“White and golden Lizzie stood, Like a lily in a flood,– Like a rock of blue-veined stone, Lashed by tides obstreperously,– Like a beacon left alone in a hoary roaring sea, Sending up a golden fire,– Like a fruit-crowned orange-tree, White with blossoms honey-sweet, Sore beset by wasp and bee,–Like a royal virgin town, Topped with gilded dome and spire, Close beleaguered by a fleet, Mad to tug her standard down” (12).
As we discussed in class, this is the moment where Lizzie is sexually assaulted, however it’s written in this implicit language that we have become so familiar with. Lizzie is described as “white and golden”, and immediately a red flag goes up. The idea of whiteness has been prevalent as a virginic and pure symbol throughout our text and this is no different. By adding in the word “golden” Rossetti suggests that there is also a kind of gold standard that Lizzie has been held to. So not only is she “white”, she is “golden” in her whiteness. She then gets compared to a lily in a flood, and immediately I thought of the painting of Ophelia in the river. Not to mention Lizzie is seen as “like a rock of blue-veined stone”, similar to Ophelia’s cold dead body.
Consistently in this passage, Lizzie becomes objectified. She’s classified as a “beacon”, an “orange-tree”, and a “royal virgin town” (cough, cough virgin). These classifications then come along with descriptions of being pure and chaste and with otherworldly forces trying to strip her of her purity. All three of these symbols also resemble some aspect of being a women. The “beacon” as an object of light that is cherished and celebrated. The “orange-tree” as the bearer of sweet fruit (children), and the “royal virgin town, topped with golden dome and spire” ready to be infiltrated by an unwelcome force (her first sexual encounter). This language that Rossetti uses is quite reminiscent of a women’s first experience with sex, but one can’t help but lean towards the idea that it’s unwelcome. What really drives this home, is the line “Mad to tug her standard down”. This force, the goblins, that interact with her are not beneficent. They are trying to sway her away from her moral and pure goodness through sexual acts, bringing any possibility of a pure marital union crashing down. Thus bringing any future that she may have, down.
Now, so what? It’s always hard for me to find an answer to this question. Why would a sexual act that is not welcomed also be a method to bring a woman’s standard down? It’s not her fault that she’s being violated. In the Victorian era, it seems to me, that no matter what sexual act that is taking place, it is deemed deviant and the fault gets put on the woman. It is her responsibility to stay pure, and no matter what she must keep it in her pants. What’s funny, or really not funny, is that this sentiment exists even today with the pressure to not sleep around, and the horrible effects of rape culture. Consistently the blame gets put on the victim. They were asking for it. Did you see what they were wearing. They didn’t say no. Well they sure as hell didn’t say yes!
While Lizzie and Ophelia are described similarly above, I think that Laura and Ophelia have much more in common. Both fall into madness and depression – Laura “wept as if her heart would break” and fantasizes/hallucinates about the goblin fruit (Rossetti, 8) and Ophelia is described as singing nonsense and weeping in Act IV, Scene V of Hamlet. Both women are used and abandoned by the patriarchy – Laura gives the goblin men her hair to partake of their fruit (a sexual exchange) and is abandoned once she has partaken; Ophelia loves and believes herself loved by Hamlet, accepting no other suitors and expecting marriage, but he abandons her as he descends into madness. Both are victims of the patriarchal obsession with chastity – and pay heavy prices: Laura her sanity, Ophelia her sanity and her life.
I am intrigued by the line “bring her standard down” in Goblin Market which you have close read. I do not think that it is just a literal reference to a standard (ie: the basis on which a person measures what is good, morally right, etc). Instead, it seems to also be referring to a battle standard, as in a flag that would be flying at the top of the “royal virgin town.” Rossetti is here comparing Lizzie to a town, or a fortress to be penetrated. The references to “dome and spire” as well as “fleet” (the attacking enemy by boat) also adds to the imagery of Lizzie’s body being a sea-side fortress under attack. The goblin men are the invading force, who are dead-set on breaching the walls and taking down the flag, all of which symbolize Lizzie’s virginity and purity. In the end, Lizzie maintains her purity despite the assault. The language which Rossetti uses, however, does portray Lizzie as an object but I am not sure if I would consider this “objectification.” Instead, I think it is likely an adherence to the subtly often required of texts (especially since it is a children’s story…) that deal with sex. Rossetti could not outright say that the Goblins were assaulting Lizzie, so instead she uses imagery that most Victorians would be familiar with and associate with sex while still passing any censors of the time.
I think it was really important to connect this poem to modern days. I think what was most striking about the [word I can’t us cuz spam] assault scene in this poem was that when it was over there wasn’t like a big deal made about. Like I know Lizzie kept reminding her sister that she owed her and then they share a very intimate scene together, but other then that there is nothing. Lizzie just goes home. I don’t really know a lot about Victorian culture, but after this class, I feel like it is safe to assume that there was no real word for sexual assault. Like it was not even taken into consideration as an option at the time it was just instantly something the woman did. Which is really scary considering the fact that as I watched the video in the “Who’s Your Daddy” post I get the same feel. In modern day America their are still people who do not really give sexual assault the attention it needs. I think that is what makes this poem truly horrifying for a modern reader, a girl is sexually assaulted and no one does anything.
Unfortunately, the blame is still put on the woman when she is sexually assaulted. It’s always “the woman’s fault” because she shouldn’t have been wearing such a short skirt in the first place, or she shouldn’t have gotten so drunk.
I like your connection to the painting of Ophelia, but I agree with roberter. Laura and Ophelia both descend into madness when they lose someone/something they love. Laura loses the ability to eat the goblins’ fruit, while Ophelia loses her father. They are obviously two very different circumstances–the possession of a fruit versus the death of a loved one–but they have the same impact on the two characters. Laura, however, is saved by Lizzie, whereas no one is able to save Ophelia in time. So while Lizzie is the hero, Ophelia and Laura are the victims.