I personally found the character of Elizabeth as quite bland, passive and submissive. She didn't have any driving qualities about her that separated her from the other meek female characters in the novel. However, one female character - though a very minor character involved in a subplot of the story - stood out to me. Safie, the Turkish girl who begins living with the family of peasants that the Creature spies on. Safie, though an exceptionally minor character in the story, conveys the ideals of the 'strong woman' - essentially through the events of her past, which include defying the harsh standards of her Muslim culture. I believe one aspect of creating the Elizabeth character was to highlight the characteristics of a submissive female when juxtaposed with the compelling female. Elizabeth's only significant purpose in the events of the novel is as Victor's potential bride, his possession. She exists only to be his support system and please him.
Mary Shelley was the daughter of an activist for sexual equality during the Enlightenment era of eighteenth century Europe named Mary Wollstonecraft. In Shelley's mother's essay 'A Vindication on the Rights of Women', she deliberately censures the modern woman of her time for adhering in the standards of the female stereotype - "docile, domestic, and childlike" - and serving only to please their men. The negative connotation of women is best delineated through the Elizabeth character, who Shelley uses to express her own views that were inherited from her mother while the character of Safie may potentially be a personification of the woman that Shelley and her mother strived to be.
That's cool that you mentioned Shelley's mother! I never knew that. Good point. I also think that Elizabeth is a bland character, but I think that she is simply too "light". Shelley writes like she is too dramatically torn and fallen from the sadness of the murder. She seems too fragile and overly emotional. Any misfortune seems to be over dramatized in her eyes. However, this seems apparent in a lot of the characters in the novel...
Then are you all perhaps suggesting that Elizabeth represents that passive Victorian woman? What are the virtues esteemed to women in the early 19th cent?
Yes, I do believe that Elizabeth is a representation of the passive Victorian woman. She lacks personal goals and interests for herself. She lacks driving qualities that make her amiable. I actually see her as quite redundant on several occasions in the book.
The virtues of early nineteenth century women usually depended on her marital status for when a woman was wed to a man, her rights were no different than the rights of a child. Legally, married couples were regarded as one person - of course with the male half possessing more power over the female half. When unmarried, a woman still had limited rights but they were not esteemed as the property of their own husband.
question: Would you agree, after reading Elizabeth's letter in ch 22, that the women during this time were simply too useless/unimportant and beneath the stature of men that their decisions were only based upon the mans intentions? It sounds to me like Elizabeth tries to be understanding of Victor's thoughts and emotions. I feel like she is depends too much on the emotions and situations of others in order to achieve her own happiness. For example she says at the end of her letter, "I shall need no other happiness". To me this is saying that her happiness is dependent upon the happiness of others. Would you agree?
Yes, I would definitely agree with you. Elizabeth is far too dependent on Victor for her emotional stability/happiness. She fits the stereotype of the women of her time, which I think is what Shelley may have intended. Though besides using Elizabeth as an example of the standard submissive Victorian woman, Shelley may have left Elizabeth as passive and weak in order to give Victor more prowess when next to her and also to not take away from the character of Victor for the story isn't about Elizabeth. If Shelley were to have made Elizabeth a stronger female character then her sublime presence, which transcended her time period, would have taken away from Victor. Consider Austen's works; all featured strong female protagonist which ruled the storyline - had Shelley made Elizabeth a stronger feminine lead then the focus of the story could have changed.
I think it can go both ways as to how the character Elizabeth is looked upon. From one point of view, she can be seen as pretty a stereotypical female of that century. Even back in the first chapter, Shelley ends it by having Victor's thoughts being portrayed as if he owns her; I mean in that moment he literally viewed her as a gift for him, which I found pretty ridiculous and creepy. Also, she really was presented with not much depth or layers, which doesn't help her case. Really, her only importance to the story line is her romantic relationship with Victor.
