i
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree ofSarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
INTAN PARAMITA 044214032
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS
FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
ii HUSBANDS
By
INTAN PARAMITA 044214032
Approved by
Modesta Luluk Artika Windrasti, S. S June 11, 2010. Advisor
iii HUSBANDS
By
INTAN PARAMITA 044214032
Defended before the Board of Examiners on June 30, 2010
and Declared Acceptable
BOARD OF EXAMINERS
Name Signature
Chairman : Dr. Francis Borgias Alip, M. Pd., M. A ______________________ Secretary : Drs. Hirmawan Wijanarka, M. Hum ______________________ Member : Tatang Iskarna, S. S., M. Hum ______________________ Member : Modesta Luluk Artika Windrasti, S. S ______________________ Member : Ni Luh Putu Rosiandani, S. S.,M.Hum ______________________
Yogyakarta, June 30, 2010 Faculty of Letters Sanata Dharma University
Dean
iv
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma :
Nama : Intan Paramita
Nomor Mahasiswa : 044214032
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul :
The Conflicts Resulted on Different Views of Marriage Found in Atherton’s
American Wives and English Husbands
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, me-ngalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya. Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal : 28 Juni 2010.
Yang menyatakan,
v
vi
and merciful God, Jesus Christ. I feel extremely blessed for giving me so many amazing gifts in my life and one of the best of all is being able to finish my thesis.
I would like to thank Modesta Luluk Artika Windrasti, S. S, as my advisor. I really thank her for her patient guidance, kindness and the times that she has given me; from the beginning until the time I finish this thesis. I would also like to thank Ni Luh Putu Rosiandani, S. S., M. Hum for the nice discussions and for the helpful suggestions for my thesis.
vii as my family.
I want to dedicate my gratitude to my beloved husband Felix Wahyu Damardono (and our will-born-baby that always accompany me in doing my thesis, Love you so much my baby!, thank you for giving me a chance to be your mother), we have gone through everything, good and bad, together. Thank you for the faith you have given to me when hope began to fade, for always being my side when I could never face the world by myself and giving me strength to stand still together, for your love, care, support, and-too many-advices. I would never finish my thesis without your patient companion and you are the one who always gets angry and says “ karepmu arep rampung kapan, ndut!” when I stopped doing my thesis, but I love you still.
viii
TITLE PAGE... i
APPROVAL PAGE... ii
ACCEPTANCE PAGE... iii
LEMBAR PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH...iv
MOTTO PAGE ...v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS... viii
ABSTRACT... ix
ABSTRAK...x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ...1
A. Background of the Study...1
B. Problem Formulation ...3
C. Objectives of the Study...4
D. Definition of Terms ...4
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW ...6
A. Review of Related Studies ...6
B. Review of Related Theories ...8
1. Theories of Characterization ...8
2. Theories of Marriage in General ...10
3. Theories of Marriage in Nineteenth-Century England...11
4. Theories of American Women in Nineteenth-Century England ...15
5. Theories of Conflict ...16
C. Theoretical Framework...18
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ...19
A. Object of the Study...19
B. Approach of the Study ...20
C. Method of the Study ...21
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS ...23
A. Lee Tarlton’s Views of Marriage………. 24
B. Cecil Maundrell, His Family, and His Friends’ Views of Marriage….31 C. Conflicts Resulted from the Difference Views of Marriage...….. 38
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION………..57
BIBLIOGRAPHY ………..59
ix
Marriage Found in Atherton’s American Wives and English Husbands.
Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University.
This study analyzes a novel by Gertrude Atherton entitledAmerican Wives and English Husbands. There are three problems formulated in this study. The first problem is to describe how the main character, Lee Tarlton, views marriage. The second problem is to describe how Lee’s husband, Cecil Maundrell, his family and friends view marriage. The third problem is to discover the conflicts that result from the difference between Lee Tarlton’s views and Cecil Maundrell, his family and friends’ views of marriage, and the results of those conflicts.
This study uses Abrams, Holman, and Murphy’s theories of character and characterization, Gough, Gallagher, and Goldman’s theories of marriage in general, Brown and Broude’s theories of marriage in nineteenth-century England, Redman, Holman and Harmon’s theories of conflict, and Gabin’s theory of American women in nineteenth-century England. Library research is chosen as the method, and this study also employs socio-historical approach.
x
Marriage Found in Atherton’s American Wives and English Husbands.
Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Skripsi ini menganalisis sebuah novel karya Gertrude Atherton yang berjudulAmerican Wives and English Husbands. Ada tiga rumusan permasalahan dalam skripsi ini. Yang pertama, untuk menggambarkan bagaimana tokoh utama, Lee Tarlton, memandang sebuah pernikahan. Yang kedua, untuk menggambarkan bagaimana suami Lee, Cecil Maundrell, keluarganya, dan teman-temannya memandang suatu pernikahan. Yang ketiga adalah untuk mengetahui konflik-konflik apa saja yang timbul dari perbedaan pandangan tentang pernikahan antara Lee Tarlton dan Cecil Maundrell, keluarga Lee dan teman- temannya memandang pernikahan, dan tentu saja akibat dari adanya konflik tersebut
Skripsi ini menggunakan teori karakter dan karakterisasi dari Abrams, Holman, dan Murphy; teori tentang pernikahan secara umum dari Gough, Gallagher, dan Goldman; teori mengenai pernikahan di Inggris pada abad ke-19 dari Brown dan Broude; teori mengenai konflik dari Holman dan Harmon; dan juga teori dari Gabin tentang wanita Amerika di Inggris pada abad ke-19. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah melalui perpustakaan, dan skripsi ini juga menggunakan pendekatan sosial-historis
1
A. Background
Literature is often considered as a reflection of reality. In the book Studying Literary Theory: An Introduction, Webster states that besides a
reflection of reality, literature is also a part of reality.
Literature is as much a part and product of the world as any other signifying process and is as much a part of reality as a reflection on it (Webster, 1996: 55).
Thus, by examining a literary work, we can learn many things about the condition in the real world, for instance about people’s behaviour, culture, and so on.
This phenomenon can be seen in the literary work entitledAmerican Wives and English Husbands, a novel written by Gertrude Atherton. The novel was
published in the year 1898, and the story is set in the nineteenth century. The novel focuses on the life of the protagonist, a young American woman named Lee Tarlton. Lee gets married to an English man named Cecil Mandrell, who brings her to his home in England. Although marriage has a universal basic concept as a legal union of a man and a woman, as a cultural practice, it is comprehended differently by each culture. Every culture has its own views of marriage, which includes the roles, expectations, obligations, rights, and so on.
Historically, many Americans were descended from English people, and many aspects of the Americans’ culture were actually derived from the English culture. However, the impact of culture in America was no longer as strong as its root in England due to the Americans’ new place and addition of other cultures. As described by Atherton herself, Englishwomen “were very much of a pattern the result of centuries of breeding in uninterrupted conditions”, while “it was the very reverse that made up nine-tenths of the fascination of the American woman” (1898: 117).
and Cecil mutually love each other and agree to commit their relationship in a marriage, Lee undergoes conflicts in her marriage, which become the main conflicts of this novel.
