The Book of Common Prayer is one that enshrines the Church of England Doctrine. This version is based on Thomas Cranmer’s version written around 1550 during the reign of Edward VI. The Form of Solemnization of Matrimony treats marriage not as ‘sacrament’ but as a moral human relationship. Nonetheless enshrines male dominance and female subordination. There are clear and precise divisions in gender roles through the use of register. These ideas were seen as the norm during the time of period in which it was written. Male domination was accepted during this time and it was sanctioned as a way of life. Matrimony is seen as an ‘honourable estate’ signifying the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church. Saint Paul makes a comparison between a husband and wife to the Christ and his Church. The Christ representing the man and the Church representing the woman. This comparison again emphasises the control that is expected from the man in a relationship. It summarises the power and authority that the man should have over the woman. Diminishing the role of the woman as portraying her as the weaker sex, dependent on the man. The text also refers to women as ‘servants’ suggesting she has no other purpose. St Paul gives advice to the married couples, ‘Husbands love your wives, even as Christ loved the Church’. Whereas the advice given to the women is much longer. ‘Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For husband is the head of the Church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. And again he saith, Let the wife see she reverence her husband.’ ‘ye wives, be in subjection to you own husbands…meek and quiet spirit’. The long explanation for women is almost presuming that she is more likely to do wrong. The text freely expresses that the woman should sacrifice herself for the man, keep quiet and serve his needs.
The use of language describing the different roles of a man and woman also clear divisions in the use of adverbs. Women must ‘reverently’, ‘discreetly’, ‘advisedly’ and ‘soberly’ consider the causes for which matrimony was ordained. All these words have impassive and subordinate connotations. Matrimony intentional cause is for procreation. Reasoning marriage as not for the creation of children. Women are only regarded and considered for sexual reproduction, to produce offspring’s. Secondly marriage is a way of conforming to the church and the legal expectations to encourage obedience. Marriage is also a way of avoiding fornication and is seen as a remedy against sin. Thirdly it is a part of society and a part of life to conform to marriage and create a family. All these reasons fail to suggest the emotional connection between the two, and presume that a man can be with any woman as long as she is able to serve him, obey him, and have children. Women are portrayed as inexpressive and are presumed to have specific roles as a nurturer and server. This idea is developed furthermore in the vows that a woman must make whilst conforming to marriage. The vows between a man and a woman differentiate to some degree. A woman must agree to ‘obey him, an serve him, love, honour and keep him’. Whilst a man must agree to ‘love her, comfort her, honour, and keep her’. The words ‘obey’ and ‘serve’ clearly states that a woman must act upon the mans wishes suggesting she is not capable of making decisions, accepting his authority over her. Whereas the man must ‘comfort’ his wife. This can have two implied meaning, one being that she needs to be comforted emotionally and that she need and that she is not able to deal with the emotional causes from life, therefore needing extra support to deal with every day life. Secondly this can be interpreted as the man being the breadwinner, and that he must provide her comfort with his prosperity.
Examining the different male characters from the books of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice’, and ‘The Making of the Marchioness’ by Frances Hodgson Burnett, it is visible to see how the male characters were created to in many ways conform and some ways subvert sexual stereotypes. Both the male characters have obtained their power and status through their fortunes. Mr Collins from Pride and Prejudice is a clergyman in the Church of England. This means that he should provide the spiritual services for the nearby villagers and formers, and for the wealthy gentry like Lady Catherine de Bourgh, own of the great estate. Unfortunately like many other clergymen during this period, Mr Collin is not a very good pastor for his sheep. The Church of England had itself lost much of its spiritual power in the late 18th century as a result of certain economic and political conditions. Mr Collins shows us what this life could be like. He is a young man grown old before his time, already comfortably settled in the grooves of polite thinking and acting. Being a churchman has not spiritualised Mr Collins in the least; in fact he is a very wordy rector, completely engrossed by such matters as social rank, prestige, position, family connections and money. Far from being a dedicated Christian, he is a condescending character. Mr Collins proposes to Elizabeth Bennet on the advice given by Catherine de Bourgh. Elizabeth Bennet refuses this proposal however Mr Collins does not take her seriously. This is suggesting that it is in a mans decision of the person whom he shall marry. The proposal is almost informing Elizabeth Bennet of who she shall be marrying rather than asking for her hand in marriage. ‘I shall be uniformly silent, and you may assure yourself that no ungenerous reproach shall ever pass my lips when we are married’. His authority is clearly present in the text. He gives many reasons to why he has chosen to marry her as though expressing that she should feel privileged at the thought. Mr Collins takes over the conversation; he expresses himself very clearly and talks a lot more than Elizabeth Bennet. The unbalance of speech suggests that he is in control of the discussion. Mr Collins speaks in pedagogic utterance he is merely telling her why they will get married. He does not take her rejection seriously and sees this as an encouragement and labels all women to reject the man that they love and believes this is in their nature. Mr Collins technique of persuasion is circumlocution. He takes immense amount of time in proposing, going into much detail factors of why the two shall be married. Mr Collins views are derogatory towards women. His descriptions of women, for example ‘nice woman’, ‘sensible’, and ‘elegant’ conform to the stereotypical ideas of how a woman should be. He does not recognize women as individuals but makes generalizations of how a woman should be.
