Carmilla written by Le Fanu was a very interesting story that had some components of a typical vampire story of present day. Apparently this “coincidence” is in part due to Le Fanu’s writings influence on this genre, most notably Bram Stoker's Dracula according to a biography website for Le Fanu written by Petri Liukkonen (http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/lefanu.htm). In addition to this site, I reviewed the Wikipedia website for additional information on Le Fanu’s background. I personally think that so much of what an author writes is related to their own personal experiences whether they consciously know it or not.
One of the first things I found of interest regarding Le Fanu was that he was Irish born into a family of Huguenot origins. I was not familiar with this term but a web search found that it is a term that is used to describe someone who is a “Calvinist” or Protestant. The origins of the word Huguenot were varied with some sites linking it to the German word for the French Calvinists.
I found all of this interesting because Le Fanu’s father was a clergyman for the Church of Ireland and according to Wikipedia “His father was a stern Protestant churchman and imbued his family with a religious sense that bordered on Calvinism”
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheridan_Le_Fanu). Two major components of Calvinism are “the doctrines of predestination and total depravity, stressing the absolute sovereignty of God” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism). This is essentially stating that a human has no control over their destiny and God has already made His plan. Therefore, if you are a “fallen” human; only God can chose to save you and His plan can not and should not be altered unless by His will.
Le Fanu grew up in a locality that was affected by the Tithe Wars and ultimately, I think this and perhaps his father’s role in the Church of Ireland may have shaped some of his political views later in life; leading to the topics and undertones in many of his writings.
I found it interesting that Le Fanu chose “Styria”, an Austrian state, as a setting for Carmilla because Germany (Prussia) and Switzerland were two of the places the “Huguenots” fled to in order to escape persecution after their religion was deemed illegal in France
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huguenot). In addition, Le Fanu makes the main character a girl of English descent who lives quite nicely in her castle. Le Fanu writes, “…I really don't see how ever so much more money would at all materially add to our comforts, or even luxuries.” He also describes Laura in the quote, “My gouvernantes had just so much control over me as you might conjecture such sage persons would have in the case of a rather spoiled girl, whose only parent allowed her pretty nearly her own way in everything” (Le Fanu). And finally in the quote, “I was not frightened, for I was one of those happy children who are studiously kept in ignorance of ghost stories, of fairy tales, and of all such lore as makes us cover up our heads when the door cracks suddenly,…” (Le Fanu). I think that all three of these quotes provide insight into what Le Fanu is trying to portray in his view of the “English”, implying wealth, no lack of comforts, and spoiled behaviors. In addition, is it possible that in his quote about remaining ignorant of “fairy tales” and such “lore” he is implying a derogatory view of these things, which ironically are a significant part of Irish culture?
Looking back to Le Fanu’s biography, I found, “In 1847 he supported John Mitchel and Thomas Meagher in their campaign against the indifference of the Government to the Irish Famine” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheridan_Le_Fanu). Interestingly both Thomas Meagher and John Mitchel were members of “Young Ireland” which was essentially a group campaigning/fighting to decrease or cease control of Ireland from the British government as well as Catholic Emancipation. In understanding Le Fanu’s views on the Irish Famine, I’m inclined to think that perhaps he used a role reversal in Carmilla. Meaning that Carmilla could represent the Irish Famine or the British indifference to it while it literally “sucked the life blood” out of the Irish people and the nation portrayed as Laura and Bertha before her. In addition, there are times when Carmilla doesn’t seem to be all bad or evil, could this be seen as Le Fanu’s frustration or struggles with his past experiences with his religion and the British government.
I’ve no idea if this is correct, but I thought it was an interesting premise. Another concept I found interesting was that according to Jim Donnelly in his article “The Irish Famine” on the BBC website, during the Irish Famine, “There was a very widespread belief among members of the British upper and middle classes that the famine was a divine judgment-an act of Providence-against the kind of Irish agrarian regime that was believed to have given rise to the famine” (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/famine_01.shtml). This idea of divine judgement is very similar to the Calvinist belief in predestination and absolute sovereignty of God.
Finally, regarding Le Fanu’s writings in Carmilla as well as many of his others, there seems to be an underlying theme of “potential supernatural” events that could also be due to an overactive imagination, anxiety, or hysterics. Not surprisingly, Le Fanu’s wife suffered from “increasing neurotic symptoms”, “anxiety”, and died after a “hysterical attack” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheridan_Le_Fanu). Again, perhaps these experiences play a role in Le Fanu’s horror or gothic writings.
