmond in a romantic way. Throughout volume ii, she refers to him as a dear friend. Geraldine also confirms Bethel’s character by stating that he “is an excellent man… and does justice to those noble qualities of heart and understanding” (82).

Finally, I found the representation of sensibility in this volume interesting because although several characters claimed this trait, they seemed reluctant to do so. Sensibility is shown in almost a negative light, as it is shown in several occasions in this volume as too painful or silly. In the very first letter, Bethel tells Desmond that they need to “save [Geraldine’s] sensible heart from the anguish it must endure for her children—to spare her the mortification and misery she must feel” (7). In Letter XVII, Geraldine wishes to not “tear apart the sensible heart of [Fanny]” (153). This indicates that what they refer to as a ‘sensible heart’ is too weak to feel too much pain, or it could send one over the edge. This also made me think about our class discussion about sensibility going out of fashion because it was ridiculous in its ferocity, and the quote about sensibility leading to madness. It seems that in this volume, the characters understand the absurdity of sensibility, yet they recognize it in themselves and in others. Because they recognize it so well, they also grasp how much it can ravage ones emotions. In Letter XVIII, Geraldine describes sensibility as something reason cannot conquer, as it is what made her stay so attached to Verney for so long.

P.S. Sorry if this was too long and a little scattered, I just had a lot of thoughts.

Volume Two: Politics and Sensibility

Letter V of volume two is one of the most impactful in terms of political commentary and the subject of sensibility. One of the interesting things about this letter in particular is the portrayal of Verney by Bethel. Bethel views him partially through a political lens, as a traditionalist. Taken in the context of the French Revolution, Verney embodies the sympathizers to the monarchy.

Letter V can be critically divided into two sections, the first being Bethel's account of what happened when he visited Geraldine, and the second being a political commentary about the necessity of the Revolution. Geraldine represents the repression of the people by the old regime, in this case by Verney, and Bethel and Desmond represent the French Revolution. They aim to free her from this overbearing rule in the same way revolutionaries did.

Sensibility is called into question in this letter as well. After Verney has left, Fanny becomes very distraught and relays those feelings to Bethel. He sees her in a different light after he realizes that she recognizes the horror of Geraldine's situation and wants it to be relieved in the same way he does. Not only does this make her more sensible, but Bethel also describes her as more attractive after this confession is made.

The difference in sensibilities between the women, Geraldine and Fanny, and the men, Desmond and Bethel, comes from how those sensibilities manifest. In the women, they manifest themselves rather dramatically. Geraldine and Fanny both become emotional and upset when the misfortune of others is displayed, but this sorrow is a form of sensibility in itself. They are able to recognize the misfortune and it affects them. The men show sensibility differently. After the duel, Desmond is upset with Geraldine's situation and aims to aid her somehow. Instead of merely wallowing, he asks Bethel to take positive action and make strides to help her, which is done. This emotion v. action response is a gender stereotype, but this is how Smith chose to portray the sensibilities of the characters.

Sensibility and Gender

Concerning "sensibility", there's something rather fascinating that occurs in Desmond, which belies Smith's particular usage, and, indeed, its use in the time period in which she is writing. This pertains to gender, and if not necessarily the role of gender, then how it pertains particularly to Desmond's character. In the beginning of volume two, Geraldine, writing to her sister Fanny, uses sensibility twice, once in regards to herself and once in regards to Desmond. Despairing of her current predicament, her "numberless distresses", she asks herself "Is it that I set out in life with too great a share of sensibility? or is it my lot to be particularly wretched?" (159) This seems to imply that she cares too much, or is pathetically inclined (i.e. feels too much pathos in her relation to others), that she does not have full mastery over her emotions. And yet, one page later, she is describing Desmond as one who has "such generous sensibility for the feelings of others" (160). Both are described as having marked sensibilities, indeed too much sensibility -- overflowing -- and yet Desmond is the one glowing with magnanimity, not Geraldine. This could possibly be chalked up to Geraldine's bias towards Desmond and her own humility. But even Fanny's sensibility is described in less glowing terms than that of Desmond's. As Geraldine writes, "Believe me, my sister, there is nothing so injurious to that delicate sensibility which you really possess, as indulging this petulance" (191). This would appear to mean that even Fanny's sensibility is not up to snuff when it comes to other's such as Desmond's, who is portrayed as the quintessential "man of sensibility". There seems to be a perfect level that Desmond possesses, a sympathetic bond between those around him that doesn't interfere with his own emotional well-being or affect him too severely, as it does in Geraldine's case. So many other characters seem to lack this quality, and although it doesn't necessarily mean gender is to blame -- indeed, there are several male characters devoid of this attribute -- it isn't a stretch to conclude that for Smith's time, men were viewed as having better mastery over their own emotions, hence a better use of sensibility.