These conflicts due to different views of marriage become the topic examined in this study. The writer is interested to conduct a study on this topic and this novel because here the writer can apply Webster’s idea about the novel as reflection of reality and learn more about human culture by examining the reflection in this novel. Moreover, through this study, the writer and the readers of this study can learn more about the culture of marriage in the place and era which is very far from our own place and era, with views and practices which might be very different from what we find now, through the media of a literary work.
B. Problem Formulation
In order to guide the subjects under discussion, the problems are formulated in the following questions.
1. How does Lee Tarlton view marriage in Atherton’s American Wives and English Husbands?
2. How do Cecil Maundrell, his family, and his friends view marriage in Atherton’sAmerican Wives and English Husbands?
C. Objectives of the Study
This study aims to answer the research questions formulated above. The first objective of the study is to describe how the main character, Lee Tarlton, views marriage; the second objective is to describe how Lee’s husband, Cecil Maundrell, his family, and his friends view marriage, and the third objective is to discover the conflicts that result from the difference between Lee’s views and Cecil, his family, and his friends’ views of marriage in nineteenth-century England.
D. Definition of Terms
To avoid misunderstanding and to help the readers understand this paper, some important words are defined in this part, based on the definitions taken from books and the Internet.
1. Marriage
Marriage is defined in Oxford dictionary as "the formal union of a man and a woman, by which they become husband and wife". However, there are many other definitions of marriage. In the United States of America, the marriage laws differ in each state. For example, in the U. S. Code (Acts of Congress), Title 1, Section 7, “marriage” is defined as "a legal union between one man and one
woman as husband and wife"
2. Conflict
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL REVIEW
A. Review of Related Studies
The first related study is an encyclopedia article about Gertrude Atherton, the author of the novel, from Encyclopedia of World Biography. Gertrude Atherton was born as Gertrude Horn in 1857 in San Francisco, California. Her father was a tobacco and cigar businessman and her mother had Southern aristocratic blood. They divorced when Gertrude was two years old. Then she lived with her maternal grandfather, who was a relative of Benjamin Franklin, in San Jose, California. Her grandfather introduced her to literature at a young age, and she had been writing since she was fourteen years old. She did not finish her formal education in Kentucky and went home at the age of seventeen. In 1876, she got married and ran away with George Bowen Atherton, a very rich man who was at first dating Gertrude's mother. Her marriage was not happy and she had little freedom. She secretly wrote her first novel entitled The Randolphs of Redwoods in 1882 at nights, which was protested by her family. After her husband died in 1887, she had a lot of time and enough money to become a writer. She wrote novels, short stories, as well as weekly column and journalism articles.
According to the article, three of Atherton's most successful novels introduced "what became known as the new Western-American woman" (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3404708151.html) as the main character, namely Patience Sparhawk(1897) about a lower class woman in the West in the
1890s who tried to succeed and be self-reliant,The Californians (1898), with the theme of man versus woman and of nature, about a woman who tried to fight an oppressive Spanish society, and American Wives and English Husbands (1898) about "an independent woman, an American from California who marries an English gentleman" (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3404708151.html). Atherton's writings usually "feature strong heroines and are often set in her native state" (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3404708151.html). She died in 1948 in San Francisco.
The second related study is a review of American Wives and English Husbands from a blog entitled "Reading California Fiction", which discusses literary works set in California. The reviewer discusses the content of the story and describes the main characters. Lee is described as "a fiesty young woman with an independent streak" and Cecil as "a well-meaning bore who values tradition" (http://readingcalifornia.typepad.com/reading_california_fictio/2008/08/american-wives-and-english-husbands.html). The reviewer believes that the characters' traits reflect their respective cultures.
Atherton sees these traits as typical of their two nations. So their marriage, if it occurs, will illustrate the similarities and differences between English and
American cultures
(http://readingcalifornia.typepad.com/reading_california_fictio/2008/08/ame rican-wives-and-english-husbands.html).
Atherton's American Wives and English Husbands as an example of the tradition of wearing excessive jewellery at that time as well as the social tradition at that time in American and English society.
"I've seen women actually turn grey under the weight of their tiaras," says a character in a novel by Gertrude Atherton called American Wives and English Husbands. As the 19th century wore on, there were more and more American wives of English husbands, trading fortunes for titles (http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/mar/23/books.guardianreview1).
B. Review of Related Theories 1. Theories of Characterization
Characters are the “persons presented in a dramatic or narrative work, who are interpreted by the reader as being endowed with moral, dispositional, and emotional qualities that are expresses in what they say—the dialogue—and by what they do—the action” (Abrams, 1981: 23). Just like persons in real life, the characters have their own way of thinking, saying, or doing something. Characterization is the way in which a character is created (Gill, 1995: 127).
While according to Murphy, there are nine ways of characterization in a literary work. Those nine ways are personal description, character as seen by other, speech, past life, conversation of others, reactions, direct comment, thoughts, and mannerism. Through personal descriptions, the author can describe a character by using the appearance and clothes. Through character as seen by other, the author can describe a character through the view, opinions, attitudes, and comments of other characters (1972: 162-172).
2. Theories of Marriage in General
Marriage is "the formal union of a man and a woman, by which they become husband and wife," as defined in Oxford Dictionary(1995: 718). Gough cites a definition of marriage by Murdock in Notes and Queries in Anthropology as "a union between a man and a woman such that children born to the woman are recognized legitimate offspring of both parents" (Murdock in Gough, 1959: 23). According to Gallagher, every human society has some form of marriage. In complex societies which are governed by law, marriage is not a "private romantic declaration" or part of religious rite, but also a "public legal act". Therefore, marriage forms a complicated system.
As a practically universal human idea, marriage is about regulating the reproduction of children, families, society. While marriage systems differ, marriage across societies is a public sexual union that creates kinship obligations and sharing of resources between men, women, and the children their sexual union may produce (Gallagher, 2002: 2).
women into a relatively narrow but highly fruitful channel" (2002: 9); thus, childbearing and raising is encouraged in marriage.
Meanwhile, Goldman states in her article entitled “Marriage and Love” that marriage and love are not related and “are, in fact, antagonistic to each other” (2005: 275). Marriage is not a result of love between two people, and on the other hand, love cannot result from marriage. Rather, marriage is described as an economic arrangement.
Marriage is primarily an economic arrangement, an insurance pact. It differs from the ordinary life insurance agreement only in that it is more binding, more exacting (2005: 275).
Marriage always has some economical purposes for both sides, the man and the woman. As described in the quote above, Goldman compares a marriage with an insurance pact just like the ordinary life insurance.
3. Theories of Marriage in Nineteenth-Century England
The theories of marriage in nineteenth-century England are specifically reviewed here because the analysis will focus on Lee and Cecil’s marriage, which occurs in England, among the English society. Therefore, the element of English marriage is more dominant in Lee and Cecil’s marriage rather than American marriage.