BUT with that said, in that same aspect, A LOT of Victor's happiness relies on her as well. I'd even go as far to say, more than Elizabeth's. So it can go both ways. Also, I never viewed Elizabeth as having many weaknesses. In fact, I viewed her as quite a strong character with a kind heart. We saw this during the time of Williams' death. She holds the family together and continues to have faith in the people around her for as long as she can. She is not a weak character at all. And in the sentence, "I shall need no other happiness" I don't view that as weak at all. She just loves him. That's not to say she CAN'T have other forms of happiness, but merely she doesn't need any if she has him. But also on a side note, I guess that can go into if you view love as a form of weakness or strength. And in the end, we see that Elizabeth is what really is holding the family together. After her death, Victor is sent over the edge and their father ultimately dies.
As far as I stand on the subject, I do tend to view Elizabeth's character as a strong female character with stereotypical characteristics.
^ & I think the point Eriel was making about Victor being the protagonist has a lot to do with it. The fact is, is that he was the protagonist, so Elizabeth really wasn't a character to get much attention and dynamics in the first place.
BUT, knowing about Shelley's involvement with women's rights, I WAS expecting more from Elizabeth's character. It would have been far more interesting to see some more independence highlighted in her character.
I think Shelley's most independent female was Safie. She resented her own ancestry because of their views on women, and found women independence exciting and intriguing. She rebelled against her father and her own government in order to stand up for what she believed in and for love. She was probably my favorite.
So maybe do you think Elizabeth was her view of the typical view of women in that time period and Safie was the contrasting view? I think they were both strong in their own right, but Safie showed a more rebellious side... a side that maybe represented more of Shelley's mind set...
In response to the commentary regarding Shelley's mother - her mother died before Shelley ever knew her; do you think she was more influenced by her father, William Godwin, or by the writings of her mother? I would be tempted to say that Godwin had more of an influence on her because not only did she read his writings, he was also an active presence in her life, whereas her only connection to her mother would have been her essays.
All of you make such great points. I enjoyed reading this. You all will really love Jane Eyre when we get to that. Because her character is going to dispel some of thoughts about the "classic" Victorian woman. Great points, here.
I personally found the character of Elizabeth as quite bland, passive and submissive. She didn't have any driving qualities about her that separated her from the other meek female characters in the novel. However, one female character - though a very minor character involved in a subplot of the story - stood out to me. Safie, the Turkish girl who begins living with the family of peasants that the Creature spies on. Safie, though an exceptionally minor character in the story, conveys the ideals of the 'strong woman' - essentially through the events of her past, which include defying the harsh standards of her Muslim culture. I believe one aspect of creating the Elizabeth character was to highlight the characteristics of a submissive female when juxtaposed with the compelling female. Elizabeth's only significant purpose in the events of the novel is as Victor's potential bride, his possession. She exists only to be his support system and please him.
ReplyDeleteMary Shelley was the daughter of an activist for sexual equality during the Enlightenment era of eighteenth century Europe named Mary Wollstonecraft. In Shelley's mother's essay 'A Vindication on the Rights of Women', she deliberately censures the modern woman of her time for adhering in the standards of the female stereotype - "docile, domestic, and childlike" - and serving only to please their men. The negative connotation of women is best delineated through the Elizabeth character, who Shelley uses to express her own views that were inherited from her mother while the character of Safie may potentially be a personification of the woman that Shelley and her mother strived to be.
~Eriel
That's cool that you mentioned Shelley's mother! I never knew that. Good point.
ReplyDeleteI also think that Elizabeth is a bland character, but I think that she is simply too "light". Shelley writes like she is too dramatically torn and fallen from the sadness of the murder. She seems too fragile and overly emotional. Any misfortune seems to be over dramatized in her eyes.
However, this seems apparent in a lot of the characters in the novel...
Then are you all perhaps suggesting that Elizabeth represents that passive Victorian woman? What are the virtues esteemed to women in the early 19th cent?
ReplyDeleteYes, I do believe that Elizabeth is a representation of the passive Victorian woman. She lacks personal goals and interests for herself. She lacks driving qualities that make her amiable. I actually see her as quite redundant on several occasions in the book.
