MASARYK UNIVERSITY BRNO
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
Department of English Language and Literature
Amelia and Becky – their relationships with men
Final Thesis
Brno 2019
Supervisor: Author:
Mgr. Lucie Podroužková, Ph.D. Mgr. Markéta Kohoutová
Prohlášení
Prohlašuji, že jsem závěrečnou práci vypracovala samostatně, s využitím pouze citovaných literárních pramenů, dalších informací a zdrojů v souladu s Disciplinárním řádem pro studenty Pedagogické fakulty Masarykovy univerzity a se zákonem č. 121/2000 Sb. o právu autorském, o právech souvisejících s právem autorským a o změně některých zákonů (autorský zákon) ve znění pozdějších předpisů.
V Brně dne
Mgr. Markéta Kohoutová
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my gratitude to Mrs Lucie Podroužková, supervisor of this thesis, for her valuable comments and advice on writing this work.
Annotation:
This thesis deals with relationships between men and women in Victorian England through analysis of Thackeray’s novel Vanity Fair. In five chapters, there are described and compared fates of two young women - Becky and Amelia. It is possible to find there information about ways how to obtain a husband, the position of women in marriage and society and the consequences of losing a husband.
Keywords:
women, 19th century, men, marriage, relationships, England
Anotace
Tato práce se zabývá vztahem mezi muži a ženami ve viktoriánské Anglii skrze analýzu románu Vanity Fair napsaného W. M. Thackerayem. V pěti kapitolách jsou zde popsány a komparovány osudy dvou mladých žen – Becky a Amelie. Můžeme zde nalézt informace o způsobech, jakými ženy získávaly manžela, o pozici žen v manželském svazku a společnosti či o důsledcích ztráty manžela.
Klíčová slova:
ženy, 19. století, muži, manželství, vztahy, Anglie
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ... 7
2. WILLIAM MAKEPEACE THACKERAY ... 9
2.1. Life and work ... 9
2.2. Topics in Vanity Fair ... 10
3. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE NOVEL ... 12
3.1. Marriage and sexual life ... 13
4. AMELIA AND BECKY AT THE MARRIAGE MARKET ... 16
4.1. 4.1. Main characters and their position in the society ... 16
4.1.1. Becky ... 17
4.1.2. Amelia ... 19
4.1.3. Men ... 20
4.2. How to find a husband? ... 23
4.3. Role and position of main heroines in their marriage ... 29
4.3.1. Participation in social raise of their families ... 29
4.3.2. Being a mother ... 31
4.3.3. Faithful wife ... 33
4.4. Loneliness ... 37
4.4.1. Amelia’s and Becky’s reflection about their marriages ... 38
4.4.2. Looking for a new husband? ... 39
5. CONCLUSION ... 42
6. REFERENCES ... 45
7
1. INTRODUCTION
This thesis deals with a novel by William Makepeace Thackeray Vanity Fair (2001). The Victorian period, often dated as a time of the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901), was famous for its political stability and strict cultural and moral norms.
Vanity Fair was written during this era. Although the story of this novel starts before 1837, it evinces many topics typical for the Victorian period – a desire for exotic things, human sexuality as taboo, identity strongly given by race and class, norms of appropriate behavior and especially gender roles which command that men belong to the outside world whereas women should be in the household. Relations between males and females are discussed in this thesis based on the book and secondary literature. The author uses methods of analysis and comparison. The main characters of the novel are compared as well as reality described by the secondary literature with the world of Vanity Fair. The aim is to describe which stereotypes are present in the novel, how the main characters deal with them, and understand the Victorian period better through it.
Although Vanity Fair is called “a novel without a hero”, there are two women, Amelia and Becky, whose fate creates the basic line of the whole story. They are often seen as a contrast to each other. Amelia, a nice, kind and obedient girl, comes from an upper-class background but her family becomes poor. She marries the man she loves but he does not love her and is killed shortly after their marriage. It takes her a long time to be accepted by his family but, finally, she finds a new husband who adores her.
Becky is a low-birth but extremely ambitious and independent young lady. She desires social rise for herself and so she secretly marries Rawdon, a man from the higher society. But his family does not agree and disinherits them. They earn money by gambling and try to stay in the high society. Rawdon leaves her because she uses her charm on other men to gain property and position. Finally, she lives with Amelia’s brother and after his death; she is not poor but still alone.
This thesis is divided into three main chapters apart from the introduction and conclusion. Chapter two sums up Thackeray’s life and work, with emphasis put on topics used in Vanity Fair. The next chapter presents the historical background of the novel and the main aim is to inform readers about gender norms of Victorian society.
The crucial part is chapter 4 which analyses the main heroines’ position at the marriage market and their relationships with men. Firstly, main characters are described because
8
it is necessary for understanding their behavior and motivation. Secondly, the issue and limits of finding a husband are discussed. Since Amelia and Becky were successful in it, the description of their position in the matches is also described. Especially, a comparison with the traditional norms of Victorian society is made – being a mother, faithfulness to their husbands, and participation in the social rise of their families. Last but not least, information about their life after the loss of the husband can be found there with emphasis on possibilities of remarriage and the reflection of the former matches.
9
2. WILLIAM MAKEPEACE THACKERAY 2.1. Life and work
William Makepeace Thackeray (18 July 1811 – 24 December 1863) was born in Calcutta, British India (Dolejší 439). Thackeray’s father worked as a secretary in this colony and that was the reason for such an unusual place of birth. “After his father’s death and mother’s remarriage” (Alexander 281), he was sent to England where he studied at a boarding school. This period of his life was unhappy because he was bullied. Thackeray can hardly be appreciated as a successful student because he did not finish Cambridge. Nevertheless, he travelled through Europe during his studies and visited Paris and the area of present-day Germany. Since there are a lot of reflections of these life experiences in his work, it is important to mention them. W. M. Thackeray is known as a novelist now but the beginnings of his career were not easy. Probably, the only reason why he became a writer was financial problems. He wrote short humoristic stories for newspapers and magazines. Even his most famous novel Vanity Fair was first being published in a magazine, not as a whole book. It may be discussed whether he was happy about his job because he used a pseudonym in the beginning. His personal life was also complicated. He got married but his wife was insane so their daughters lived with Thackeray’s mother in Paris. William Makepeace Thackeray died in London at the age of fifty-two.
