Author: The gaslight flickers

The poem “No, Thank You, John” by Christina Rossetti is very interesting in light of the time in which it was written as well as in light of the other texts we have discussed in class up to this point. While the ideal Victorian woman is docile and lady like, the speaker in this poem has a strong, defiant voice that is almost sassy in her rejection of man who says he is in love with her. The speaker of “No, Thank You, John” is a new and independent type of women emerging in this era as a result of the Industrial Revolution and changing social norms. Perhaps this is because the author of the poem is a woman surrounded by men who definitely developed a strong personality and had to be defensive around her brother and his fellow members of the Pre-Raphaelite brotherhood she was not allowed to join. The speaker of this poem is a stark contrast to the other female characters we have encountered in our texts thus far. In Dracula Lucy also rejects two suitors, as she has three men who want to marry her. Yet her rejection of her suitors was sweet and kind. She even mentions that she feels bad that she had to let them down. This kind of portrayal of a Victorian woman is typical in many texts, however it is interesting that this woman soon becomes corrupted into an overtly sexual monster. Mina also is a perfect example of what a woman should be and is loyal to her husband, eventually being saved from turning into a vampire. Bram Stoker seems to suggest that a woman’s sexuality and strength can turn her into a monster. Even in Lady Audley’s Secret, despite having been written by a woman, Lady Audley went crazy as a result of trying to marry up and make a better life for herself after she is abandoned by her husband. The poem; “No, Thank You, John” portrays a new kind of independent woman who doesn’t seem to be punished by her actions and the end and takes charge of her life. This poem is interesting to think about in terms of the other texts we have looked at this semester, as well as the era in which they were produced. In Dracula and even Lady Audley’s Secret, there definitely is an anxiety about what will happen if women are independent and in control of themselves. In both cases they end up becoming a type of monster and going insane. While Lady Audley simply becomes a crazy murderess, Lucy is physically transformed into a sexual, bloodsucking vampire. “No, Thank You, John” is the first time we see this type of women, and she is perhaps better off in the end of the poem, ridding herself of John. There is still the annoyance that John expects that the speaker will love him in return, however things seem to be changing at this point, introducing a new type of modern woman who defies men and ends up being perfectly fine.

One of the most interesting reoccurring themes in Dracula is xenophobia. Both Johnathan Harker and Count Dracula himself point out and comment on oddities, blaming the country of Transylvania on them. The most interesting part about this is that many times it is in fact Dracula who uses his country as an excuse. We see this many times throughout the text. For example, after the incident where Harker cuts himself shaving and the Count lunges at his neck, he states “Take care how you cut yourself. It is more dangerous than you think in this country (Stoker 43).” This quote seems to highlight a distinct difference between England and Transylvania and makes Harker more wary. Dracula seems to be using his country to justify his own action, as perhaps he realizes the English look down upon Transylvania as undeveloped and barbaric. Yet Dracula seems to be genuinely warning him, and perhaps this comment is only to gain the trust of Harker, as he realizes his country will be a believable excuse. Earlier in the novel, Dracula does a similar thing, by emphasizing the difference between Transylvania and England saying “Our ways are not your ways, and there shall be to you many strange things (Stoker 35).” In this quote the Count again seems to be justifying the supernatural happenings by using his unmodern country as an excuse. If Dracula understands this difference between the two countries, does that make him more civilized and more trustworthy to Harker? What’s really interesting about this is that he seems to take pride and passion in his country’s history when relating it to Harker, and simply undermined it with such warnings the next minute. Dracula seems to also be using this “difference” the English seem to focus on to dismiss the warnings of the common people Harker encountered on the way to his house. In the passage where Dracula is explaining to Harker why he wants to perfect his English he says “The common people know me, and I am master (Stoker 34).” This also brings in the issue of class and nobility, as Dracula seems to be hinting at Harker that he is less barbaric, and above all the people that warned him about coming to the castle and were frightened by it. If that is the case, Harker need not be afraid of Dracula, as he is more trustworthy. That entire passage also seems to highlight that Dracula understands the difference in sophistication between the English and foreigners. He almost gives off the impression of being obsessed with the English way of life, which will also hopefully make Harker less suspicious of intentions he might have.

The presence of these passages in the text seem to contribute to an underlying sense of xenophobia that was so prevalent during the time in England. Was this intentionally put into the novel by Stoker, either to frighten readers about other countries and foreigners? Or was it perhaps so prevalent at the time that Stoker unintentionally inserted xenophobic aspects with realizing. Either way it is an important theme to note, especially considering the time which the novel is a product of.

