Ivanna Russell
Mrs. Warren’s Profession by George Bernard Shaw can be viewed as a direct critique of Victorian societal norms and gender roles; he creates a female character that makes readers question the concept of gender in relation to the ideal Victorian woman. The ideal Victorian woman was modeled after Coventry Patmore’s poem The Angel in the House; the “angel” was completely devoted to her husband, and she had no identity outside of the family. She was to be completely selfless and passive with no aspirations of her own; her role revolved around domesticity. According to Judith Butler, the concept of gender often revolves around a certain set of repeated acts, and this is the case with the “angel in the house” (Culler 44). Butler’s theory asserts, “You become a man or a woman by repeated acts, which…depend on social conventions and habitual ways of doing something in a culture” (Culler 45). Thus, to be an ideal Victorian woman, one would have to follow this model that was created by male society; the “angel” role was the norm for 19th-century women. In contrast, Vivie completely deviates from the role of the “angel” and questions its normalization. Vivie takes on traditionally masculine traits; she is educated, authoritative, and independent. Vivie’s assertion of her independence leads to her rejection of the institution of marriage and family values; she displays that a woman can find fulfillment outside of the home. In her repudiation of the “angel,” Vivie breaks out of the traditional mold, and she acts as a clear deconstruction of gender norms and what it means to be a Victorian woman. I will claim that Vivie ultimately proves that the “angel in the house” is an ideological construction made to appear “natural” to keep women in an inferior position.
Scholarship on Mrs. Warren’s Profession has a clear trajectory that focuses on the social injustices women faced during the time; this included the New Woman movement as a result of inequality and Shaw’s play as a critique on the hypocrisy of Victorian society. For instance, chapter 3 in D.A. Hadfield and Jean Reynolds’ Shaw and Feminisms: On Stage and Off asserts that Vivie theatrically performs her role as a “new woman” which was modeled after her mother’s “successful performance of middle-class femininity” (57). Using Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities, they argue that the trope of the family, which included the idealized “angel in the house,” was vital to “the project of nation-building and of national identity” which explains why the angel’s role lingered (59). Michael Sargent advances the conversation on Vivie as the “new woman;” Sargent argues that Shaw was influenced by the social injustices that surrounded him, and he focuses heavily on the historical account of the New Woman movement. Raymond Nelson’s “Mrs. Warren’s Profession and English Prostitution” argues that the play addresses the role society played in the prevalence of prostitution in the 18th and 19th centuries. Similar to Nelson, Eun-Hye Yeo’s “The Shavian Idea of Social Reformation in Mrs. Warren’s Profession” argues that Mrs. Warren’s Profession called for a social reform of Victorian society that drove women to prostitution. Banu Öğünç’s “From Mrs. Warren’s Profession to Press Cuttings: The Woman Question in George Bernard Shaw’s Plays” shifts the attention to the influence that the Women’s Suffrage movement had on Shaw’s plays. His comparison between Mrs. Warren’s Profession and Play Cuttings proves that the former encompasses heavier feminist themes with more groundbreaking female characters which contributed to the fight towards women’s rights. In my paper, I will engage with Hadfield and Reynolds’ discussion on The Angel in the House in my assertion that Vivie’s actions prove her repudiation of idealized Victorian femininity; she embodies many traits that are associated with the New Woman movement, as they state. However, through Butler’s theory of gender, I will further the discussion by arguing that Shaw’s presentation of Vivie’s masculinity actually exposes the “angel in the house” to be an ideological construction which in turn deconstructs gender norms.
The ideal Victorian woman was to be passive, powerless, selfless, and chaste; Victorian women were expected to uphold these values which can be summed up by Coventry Patmore’s poem The Angel in the House. Patmore’s poem was based on his wife, Emily, and it detailed how Victorian women were expected to act; it emphasized separate male and female gender roles. If women deviated from this mold at all, they were looked down upon and viewed as less of a woman because femininity was tied to the “angel’s” role. According to Patmore, this “angel” dedicates her life to her husband and children, and she is to have no aspirations of her own:
Man must be pleased; but him to please
Is woman’s pleasure; down the gulf
Of his condoled necessities
She casts her best, she flings herself (Patmore 9.1.1-4).