It is taken as a fact that Vanity Fair made him a regarded author. In 1848, he published it as a classic novel “with a new and provocative subtitle: A novel without a hero” (Jones 6). Writing about this subtitle it is not possible to omit its origin. It was inspired by the book The Pilgrim’s Progress (1678) a religious allegory written by John Bunyan. There is a fair full of vanities and each person has to go through it on their journey to salvation. However, Thackeray modified the meaning of this scene. In his work, it is not a way to eternal reward but to earthly one: to money, position or power.
Although Thackeray is often considered to be a man of one novel, he wrote many other works, e.g. The Book of Snobs (1848), The History of Henry Esmond (1852), The Newcomes (1855) or The Virginians (1859). Later novels were less popular and did not reach the quality of Vanity Fair. From the point of view of literary scholars and the general public, there are many positives and negatives in Vanity Fair. The most often discussed quality of the book is a realistic picture of English society in the first
10
half of the 19th century, which is probably connected with a fact that Thackeray was inspired by the real world (literary works or conversations) which surrounded him.
Vanity Fair was and is mostly criticized for “prolixity, slow movement and loose structure” (Cuff 94). Many of these reproaches are caused by the belief that the main principle of this novel’s structure is “contrast of characters and the actions” (Taube 119). This can be illustrated by placing different characters into similar situations.
Owing to it, the contrast between them is more obvious. As an example marriages of Amelia with George and Becky and Rawdon can be mentioned. Both marriages were made without an approval of families and both couples lost a chance to inherit their families’ property. Each person reacts in a different way: George is furious, Amelia is too naive to see consequences, Rawdon angry but able to think about the situation and Becky is laughing. It is possible to agree with a statement there is a “vertical, rather than horizontal, development” (Taube 135).
2.2. Topics in Vanity Fair
In the context of Vanity Fair, it is appropriate to consider two things. Firstly, the novel is satirical and so not everything what is written should be taken literally.
Secondly, being a social novel it is almost impossible to say that there is one main theme. Experts usually consider following topics to be most accentuated: vanity, which is the main motivation of whole society’s behaving, corruption of people by their desire for money and the social position, egoism, contrast of reality and illusion and nonexistence of an ideal man or woman as well as happy marriage (Melani).
In other words the author described the world where “money drives this society”
(Dyer 67). Even though in the article The Seductiveness of Female Duplicity in Vanity Fair Lisa Jadwin claims that Thackeray denounced Becky at first pages, many experts see the novel rather as a mockery of a traditionalist society and its perspective of gender roles - the concept of an ideal man and woman. In this novel, neither men nor women behave honourably, which means the whole book is full of “lies, deceit, secrets, and silences” (Bodenheimer 67). However, there is one issue which should be pointed out.
These dishonesties are not only verbal but they influence the whole life to such extent that people have to live a double life.1 Talking about the author’s sarcasm, it is possible
1 It is more interesting when people become aware of the official ideology of the 19th century society which was veracity. Nevertheless, the art of the pretence was highly appreciated. The public facade of people was more important than their real qualities
11
to show it at impossibility to reach the fulfilling of being a Victorian ideal man or woman. The only person who has these qualities is Dobbin but his actions do not have positive but catastrophic results including the unhappy marriage of George and Amelia which Dobbin helped to create (Pieta 239-241). In connection with this topic some people could ask if the nonexistent ideal man and woman have some relation with inclusion of a broken marriage into the novel despite the rarity of the phenomenon in society at that time or, as Anne Humpherys suggests, it was only a tool to extend limits of the novel (42).
On the whole, this work questions the traditional gender stereotypes. The author demonstrates it in the novel several times. For example, vanity used to be rated to be a typical attribute of women. Transgression of these rules was a description of a man looking at himself in the mirror. It is possible to agree with Sarah Rose Cole that “the words “male” and “vanity” implies a gender reversal.” (147)
12
3. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE NOVEL
The aim of this chapter is to outline women’s rights and their position in the Victorian period. It is possible to commence with the following quotation by Odubajo:
“one of the major characteristics of the Victorian society is the gender-based inequality that existed in the period” (9224). After 1830 a lot of important changes were done in English legislation. One well-known example of this process was an electoral reform which terminated “the parliamentary monopoly of landowners and landed merchants”
(Fleischmann 53-54). Among other laws which were created before and during the 1870s are ranked sanitary or social ones, which helped the working classes. None of these improvements had any effect on women’s position in the society or marriages, for example, women had no legal chance to end an unhappy marriage. The general point of view about marriage and the role of women in the society was particularly conservative and each modification in this sphere was seen as a threat.2 Certain transformations of women’s position were countenanced for women of higher society who were active either in literature or even politics. However, the heroines of Vanity Fair are not those who would utilize this chance. What is relevant is the fact that Victorian bourgeoisie was driven by their desire to gain an aristocratic status and the relationship between these two social groups according to S. R. Cole is the central question of the 19th century (138-139).
Literature is an important source of information for an exploration of society. In this period, reading became a frequent pastime activity of many women of higher society and “the novel again reached the popularity it had enjoyed in the 1740s”
(Alexander 272). From this it can be deduced that literature involved women and served as an inspiration or a way to influence women and their perception of themselves. Love as a central topic of books for women is not a modern idea. “Ideals of romantic courtship and marriage ... where to be innocent is to be unhappy” can be found in many 19th century novels (Sanders 38).3 Women should have seen love as a spiritual matter, not as a sexual one. Even moral models which depicted an ideal woman who was able to be patient, kind, a good homemaker and a teacher of their children can be found there (Ciocoi-Pop 69). In other words, the literature presented a concept of “The Angel in the House”. It can be compared with contemporary magazines which create pressure on
2 Woman’s sexuality was seen as a dangerous element of destabilisation.
3 As well as it can be seen in Amelia’s marriage with George in Vanity Fair.
13
women to be perfect. A woman was seen as a mother, an angel, an idol and a guardian of good manners (Michaud 92). That is one reason why Becky Sharp has more problems in her climb into higher society with women than men. Women just tried to fulfil their role as a guardian of moral standards and were not willing to allow her to come in because they saw a danger for their families’ reputation in her. As a conclusion, it is possible to state that being man and woman was restricted by moral, political and social roles which led to a moral dictate which people’s behaviour was judged by (Saville 527).