Honestly, I’ve no idea if I’m even close with many of these ideas, but I found them all interesting. Sorry to be so long winded, I didn’t even get to discuss the definite homosexual undertones seen in this writing as well. Maybe next time.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Analysis of Egenolf’s “Maria Edgeworth in Blackface”- MORE CONFUSION??
So here's my analysis of this literary critique. Once again there is soooo much information in this piece, yet I'm almost just as confused as I was when I started. Interesting...
Marie Brick
English 263
17 February 2010
Analysis of Egenolf’s “Maria Edgeworth in Blackface”
The book, Castle Rackrent, written by Maria Edgeworth has clearly demonstrated that it is steeped in political undertones; however, fully understanding those undertones has proven to be an incredibly arduous task for many. The ambiguous nature of the writing and the frequent contradictory statements leads the reader through a tangled and torturous story when read with the full context of the footnotes, notes, and glossary.
The first time reading through this book, I thought it seemed that Edgeworth was speaking highly of the native Irish and looking down upon those of the ascendancy. After reading the critique, “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay” written by Sara L. Maurer, I realized that some of my initial ideas were likely incorrect or at least not as in depth as the book really warranted. In Maurer’s critique I discovered a greater underlying political voice regarding property ownership rights between, native Irish, Anglo-Irish, and English.
From Maurer’s perspective, I had assumed that Edgeworth’s view was that the property’s true ownership would always be up for debate and that in writing about this, Edgeworth was subtly trying to convey the instability in Ireland at the time. This was further supported by Maurer’s comment, “The paradox of inheritance in Ireland, then, is that it can not be owned by its Anglo-Irish holders, since they illegitimately seized it from the Irish children to whom it was owed. On the other hand, Ireland cannot be given up by its Anglo-Irish holders, who already owe the land to their children”.
At the end of my readings of Castle Rackrent and “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay”, I was still left confused about Edgeworth’s ambiguous tone and purpose in her writing, but thought perhaps she was attempting to distance herself from her Anglo-Irish heritage in favor of the Irish. This idea has been thrown into utter disarray after reading the critique, “Maria Edgeworth in Blackface: Castle Rackrent and the Irish Rebellion of 1798” written by Susan B. Egenolf.
Perhaps I should have guessed at what Egenolf thought of Edgeworth based on the title; however, as I was not completely familiar with the idea of “blackface”; I needed to take a closer look at this term and its implications. After researching the term, I found an interview statement on PBS.org from Mel Watkins regarding blackface minstrelsy and racism, “To that extent, it affected all of society because those people who didn't know blacks, and there were many places where there were very few blacks, assumed that those characterizations, those depictions, those foolish characters on stage, were real black people. And so it had an immense effect on the way mainstream society thought about blacks”. This gave me a much better understanding that in doing blackface, one was essentially making light, belittling, and negatively stereotyping a group of people. A comment I found very interesting was, “Despite the fictional Editor’s claims of authenticity, Maria Edgeworth in fact appropriates the voice of the native Irish Thady, and thus performs linguistic blackface for her English and Anglo-Irish readers” (Egenolf 846).
I think that the reasoning for Edgeworth’s use of a “linguistic blackface” was likely due to the inability to fully distinguish herself or others of the ascendancy in any other way. This was further evidenced by Egenolf in her quotation from Claire Willis, “…because the usual “visual marker of skin colour difference” used to “legitimate domination in other colonized societies” is absent, in Ireland difference is marked primarily through “language.” Wills notes, “Whether it is a patronizing approval of lyrical celticism, or horrified revulsion from the degenerate Irish accent, Irish men and women are marked by their voices, their (mis)use of the English language” (Egenolf 849). This idea further expands on the use of linguistic blackface not only as a means to stereotype a group of people, but it also shows that this “marker” was used as a justification for considering native Irish as inferior and therefore legitimizing their need to be colonized.
