Peter Taylor’s short story Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time tells the tale of an odd brother-sister duo, Alfred and Louisa Dorset, who reside in the small, presumably southern, town of Mero. From the very beginning, readers are led to believe that the Dorsets are more than just brother and sister – they are lovers. Several occurrences throughout the story hint at a depraved relationship, however the story offers no firm confirmation of an incestuous relationship actually occurring. Despite their peculiarities, Mr. and Miss Dorset seem to have a great deal of influence on the social traditions of the town, the most important one being the annual party they host for the young children in the community. These parties are exclusive events that …show more content…
As such, these parties seem to be an indication of the social order of the town, with the Dorsets acting as the unlikely social arbiters. Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time is a subtle examination of upper-class life, in which Peter Taylor uses the Dorsets’ seemingly incestuous relationship as a symbol for the greater idea of “social incest.” Furthermore, the Dorset’s fall from the top of the social ladder ultimately brings about the end of social incest in Mero. Alfred and Louisa Dorsets’ relationship is not literally incestuous; that is, they are not lovers. Rather, their seemingly incestuous relationship is symbolic of a much larger societal characteristic – a type of incest defined in much more expansive terms. Mr. and Miss Dorset engage in a different brand of incest known as “social incest.” Simply put, social incest is the inclination to only marry within one’s own class. In an interview with Barbara …show more content…
It was a result of Ned and Emily Meriwether and Tom Bascomb’s seemingly harmless prank on the Dorsets. Ned and Emily Meriwether are two children of high social standing in the Mero community, as understood by their invitation to the Dorsets’ party. Tom Bascomb, on the other hand, is the paperboy for West Vesey Place. As such, he was not invited to the party. However, the three children contrive a plan to trick Alfred and Louisa. Tom is going to attend the party with Emily in Ned’s place, and Ned will sneak in as if he is Tom, an outsider. As noted above, the Dorsets take pride in only inviting the “best” children to their party; Tom is not such an individual. Tom lives on Division Boulevard, an aptly named street. Tom takes this prank as “an opportunity to mock the group from which he has been excluded,” or more precisely, to mock the “social pretensions” of the Dorsets’ (Robinson 287-88). As stated above, Alfred and Louisa are thoroughly convinced that they can recognize a quality child when they see one. Consequently, it is devastating for the Dorsets to find out that they have been tricked: “‘Why, we know nice children when we see them’…a pleading quality in her voice” (Taylor 166). They are reluctant to admit that they have confused Tom, an outsider, with Ned. They continue to insist that “it isn’t just the money,” but ironically, the presumption of money is
Incest is not something that happens to “those people over there” the ones across town who don’t wash very often. It happens to all strata of society, at all economic levels, and in all ethnic groups.
Imagine yourself, dear reader, transported to Shakespearian Verona, a bustling, peaceful city (aside from the occasional death or two), with its obligatory social classes going about agreeably (aside from the occasional brawl or two), and all people happy and successful (aside from the occasional poor wretch or two). The Verona in which Shakespeare’s tragedy Romeo and Juliet takes place in is made sinister by the deadly consequences than ensue from its strict, unbending society. Romeo and Juliet paints a tale about two young lovers, Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet, whose attempts to be together are cruelly thwarted by society. Society’s fixation on honor and disgrace, poverty-creating laws, and austere social roles all have crucial functions in causing the deaths of Romeo and Juliet.
In Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth Bennet’s journey to love and marriage is the focal point of the narrative. But, the lesser known source of richness in Austen’s writing comes from her complex themes the well-developed minor characters. A closer examination of Charlotte Lucas, Elizabeth’s dear friend in Pride and Prejudice, shows that while she did not take up a large amount of space in the narrative, her impact was great. Charlotte’s unfortunate circumstances in the marriage market make her a foil to Elizabeth, who has the power of choice and refusal when it comes to deciding who will be her husband. By focusing on Charlotte’s age and lack of beauty, Austen emphasizes how ridiculous and cruel marriage can be in this time.