3.1. Marriage and sexual life
The first topic which should be discussed is why people entered marriage. Is the thesis that there was only “impersonal basis of marriage in an acquisitive, money oriented, status-conscious society” (Melani) truthful or was there any real influence of romanticism on everyday life? Generally, several reasons for marriage are possible to notice there. Firstly, it is an economical-social motive − in other words, “a contract between two families” (Stone 182). Secondly, marriage could be created based on a romantic bond between two people. In this case, moral qualities of the future partner were determinative. The most condemned incentive, both in society and literature, was a sexual desire. Even articles were preserved where women were cautioned against men’s lust which was especially dangerous because it could be confused with romantic feelings (Stone 190). Also, men were expected to find their future wife according to moral qualities. Last but not least, there was an opportunity for romantic love which combined the previous two motives. On the whole, a broad range of possibilities can be seen from an unconditional parents’ authority to the freedom of children. However, one important principle can be detected both in Vanity Fair and professional journals: “the richer and more well-born the family, the greater is the power likely to be exercised”
(Stone 182). Supposedly, it was caused by the necessity to administrate property and increase it. A wrong decision at the marriage market could destroy the effort of many generations. That was why parents kept the power of a veto for a long time. On the other hand, they wished their children were happy which means a lot of opportunities for meeting a suitable partner (Stone 213). A convenient demonstration of this principle can be found also in Vanity Fair. When Amelia’s family loses their position, she has almost no chance for the legal relationship with George, because “money and fair repute are the chiefest” (Thackeray 186). Finally, it is possible to say marriage should have
14
been based on feelings but also served as a tool to keep a social position o family or even to be a lift to a higher status.
Marriage as an institution was defined by laws which regulated it in favour of stronger gender considered in marriage as a representative of God himself (Michaud 109). The society of the 19th century could be called a patriarchal one and the most conservative classes were the middle and higher (Wasson 126). A marriage can be considered as a unit where a lot of issues were discussed: distribution of power and authority, taking advantage of sources, division of labour and showing their opinions (Abrams 71). It is a matter of fact that women were brought up believing they are inferior to men and most women were married because of economic reasons. It was believed that having a home is unconditional if a woman wants to be a woman.
Moreover, maternity increased the value of a woman (Calder 128).
There was almost only one sphere where women could be successful – their home. Two short extracts are used there to support this opinion: natural place for a woman was her home (Utrio 169) and women’s education was possible but it should not disrupt the function which was given her by nature, that means bearing children and caring of household (Lenderová 39). It is possible to deduce that men and women needed another type of education. That is why girls were educated at their homes or in private institutions. Although women were expected to be “The Angel in the House”, requirements of woman’s higher social activity grew stronger in the 19th century. Wives of higher society were expected to strengthen their husbands’ contacts, which required knowledge, good information about current affairs and charm. In the light of these facts, it makes more sense why woman’s education was not focused so much on economic questions which are necessary for handling problems of the household but on music, languages and social conversation (Calder 102). In general, a lady was supposed to be a social active “Angel in the House” who arranged a sanctuary not a prison for her tired husbands.
Marriage without sex was not possible and from the legal point of view, it never existed. Unfortunately for women, it did not mean something pleasant in their marriage.
It is often described as a matter which was necessary to endure rather than enjoy and a man was an owner of his wife’s body as well as their children. A double standard was more obvious in the sexual matter than in other parts of married life. Although the traditional point of view about gender was “woman=deceit and man=honesty”
(Bodenheimer 68), it does not mean chastity should be required from men. Purity of
15
their bodies was necessary for women, not men, but virtue of words was demanded from men. As Jadwin writes, there was a “double standard that permits women to play with word in ways men cannot” (667). In other words, women were allowed to tell lies but not to be unfaithful. Among necessary qualities of a good wife were chastity, purity and self-sacrifice. And so a woman had to suppress her sexuality (Abrams 156).
Hypocrisy or pretence was even taken as a necessity for building a home as a sanctuary for a husband.
16
4. AMELIA AND BECKY AT THE MARRIAGE MARKET 4.1. 4.1. Main characters and their position in the society
Before describing heroes and heroines of the book, it is convenient to deal with the society of this period, especially describe how they saw their world. Thackeray, as a representative of the society, describes it as “the moral world, that has, perhaps, no particular objection to vice, but an insuperable repugnance to hearing vice called by its proper name” (Thackeray 606). If only one attribute of the 19th century society has to be mentioned, it should be the polarized seeing of the world. In other words, people saw their lives and also other people in contrasts. One of the most significant ones was the common belief that women are supposed to be passive and weak whereas men were seen as those who should be active and strong. According to Bernard, Thackeray questions these opinions: his society of Victorian England is full of either spoilt or unintelligent people who, nevertheless, are able to behave morally, e.g. Becky helps Amelia to dispose herself of her idealisation of George or dandy Rawdon is a loving father (Barnard). Not only black and white seeing of the world is relativized in Vanity Fair. The distinction between men’s and women’s behaviour is contested as well, especially their manners at the marriage market. Becky is more active in this business than the majority of men. However, some features of the principle of contrast can be seen in Vanity Fair. Generally, in this period of time women were contrasted in literature: a virginal lady and a whore. Thackeray basically works with this principle when we are talking about the central pair of heroines.
It should be noted that a woman was bound by norms and myths” (Michaud 94).
There can be seen the first contrast between two main heroines Amelia and Becky. The first mentioned is still inside the myths and she rarely dares to get off these limits. On the contrary, Becky is outside these social borders the whole time and not even her marriage had any influence on it. Their stories are almost identical, in a sense; they both go through similar situations. In other words, there are the same pictures of their lives but reversely orientated. Their fates are parallel but contrasting routes. Barnard says when Becky’s star is rising, Amelia’s star is falling and vice versa (126). In the time when the book was published for the first time, people usually see it as a moral example: Amelia as “The Angel in the House” and so there has to be happy end for her, whereas Becky was her opposite – active, beyond her social class, ready to conquer the world of high society and so a punishment follows. A lot of contrast can be seen also in
17
self-reflections of the heroines. Whereas Amelia has tendencies to blame herself, Becky sees flaws only in others.
