ABSTRACT

EXPLORING THE IMPACT OF NARCISSISTIC DIMENSIONS ON WOMEN’S AUTONOMY IN THE NOVELS OF THE BRONTË SISTERS

This thesis analyzes the effect of narcissistic dimensions on female autonomy in the novels of Jane Eyre, The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, and Wuthering Heights. Jane, Helen, and Catherine suffer from the internalization of patriarchal oppression which prompts the development of narcissistic personalities— vulnerable or grandiose—and produces the exaggerated self-portraits that impede their agentic growth. Patriarchal confinement acts as a catalyst that either promotes their narcissistic behavior, or inspires their agentic growth by inspiring the development of an agentic skill set. Jane and Helen are able to use confinement to overcome their narcissistic disorders and aid them in the revision of their exaggerated self-portraits, which is essential in order to develop the agentic skills that are necessary for autonomy. Catherine, on the other hand, uses confinement to shelter herself from reality, plunging herself more deeply into her narcissistic illusions, and her self-destruction.

Jennifer Wolfe Lewis August 2015

EXPLORING THE IMPACT OF NARCISSISTIC DIMENSIONS ON WOMEN’S AUTONOMY IN THE NOVELS OF THE BRONTË SISTERS

by Jennifer Wolfe Lewis

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in English in the College of Arts and Humanities California State University, Fresno August 2015 APPROVED For the Department of English:

We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student's graduate degree program for the awarding of the master's degree.

Jennifer Wolfe Lewis Thesis Author

Ruth Jenkins (Chair) English

Bo Wang English

Michael Clifton English

For the University Graduate Committee:

Dean, Division of Graduate Studies AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION OF MASTER’S THESIS

X I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in part or in its entirety without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorbs the cost and provides proper acknowledgment of authorship.

Permission to reproduce this thesis in part or in its entirety must be obtained from me.

Signature of thesis author: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

For my mother… TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 CHAPTER 2: PLOTTING THE EFFECT OF CONFINEMENT AND VULNERABLE NARCISSISM ON AUTONOMY: OVERCOMING NARCISSISTIC INJURY IN jANE eYRE ...... 17 CHAPTER 3: PROVOKING AUTONOMY: RESOLVING THE ILLUSIONS OF THE GRANDIOSE NARCISSIST IN THE TENANT OF WILDFELL HALL ...... 41 CHAPTER 4: THE GRANDIOSE NARCISSIST IN CONFINEMENT: NARCISSISTIC RAGE, WITHDRAWAL, AND THE ILLUSION OF POWER IN WUTHERING HEIGHTS ...... 62