Shakespeare married Anne Hathaway at 18 and had three children, twin girls and a son,
Sexual relations between men and woman have created issues of life and death from the beginning of time. In most classic Western beliefs it began when Eve with the help of the Devil seduced Adam thus leading the downfall of humanity into an abyss of sin and hopelessness. This issue arises in all literature from Genesis, Chaucer and into modern day. Authors, clerks and writers of all types have aided stereotyping women throughout history and Geoffrey Chaucer is not an exception in most cases. However, in Chaucer's Wife of Bath we can find the beginnings of a new type of woman arising from the dark ages of the post-Roman era. And of course at the center of his character's struggle is sex. As this topic develops, we shall take a brief look into sex, women, the Middle Ages and Chaucer's Wife of Bath as an example of Middle Ages reflections.
In medieval England, society’s roles were dominated by men and women were either kept at home or doing labor work. Among the most famous medieval English literature, “The Canterbury Tales” by Geoffrey Chaucer, lies ‘The Wife of Bath's Prologue’ and ‘The Wife of Bath's Tale.’ Within, Chaucer shares his perspective of the Wife of Bath, the Queen, and the Crone. Through the use of symbolism and diction, Chaucer aims to change society’s expectations of women.
"Some mothers might have encouraged intimacy from motives of interest...and some might have repressed it from motives of prudence...but Mrs. Dashwood was alike uninfluenced by either consideration. It was enough for her that he appeared to be amiable, that he loved her daughter, and that Elinor returned the partiality" (13).
“The Wife of Bath’s Tale” is written in an entertaining and adventurous spirit, but serves a higher purpose by illustrating the century’s view of courtly love. Hundreds, if not thousands, of other pieces of literature written in the same century prevail to commemorate the coupling of breathtaking princesses with lionhearted knights after going through unimaginable adventures, but only a slight few examine the viability of such courtly love and the related dilemmas that always succeed. “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” shows that women desire most their husband’s love, Overall, “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” shows that the meaning of true love does not stay consistent, whether between singular or separate communities and remains timeless as the depictions of love from this 14th century tale still hold true today.
Of all the numerous females depicted in literature throughout the centuries, Geoffrey Chaucer’s Wife of Bath has inspired more in-depth discussion and gender-oriented analysis than the majority. She is in turn praised and criticized for her behavior and her worldview; critics can’t seem to decide whether she is a strong portrayal of 14th century feminism or a cutting mockery of the female sex. Both her tale and its prologue are riddled with themes of conflict and power struggle between the sexes, and the victor of this battle is not made explicit. Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales being a parody of various societal conceptions and literary conventions, it is likely that this ambiguity was entirely intentional. By comparing the Wife of Bath and her husbands to the characters presented in the tale, Chaucer makes the subtle but sharp implication that there is no true winner in the battle of the sexes; the essential qualities of men and women are equally unsavory, and harmony between the two can only be achieved when an illusion of triumph has been constructed separately for both parties.
In “The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale” of Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales, the Wife of Bath challenges the oppressive standards women are expected to uphold and asserts her agency by reassessing women’s public and interpersonal roles. However, rather than naively disregarding the influence of gender constructs, the wife manipulates the “limitations” that binary oppositions create for her gender in order to dominate the skill of persuasion. Through the careful use of language, the Wife of Bath exploits societal standards placed upon females in order to reconstruct women’s role within her culture and the institution of marriage. In particular, the Wife argues that her opinions should be regarded because her amount of marriage experience undermines authority. By invoking experience over authority, the Wife is able to disguise her domineering arguments, references, and ethics as informed opinions rather than efforts to overturn masculine supremacy. Although her scandalous actions and suggestions within her prologue and tale are seen as distasteful by many of the pilgrims, she still seemingly adheres to the customs appropriated for her gender. She is able to re-interpret said customs through the manipulation of semantics, and in doing so she successfully overturns patriarchal power. By working the system to her advantage, the Wife of Bath contests for the re-evaluation of the power dynamics within marriage.