4.1.1. Becky
Becky is probably the most interesting and popular character of the book. There are many questions about this woman and Thackeray’s description of events allows several options of interpretation. In her fate, some people recognize similar components to Jane Eyre’s life. Both of them are orphans but also strong women whose rise can be seen as a threat by the society. However, their behaviour is completely different (Kaye 727). Becky is depicted as a Femme fatal, someone who is able to engage men’s attention by one glance so much that they “proposed something like a marriage”
(Thackeray 12). She is able to act and risk a lot; furthermore, she enjoys her gambling.
“Her military personality and relentless pursuit of social mobility” must have been seen as inappropriate and especially as a man’s qualities which were stolen by a woman there is not anything masculine in her physical appearance (Pietka 239). However, it would not be correct to think Becky is only the opposite of a typical 19th-century lady. There are at least two elements in her life which are typically feminine. She participates on charity which is quite often the only way how women could be involved in public life, because as Lenderová writes, men did not consider charity as something which could endanger their dominance in household and society (231). Also, Becky’s job as a governess was typical for girls of her social group.
According to Dyer, Thackeray uses several hidden ways how to characterize Becky. She is a half-Frenchwoman and France used to be a traditional enemy of England for a long time. Her surname means in slang something like a “liar” and furthermore, through charades, she is connected with East / Orient, which associates the place where everyone tries to cheat everyone. Bolchi analyses her speech and the conclusion is that emotionally neutral verbs are used, e.g. say, and also the world
“calm” is almost overused. That is her depiction in the whole book – calm, self- controlling, hiding her real emotions. On the other hand, she provokes tremendous emotions in people who are close to her.
Apart from Becky’s typical attributes, such as clever, selfish, courageous, active, unscrupulous or desiring of social rise, there is one thing which is not discussed as often but it can be one of the most determining factors of her life. She is extremely cool-
18
headed. For example, after Rawdon’s departure to the battlefield, she examines property he left her and she is considering her opportunities after his possible death. It seems she is a person without emotional intelligence. It is a question if she does not understand the pain she has caused for many times or if she enjoys “the groans of a person stinging under defeat” (Thackeray 288).
To understand Becky’s behaviour, it is good to know her aims. The two most significant are to survive and gain money and position. It is important to say Becky has no one to help her and that can be the reason why Thackeray shows sympathy for her.
She has only a couple of choices: find a husband and be wealthy or accept her fate and become a governess. Unlike rich women, she has to fight for her place at the marriage market herself and she knows only strong people survive in this world. She decides that she will survive even if it will be “through unscrupulous tricks and opportunism, cleverly exploiting the vanity and snobbery” (Fleischmann 56). For her, survival of the fittest means that she gains not only position but also enough fortune. How important money is for her can be seen in the sentence that she would be a good wife for 5,000 per year.4 Another situation which supports this opinion about Becky is when Sir Pitt proposes marriage to her and “Becky is sorry because she has misplayed her hand ... As Sir Pitt’s wife, she would be rich now” (Alexander 283). She believes that being wealthy is a kind of protection. As weapons in her survival mission she uses mocking and irony against women, provoking and flattering against men, pretending against all people and, primarily, telling lies. The first person she is able to successfully deceive by lies is not a man but Miss Pinkerton who gives her education and accommodation. Then there are Amelie, Rawdon, Jos and many others. Becky has been kind of an actress her whole life: “Becky’s Gaunt House triumph simply confirms the extent to which her informal performances have already been rewarded throughout the novel” (Jadwin 678).
The last question is if her effort is successful. Ely in the article The Psychology of Becky Sharp claims her all life is abortive. She is not popular among girls at school then she fails in making a relationship with Jos, underestimates the game with Crawleys and never creates a real friendship. She does not experience the profundity of life instead she moves on the surface. On the one hand, because of the lack of support and permanent loses she cannot afford to be sensitive; on the other hand, she has to break
4 Richard Kaye writes it is “approximately £160,000 or £250,000 by today’s standards” (724).
19
the rules. And one interesting idea, which is worthy of noticing even if the author of this article does not share this opinion, as a conclusion: “Becky was a gambler. Neither money nor position was the real lure, but the excitement of the game” (Ely 33).
4.1.2. Amelia
Most frequently, articles about Amelia’s personality mention words such as passive, loving, faithful, boring, kind, sweet, self-sacrificing, weak, gentle, cultivated and beautiful (but not sexy). Although there are also negative connotations in this list, it can be said that she seems to be a conventional positive heroine of the Victorian period.
At first sight, she is the true lady who is to be an obedient wife and daughter, a sexually inexperienced bride and a loving mother. Amelia corresponds with Victorian requirements of femininity, in other words, admiring her husband, being “The Angel in the House” and an accessory of a man. Nevertheless, Amelia is able to gain something from this passive position. The problem is it is not her first husband but Dobbin who serves her. It could be said she is a mix of positive and negative characteristics.
The first attribute which determines Amelia’s personality is her naivety. She trusts everyone and is not able to detect pretending which means she is probably not able to pretend. The article written by Bolchi is indeed interesting when this matter is discussed. It is proved there that Thackeray uses emotional words “cry” and “shout”
more often for Amelia’s speech than for any other character. In her naivety she shows all her emotions and when she is crying it is a sincere reaction. It has a relation to the fact that Amelia is easily touched by people’s sad fate which means it is not difficult to deceive her and gain from her whatever the person wants. And so her naivety can hardly be taken as a completely positive quality.
The second important part of Amelia’s characteristic is her passivity. In Vanity Fair, a parable to her real life can be found in the stage play. There is “opposition between her as the passive Iphigenia – victim, and Becky as the active Clytemnestra”
(Sutherland 20). In other words, Amelia is a suffering saint. No one probably would be able to question her inactivity. Generally, she is not able to do an independent action.
Basically, she only reacts to actions of other people (especially men) for the whole book. It could be caused by the fact that she believes the myth about women being inferior to men. The other reason why she was passive can be her emotionality. She still needs someone’s help and support. For example, she is not able to deal with George
20
having gone to fight and stress completely paralyses her. It follows that such personality is not active from nature. The conclusion may be that her passive loyalty to her husband is not caused by positive sides of her but by the fact that “she lacks the strength and courage to face the truth” (Melani).