Mr Walderhurst from ‘The Making of the Marchioness’ is in many ways similar to Mr Collins. Mr Walderhurst is also a very wealthy man. However his approach to proposing to Emily Fox Seton is slightly different. From the language Mr Waldehurst uses it can be seen that he is well educated as his language is formal, yet the discussion between the pair are more of an interactional talk where both equally speak their minds. Mr Walderhurst however is in control of the conversation. He clearly allocates Emily Fox Seton to speak; he directs the questions and initiates the conversation. He is also in charge of the topic of the conversation. ‘I came here in fact, to ask you – if you will come and live with me?’ the structure of the conversation shows us who is in control and has power over the other character. He is also physically in control of the female character. ‘He took hold of her hand. His own closed over it firmly’. Another example of this is whilst they go back into the cart. ‘The basket of fish was put in the cart, and Emily Fox Seton was put in’. This is illustrating the commodity against Emily Fox Seton. Although he does take much care in asking her opinion he doesn’t actually receive a response to his proposal. However he presumes she will accept as he remarks ‘I will explain myself with greater clearness as we drive back to Mallowe.’ Mr Walderhurst is dominant, physically economically and through his status. Mr Walderhurst is very clear and straight to the point. He does not witter about the matter and merely gets straight to the point. The language used by Mr Walderhurst is very short and precise of his intensions. His language is assertive and authoritative, ‘I want a companion’, ‘you are the woman I want’, ‘there is black…I will explain myself’.
Mr Collins and Mr Walderhurst conform into the sexual stereotype of society today. They are both over powering with their statuses. Both of their statuses come from their good fortunes. They both have domineering personalities due to their social status. Mr Collin fails to get a positive response as he is extremely overpowering and therefore is rejected, as he doesn’t even feel the need to ask her what she thinks of him. Whilst Mr Walderhurst manages to impress Miss Seton by taking an interest in her and talking to her.
Examining the female characters we can see how both characters in some ways subvert to the sexual stereotype in society, and reject the period in which they were written.
In Jane Austen’s novels we see the pressures of the economical system being exerted against young girls. In her time, an unmarried woman was doomed to the unhappy life of caring for some one else’s children. Otherwise there were no outlets for women in industry, commerce, business, or education. The female was indeed one of the most pitiful victims of the economic system. It is therefore unusual to read of such a character as Elizabeth Bennet. Jane Austen leaves implicit the important economic factors behind Elizabeth’s rejection of Mr Collins she is a young girl without any lively hood, any profession, Mr Collins offer is attractive in many ways, there is a promise of a comfortable life, not only for herself but for her family too. Elizabeth’s rejection is an act of coverage and honesty, the act of courage and honesty, the act of a ‘rational creature’. In Jane Austens view marriage depends much more than mere physical comfort and material security. Elizabeth Bennet is barely given the opportunity to speak whilst Mr Collin makes his proposal. The narrative is from Elizabeth’s point of view so we acknowledge that she does not agree with Mr Collins statements. She is forced by Mrs Bennet to stay alone with him and listen to what he has to say however much Elizabeth pleads not to. Elizabeth’s use of language is very clear. She states her views clearly and rejects the proposal very plainly. Her reasons for refusal are very simple, ‘my feeling in every respect forbid it’. She does not love him therefore she is refusing. However straightforward this may seem, turning down a wealthy clergymen was most scandalous at the time as most women would be delighted with such opportunity. Elizabeth therefore is a contradictory character as this is not the sort of behaviour expected from her.
