Portrayals Of Social Outsiders

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Ethan Penning

Dr. Sandra Adams

19th Century British Literature

February 25, 2013

An Examination of Portrayals of Social Outsiders in 19th Century British Literature

Victorian literature, is commonly defined as a period of time in British literature during the reign of Queen Victoria from 1837-1901 and could more broadly be defined as British literature during the 19th century in general. Owing possibly to the fact that the height of the time known as "Pax Britannica" or "Britain's Golden Age" when Britain controlled the world's largest empire in history roughly corresponds to this time period, Victorian literature possesses a very distinct character that can be seen as reflecting the social and cultural views of the British civilization during this time. Interestingly reflected in Victorian literature for example is the role of characters deemed to be "outsiders" within Victorian society. Characters who do not fit neatly into the social strata of Victorian Britain, are portrayed broadly in Victorian literature as fitting in as far as they can attempt to mold themselves into society, rather than carving out their own places in society. Even when no real mold for them to fit into exists, characters such as the Muslim girl Safie in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, the titular character Jane Eyre from Charlotte Bronte's novel Jane Eyre, and the character of Esther Summerson from Charles Dickens' Bleak House are encouraged to fit into Victorian society, and subject themselves, even when a place for them is unclear, or restrictively deterministic in their mold.

The Muslim girl Safie in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is a prime, easy, and early example of an outsider in Victorian society, and in some ways is the definition of an outsider in a society, as she is not from Victorian society itself. Safie is the daughter of a Turkish merchant who is imprisoned wrongly by the French government and then sprung from jail by Felix, the son of a French nobleman. Felix and Safie fall in love, but Felix' family is held prisoner by the French government and he turns himself in in order to help free them. Safie's father leaves for Istanbul and requests Safie follow him, but she leaves instead to find Felix in exile in Germany. Her story is overheard by the Creation of Victor Frankenstein who relates the story to the audience. Safie's story, its depiction of Safie and her father and its discussion of Muslim society in general reveal many details of Victorian British society's perception of Muslim society or societies (or even possibly other non-European societies) during this time period. A good starting point is a discussion of the portrayal of Safie's father, the Turkish merchant. Her father is portrayed unflatteringly as a villainous and untrustworthy character described variously as deceitful, loathsome, and, " a traitor to good feeling and honour" [1] throughout the chapter relating his story during which he proceeds to perpetrate a number of dishonorable or immoral acts described to offend the sensibilities of the Victorian reader including but not limited to: purchasing Safie's Christian mother as a slave, conspiring against Felix because he is a Christian, conspiring against Felix and Safie after Felix helps him to escape from prison to deny him his promised reward of Safie's hand in marriage, abandoning Felix to his fate of exile, mocking Felix with a small amount of money after he has been exiled to "help" him, and attempting to convince his daughter to abandon Felix as well after he has been exiled. These acts are all described as despicable by the monster, however, it is unlikely that all of these acts would necessarily be condemned if perpetrated by a Victorian reader against a member of the Turkish society. For example, a Victorian reader could easily imagine that it is justified to conspire to keep one's daughter from marrying outside the faith, as the merchant does, because the reader probably viewed their faith as the "true faith," and to allow one's daughter to be taken in by a husband who would be seen as within his rights (and would certainly attempt) to force her to convert would be unconscionable. To allow one's daughter to be forcibly converted to a religion that would lead her away from salvation would be seen as the ultimate in immorality during this time period. A good example of the views of Christians during this time period, comes from noted Orientalist William Muir of Scotland who expressed common fears of Islam in the Christian world. He wrote,

"From all the varieties of heathen religions Christianity has nothing to fear, for they are but the passive exhibitions of gross darkness which must vanish before the light of the Gospel. But in Islam we have an active and powerful enemy; - a subtle usurper, who has climbed in the throne under pretense of legitimate succession, and seized upon the forces of the crown to supplant its authority." [2] 