The last topic which should be discussed is a question why Amelia is so ready to sacrifice herself for others, whereas the majority of the society is able to sacrifice a lot only for their own good? Unfortunately, the author of this thesis has to agree with literary scholars who claim it is not a positive quality. It is in her nature to sacrifice herself because she sees herself as “such a miserable wicked sinner” (Thackeray 543).
She does not like herself and, consequently, she thinks she does not deserve anything better than suffering. However, people do not appreciate it and so the misery comes because “she did not respect herself any more than the world respected her” (Thackeray 542). Her lack of self-esteem can be seen also in her relation to her physical appearance.
Her brother Jos probably takes care of his appearance more than Amelia. The presumable reason is that she transfers her vanity to the picture of George which she herself created.
4.1.3. Men
Men are more or less in a shadow of the above-mentioned women in Vanity Fair. At first sight, it seems that Rawdon, George and Jos have nothing in common.
Nevertheless, one attribute can be assigned to all of them. They are a parody of the traditional depiction of a hero in literature at that time. For instance, these men are portrayed looking at themselves in a mirror, which is taken as an attribute of a woman.
In a symbolic way, it means they are vain and fascinated by themselves.
4.1.3.1. Rawdon
The first man who should be characterised is Rawdon because he is probably the most noticeable of men. Generally, literary scholars describe him as not so intelligent, handsome, a loving father and a person with a bad reputation. There is a letter for Amelia where one passage about him is written. He is characterized by his action: he is a womanizer, despises his father and spends money like water. The last mentioned attribute must be important for Becky’s interest in him because if he is not careful with money, he will probably be disinclined to invest in her. Talking about physical
21
appearance, he could be a hero of the Victorian period but he lacks his moral and intellectual qualities. Paradoxically, his unattractive brother has them. According to Moler, the Victorian idol is split into two characters (178).
At the beginning, Rawdon is quite similar to George. Both of them are quite selfish and enjoy the same activities. However, the marriage with Becky changes Rawdon – he loves his wife and especially his son.5 Rawdon sees his marriage as a big change in his life. The affection is obvious during his farewell before the battle. When he is going to fight, he prays and tries to secure his pregnant wife’s future by leaving all valuable property to her. He seems to be more sensitive than his wife and more devoted to her than she is to him. It is possible to say that Becky and Rawdon changed their roles in the marriage. In other words, Rawdon is uxorious, which was seen as a failure of masculine energy in the 19th century.
4.1.3.2. George
George shares some attributes with Rawdon: he is young, naive and infatuated with himself. Figuratively speaking, he is blind, not able to see anything except himself and thus he does not understand the reality of the society and does not know people despise him. His selfishness is very well distinguishable when he, going to the battle, leaves his wife without making any provision for her. Despite his vanity, he has nothing effeminate in his appearance, the other way around; he may look like a hero. Talking about his effeminacy, another fact must be mentioned. He uses criticism and rumours as weapons to destroy Becky’s relationships, which has always been considered to be women’s domain. His self-admiration may be caused by his father’s education when he was told for many times he is special. According to Cole, the consequence of it is that he “fetishizes his own body” (167).
4.1.3.3. Jos
“As Proust might have said, Jos practically is a woman” (Litvak 240). This sentence may sound strange because physically Jos is a man – unattractive, uncertain, nervous and shy - but still a man. Nevertheless, there are so many female attributes that Litvak’s statement cannot be seen as a complete nonsense. Jos is the complete opposite of a “patrician hero” (Moler). His vanity is enormous. He dresses exaggeratedly, is
5 George’s marriage does not take enough time to have any chance to change him.
22
over-decorated and not elegant. Not only his appearance but also his behaviour has hardly anything in common with a true gentleman. He is more coward than most women as we can see during the battle. Amelia and Becky want to stay there, Jos wants to leave. There is one thing in which Jos is like Becky. Lies are a part of their lives because Jos is unable to confess he behaved like a coward during the battle and instead he creates stories about his heroic behaviour.
4.1.3.4. Dobbin
As you might have seen Dobbin’s name was not written in chapter 4.1.3. The reason why he was omitted is that he does not share some attributes of other men in the book. Many people see him as a real hero – honest, unselfish, soft-hearted, brave, shy and loyal. No literary scholars deny his qualities. He is an idealist who projects his romantic illusions to other people, especially George and Amelia. For example, “he [falls] in love with an idealized image rather than the actual Amelie” (Melani). His relationship with Amelia is a completely determining factor of his life. Although he shows no feelings and respects she is to be a future wife of George, he defends Amelia and takes care of her benefits, e.g. he tries to compel Jos to look after her even though he does not benefit from it. As mentioned before, Dobbin’s feelings for Amelia are hidden and he hides them even from himself. One could say it is a manifestation of hypocrisy which was, to some extent, normal in the society of this period of time.
Generally, this unattractive man was different from others because of his behaviour, values or his relationships to Becky and Amelia. Becky enchants all men, except Dobbin − her charm does not work on him and so she dislikes him.
23
4.2. How to find a husband?
This chapter shows women’s life before marriage, analyses their limits, expectations of the society, and also describes consequences of their potential failure. In order to understand this topic, it is necessary to know that it used to be a world where marriage was not primarily a matter of love but was inspired by money and social status (Odubajo, 9227-9228). The importance of being wealthy is a serious complication at the marriage market for Becky as well as for Amelia, but Becky knows about these limits and calculates with it. The society of the 19th century saw spontaneous sexuality as a threat and expected that marriage should be based more on rational family’s consideration than passion (Utrio 69).6 Vanity Fair also presents this norm when Thackeray writes that marriage is not a matter of passionate love (45). It may not be only a decision of a family but there is no place for passion and, definitely, a family must agree with the partnership. In Thackeray’s time, women were commodities, which were sold to future husbands either by their families or themselves. We, people of the 21st century, are shocked that girls used to be presented at the marriage market at the age of 15 or 16 (Lenderová 52) or by seeing a wedding as a business. How natural it used to be is possible to see in Vanity Fair. In the novel, it is written the dead wife of Mr. Crawley sacrificed herself because she had loved another man. However, it is suggested this is normal: “mothers and daughters are making the same bargain every day” (Thackeray 131).
