Untitled @laynematt-blog - Tumblr Blog

Posts

With the new knowledge I have gained from this essay regarding the historical uses of bloodhounds in England, and many other countries, I cannot help but make a connection between the use and nature of the these bloodhounds and Mr. Stapleton and his hound in Doyle’s Hound of the Baskervilles. Pemberton tells us that the bloodhound’s attachment to the national identity of England, with all its high class and conservation of prestige, has a much darker side to it as well, the dogs used as “instruments of a grim colonial past.” Those that were against the use of the dogs for hunting people pointed to this past, referencing their involvement in colonization, the dogs used to “suppress Irish, Welsh and Scottish rebellions”, and inevitably causing “many humans (to suffer)” as most colonial endeavors do. When hearing of this, I immediately thought to our power-hungry, desperate Mr. Stapleton. Mr. Stapleton’s hound in Hound of the Baskervilles is not used for mere hunting or as a companion, but is used for violent, fatal crimes against other people. He was so eager to gain the title and inheritance as a Baskerville, using the hound as a means to take what he thought was rightfully his. I wonder if Doyle had thought of this connection, perhaps critiquing his country’s past and the use of these dogs for such purposes. Of course, Doyle did not think that all bloodhounds were used for these purposes, as we see later the association of Holmes to a hound, as pointed out by Watson many times. However, once again we see the somewhat violent and “predator” side of the hound, Watson commenting on how easy it would be for Holmes to be a criminal. Very interesting!

Domestic Abuse in Hound of the Baskervilles

In this week’s issue of Hound of the Baskervilles, Doyle reveals a perhaps one of the unsurprising, but yet to be revealed, tragic consequences of Victorian patriarchy. We have known the place of women within Victorian society to be suffocating, limiting, and inferior (adjectives not even sufficient) to that of men, but this very physical manifestation of this oppression of women within marriage (not all I am sure) had yet to be revealed. Doyle makes more than a couple references to the physical abuses by Mr. Stapleton against his wife, he so consumed with his criminal plans and obsession with money and power. After Holmes and the others find the beaten Mrs. Stapleton tied to the post, she tells them that she “could endure it all as long as (she) could still cling to the hope that (she) had his love...” This tragic statement reveals the unfortunate situation Mrs. Stapleton was in, torn by her love for her husband, who returned her devotion with self-absorbed, advantageous plans, leading later to abuse. Mrs. Stapleton was merely a pawn in his game, using her beauty and the “fear of her husband” he has incited for his own gain. Of course, there is also the factor of her being a woman from a foreign country (Costa Rica), factoring into themes of colonization as we have seen in Wuthering Heights and The Adventures of Mrs. Seacole. Doyle has shed light on a sorrowful, tragic consequence, often hidden from the public eye, of an all too common relationship in which the male, situated in a society in which men are superior and women are subjected, becomes consumed with power and entitled to what he deems his property, and thus treats it (her) as so.

P.S. I am not saying this is true of all men during this time, just a predictable consequence and product of the unfortunate society in which they existed.

Although this probably wasn’t Petra Dierkes-Thrun’s intention, as soon as I began reading this essay, I couldn’t help but think of the classic movie, The Graduate. Although I have never seen this movie, I know the basic premise. The personalities of The Graduate’s Benjamin and our slimy Frank of Mrs. Warren’s Profession seem to conflict, but their love lives are not wholly different (of course, Ben is not committing incest). I just thought this was pretty funny. Shaw was on to something when writing this play.