In the final paragraphs of Castle Rackrent, the Editor states, “It is a problem of difficult solution to determine, whether an Union will hasten or retard the melioration of this country. The few gentlemen of education, who now reside in this country, will resort to England: they are few, but they are in nothing inferior to men of the same rank in Great Britain. The best that can happen will be the introduction of British manufacturers in their places” (Edgeworth 122). Initially, I overlooked this paragraph and didn’t ascribe much meaning to it; however, after reading Egenolf’s critique and re-reading the aforementioned paragraph, perhaps this was a glimpse at Edgeworth’s true political feelings in writing this novel. Edgeworth uses the word “melioration” when discussing “this” country; possibly implying that she felt the country needed improvement as though the native state of the country was not “proper” enough. In addition she states that the educated gentlemen will resort to England and that they are not inferior to the men in England. It is assumed that she must be discussing Anglo-Irish as compared to the men of England. Her comment as to the “best” solution for Ireland was that British manufacturers should be established in Ireland. Again this may reflect a bias towards her political feelings that the Anglo-Irish and the British were truly in the right regarding the current situation in Ireland.
This glimpse into Edgeworth’s political stance, bias, and fears is further evidenced in Egenolf’s commentary on Edgeworth’s writings in her father’s memoir, “a rumor of a French invasion spread through the country, raising the hopes of the disaffected, and creating terror in all, who had any thing to lose” (Egenolf 849). Edgeworth goes on further in a letter to her aunt stating, “that whilst our terrified neighbors see nightly visions of massacres, we sleep with our doors and windows unbarred.’ I must observe, though, that it is only those doors and windows which have neither bolts nor bars that we leave unbarred, and these are more at present than we wish, even for the reputation of our valor” (Egenolf 849). Edgeworth and her family were eventually forced to retreat from there home and Egenolf discusses this event in the following paragraph, “Later in 1798, Maria penned a lovely description of their journey to a nearby British camp where the French army and the Irish rebels had just been put down by the English at the battle of Ballinamuck. In her discussion of the pastoral scene and the soldiers “gathering blackberries,” Edgeworth elides the 2000 Irish prisoners held there who would be executed within a couple of weeks; however, her idealized description’s final line, previously suppressed, is telling: “Don’t imagine that I am camp mad—I was only glad to see anything like order & civility after the horrors of Longford” (Egenolf 850). Again, this paragraph further comments on Edgeworth’s sense of belonging more to the English than the native Irish. Despite her attempt to downplay her bias towards the “camp”, her complete omission of the true situation regarding the Irish prisoners and her obvious comment about “order and civility”; points towards her potential view of the native Irish as inferior and “uncivilized”.
Egenolf’s critique was quite interesting and contained far more topics I would have liked to discuss, but in the interest of time and space; it will have to wait until another day. When I compared Egenolf’s critique with Maurer’s critique, there seemed to be very few similarities. Perhaps one common theme was that Edgeworth’s writing was indeed politically charged even if it was done in disguise. Another common issue surrounded the fact that Castle Rackrent definitely addressed the instability that was all around Edgeworth at the time. And property and class were indeed both talking points between the critiques read; however, this is where the similarities end. The two give completely different views on Edgeworth’s political stance and purpose in writing. In the end, I think I may agree more with Egenolf than Maurer. Egenolf provided a lot of additional letters, stories, and writings, as previously discussed, regarding Edgeworth that seemed to help the reader better understand her from Egenolf’s perspective. However, only Edgeworth would know her true intentions in her writings.
So, as readers we are still left wondering; “Whose side was Edgeworth on?”, “Why did she seem to contradict herself in so many areas of Castle Rackrent?” and “How many different variations and interpretations of her writings can there really be?” As for the last question, I’m not sure how many more I can read since my current level of confusion is already quite overwhelming.
Works Cited
Edgeworth, Maria. Castle Rackrent. London: Penguin, 1992. Print.
Egenolf, Susan B. “Maria Edgeworth in Blackface: Castle Rackrent and the Irish Rebellion of
1798.” English Literary History, Winter 2005. Project MUSE. Web. 15 Feb. 2010.
Maurer, Sara L. “Disowning to Own: Maria Edgeworth and the Illegitimacy of National
Ownership - Irish Nationalism in the Works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay.” Criticism.
22 Nov. 2002. FindArticles.com. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2220/is_4_44/ai_102981644/?tag=content;col1
Watkins, Mel. “Blackface Minstrelsy: How were the minstrel shows racist?” PBS.org.
