Proto-Feminism: A Case Study of Patriarchy

PROTOFEMINISM: PATRIARCHY IN LITERATURE, 2015

PROTOFEMINISM: PATRIARCHY IN LITERATURE

BY

Aformeziem Brendal

[email protected]

[email protected]

Abstract

The concept of patriarchy has often been criticized

in feminist criticism. However, a diachronic study of

the representation and manifestation of patriarchy in

literature is paramount and fundamental to a deeper

understanding of the concept and its role in feminist

criticism. In this study, the manifestation of

patriarchy in three ‘protofeminist’ texts are revealed

and criticized. The texts are Thomas Wyatt’s ‘Whoso

List to Hunt,’ Thomas Hardy’s Mayor of Casterbridge, and

William Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice. The article

further relates the culturally subversive acts of the

female characters to “grains of wheat” that germinated

into the Feminist Movement. Kate Millet’s, Simone de

1

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Beauvoir’s and Elaine Showalter’s approaches to

Feminism are also referred to.

Keywords: protofeminism, feminism, patriarchy

1.Introduction

Patriarchy, as a word, will be one of the many

words to lose its original meaning and usage by the end

of the 21st century. It has become, recently, a

rejuvenated concept that occupies the lips of

revolutionary feminists. Etymologically, the word is

derived from Greek patriarkhia which means a “system of

society or government by fathers or elder males of the

community.” The above definition asserts that

patriarchy as a ‘system’ is manifested in the ‘society’

and in ‘government.’ Thus, a society or government that

encourages or upholds the governance or rule of male in

a community is patriarchal. A distinguishing feature of

2


such societies and governments is that it is often

patrilineal.

However, the term has been recreated to mean “an

unjust social system that enforces gender roles and is

oppressive to both men and women.” Phrases frequently

associated with patriarchy include: male chauvinism,

male dominance, sexism, male supremacy etc.

Essentially, the fervent supporters of the latter

definition argues that, as a system, patriarchal

domination is exhibited in the cultural, social,

economic, political and even ideological ramifications

of life. In addition, it is simultaneously revealed in

large and subtle ways throughout the world. In this

article, the latter definition is employed.

One of the major goals of feminists is to

eradicate every form of patriarchy in all spheres of

life. To an extremist, it includes painting the word as

pejorative and if possible, omitting it from the

English lexicon. In relating the ‘levirate’ custom

found among many Oriental peoples in ancient past,

which includes the “sacrifice [of widows] on their

husbands’ tombs,” Simone de Beauvoir (1949) refers to

3


such practices as a form of patriarchy called “radical

patriarchy.” Sylvia Walby in Theorizing Patriarchy postulates

two forms of patriarchy: private and public. She

asserts that the private form of patriarchy involves

the denial of “access to paid employment” which results

in the woman necessarily dependent on the man whom

might be the father or husband. On the contrary, the

public form of patriarchy allows women access to paid

employment but disallow equal payment with the men. In

addition, they are publically subordinated to the men

and given lower status.

In the world of literature, the role of women is

considered “second-class.” Until the 19th century, the

feminine gender was not allowed to write publicly. In

fact, they were disallowed from going to school.

However, few stood their ground and radically achieved

a breakthrough of the male chauvinistic world. Some of

these include Hildegard of Bingen, Julian of Norwich,

Margery Kempe, Jane Anger etc. Owing to the fact, a

majority of writers in the literary canon have been

observed to be males. In addition, the major works

written by such highly esteemed writers directly or

4


indirectly reveals patriarchy. Thus, it is the

responsibility of the feminist critic to extract these

patriarchal exhibitions and critically analyze it.

2.PATRIARCHY IN PROTOFEMINIST LITERATURE

One of the underlined methods of annihilating

patriarchy by the feminist critic is by bringing to

limelight and critically analyzing the manifestations

of patriarchy in works considered to be classic.

Feminist critics Simone de Beauvoir, Kate Millet and

Elaine Showalter have contributed largely to the

achievement of this goal by exemplarily using the

method. Their works are considered to have laid the

foundation for the most prevalent approach in this

method called the “images of women” approach. This

section contributes to the achievement of the goal by

critically analyzing some major works not highlighted

by Millet and Beauvoir, and providing further criticism

of the texts they considered.

2.1. THOMAS WYATT’S ‘WHOSO LIST TO HUNT’

5


Whoso list to hunt, I know where is an hind,

But as for me, alas, I may no more.

The vain travail hath wearied me so sore

I am of them that farthest cometh behind.

Yet may I, by no means, my wearied mind

Draw from the deer, but as she fleeth afore,

Fainting I follow. I leave off therefore,

Since in a net I seek to hold the wind.

Who list her hunt, I put him out of doubt,

As well as I, may spend his time in vain.

