We mentioned this in class, but I'd like you to discuss the different views of the fallen women from the poetry thus far (and the poetry for next week if you'd like) and from Tess. According to these works, what does it mean to be fallen and can/should a fallen woman be redeemed?
I cannot wait to see what you have to say. . . . .
I am posting early, so you can still get your posts in on the discussion due this week before I grade them.
According to what we’ve read, I guess a fallen woman would be a woman who has lost her virginity outside of marriage. It doesn’t seem to matter how this happened. In the case of Tess, even the fact that she was raped does not get her off the hook – her whole life is ruined. On the other hand, Angel has had his 48 hour dalliance, but that’s not a problem at all. In A Legend of Provence, Angela is told that in this life, “the tenderest one have limits to its mercy: God has none.” To me, this means that the fallen woman cannot really expect to be redeemed in this life – but that’s Ok, not to worry – God will forgive her. The knight she takes off with, however, does not have to be concerned with forgiveness or redemption, even though he knew that Angela was totally innocent and had never been outside the convent. It’s Ok for him to encourage (or allow) her to run off with him. Wha??? In A Castaway, Eulalia says, “I know of worse that are called honourable.” So, the worst thing a person could be is an “unchaste woman.” I guess she could steal, lie, or what have you – BUT, she MUST be a virgin until she marries!!!
ReplyDeleteApparently, in the Victorian era, no redemption was possible for women. The double standard implies that women are the ones who are responsible for protecting men from their worst selves. If women were the “strong” ones and remained chaste at all costs, then men would behave properly – or something like that. The whole idea then implies that men really can’t help themselves, so they can’t be to blame for causing the “fall” of a woman. This all sounds like some convenient philosophy that men imposed on women and society, but I can’t completely blame men for these ideas. Women would have had to go along with it. Women would have shunned a fallen woman, rather than show compassion for her. When I did the research for my biographical presentation on Wilkie Collins, I found that he was living with a woman he was not married to. She posed as his “housekeeper,” but his friends were in on his secret. I read that “decent” women could not visit their house, nor could the woman he was living with associate with “decent” women. So, I think that without women’s complicity in the social mores of the time, there could be no “fallen” women.
According to the texts we have read thus far, a "fallen" woman is a woman who has been deflowered outside of marriage, whether it was by her choosing or not. A "fallen" woman is also one who is seen in the company of a man of questionable status; assumptions are made about women who spend a considerable amount of time with these ladies' men because it is a given that the women will be unable to resist their undeniable charm. Even the women who resist are somehow swayed eventually, or in Tess' case, taken advantage of.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that the fallen women are not allowed redemption because their social status has automatically dropped from virtuous maiden to common whore. Women face a double standard in society that keeps them in whatever corner they happen to end up in. People may choose not to talk about it, but the fact still remains that the woman has lost the very thing that made her desirable and there is no hope of ever getting it back, so there is little hope of her ever gaining respect again. I personally think the fallen woman should be given a second chance, especially since most of the women who have lost their virginity were young and naive. How are they supposed to know any better when everything is kept hush-hush and not even their parents take the time to explain the "birds and the bees"? But the society we live in today is completely different from the one discussed in the stories and poems we have read...
Allison,
ReplyDeleteI am glad that you brought up the double standard that Tess faces in her relationship with Angel. Her case is most unfortunate but it points out the unfair treatment of women in comparison to their male counterparts. I also like how you brought up specific examples from the poems we have read as well. The bit about Wilkie Collins and his "housekeeper" was also interesting.
According to the texts that we have read, a woman is fallen when she loses her virginity outside of marriage, regardless of how it is lost, by choice or by force. Of course this “fallen” stature is not applied to the men who partake in “the falling” or is involved in a “falling” of their own! It is an extremely hypocritical stance.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Victorian era, there really was no redemption for a “fallen” woman, either by men, or women. They were sentenced to a life of solitude, despair, and rejection by society. If the question of whether a “fallen” woman can/should be redeemed was posed during the sixteenth century, there might be a possibility that I would have to say that a woman should not be redeemed if the society in which I live pushes the agenda of the time.
Today….it’s a completely different story. I still would NOT believe a “fallen” woman should be redeemed because in my opinion, there is nothing worth needing redemption, regardless of whether the action was by choice or force.
In response to Claudia:
ReplyDelete"How are they supposed to know any better when everything is kept hush-hush and not even their parents take the time to explain the "birds and the bees"?