Requirements which were demanded from young women in Thackeray’s time will be discussed here. An ideal woman was rather passive, not over-educated with high social position and rich. Vanity Fair suggests that there was an official view of women what should be important at the marriage market but men had a different point of view.
Female ideals were based on romantic literature with heroic women whereas men desired a domestic type of woman and men determined belief of the whole society. This theory could explain the reason why Amelia has many friends at Mrs. Pinkerton’s but later she is lost in the society. Amelia embodies the men’s idol and it is in nature of
6 Amelia and Rawdon violate this rule in Vanity Fair and moreover, their future marriages are not accepted by families. It is possible to say according to knowledge gained in the previous chapters that Amelia’s and Becky’s fates are in contrast again. Even their secret marriage is not the same case. Amelia loves her future husband but he does not love her, Becky’ relationship with Rawdon is the other way around.
24
women to envy and hate such a person. However, being such a passive idol includes some danger. Generally, such people are quite often seen as boring and that probably happens to George. He fails in his affection for Amelia. He himself credits it to her loyalty, in other words, boring passivity. What is appropriate to add, for the most of girls living in the higher class included Amelia it is typical that their family protects them, guarantees their virtue and teaches them to admire and trust men, especially their father and future husband (Utrio 185).
When we look at the previous paragraph, it is obvious Becky has many disadvantages at the marriage market – no family, especially missing mother who would arrange her future marriage or reputation of an artist’s daughter. The only positives are mentioned by Mr. Sedley (Jos’s father). He says she is good humoured, clever and that she belongs to “white” race: “better her, my dear, than a black Mrs. Sedley” (Thackeray 47). Generally, Becky’s situation offers her rather to be a mistress of a rich benefactor than a wife of a gentleman. Those lovers used to be women who were well-educated, beautiful but not well-off (Utrio 126). Becky’s life has made her a much more experienced woman than ladies of the same age are. These passages from Vanity fair can serve as evidence: “though in years, our heroin was old in life and experience”
(Thackeray 82) or Amelia ”blushes as only young ladies of seventeen know how to blush, and as Miss Rebecca Sharp never blushed in her life (27).
Becky’s infinitesimal chances at the marriage market are revealed by the fact that George destroys her arising relationship with Jos. There is no personal problem between them but George sees that the reputation of Sedleys’ family could be endangered and so he stops this possible marriage by mocking Joseph and the reason comes out of his own mouth: “family is low enough already, without her. A governess is all very well, but I’d rather have a lady for my sister-in-law. I’m a liberal man; but I’ve proper pride” (Thackeray 53). The event which depicts Becky’s position very well is her refusal of Sir Pitt’s marriage proposal. He is honest to her in his anger and says her value at the marriage market is zero (Thackeray 133). Also for other people, it is unbelievable “that an old gentleman of station should fall on his knees to a penniless governess ... that a penniless governess should refuse a baronet with four thousand a year – there were mysteries” (Thackeray 135). No one considers his age or physical appearance as a reason, in other words, these matters are not important, money and
25
position are more. It is possible to expect that Becky’s only reason for her refusal is her marriage with Rawdon because she regrets it.
As shown in Chapter 3.1., the power during arranging a marriage was divided especially between children and parents. The most common situation in the 19th century was a parents’ veto. Both couples, Becky and Rawdon as well as Amelie and George, violate this system and so the punishment by their families appears. Phyllis Susan Dee elaborates a theory about relationship triangles considering the activity of people. The first mentioned is a triangle between George, Amelia and his father, where Mr. Osborne acts as a mediator who is the most active and tries to create and then stop George’s relationship with Amelia. The second one is presented by George, Amelia and Dobbin where although in love with Amelia Dobbin mediates George’s and Amelia’s marriage.
The last triangle represents Becky, George and Rawdon. This one is the only eternal triangle when George admires Rawdon but at the same time desires his wife. Thus Dee argues in her article that many people could be active during creating future marriages – family members, young men or girls. Are those protagonists of marriage market depicted also in Vanity Fair?
As suggested sooner the family was extremely important for a girl’s chances for a good marriage. Members created opportunities to meet a future husband and also negotiated with him. The reason was the norm of the society that a woman should be passive because it was forbidden for her to feel a sexual desire. Subsequent examples of Amelia’s and Becky’s situation illustrate it well. Amelia’s family is initiative at the marriage market even if they have financial problems, e.g. immediately after her homecoming her mother “has already arranged a score of little schemes for the settlement of her Amelia” (Thackeray 19). It is important not only for them but also because of Amelia’s chances to keep at least an illusion of their possession and position.
Amelia is passive during this problematic time and does not try to improve their position or her chances.7 Becky is trying to enter at the market too but her position is completely different. “Task of husband-hunting is generally entrusted by young persons to their mammas” but she has no one (Thackeray 19). All girls do a lot to be married (for example, learning to sing and play) but real actions are done by their mothers.
Chapters which demonstrate the strength of parents’ opinion about the future partner of
7 Her passivity is also mental because she is not able to admit that something is wrong about George and calculates with it.
26
their children are especially those which deal with time after social fall of Amelia’s family. Her father is ready to accept the marriage (but not give permission) only to insult Osborne’s family, in other words, he uses his daughter as a weapon while Mr.
Osborne behaves like a procurer and tries to secure a better wife for his son. When George refuses to obey, he threatens him to take his money and position as a result of his inappropriate marriage.
This thesis mentions for many times that the society expected a man is to be active and choose his future wife based on their moral qualities. It was believed if a man is not active in relation to women, he is not satisfied and ready to accept his role. The first man whose depiction violates it is Jos. He is less active than Becky, e.g. after the evening Jos and Becky spend together he is sleeping and she is lying and thinks about their future, and even his own father describes him as a weak man who will be hunted by a woman. On the whole, there is only one moment when Jos is active – under the influence of alcohol. George seems to be more active in his relation to Amelia – opposes his father’s decision, initiates being alone with her or wants to kiss her. On the other hand, he is not ready to confess his feelings and hides them behind an agreement between families when he tells his father “didn’t you order me to marry her, and ain’t I a good boy? “ (Thackeray 114). His marriage is not established on long-term and deep feelings, it is caused by anger and Dobbin’s influence. Dobbin is a strange person at the marriage market – he arranges a marriage of a woman he loves with another man and later he announces it to Mr. Osborne. Hardly could it be seen as a typical action of the 19th century man. At first sight, Rawdon is the real active predator but it is Becky who arranges their “coincidental” meetings. So the men are active but chances to be active, in other words traps, are created either by families or women.