Marriage in nineteenth-century England is strongly related to the historical condition at that era. As described by Brown in A Reader's Guide to the Nineteenth-Century English Novel, after the Protestant Reformation, the idea of
steadily (1985: 76). Also, industrialization in the Victorian era took men away from their homes to work in the all-male professions and changed the position of middle-class wives, making them economically useless in the home (1985: 70).
At that time, women could not work because there was no professional job available for women. Therefore, they could not live independently. The only job for women was to become a governess, commonly described as the “governess slave-trade” because “minimum wage and hour limitation for workers did not exist at the time” (Brown, 1985: 63). Even then, the available job was very limited. In 1869, the Home for Unemployed Governesses took in 24, 000 women and turned away many more (1985: 63). While according to Jane Austen, marriage “was the only honourable provision for a well-educated young woman of small fortune, and however uncertain of giving happiness, must be their pleasantest preservative from want” (1972, 163).
Even if a woman came from a rich family with enough money to support her life, unmarried women were given bad stigma and would be ostracized by the society. It would not only destroy the woman’s reputation, but also her family’s reputation. A woman called Louisa Garrett Anderson wrote about attitudes towards marriage in the 1860s: “To remain single was thought a disgrace and at thirty an unmarried woman was called an old maid. After their parents died, what
could they do, where could they go?”
It was very difficult for women to obtain a divorce. The Matrimonial Causes Act, which was issued in 1857 and lasted until 1923, had a double standard for men and women. A man could divorce his wife if she was proven to do adultery, but a woman could only divorce her husband if he was proven to do adultery as well as cruelty or desertion (Brown, 1985: 74-75). After the divorce, the woman loses all her properties, as described below.
Throughout the Victorian age, children were considered the property of the father and automatically went with him in the event of divorce. In a well-known case early in the century, Caroline Norton had to fight to receive the proceeds from her own writing and to visit her own children after leaving a husband who badly mistreated her (Brown, 1985: 75). Running away from home was illegal for any reason. Even if the husbands treat them badly or abuse them, women must endure it.
Until the end of the century, a wife could be put in prison if she refused to return to the conjugal home, and the husband could confine his wife himself in the event of such behavior (Brown, 1985: 75).
In the nineteenth-century marriage, the woman’s sole duty is to take care of her husband, the house, and their children, from feeding them, cleaning after them, to entertaining them. Because women in that era had no other choice of lifestyle, they regarded their marriage life as her “vocation”.
The wife was both the ideal itself, since she was the spirit of the Victorian home, and the seeker after the ideal, since marriage was her vocation and sole option in life: a psychologically intolerable box to be in (Brown, 1985: 76-77).
As described above, women’s life was focused on her marriage, not only physically but also psychologically. Because they had no access to education or work, as described by Brown, “women place their hopes for personal fulfilment not in love but in the social, moral, and intellectual challenges they can get from marriage” (1985: 76). This is supported by Calder in her book Women and Marriage in Victorian Fiction, who described the situation in nineteenth century
England as the situation “in which women had no status except as a daughter and a wife, and where, if she were deprived of her belief that marriage was both a worthy ambition and her salvation, she would be deprived of life” (1976: 19).
Cross-Cultural Encyclopedia, “romantic love is more likely to be found in cultures
where spouses are not highly dependent upon each other for their subsistence. By contrast, where there is a high interdependence of spouses in subsistence activities, romantic love is less important” (1994: 266). When a husband and wife are necessary to each other's economic well-being, their mutual needs keep their marriage. They do not need romantic love as the “cement” to stabilize their marriage (Broude, 1994: 266- 267).
4. Theory of American Women in Nineteenth-Century England
In this study, the writer is not comparing or contrasting American marriage and English marriage. Instead, the writer describes an American woman’s reaction to the tradition of marriage in nineteenth-century England. In general, the marriage in America actually did not have any significant difference with marriage in England at that time. The factor that made a significant difference between America and England was the characteristics of the American women, who were less easily influenced by the tradition, including the tradition of marriage. Therefore, it is important to discuss the theory of American women in nineteenth-century England as a reference to better understand American women such as Lee in this novel, who has her own views and try to defend them. Although this theory is not directly quoted or applied, it is highly useful to help the readers understand about Lee and her views of marriage.
century, to be precise between about 1870 and the end of the First World War. The women were Americans who became expatriates, lived, and worked in London, England. There are fifteen women analyzed in this study, including Jennie Jerome Churchill, the mother of Winston Churchill, the novelist Gertrude Atherton, the journalist Elizabeth Banks, actresses Mary Anderson, Eleanor Calhoun, Edna May, Cora Potter, Elizabeth Robins and Genevieve Ward, writers Pearl Craigie and Elizabeth Penell, the poet Louise Moulton Chandler, and the singer and composer Mary Frances Ronalds.
This study analyzes the kinds of women who became expatriates, why they chose London, how their Americanness helped them and how that American identity alters over time as they either do or do not become Anglicised (Gabin, 2006: 3). Gabin sees these American women as bringing with them from their native country a certain kind of Americanness, a “verve and independent spirit” which “injected a new energy and dynamism into old London” (2006: 60). According to her, they all show ‘a very distinctive American trait: the ability to reinvent oneself” (2006: 60).
5. Theories of Conflict
protagonist’s struggle against someone or something, conflict also shows motivation and goal that want to be achieved (1986: 108). While according to Redman, conflict is something that appears from how the central character deals with other forces. It is the central character’s responsibility to solve the conflict. Conflict is ended when central character succeeds or fails to overcome the other forces (Redman, 1962:363).
There are two types of conflict: inner conflict and external conflict. Inner conflict refers to a struggle inside the heart and mind of the protagonist (Redman, 1962: 363). This conflict does not involve any physical struggle and usually cannot even be seen in any visible form, because it happens inside the protagonist’s self. Inner conflict always puts “two elements within the person” (Holman and Harmon, 1986: 107), namely confronting the character’s thought with his or her feeling.
struggle against destiny. This conflict is about the protagonist’s effort in dealing with the greatest force or his or her creator in order to build or change his or her own destiny (1986: 108).
C. Theoretical Framework
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
A. Object of the Study
American Wives and English Husbands is Gertrude Atherton’s novel which was written in 1898. The novel consists of 318 pages and is divided into 23 chapters. It was published in New York by International Association of Newspapers and in 1901.
American Wives and English Husbands is one of the most successful novels of Gertrude Atherton. The novel describes the life of Lee Tarlton as the major character. She is an American who used to be a rich girl. Because of her father’s bad habit in gambling, he loses all of his money and leads his family into bankruptcy. He commits suicide by shooting himself. As a result, Lee and her mother have to live in poverty.
As a child, Lee meets Cecil Barnstaple, a young English boy who lives near her boarding house. They become good friends and he helps to take care of Lee when her mother dies. One day, Cecil has to leave America and goes back to England, and he promises to Lee that one day he will marry her. Lee grows up as a young beautiful lady under the care of Mrs. Montgomery’s, one of Mrs. Tarlton’s best friends who takes care of Lee after Lee’s mother’s death.