American Experience, n.d. Web. 16 Feb. 2010.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/foster/sfeature/sf_minstrelsy_5.html
Marie Brick
English 263
17 February 2010
Analysis of Egenolf’s “Maria Edgeworth in Blackface”
The book, Castle Rackrent, written by Maria Edgeworth has clearly demonstrated that it is steeped in political undertones; however, fully understanding those undertones has proven to be an incredibly arduous task for many. The ambiguous nature of the writing and the frequent contradictory statements leads the reader through a tangled and torturous story when read with the full context of the footnotes, notes, and glossary.
The first time reading through this book, I thought it seemed that Edgeworth was speaking highly of the native Irish and looking down upon those of the ascendancy. After reading the critique, “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay” written by Sara L. Maurer, I realized that some of my initial ideas were likely incorrect or at least not as in depth as the book really warranted. In Maurer’s critique I discovered a greater underlying political voice regarding property ownership rights between, native Irish, Anglo-Irish, and English.
From Maurer’s perspective, I had assumed that Edgeworth’s view was that the property’s true ownership would always be up for debate and that in writing about this, Edgeworth was subtly trying to convey the instability in Ireland at the time. This was further supported by Maurer’s comment, “The paradox of inheritance in Ireland, then, is that it can not be owned by its Anglo-Irish holders, since they illegitimately seized it from the Irish children to whom it was owed. On the other hand, Ireland cannot be given up by its Anglo-Irish holders, who already owe the land to their children”.
At the end of my readings of Castle Rackrent and “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay”, I was still left confused about Edgeworth’s ambiguous tone and purpose in her writing, but thought perhaps she was attempting to distance herself from her Anglo-Irish heritage in favor of the Irish. This idea has been thrown into utter disarray after reading the critique, “Maria Edgeworth in Blackface: Castle Rackrent and the Irish Rebellion of 1798” written by Susan B. Egenolf.
Perhaps I should have guessed at what Egenolf thought of Edgeworth based on the title; however, as I was not completely familiar with the idea of “blackface”; I needed to take a closer look at this term and its implications. After researching the term, I found an interview statement on PBS.org from Mel Watkins regarding blackface minstrelsy and racism, “To that extent, it affected all of society because those people who didn't know blacks, and there were many places where there were very few blacks, assumed that those characterizations, those depictions, those foolish characters on stage, were real black people. And so it had an immense effect on the way mainstream society thought about blacks”. This gave me a much better understanding that in doing blackface, one was essentially making light, belittling, and negatively stereotyping a group of people. A comment I found very interesting was, “Despite the fictional Editor’s claims of authenticity, Maria Edgeworth in fact appropriates the voice of the native Irish Thady, and thus performs linguistic blackface for her English and Anglo-Irish readers” (Egenolf 846).
I think that the reasoning for Edgeworth’s use of a “linguistic blackface” was likely due to the inability to fully distinguish herself or others of the ascendancy in any other way. This was further evidenced by Egenolf in her quotation from Claire Willis, “…because the usual “visual marker of skin colour difference” used to “legitimate domination in other colonized societies” is absent, in Ireland difference is marked primarily through “language.” Wills notes, “Whether it is a patronizing approval of lyrical celticism, or horrified revulsion from the degenerate Irish accent, Irish men and women are marked by their voices, their (mis)use of the English language” (Egenolf 849). This idea further expands on the use of linguistic blackface not only as a means to stereotype a group of people, but it also shows that this “marker” was used as a justification for considering native Irish as inferior and therefore legitimizing their need to be colonized.
In the final paragraphs of Castle Rackrent, the Editor states, “It is a problem of difficult solution to determine, whether an Union will hasten or retard the melioration of this country. The few gentlemen of education, who now reside in this country, will resort to England: they are few, but they are in nothing inferior to men of the same rank in Great Britain. The best that can happen will be the introduction of British manufacturers in their places” (Edgeworth 122). Initially, I overlooked this paragraph and didn’t ascribe much meaning to it; however, after reading Egenolf’s critique and re-reading the aforementioned paragraph, perhaps this was a glimpse at Edgeworth’s true political feelings in writing this novel. Edgeworth uses the word “melioration” when discussing “this” country; possibly implying that she felt the country needed improvement as though the native state of the country was not “proper” enough. In addition she states that the educated gentlemen will resort to England and that they are not inferior to the men in England. It is assumed that she must be discussing Anglo-Irish as compared to the men of England. Her comment as to the “best” solution for Ireland was that British manufacturers should be established in Ireland. Again this may reflect a bias towards her political feelings that the Anglo-Irish and the British were truly in the right regarding the current situation in Ireland.