Problems leading to the Revolution in Smith's Desmond

In Charlotte Smith’s Desmond, there a number of pro-revolutionary moments, points that are touched on frequently throughout the letters. One of the most prominent examples, thus far in a reading, is Letter XVI from Desmond to Mr. Bethel. In this letter, the reader is introduced to a Breton, who suffers greatly at the hands of the English and the aristocracy. After being captured by the English, he is taken to the prison located in Winchester. Prior to residing in one, the Breton had heard relatively good things about the English prison system. However, that was soon remedied by the horrendous conditions forced upon the prisoners. There he and the other prisoners were forced to deal with the overcrowding, a lack of sufficient provisions, and rampantly virulent diseases. “...out of the nine-and-twenty of us poor devils, who were taken in our little privateer, fourteen died within three weeks…” (145). The conditions did not improve post-mortem. The dead were tied into makeshift coffins and buried in shallow holes, often in groups. Unfortunately for the Breton, life does not wholly improve after getting out of prison. He gets home and takes charge of his family’s estate, as his father and brother have passed in his absence. He quickly discovers that he has almost no rights to anything on his land, and any rights he does have can be snatched away from him at the whim of the Baron de Kermanfroi, the Lord Paramount. The Baron has sole rights and privileges to the animals and land that the river, which runs by the Breton’s farm, nourishes or touches in any way. Should the Breton overstep his rights he can be punished as seen fit by the Baron. This is used as a prime example of the unfair treatment those of remotely lower class received by from the aristocracy in pre-revolutionary France. It can be concluded that the Revolution, in Desmond and possibly Charlotte Smith’s eyes, is the solution to disposing with the old ways and creating a new and better society. 

Sensibility in Smith's Desmond

In terms of sensibility, there are remarkable similarities and subtle differences between Smith's "Desmond" and Williams's "Letters Written in France", especially in regards to the display of human emotions and their relation to love and attraction.

In Smith's letter XX on page 129, the use of the periodic sentence heavily imbued with emotionally charged words leads the reader to assume the role that the writer is trying to convey. The same thing happens in Desmond on page 51, but in a slightly different way.

The speaker in "Desmond" elicits an emotional response from the audience by drawing upon the notions of sensibility. She does this by using emotionally charged words as well, but without the use of Williams'  overly exalted, flowery language. Smith's Desmond refers to the object of his affection as having a "soul-soothing voice" that "vibrates in [his] ear". This brings to mind aspects of sensibility because it demonstrates the heightened affects of emotions and compassion of the speaker, as well as a romantic undertone of sensuousness.

Sympathy and Sensibility

On Sympathy

David Hume, A Treatise on Human Nature (1739-40)

"We have a lively idea of everything relating to us. All human creatures are related to us by resemblance. Their persons, therefore, their interests, their passions, their pains and pleasures must strike upon us in a lively manner, and produce an emotion similar to the original one. . . If this be true in general, it must be more so of affliction and sorrow. These always have a longer and more lasting influence than any pleasure or enjoyment."

Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)

"How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is pity or compassion, the emotion we feel for the misery of others, when we either see it, or are made to conceive of it in a very lively manner."

Fellow-feeling is caused "by changing places in fancy with the sufferer, that we come either to conceive or be affected by what he feels . . . [but] our sympathy with the joy or grief of another, before we are informed of the cause of either, is always extremely imperfect . . . Sympathy, therefore, does not arise so much from the view of the passion, as from the situation which excites it."


Sensibility, from the OED Online:
 5. a. Quickness and acuteness of apprehension or feeling; the quality of being easily and strongly affected by emotional influences; sensitiveness. Also, with const., sensitiveness to, keen sense of something.
1799   R. Sickelmore Agnes & Leonora II. 9   Her feelings, which had been so acutely wounded..as almost to hurry sensibility to madness, now assailed her with renovated force.
6. In the 18th and early 19th c. (afterwards somewhat rarely): Capacity for refined emotion; delicate sensitiveness of taste; also, readiness to feel compassion for suffering, and to be moved by the pathetic in literature or art.
1768   L. Sterne Sentimental Journey II. 182   Dear sensibility! source inexhausted of all that's precious in our joys, or costly in our sorrows!