However, when a man with a different or what they would call a, "false" faith is portrayed as doing as a Christian/Victorian might do, he is vilified. There is a clear double standard, that Victorians would probably attribute to the difference between what they would call the "right" and "wrong" religions. The Victorian reader might therefore view the conspiracy of the merchant to take his daughter with him back to Turkey and not turn her over to the young Felix as his promised reward differently if the situation were reversed and a Frenchman were fleeing Turkey. The Victorian reader would probably not see a man attempting to cheat another man, but a man attempting to rescue his daughter from a "false" religion or even a "backwards civilization." The Muslim society itself is also shown in a consistently negative light compared to Christian society within the book. The Turkish merchant is portrayed as acting to deceive the young Felix, not because he is inherently a bad person, the Turk is shown as being attempting to do this because he is from a "backwards" civilization. He has been raised by people whose values are what Victorians would call wrong. He is shown as being deceitful because his civilization is the sort that would foster such acts. This is seen as easy to believe in the mind of the Victorian reader, because if his civilization can get something so fundamentally wrong as the question of which God is correct, then it is easy to believe that anything they do could be wrong. His daughter Safie by contrast, is shown as one who is pious and worthy of the reader's sympathies because she wishes to move out of this "backwards" society on account of her mother being a Christian, and therefore what the Victorians might call, an enlightened person. References are made in passing for example to the freedom either given to Christian women or denied to Muslim women. When raising Safie, her mother is said to instruct her daughter on Christianity and the novel expresses the idea that by teaching her daughter to be a Christian, Safie's mother has given her a better place in the world and made her somehow more complete of a person. The novel states, "she instructed her daughter in the tenets of her religion and taught her to aspire to higher powers of intellect and an independence of spirit forbidden to the female followers of Muhammed." [3] In this section, the novel flatly states that Islam forbids female Muslims from being independently minded or truly thinking peoples. It puts forth the view that Muslim society is a society of slavery for women yet it provides no such backing for these claims. The novel furthermore introduces the fact that Safie is secretly a sort of Christian without her father's knowing, but never explains her reasons for choosing one faith over the other. Such a lack of explanation may seem jarring to the modern reader, but to the Victorian reader however, such reasons do not need to be explained. To the Victorian reader, the choice between Christianity and Islam is clear. Christianity is the "true" faith. Islam is a "false" faith, to stray or choose a "false" faith would be akin to suicide for one's soul. Such strong and unquestioned belief systems are echoed later in other Victorian novels such as Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre, another Victorian novel with a cast of religious characters hosting views typical of religious attitudes of the time which work to show how Victorian ideas of religion worked at home as well. Views which manifest the idea that it is preferable for Safie to flee her father and background in order to "escape" and start a new life with honorable young Christian Felix are echoed in the paragraph introducing the background of Safie which explains her desires to marry Felix. The creature relates of Safie that, "the prospect of marrying a Christian and remaining in a country where women were allowed to take a rank in society was enchanting to her." [4] The novel says this because to the Victorian reader, Muslim society, with its perceived enslavement and imprisonment of women, provided no true or honorable place for them. To the Victorian reader in their ignorance, it is entirely plausible that a society exists that affords no social ranking to half of its population because it is not Christian, which again explains why the novel's portrayal of Safie herself (the girl who grew up in this society) is possibly the most revealing of the Victorian views expressed in the novel. Safie is portrayed as a sympathetic character, and more importantly, a sympathetic outsider in contrast to her outsider father, not because she comes from a very different and yet equally "wrong" background from him, but because she comes from a slightly less tainted place, her Christian mother, and seeks to escape from the "backwards" society and escape to a more "civilized" one. The above quote shows that Safie's love of Felix is stems from his Christianity and his offer of escape from her "backwards" civilization principally and (possibly) from other sources such as his rescue of her father. In a novel written in a society that assumes another society is backwards, there is little more noble than for a member of the "civilized" to help one of the "uncivilized" move up in the world. This view today may be ethically or socially unacceptable, but it moves past ironic and into hypocritical since for all of the negative depiction of Muslim society within this Victorian novel, later novels reveal that the role of women in Victorian society itself was fairly limited itself, rather than more open. A key examples of domestic treatment of women within the Victorian-era British Empire would be Esther Summerson.