This glimpse into Edgeworth’s political stance, bias, and fears is further evidenced in Egenolf’s commentary on Edgeworth’s writings in her father’s memoir, “a rumor of a French invasion spread through the country, raising the hopes of the disaffected, and creating terror in all, who had any thing to lose” (Egenolf 849). Edgeworth goes on further in a letter to her aunt stating, “that whilst our terrified neighbors see nightly visions of massacres, we sleep with our doors and windows unbarred.’ I must observe, though, that it is only those doors and windows which have neither bolts nor bars that we leave unbarred, and these are more at present than we wish, even for the reputation of our valor” (Egenolf 849). Edgeworth and her family were eventually forced to retreat from there home and Egenolf discusses this event in the following paragraph, “Later in 1798, Maria penned a lovely description of their journey to a nearby British camp where the French army and the Irish rebels had just been put down by the English at the battle of Ballinamuck. In her discussion of the pastoral scene and the soldiers “gathering blackberries,” Edgeworth elides the 2000 Irish prisoners held there who would be executed within a couple of weeks; however, her idealized description’s final line, previously suppressed, is telling: “Don’t imagine that I am camp mad—I was only glad to see anything like order & civility after the horrors of Longford” (Egenolf 850). Again, this paragraph further comments on Edgeworth’s sense of belonging more to the English than the native Irish. Despite her attempt to downplay her bias towards the “camp”, her complete omission of the true situation regarding the Irish prisoners and her obvious comment about “order and civility”; points towards her potential view of the native Irish as inferior and “uncivilized”.
Egenolf’s critique was quite interesting and contained far more topics I would have liked to discuss, but in the interest of time and space; it will have to wait until another day. When I compared Egenolf’s critique with Maurer’s critique, there seemed to be very few similarities. Perhaps one common theme was that Edgeworth’s writing was indeed politically charged even if it was done in disguise. Another common issue surrounded the fact that Castle Rackrent definitely addressed the instability that was all around Edgeworth at the time. And property and class were indeed both talking points between the critiques read; however, this is where the similarities end. The two give completely different views on Edgeworth’s political stance and purpose in writing. In the end, I think I may agree more with Egenolf than Maurer. Egenolf provided a lot of additional letters, stories, and writings, as previously discussed, regarding Edgeworth that seemed to help the reader better understand her from Egenolf’s perspective. However, only Edgeworth would know her true intentions in her writings.
So, as readers we are still left wondering; “Whose side was Edgeworth on?”, “Why did she seem to contradict herself in so many areas of Castle Rackrent?” and “How many different variations and interpretations of her writings can there really be?” As for the last question, I’m not sure how many more I can read since my current level of confusion is already quite overwhelming.
Works Cited
Edgeworth, Maria. Castle Rackrent. London: Penguin, 1992. Print.
Egenolf, Susan B. “Maria Edgeworth in Blackface: Castle Rackrent and the Irish Rebellion of
1798.” English Literary History, Winter 2005. Project MUSE. Web. 15 Feb. 2010.
Maurer, Sara L. “Disowning to Own: Maria Edgeworth and the Illegitimacy of National
Ownership - Irish Nationalism in the Works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay.” Criticism.
22 Nov. 2002. FindArticles.com. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2220/is_4_44/ai_102981644/?tag=content;col1
Watkins, Mel. “Blackface Minstrelsy: How were the minstrel shows racist?” PBS.org.
American Experience, n.d. Web. 16 Feb. 2010.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/foster/sfeature/sf_minstrelsy_5.html
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Online Artifact Analysis- "Castle Rackrent"
Hi all-
As you may have seen, according to the schedule it is my week to post my Online Artifact Analysis. I found this more difficult than I initially thought it might be, that seems to be a theme so far with Irish novels...Enjoy!!
