Masculinity is something that is often at the forefront
of literary culture, especially for the Victorians, who despite living under a
Queen, still held the view that men were superior. The ideals a man was held to
fluctuated and changed a great deal over this time period, and what made a man
appear ‘Manly’ frequently contradicted some of the other desired tropes on more
than one occasion. If we look at Edgar Linton and Heathcliff from Wuthering heights, they both show
different aspects of the Victorian masculine figure, both were decisive, and
strong in their own way, though Heathcliff was physically powerful, emotionally
aloof a good portion of the time and is romanticized by Isabella Linton for his
self-made man-of-mystery persona. Edgar however is more sensitive, which is
also a trait desired in the Victorian man. In these two characters alone, we
can see the contradictions, and how there isn’t really a solid picture of
masculinity.
John Barton as portrayed in Gaskell’s Mary Barton seems to bridge the gap
between the feminine and the masculine, as in the first chapter of the book, he
is cradling a baby in his arms while his wife rests. Again, feminine qualities
seem to be the ideal for a ‘modern’ Victorian man. Similar to Heathcliff, John
is a strong self-made man (though he is not is as good a position). Unlike this
other ‘template’ and other tropes we have seen already courtesy of Wuthering Heights John Barton is also a
key contributor to his own community (if we put a flowery spin on political
activist) and even prior to allying with the chartists, is still portrayed as
eager to share what he has with his friends “Say two pounds missus and don’t be
stingy”. Kind, paternal and dependable, another three traits, some of which do
not align with other masculine ideals that have cropped up already, making it
even more painfully clear that the picture f masculinity for the Victorians
would differ depending on who you asked.
Stefan Collini perhaps phrases it best in his critical
analysis of Victorian literature, which reads as follows:
“For, if the supposedly
"normative" is in fact much more diverse, flexible and just plain
ragged than that imperious and tidy term suggests, then the self-generated
drama of challenges to and subversions of that allegedly controlling power
largely loses its frisson. It is, of course, true that we need organizing
concepts, and at present concepts such as "hegemonic masculinities"
offer to help us to order our perceptions of the past in telling ways.”
Thereby stating that there is no solid norm in terms of
Victorian masculinity and thus making it impossible to pin down what exactly
was considered masculine for the Victorians.
Charles Darwin is widely
acknowledged to be one of the greatest scientific minds of his time,
ground-breaking zoologist and overall visionary. Though it’s true that he is a
good portion of these things, he is also the man who gained the most from
poking weird looking animals with sticks, similar to every seven year old child
in their parent’s back garden “This slug, when disturbed, emits a very fine
purplish-red fluid which stains the water for the space of a foot around”
though it’s possible Darwin merely observed his process occurring naturally, it
is more than likely that he himself was the cause, as he later states that the
secretion “causes a sharp, stinging sensation” bravo Charlie, bravo.
Childishness is another trope that falls into the category of ‘emasculating’.
In fact his own journal undermines his own masculinity multiple times. When
meeting with Gouchos, Darwin manages to lasso his own horse and is sent flying,
hardly the strong, man-of-action we see in John Barton and Heathcliff, in fact
Darwin also defers from Edgar Linton’s Masculine template, as comparatively,
there is little duty involved here. Not only this, but Darwin later went on to
produce The Origen of the Species
something that caused immense civil unrest and questioned the existence of God
himself, hardly meeting any Victorian ideals, let alone what a man should or
should not be doing.
Oddly enough though, in terms of ideals and masculinity,
Darwin would be more at home in the 21st century, where young men
are encouraged to ‘find themselves’ and their place in society, usually through
exploration, and the childish ‘try anything’ nature Darwin adopts is more in
line with the modern day ‘Lads on tour’ mentality as opposed to that of a Victorian
gentleman.
Financial stability seems to be the only trope of
masculinity that connects a number of the candidates, even John Barton, though
poor, is able to care for his family, as indicated by his house’s description “The
fire-light danced merrily on this and really… it gave a richness of colouring”
coupled with a description of their prized china, it becomes clear that even
though they are poor, they are financially stable enough to live comfortably. In
fact out of all the common masculinity tropes that the Victorians consider
desirable, this seems to be the predominant one, the man must earn a living and
be able to support the family. Other than that, there is really little else he
is required to do. Out of the men I have listed, only one does not fit this
ideal (looking at you Charles) though the others might because they are for the
most part, fictitious, therefore more likely to meet the ideals set out by the
writers, and what they consider to be masculine.
Darwin, Charles. Voyage
of the Beagle. 1839. Ed. Janet Brown and Michael Neve. London: Penguin,
1989. Print.
Bronte, Emily. Wuthering Heights. 1847. Ed. David
Daiches. London: Penguin, 1985. Print.
Gaskell Elizibeth, Mary
Barton, London: Penguin, 1996, print
Collini, Stefan. "Having Emotions the Manly
Way," Times
Literary Supplement June 4
1999, p. 6. [A review of Trev Lynn Broughton, Men of Letters, Writing Lives:
Masculinity and literary autobiography in the late Victorian period.
No comments:
Post a Comment