And graven with diamonds in letters plain

There is written, her fair neck round about,

‘Noli me tangere, for Caesar’s I am,

And wild for to hold, though I seem tame.

The poem is considered one of the classics of the

English sonnets. In fact, Thomas Wyatt is referred to

as the “originator of the English sonnet.” In the above

poem, Wyatt openly declares his futility to love and be

loved by Anne Boleyn. Nevertheless, the poem is

stereotypical in the sense that it manifests subtly the

traits of patriarchy. Before studying the poem in-

depth, a critical analysis of the surface reveals that

6


the poem is more of a communication between a speaker

and his targeted audience. The speaker, Thomas Wyatt,

addresses the poem to the addressees, the men. In

essence, the title of the poem is “[To] Whoso List to

Hunt.” It is therefore logical to assume to that the

poet excludes the feminine gender in his address. How

then should the female gender read the poem? Another

assumption that can be drawn from the title is the

assumption that the poem reveals the societal situation

of women in the sixteenth century as dormant,

uneducated, unsophisticated, and inactive. History

reveals that in the sixteenth century, only few women

were educated and well versed in Latin, Greek and

French, the languages of the sixteenth century.

Thomas Wyatt twice indicates the addresses (line 1

and 10) as an emphasis that the audience is restricted

to a particular gender. In addition, Wyatt symbolizes

the addresses as the hunter and Anne Boleyn as the

hunted. Andrew Bennett and Nicholas Royle (2004) agree

with the claim that Wyatt represents men and women in a

“gender-stereotypical way” which include “man as the

subject, active, full or travail;” women, on the other

7


hand as “object,” and inactive. Therefore, men are

given the higher status whereas women are given the

lower status.

Wyatt symbolically referred to Anne Boleyn as an

outstanding “hind,” a female deer that should be

hunted. The use of an animal to represent a woman

further contributes to the belittling of the feminine

gender. It would have been considered fair and

appropriate if the hunter was another animal, maybe a

lion (it could as well be the deer itself), in pursuit

of the hind. On the contrary, the comparison is

between a human and an animal. Furthermore, Wyatt’s

poem reveals the ‘hind’ as branded.

And graven with diamonds in letters plain

There is written, her fair neck round about,

‘Noli me tangere, for Caesar’s I am

There is a written sign round the neck of the hind

to put off any other suitor. In essence the suitor,8


‘Ceasar,’ has enslaved the hind with ‘diamonds’ to

exhibit his ownership, affluence and nobility.

Therefore, not only did Wyatt subordinate women under

men, he also portrays women as a property of man,

dependent on man and disallowed to make personal

choices and decisions.

The last world of the poem describes a

characteristic of women in the Sixteenth century,

‘tame[d].’ A synonym of the word tame is

‘domesticated.’ A dictionary even defined the word as

an adjective used to describe “a person who is willing

to do what other people ask, even if it is slightly

[against her wish].” Therefore, Anne Boleyn is the

‘tame[d]’ hind. Generally, according to Wyatt, women

are therefore supposed to be tamed by men.

A perfect example of this patriarchal domination

and taming of the women by men is captured in Margaret

Cavendish’s Philosophical and Physical Opinions (1655):

9


we are kept like birds in cages to hop up and down in our

houses, not suffered to fly abroad . . . we are shut out of

all power and authority, by reason we are never employed

either in civil or martial affairs, our counsels are

despised and laughed at, the best of our actions are trodden

down with scorn, by the overweening conceit men have of

themselves and through despisement of us. (qtd. in Margaret

Walters 2005: 21)

2.2. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE’S MERCHANT OF VENICE

In terms of choice I am not sole led

By nice direction of a maiden’s eyes:

Besides, the lottery of my destiny

Bars me the right of voluntary choosing;

But, if my father had not scanted me,

And hedg’d me by his wit to yield myself

His wife who wins me by that means I told you….

(II.i.13-19)

The Merchant of Venice was written during the late

sixteenth century. The Norton Anthology of English Literature

remarks that the play is one of Shakespeare’s

10


achievements which are “unprecendented succession of

romantic comedies… whose poetic richness and emotional

complexity remain unmatched.” The play reveals the

sixteenth century patriarchal society that subjugates

women under men.

The above quotation is Portia’s speech addressed to

the Prince of Morocco. She expresses her desire to have

a personal rather than imposed choice on whom to be

married to. However, before his death, Portia’s father

willed his property to any suitor of the daughter who

chooses among the three caskets, the casket which

contains a picture of Portia. Thus, both Portia and her

father’s wealth would belong to the man; this provokes

her to label it as “the lottery of [her] destiny.”