Patmore’s work idealizes the woman who puts her husband’s needs before her own; in many ways, the “angel” has no identity of her own outside of being a wife and mother. Hadfield and Reynolds discuss Patmore’s idea of the “angel”: “The ideal…woman realizes herself by dedicating her life to supporting others, particularly her husband, as if she were without aspirations of her own…if the husband fails, the proper wifely response is to assume responsibility and accept the fault herself as a consequence of her failing to meet her duties, which include…unconditional devotion to her husband” (57). The role of the “angel” was the ultimate figure of Victorian femininity, and it permeated throughout the Victorian era and into 20th-century. Moreover, in “Victorian Masculinity and the Angel in the House,” Carol Christ asserts, “The Angel in the House is not a very good poem, yet it is culturally significant, not only for its definition of the Victorian sexual ideal, but also for the clarity with which it represents the male concerns that motivate fascination with that ideal” (147). Women could not break away from this gender role without facing consequences for misbehavior, as it was highly romanticized.
The ideology of the “angel in the house” can be understood in terms of being a “forcible citation of a [gender] norm” (Culler 45). In other words, the “angel” became a way to measure Victorian femininity, and society made this gender norm seem compulsory. To become a “real” respectable woman, one would have to fit into this mold. In chapter 7 of Jonathan Culler’s Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, he discusses Judith Butler’s concept of gender as a performance of repeated acts, and one can see this occur with the ideal of the “angel;” Butler argues that “the fundamental categories of identity are cultural and social productions, more likely to be the result of political cooperation…They create the effect of the natural…and by imposing norms (definitions of what it is to be a woman) they threaten to exclude those that don’t conform” (44). The “angel in the house” role is normalized by Victorian society; women are expected to take on this role because it is perceived as natural. According to Butler’s theory, women are immediately forced into the idealized role upon being assigned a sex at birth: “The naming of a girl initiates a continuous process of ‘girling,’ the making of a girl, through an ‘assignment’ of compulsory repetition of gender norms…To be a subject at all is to be given this assignment of repetition” (Culler 45). This would suggest that a Victorian woman’s identity as a female would be directly tied to the characteristics and acts associated with the “angel.” John Stuart Mill furthers this idea in suggesting that “what is now called the nature of women is an eminently artificial thing—the result of forced repression;” thus, it is clear that the “angel” is an ideological construction of society to empower men and keep women in an inferior and suppressed position.
Vivie deviates entirely from the “angel in the house” role that is expected of her, and through her actions, one can see the deconstruction of Victorian gender norms. Her deviation from the norm is depicted through her masculine traits, and Shaw opens with stage directions that allude to this: “A lady’s bicycle is propped against the wall…a young lady lies reading and making notes…within reach of her hand, is a common kitchen chair, with a pile of serious-looking books and a supply of writing paper upon it” (Shaw 13). Vivie is partaking in activities that the “angel” would not have anything to do with; her behavior strikes readers as unexpected. The “angel” would certainly not participate in any form of exercise such as riding a bicycle; moreover, she would be unconcerned with reading and studying. These activities would be considered too “masculine” for the “angel,” and because her identity revolved around being selfless, she would not engage in such “selfish” pursuits. These pursuits would take her away from her domestic role. Vivie’s masculinity is furthered in her first interaction with Praed; she “proffers her hand and takes [Praed’s] with a resolute and hearty grip" (Shaw 14). Her dissimilarity from the traditional Victorian woman is pointed out when Praed applauds her for being “unconventional:”
PRAED …Now I was always afraid your mother
would strain her authority to make you very conventional. It’s such a relief to find that she hasn’t.
VIVIE Oh! Have I been behaving unconventially?