Esther Summerson from Charles Dickens' Bleak House is an orphaned girl taken in by her distant relative, Mr. John Jarndyce. Throughout the novel, Esther, a girl living a middle-lower upper class existence experiences the trials of girls in her social situation. When examining the Victorian era, it is highly crucial that one takes note of class and social standing when examining persons within Victorian society, fictional or not. As a middle-upper class girl, Esther's prospects for the future are extremely limited. Esther does not have the upbringing of a lower class girl, meaning that she does not have any skills cleaning or managing anything. Esther even states that, "I know I am not clever," [5] which shows off at least a lack of self-respect. She is also ineligible for becoming the heir or Mr. Jardyce, in spite of his affection for her. She is also completely unable to go to a university, receive a degree and enter the workforce. The main source of employment for girl's within Esther's social standing was that of a governess or teacher. However, this was mostly resorted to when one had no other means of supporting oneself, and having a patron, Mr. Jarndyce, it would have been socially embarrassing for Mr. Jarndyce to allow her to become one, as it would imply that he either did not take care of her, or more likely, that he was running out of money. Therefore, Esther is roughly expected to live with her patron Mr. Jarndyce, until he can marry her off to some one to take care of her, something he attempts to do himself, since he is already taking care of her and women who are unmarried are seen as themselves being outsiders for being unable to find a husband. This is the mold that Esther is expected to fit. However, the fit is not necessarily the best, because as an orphan of unknown parentage, Esther has no social standing. Her pedigree cannot be determined, and it is therefore unknown what her social value is. Society has chosen to afford her little value, so she has little and therefore, she has less social value as a wife. Two men attempt to marry her for love, but women with money were sought and married for it. As an orphan girl, one who has no direct family, and cannot lay a strong claim to an inheritance, Esther has a starting disadvantage in a society that favors family, money, and men. In fact, some disadvantages, such as those of being subject to one's husband, as Esther would have to do even if she had her own money and heritage, are problems faced by other, more independent women, such as Jane Eyre.

Jane Eyre from the novel of the same name by Charlotte Bronte is, like Esther, an orphan taken in by her middle-lower upper class relatives, the Reed family. Jane is herself shown as an outsider however, not only because she is an orphan girl, but also because she chooses to express her views as a child and a female at a time when when both groups are more expected to be seen and not heard. In the beginning of the novel, Jane is shown to be disapproved of and rejected by her adopted family, that of her aunt and late uncle because she is thought to be willful and has a perceived eagerness to express her views when it is expected of her to simply submit to those around her. Jane is seen as not fitting neatly into the mold that adults expect of her and views are expressed wishing that Jane had a demeanor more like that of perceived "normal" children who are obedient and submissive. Jane's adopted family, in contrast to that of Esther's, is shown as non-accepting of Jane's personality and her choice to express her own opinions, but in Victorian society, the views of women (let alone children) were given little weight. Her society sees her as needing to be taught how to bear her burden in society as an outcast, rather than giving her views or opinions any sort of evaluation. To this end, Jane's aunt ships her off to a boarding school for orphans, in order for her to learn to be what society expects her to be. Jane's friend from her school at Lowood, Helen Burns, is shown to be more accepted by the head of the school because she submits wholeheartedly to any punishment given her by her superiors, but still struggles with particular teachers because she is seen as being outside of the normal social structure. Her teacher picks on her because she is vulnerable to being picked on, in spite of the fact that the novel states that she has done nothing seriously wrong. The place of the orphan, some one without a clear patron in Victorian society, is seen as precipitous and views on the treatment of the outsider orphan children are expressed through the man running the boarding school that Jane is sent to, Mr. Brocklehurst. Brocklehurst expresses strong views that the school is to show the girls who live within it to become humble and accept a place in society that is less than average because God has chosen to test them. The societal view of the Victorian era Britain places weight on "God's plan" to take care of citizens, instead of taking care of them itself. At one point, Brocklehurst even likens the girls and the experience he wants them to feel to, "the sufferings of

