The Epstein essay surveying liminality in the heroines of Burney's novels drew a slightly different response from than was elicted from Alana. I was drawn to the fact that Burney depicted her heroines in these peculiar stations to explore their abilities to identify themselves in their societies. In the case of Evelina, I find her liminality, while certainly indicative of her inability to establish a position on her own, that is without a male counterpart, an interesting and often humorous probing of ridiculous social convention.
As Epstein points out, the liminalities with which Burney garners her heroines often "blast the social structures...of social preservation" (203). It is this point that attracted my attention during reading Evelina, and what drew my notice reading Epstein's essay. The humor of many of the early situations in the novel when Evelina goes to London stems from the absurdism of the conventions she needs to follow. It's true that Rev. Villars does not prepare her for the world in his overprotective rearing, and this leads to her inability to navigate her own way when she is released to it. But this serves the plot's purposes perfectly (all the while adding a realistical psychological dimension of weakness to his character), so I find it less an indictment of the paternal control of young women in society (though it is that) and more a circumstance within which Burney explores the utter lunacy of requiring such delicate and specific conventions given many other characters' true actions. In many ways, Evelina is better prepared for the world than many other women (notably Miss Mirvan), for she does not have the shackles of absurd convention to prevent her from detecting hypocrisy and cruelty in those that abuse those conventions. Evelina's inability to fend off suitors in a "suitable" way, leads her to more comic, uncivil, and effective means of protecting herself (e.g. accompanied by prostitutes, laughing in the faces of those she dislikes).
Monday, April 2, 2007
The Advantage of the Uncouth: Burney's Indictment of Middle-Class Morality
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Kris makes an excellent point: the novel is more a space "within which Burney explores the utter lunacy of requiring such delicate and specific conventions." I think this idea might tie fruitfully back into Liana's post, and our comments on it, especially regarding the critical agency--if it exists--in the novel. I am tempted to read the humor in the novel as an analog to Evelina's agency, and by extension, to Burney's. I think the fact that Evelina finds her name only to give it away is a circumstance much like the irony in the later letters: "Lord Orville, ever benevolent...." By pointing up these paradoxes, I think Evelina is invested in the reader's critical awareness--we are expected, I think, to see these problems and not gloss over them. How might this reading offer us another perspective on earlier texts where gender is the chief subject matter? Any thoughts?
I think that such a perspective might offer an interesting analysis of "Fantomina," given its themes on identity and identity's relation to gender in society. I think Fantomina's evasion of social expectations illustrates a strength of hers. Indeed, the ending (with its ambiguous resolution) offers a chance for Fantomina's success over social expectation; but it is problematic that she breaks down in such a systematic way and it is her mother, not her, who prevents the marriage and, indeed, sends her daughter away. This ending highlights the problems with social conventions and emphasizes the Fantomina's strength before the child is born. Her inability to act with any agency once her mother returns is nearly ridiculous, given what she's done before.
Post a Comment