Gender, Fantasy, and Empowerment in Diana Gabaldon’S
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
GENDER, FANTASY, AND EMPOWERMENT IN DIANA GABALDON’S OUTLANDER A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts August, 2009 BY Melissa Ormond Department of Liberal Studies College of Liberal Arts and Sciences DePaul University Chicago, Illinois Introduction Diana Gabaldon's Outlander is the story of Claire and Jamie, an unlikely couple from two different historical and social settings who found love in the most unlikely of circumstances. Claire and Frank, who spent the first seven years of their marriage separated by war, are on their second honeymoon in Scotland when the story begins. After visiting the sacred stones at Craigh na Dun, Claire is swept back in time to 1741 Scotland and encounters a band of Scottish Highlanders who abduct her to Castle Leoch, where she continues to care for one of their injured party, Jamie. Claire’s life at the castle is full of intrigue, Highland tradition, and espionage. In order to keep Claire safe from the sadistic British captain, Black Jack Randall, she is forced to marry young Jamie Frasier. Though she has come to respect Jamie for his honor and courage, she is against the marriage as she is already married to Frank, and knows she must escape back to the stones in order to return to her own time. After several failed escape attempts, one of which puts Jamie’s life in jeopardy, Claire begins to acknowledge her love for the young Scot while dealing with the guilt and betrayal these feelings evoke when contemplating her love for and marriage with Frank. When Claire opens up to Jamie about her past, he takes her back to the stones and tells her to return to Frank and 1945. Once presented with the option, Claire decides to remain in 1741 as she can not bear the thought of losing Jamie, as she is already suffering from the loss of Frank. Outlander is a tale of love and adventure, but the inner logic of the story brings to question ideals of masculinity and femininity, empowerment and fantasy, that lie at the heart of the story. It is more than just a story of love; it is a story of what that love represents. 2 In order to better understand the complexity of the choice that Claire made on that fateful day on Craigh na Dun one must first explore the two men behind her decision: Jamie and Frank and what sets them apart from one another even though they have many similar characteristics. To begin with, it is important to understand that Diana Gabaldon was writing Outlander in the last 80s and early 90s, therefore she is using two different but related historical masculinities in order to set up a contrast between the two masculinities, as well as a contrast between those two ideals of masculinity and the modern ideal of masculinity on display during the years of her writing. The contrast between Diana’s modern notions of masculinity and those she represents in the book and the extent of that contrast could be used to explain why Diana would return to earlier forms of masculinity for her writing. Not only does she set the bulk of her story in the eighteenth century, but further complicates gender ideals by also setting the story in post WWII Europe. Perhaps confusion over appropriate gender roles and masculine ideals that were found in the late 80s and early 90s led to the important question of ‘what is the ideal male’ and ‘how can I represent him?’ One can not diminish Diana’s choice to use the 18th century and post WWII in order to represent manly ideals through the characters of Jamie and Frank. James Alexander Malcolm MacKenzie Fraser, Laird of Broch Tuarach To begin with the obvious, Jamie is a Scottish Highlander, born in the eighteenth- century, and is characteristic of George Mosse’s ‘manly ideal,’ or the chivalric warrior. In his 1996 book The Image of Man, George Mosse sets out to define normative masculinity, or as he termed the notion, the ‘manly ideal.’ This masculinity was 3 influenced by Greek ideals of beauty and grace, and “at the center…lay a renewed emphasis upon the perfectibility of the male body, which became an outward sign of a man’s moral superiority and inner strength of character” (Glover 59). Emphasis was placed on self-control, restraint, and discipline, and was greatly influenced by 18th century notions of masculinity. As Mosse argues, “masculinity was regarded as of one piece from its very beginning: body and soul, outward appearance and inward virtue were supposed to form one harmonious whole, a perfect construct where every part was in its place” (5). This was a high ideal to live up to, and became even more conflicted with the emergence of the New Woman after WWI who many thought threatened the existing ideals of