Emily Fox Seton also is a successful woman in her time. She has a career and has managed to live of her own earnings until now. She has handled her life and has become a respectable Lady to the people around her. This is not the norm of the time as women are expected to settle down with a husband and become a housewife. However the presence of Mr Walderhurst, automatically changed Miss Setons attitude
She becomes very negative about herself; she’s self-deprecating out of her respect towards the male sex. However much her status subverts general stereotypes her attitude still conforms to what is expected of her. The language used also supports this. The verbs and adverbs used to describe her emphasise how emotional she is. Emily is presented not as an independent woman but as a feeble lady in need of rescuing. Her phatic utterances devoid from meaning. ‘You-are-asking-me’ the short pauses suggests that she can’t think or decide what to say. The presence of Mr Walderhurst changes Emily attitude and she is portrayed as a stereotypical lady in need of rescue, however much her independent life may contradict this.
The female characters in both novels subvert to the stereotypical image. Elizabeth Bennets attitude does not convey to this conventional image, Emily Fox Setons experiences in life also do not convey to this image. In both the text we learn the women’s first names, however we do not learn the male characters first names. This shows the inequality between the two sexes, as the male characters are portrayed as having higher status and are more formally approached.
Pride and prejudice dramatize the economic inequality of women showing how women had to marry undesirable mates in order to gain some financial security. It is no exaggeration to see the system as another form of prostitution.
Money is extremely important in all Jane Austens work and it’s an aspect of her fiction, which some readers find difficult to cope with. They feel that in some cases both she and her heroines are more interested in money than in more important considerations when it comes to choosing husbands, or that the novels concern with characters that are comparatively well off suggests a kind of snobbery.
They see marriage as the natural consequence of having a ‘good fortune’, whereas the reader might want to argue that affection ought to be the important factor.
An opposition is established from the very beginning between money and love. In the context of this immediate opposition, the word property takes on interesting importance and can be seen as a key word in the possession, not only of a fortune but also of a person – indeed the two seem to be completely identified. Again, the reader and particularly a modern reader, might want to argue that marriage should be about partnership, a moral contract between individual, rather than a financial take of ownership, and these opposing ideas of marriage reinforce the basic oppositions between money and love.
When Jane Austen was writing, married women legally owned nothing: all their property belonged to their husbands. Yet the only way to financial security for many women of the time was through, marriage to a richer man, so that a contemporary reader might be less quick than a modern reader to see affection as the only important reason for marriage.
Analysing other texts such as ‘Mansfield Park’ by Jane Austen and ‘Aurora Floyd’ by Mary Elizabeth Braddon also clearly indicates how the texts are typical of their time, conforming to the accepted norms and values of that current period. In ‘Mansfield Park’ we are faced with a very subordinate female character that is completely over-powered by a male character. Fanny’s re-fusion of Mr Crawford is seen as an outrage from Sir Thomas as he cannot see why any female would turn him down, as he possesses a very wealthy and fortunate life. He does not even consider how affection could e involved or can be of any reason to reject a man with such status. The domination and authority of the male character is also present through the language used in the text. Sir Thomas leads and controls the discussion. Any questions that he interrogates are closed questions only requiring a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer, not giving her any opportunity to explain herself. Studying the morphology it is also it is also visible to see the male domination by looking at the speech belongs to Sir Thomas whereas Fanny very rarely speaks, and when she does it is only a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. The use of titles also diminishes the female character as the male characters are referred by titles such as ‘Sir’ and ‘Mr’ whereas the female character is referred to by her first name only, as though she is undeserving of a title.
Having thoroughly examined the literary and non-linguistic texts in which to identify how gender roles are constructed, I believe there is a strong division between language and gender. At a time when the development of literacy was at its peak, there was a distinct inequality between gender roles, which therefore became present in the language used. The English language today still has biased aspects towards women. Historical referents have been accepted as a norm however without realising this also means accepting male domination. Many changes have been made to the language used today. Although much development has been present, there is still a disparity in the language used. English language has many negative connotations referring to a woman whilst the equivalent word referring to a man has contrasting connotations of status and superiority.
Analysing the marriage proposals from different texts also show the evident equality in the way gender roles are construed through language. A woman’s choice of whom to marry heavily depended on their status and wealth. Women are portrayed as reliant on men for their financial status. Men were depicted as intelligent, wealthy, dominant characters, whilst women were seen as gullible, naïve, subordinate characters that relied heavily on their sexuality and appearance to receive a proposal from a wealthy gentleman. Throughout history female subordination has always been present however there are new rights movements and developments for equality and it is evident that there is a vast change in the way we perceive the world and the changing stereotypes within the sexes.