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ...... 84

WORKS CITED ...... 87

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

This thesis expands the definition of autonomy by going beyond the notion that autonomy is simply the ability of an individual to make choices and act according to their own best interests. With Diana Tietjens Meyers’ autonomy theory, I will show that autonomy is not simply a quality that one possesses, but a process that is developed through trial and error, self-reflection, and which depends upon a list of agentic skills that one must incorporate into one’s identity. Additionally, I explore how one’s journey to attain autonomy depends upon the ability to defy the hegemonic patriarchal culture in a way that allows one to avoid the internalized oppression that occurs through subordination and enculturation. It is possible for autonomy to be impeded by the detrimental effects of internalized oppression, which obscure one’s ability to determine one’s own best interests. Internalized oppression must be resolved if one is to attain the self-knowledge necessary to progress into an autonomous individual. Self-knowledge and the ability to self-reflect are among the most important aspects of autonomy because the ability to understand and articulate one’s needs in an authentic voice is the foundation upon which autonomy is possible. But without these key attributes, the authentic voice becomes obscured, and one’s capacity for autonomy is obstructed. Diana Tietjens Meyers defines autonomy theory in Gender in the Mirror: Cultural Imagery & Woman’s Agency as the capacity for individuals to possess self-reliance and self-knowledge: “they know who they are—what really matters to them, whom they deeply care about, what their capacities and limitations actually are, and so forth” (11). Autonomous individuals possess profound and insightful self-knowledge which influences their daily actions, and they are able to draw upon this self-knowledge through the development of agentic skills which 2 2 help them “reflect upon themselves and their lives and as they reach decisions about how best to go on” (Meyers 21). Meyers has combined aspects of autonomy and feminine voice theory to create a theory of autonomy that considers the role that one’s social environment plays in the development of autonomy through the careful maintenance of agentic skills, or how one’s autonomy can be impeded through by internalized oppression. Meyers argues that internalized oppression through subordination or enculturation can impede a woman’s agentic abilities, a set of skills which foster one’s ability to make choices with an authentic voice, and that allows one to discern one’s own voice from that of a subordinate or internalized self. In such cases, women become self-determining individuals who are able to exercise autonomy: women who have under-developed or a lack of agentic skills have limited self-knowledge and cannot achieve self-determination and autonomy (20-24). The agentic skill set is a collection of abilities that one must have in order to develop the self-understanding necessary to progress to self-determination and autonomy. As stated above, autonomous people use their agentic skills to make informed decisions about their everyday lives because they provide them with self-knowledge and understanding that allows them to tap into their genuine selves (Meyers 11-12). Meyers lists eight essential agentic skills—ranging from cognitive to social—that provides an individual with the foundation of autonomy: 1. Introspection: this enables individuals to process their experiences in order to achieve an awareness of self through their emotions, feelings, and desires, which in turn provides them with the ability to make sense of their subjective experiences in a meaningful way. In this way, individuals are able to assess the validity and authenticity of their sense of self (Meyers 20). 3 3

2. Communication: this allows individuals to profit from the insight, advice, knowledge, and experience from others (Meyers 20). This is particularly successful in homosocial environments and mentoring relationships. 3. Memory: the ability of individuals to recall and utilize significant experiences that is drawn from a pool of knowledge that is collected from their own experiences, from the experiences of others they have communicated with, and also from various forms of literature and art (Meyers 20). This is most often used in concert with analysis and imagination skills. 4. Imagination: the ability of individuals to imagine options for their future; this enables individuals to consider alterations to their self- images, and different paths their lives may take (Meyers 20). 5. Analytical: the ability of individuals to make decisions based upon their ability to reason, to assess the future impact of the visualization of their imaginings, and to evaluate and interpret the success of these imaginings through interpretation and analysis (Meyers 20). This is not only applicable to their own lives, but to the lives of others that they have observed. 6. Self-nurturing: the ability to safeguard and strengthen physical and mental health despite drawbacks and obstacles in their way. Also, to be able to reassure themselves of the value of their self- knowledge, and to be able to persevere when they find their identities in need of improvement, when they find themselves misguided, and their self-respect in danger (Meyers 20). 4 4