Although we are unsure of the familial ties between Frank and Mrs. Warren and Vivie, we might use the coined term, “social incest” as Thrun has put it, to describe the relationship between the three. Just as Ben seems to appropriate a privilege amongst the women he is around, Frank--as well as George and Praed as Thrun points out--believes that he can hop around from one woman to the next, the mother and daughter relation “virtually erased under the calculating gaze of the male character(s).” A part from The Graduate example, we see these types of relationships and senses of entitlement throughout our society in the movies we watch, the songs we listen to, the workplace, and just normal conversation at times, often containing subtle (or not so subtle) undertones that suggest ownership of another person out of superiority and only wanting from them what they can give. As Thrun points out, rather than criticizing Vivie for the disownment of her mother and rejection of Frank, Shaw seems to emphasize the liberty and strength of Vivie as she breaks free from any connection to this incestuous (both physical and social) family, consumed with extracting what they can out of others for their own profit and gain. She breaks off as the “New Woman”, also attracted to money and business, but determined to live independently, condemning hypocrisy and “sexual and economic exploitation.” It goes to show just how embedded this type of injustice was (and still is in many ways) in this society, Vivie--and in turn, Shaw--seeing the absolute necessity to abandon it all, finding this the only way to forge her own “independent and able” (Mrs. Warren to Vivie regarding her self-respect in Mrs. Warren’s Profession) path, different from her mother’s and her male counterparts.

Bernard, in Mrs. Warren’s Profession, has chosen characters that make up a wide range of people groups and philosophies that display the hypocritical, the self-righteous, the slimy, the greedy, the independent, and many more conflicting character flaws at work. I observe Mr. Praed to be the only character that provides a sense of consistency and doesn’t make your heart start beating in anxiety at the entrance of his dialogue. As for the Reverend, Mrs. Warren, Miss Warren, Crofts, and Frank, you cannot quite reconcile fully with any of them. At the original, yet withholding, confession of Mrs. Warren to her daughter, the reader is startled by Mrs. Warren’s ironic proclamation that she wouldn’t be able to maintain her “self-respect” if she had continued to honestly work at the Waterloo bar rather than becoming a prostitute. She then goes on to describe, in so many words, that this self respect equates to being “independent and able.” In a world in which women are pawns in a man’s game at making money, rising in social class, or in Mrs. Warren’s case, sexual instruments, you cannot wholly deny Mrs. Warren’s viewpoint. The reader is challenged to reconsider their definition of “self-respect”, Miss Warren faced with this challenge later on and unable to live with herself on her mother’s money. Although I am sure Bernard does not wish to promote prostitution, and Mrs. Warren has her faults and greedy tendencies that do not justify her chosen trade, none of the characters seem to offer a more honest alternative in their choice of lifestyle (except arguably Vivie and Mr. Praed). Vivie, in the end, although her treatment of her mother perhaps harsh and unfeeling, sticks to her principles, defining her own version of self-respect and is not swayed by the shallow, slimy compliments of Frank or what she deems the demoralizing life of her mother. I feel that we are meant to leave this book with both the unsettling sense of injustice, impressed by the characters of Crofts, Frank, and the Reverend, but also a sense that Vivie’s dignity is intact with “intense relief.” Her mother, however, is left alone with the unjust, dehumanizing blows dealt her in life, no matter how rich, “independent” or “able.”

A Point of Concern

I was very intrigued by Roberty Dingley’s essay, it bringing to light many analogous comparisons between Sewell’s Black Beauty and Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin (UTC). I understood Black Beauty and his fellow horses to be not only representative of the creatures affected by animal cruelty, but also the subjection of human beings in the lower classes, often stripped of their own voice and liberty. However, this comparison between the slaves in UTC and Black Beauty reveals a whole other highly probable motivation of Sewell. I thought Robert Dingley’s point on the pattern of reformational literature’s tendency, out of desire to skirt intense opposition due to radicalness, to “occlude general and systematic injustices...and (suppress) intractable problems in favor of soluble ones” was very interesting. We have seen this type of sensational writing present in some of the reformational literature we have read so far, the authors, whether well-intentioned or not, stimulating the senses through pathos rhetoric and focusing on small, attainable issues rather than the overthrow and condemnation of an entire system. Whether or not I agree that this outcome or effect was intended by Sewell’s in her narrative, I am unsure; I don’t believe it was her intention to condemn the system (animal captivity in general) so I don’t believe that she missed the mark in this way. In my personal opinion, I believe that humans and animals are very, very different creatures, made for different purposes and, although both inherently valuable because they are living creatures, do not possess an equal amount of innate worthiness of quality of life. I love animals!!!! Do not get me wrong!!! Anna Sewell revealed the cruel, awful injustices that were, and perhaps still are, imposed upon helpless horses and other creatures and I believe that to have been a very necessary, noble thing to proclaim through her writing during that time. However, to say that because Sewell most probably was inspired by UTC, calling awareness to the injustices of slavery as well as animal cruelty, and therefore, had taken the position that “it is as wrong to deprive horses of liberty as it is to deny freedom to slaves”, is quite troubling. If this were to be the accepted conclusion regarding Sewell’s intentions in writing Black Beauty, the novel would have served to dehumanize human slaves and further separate her audience from possessing an empathy and connectedness to their fellow man. Although useful for artistic comparison, Horses and humans are innately different and their purposes and treatment should not be too closely compared. Sorry, that was a rant and perhaps I have missed the point the writer was trying to make! This was just one particular point that I wanted to call attention to and emphasize, arguing that Sewell did not mean for this comparison between UTC and Black Beauty, although probably inspired, to be this closely connected.

