One of the advantages of Sedgwick’s
use of third person omniscient narration in Hope Leslie is her ability
to use the narrator as a mouthpiece for her personal commentary. This
phenomenon stood out to me the most as I read Volume II, Chapter IV, throughout
which the characters’ quite literally puritanical concepts of gender identity
worked to undermine their virtues. Sedgwick wrote, “The Governor was in the
habit of participating with his wife his most secret state-affairs; moved to
this confidence, no doubt, by his strict views of her rights as his help-mate” (p. 211). With this passage, she seems to imply that Governor
Winthrop’s ability to hold government business in confidence is compromised by
his sexism. Indeed, throughout this chapter, the narrator harshly condemns the characters for letting their perceptions of gender identity cheapen them.
On the very next page, Sedgwick
goes on to belittle Madam Winthrop: “[She] was happily too much absorbed with
the feminine employment of watching the development of her niece’s affairs, to
have much curiosity in relation to cabinet secrets.” Although seemingly
neutral, Sedgwick’s choice of diction expresses strong conviction towards Madam
Winthrop. Her use of the word “absorbed” illustrates the woman as aloof and
caught up in the petty triviality of her “feminine employment.” By saying that
Madam Winthrop lacks “curiosity,” Sedgwick paints a mental image of the housewife
as dull and uninteresting. Her portrayal of these characters, and the way that
they use gender roles and gender identity at large as a crutch, is Sedgwick’s
way of providing first person social commentary through third person narration,
and it is a highly effective rhetorical technique.
I also found Sedgwick’s use of a spicy, sarcastic third person narrator to be a window into her personal commentary of the times. It seemed that she would interject her own opinions, especially on gender roles in the 19th century, into the novel through the use of her narrator in many instances, especially the ones you listed. However, I found it somewhat contradictory that Sedgwick also seemed to highly value the qualities of docile and subservient women such as Esther and Mrs. Fletcher. On the last page of the novel, Sedgwick applauds Esther’s “personal loveliness and Christian graces,” and the formality and tone of Mrs. Fletcher’s letter on pages 30-36 seem to suggest that Sedgwick does hold obedience and subservience to men in some sort of esteem, while holding fast to her belief that men are not in fact the superior sex as can be seen in the heroic roles of both Magawisca and Hope, the two most active and dynamic protagonists in the novel.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mike's assertion that Sedgwick uses the third person omniscient narrator as a tool for criticizing the characters' actions as they relate to gender roles. However, I would tend to argue that Sedgwick may have intended this commentary as a criticism of the accepted gender roles of the time period rather than as a direct criticism of the individual characters' virtues. It seems that Sedgwick's narrator most often comments on gender roles in describing characters with generally virtuous personalities. The narrator often attests to the kindness and "tenderness" of Governor Winthrop's sentiments, for example. I feel that her gentle criticisms of the characters' perceptions of gender roles do not significantly alter the readers' perceptions of the characters' moral worth.
ReplyDelete