Amelia is just a passive puppet at the marriage market – completely devoted and faithfully waiting for George’s decision to marry her. On the other hand, Becky is a person who is active and able to break rules, for example, it is her who initiates the first physical contact between her and Jos which is quite shocking for the society of the 19th century. Despite it, she is intelligent enough to behave innocently and make men feel comfortable in her presence. She tries to make Jos talk about his feelings but at the moment when she believes he will tell her about them, she is ready to be passive as it is a social standard. She is depicted as Femme fatal; someone who is able to engage men’s attention by one glance so much that they “proposed something like marriage”
27
(Thackeray 12). Her strategy is quite complex – be kind, flatter, show interest in everything people around her do or like and provoke and torture Jos in a kind way. Her other quality is the ability to think in advance. During one conversation with Amelia about Jos Becky gives calculated questions relating to his wealth and (non-existing) marriage. Amelia cannot detect why her friend asks these questions but Becky knows that a more experienced listener would reveal her intentions and she is ready to improve her skills of pretending. She is also a self-confident player at the marriage market, which is substantiated by sentences like: “If Mr. Joseph Sedley is rich and unmarried, why should I not marry him” (Thackeray 17). It is possible to say she behaves like men - they or their families chose who they will marry, not a woman. She is also ready to admit that she would marry not for love but as a matter of sense. Other women may think the same but they usually hide it behind the romantic speech.
One important question should be answered here. Why did parents try to keep the veto at the marriage market? Many historians claim the veto functioned as an instrument of regulation and prevention of unequal marriage which was seen as a source of social unease. In the highest classes of the society, power and money were such an important motivation for marriage that it could not be separated from other reasons.
Thus a wedding was quite often a mix of feelings and “old-fashioned economic horse- trading” (Stone 202). Parents endeavoured to let their children freedom of choice, nevertheless, without endangering their social position. Meetings of young people descending from the same social class were arranged to meet their future partners.
Amelia’s and George’s example shows they were brought up to like each other. The complication appears when Amelia’s family loses their finances and position, which is an obvious handicap for her. Their marriage ceases to be supported and turns into undesirable.8 No wonder that many people see Becky as a threat to this system. In the beginning, her story gives the impression of being a typical story of the literature of Romanticism. A poor orphan without money and social position who used to live in an institution for women enters into the world of adults. Other women are rude to her because of her poverty and low status. Soon she meets a man who is above her and who she could live with. But the hero is Jos and that is the end of the traditional story because he is not active and so she has to try to hunt him personally. And this activity is condemned to failure.
8 George’s decision to marry Amelia was considered by many people as an act of charity.
28
Consequences of the failure at the marriage market were serious especially for women. We must realize that engagement used to be a fundamental event and there had to be a good reason to cancel it. That is why Mr. Osborne talks about Mr. Sedley in a bad way. Neither of them really cares about Amelia’s feelings. Her spontaneous love is obvious for the society and so everyone can speak about it. Many people see it as her fault and believe she is punished for her affection, e.g. ladies talk about “criminal impudence ... horrid familiarities” (Thackeray 162). She takes the crash of her love as a fatal event and “her appearance was so ghastly and her look of despair so pathetic”
(Thackeray 166). These problems also cause a change in Amelia’s psyche. She is more than before in an enormously humble position towards George; for example, she even kisses his hand. This may lead him to believe “he was making a tremendous sacrifice in marrying” her (Thackeray 178). Hardly could it be seen as a healthy basis for a relationship.
On the contrary, Becky sees her failure with Jos only as one lost battle in a war despite the fact that she has to leave the house of Amelia’s family. She does not give up her dreams about a rich husband, is ready to learn from the first bad experience and as she says “become a mother to herself” (Thackeray 79). A new couple, Becky and Rawdon, is created by the activity of both of them. However, something has changed about Becky. She is not as sweet as she used to be to Jos. She behaves self-confidently and decides herself who will be close to her. In other words, she keeps her own promise to be a mother to herself.
29
4.3. Role and position of the main heroines in their marriage 4.3.1. Participation in social rise of their families
In the context of Victorian marriage, it is suitable to mention that people used to emphasize women’s responsibility for a household which “was the only reflection of her achievement and her importance” and tried to keep them out of the public life (Calder 103). The society did not believe that women would need an alternative to domestic life and saw them “as irrational and unsuited to public-sphere activities”
(Saville 529). It is obvious Becky is less and less a woman according to common standards of this time: not only she does not like children but she also knows her own value very well: “did not men give up their gayest balls and parties in order to pass the evening with me” (Thackeray 13). Men were supposed to be active in the public sphere and the functioning household was seen as a condition for their successful career and place where they could relax. It follows that the lives of individual members of a household were separated. It is connected with the common conviction that responsibility should not be shared. This opinion could have caused Amelia’s lack of interest in the social rise of her family, in other words, she may believe it is George’s business whereas Becky, not a member of higher society, was not influenced by this point of view and thus she is active. Active or not, marriage meant completely new responsibility for a woman: for the first time she was expected to manage wisely with money and what is more, she also had to improve the social image of her husband by arranging parties or dinners. That was the reason young ladies were trained in music, painting and dancing.
Generally, Amelia is passive and Becky active. The question is what enables Becky to be such a person. Abrams writes that the dominant position of the husband in a household could have been endangered especially by the economic insecurity (81).
Just Rawdon’s inability as a breadwinner gives Becky enough place to play her games.
