Wednesday, October 15, 2008

What's Love Got To Do With It?

There’s no doubt that our recent readings have been strewn with expressions of romantic love. I wouldn’t say that we’ve seen any examples of true love, since the amorous sentiments are completely one-sided. Whereas unsuspecting Amelia (in the "Story of Amelia") develops deep feelings of devoted affection, the rakish Alonso tricks her by “what he seemed to feel.” However, the idea of romantic love was clearly growing in popularity with the late eighteenth-century audience. In her letter to a friend, Amelia explains that her seducer “told me that love was the supreme bliss of human life…no emotions could have been planted in our breasts by the great Creator merely to be repelled.” I imagine that contemporary readers—though they were expected to look disdainfully upon Amelia’s fall—were able to relate to such statements and recognize their persuasive power.

I do think that a move toward romantic love rejected the patriarchal structure; that makes complete sense given the trends we’ve witnessed over the course of the semester. The patriarchal power of Cotton Mather’s society has steadily diminished, particularly since we began reading post-Revolutionary texts. That’s not to say that young women are openly encouraged to exercise independence. But the fact that the men in this week’s readings are courting, flattering, and making promises of marriage says something about the father’s weakened role. The interaction between daughters and suitors is emphasized, while he receives little or no mention.

In "The Sorrows of Amelia," I like the explanation that she was easily deceived because she was “unversed in the secret villainies of a base degenerate world [and] ever imagined all mankind were as spotless as herself.” Society forced her to live a sheltered lifestyle because this was viewed as the way to protect her virtue. But as the texts ironically point out, Amelia’s naiveté contributed to her fall. Continuing (or returning to) the practice of arranged marriage would have prolonged an unhealthy limitation of female freedom. Of course, during this period, women like Amelia were occasionally the victims of rakes, but time has since shown that exposing women to the wider world is a positive thing. Today’s independent 20-something female is much more savvy and worldly-wise—she generally knows how to recognize the rakes, and she can detect when the feelings are one-sided. The modern woman is therefore capable of choosing a husband for herself. Arranged marriage wouldn’t resonate with our present-day culture; there isn’t a need for it. Rather, it would be a detrimental recipe for affairs and divorce!

1 comment:

Jordan V said...

Your post was very insightful and I agree with a lot of the points you make. Especially the idea that the woman's forced role of staying naive and pure does make her susceptible to the persuasive power of men and the patriarchal structure would not have been at all positive to encourage independence for the women themselves and from the influences of bad men. Obviously society and gender relations had a long way to go.