PRAED Oh, no…At least not conventionally unconventionally…But it was so charming
of you to say that you were disposed to be friends with me! You modern young ladies are splendid…Do you know I have been in a positive state of excitement about meeting you ever since your magnificent achievements at Cambridge—a thing unheard of in my day…When I was your age, young men and women were afraid of each other…maidenly reserve!—gentlemanly chivalry!—always saying no when you meant yes…
VIVIE Yes, I imagine there must have been a frightful waste of time—especially women’s time (Shaw 16).
Praed, who is said to be “hardly past middle age,” would have grown up with the gender roles that were considered appropriate for Victorian women; this time period was precisely when The Angel in the House would have been circulating widely. Thus, a figure such as Vivie would have been unrecognizable to him. Interestingly, when Vivie questions whether she had been “behaving unconventionally,” this suggests her questioning of the very concept of conventionality; the term would imply that there is a set of behaviors that are considered “normal,” and another set that is considered “unconventional.” To her, it seems odd that her behavior would even strike someone as abnormal. She views herself as Praed’s equal and disagrees with the modest ways of speaking and “gentlemanly chivalry;” when Praed says this, she remarks to herself that he lacks in “brains and character” (Shaw 15). Additionally, readers learn that she is educated and intelligent when Praed expresses surprise over her mathematics degree from Cambridge and her “tieing with the third wrangler” because it was “unheard of” in his time. These opening lines separate Vivie entirely from the idealized “angel in the house;” instead, she is modeled after the “new woman.”
The New Woman movement valued traditionally masculine traits over feminine traits. In many ways, the movement promoted the invasion of what was traditionally the male sphere. This caused patriarchal Victorian society to fear the “new woman.” Charles Harper “claimed that women were not intended to follow intellectual or indeed any traditionally masculine pursuits and warned…that their reproductive capacities would be permanently damaged by such unnatural activity” (Sargent 8). Harper refers to these activities as “unnatural” which implies that the “natural” role would be the “angel in the house;” one can see the ways in which Butler’s concept of gender is aligned with this. It is clear that this was an ideological construction, and perhaps Harper made such claims to incite fear in the public to maintain the male position of power; Victorian society did not want women to invade the male sphere, and this is why the “angel” was idealized and highly sought after. In contrast to the femininity of the “angel,” Vivie is described as “prompt, strong, confident, [and] self-possessed” and is wearing “plain, business-like” attire (Shaw 14). Sargent calls Shaw’s masculine portrayal of Vivie a “caricature” because of her taking to “cigars and whiskey,” and “her utter devotion to work and determination to succeed in a male-dominated profession” (5). Vivie’s exaggerated masculinity[1] suggests that Shaw may have modeled her after other women of the time and wanted to emphasize the social injustices that women faced. For instance, women were not actually allowed to receive degrees until 1948; thus, Vivie would appear to be a “caricature” because many of her characteristics seemed unrealistic given the time and were considered “unnatural” for a Victorian woman (Sargent 6). Correspondingly, if one applies Butler’s concept of gender to Vivie it becomes clear that she was “performing” each of these acts to align with the New Woman movement. In a sense, Vivie is asserting the newer gender norms that have been constructed by the movement. It is evident to readers that Vivie strays entirely from the idealized role to expose that the behaviors that are perceived as “natural” for a woman are actually the result of a societal construction; this suggests that there is no “normal” or “natural” behavior for a woman. One can see that there is a binary that exists between Victorian men and women in which the former maintains control at the expense of the latter.
According to Patmore, an extreme devotion to one’s husband made up the majority of a woman’s identity. The “angel’s” role was wrapped up in being a wife and completing her domestic tasks. However, Victorian marriage laws restricted a woman’s freedom; marriage often repressed women and erased their own identity because they were to be entirely selfless. Hammerton’s “Victorian Marriage and the Law of Matrimonial Cruelty” states that husbands were “sanctioned by law” to hold “undisputed power…over wives and children” (270). This “undisputed power” that husbands held eradicated what little rights women had; she essentially became the property of her husband. Vivie’s repudiation of Victorian gender norms can be seen in her own rejection of marriage; she bluntly refuses Crofts’ marriage proposal:
CROFTS But when I say a thing I mean it…and what I value I pay hard money for…I want to settle down with a Lady Crofts. I suppose you think me very blunt, eh?
