Abby – Victorian Sexualities

Archive Project: Emily Pepys and the Marriage Dream

“Thursday, 25^th July. I had the oddest dream last night that I ever dreamt; even the remembrance of it is very extraordinary. There was a very nice pretty young lady, who I (a girl) was going to be married to! (the very idea!). I loved her and even now love her very much. It was quite a settled thing and we were to be married very soon. All of a sudden I thought of Teddy and asked Mama several times if I might be let off and after a little time I woke. I remember it all perfectly. A very foggy morning but Henry said it would be fine, but I do not think it has. It feels very thundery. This afternoon we began making our Harmonicons. I did not succeed very well, and got rather out of patience. Sent one piece to the Carpenter to plane, as that is the only thing we cannot master. Went out for about half an hour. It rained hard, this evening, so we did not go out.” – Emily Pepys

During the Victorian era, diary entries helped provide insight to the coded and hidden thoughts and lives of Victorian women. This is why I chose a series of diary entries from the ten-year-old Emily Pepys written over July 1844 to January 1845 as my primary text. The entries range from day to day interactions with other young children and adults, playing outside, and other activities a ten-year-old Victorian girl would take part in. Ideas circulating marriage, social responsibilities, and proper etiquette also litter the diary. One entry in particular struck me as it addressed relations among women. Throughout our course of study and reading The Women in White I have been fascinated with these types of relations and the way in which female sexual politics are expected to play out in Victorian society. And in this entry, Emily Pepys rather unknowingly steps outside of heteronormative modes of being, securing her entry’s rightful place in this archive.

This entry from July 25^th, 1844 is loaded with hidden meanings. Emily writes that she had “the oddest dream last night that [she] ever had dreamt” but it was truly extraordinary. The word “odd” in particular strikes me immediately as it is linked to the rudimentary definition of queer as being strange or odd. But also this attention to something being extraordinary allows this queerness to exist in an acceptable way. Dreams are also a concept that we’ve talked about a lot in this course as a sort of space to play out non-normative or sexual ways of being, and Emily does just this. She tells us the rather sensational news of her dream, “There was a very nice pretty young lady, who I (a girl) was going to be married to! (the very idea!)” (Avery, 32). The use of Emily’s form is key here. She uses italics and parentheticals to exclaim just how exciting but also different this dream was. The young “lady” in question seems to be an ideal wedding partner; she’s nice, pretty, young and Emily would “be married to” her! This excerpt followed along with “(the very idea)!” shows us how this dream differs from normative ways of being in her society. This idea of her marrying another young lady is rather crazy to Emily because of the society she lives in, but she welcomes it whole-heatedly. She claims that she “Loved her and even now love her very much,” and it was “quite a settled thing” (32-33). Emily’s refreshing but maybe also childish acceptance of this dream is what queers her from her Victorian counterparts. But in some fashion, I hope she does see the value in woman to woman relations.

Despite this uplifting take, Emily takes a step back when she “All of a sudden” thinks of Teddy, the boy she has a crush on (32). Now this could be explained in two ways. It could be that just the mere mention of marriage makes her want to revert back to heteronormative ways of being, as evident in this quote in a prior entry: “I think in that way I shall be quite fit to be Teddy’s wife,” (28). Or simply she’s a child with a short attention span that has a crush on a boy. I think both might be true. But the above quote suggests that there’s a certain way that she has to act in order to become his wife, while with this other young lady it is already “quite a settled thing”. Emily then goes about her day, claiming that the morning is very “thundery” or as our class would like to describe, filled with vibrations. She then makes Harmonicons with friends, but finds herself distracted and out of patience, and the entry ends rather abruptly. What makes this entry queer is that there are two relations at play: one that is very concrete and definite yet existing in this dream world, and one that hasn’t quite figured itself out yet. It’s queer because the woman to woman relationship is concrete while her relationship with Teddy is not. And although she may be engaged to this woman in a dream world, she seems way more sure of it, than with the heteronormative one. Although Emily might be young, this sort of naive same-sex desire is rather refreshing during the Victorian Era. In a time where heteronormative relations are required, this young girl’s dream falls excitingly out of place.

Archive Link: http://vqa.dickinson.edu/diary/journal-emily-pepys

Full text/photos from:

Avery, Gillian, ed. The Journal of Emily Pepys. England: Prospect Books, 1984.

Lizzie: Ophelia, Purity, and Rape

“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!

Feeding the Motherless

This image from the Trout Gallery called “Feeding the Motherless”, appears simple at first. At a glance, it looks plainly as if a well put-together woman is feeding motherless birds with the tip of a feather in a dark walled-room that also contains a table. Simple enough, right?

However, a closer reading would prove that this etching is filled with Victorian connotations, ideals and limitations. Primarily, one must address the woman’s attire. She is wearing a white dress displaying her purity and innocence, a characteristic of women in this period that our class can seemingly never escape. Her hair is pinned back with lovely white flowers and she is wearing limited make up. Right from the beginning one can assume that she is of a higher class based on her outfit. She need not go into other methods of making money (prostitution), and can instead spend her time looking around for motherless bird’s nests. The white flowers in her hair also suggest that although she is chaste and pure, she’s most likely blooming and ready to be married off.