Essentially, this act of the late father posits two

points. First, as was the popular tradition in the

sixteenth century, a woman should be totally submissive

to the man, father or husband, in all arrangements

whether pleasing to her or not. Therefore, she does not

have any right to speak for herself, much less opines

what she wants. Secondly, the act pinpoints a common

feature of a patriarchal society; it is petrilineal.

11


Therefore, women are usually not allowed to inherit

property; they themselves are properties. In the

absence of a male child, the husband of the eldest

female child inherits the property. Unfortunately, this

patriarchal feature has been in existence since the

beginning of patriarchy down to this day. Similar

practices still exist especially in the African and

Asian communities. However, a rapid decrease of such

acts has been observed in these areas.

In her 1980 book, Women Oppression Today: Problems in

Marxist Feminist, Michele Barret distinguishes patriarchy as

the “domination of women by men” from patriarchy as “a

specific form of male domination in which father have

power over women and younger men.” Apparently, the act

made by Portia’s late father can be viewed from both

types of patriarchy. The aspect of male domination is

revealed through the subjective role given to the

suitors. Whoever chooses the right casket automatically

becomes Portia’s husband. It will be right be assume

that Portia’s life would have been utterly miserable

and helpless if the right casket was chosen by the

Prince of Morocco or the Prince of Arragon. It further

12


presents the gender-stereotypical roles of men as

subjective and active while women as objective and

inactive. Rather than choosing whom to marry and share

her father’s inheritance with, she can neither select

the suitors who would select among the three caskets

nor can she give a hint of the right casket to her

favorite suitor, as in the case of Bassanio.

Another manifestation of patriarchy in the play is

found during the court scene in act four, scene one.

Some professions, such as lawyers and doctors, were

strictly for the masculine gender. If women were

prevented from minor things such as going to school and

writing, how much more specializing in such

distinguished professions. The patriarchal society of

the sixteenth century forbade women from anticipating

such professions which would increase their position

and status in the society.

Although Shakespeare’s female characters in the

play cleverly and boldly rejected the pervasive social

norms and upheld theirs, their bold steps did not

change the situation in the society. The acts were

culturally subversive and radical but the system of

13


patriarchy remained unshakeable. Some scholars have

traced the origin of patriarchy to such “social and

family structures” found in the works of Western

scholars. Nevertheless, these acts of patriarchy

undoubtedly still exist and are being passed down from

one generation to another.

2.3. THOMAS HARDY’S MAYOR OF CASTERBRIDGE

Hardy’s works gain attention from every form of

criticism. Feminist criticism is no exception. An

outstanding feminist critic who has successfully

described “The Unmanning of Mayor of Casterbridge” is

Elaine Showalter. The novel is a classic written in the

Victorian era.

In The Mayor of Casterbridge (1886), the first act

that negotiates the feminist critic attention is

Henchard’s auction of his wife and baby daughter, Susan

and Elizatbeth-Jane respectively. At 21, while

travelling with his wife and baby daughter in search of

employment as a hay-trusser, Henchard stops to eat. In

what seemed like a joke when he was drunk, he sells his

14


wife and baby daughter to a sailor, Newson, for five

guineas. The above act is an outstanding manifestation

of Victorian patriarchy. The trend continues from the

early patriarchal societies – the “worthlessness of

women.” To extrapolate, Susan and her daughter are

simply regarded as properties which could be discarded

or sold at any given time or place. Feminist critics

tend to restrict their focus of this patriarchal action

to the auction made while simultaneously neglecting the

roles of the setting and the buyer.

The sale was made at “the fair of Weydon-Priors.”

Undoubtedly, there were others present in the same

setting when the sale is made. The fact that no one

stops him or attempts to, even though Henchard was

drunk is perspicuous evidence that even the society was

in fervent support of women subjugation to men. In

addition, Newson, the sailor and buyer, purchases Susan

and the baby daughter for the five guineas demanded.

Thus, Susan becomes a stock that can be exchanged for

money. Such acts were not unusual; the narrator points

out that “it has been done elsewhere.” These acts also

15


pinpoints the Victorian patriarchal ideology dominant

in the Victorian era.

In response to the above, Elaine Showalter points

out that the novel “begins with a scene that dramatizes

the analysis of female subjugation as a function of

capitalism: the auction of Micheal Henchard’s wife

Susan at the fair at Weydon-Priors” (qtd. in Dana

Elisabeth). Jung-Sun Choi critically points out that:

In terms of the Victorian patriarchy, the most

conspicuous character is Susan because she is a typical

victim of the patriarchal ideology. The relationship

between Susan and Henchard demonstrates the essence of

raltionship between man and wife in the Victorian age.