After several years, Lee meets Cecil again and they finally get married. They actually love each other, but their marriage is not as easy as they think, because they have different views on marriage itself. They come from different
countries, so they also have different perspectives about marriage. Both Lee and Cecil insist on keeping their own perspective about marriage, so they undergo some conflicts. They almost separate once, but they try to go back together again.
B. Approach
This study employs socio-historical approach. According to Guerin, historical approach is a part of the traditional approach of literary criticism. The traditional approach dominated the study of literature until early 20th century and still used in classrooms presently (1999: 16). Guerin also defines historical approach as the approach that sees a literary work as a reflection of the life and times of the author or the characters in the work: “this approach sees a literary work chiefly, if not exclusively, as a reflection of its author's life and times or the life and times of the characters in the work” (1999: 51).
Based on the definition above, this approach analyzes literary works through circumstances surrounding them, such as the condition at the time when the work is written or the intention of the literary work. As discussed by Bressler inLiterary Criticism an Introduction to Theory and Practice:
At the beginning of the twentieth century, historical and biographical research dominated literary scholarship. Criticism’s function, many believed, was to discover the historical context of the text and to ascertain how the authors’ lives influenced their writings (1999: 38).
and English Husbands is set. Even though the readers do not live in nineteenth-century England, the novel can be understood better if the novel it is analyzed based on references or information about condition of society in nineteenth-century England, or in other words, if the novel is analyzed using this approach. This is supported by Guerin’s idea that “a historical novel is likely to be more meaningful when either its milieu or that of its author is understood” (1999: 52).
C. Method of the Study
This study applies the library research method, meaning that the information is gathered from books and articles from the internet. The object of study is Gertrude Atherton’s novel entitled American Wives and English Husbands, while the theories consist of Holman and Murphy’s theories of
characterization, Murdock, Gallagher, and Goldman’s general theories of marriage, and Brown, Calder, and Broude’s theories of marriage in nineteenth-century England.
CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS
This chapter analyzes the problems formulated in the first chapter. The focus of this analysis is to show how people’s way of life and way of thinking in a certain era can be seen in a literary work created in that era, namely Atherton’s American Wives and English Husbands, rather than to make a complete research
about social life in nineteenth-century England. Therefore, the characters and events discussed here only include characters and events from the novel, instead of real characters or real historical events in nineteenth-century England.
Although the married couple depicted in this novel consists of both Cecil as the husband and Lee as the wife, this study focuses on Lee Tarlton for two reasons. Firstly, although there are some major characters, Lee is the main character or protagonist, who is described by Abrams as “the chief character on whom the readers’ interest centers” (1981: 224). Lee is the center of the readers’ interest, which is shown in the content of the novel itself. Throughout the novel, the omniscient narrator follows Lee’s life from childhood until adulthood, even including Lee’s background before she was born, and describes Lee’s feelings and characteristics in detail, while Cecil is only described briefly and not in detail. Secondly, this study discusses the conflicts in a literary work. As stated in the second chapter, conflict in literary works occurs between the protagonist and the other forces. Therefore, the conflicts in this novel are focused on Lee, whether against her husband, against other people, even against the society, because of her
values or her views. Cecil is involved in the conflict against Lee, but besides that, he does not experience any other conflict at all. Because of those two reasons, this study just discusses Lee instead of Cecil.
This chapter is divided into three parts. Each part functions to answer each problem formulation. The first part discusses Lee Tarlton’s views of marriage as shown in the novel, the second part discusses Cecil, his family, and his friends' views of marriage as shown in the novel, and the third part discusses the conflicts that result from the differences between Lee’s views and Cecil, his family, and his friends views.
A. Lee Tarlton’s Views of Marriage
are relatively more brave to have their own views, even though the views might be different from the society’s views in general.
First, Lee views marriage in an idealistic way, according to Murphy’s theory of characterization, which will be discussed in detail later. In other words, people get married purely because of love and attraction between the man and the woman. Marriage is based on personal attraction to an individual's characteristics and usually physical attractiveness. Based on Murphy’s theory of characterization, Lee’s view is shown through Lee’s past life, the conversation of others, speech, and thoughts in the novel.
According to Murphy, through past life, the author can describe a clue to events that help to shape characteristics by giving the readers the character’s past life (1972: 165). Through Lee’s past life, it can be seen that Lee’s idealistic view of marriage is developed from her mother’s teachings and examples. Since her childhood, Lee’s mother has always taught her to maintain her beauty and manners so that she will attract man for good marriage in the future. According to Lee's mother, a woman's beauty and manners are the main source of attraction for men, which will then lead them to get married. The more beautiful a woman is and the better manners she has, the better husband and better marriage she will get. That is why, Lee’s mother says, “Why are American women the most successful in the world? Because they know how to be beautiful” (1901: 13). Her mother also gives Lee a lot of advice to be beautiful and to attract men, even when Lee is only eleven years old.
won't catch anything; and do stand up straight, and you must wear a veil when these horrid trade winds blow. Beauty is the whole battle of life for a woman, honey, and if you only do grow up pretty and are properly, you will be sure to marry well (1901: 10).
Lee also learns from the example of Lee’s mother’s own experience, which she often hears. In her youth, Lee’s mother was very beautiful and well-mannered. Although her family in New Orleans no longer had much money after the Civil War, Lee’s father was greatly attracted to her. It was her beauty and manners which attracted Lee's father, and they got married less than a month after they met.
Marguerite inherited her impulsiveness and vivacity ; and, for the rest, was ethereally pretty, as dainty and fastidious as a young princess, and had the soft manner and the romantic heart of the convent maiden. Hayward Tarlton captured twelve dances on this night of her triumphant debut, and proposed a week later. They were married within the month ... (1901: 6). As a result of her past life, Lee grows up with the view that love and attraction are the main factors that motivate people to get married.
also tells that she “has had other offers, you know, and some from very rich men" (1901: 95). However, Lee just asks Tiny about whether she is in love with him.
Lee jerked her knees up to her chin and gave a gurgle of delight. "Are you in love with him?" she asked softly. “Do tell me, Tiny?” (1901: 95)
Lee’s question to Tiny above shows that she is much concerned and places much importance in love when Tiny plans to get married.
According to Murphy, the author can describe a character by giving readers an insight into the characteristics through the way he or she speaks (1972: 164). Lee’s speech about marriage reveals her idealistic view of marriage. For example, she describes her attraction and love to Cecil, a man who has been her friend since childhood. She says that it has been her “dearest dream” to get married to Cecil. Therefore, her speech shows that her wish to get married to Cecil is based on idealistic dream rather than any practical purpose.
"All the same I won't give up Cecil," said Lee obstinately. “It has been my dearest dream, and I won't even think about it’s being all a sham." (1901: 108)
According to Murphy, through thoughts, the author gives readers direct knowledge of what a person is thinking about (1972: 170). When she thinks about a couple who are her acquaintance, Lee’s thought shows that she does not agree with men who married a woman for her money. Lee admits that there might be marriages that are motivated by financial reason, but she thinks the decent thing is to obscure or hide the financial motive. If a man has no money and marries a woman for her money, for example, he still has to pretend to work.
had the decency to affect the habit of the worker, if it were only to write alleged poems for the magazines, or to attach himself to a Legation (1901: 191).