...one of the most singular and sensational crimes of modern times.

Arthur Doyle, Hound of the Baskervilles

Do you know why this world is as bad as it is?...it is because people think only about their own business, and won't trouble themselves to stand up for the oppressed, nor bring the wrong-doer to right.

Anna Sewell, Black Beauty

After looking a bit into the life of the author Anna Sewell, I came to find out that Sewell’s mother was a devout Christian. Therefore, it would not surprise us that much of Sewell’s philosophy is inspired by Christian doctrine, most likely influenced by her mother and Sewell seeming to contain a personal piety within her as seen through her writing. Jerry Barker embodies Sewell’s devout, honest, kind-hearted man--a foil to the hard, unforgiving men present throughout the novel, hurting both beast and man. Beauty says about Barker that he “never knew a better man than (his) new master.” Barker’s real name is Jeremiah, told in the foot notes to be a reference to the old testament prophet, “appointed to reveal the sins of the people.” Barker does just this by not only condemning those that treat their horses ill, but through his example of correct, tender treatment toward Beauty and the people around him. We have seen similar care and love toward people and horses through a couple of Beauty’s past masters, but perhaps Sewell means to make explicit the motivation--or at least that of Barker’s--for the treatment of all living things, “for God made man, and he made horses...” One of the most powerful quotes for me within this book relates to the interaction between Barker and the “gentleman” that helped Dolly one cold afternoon. The quote mentioned above recalls the gentleman’s correction of a man beating his horse. I believe this, aided by example after example of worthy treatment of living things as well as unworthy, embodies what I would say to be Sewell’s conclusion of the cause of all selfish, indifferent, unjust treatment of others by humans. We care only of ourselves, failing to recognize life and worthiness in others, thereby ignoring the plights of others and failing to correct what is wrong. This is a powerful statement and Sewell’s characters such as this gentleman and Barker, along with Beauty’s other kind owners and caretakers, represent the hope of mankind and an example for us all.

Mr. Stappleton?

I am suspicious of whether or not Mr. Stappleton is the true murderer. Although Holme’s discovery of Miss Stapleton actually being his wife, I still am not fully convinced that he is the sole murderer. I do not doubt that he knows more information than he lets on and, perhaps, aides the killer in some capacity, but there are certain clues that lead me to believe he is ignorant. Holmes even says upon Mr. Stappleton coming across the body, “What a nerve the fellow has! How he pulled himself together in the face of what must have been a paralyzing shock when he found that the wrong man had fallen victim to his plot.” Either Mr. Stappleton is a very clever, talented actor, or he is sincerely uninvolved in this death. I am still suspicious of the Barrymores and Mr. Frankland (I believe that’s his name), Laura’s father. We will see!