7. Volition: The ability of individuals to resist the pressure from patriarchal culture to submit to enculturation and subordination, and to maintain their commitment to their own identities (Meyers 20). 8. Interpersonal: the ability of individuals to cooperate with others in order to challenge the oppression of patriarchal culture, and work together to effect change (Meyers 20-21). This is most effective in homosocial and mentoring relationships. It is through the development and employment of these agentic skills that the foundation for autonomy is possible. However, if the advancement of these skills should become obstructed, particularly through oppression, autonomy cannot be realized. The development of autonomy and agentic skills is impeded by the internalized oppression of patriarchal culture. Internalized oppression occurs when individuals are unable to develop the self- knowledge necessary to make sense of their experiences, thereby hampering their advancement of agentic skills and autonomy. Internalized oppression is a term used to describe the experiences of subordinated and marginalized individuals or groups who consent to their oppression, either by dominant individuals or by incorporating the beliefs of the hegemonic culture into their identity, thereby negatively affecting their sense of self (Tappan 2116). In this view, women consent to their subordinate status by accepting their subordinate role through the domination of patriarchal culture. Meyers believes that the agentic skills necessary for autonomy are inhibited by patriarchal culture, which perpetuates the oppressive subordination and enculturation of women through cultural images and perceptions that, if internalized, influences women’s psyche—their desires, behaviors, and the way they understand themselves. A simplified example of this would be the 5 5 submissive woman who has internalized the patriarchal perception that men are the dominant force in the family, and that if her husband abuses her, it is her own fault because she adheres to a patriarchal construct that insists that women enable their husband’s abuse. The woman accepts these perceptions as true because there are no other pathways of influence or a pool of knowledge upon which to draw that may suggest otherwise. However, it takes more than the state of one’s environment to determine whether or not one internalizes oppression; the cause, or the mechanism through which oppression may become internalized, and how agentic skills may become impeded, must also be identified. I suggest that a narcissistic personality, which is often rooted in some form of subordination and enculturation, is a major contributor to internalized oppression, and the inhibition of agentic skill development. At its most basic definition, a narcissistic personality is a defense mechanism that one uses in order to mask one’s feelings of inferiority, which is often rooted in some form of internalized oppression. A key feature of the narcissistic personality is the way in which it inhibits one’s ability to contemplate and make sense of their subjective experience. In addition, the narcissistic personality inhibits one’s ability to form healthy communicative relationships. This occurs because a narcissistic individual develops a distorted view of his or her internal self—a self-portrait—exaggerating their self-importance, thereby affecting the way in which experiences are interpreted and actions are determined. In order to facilitate the discussion on how narcissism may act as an impediment to the development and implementation of agentic skills, I will be drawing upon established definitions, concepts, and traits consistent with narcissistic personality disorder, as well as integrating Freudian concepts concerning the origins of narcissism during childhood. 6 6

The narcissistic personality can be divided into two dimensions: grandiose and vulnerable. Though these dimensions share basic origins and traits, these two narcissistic dimensions both display very distinct behavioral features. Freud believed that parental overvaluation and neglect are the root causes of narcissism, and not only are parental overvaluation and neglect contributing factors to the formation of narcissistic personalities, but the internalization of these factors may play various roles in development of the different dimensions (Otway & Vignoles 113). Although both dimensions of narcissistic personality, grandiose and vulnerable, include an inflated sense of self-importance, self-absorption, and arrogance as core narcissistic traits, vulnerable narcissism is most often associated with defensive behavior, vulnerability, desire for recognition, and interpersonal aloofness. Grandiose narcissism is associated with exhibitionist behavior, aggression, deceitfulness, and anti-authoritarianism (Miller et al. 507, Otway & Vignoles 104). Despite these similarities, these narcissistic dimensions vary greatly in defense mechanisms. Both dimensions of the narcissistic personality include defense mechanisms that affect the way narcissists interact with their environment: the narcissistic illusion, and responses to narcissistic injuries through rage and withdrawal. Often, the narcissistic personality will seek to defend itself through the manifestation of grandiosity, or the grandiose illusion. The grandiose illusion, most often utilized as a defense mechanism by the grandiose dimension of the narcissistic personality, is defined as an unrealistic or fantastical exaggeration of one’s self-worth, and the idealization of one’s self-importance, (Thomas et al. 160). While exhibiting a narcissistic illusion, grandiose narcissists idealize certain aspects of their lives and their self-worth by over-inflating their self-value and contribution to their immediate community or culture, and behave according to those idealizations. 7 7