If something must be hidden, it means that thing is negative or bad. This thought indirectly shows that according to Lee, people should not married for money but rather for love and attraction.
Second, Lee views marriage in a romantic way, according to Murphy’s theory of characterization, which will be discussed in detail later. In other words, a husband and a wife must constantly show their love and affection throughout their married life. Romantic acts are an inseparable part of marriage. Based on Murphy’s theory of characterization, this view is shown through Lee’s past life and the conversation of others in the novel.
Through conversations of others, the author can also provide a clue about a character through the conversation of other people and what they say about him or her (Murphy, 1972: 166). Through Lee’s conversation with her mother, the author shows Lee’s romantic view about marriage. Lee’s mother tells her that when Lee’s father was alive, he used to button Lee’s mother’s boot, put her to bed, and cut up her meat. Lee then responds with awe and longing, as shown in the following quotation.
" Did you never, never button your own boots, memmy?" asked Lee one day, as she was performing that office.
" Never, honey. When Dinah was ill your father always buttoned them, and after she died he wouldn't have thought of letting any one else touch them; most people pinch so. Of course he could not do my hair, but he often put me to bed, and he always cut up my meat."
" Do all men do those things for their wives ? " asked Lee in a voice of awe; "I think they must be very nice" (1901: 9-10).
As another example, this view is also shown in Lee’s conversation as a grown-up woman with Randolph, a man who likes her. When Randolph proposes Lee, she asks him whether he would button her boots.
"Would you button my boots? " asked Lee merrily. "Of course I would" (1901: 102)
"It is all a matter of temperament, of course. Try and not expect too much, and it will be easier. An Englishman simply won't keep on telling you that he loves you."
“Mine will, or there '11 be trouble" (1901: 167).
All of the three conversations show that Lee places importance on romantic acts done by a man to his wife in a marriage, and that she expects her husband to do such romantic acts in their marriage.
Third, Lee regards the wife as more dominant to the husband in a marriage, according to Murphy’s theory of characterization, which will be discussed in detail later. It is the husband that adapts to the wife and obeys her. When a man is married and has a wife, he will obey most of her requests. She thinks this way because of her mother’s indoctrination and because of her own thinking, which results from her childhood upbringing. Based on Murphy’s theory of characterization, this view is shown through Lee’s past life.
Through past life, the author can describe a clue to events that help to shape characteristics by giving the readers the character’s past life (Murphy, 1972: 165). From her past life experience with her parents, Lee directly sees and learns that a man should adapt to his wife and obeys her requests. Lee’s father obeys and adapts to Lee’s mother, as shown in the author’s description that “he was the slave of her lightest whim” (1901: 7). Furthermore, as already described before, Lee’s father does everything requested by Lee’s mother, such as buttoning her boots, putting her to bed, and cutting up her meat, even though they actually have a servant called Dinah.
them; most people pinch so. Of course he could not do my hair, but he often put me to bed, and he always cut up my meat." (1901: 9)
When Lee asks her mother whether all men do such things for their wives, her mother answer that all men “who are fit to marry” (1901: 9) do those things. Thus, it becomes a lesson that Lee learns from her past life that good husbands are supposed to obey, serve, and adapt to their wives, as shown in the quotation below.
“Do all men do those things for their wives?” asked Lee in a voice of awe; "I think they must be very nice."
“All men who are fit to marry, and all Southern men, you may be sure (1901: 9-10).
B. Cecil Maundrell, His Family, and His Friends’ Views of Marriage
This part analyzes Cecil Maundrell, his family, and his friends’ views of marriage, as shown in the novel. These views shown in the novel are indeed personal views, but they have also become the common views of marriage in nineteenth-century English society, as supported by the theories. To analyze Cecil, his family, and his friends’ views of marriage, Brown, Calder, and Broude’s theories of marriage in nineteenth-century England are used. Cecil, his family, and his friends view marriage in three ways, namely practical, not romantic, and as an institution in which the husband dominates the wife.
From the husband’s perspective, this view is supported by Brown’s theory of economic arrangement in nineteenth-century English marriages. Brown states that when a man and a woman get married, all of the woman’s properties automatically belong to her husband. Based on English matrimonial law until 1883, the husband became the owner of all property of his wife, including real estate, through marriage (1975: 73). This theory indirectly confirms and validates the nineteenth-century England society’s view that financial gain for the husband can become one of the factors that motivate marriage.
This view is demonstrated by Lord Barnstaple, Cecil's father, himself. Lord Barnstaple marries his second wife, Emmy, for her money. Lord Barnstaple has a title, which means he has aristocratic descent and high position in the society, but he does not have money. On the contrary, Emmy has a lot of money, but she is craving for high position in English upper-class society. Cecil describes his parents’ marriage in his statament, "But my stepmother has the money and is awfully keen on me, so they live together usually" (1901: 35). Meanwhile, when Lee learns about their arrangement of marriage, she is a little upset with the fact that Lord Barnstaple, as a man, actually lives on a woman’s money.
Lee wondered at even a dilapidated set of ideals, and at a pride and pride was written all over him which would permit him to live on a woman's money (1901: 191).
they do not get married. Furthermore, it is supported by Louisa Garrett Anderson’s statement that “to remain single was thought a disgrace”, and that a single woman would have nothing to do and nowhere to go after her parents’ death (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Wmarriage.htm). This theory confirms and validates the nineteenth-century England society’s view that position or security can become one of the factors that motivate marriage.
This view is not only demonstrated by Lord Barnstaple, but also by Emmy, Lord Barnstaple’s second wife. As discussed above, Lord Barnstaple marries Emmy for her money, but on the other hand, Emmy also has a particular purpose in marrying Lord Barnstaple. She marries Lord Barnstaple to gain social position. Thus, through her marriage to Lord Barnstaple, she gets a title as a Lady and social position in exchange for her money, as shown in Randolph’s description, “Lady Barnstaple has cut into her capital trying to keep up with smart London. She is simply mad to be known as one of the three or four smartest women in society, and the smartest American” (1901: 100). Lee also describes Lord and Lady Barnstaple’s practical view of marriage in her statement, “Of course he may have argued that Lady Barnstaple was paying a fair yearly rent for the title and the Abbey” (1901: 191).
instead of as a private affair, or “an essentially private, intimate, emotional relationship created by two people for their own personal reasons" (2002: 5).
This is further demonstrated in Lord and Lady Barnstaple’s marriage. They just use the marriage as a publicly acknowledged union to legally get what they want, namely money for Lord Barnstaple and social position for Lady Barnstaple. Their marriage itself is not happy because they do not have good private, intimate, and emotional relationship, and neither of them conceal that fact. Their marriage is described by a family friend below.