Understanding Maria Edgeworth and Castle Rackrent
While reading Maria Edgeworth’s Castle Rackrent, it was difficult to completely grasp the position of Edgeworth with regard to Irish and English relations. The writing seemed ambivalent at times; in one section you would feel sympathy for the landlord and at other times sympathy for the tenants. There were no clear hero or villain roles. It seemed as though Edgeworth was writing this novel as a representation of an Anglo-Irish landlord with Irish tenants; however, she clearly states in Thady’s introduction that the Rackrent family is native Irish. “The family of the Rackrents is, I am proud to say, one of the most ancient in the kingdom. Every body knows this is not the old family name, which was O’Shaughlin, related to the kings of Ireland – but that was before my time” (Edgeworth 66).
Despite this family’s position as native Irish landlords, Edgeworth spun a tale of almost constant dissatisfaction and failure since the death of Sir Patrick; while consistently displaying the loyalty of the Irish peasant turned server to the family, Thady. This, almost implied, classification of roles and descriptors seemed to me to possibly be representative of Edgeworth’s personal feelings, opinions, and perhaps even life story. Therefore, in order to get a better understanding of Edgeworth herself, I looked for essays, criticisms and biographies about her.
The main website I used as my online artifact was an extremely interesting essay/criticism of Edgeworth’s work. The article, “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay” was written by Sara L. Maurer. In addition a biography was reviewed from the online literature network. In reviewing this information provided in the biography, Edgeworth’s personal life became more understood. Knowing that Edgeworth’s father was an Anglo-Irish landowner, her mother died when she was six, her first step-mother, Honora, died when Edgeworth was 14, her father remarried Honora’s sister shortly thereafter and then moved the family to their estate in Ireland; helped to formulate an idea of who Maria Edgeworth was and her background (Merriman). Despite her own somewhat tumultuous personal life, she seemed to have an extremely close relationship with her father seemingly to the point that some of her opinions were likely strongly influenced by him or overruled altogether. For example, “It's often said that he was too heavy-handed and interfering, that the moral tone and preachment she sometimes affected was not genuinely hers and stunted her expression” (Merriman).
When reflecting on Edgeworth’s background as the daughter of an Anglo-Irish landlord, I initially assumed that because of this background, she had developed somewhat of a bias towards Irish landlords and Irish tenants as being less than their English counterparts. I thought this was evidenced by the portrayal of the Rackrent family as inept landowners. The Irish tenants, in my initial opinion, were portrayed as lazy and silly people as evidenced by the glossary definitions for quotes such as “Monday morning” (Edgeworth 123), “fairy mounts” (Edgeworth 129) “And so should cut him off for ever, by levying a fine, and suffering a recovery to dock the entail” (Edgeworth 132), “a raking pot of tea” (Edgeworth 135), and “we gained the day by this piece of honesty” (Edgeworth 136).
However, at the end of Castle Rackrent, it was an Irish tenant, Jason- Thady’s son, who appeared to have bested the Irish landowner seemingly by having obtained an education and worked meticulously. Although, there was still no resolution in the end since even Jason was left fighting for “ownership” of what he “rightfully purchased”. At first glance, I thought that the main point of Jason’s story was to show that through hard work and education, social class was merely a title. I thought that this point was simply a reflection of Edgeworth’s father’s influence on her writings as she had collaborated with her father on Essays of practical education, which in a way, related to that ideal.
Nevertheless, my initial opinion appeared incorrect again due to the lack of resolution at the end of the book. Therefore I turned to the online essay, “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay”. In reading this fascinating essay regarding Edgeworth’s work in comparison to many other 19th century novelists, I was able to develop some new opinions regarding the possibilities of Edgeworth’s perceptions and meanings behind her works.
A major concept that I took away from this essay was the idea that most novels that had been written at the time of Castle Rackrent had a theme related to physical ownership and property which belonged to a family; past and present. This theme did not work as nicely in an Irish novel because of the discourse in history as evidenced by the following comments, “Yet unlike the paintings, romantic ruins, and "recovered" manuscripts that can belong both to past and present in Scott's novels, the objects of the Irish national tale are the subject of current property disputes that an appeal to the past only complicates. If the nation is an inheritance, perpetually owed to its descendants, Ireland's problem lies in being owed to more than one line” (Maurer). This concept reminded me of the constant feeling of ambivalence I had felt while reading Castle Rackrent, as to who I should side with in the story and in my opinion, was Edgeworth’s way of portraying the actual instability of Ireland at that time. “The paradox of inheritance in Ireland, then, is that it can not be owned by its Anglo-Irish holders, since they illegitimately seized it from the Irish children to whom it was owed. On the other hand, Ireland cannot be given up by its Anglo-Irish holders, who already owe the land to their children” (Maurer).