The vulnerable narcissistic personality more often reacts to a perceived narcissistic injury with either narcissistic rage or narcissistic withdrawal. Narcissistic rage is reactive, and its roots are based upon the fight facet of the fight-or-flight response. Its primary features include anger and aggressive behavior as a reaction to a narcissistic injury, including the shame of the rejection, the hostility of a blow to one’s self-esteem, or a realization that “contradicts one’s specialness” (Kirzan & Johar 2). But the narcissistic personality does not always respond to these injuries with anger; I propose that a narcissistic injury may prompt narcissistic withdrawal. On the opposite end of the fight or flight spectrum, narcissistic withdrawal is a flight response that is a reaction to an injury that doesn’t necessarily inspire explosive anger or frustration (but doesn’t necessarily exclude them, either). An example of non-aggressive narcissistic withdrawal is the removal of oneself from social situations because of an event that prompts depression, disappointment, or feelings of shame. It is still possible for a narcissist to simultaneously utilize both rage and withdrawal as a duel coping mechanism. The manifestation of both the narcissistic illusion and the narcissistic injury is based upon the way the individuals perceive their true selves: their own internal self-portrait. The manner in which narcissistic individuals interact with their environment is determined by their self-portrait. The self-portrait provides individuals with a sense of self: how they see and define what they believe to be their true selves. The self-portrait is, essentially, the internal sense of self that synthesizes an individual’s ability to understand one’s capabilities and one’s values into an internal nucleus (Meyers 87). In autonomy-based philosophies, the self-portrait is an internal author that determines one’s actions and reflects an internal sense of self (Wegner 2). Through the self-portrait, an individual’s subjective experiences are internalized and synthesized into self-knowledge; the 8 8 self-portrait is also the mechanism by which self-knowledge becomes distorted, because it is through the self-portrait that oppression can become internalized. When oppression is internalized, an individual is compelled to employ a defense mechanism that masks the feelings of inferiority caused by that oppression. The self-portrait, anxious to defend itself, begins to inflate its self-worth in order to compensate. As a result, the self-portrait becomes distorted or exaggerated, and it is exactly this exaggerated sense of self that is the nucleus of narcissistic personalities. One’s beliefs and actions are determined by one’s self-knowledge. When the self-portrait becomes exaggerated, the ability to develop and exercise agentic skills becomes impeded. Because of the self-centric nature of the exaggerated self-portrait, the narcissistic traits that arise from the resultant narcissistic personality hinder the development of agentic skills, and are particularly detrimental to the development of the introspection skill; one cannot be self-aware or make sense of subjective experience if one’s self-portrait is based upon an over-blown sense of self-worth, nor can one benefit from communication and interpersonal skills if one is constantly self-absorbed, ignoring the needs of others while focusing on the needs of the self. Further, because a sense of entitlement often accompanies the narcissistic personality, particularly the grandiose dimension, one cannot imagine or analyze solutions to problems, or recognize when circumstances require a need for change because the sense of entitlement encourages one to deny culpability. In fact, narcissistic traits expended by an exaggerated self-portrait are consistently at variance with the development and exercise of agentic skills. It can be argued that in certain oppressive environments, the development of an exaggerated self- portrait and narcissistic traits can become magnified. 9 9