the primitive Christians; to the torments of martyrs; to the exhortations

of our blessed Lord Himself," [6] Consequently, Mr. Brocklehurst is shown to be a hypocrite who is overly harsh on the orphan girls of Lowood, yet spoils and pampers his own daughters. He is able to do this without reprimand in society, because Victorian society accepted that the orphan girls would be outsiders, and therefore not truly welcome in society, but allowed a special place for those of the right birth in society. Victorian society accepted that it was what they thought was "God's plan" and in this way, they were able to justify a rigid society that allows few places for outsiders such as orphans, because since no one had cared for them before, and the world was in the hands of a god who had a plan, then it must be in God's plan that orphans were not cared for. However, the simple fact is that society could give itself more places for women, and build a school that raises orphaned girls to assume a more normal and respectable role in society as Jane eventually does, however, there is nothing seen as inherently wrong in Brocklehurst's views in the novel, because Victorian society did not build itself that way and would not reform for some time. Brocklehurst is shown to be "wrong" in the novel by Jane's telling, not because his views are considered "wrong," but because his is a hypocrite. Jane's view misses the point however, Brocklehurst is merely a representative of the views of society, not the creator of them. A parallel can be drawn to the character of St. John rivers, Jane's secret cousin, and suitor. St John Rivers asks Jane to marry him, and submit to his will as Victorian society expects a bride to submit to her husband. However, Jane resists his proposals because she does not love him, and she privately confesses that she is afraid to lose her independence. Jane feels that she has carved her own place in society as a teacher and a governess, and she resents the giving up of her freedoms. In her mind, Jane has found a mold she can fit into. She is not married, but she is happy in her vocation and seeks to maintain it. Having said that, Jane is still an outsider. Jane may feel happy with her career, but Jane does not have social standing. Jane does not find men who pursue her for money, as Mr. Rochester is suspected by her of doing. Jane has suitors for love as Esther does, but the societal value of both women is low. One girl has no background and no inheritance. One girl has no inheritance, and is working class. To the upper and possibly even middle classes, they are below notice for social reasons. Only a man in the throes of love could pursue them, that or a man who has been brought down through tragedy as Mr. Rochester eventually is, will pursue them.

There is something to be said for the argument that at least two of these girls could be interpreted not necessarily as "outsiders" in society, but more as special cases. The case of the Muslim girl is an argument that cannot be heard. She cannot be portrayed as an outstanding case because she literally does not belong in the European society she lives in, it is not her society. She is an outsider because she is attempting to come into it from the outside. She is an exact example of the definition of "outsider." The argument that the orphans are merely odd cases out is interesting but also falls flat. This is not because they are uncommon, but because they are too common. "In England and Scotland in 1788, two-thirds of the workers in 143 water-powered cotton mills were described as children." (Galbi) [7] Victorian society was a society made up of a majority of children but their society struggled to adjust for them and Esther and Jane hold no place in common social practices. Victorian society is rife with children, orphans and not, but it only really expects children to grow and have families, and makes no real attempt to give orphan children a way to overcome the social handicap of a society that revolves around social standing and background, of which they have none, except for them to be taken in by a relative or the state, wherein they are expected to blindly fit molds that do not account for, or help them overcome their social problems. Society at large also offers little in the way for them in terms of adjustments into it other than to tell them to keep their heads down and not rock the boat. It provides a minimal amount of employment for orphans, except for them to be taken by a tradesman or merchant and learn a trade, join the military, leave for a colony (and hope no one knows you there) or become a prostitute. Several of these even take money or family connections however, and could be inaccessible to an orphan. At least two of them are also unavailable to women. The fact is, Esther and Jane are outsiders, because they exist outside of the mainstream social circles of their society, and because of social handicaps they received as children, are unable to find their way into social circles. Even marrying a rich man would not bring them into social circles, it would probably only bring their husband out of them.