Anna Sewell’s decision to assign to a horse the first person narrator and, thereby, personify the animal by allowing him to have personal feelings, thoughts, actions, etc, not only gives an intimate voice to animal cruelty and animals in general, but lends a hand to all living creatures that are subjected by the arrogant hand of mankind. Although the treatment of horses and animals is evidently the most apparent theme throughout the novel, I argue that Black Beauty serves just as much to call attention to all living things–humans as well–than solely animals. When considering what else beside good work and kind masters could he ask for, Black Beauty cries inwardly, “Why, liberty!” A horse, like all living things, although made to create and work, long for this same desire–to be free beings with an independent will. Often people, just as Beauty, are forced into circumstances where they have “no will of (their) own; but always do (their) master’s will.” On the other hand, you have the darker side of man that is susceptible to all humans. We see this through certain handlers cruel treatment of their horses, Black Beauty’s mother explaining that “there are good thoughtful men like our master, that any horse may be proud to serve; but there are bad cruel men… vain, ignorant, and careless.” We see both sides of human nature, revealing the consequences of each upon the helpless. Sewell, by doing this, advocates for all living creatures, whether they have feet or hooves.

Women power?? Kinda?

I was surprised that as I was reading Mary Carpenter’s essay “On the Treatment of Female Convicts” to feel that this was not as empowering to women as I was expecting it to be. As Carpenter tries to express the pressing needs for reformation within prisons for women--which obviously were desperately needed--it seems in the process she, whether consciously or not, affirms certain stereotypes of women as a means to defend her position. She portrays them as the more fragile and prone to corruption of the sexes, almost explicitly stating women to be the “weaker sex” (83). I believe that she implies that the higher number of women convicts in England has to do with their degraded relation to men/their husbands, especially within the lower classes (lack of self-confidence, desperate situations, etc). However, even then, there is a degree of understanding on her part that is lost or is not conveyed completely. Does the inability to reform and lead women convicts to more virtuous lives have to do with their nature, the lax treatment in prisons, or both? I believe Carpenter conveys that all these play a factor, which is somewhat troubling to me. However, I believe the motives of Mary Carpenter to be mostly sincere, establishing that female convicts “are our fellow-subjects: they are the mothers or sisters of our children, they are equally with ourselves fellow-heirs of eternal life...” (92). Carpenter has established an equal playing field, assigning these often outcast women worth solely because they are human beings and children of God. Above all else, she has assigned human dignity to these women, worthy of both love and discipline in order to help steer them in the right path--a combination lacking and desperately needed within these prisons. In regards to some concerning wording, I believe Carpenter to be merely affected by her times and, like all of us, influenced by her contemporary culture.

When I googled “Newgate Prison”, this was one of the first images to pop up. In Henry Labouchere’s dramatic essay, “Inside Newgate”, he mentions the exercise yard. For an hour and a half a day, depicted above, the prisoners were allowed to walk outside in circles just like this. This looks like the most boring, monotonous, maddening, poor excuse for exercise that I have ever seen. As described by Henry, the treatment of convicts in Newgate, and I imagine in most Victorian prisons, was horrible. It is told to us in the introduction that Henry used this type of writing that is more dramatic and image-invoking in order to create a sense of empathy among his readers and call attention to such travesties. However, knowing the somewhat two-faced character of the writer from the intro, I question the writer’s motives. Although I imagine the conditions to be horrible by his descriptions, there does not seem to be any sorrowful emotions attached on his part. He describes the food as, “better I never came across.” In addition, the prisoners get a “warm bath” upon arrival and describes the gaolers as “kind and friendly”. This may all be very well true, but a part from a few mentions of some forlorn faces and bleeding nails from picking oakum, Henry seems somewhat indifferent to the awful conditions that existed in these prisons during this time. The faces of these men “exercising” do not seem to display even some small bit of contentment with their present situation.