In patriarchal culture, confinement is an oppressive tool that is used to subordinate and enculturate. Patriarchal confinement is versatile, as it can create hostile environments that can either neglect or overvalue the individual. It stands to reason that if one is removed from society and thrust into an environment where one is manipulated into enculturating or subordinated, giving rise to feelings in which one must somehow compensate for feelings of inadequacy, the development of either dimension of narcissistic personality disorder is a feasible result. As both the grandiose and vulnerable narcissists are subject to narcissistic illusions, and both are susceptible to narcissistic injuries that can spawn a reaction of rage and withdrawal, a confined environment may serve to exacerbate these behaviors, particularly if the potential for narcissism already exists. For example, the grandiose narcissist may form a grandiose illusion that, with the help of patriarchal confinement, deceives her into believing that she is a perfect representative of her gender, indicating that she has been enculturated into patriarchal culture’s idea of what a perfect woman should be. Under similar conditions, the vulnerable narcissist may develop an inflated desire to be recognized by patriarchal culture as a result of her subordinate state, which deceives her into believing that receiving such recognition is empowering, but if she fails to receive the recognition she deserves, the frustration may result in a narcissistic injury to her exaggerated self-portrait that triggers narcissistic rage of withdrawal if her self-esteem is threatened. However, the effect of patriarchal confinement on the narcissistic personality is not necessarily limited to the exacerbation of narcissistic traits and behaviors: it can also serve to resolve them. Although the groundwork for narcissism can be laid during childhood, and patriarchal confinement may serve to magnify narcissistic tendencies, it may also affect the revision of the exaggerated self-portrait and the resolution of narcissistic 10 10 traits and behaviors, clearing the way for the development of agentic skills. Depending upon the nature of the confined environment, patriarchal confinement can act as a catalyst for a reevaluation and revision of an exaggerated self-portrait. This revision can be accomplished through the exposure of new pools of knowledge or by experiencing moments of crisis that force some measure of self- reflection, which, in turn, allows the individual to challenge the viability of her exaggerated self-portrait; it is through these means that an individual may be able to come to terms with her narcissistic traits and behaviors. Once the self-portrait is re-examined and revised to more accurately reflect one’s true self, the impediment to the development and exercise of agentic skills is removed, and autonomy may follow. The narcissistic personality, then, is the mechanism through which autonomy is inhibited, and once the narcissistic personality is resolved, autonomy may be realized. As an inhibitor of agentic skill growth, a narcissistic personality is the result of oppression that has been internalized through an exaggerated self- portrait; the narcissistic personality also perpetuates the internalization of oppression by impeding the very skills one would need to resist internalizing oppression in the first place. While internalized oppression may give rise to narcissistic disorders that inhibit agentic skills, episodes of patriarchal confinement may act as a vehicle through which an individual may be pushed further into narcissistic illusions, inflict deeper injuries, or it may affect the resolution of narcissistic traits in order to develop the agentic skills that are essential for autonomy. In both content and genre, Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre, Anne Brontë’s The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, and Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights each provide an excellent framework for the application of autonomy theory and the narcissistic 11 11 impediments that problematize the processes through which autonomy is realized. As an autobiographical bildungsroman, Jane Eyre provides a very detailed description of how the resolution of vulnerable narcissism becomes a journey of autonomy from childhood to adulthood. We can plot the ebb and flow of Jane’s narcissistic personality, observe how it develops through internalized neglect at Gateshead Hall, and witness the way in which she is able to resolve her narcissistic traits at Lowood, only to have a narcissistic relapse during her adulthood at Thornfield Hall. The first person narrative offers the reader a window into how Jane has acquired self-knowledge as she looks back upon, and makes sense of, her narcissistic self. In The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, Helen Huntingdon’s first-person journal offers the reader a unique perspective into the inner workings of the grandiose narcissist’s mind. Through her journal entries, we can see moments where the environment plays a role in prompting the resolution of her narcissistic illusions, and identify the circumstances in which Helen is compelled to reevaluate her exaggerated self-portrait. Helen’s struggle with autonomy is both an individual struggle and a cultural one as she devises her escape from her depraved husband, Arthur Huntingdon, and achieves autonomy. In Wuthering Heights, Catherine Earnshaw is not as lucky as Jane and Helen. Catherine provides an excellent example of how the grandiose narcissistic personality is perceived by others. But more importantly, she exemplifies the consequences of an unrevised exaggerated self-portrait during moments of crisis. For Catherine, the grandiose illusion that she has created becomes so strong that she is unable to revise her exaggerated self-portrait, ultimately leading to her own self-destruction. In the novels Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, Jane, Catherine, and Helen are each oppressed by patriarchal culture, and each internalize this oppression in different ways. These characters experience 12 12 similar childhood traumas that have shaped the development of narcissistic personalities, either through paternal rejection and abandonment, as in the case of Helen and Catherine, or subordination and neglect, as in the case of Jane. But the way in which their narcissistic personalities are manifested and resolved—or not, as in the case of Catherine—differs greatly. What is certain is that each faces circumstances that require them to work through a crisis of identity that will enable them to overcome patriarchal oppression, and foster agentic growth. Essentially, Jane, Helen, and Catherine have internalized oppression through patriarchal enculturation and subordination, which gives rise to narcissistic personalities—either vulnerable or grandiose—and exaggerated self-portraits that impede agentic growth. In its various forms, confinement acts as a catalyst that may either thrust them deeper into grandiose illusions, or cause narcissistic injuries to which they respond with rage and narcissistic withdrawal. Confinement may also inspire agentic growth by overcoming their narcissistic disorders through the revision of their exaggerated self-portraits, which is essential in order to develop the agentic skills that are necessary for autonomy. Scholarship on agency in the novels of the Brontës focuses primarily on feminist interpretations of the novels, post-colonial readings, and cultural renderings. For Jane Eyre, agency in the form of emancipation, rebellion, and self-sufficiency are explored by exposing images of imperialism imbedded in the narrative, that are interpreted through feminist, post-colonial, and various cultural lenses.1 The scholarship on agency in The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, however, is mainly discussed through cultural lenses. The discussion of the novel’s impact