"She and Barnstaple lead a cat-and-dog life. She gives him immense sums to keep him from leaving her, for without him she'd drop out; she has no real hold. When she calls him a cad, he calls her a tuft-hunter, a parvenu, and a pushing failure" (1901: 100).
Thus, what keeps Lord and Lady Barnstaple together is their mutual practical needs, which are validated in a public union called marriage.
Second, Cecil, his family, and his friends do not view marriage in a romantic way. In other words, a husband and a wife do not need to show their love and affection throughout their married life. Romantic acts are not necessarily a part of marriage. Romantic acts such as saying "I love you", buying presents, or doing other things to spoil one's spouse are regarded as unnecessary in marriage according to the English culture.
mutual needs to keep their marriage (Broude, 1994: 266- 267). To continue the first view explained above, namely practical view of marriage, the nineteenth-century English marriages are commonly based on mutual needs. For example, as already discussed above, the husband needs the money and the wife needs social position and security. Thus, romantic love is not really needed in the nineteenth-century English marriage.
This view is explained by Tiny Montgomery, Lee’s close friend. Tiny, who is married to an Englishman, tells Lee about the Englishman's lack of romantic acts. According to Tiny Montgomery, English husbands do not want to say their love to their wives more than once, because they want their wives to take it for granted that they love their wives, as shown in the quotation below.
"It is all a matter of temperament, of course. Try and not expect too much, and it will be easier. An Englishman simply won't keep on telling you that he loves you. [...] When they’ve told you once they love you, they don't see why you can't take it for granted ever after" (1901: 167).
Supported by Tiny's idea, this view is also demonstrated by Cecil Maundrell himself. Cecil does not feel it necessary to express his affection towards Lee, his own wife, in romantic acts such as hugging, kissing, or telling Lee that he loves her. He is willing to do those actions, but he does it awkwardly and uneasily, as shown in the description of “glanced uneasily about” in the quotation below. Tiny’s explanation and Cecil’s example show that English husbands do not view romantic love as something necessary in their marriage.
This unromantic view of marriage is also supported by Gallagher’s theory of marriage as a public affair, in which marriage becomes "a publicly acknowledged and supported sexual union between a man and woman which creates rights and obligations between the couple " (Gallagher, 2002: 9) rather than as a private affair, or “an essentially private, intimate, emotional relationship created by two people for their own personal reasons" (2002: 5). In the common view of marriage in nineteenth-century England, the public acknowledgment of the union becomes the more important thing compared to the intimacy of emotional relationship between the husband and wife.
In the example of Cecil and Lee above, Cecil’s question “When do you think you will take it for granted?" (1901: 185) shows that even after he tells Lee about his love to her, he is expecting her to take it for granted in the future, so he will not need to say it again.
Third, Cecil, his family, and his friends regard the husband as more dominant than the wife in a marriage. It is the wife that adapts to the husband and obeys him. When a man is married and has a wife, the wife will obey his requests or commands. They think this way because of the strong, long-standing patriarchal culture in their society at that time which places men higher than women, as already discussed in the theories in the second chapter.
man could divorce his wife if she was proven to do adultery, but a woman could only divorce her husband if he was proven to do adultery as well as cruelty or desertion (Brown, 1985: 74-75). It is illegal for women to run away from home for any reason, even if the husbands treat them badly or abuse them (1985: 75). Lastly, women must focus their life on their marriage and their husbands both physically and psychologically, as shown in Brown’s statement: “marriage was her vocation and sole option in life: a psychologically intolerable box to be in” (Brown, 1985: 76-77). This theory confirms the nineteenth-century England society’s view that the husband dominates the wife in a marriage.
This view is demonstrated by Cecil himself, as exemplified by the debate between Cecil and Lee when they are still young teenagers. As an Englishman, Cecil believed men should not be ordered or told what to do by women, but as an American, Lee believed the contrary. Each of them gives examples from their own life, as shown in the quotation below.
"Oh well I'll do it; but I ought to have offered. Girls ought not to tell boys what to do."
"My mother always told her husband and brothers and cousins to do everything she wanted, and they always did it."
"Well, I've got a grandmother and seven old maid aunts, and they never asked me to do a thing in their lives. They wait on me. They'd do anything for me."
"You ought to be ashamed of yourself. Boys were made to wait on girls." "They were not. I never heard such rot." (1901: 21-22)
Lastly, as an Englishman, Cecil tells Lee about the way he views marriage according to his own culture:
"You see an Englishman is certain of several things if he marries a perfectly normal Englishwoman of his own class. She will obey him, she will have as many children as he wishes, her scheme of life will be his, and, no matter how bright she may be, she will adapt herself to him which is not the least important point. An Englishman simply cannot adapt himself to anybody. It isn't in him" (1901: 142-143)
Cecil’s speech shows that in general, Englishmen are not used to adapting to their wives or doing what they wives wish them to do. It proves that husbands generally dominate their wives in nineteenth-century English marriage, and thus, it is the wives who are obliged to serve, obey, and adapt to the husbands.
C. Conflicts Resulted from the Difference Views of Marriage
Conflict in literary work means “the struggle that grows out of the interplay of the two opposing forces in a plot” (Holman and Harmon, 1986:107), or the protagonist’s struggle against someone or something (Holman and Harmon, 1986: 108). As discussed in the second chapter, a conflict describes how the central character deals with other forces (Redman, 1962:363).
acts, and the conflict between Lee and Cecil because of their unwillingness to adapt to each other. These conflicts will be discussed based on Holman, Harmon, and Redman’s theories.
The first conflict does not happen between Cecil and Lee as husband and wife, but instead, the conflict happens between Lee and Cecil’s family and friends. This conflict is a result of the struggle between two opposing forces, namely Lee with her idealistic view of marriage against Cecil’s family and friends and her own friend with their practical view of marriage, based on the common view of marriage in their society at that time. This is suitable with Holman and Harmon’s definition of conflict as “the struggle that grows out of the interplay of the two opposing forces in a plot” (1986:107).
For Lee, based on her idealistic view of marriage, her and Cecil’s mutual love and willingness to unite their lives are enough to serve as good reasons to get married. She thinks that she and Cecil love each other and therefore they should get married. However, for many people around Lee and Cecil, based on their practical view of marriage, Lee is not rich or profitable enough to get married to Cecil. They think that Lee does not have enough money to bring to Cecil, and therefore Lee and Cecil should not get married. They openly declare their regret that Cecil married Lee, who does not have much money, and state that Cecil should have married a woman with much more money to pay the high cost of the maintenance of his family's residence.
Cecil's stepmother or Lee's mother-in-law. Instead of being happy that her only stepson finally finds a woman he loves, she directly confronts Lee for not bringing enough money for Cecil in their first meeting after Lee’s marriage. Cecil’s stepmother does not welcome Lee, or shows sympathy to Lee, but directly states her regret that Lee does not have much money, as shown in the quotation below.