Between them there is a “total absence of

conversation.” Her husband is only “her present owner;”

she is only “an article” belonging to him. Naturally,

marriage is a disaster to her. (57)

By creating a sharp contrast between Michael

Henchard and Donald Farfree, Thomas Hardy promotes a

particular kind of masculinity which is believed to

16


have contributed to the evolution of the “New Woman.”

Another critic agrees that by “portray[ing] masculinity

in states of ambivalence,” Thomas Hardy “gives a great

deal of insight in the types of men he favors – the

chaste male, who is able to abandon his ‘savage male

defiance’ for love and sensitivity.”

The patriarchal domination of women under men –

father or husband, has been in existence since time

immemorial. Evidence of such pervasive patriarchal acts

is manifested in the three texts analyzed. It was

revealed that women were mostly viewed as “property”

belonging to men. This article also points out how

culturally subversive steps taken by female characters

as Portia, Jessica, Nerrisa, and Elizabeth-Jane sow the

seeds of feminism in their different ways. Other

protofeminist texts include: William Shakespeare’s

Othello, Nathaniel Hawthorn’s The Scarlet Letter etc.

Sadly to say, these acts of patriarchal domination

still exist in some societies. Patriarchy, as the

subjugation of women by men against their will, is

evident in the works of Ola Rotimi’s Our Husband has Gone

Mad Again, Buchi Emecheta’s Joys of Motherhood, Alice

17


Walker’s Color Purple, Zulu Sofola’s Old Wives Are Tasty, Ngugi

wa Thiongo’s Devil on the Cross and a “thousand” of other

texts. A perfect example of Patriarchal domination of

the father over female and male children in

contemporary literature is Joe De Graft’s Sons and

Daughters.

The radical and culturally subversive steps taken

by few women before the advent of the Feminist Movement

can be considered as the “grains of wheat” which were

sown. Any political, social, cultural and economical

attempt to liberate them of male chauvinism were not

only turned down but also ridiculed, abused and viewed

as contemptible. Those “grain-of-wheat” efforts

implanted have germinated to the Feminist Movement

which has in turn led to the development of other

feminist concepts and studies: gender studies, sexism,

gynocriticism, ideology, reproduction etc.

18


WORKS CITED

Asiyanbola, A.R. Patriarchy, Male Dominance, the Role and Women

Empowerment in Nigeria. A Paper submitted to the

International Union for the

Scientific Study of Population, 2005.

Bazzell, D. J. The Role of Women in The Merchant of Venice: Wives

and

Daughters Ahead of their Time. A Thesis Submitted to the

Faculty of the 19


School of Theatre Arts, University of Arizona,

2008.

Habib, M.A.R. A History of Literary Criticism, from Plato to Present.

Malden:

Blackwell Publishing, 2005.

Bennet, A. and Royle, N. An Introduction to Literature, Criticism

and Theory.

Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2004.

Choi, J. The Mayor of Casterbridge: Human Suffering in the Victorian

Patriarchy,

(unknown).

De Beauvoir, S. Le Deuxieme Sexe. Paris: Editions

Gallimard, 1949.

Gbenoba, F.E. and Okoroegbe F. N. Literary Theory and

Criticism. Lagos:

National Open University of Nigeria, 2014.

Walters, Margaret. Feminism: A Very Short Introduction. New

York: Oxford

University Press, 2005.20


INTERNET

Allingham, D.E. “The Social Role and Treatment of Women in Thomas

Hardy’s

The Mayor of Casterbridge.” Victorianweb.org. 28 June,

2015.

<http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/hardy/da1.html>

“Changing Forms of Patriarchy, Public and Private Patriarchy.”

Blacksacademy.net. 28 June 2015.

<http://www.blacksacademy.net/content/2985.html>

“Michelle Barrett: Capitalism and Women’s Liberation.”

Uhaweb.hartford.edu. 28

June 2015. <http://www.uhaweb.hartford.edu>

“Masculine Identity in Hardy’s Novels.” 123HelpMe.com. 28 June

2015

<http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=19180>

21

http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=19180

http://www.uhaweb.hartford.edu/

http://www.blacksacademy.net/content/2985.html

http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/hardy/da1.html


Mackay, F. “The Biggest Threat to Feminism? It’s not Just the

Patriarchy.”

theguardian.com. 28 June, 2015. >

<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/23/thre

at-feminism- patriarchy-male-supremacy-dating-makeup

“Patriarchy.” Wikipedia.org. 28 June 2015.

<http://www.en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki.Patriarchy>

22

http://www.en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki.Patriarchy

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/23/threat-feminism-%20patriarchy-male-supremacy-dating-makeup

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/23/threat-feminism-%20patriarchy-male-supremacy-dating-makeup

Proto-Feminism: A Case Study of Patriarchy

Documents

Transcript of Proto-Feminism: A Case Study of Patriarchy