VIVIE …I quite appreciate the offer: the money, the position, Lady Crofts, and so on. But I think I will say no, if you don’t mind. I’d rather not.
CROFTS I’m in no hurry. It was only to let you know in case young Gardner should try to trap you. Leave the question open.
VIVIE My no is final. I won’t go back from it. [She looks authoritatively at him.] (Shaw 48).
Interestingly, Crofts stating that he values what he pays “hard money for” implies that he views Vivie as an object to be bought; this is later confirmed when he tells Mrs. Warren that he is willing to pay a hefty price to marry Vivie (Shaw 33). Vivie’s flippant response that she would “rather not” suggests that she has other more desirable options unlike previous generations of women that were forced to choose between prostitution, marriage, or working in a factory, as Mrs. Warren’s sisters prove. She has her mathematics degree which has given her marketable skills; thus, she is not reliant on marrying for socioeconomic security and is free to conceptualize herself outside of The Angel in the House. Vivie’s freedom allows her to craft her own identity instead of allowing Victorian society to craft it for her. Crofts continues his attempts to manipulate her into marrying him, yet she remains firm and speaks to him with no false politeness; where the “angel” is passive and powerless, Vivie maintains an assertive and commanding presence. However, unmarried Victorian women were often viewed as abnormal because of the tie marriage had to the “angel’s” role. Moreover, the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857 “enshrined the double standard of morality in law by allowing relief to a husband for a wife’s adultery alone, while requiring a wife to prove adultery plus a compounding offense such as cruelty, desertion, incest, or bigamy” (Hammerton 271). Thus, marriage was something that Vivie was not willing to gamble on due to “the very being or legal existence of woman [being] suspended during the marriage” (Boone 4). She was aware that her “future hung on that ‘reasonable’ qualification, which…implied a man who was unwilling to exercise powers that remained his right” (Hammerton 270). Her determination to remain single shatters what it means to be a Victorian woman; she completely changes the narrative.
Vivie rejects not only Crofts but the entire institution of marriage; she refuses to marry Frank as well despite the fact that she was romantically involved with him. While Frank never actually proposes to her, he has made it clear that he intends to marry her. In her pursuit of complete independence and separation from the “angel” role, she tells Frank and Praed that she should “be treated as a woman of business,” and they should consider her “permanently single;” she also mentions that she does not want a husband (Shaw 57, 65). This emphasizes her intention to never get married; it seems that she views the idea of “love” as a childish notion. In a sense, by asserting that she “be treated as a woman of business,” she is implying that she would like to be treated as equal to a man. Vivie states, “But there are two subjects I’d like dropped, if you don’t mind. One of them is love’s young dream in any shape or form: the other is the romance and beauty of life…” (Shaw 57). Vivie repudiates things such as “romance” and “beauty,” as she considers these notions to be frivolous; in her pursuit to separate herself from the role of the “angel,” readers can see her dissociate from all that is considered “feminine.” Immediately after Vivie has cut Frank out of her life “the strain [on her] face relaxes; her grave expression breaks up into one of joyous content,” and she laughs “unconcernedly” at Frank’s note which suggests that she is unaffected by his absence. She chooses independence over marriage. Interestingly, Vivie’s insistence on partnering with Honoria Fraser can be understood as her choosing to “partner” with a woman in business instead of “partnering” with a man in marriage, and this is emphasized by the imagery that is set up prior to act 4; Shaw points out that Honoria Fraser’s office has a sign “lettered in black on the outside, ‘Fraser and Warren’” (Shaw 53). This choice further deconstructs gendered norms of femininity; Victorian women did not take on positions such as this. She displays that a woman can find fulfillment outside of the home.