"It's a thousand pities, a thousand pities that you couldn't bring Cecil a fortune !" Her voice gave a sudden querulous break. "He could have had one probably a dozen for the asking, and I think the Abbey should have been his first consideration. He won't inherit a penny from Barnstaple, and Heaven knows what I'll have left! He can't possibly keep it up on what you and he have together your house in town will take every penny and he'll either have to break the entail and sell it, or rent the moor, and cut the rest up into farms, and perhaps let the Abbey itself (1901: 180).
The next person who opposes Lee and Cecil’s marriage is Captain Monmouth, a friend of the Maundrell family. He also directly confronts Lee for not bringing enough money in their first meeting, although he does it in a more friendly way than Lady Barnstaple. He also reveals that Lady Barnstaple actually wants Cecil to marry Miss Fix, a woman that he does not like but who has a lot of money, as shown in the quotation below. This condition further reveals the conflict between Lee’s thought, that she deserves to marry Cecil because they love each other, and the society’s thought, that a woman can only deserve to marry Cecil if she has enough money.
"What did Lady Barnstaple mean? Did she want Cecil to marry that Miss Fix?"
Even Randolph, Lee’s close friend who is an American, also opposes Lee and Cecil’s marriage because he knows that Lee does not have enough money to bring to Cecil’s family, and he knows that Lee would not get accepted well by Cecil’s family if she and Cecil actually get married. It is shown in his statement below.
The Maundrells are paupers. Old Lord Barnstaple left the greater part of his private fortune to his young wife, and the present earl soon made ducks and drakes of the rest. Cecil must marry a fortune, and yours is entirely too small; they want millions over there. Lady Barnstaple has cut into her capital trying to keep up with smart London (1901: 99-100).
Conflict can be classified into two types based on the form and the forces involved, namely inner conflict and external conflict. External conflict is further divided into four types, based on the type of force that the protagonist struggles against (Redman, 1962:363). Based on Redman’s theory, this conflict between Lee and Cecil’s family, friends, and her own friend is an external conflict because it refers to a struggle between Lee, as the protagonist or central character, and the outside force, namely Cecil’s family and friend and Lee’s friend.
voice their objections to the marriage as the voice of society. Thus, based on Redman’s theory, this conflict is an external conflict against society.
A conflict can be responded in many ways by the conflicting sides, both the protagonist and the opposing force. In this case, Lee as the protagonist overcomes the conflict not by taking any active action, but by restricting herself. From her reactions, it can be seen that she is not happy about this conflict. For example, when Lady Barnstaple as her mother-in-law complains about her lack of money, Lee’s eyes become very passionate. Similarly, when Captain Monmouth talks about his wish that Lee would become very rich one day, she feels dismayed, as shown respectively in the two quotations below.
Her restless eyes had been moving about the room ; they suddenly met her daughter-in-law's. Lee had very beautiful eyes, but they were capable of a blue-hot flame of passion at times. Lady Barnstaple blinked rapidly; her own seemed scorching under that blue-fire (1901: 180).
Lee laughed, although the sensation of dismay induced by Lady Barnstaple's visit returned at his words (1901: 190).
marriage with Cecil. If Cecil’s family and friends do not approve of her, her marriage with Cecil might be in danger.
The second conflict happens between Lee and Cecil. This conflict is a result of the struggle between two opposing forces, namely Lee with her romantic view of marriage against Cecil with his unromantic view of marriage, based on the common view of marriage in nineteenth-century England. This is suitable with Holman and Harmon’s definition of conflict as “the struggle that grows out of the interplay of the two opposing forces in a plot” (1986:107).
Lee and Cecil have a conflict because of their different views of romance in marriage. Lee, based on her romantic view of marriage, hopes for Cecil to behave romantically to her because she thinks it is part of his task as a husband. Cecil, who follows the unromantic view of marriage from his society, simply does not regard it as something necessary to behave romantically to Lee. He feels that Lee is exaggerating and asking too much when she demands romantic behaviors, something which is completely unnecessary in his mind.
the time together after their engagement. He thinks that he would only go for a few weeks and go back to her afterwards, so it does not really matter.
" Are you angry about something ? "
" Do you really mean that you would leave me to go to spend two weeks tracking a grizzly bear?"
" It need not be as long as that."
"It's almost sure to be. It takes nearly two days to get to the ranch, and is such a tiresome trip that you will have to rest for another before you go out. You will be gone a fortnight at the very least."
Cecil made no reply.
" We have not been engaged two weeks. Do you really mean that you will that you can leave me for a loathsome grizzly bear ? " (1901: 162)
They have a long conversation. In the conversation, Lee pleads Cecil not to go and says that he would not leave her if he really loved her, while Cecil insists on going and says that he does love her although he leaves her to hunt for bears. In the end, Cecil still leaves Lee to go hunting for bears. Lee is described as sobbing and saying “I can't bear the thought of having you go, and I can't bear the thought of being put aside for a bear” (1901: 163). She also angrily says, “I don't understand at all how you can leave me! I 'm not your own sort, you see, or, doubtless, I should” (1901: 162).
should just take it for granted as a given fact. As shown in the quotation below, this condition makes Lee explicitly asks Cecil to compliment her about her looks.
" We represent the fusion of the two greatest nations on earth. Why do not you tell me that I am looking particularly well?"
They were traversing one of the long corridors. Cecil glanced uneasily about, then put his arm round her and kissed her.
" I am doing my best to live up to the American standard, and tell you once a day how much I love you, and how beautiful you are. When do you think you will take it for granted ? "
In the quotation above, Cecil reluctantly agrees to behave romantically by embracing Lee, kissing her, and telling her about her beauty, but eventually he “had begged to be released from paying her compliments, and had received his discharge” (1901: 232). It means that he begs Lee to allow him not to compliment her, and Lee finally agrees not to demand compliments from him. Lee feels upset because this condition is not suitable to her wish about their marriage, which is shown in her statement, “I shan't care at all about society when I 'm married. Cecil and I will be frightfully in love, and live in an old castle, and stay out all day on the moors and in the woods” (1901: 107). Her slight upset feeling is shown in the following statement.
She was willing to excuse Cecil from buttoning her boots, but she would have liked him to manifest a natural desire to kiss her slipper. Of the strength of his passion she had no misgivings, but she was too clear-sighted to permit herself to hope that idolatry had any part in it (1901: 166).
Lee, as the protagonist or central character, and Cecil, as the outside force. To be precise, this conflict can be classified as the second type of external conflict or “the struggle against another person” (Redman, 1962: 363). Here, Lee as the protagonist is in conflict with Cecil, another character. Cecil is not depicted as an antagonist, but in a way, he prevents Lee from her effort to achieve happiness in her life. Thus, based on Redman’s theory, this conflict is an external conflict against another person.
As already discussed above, a conflict can be responded in many ways by the conflicting sides. In this case, Lee as the protagonist overcomes the conflict by reducing her own individual view and conforming to the more common view upheld by her husband and the society at that place and time. In other words, Lee reduces her romantic view of marriage and becomes less romantic. She no longer forces her husband to show his affection to her through romantic acts such as kissing, praising, giving presents, and so on, and she no longer has romantic fantasy about her husband. Based on Murphy’s theory of characterization, Lee’s change of view is shown through Lee’s speech, reactions, and mannerism.