Capitalistic and Monarchical Rejection within Charlotte Smith's Desmond

Desmond's Letter XIV to Mr. Bethel utilizes a Breton's story to commentate on the horrible condition of English prisons and to mock the unjust monarchical system of old France before the Revolution had begun. The running theme throughout the Breton's story of his life is injustice. He begins his tale by describing how when he was originally taken prisoner by the British military he had faith that the British prison system would not treat him terribly or unjustly because he had heard good things about Britain's prisons. Instead the prisons are overcrowded and under horrible living conditions which lead to the deaths of almost half of his French comrades. Smith also uses the story to describe the capitalistic tendencies of the English within the prison system instead of relying on their own military or police forces. The Breton's friend dies and "the next day [he] saw him tied up between two boards, by way of the coffin, which was to be provided by contract...in a grave, dug by contract...which he was covered with about an inch of mould, which was by contract also" (146). The extreme presence of contracts in the prison system demonstrate how intertwined the English are with capitalism. The contract work itself also demonstrates how terribly those under contract can treat their fellow human beings. The Breton's friend is not even given a coffin but two boards wrapped together in an attempt to save time and money. English materialism and capitalism is not the outcome Smith hopes for at the end of the French Revolution. It is interesting that Smith uses contract work within prisons to exhibit how poorly capitalism can treat people, but then describes the ridiculous brutality of the old French monarchy.

Smith then uses the Breton's story to commentate on the injustice of the Lord Paramount to have "the sole right and property of the river running through his fief, together with all the fish therein...also of all the birds of whatsoever nature or species" (148). The incoming Lord of the Breton's land is given rights to all the animals within his domain although the Breton and his family have lived upon the land for generations. It is ironic that the Breton's punishment for fishing or hunting the lands on which he was raised is to "be delivered into the hands of justice" when the system is so unjust (148). The Breton tells Desmond "twas hard to imagine where the power originated that thus deprived all other men of their rights, to give to those nobles the empire of the elements, and the dominion over animated nature!" (148). Smith uses this example to demonstrate how old French nobles were using extreme unnatural power not only over their people but also the Earth itself. The fall of the monarchy in France freed the Earth from the bounds of the rulers alike to how it freed the people, according to Smith. Smith mocks these old French monarchical rulers by naming the antagonist of the Breton's story "Raoul-Philippe-Joseph-Alenandre-Caesar Erispoe, Baron de Kermanfroi" (149). The ridiculously long title for the ruler is unneeded and pointless just like his presence in the Breton's countryside.

Smith uses this example of how unjust the monarchical system is by attacking old France instead of England. It seems she is using the Breton's story to represent the progress in France which England has not yet gone through. However, Smith is also unhappy with the capitalistic and materialists ways of England demonstrated by her dislike of contract work in the English prisons. According to Smith -- based off the Breton's tale -- neither monarchy nor materialistic capitalism are the paths to societal justice. Smith uses Desmond to end her commentary on the two systems with his statement that anyone who believes those in power "possess no powers inimical to the general rights of mankind" are both ignorant and insolent (151).

Baron du F---, a tyrant

Helen Maria Williams coaxes the reader into the revolution by presenting the life of Mons. Du F----, and his many misfortunes caused by his father. Baron du F---- “preferred the exercise of domestic tyranny to the blessings of social happiness, and chose rather to be dreaded than beloved” (115). Williams described how Baron du F---- exercised his way of ruling, and further explains in her novel, Letters Written in France, his tyrannical behavior is not limited even to his sons, at one-point imprisoning Mons. du F---- for going against his father’s wishes. Even Baron du F----‘s other sons hesitated in visiting Mons. du F----, as to not face their father’s repercussions.   Discussing first-hand accounts of the severity and cruelty from Baron du F---- gives further insight as to why the French Revolution came to occurrence. Baron du F---- no doubt exercised similar actions towards the people in the civilization.