Now, one must address this feeding action that is taking place. There are two seemingly competing ideas about what could be going on here. My initial reaction, was, hey this looks a lot Marian, and also she’s taking care of some smaller frailer creature resembling Laura. The woman appears to be very intent on the birds showing this sort of stark determination. Many other women in the other etching we saw in class display women looking off into the distance forlornly, or moaning for their lover. Rarely we see a woman physically doing something in an etching, in contrast to her normal role as the object itself. However, this image could also read the opposite. In the reading we read for class this Wednesday, the British Library discusses women’s role in the domestic sphere. The site says, “Not only was it their job to counterbalance the moral taint of the public sphere in which their husbands laboured all day, they were also preparing the next generation to carry on this way of life,” (British Library). In essence it was the woman’s role to nurture youth, and have them grow up in the ways in which society was governed. Thus this woman feeds these baby birds, and nurtures them showing her ability to thus assume this motherly role to a real human child. Her hair is blooming like her body, and she’s ready to get prego. The dark background of the photo adds to this well by promoting this woman as the object of motherhood. There’s no distractions, just this pure and fertile woman.

So this leaves me with questions. What does this say about Marian now? Although she acts through determination and vigor, can she still not escape these stereotypical gender roles? She in essence becomes the mother of Laura, and even plays a similar role to Laura’s newborn son, so does she achieve the same status of man? We had such high hopes for Marian, but it seems that the cards lie where they are. This image of this woman suggests, “Women were assumed to desire marriage because it allowed them to become mothers rather than to pursue sexual or emotional satisfaction,” (British Library). This woman depicting a motherly vibe, is more likely a more chaste way of telling the general public that she’s ready to nuptially open her legs.

Laura, a moment of strength?

“They had passed the hill above the churchyard, when Lady Glyde insisted on turning back to look her last at her mother’s grave. Ms. Halcombe tried to shake her resolution; but, in this one instance, tried in vain. She was immovable. Her dull eyes lit with a sudden fire and flashed through the veil hungover them. Her wasted fingers strengthened, moment by moment, round the friendly arm that they had held so listlessly until this time. I believe in my soul that the Hand of God was pointing there way back to them, and that the most innocent and most afflicted of His creatures was chosen and that dread moment, to see it.” (430)

What immediately shocked me about this paragraph was that Laura has this fleeting moment of extreme determination, that we rarely see in her, especially after her encounters in the asylum and those two awful men. She was “immovable” showing strength. Her eyes “lit with a sudden fire”, flashing through her veil, breaking free of the erasure that Percival and Fosco bestowed on her, even if only for a moment. These “wasted fingers” came alive to her own disposition, breaking free of their listlessness. This is a moment where we see Laura acting on her accord which she doesn’t usually do, but she still has the aura of a daze around her.

Another note is her shocking likeness to Anne, once again. Not only is she hanging around the grave of her mother, in a misty night, but she is followed by a caretaker (Marian resembling Mrs. Clements). And there they find Walter. The last sentence of this passage also proves interesting because it seems as if the hand of god has lumped these two unfortunate souls together of Anne and Laura. Although I’m not sure who this “them” is that god is pointing too. Maybe it’s the grave? It’s also interesting to think about how Anne and Laura are seen as the most innocent, but also the most afflicted, so what does this say? Are the innocent always characterized as the most manipulated? Usually, that’s the case.

Her Fingers Had a Restless Habit…

“Her fingers had a restless habit, which I remembered in her as a child, of always playing with the first thing that came to hand, whenever anyone was talking to her. On this occasion they wandered to the album, and toyed absently about the margin of the little water-colour drawing. The expression of melancholy deepened on her face,” (142).

I find it very interesting to note that as soon as we discuss Freud’s ideas about repressed trauma through repetitive actions, we get this passage with Laura’s fiddling fingers. But before I get into that, let’s just unpack this a little bit. The word choice in the first sentence proves that it’s not Laura that has a restless habit, but her fingers. In this way, although the audience knows that they are a part of her own body and actions, they are somewhat disconnected. In fact, they almost serve a purpose to distract her from what’s going on around her and more specifically the conversations that she has. Freud would highlight upon the idea that she has been doing this since childhood, and would see this repetitive action as a symptom of some repressed trauma. What that trauma could be, I don’t know, but it’s definitely something that she would have to constantly distract herself from.

However, this repetitive act is a little different because of the object she’s drawn to and what that represents. She moves to the little album of water color drawings that Mr. Hartwright had left, and implicitly we know what’s going on. She misses and loves him. And the fact that her face “deepened with melancholy” proves that. She’s not absentmindedly playing with the thing like she usually does, she’s overwhelmed with emotion.

Finally, Laura consistently gets characterized with child-like associations. Her innocence and pureness radiates throughout the novel, and then with the words in this passage like “restless”, “toyed”, and “playing” it sends the message home.

Because of Laura’s need to distract herself, and her common associations with being a child, it proves that “pure” women need both of these things: to keep themselves busy while also being protected. The Women in White does a good job at implicitly showing this sentiment throughout the novel.