1 For example, see Lee, Julia Sun-Joo, “The (Slave) Narrative of Jane Eyre.” Victorian Literature and Culture 36.2 (2008): 317-329. 13 13 upon society has been contemplated by questioning how agency in the feminine sphere impacts, and is inhibited by rigid patriarchal social structures. Many of these focus on the institution of marriage, abuse, and child custody. However, a recent trend in agency through female self-employment and art has also arisen.2 Little if any recent scholarship on agency exists in regards to Catherine Earnshaw from Wuthering Heights. However, a number of scholars have discussed narcissism in the novel, particularly as it plays a significant role in Catherine Earnshaw’s self-destruction. Catherine’s narcissism has been interpreted through Freudian and Lacanian theories, focusing on defense mechanisms and self-destruction.3 It is interesting to note that scholarship on agency and Catherine is lacking just as scholarship on images of narcissism relating to Jane and Helen. This does not mean, of course, that images of narcissism in Jane Eyre and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall are absent or overly-covert for a realistic analysis of narcissism, far from it. The problem with the lack of narcissistic research on Jane and Helen stems from, I believe, the overt narcissism of the male characters in these texts, which obfuscates the narcissistic tendencies of Jane and Helen in a miasma of patriarchy. It is the gap in research on narcissism in relation to how autonomy or agency is perceived in Jane Eyre, The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, and Wuthering Heights that is the focus of this thesis. First, by reformulating agency through this autonomy theory, the ways in which agency and autonomy are exhibited in these

2 For example, see Kanwit, John Paul W. “‘I Have Often Wished in Vain for Another’s Judgment’: Ideal Aesthetic Commentary and Anne Brontë’s The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.” Victorians:A Journal of Culture and Literature 121 (2012): 84-102. 3 For example, see Massé, Michelle A. “‘He’s More Myself than I Am’: Narcissism and Gender in Wuthering Heights.” Psychoanalyses/Feminisms. Ed. Peter L. Rudnytsky and Andrew M. Gordon. New York: State University of New York Press, 2000.