 

”You have conquered—a MAD WOMAN!”
“A mad woman!” cried Mr. Audley
“Yes, a mad woman. When you say that I killed George Talboys you say the truth. When you say that I murdered him treacherously and foully, you lie. I killed him because I AM MAD! Because my intellect is a little way upon the wrong side of that narrow boundary-line between sanity and insanity; because, when George Talboys goaded me, as you have goaded me, and reproached me, and threatened me, my mind, never properly balanced, utterly lost its balance, and I was mad!”
This passage is interesting and reveals several different things about the novel and Lady Audley herself. The first thing that struck me was that in the chapter titled “In the Lime Walk” there is a passage where Robert speaks about a conspiracy, Lady Audley cried “a conspiracy” and George launches into a long rant about what the conspiracy is. This passage has the same structure, although with the roles of Robert and Lady Audley reversed. When accused straight out, Lady Audley almost takes the place of a man in her outspokenness. This makes readers draw parallels between Robert and Lady Audley. Is Robert just as mad as Lady Audley in his obsession with George? The way Lady Audley presents her confession is also interesting. While the explanation of her madness might be an exciting twist for the readers, there appears to be more in it. She does not seem crazy when she speaks, but rather seems to be trying to convince Robert that she is justified in her actions. Perhaps because of the time period, she could not come out and say she was doing what is justified and accepted for any man to do, but when a woman does the same thing, she must be considered crazy. This is also showed through the parallel form. Lady Audley also threaten Robert in this passage. She seems to still be power hungry, deriving that power from the fear she is instilling in him. When she says “When George Talboys goaded me, as you have goaded me…” In this Lady Audley threatens to do to Robert what she did to George. The diction and form of this passage is also telling. The author begins sentences with because, uses long sentences with dashes and commas, and in my version of the novel capitalizing the words “I am mad” several times. Perhaps this is to mimic how a lunatic would sound.
Over all the passage seems to be directly telling readers two things. I first brings up the idea of a double standard between men and women, as using the same form as a previous passage between Robert and Lady Audley and reversing roles, now calling Lady Audley mad for acting and speaking in the way Robert did. This only adds to the novels interesting discussion of men and women. The second thing the passage does for the novel as a whole is add to Lady Audley’s complex character. It appears her last defense is to plead insane, and yet she is cunning and calculated in doing so. In the Victorian Era, madness was viewed very poorly as well, and people who were crazy were also treated very poorly. I find that this passage almost links craziness with womanhood, as the more and more you push a women, the more insane she will become.

“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. Phoebe’s eyes dilated as she examined the little packet.”
This passage at the end of the third chapter is both startling, and extremely telling. Some really great points about this passage were made in Jumpman’s post yesterday, and this post will also attempt to make sense of this strange passage. There passage within itself is very unusual, even how the small packet is described is odd and off putting. The fact that the secret package contains both a baby shoe and a lock of baby hair might not have been odd for a woman during the era to keep, however the way these items dealing with babies are contrasted with descriptions of that make them seem old and worn-out is off putting. A baby’s shoe being described as “worsted” and even the hair described as “pale yellow” gives these objects an unsettling aura. It makes the reader wonder what could have possibly happened to the child if these items are so beaten up and worn out. This items also add intrigue and mystery to Lady Audley herself and reveal traits about her character. We of course wonder why it is she has these items and what they tell about her life, but even the way their hidden adds to Lady Audley’s enigma. The items are stuffed in the secret compartment of a chest of jewels and rolled up in a piece of paper in a little packet. This is purposely reminiscent of the ring rolled in paper that Lady Audley carries around her neck. She has an entirely unique way of folding away her secrets and stashing them like a squirrel. It makes us wonder what other secrets she has hidden away in the vast house that is a character all its own.

The passage and the following sentences also reveal something about Phoebe, as she excites at the discovery of the items and actually takes them with her. It seems that she will use them to her own advantage but what is it that she will convey about Lady Audley with them? Are the readers perhaps missing a piece of vital information that Phoebe is somehow aware of? We learn that where they were hidden away, with gold and jewels, is important as well when Phoebe says to Luke “You will bear me witness where I found this.” Either way, her excitement at the discovery not only shows their importance but also makes us hesitant to trust Phoebe and even more suspicious of Lady Audley.