L.L. and Mr. Frankland

In chapters 10 and 11 of Arthur Doyle’s Hound of the Baskervilles, we are introduced to more characters, adding more light and perhaps dark to the mystery Watson is trying so desperately to uncover. The mysterious L.L. (Laura Lyons) definitely carries with her some suspicion; I am not quite sure whether to trust her. Although Watson deemed much of her story true, he also recalls the “the lady’s face and of her manner” as she turned so pale and apprehensive toward his questioning. It cannot be no small coincidence that Mr. Baskerville’s death happened at the precise time of their appointed meeting. Perhaps someone is following her steps? I wonder if Mr. Frankland, the harsh father of Mrs. Lyons, plays a larger role in this. I do not doubt he plays some role or else Doyle would not have made his character so eccentric and curious. Mr. Frankland seems all too interested in the happenings on the moor, perhaps concerned with whether this “stranger” is trying to get in his way or his a threat to his plans toward the Baskervilles. We will have to see!

Marginalization is manifested in her experience of time...

“Rehearsing Social Justice: Temporal Ghettos and the Poetic Way Out in ‘Goblin Market’ and ‘The Song of the Shirt’”, Jennifer Maclure

Although this quote in Maclure’s essay is directed toward the monotonous experience of the seamstress in “The Song of the Shirt”, the writer makes the point that the claim is adapted to both the woman oppressed by “repetitive temporality” and “linear temporality.” One is the backbone of progression, as seen in “The Song of the Shirt”, living in cycles of numbing work, labor, and struggle while those that are privileged enough can ride the tide of industrialization and reap the benefits (5). On the other hand, it is demonstrated in “Goblin Market” the good, natural order of repetition as opposed to the consuming dangers and “death of progression” (10). In both cases, women are subjected by time, men able to escape the oppressive sides of both since they are seen as the forward-moving forces behind progression. This was an interesting concept for me because I took a totally different interpretation of “Goblin Market” as mentioned in my last post, as I was unsure what to think of such an odd children’s, fictitious tale. However, Maclure does mention an interpretation relating to women’s relationship with men, women being lured into trading their virginity--’’joys brides hope to have”--only for this “single event” to be over and death to follow (11-12). Both interpretations, as well as the seamstress’ experience, reveal the oppressive circumstances of Victorian women at the hands of “economic forces” at work in time (11). Very interesting!

This is a painting by Hilda Koe (fl. 1895-1901) depicting the beginning scene of Christina Rossetti’s “Goblin Market”.

At the beginning of the poem, I struggled to understand what the goblins symbolized and the who the girls were considering the Victorian era. I googled the poem and found that this was originally read as a poem for children, it being a fictional tale with goblins. I have not read the scholarly essay on the poem yet, but I am sure that it will be informative as to whether Rossetti meant for the characters and actions in this poem to be representative of certain people or social issues during this time. I can’t help but think that this may have to do something with the relationship between men and women. With words such as “white”, “pure”, “golden”, to describe the two girls, we picture something undefiled and innocent. As soon as Laura tasted the fruit and went back for more, she found that ”Her tree of life droop’d from the root” (a biblical allusion to Adam and Eve) and she could not live without more, unsatisfied and physically declining and dying as her hair turned grey and she basically went mad with longing. There is a contrast between the sister that could resist this temptation (Lizzie) from the “goblin men” and the sister that gave in to their enticements (Laura), enslaved by their sweetness and eventually abandoned. Considering the attitudes toward women during this time, I wonder if this is a warning to young girls to guard themselves from men that, although they promise satisfaction and life, wish to only use them, their sweetness fading and unsatisfying. This is just a guess!!

I find it interesting that most of this serial is void of Holmes’ physical presence, relying solely on the observations and letters of Watson to Holmes. Although we always read these mysteries through the eyes of Watson, our narrator, I wonder why Doyle chose to keep Holmes absent throughout most of this. It is for sure more of an insight into the character of Watson, relying on him as our primary detective and protagonist. It is rare that a narrative switches its focus onto a another character in the middle. As Watson always ends his letters to Holmes with a plead that he would come to Baskerville himself, I assume he will soon show up.

On an unrelated note, I noticed something very interesting regarding topics that we have discussed in class about the cultures of the north and the south. After Watson and Barrymore forsake their chase, they hear a howl similar to one that Watson heard in the last issue. Barrymore enquires to Watson what the people call this “hound” and Watson replies, partly out of fear and denial of such a tale, “Oh, they are an ignorant people. Why should you mind what they call it?(9)” This is just another example of the existing stereotypes that existed between the north and the south in Victorian England, the southerners thinking the northerners to be “country” people, perhaps less intelligent and more rough.