Vivie refuses to comply with the ideal of Victorian femininity that is defined in The Angel in the House; she completely changes the narrative on what it means to be a Victorian woman. The ideals that were dictated in Patmore’s poem were normalized and became a way to measure Victorian femininity; the “angel” role was perceived as natural for women. If one uses Butler’s concept of gender as a lens with which to analyze Vivie’s masculinity and the “angel,” it becomes apparent that the idealized “angel” is an ideological construction created and endorsed by patriarchal society to keep women in an inferior position; they did not want women to invade the male sphere. Vivie’s repudiation of the “angel” can be seen in her traditionally masculine traits, along with her rejection of the institution of marriage and her insistence on partnering with Honoria Fraser. Moreover, her “performance” of her masculinity aligns with Butler’s concept of gender as well; it is clear that she is acting out the characteristics associated with the “new woman.” It is striking that Vivie does not view her behavior as deviant; to her, it is entirely normal which displays her rejection of gender norms. Shaw’s depiction of her deconstructs the way gender is viewed, and this suggests that he was ahead of his time. She breaks out of the traditional mold and redefines what it means to be a Victorian woman.
Notes
[1] Vivie’s exaggerated masculinity is apparent in her relationship with Frank as well; this furthers the idea that all gender is largely performative, as Butler suggests. Frank and Vivie engage in a reversal of gender roles; this is emphasized by Frank’s admittance that he only wanted to marry Vivie for her wealth (Shaw 60). Typically, it would be the woman who needed to marry for socioeconomic security. Crofts points out that Frank has “no profession” and “no property” (Shaw 47). Meanwhile, Vivie has gained marketable skills through her education, and as Sargent suggests, she is insistent on entering the male sphere (Sargent 5). Vivie performs this traditionally masculine role in their relationship while Frank can be associated with the traditionally feminine role. Their relationship furthers the conversation on gender deconstruction. This advances my argument; however, I will not be discussing this in detail due to limited space.
Works Referenced
Boone, Allen Joseph. “Wedlock as Deadlock and Beyond.” Mosaic: An Interdisciplinary Critical Journal, vol. 17, no. 1, 1984, pp. 65-81. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/24777765. Accessed 21 Oct. 2020.
Christ, Carol. “Victorian Masculinity and the Angel in the House.” A Widening Sphere: Changing Roles of Victorian Women, edited by Martha Vicinus, Indiana University Press, 1977, pp. 146–162. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=1977104577&site=ehost-live&scope=site. Accessed 11 November 2020.
Culler, Jonathan. “Performative Language.” Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 42-46.
Hadfield, D.A., and Jean Reynolds. “Shutting Out Mother: Vivie Warren as the New Woman.” Shaw and Feminisms: On Stage and Off, University Press of Florida, 2013, pp. 56-72.
Nelson, Raymond. “Mrs. Warren’s Profession and English Prostitution.” Journal of Modern Literature, vol. 2, no. 3, 1972, JSTOR, https://www-jstor-org.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu/stable/30053190?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents. Accessed 18 Oct. 2020.
Öğünç, Banu. “From Mrs. Warren’s Profession to Press Cuttings: The Woman Question in George Bernard Shaw’s Plays.” Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Edebiyat Dergisi, vol. 37, 2017, pp. 55–66. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=2018970765&site=ehost-live&scope=site. Accessed 16 Oct. 2020.
Patmore, Coventry. “The Angel in the House.” 1862. Project Gutenberg, https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4099/4099-h/4099-h.htm. Accessed 9 November 2020.
Sargent, Michael. “Shaw and the New Woman.” The Shavian: The Journal of the Shaw Society, vol. 11, no. 4, 2010, pp. 5-16. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=2010140204&site=ehost-live&scope=site. Accessed 19 Oct. 2020.
Yeo, Eun-Hye. “The Shavian Idea of Social Reformation in Mrs. Warren’s Profession.” The Journal of Modern English Drama, vol. 18, no. 1, 2005, pp. 127-140. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=2005583144&site=ehost-live&scope=site. Accessed 17 Oct. 2020.
Biography
Ivanna Russell is a graduate student in the English MA program with a focus in literature. Ivanna is also a tutor at the writing center at CSUF. She received her bachelor’s in English from UC Irvine, and her research interests include 19th-century literature, gender and sexuality, poetry, and feminist theory.
Comments