You are right Claudia! This is a point Tess makes straight to her mother. During these times, not only was there a huge hypocritical stance against women, but they were not even taught the "evil/temptation" that lurked and the ways in which to combat them.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe worst social scandal a 19th century Victorian man could endure was the infidelity of his wife whether before or during their marriage. Men were socially deemed the masters of women in order to preserve the moral and spiritual integrity of women. Ironic right? How could men, the pigs and slaves to lust and sexual deviancy have anything on women's piety? It all has to do with the original fall of humanity in the Garden of Eden. Despite the obvious shortcomings and social repression Christianity has been attributed with in the history of western culture, it was still and currently is a very prevalent cosmic force that operates within society today. The concept of the fall of man from grace to sin when taken in its literal context claims that it was Eve who gave the apple to Adam, thereby pulling him into her sin. Now obviously the man is just as responsible for his actions as Eve was for hers, but for the latter part of the past two 2,000 years, women couldn't shake off the blame Adam placed on Eve once he realized what he had done. Following Adam's example, Victorian men felt it their duty to control their women lest they succumb to the temptation of the serpent once again. Women were the weaker sex as an inherited from Eve’s weakness. Unfortunately, the religion that many European and American women used to raise their families and advocate for the Women's Rights Movement was also the source of their social and sexual incarceration. Moreover women were considered a part of men due to the literal translation of God's creation of man and the following creation of woman from man. Women are considered a part of men, and it is perfectly illustrated in the western concept of marriage. Man and wife is one flesh, and when a man's wife is perceived as unfaithful or impure, the man takes on the same "shame" so to speak. A husband's indiscretions are humiliating and despicable to any upstanding and loving wife, but in his eyes it is the wife, who is the most intimate fiber of his being, that determines whether or not he is a shameful cuckold. Sorry ladies, it's just the way we think, and it is a method of thinking that has been reinforced since the literary explanation of the creation of mankind i.e. Genesis chapter 1.
ReplyDeleteIn truth from the literature we have read regarding the concept of the fallen woman it is obvious that the dubious double standard applied to men and women in Victorian society seldom allowed women to become redeemed from their perceived social "fall.” The fallen woman was too much for a man to handle, and it was men who determined the law of the land in 19th century England. Tess was violated and forced, and yet instead of blaming the snake (Alec), Angel has to blame Tess for the sinful state she has dragged him into. Some men like Hardy realized the serious inconsistency in men's treatment of women and illustrated this in Tess of the D'urbervilles, but one doesn't undo centuries of social misconception through a book and a couple of poems. Unfortunate though it may be this inconsistency is a concept that has been firmly grounded in a too literal translation of a religious text that has virtually shaped and determined the development of western culture. How could women possibly hope to escape the limitations that man's God-breathed inspiration had placed on them? Luckily it was people like Hardy, E.B.B., Procter and others who began to turn this concept of the female inclination to sin on its backside.
To be a “fallen woman” can be defined as a woman who has basically lost the innocence of her virginity before marriage. I think a woman should be redeemed for her past transgressions especially if she was not the type of woman who made a career out of it. But then again if she was the type of woman who made a career out of keeping company with many men then that is a different story. But on the other hand if she has decided to change her life then yes she should also be forgiven. If God forgave Mary of Magdalene then why shouldn’t society forgive all “Mary of Magdalene’s?” In the novel Tess I found it rather hypocritical of Angel to be unforgiving for her secret about Alec and the death of the baby that she lost behind him. The Victorian society and its moral ethical views on sex before marriage where just a one way standard idea that only suited the male species back in that era. To look down upon a woman who was raped and just totally violated against her own will is pathetic. Did they not have sort of the same bible that we have today? Hmmmm, I think I need to ponder that one for a while. In the poem “Modern Love” here was another example of a man choosing not to forgive his wife for her past transgression. His mannerisms toward her only tortured her into suicide. The comparison between the lovers in “Modern Love” and to Angel and Tess is so ironic because Angel also made Tess feel she should commit suicide because of the way he viewed her.
ReplyDeleteReply to Connor:
ReplyDeleteThat is really interesting that you bring up the Adam and Eve thing, and that woman has always gotten the blame for the fall. But I think there is another way to look at it, if you believe in Genesis at all, that is. God told Adam and Eve that the forbidden tree was the tree of "wisdom," or the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. My question has always been, why wouldn't God want his human creations to have knowledge? It always sounded kind of strange to me. But anyway, Eve, of course wanted knowledge, like the smart lady she was, so she ate the apple. Adam, however, just ate the apple because he saw that she was doing it. So....maybe that implies that men want to prevent women from attaining wisdom????? Well, that's just another way of looking at it.