Mother and Heroine

Coming from a fresh of reading Mrs. Seacole’s memoir and then turning to this essay, Chang has opened my eyes to very subtle epistemological nuances woven throughout the memoir that informed the roles that Mrs. Seacole took on both literally and through her literature. As we have discussed in class, much of the way she described herself related to her need to establish credibility, much more so being a colonized woman of color, and also a form of establishing herself and those that she stands for as strong, capable human beings. As Chang points out, Mrs. Seacole attaches herself strongly to the Creole identity, thus allowing her to distinguish herself from others, but also stand by her English identity. This “englishness” is very important as it softens her “otherness” and gives her more of a place in a society weary of any impurity or blemish. I think a very good example of this attachment to English identity, yet challenging the status quo would be Mrs. Seacole’s twist on the war-time nurse “mother” role. I thought it was interesting that Chang describes this emergence as sort of a feminist movement, women establishing themselves outside of the home, but also “left the role of the non-white women undecided or appropriated it as the sign of ‘otherness’ and ‘oppression’ against which British women claimed their own emancipation.” Mrs. Seacole, although joining this movement, had to fight against this and fight for double the emancipation from racism and stereotypes. She takes on these similar “motherly” roles, claiming to uphold purity, morality, order, but also comfort and mirth, possibly less likely to be found in Nightengale’s hospital. As Chang has noted, Mrs. Seacole both attaches herself to her “Britishness” and adheres to her Creole identity by applying herself to this “Victorian Motherhood” while establishing herself as a “Crimean Heroine” for herself and representative of a larger, subjugated group.

Chang, Tan-Feng. “Creolizing the White Woman’s Burden: Mary Seacole Playing ‘Mother’ at the Colonial Crossroads between Panama and Crimea.” College Literature, vol. 44, no. 4, 2017, pp. 527–57. Crossref, doi:10.1353/lit.2017.0033.

Because Mrs. Seacole has experienced so much, travelled to far off places, and met very different people, she perhaps has a view of the world that is more open, more transcendent, crossing border and culture, than most for her time (especially as a woman). In addition, her skin color and gender have also to do with this, knowing fully well the realities of discrimination and racism (herself racist at times) and thus understanding the consequences of narrow-mindedness. One of my favorite passages is from a description of Mrs. Seacole’s work on the frontline of the battles, not only helping and saving the allies, but also the Russians. She concludes this description on page 145 saying, “Many others on that day gave me thanks in words the meaning of which was lost upon me, and all of them in that one common language of the whole world--smiles.” When faced with the realities of suffering and death, one can’t help but see solely the humanity in one another, as Mrs. Seacole was able to see that day. Despite the prejudices, despite the animosity (even amongst the allies--British and French), “war, like death, is a great leveller” (164). Considering the deep nationalism imbedded in many of these cultures and countries at the time, it is amazing that she was able to see past all of this, despite her own prejudices perhaps that we see slip in throughout the novel. Mrs. Seacole seems to have a keen understanding of this “leveling” quality, made obvious considering her participation and up close experience with such realities in the Crimean War.

In addition, when speaking to the way that Mrs. Seacole presents herself in her own autobiography, I have noticed how she sees herself as almost similar to a soldier. Not only does she participate on the battlefield, running onto the front lines to save these boys, but she claims to emotionally attach to them as well. She relates to the soldier’s need for excitement and danger, finding identity in this role. In some of the last pages, we see her talk of the few soldiers that come into say their farewells to Mrs. Seacole not in excitement, but with dread, knowing that they have nothing waiting for them at home. She adds similarly, “Was it not so with me?...What better or happier lot (that of being a soldier) could possibly befall me?” Like the image of “mother” that we Mrs. Seacole take on, she also presents herself as a “soldier”, strong and eager to be of assistance.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Untitled