Williams then brings a call to action in her final letters by responding to the British criticism of the French Revolution. The British thought differently of the French Revolution, Williams recounting these descriptions as “dismay” and “horror” and tells of the main discussions in British conversation being about “crimes, assassinations, torture, and death” (147). Williams asks herself “Must I be told that my mind is perverted…because I do not weep with those who have lost a part of their superfluities, rather than rejoice that the oppressed are protected, that the wrong are redressed…” (148). Williams, as opposed to seeing the French behaving in a barbaric manner, celebrates the revolt as a fight for freedom and liberty. The British lived a more privileged life, and seeing the French fight against the authority oppressing them shocks the British because they were afraid of another war. 

9/13

Williams uses the story of Antoine du F-- to truly emphasize the power the aristocrats had at this time. The abuses he endures from his father, the Baron, grow greater through out the story and we are able to see Williams highlight their power and influence over not just their children, but the law and the church as well.

Williams outlines a small history in the beginning to show the normal behavior of the Baron using lines such as "ruled his feudals tenures with a rod of iron" (115) and description of the barons' beliefs that the poor "were only born for suffering; and he determined...not to deprive them of their natural inheritance"(115) to show us how abhorrent of a man he is. The Baron not only treat his family with such cruelty, but all whom he has power over. He views marriage as a "convention of interest, and children as a property...for parents to make the most in their power" (116). So now the audience knows what the Baron's intentions are at all times.

I believe that Williams also made sure the audience knew that Mons. de F-- and Mad Monique--C were married several different times under a Priest, a Curate of a Parish, and a Chaplain to show that the aristocracy had more power even than the church. It does not matter if you are married by in the eyes of the church, a nobleman can annul that as he sees fit. The Baron wants the marriage annulled so he can marry his son to someone that will increase the his power, for that is all the concern he has, even though there are children, or more heirs, available to him now, they are not good enough to advance the Baron's power.

The paragraph that shows Williams intentions the most was the beginning of Letter XX on page 129. "You, my dear friend, who have felt the tender attachment of love..." she reminds the audience of their own lives and loves then tell them that they can "judge the feelings of Mons. du F--.." I don't believe she is only referring to the letter he has received from his wife, or his feelings while he is imprisoned, she is calling for them to place themselves in the place of Mons. du F--. To feel what he is feeling, to experience what is like to be at the hands of someone who has complete power over you, even as a full grown man born of nobility. The Baron holds all of the power and uses it to get what he wants regardless of anyone else. Everyone is at the mercy of this brute as long as the aristocracy has this much power. She uses this story to get the audience to make an emotional connection to the Revolution.

09/13/16

It is quite obvious that Helen Maria Williams's Letters Written in France is a persuasive work meant to warm England to the idea of revolution. However, the manner in which she retells the life of Mons. du F---- is her most effective device she's used so far. First, Williams reassures her audience that Mons. du F---- is to be pitied, even though he is an aristocrat. In Letter XVI, she writes about how awful his father, whom serves as a symbol for the old aristocracy, treated him. Baron du F---- is described as a man who was "formed by nature for the support of the antient government of France" (115). Williams also informs her readers that Baron du F---- "considered the lower order of people as a set of beings whose existence was tolerated merely for the use of the nobility" and that poor people "were only born for suffering" (115). Here, Williams has clearly set up Baron du F---- as the villain for this narrative, along with all of the other nobles of France. She intended to shock her audience with not only the prejudice the upper class have the potential to hold, but also the peculiar way in which the Baron mistreats his own son. The subtle implication here is that those of higher rank are capable of lacking compassion toward their own flesh and blood. The unnaturalness of Baron du F----'s parenting style makes the audience distance themselves from him.

 By making her readers uncomfortable with Baron du F----'s views, Williams has influenced her audience to take a sympathetic stance against those like him for the sake of Mons. du F----, whom Williams chose to use as a symbol for the regular man. Through Baron du F----, Williams was able to highlight how the rich have the ability to corrupt the government. When the Baron manipulates the law several times throughout the retelling, Williams proves the point that something as tangible as money has the power to touch something as intangible as justice. The aristocracy of France does not live by the law, because they are the law.

Mons. du F---- would not have had to go through his troubles if the government had acted honestly and effectively. I believe that Williams intended to tell the tale of Mons. du F---- for the purpose of bringing out the passions of the English people. This retelling is a public call for justice. Williams is inciting her readers to be in favor for change, or else be indifferent to the sufferings of the innocent.

On the Text

 Helen Maria Williams's Letters Written in France gave a very optimistic view of the beginnings of the French Revolution. The author seems to be in love with the ideas of equality and liberty. In the second letters she writes about the citizens working together "...the highest and lowest orders of citizens gloried in taking up the spade." (65) Everything is fresh and new. France is the young maiden ready to take on the world's problems while England is the older woman who has settled for her lot in life.

