“Does my poor portrait of her, my fond, patient labour of long and happy days, show me these things? Ah, how few of them are in the dim mechanical drawing, and how many in the mind with which I regard it! A fair, delicate girl, in a pretty light dress, trifling with the leaves of a sketch-book, while she looks up from it with truthful, innocent blue eyes—that is all the drawing can say; all, perhaps, that even the deeper reach of thought and pen can say in their language, either. The woman who first gives life, light, and form to our shadowy conceptions of beauty, fills a void in our spiritual nature that has remained unknown to us till she appeared. Sympathies that lie too deep for words, too deep almost for thoughts, are touched, at such times, by other charms than those which the senses feel and which the resources of expression can realise. The mystery which underlies the beauty of women is never raised above the reach of all expression until it has claimed kindred with the deeper mystery in our own souls. Then, and then only, has it passed beyond the narrow region on which light falls, in this world, from the pencil and the pen” (Collins).
This passage highlights the stark difference in the way Mr. Hartright describes Laura Farlie versus his original description of the woman in white, Anne Catherck. I find this passage interesting in sensing this connection because this is before Miss Halcomb reveals to him that they look so similar. He describes Miss Farlie as, “A fair, delicate girl, in a pretty light dress…with truthful, innocent blue eyes” (Collins). In his first description of the woman in white he says, “ All I could discern distinctly by the moonlight was a colourless, youthful face, meagre and sharp to look at about the cheeks and chin; large, grave, wistfully attentive eyes; nervous, uncertain lips; and light hair of a pale, brownish-yellow hue….and her dress—bonnet, shawl, and gown all of white” (Collins). He describes the two women so similarly: their fair skin, their youth, their light/white garments, but differs when describing their eyes. Laura’s are truthful, while Anne’s are attentive.
Despite highlighting their similarities, Laura is idealized by Mr. Hartright and he sees her as passive, etheral, and pure, while Anne is seen as mysterious and almost uncanny. Laura represents perfection, while Anne represents the unknown. I find this description interesting when we think of the way Mr. Hartright perceives women throughout this novel. Until this point, Anne has had more agency than Laura. She was the one that approached Mr. Hartright and asked for directions and denied his requests for more information about her. Her ability to approach a man shows her independence, whilst Laura has been more passive, and reflects innocence and what Mr. Hartright might see as what should be the expected nature and norms from women at the time. Anne’s agency reflects her mysterious nature, while Laura’s passive nature shows her dependence on others. Mr. Hartright’s contrasting views of Laura and Anne reflect the way he typically romantacizes women and his reflection on women as a whole throughout the novel.
I think your reading of Anne as more independent than Laura is interesting. Especially when thinking about Marian too. Marian is more independent than Laura, but she’s portrayed in a masculine light and doesn’t have the “paleness” or “delicateness” that Anne and Laura have. I’m not sure what to make of this, but it’s also interesting to think of Anne’s independence and Laura’s passivity in the light of both their imprisonments. Anne seems to be pretty traumatized by her institutionalization and still doesn’t seem mentally free from it. When Sir Percival starts to show his true evilness, Laura stops being so passive and starts to stand up for herself.