Another concept that was discussed in Maurer’s essay was the idea of resolution or a “happily ever after” ending to a novel. As stated above, this is a difficult concept to deal with in the Irish novel because of the angst over who rightly owns the inheritance; however according to Maurer, many Irish novelists at the time wrote a simple resolution involving marriage between the Irish and the Anglo-Irish family in dispute. “In these novels, desire and deservingness coincide, suturing over the paradox at the center of inheritance. Edgeworth's Irish fiction, on the other hand, confronts this contradiction and refuses to end with Irish and Anglo-Irish neatly united in possession” (Maurer). This concept is seen throughout Castle Rackrent in the form of the failed marriages of all the Rackrents.
Maurer’s essay goes further in depth into additional issues and relationships regarding Edgeworth’s writings, all of which were quite fascinating, but too much to discuss in this particular assignment. However, Maurer’s essay and a better understanding of Edgeworth’s background provided a little insight into the extremely complicated undertones to Edgeworth’s Castle Rackrent. I am still not completely sure of which side she is “cheering for”, but I also think she herself struggled with understanding her true identity as an Anglo-Irish descendent living in Ireland at a very tumultuous time.
Works Cited
Edgeworth, Maria. Castle Rackrent. London: Penguin, 1992. Print.
Maurer, Sara L. “Disowning to Own: Maria Edgeworth and the Illegitimacy of National
Ownership - Irish Nationalism in the Works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay.” Criticism.
Merriman, C.D. “Maria Edgeworth.” (2005). Online-literature.com. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
As you may have seen, according to the schedule it is my week to post my Online Artifact Analysis. I found this more difficult than I initially thought it might be, that seems to be a theme so far with Irish novels...Enjoy!!
Marie Brick
English 263
9 February 2010
English 263
9 February 2010
Understanding Maria Edgeworth and Castle Rackrent
While reading Maria Edgeworth’s Castle Rackrent, it was difficult to completely grasp the position of Edgeworth with regard to Irish and English relations. The writing seemed ambivalent at times; in one section you would feel sympathy for the landlord and at other times sympathy for the tenants. There were no clear hero or villain roles. It seemed as though Edgeworth was writing this novel as a representation of an Anglo-Irish landlord with Irish tenants; however, she clearly states in Thady’s introduction that the Rackrent family is native Irish. “The family of the Rackrents is, I am proud to say, one of the most ancient in the kingdom. Every body knows this is not the old family name, which was O’Shaughlin, related to the kings of Ireland – but that was before my time” (Edgeworth 66).
Despite this family’s position as native Irish landlords, Edgeworth spun a tale of almost constant dissatisfaction and failure since the death of Sir Patrick; while consistently displaying the loyalty of the Irish peasant turned server to the family, Thady. This, almost implied, classification of roles and descriptors seemed to me to possibly be representative of Edgeworth’s personal feelings, opinions, and perhaps even life story. Therefore, in order to get a better understanding of Edgeworth herself, I looked for essays, criticisms and biographies about her.
The main website I used as my online artifact was an extremely interesting essay/criticism of Edgeworth’s work. The article, “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay” was written by Sara L. Maurer. In addition a biography was reviewed from the online literature network. In reviewing this information provided in the biography, Edgeworth’s personal life became more understood. Knowing that Edgeworth’s father was an Anglo-Irish landowner, her mother died when she was six, her first step-mother, Honora, died when Edgeworth was 14, her father remarried Honora’s sister shortly thereafter and then moved the family to their estate in Ireland; helped to formulate an idea of who Maria Edgeworth was and her background (Merriman). Despite her own somewhat tumultuous personal life, she seemed to have an extremely close relationship with her father seemingly to the point that some of her opinions were likely strongly influenced by him or overruled altogether. For example, “It's often said that he was too heavy-handed and interfering, that the moral tone and preachment she sometimes affected was not genuinely hers and stunted her expression” (Merriman).