Cecil is not the romantic figure in her imagination, but a regular man instead. The fact is that men do not behave romantically in that era, so her speech below implies that she no longer expects Cecil to behave romantically like the poets or heroes in her imagination.
"I 'd day-dreamed for years about him before he came, but it was all romantic and impossible nonsense. I don't think I ever realised that he was the author of his own letters, and I persisted in imagining him a mixture of Byron, Marmion, Robert Dudley, Eugene Wrayburn, Launcelot, and several of Ouida's earlier heroes. Of course, my imagination wore down a good deal after I came out and saw more of the world; nevertheless, when Cecil did come, he was wholly unlike anything I had concocted (1901: 212).
According to Murphy, the author can characterize a character through the character’s mannerism, habits, or idiosyncrasies (Murphy, 1972: 172). Lee used to think that a married couple should do romantic activities such as spending time together, buying presents, flirting and praising each other, and that the husband should pay attention to his wife and do little favors to her. Cecil is a busy politician, so he does not have much time to spend together with Lee, pay attention to her, buy her presents or praise her. At first, Cecil’s preference of his job over romance becomes a source of conflict between them. Gradually, however, Lee’s habits show that she no longer demands much attention or affection from Cecil. Instead, she tries to understand Cecil’s activities, surroundings, and work environment by attending the parliamentary debates, accompanying Cecil at work, and even reading about the speeches in the newspaper, as shown in the quotation below.
speeches as she did not hear she read next morning, as well as the comments thereon in no less than six different newspapers (1901: 238). Furthermore, Lee learns to accept when her husband does not behave romantically. As shown in the quotation below, Lee has dressed especially for him, but he does not give her enough romantic response such as praise, admiration, or attention. She is not angry or disappointed, and she stays faithful and never flirts with other men to compensate for her husband’s lack of praise, admiration, or attention.
During the past three years she had dressed for no man but her husband, who occasionally informed her that she always looked exactly the same to him no matter what she had on, and she had been as indifferent to the admiring glances of other men as a beautiful woman can be. She had not indulged in so much as a dinner flirtation (1901: 254).
According to Murphy, through reactions, the author can describe characteristics by showing how a character responds to various situations and events (1972: 167). Even though Lee has dressed especially for her husband, he does not praise her or pay much attention to her. He only responds insensitively and “occasionally informed her that she always looked exactly the same to him no matter what she had on” (1901: 254), but Lee does not react angrily and continues to dress especially for him for years. This reaction shows that Lee no longer demands romantic treatment from her husband. Furthermore, Lee’s effort to reduce her individual romantic view shows that she is willing to overcome this conflict.
marriage, that men dominate the women based on the common view of marriage in nineteenth-century England. This is suitable with Holman and Harmon’s definition of conflict as “the struggle that grows out of the interplay of the two opposing forces in a plot” (1986:107).
Besides their conflict related to the necessity of romantic behavior, Lee and Cecil also have a conflict because they are both not willing to serve and adapt to each other. Lee, based on her view that women dominate the men, expects Cecil to serve her and adapt to her. On the contrary, Cecil, based on the common view that men dominate the women, expects Lee to serve her and adapt to her. They are both persistent and have strong determination despite their love to each other, so eventually their expectations clash in a conflict.
For example, since before their marriage, Cecil already emphasizes that he cannot adapt to Lee and that he expects her to adapt to him instead, as seen in his statement below.
You see an Englishman is certain of several things if he marries a perfectly normal Englishwoman of his own class. She will obey him, she will have as many children as he wishes, her scheme of life will be his, and, no matter how bright she may be, she will adapt herself to him which is not the least important point. An Englishman simply cannot adapt himself to anybody. It isn't in him. He can be a good husband on his own lines, particularly if he loves his wife; and if he loves her enough, and she makes herself more charming than other women, he '11 be faithful to her, and do what he can to make her happy. But she must adapt herself to him.
“But Cecil Maundrell!” She kicked out her little foot rather viciously. After all, why should she adapt herself to anybody? She was an individuality, more of one every month of her life, and extremely interesting to herself and other people (1901: 118).
As shown above, Lee and Cecil do love each other, but their unwillingness to adapt to each other brings a problem in their relationship. They try to discuss this problem and find the solution, namely that Lee as the wife must learn to adapt herself to Cecil, her husband.
" If I pluck out my complexities in other words, my individuality by the roots, and adapt myself to you."
" You could adapt yourself to me without sacrificing the least of your individuality" (1901: 46).
In the quotation above, Cecil says that she could adapt herself to him without sacrificing her individuality, but his unwillingness to adapt to Lee in a two-way process shows his view of male domination in marriage. He justifies his insistence by saying “If you loved me well enough that would be the whole point”, and Lee replies by saying "In other words, the entire responsibility of this matrimonial experiment would lie on my shoulders” (1901: 46). It means that only Lee, as the wife, is responsible for the success of their marriage. She accepts it, although she sometimes feels unhappy with her position, as shown in her statement, “Three years more of this and I shall be a machine without a nerve, or I shall hate Cecil Maundrell” (1901: 264).
“was disgusted at the bare idea of sharing his wife with the public”, without asking Lee whether she wants to be interviewed or not (1901: 231).
Then, when Lee asks for permission to go to London Society events with her mother-in-law, Cecil forbids her to go. Cecil feels that she should obey him because the husband’s position is more dominant than the wife’s position, and he does not approve of women who go outside without their husbands. Even though he admits that he does not have enough time to accompany her, he says that he wants Lee to always stay at home. On the other hand, Lee feels that it is unreasonable for her to obey him, because she feels bored and he does not have enough time for her anyway. Furthermore, she just wants to go with her own mother-in-law, or Cecil’s own stepmother, instead of strangers or bad people. Thus, she sorrowfully feels that marriage bars her from many things she wants, as shown in this statement, “What she wanted she was scarcely able to define, but she felt sure that she wanted several dozen things that she would never have as the wife of Cecil Maundrell” (1901: 277). Cecil’s refusal to give Lee permission to go is shown in the quotation below.
"I'm afraid you must get rather bored. I'm sorry I have to be so much away from you. But I hate to see women running about without their husbands. Besides it 's always the beginning of the end when a woman goes her way and a man his. It 's selfish of me, but I like to think of you as always here. As you know, I break away sometimes, and come home unexpectedly " "You haven't this year."
"We 've been so confoundedly busy. But I often think of you, and I like to picture you in this room with a book, or asleep when other women are baking their complexions" (1901: 245).
her hometown, but Cecil forbids her to go without him. However, Cecil also admits that he is very busy and cannot accompany him, which means that he expects Lee to endure her homesick feeling without any solution until he has the time to accompany her. Cecil’s insistence for Lee to abandon her homesick feeling and her wish for vacation is shown in his statement, “It is always the greatest possible pleasure to me to know that you are where I can see you at any moment, and that you have no interests apart from my own” (1901: 298). On the other hand, Lee really feels homesick and tired with her life in England and really wants to have