There is another argument that does have weight though, that the books of Bleak House and Jane Eyre are less than optimal for putting forth the argument that Victorian society was not accepting of orphans, in a similar vein of the non-acceptance for foreigners shown in Frankenstein because the tone of the books makes this less clear. While in Frankenstein, the Creature of the Frankenstein tells his story in a way that may seem almost comically bigoted today, the facts of Esther and Jane's situations make the opinions of Victorian society well known to the modern reader. In Bleak House for example, Esther has so few suitors (one up to that point) that her patron Mr. Jarndyce proposes to her. While Esther has no money, such a thing can be slightly easier to overcome in the pedigree oriented world of Victorian society than the fact that Esther has no background. To a potential suitor, she is a no one, she has no past, and since she has no past, she has no future with that suitor. He would have nothing to tell anyone in any social circle, because for all intents and purposes, she could have been lifted off the street on the other side of the country and dressed up. She has no background to investigate, no family history to recommend her, nothing to say if her family history is stable or trustworthy or "suitable" for a man of her husband's stature or anything. Jane for her part has joined the working class. She is seen as a woman who has worked with money. This is an unwholesome act to the upper classes of Victorian era, who could go through years, decades, a lifetime without ever touching their own money for themselves. She has gone into the only form of employment open to her short of prostitution because society gives her no other options, but because of this, she is tainted. Furthermore, Jane similarly has no family history. She doesn't even know her past, she only knows her cousins, and while that is better than nothing, her poor relations with the Reed family does nothing to recommend her. The two girls are seen as giving little, and taking much. Esther has no means of supporting herself, and Jane's makes her common. Perhaps this sentiment is expressed best by Jane's cousin John Reed when he catches her reading a book. He becomes livid. He admonishes her, ""You have no business to take our books; you are a dependent, mama says;

you have no money; your father left you none; you ought to beg, and not

to live here with gentlemen's children like us, and eat the same meals we

do, and wear clothes at our mama's expense." [8] 

Overall, Victorian literature, as exemplified by the books Frankenstein, Bleak House, and Jane Eyre exhibit Victorian society’s views on outsiders such as foreigners or orphans within society other than to accept them as far as they can attempt to make themselves fit into "normal" ideas of where they can be placed in society, even if they are unable to effectively fit those molds. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein depicts an outside society, as exemplified by two characters as barbaric, but salvageable, but bases they idea of salvaging the people within those societies on their willingness to abandon their own social ideas and accept the ideas of Victorian society. Safie's father is shown as villainous because he rejects European values such as Christianity, and his daughter in contrast is shown as noble because she embraces them. Similarly, in Dicken's Bleak House and Bronte's Jane Eyre, the society is shown as non-accepting of the main characters who are orphans because of Esther's lack of family background and Jane's lack of money. Both Esther and Jane subsequently lack a large amount of social freedom, a reflection of the limited social mobility within Victorian society, where middle class women in particular had few options for either social mobility or employment, especially to those without background or money. Furthermore, both overcome their social situation and find love, but both find love in the arms of husbands who love them in spite of their social handicaps, not in the arms of husbands who seek them for their social standing, as was the common idea of the foundation of a marriage among the upper classes.

Citations:

Brontë, Charlotte, Fritz Eichenberg, and Bruce Rogers. Jane Eyre. New York: Random House, 1943. Print.

Dickens, Charles. Bleak house. Champaign, Ill.: Project Gutenberg, 199. Print.

Muir, Sir William (1897) The Mahommedan Controversy, Edinburgh, T & T Clark. Pg 2

"Child Labor and the Division of Labor in the Early English Cotton Mills." Galbi Think! - Communications Industry and PolicyAnalysis. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Feb. 2013.

<http://www.galbithink.org/child.htm>.

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft.Frankenstein. Charlottesville, Va.: University of Virginia Library, 1996. Print.