It would be a mistake to omit Becky’s “militant personality and relentless pursuit of social mobility” (Pietka 239), which must have been seen as alarming. She loves being active, risking and adventurous, and alongside she has no scruples. Due to it, she is able to use her acting to reach high positions. According to Moler, Rawdon’s low intelligence causes that Becky accepts male’s role in order to secure social and economic rise of the family. If this character is really stupid is not obvious but it is
30
evident Becky thinks about him this way. She sees him as her silly tool or puppet. On the one hand that is what she wants, on the other hand she feels that everything depends on her and misses a prop: “‘If he had but a little more brains,” she thought to herself,
“I might take something of him.'” (Thackeray 154). She controls Rawdon very much, for example, she even dictates his letters which should affect his aunt’s feelings and open them the door into his family and scolds him. Finally, Rawdon loses his position in the eyes of other people and he is “Colonel Crawley no more, [he is] Mrs Crawley’s husband” (Thackeray 357). Becky does not need him and tolerates him only because of society. She says: I “would have left him at home, but that virtue ordained that [my]
husband should be by [my] side to protect” (Thackeray 463). The claim that Becky is more capable is also supported by the behaviour of other people towards the couple.
Both Mrs Bute and Miss Crawley probably see Becky as the more dangerous part of the two. That is why Mrs Bute attacks her because of her family background or Miss Crawley invites only Rawdon to solve the situation. Their aim is to eliminate her.
Becky’s goals are not easily recognizable because they change. Firstly, she wants to solve their economic problems. In the context of money, it is necessary to say that the sources are unreliable because it is gambling. It is Becky who helps Rawdon lure young men into coming to their house so he can have a win over them.9 The system works cleverly: Becky warns young men not to play with her husband but, logically, that only provokes them into playing because these gentlemen want to impress her by winning. But their house gains bad reputation and her charm ceases to work. And so Becky, the star of Parisian society, and her husband have to move back to England. Another permanent problem is their debts. Becky has no choice than being step-by-step more inventive in solving these situations and soon “there was no woman in Europe who could talk a creditor over as she could” (Thackeray 201). Her ability to obtain and use information should be mentioned as well. The fact that they were able to live without money in higher society for many months shows how successful Becky was. This is where Amelia fails completely. No wonder, she is getting more cynical and everything is about money for her, e.g. her famous sentence about being a good woman for 5,000 pounds.
9 Real case substantiated by Arthur Shebo shows that it was not so rare way to gain property.
31
Secondly – after their return to England, she wants to make Rawdon’s family accept them, especially to be “acknowledged by the head of the family” (Thackeray 420). Their situation is not good because they are isolated from the Crawley family which accuses them that their marriage “dragged the name of Crawley through the mud” (Thackeray 305). The first chance to infiltrate the family again is the funeral of Sir Pitt, the head of the family. Her plans are long-term and daring: “I mean that Lady Jane shall present me at Court next year. I mean that your brother shall give you a seat in Parliament.” (Thackeray 387). She has no feelings of guilt because of her former behaviour to the Crawleys and shows no fear.
The final step in her plans is to be received by high society and “from her wit, talent, and energy, indeed merited a place of honour in Vanity Fair” (Thackeray 328).
She is able to represent herself as well as her husband, in other words, she masters ability to behave like a lady of the highest society in a minute. She knows very well that the greatest way how to secure the society’s appreciation is to be in contact with the noblest people. On that account, she desires to be received by the King. Although they have no property, Becky is a star of society. It is obvious this is not only a matter of money: whereas Becky wins, Amelia being in the same position loses. During their marriages, both of them are ignored by ladies – Amelia because of banishing from the Osborne family and Becky because of her low-birth. The reason only one of them is successful is a psychological one. For sensitive Amelia, it is a real problem to be excluded from ladies’ conversations and she is not able to play the game. On the other hand, Becky is aware of her limits (governess, debts and hazard) and does not trouble herself about them.
4.3.2. Being a mother
Recent literature has noticed that motherhood used to be the official peak of each woman’s life, prove of her virtue and fulfilling of her existence (Abrams 102-103).
A married heterosexual couple was seen as an ideal unit of the society and women judged the qualities of other ladies according to their abilities to create a perfect home.
Becky’s and Amelia’s approach to children presents one of the main contrasts in Vanity Fair. Nonetheless, Thackeray condemns both extremes: cold-hearted disregard as well as passionate ownership of the child. Both women fulfil the main role of the 19th-century ladies – to bear a son and heir, yet the consequences are different than it
32
could be expected. Neither of these children secures the position their mothers seek in their husbands’ families. This may be the reason why Becky does not love her son – he failed to gain love and money from Miss Crawley. Becky, as a mother, is compared to a statue: “Mother is the name for God in lips and hearts of little children, and here was one who was worshipping a stone” (Thackeray 359). As a demonstration of this fact, Becky’s visit at the Crawleys can be used when, normally, she is not interested in her own son but now she is pretending interest in her brother-in-law’s children and she is also kissing her own child.10 Later, Becky might see him as a barrier or her weak point because children usually tell the truth. In other words, he could unintentionally destroy his mother’s reputation. Modern readers feel like the most alarming moment of Becky’s relation to her son the situation when she beats him after he heard her singing to Lord Steyne. Common interpretations show it as a way of how to characterize Becky as a bad woman, who is not able to have a normal relationship with her child, or they suggest she was afraid of a public scandal. However, this thesis agrees with Andrew von Hendy that she would be more careful among other people if she feared a scandal. She is bored, considering being unfaithful and the appearing of her child makes her feel guilty (280).
In other words, her motivation is to dispose herself of the unpleasant feeling by hitting her son.
By contrast, Amelia is fully recovered from depression by bearing her son. All her feelings for George she redirects to her child. It is possible to say “this child was her being” (Thackeray 338). However, she is too sensitive about her son, e.g. she does not allow anyone to take care of him. As Amelia used to break rules only because of George, now, she does it for her son. Although it is in her nature to be sweet, weak and ready to obey, she is unkind to anyone who she sees as a threat to her and the son. When he meets George’s sister, his aunt, Amelia reacts hysterically since she does not want to share him with anyone, even if he could be her way to Osborne’s family and thus to higher society and a better life. Her bond to him is unhealthy due to two reasons: she loves him as George’s memento and also as a compensation for the lack of her social life. She is so emotionally attached to him that every “proof of the boy’s affection”
delights her (Thackeray 533).
10 It is possible to say these actions are not normal because her son wonders publically and says she never does it at home (Thackeray 428).