Through the use of literary devices, Pride and Prejudice reveals Jane Austen’s attitude towards the novel’s theme of true love through the actions of the suitors; the process of courtship in the 1800s articulates characterization, foreshadowing, and irony. The novel opens with the line, “it is a truth acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of wife,” (Austen 1) which foreshadows the conflict of finding a significant other . During the Victorian age, men and women courted others of the same education, wealth, and social status; it was considered uncommon for someone to marry beneath them or to marry for love. Jane Austen uses Elizabeth Bennett’s encounters with different characters of varying social statuses to criticize the traditional class system; she illustrates a revolutionary idea that marriage should be based on love. In the resolution of the plot, Austen demonstrates the perfect qualities in a marriage; she incorporates Aristotle's philosophy of friendship to prove the validity of the having an affectionate relationship.
Within this extended essay, the subject chosen to study and formulate a question from was English Literature, in particular the portrayal of women during the 19th and 20th centuries, where the following novels 'The Great Gatsby' written by F. Scott Fitzgerald and Jane Austen's 'Pride and Prejudice' were set in and originated the basis from. The question is as follows 'How does Jane Austen and F Scott Fitzgerald portray gender inequalities in both lower and upper class relationships particularly through love and marriage within the novels 'Pride and Prejudice' and 'The Great Gatsby' from the different era's it was written in?' This particular topic was chosen reflecting the morality and social class during the two different era's and determining whether there was change in the characteristics of women as well as men and how their behaviour was depicted through the two completely different stories, as they both reflect the same ethical principles in terms of love and marriage. The two novels were chosen in particular to view their differences as well as their similarities in terms of gender inequality through love and marriage, as the different era's it was set in gives a broader view in context about how society behaved and what each author was trying to portray through their different circumstances, bringing forward a similar message in both novels.
Marriage is a powerful union between two people who vow under oath to love each other for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health. This sacred bond is a complicated union; one that can culminate in absolute joy or in utter disarray. One factor that can differentiate between a journey of harmony or calamity is one’s motives. Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice is a novel of manners, where Elizabeth Bennet and her aristocratic suitor Mr. Darcy’s love unfolds as her prejudice and his pride abate. Anton Chekhov’s “Anna on the Neck” explores class distinction, as an impecunious young woman marries a wealthy man. Both Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice and Anton Chekhov’s “Anna on the Neck” utilize
Jane Austen’s works are characterized by their classic portrayals of love among the gentry of England. Most of Austen’s novels use the lens of romance in order to provide social commentary through both realism and irony. Austen’s first published bookThe central conflicts in both of Jane Austen’s novels Emma and Persuasion are founded on the structure of class systems and the ensuing societal differences between the gentry and the proletariat. Although Emma and Persuasion were written only a year apart, Austen’s treatment of social class systems differs greatly between the two novels, thus allowing us to trace the development of her beliefs regarding the gentry and their role in society through the analysis of Austen’s differing treatment of class systems in the Emma and Persuasion. The society depicted in Emma is based on a far more rigid social structure than that of the naval society of Persuasion, which Austen embodies through her strikingly different female protagonists, Emma Woodhouse and Anne Eliot, and their respective conflicts. In her final novel, Persuasion, Austen explores the emerging idea of a meritocracy through her portrayal of the male protagonist, Captain Wentworth. The evolution from a traditional aristocracy-based society in Emma to that of a contemporary meritocracy-based society in Persuasion embodies Austen’s own development and illustrates her subversion of almost all the social attitudes and institutions that were central to her initial novels.
In the satiric novel, Vanity Fair, William Makepeace Thackeray exposes and examines the vanities of 19th century England. Numerous characters in the novel pursue wealth, power, and social standing, often through marriage or matrimony. Thackeray effectively uses the institution of marriage to comment on how these vanities often come at the expense of the true emotions of passion, devotion, and, of course, love.