One passage stuck out to me. In letter five, the author tells us of a visit to a friend who shares her philosophical ideals. They talk about the importance of equality and the irrelevance of rank. The author then tells us that her friend wears a pendant make from a piece of the Bastille that is decorated with diamonds and other precious stones that is meant to celebrate her revolutionary ideals. This strikes me as the equivalent of putting a save the earth bumper sticker on a low mileage SUV. The rest of the text is very pro-revolution so her inclusion of this anecdote seems strange. Is she aware that the reality of the revolution can't live up to the people's high expectations? On the other hand, is this a sign that she doesn't see the potential problems ahead?

On the Reviews

In this period it became far easier to publish books due to advances in the industry which led to a greater availability and diversity of materials. Many critics and authors responded to this with claims that this could have a negative effect on literature and the public at large. In the criticisms of Helen Maria Williams's work we can see that the debates over the literary merits of 'popular' literature have been going on for a very long time. One reviewer wrote "whoever would write well must write to the few, and must even be able to reject whatever is likely to charm the multitude." (214) He is basically making the argument that in order for her future work to have merit she must write to a more select audience. Their is also a great deal of sexism in the reviews. Every reviewer made some remark about what they saw as the feminine quality of the writing.   

William Blake

Blake's image of "the eternal female" renders the Revolutionary ideas of liberty as being closely tied to femininity, and goes so far as to suggest that out of woman, the ideas of liberty and the destruction that accompanies it in the French Revolution were born out of her, "In her trembling hands, she took the new-born terror, howling."(7) In line 2, Blake mentions the coast of Albion, the object of a mythological story depicting the fall of primeval man, thus indicating that this "new-born fire"(8) will result in an advancement in the human experience, but the image of fire also indicates destruction born out of passion. Fire is also difficult to control. As the fire is falling from the sky, those on the earth are encouraged to look up to and welcome this change. Blake's image of the fire falling to the earth is characteristic of imagery that is traditionally considered to be evocative of serenity, or even holiness, yet, so much of this imagery is just the opposite. The last line of the poem, in which the speaker says, "For all that lives is holy," creates a paradoxical impression, because hardly any of the imagery throughout the poem evoked what I would think of as holy, serene, reflective, etc. Blake asserts that liberty is at stake, and that it may only be salvaged by the willingness to accept destruction and hardship, and that this hardship, like the liberty, is holy.

The Age of Romanticism

The Romantic era was a movement of great strides in music, artistic, intellectual, and literary areas. This movement emphasized intense emotions being felt by the people all over Europe and was essential for channeling their thoughts on the wars and time of great political turmoil.

Women were great contributors to the literary movement during the Romantic era. They wanted their voices heard and their feelings about the changing times to be known. Although they haven't been studied until recently, I feel as if their perceptions about the Romantic movement are important to study to get another view on the way things were.  Their opinions and interpretations can help readers view the Romantic movement in another light. Their contributions can finally have meaning to others and be given the credit they have deserved for quite some time now.

The Age of Romanticism Response

Politically, the Age of Romanticism brought with it a shift in social structure when the lower class began to rise in wealth and landholdings due to their inclusion in business. Women played an active role in the literary movement of the Romantic period, contributing to fiction, non-fiction, poetry, and politics. More literature was released demanding better, equal treatment of the classes and women. Romanticism was spurred on and characterized by the revolutions taking place during this time period, particularly the French and Industrial Revolutions.

Many of the women writers of the Romantic Age were popular and well respected during their time. Not only did they contribute to fiction, but they were also channeling their creativity and insight into political avenues, as well. The passage mentions Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Women as one such example of this extension into the political realm by the women of this time period. Later, we see Jane Austen’s satirical Pride and Prejudice being discussed in regards to the shift in social structure during the Industrial Revolution and the consequences for the reputation of the lower class moving up. While Pride and Prejudice is a work of fiction, it's interesting to note the inclusion of such relevant political themes present within Austen's work.

After reading “The Age of Romanticism” I find I am highly impressed and excited to learn more about these women who broke social barriers in order to play in the ring with some of the “big boys” who were writing during this time. These women helped pave the way for women to be allowed to express their creativity and insight in the same areas as their male counterparts.