masculinity. As an 18th century Scottish Highlander, Jamie’s masculinity would have been influenced by a number of factors, including a quest for national unity and identity, ideals of progress and civilization, the patriarchal traditions of the clan-based society, elements of revived chivalry, and the refashioning of the gentleman as masculine. The romantic nostalgia surrounding the Scottish Highlanders and the Battle of Culloden that came out of the Romantic Movement can not help but influence modern notions of 18th century masculinity. The works of Sir Walter Scott, the Poems of Ossian, and any number of feature and documentary films surrounding the Battle of Culloden have helped to portray the 18th century Scottish Highlander as both tragic and heroic, the “noble savage” who was a “paragon of domestic virtue” as well as a warrior (Shields 922). Early ideals of masculinity would have been based upon a warrior caste, yet by the 18th century a new ideal of masculinity began to emerge that combined the characteristics of the gentleman with elements of revived chivalry. Men were now 4 distinguished by their civility and etiquette. Men of battle became men of conversation and pleasant manners. “Refinement is a keyword in many histories of the eighteenth- century masculinity,” as men’s ability to please others and make them feel easy became an important characteristic of a gentleman (Harvey 301). Elements of both restraint and gallantry abounded at the same time as characteristics of chivalric manliness such as bravery and loyalty. The use of chivalry as a manly ideal provided an opportunity to integrate national identity with ideals of progress, as “the male body was thought to symbolize society’s need for order and progress, as well as middle-class virtues such as self-control and moderation” (Mosse 9). An element of restraint was a common characteristic of the ‘Polite Gentleman’ of 1660-1760. According to Karen Harvey, “the polite gentleman strove for restraint…was easy and thoughtful of others…[and] came from the middling sort, not the aristocracy” (302). This element of restraint is not only typical of eighteenth-century ideals of masculinity as it can also be found in post WWII ideals of masculinity where men like Winston Churchill “insisted that English masculinity was signified by a personal style rooted in bourgeois restraint and understatement” (Francis 649). Both Jamie and Frank, though separated by almost 200 years, exhibit attributes of restraint, although in different contexts. Frank’s restraint seems to stem from what he deems proper behavior for an English gentleman, while Jamie’s restraint appears more in line with chivalry. The characteristic of restraint will come into question again when analyzing Claire’s level of intimacy with both of her husbands. From the start of their complex relationship, Jamie takes on the role of Claire’s protector. While Claire may be physically responsible for saving Jamie’s life from his 5 battle injuries upon their first meeting, he never acts like an injured patient. He is instead stubborn and pig-headed, refuses to sit still, and displays characteristics of strength, honor, and protectiveness, as he tells Claire, “ye need not be scairt of me…nor of anyone here, so long as I’m with ye” (66). During the 18th century ideals of honor became “less a matter of public reputation and more a matter of individual conscience” (Harvey 303). With this honor came a strong sense of protection toward the weak and oppressed, especially a consideration for women, which was not uncommon among Scottish Highlanders who were viewed by some as “paragons of domestic virtue and familial affection, embodying all the social virtues most cherished by so-called civilized Britons” (Shields 922). If Juliet Shields’ argument is correct, perhaps Frank, the ‘so-called civilized Briton,’ and Jamie, the savage Highlander, where not very different after all. After her first acknowledged intimacy with Jamie while nursing his battle wounds, an intimacy a WWII nurse would have been accustomed to avoiding, the next occasion Claire has to see her young patient is during ‘Hall’ the following evening. The young girl Laoghaire, one of Jamie’s many suitors, is brought before the ‘Hall’ by her father who demands she be punished for her loose behavior (behavior which remains ambiguous to the reader). Before the guards punish the girl, Jamie parts the crowd and offers to take the punishment for her, which is approved by the head of the clan, Colum. After his beating, Claire tracks down Jamie in the courtyard and asks him why he offered to take the punishment for a girl he admits to have never spoken to. Jamie’s response is simple, “it would have shamed the lass, to be beaten in Hall. Easier for me” (83).