“There was not much in it; neither gold nor gems; only a baby’s little worsted shoe, rolled up in a piece of paper, and a tiny lock of pale and silky yellow hair, evidently taken from a baby’s head.” (32)
One thing that immediately comes across is how unusual the content of Lady Audley’s secret drawer is. Kept hidden away in this drawer, “lined with purple velvet,” is a child’s “little worsted shoe” and a lock of “pale and silky yellow hair” (32). The fact that Lady Audley hides both of these items reveals two important ideas: 1. Lady Audley likely has memories associated with these items, which is why she wishes to preserve them. 2. The fact that she finds these items significant, but does not keep them preserved in a visible space, indicates that there’s a reason for that. Given the usage of “little” and tiny” in this passage to describe the baby’s remnants, the child must have been very young. Additionally, the secrecy of these items leads me to believe that Lady Audley may have had a first born before her marriage to Sir Michael Audley.
By ending the chapter on Phoebe’s and Luke’s discovery, I believe Braddon is foretelling what will come later in the novel: confusion over Lady Audley’s early life. While I believe this is one aspect of this passage, there may be another layer to it. Mary Elizabeth Braddon could have included this to combat gender roles at the time, which suggested women follow a prudent life before marriage. The prospect of Lady Audley having a child runs against this stereotype of women. At other points in the book, Braddon has described Lady Audley as a “fragile figure” and “as girlish as if she had but just left the nursery” (50). The image depicted here is a complete 180 from the Lady Audley whose past is eluded to by the drawer lined with purple velvet. In this way, I believe the author includes these depictions to tear them down later on in the book. If the readings to this point have hinted at anything, Lady Audley’s Secret could be one that challenges Victorian notions of femininity.
I as well thought this was an interesting and important passage in the novel. It is one line, yet contains so much mysterious information that is critical to the book as a whole. I have had multiple ideas about what these hidden objects are/what they mean to Lady Audley. Everything the author of this post mentioned is what I believe too. It is quite possible Lady Audley had a child out of wedlock, and it is something she must keep secret. If so, where do you think the child is now? Do you think Lady Audley goes to London periodically to see the child? There is a lot of confusion and ideas circling around this topic. Do you think Phoebe and Lady Audley have discussed this matter? I am anxious to see what the lock of hair and a baby’s shoe mean to this story.
Linking with my reply to the blog post, ‘Red With…?’, Lady Audley’s hidden keepsakes are of no monetary value, ‘neither gold nor gems.’, however to her they are priceless. They are hidden away, because if found, Lady Audley’s marriage and status would be jeopardised, leaving her vulnerable to poverty once more. These memorabilia act as her ‘bait’, which Phoebe understands as soon as she finds the items, and will probably use them later on in the book as leverage against Lady Audley which is why Phoebe says to Luke, ‘I’d rather have this than the diamond bracelet you would have liked to take.’ . So in some ways, these ‘useless’ items of no monetary value become much more important than jewels or gems.
The idea of gender roles is a notion that reoccurs quite frequently throughout this novel. The image of the woman is always depicted as “fragile” and “childish” that it almost makes the reader wonder whether or not this image is true. During the last couple chapters of the first section, it becomes very evident that the role of women at that time was to earn a so-called “classical” education, and then serve as a wife and mother.
However, the one character that does not fit this stereotypical image is Alicia Audley. Alicia is a bold woman who is not afraid to express her strong hatred towards Robert Audley (118-119).