When reflecting on Edgeworth’s background as the daughter of an Anglo-Irish landlord, I initially assumed that because of this background, she had developed somewhat of a bias towards Irish landlords and Irish tenants as being less than their English counterparts. I thought this was evidenced by the portrayal of the Rackrent family as inept landowners. The Irish tenants, in my initial opinion, were portrayed as lazy and silly people as evidenced by the glossary definitions for quotes such as “Monday morning” (Edgeworth 123), “fairy mounts” (Edgeworth 129) “And so should cut him off for ever, by levying a fine, and suffering a recovery to dock the entail” (Edgeworth 132), “a raking pot of tea” (Edgeworth 135), and “we gained the day by this piece of honesty” (Edgeworth 136).
However, at the end of Castle Rackrent, it was an Irish tenant, Jason- Thady’s son, who appeared to have bested the Irish landowner seemingly by having obtained an education and worked meticulously. Although, there was still no resolution in the end since even Jason was left fighting for “ownership” of what he “rightfully purchased”. At first glance, I thought that the main point of Jason’s story was to show that through hard work and education, social class was merely a title. I thought that this point was simply a reflection of Edgeworth’s father’s influence on her writings as she had collaborated with her father on Essays of practical education, which in a way, related to that ideal.
Nevertheless, my initial opinion appeared incorrect again due to the lack of resolution at the end of the book. Therefore I turned to the online essay, “Disowning to own: Maria Edgeworth and the illegitimacy of national ownership - Irish nationalism in the works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay”. In reading this fascinating essay regarding Edgeworth’s work in comparison to many other 19th century novelists, I was able to develop some new opinions regarding the possibilities of Edgeworth’s perceptions and meanings behind her works.
A major concept that I took away from this essay was the idea that most novels that had been written at the time of Castle Rackrent had a theme related to physical ownership and property which belonged to a family; past and present. This theme did not work as nicely in an Irish novel because of the discourse in history as evidenced by the following comments, “Yet unlike the paintings, romantic ruins, and "recovered" manuscripts that can belong both to past and present in Scott's novels, the objects of the Irish national tale are the subject of current property disputes that an appeal to the past only complicates. If the nation is an inheritance, perpetually owed to its descendants, Ireland's problem lies in being owed to more than one line” (Maurer). This concept reminded me of the constant feeling of ambivalence I had felt while reading Castle Rackrent, as to who I should side with in the story and in my opinion, was Edgeworth’s way of portraying the actual instability of Ireland at that time. “The paradox of inheritance in Ireland, then, is that it can not be owned by its Anglo-Irish holders, since they illegitimately seized it from the Irish children to whom it was owed. On the other hand, Ireland cannot be given up by its Anglo-Irish holders, who already owe the land to their children” (Maurer).
Another concept that was discussed in Maurer’s essay was the idea of resolution or a “happily ever after” ending to a novel. As stated above, this is a difficult concept to deal with in the Irish novel because of the angst over who rightly owns the inheritance; however according to Maurer, many Irish novelists at the time wrote a simple resolution involving marriage between the Irish and the Anglo-Irish family in dispute. “In these novels, desire and deservingness coincide, suturing over the paradox at the center of inheritance. Edgeworth's Irish fiction, on the other hand, confronts this contradiction and refuses to end with Irish and Anglo-Irish neatly united in possession” (Maurer). This concept is seen throughout Castle Rackrent in the form of the failed marriages of all the Rackrents.
Maurer’s essay goes further in depth into additional issues and relationships regarding Edgeworth’s writings, all of which were quite fascinating, but too much to discuss in this particular assignment. However, Maurer’s essay and a better understanding of Edgeworth’s background provided a little insight into the extremely complicated undertones to Edgeworth’s Castle Rackrent. I am still not completely sure of which side she is “cheering for”, but I also think she herself struggled with understanding her true identity as an Anglo-Irish descendent living in Ireland at a very tumultuous time.
Works Cited
Edgeworth, Maria. Castle Rackrent. London: Penguin, 1992. Print.
Maurer, Sara L. “Disowning to Own: Maria Edgeworth and the Illegitimacy of National
Ownership - Irish Nationalism in the Works of Maria Edgeworth - Critical Essay.” Criticism.
22 Nov. 2002. FindArticles.com. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2220/is_4_44/ai_102981644/?tag=content;col1
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2220/is_4_44/ai_102981644/?tag=content;col1
Merriman, C.D. “Maria Edgeworth.” (2005). Online-literature.com. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