ReplyDeleteThe virtues of early nineteenth century women usually depended on her marital status for when a woman was wed to a man, her rights were no different than the rights of a child. Legally, married couples were regarded as one person - of course with the male half possessing more power over the female half. When unmarried, a woman still had limited rights but they were not esteemed as the property of their own husband.
question: Would you agree, after reading Elizabeth's letter in ch 22, that the women during this time were simply too useless/unimportant and beneath the stature of men that their decisions were only based upon the mans intentions? It sounds to me like Elizabeth tries to be understanding of Victor's thoughts and emotions. I feel like she is depends too much on the emotions and situations of others in order to achieve her own happiness. For example she says at the end of her letter, "I shall need no other happiness". To me this is saying that her happiness is dependent upon the happiness of others. Would you agree?
ReplyDeleteYes, I would definitely agree with you. Elizabeth is far too dependent on Victor for her emotional stability/happiness. She fits the stereotype of the women of her time, which I think is what Shelley may have intended. Though besides using Elizabeth as an example of the standard submissive Victorian woman, Shelley may have left Elizabeth as passive and weak in order to give Victor more prowess when next to her and also to not take away from the character of Victor for the story isn't about Elizabeth. If Shelley were to have made Elizabeth a stronger female character then her sublime presence, which transcended her time period, would have taken away from Victor. Consider Austen's works; all featured strong female protagonist which ruled the storyline - had Shelley made Elizabeth a stronger feminine lead then the focus of the story could have changed.
ReplyDeleteI think it can go both ways as to how the character Elizabeth is looked upon. From one point of view, she can be seen as pretty a stereotypical female of that century. Even back in the first chapter, Shelley ends it by having Victor's thoughts being portrayed as if he owns her; I mean in that moment he literally viewed her as a gift for him, which I found pretty ridiculous and creepy. Also, she really was presented with not much depth or layers, which doesn't help her case. Really, her only importance to the story line is her romantic relationship with Victor.
ReplyDeleteBUT with that said, in that same aspect, A LOT of Victor's happiness relies on her as well. I'd even go as far to say, more than Elizabeth's. So it can go both ways. Also, I never viewed Elizabeth as having many weaknesses. In fact, I viewed her as quite a strong character with a kind heart. We saw this during the time of Williams' death. She holds the family together and continues to have faith in the people around her for as long as she can. She is not a weak character at all. And in the sentence, "I shall need no other happiness" I don't view that as weak at all. She just loves him. That's not to say she CAN'T have other forms of happiness, but merely she doesn't need any if she has him. But also on a side note, I guess that can go into if you view love as a form of weakness or strength. And in the end, we see that Elizabeth is what really is holding the family together. After her death, Victor is sent over the edge and their father ultimately dies.
As far as I stand on the subject, I do tend to view Elizabeth's character as a strong female character with stereotypical characteristics.
^ & I think the point Eriel was making about Victor being the protagonist has a lot to do with it. The fact is, is that he was the protagonist, so Elizabeth really wasn't a character to get much attention and dynamics in the first place.
BUT, knowing about Shelley's involvement with women's rights, I WAS expecting more from Elizabeth's character. It would have been far more interesting to see some more independence highlighted in her character.
I think Shelley's most independent female was Safie. She resented her own ancestry because of their views on women, and found women independence exciting and intriguing. She rebelled against her father and her own government in order to stand up for what she believed in and for love. She was probably my favorite.
So maybe do you think Elizabeth was her view of the typical view of women in that time period and Safie was the contrasting view? I think they were both strong in their own right, but Safie showed a more rebellious side... a side that maybe represented more of Shelley's mind set...
In response to the commentary regarding Shelley's mother - her mother died before Shelley ever knew her; do you think she was more influenced by her father, William Godwin, or by the writings of her mother? I would be tempted to say that Godwin had more of an influence on her because not only did she read his writings, he was also an active presence in her life, whereas her only connection to her mother would have been her essays.
ReplyDeleteAll of you make such great points. I enjoyed reading this. You all will really love Jane Eyre when we get to that. Because her character is going to dispel some of thoughts about the "classic" Victorian woman. Great points, here.
ReplyDelete