14 14 novels can be explored by exemplifying how it is developed and incorporated into the identity, or how one’s self-knowledge and experiences become the driving force of agency and autonomy, despite cultural or psychological impediments. With this lens, the gap in research on narcissism in Jane Eyre and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall can be addressed. The ways in which Jane and Helen resolve their narcissistic personalities and revise their exaggerated self-portraits during times of crisis are instrumental in not only their social success, but also in their ability to acquire the self-knowledge necessary to become successful individuals. This thesis contributes to the larger conversation of female agency in Victorian literature by analyzing how the female agent achieves autonomy through a journey of self-discovery and the resolution of impairments that are simultaneously created and maintained by patriarchal oppression. Chapter 1 explores images of vulnerable narcissism, and responses to narcissistic injury with and narcissistic withdrawal and rage in Jane Eyre. Jane’s vulnerable narcissism, a product of the devaluation she experiences by the Reeds during her childhood, is examined as an impediment to her ability to foster agentic skills. When Jane is influenced by the homosocial environment at Lowood, she forges mentoring relationships that help her find the strength necessary to resolve the narcissistic rages that she manifests as a response to attacks on her low self- esteem. But because she maintains her need for recognition and approval in order to satisfy her exaggerated self-portrait, Jane is unable to progress to autonomy until a spiritual rebirth helps her to resolve these needs, and she is able to resist the pressure to enculturate when she refused to become St. John’s missionary wife. In the end, Jane is able to find an authentic voice through which she is able to articulate her own wants and desires, allowing her to become an autonomous individual. 15 15

Chapter 2 analyzes grandiose illusions of power in The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, and discusses how Helen Huntingdon, though suffering from the grandiose dimension of narcissism, has deceived herself into believing that her patriarchal enculturation is a source of empowerment, subordinating her into an oppressive confinement where she works to overcome her grandiose narcissistic illusion in order to escape. Helen begins her journal with an illusion of power and autonomy, which has been fostered by her enculturation by patriarchal religion. This illusion of power is demonstrated by her belief that she can save her husband, Arthur Huntingdon, from his debauchery, and change him into a model husband and father. This illusion is dispelled early in their relationship, and she finds herself confined to Grassdale, where Helen is routinely oppressed and subordinated by Huntingdon. Helen is able to use confinement as a catalyst to come to terms with her grandiose illusion, when a spiritual crisis lifts the veil of her illusion, the result of which allows her to develop the necessary agentic skills—skills that had previously been impeded by her grandiose narcissism—in order to escape patriarchal confinement, and find autonomy and self-empowerment. Chapter 3 analyzes Wuthering Heights, and describes what happens when the detriments of a grandiose narcissistic personality are not resolved. Catherine Earnshaw’s experience as a rejected and overvalued child prompts her to develop vulnerable narcissistic traits that provoke illusions of power, and an unshakable belief in her own superiority, which deceives her into believing that she is in complete control over her environment, and is fooled into believing herself the center of her small community. Catherine’s childhood is marked by her father’s rejection in favor of Heathcliff, which fosters the feelings of inferiority that she is compelled to mask. But she is also overvalued by the Lintons, whose desire to enculturate Catherine into their social class appeals to her belief in her superiority 16 16 over others. Catherine experiences periods of confinement that fail to function as a catalyst for the development of agentic skills and autonomy; rather, Catherine’s agentic growth is completely impeded by her need to gratify the desires of her exaggerated self-portrait. In the end, Catherine is deluded into believing that she holds absolute power over the very people that have influenced her narcissistic illusions. But when the illusion is shattered, Catherine evokes a narcissistic rage that affects her own self-destruction.

CHAPTER 2: PLOTTING THE EFFECT OF CONFINEMENT AND VULNERABLE NARCISSISM ON AUTONOMY: OVERCOMING NARCISSISTIC INJURY IN JANE EYRE

Jane Eyre is an autobiographical bildungsroman, written by a narrating Jane that reflects upon the life journey of her younger self. But Jane’s journey to find that voice is interrupted by her need to gain the approval and recognition from those that oppress and exploit her. When her need for approbation from others is frustrated, Jane internalizes the destructive experiences, leading to a diminished sense of self-worth. Jane becomes enculturated when she is compelled to take on the attributes of her oppressors in order to boost her low self-esteem, but this only obfuscates her authentic voice, negating her ability to act as an autonomous individual. Diana Meyers states that autonomous individuals make use of an agentic skill set that they often call upon “as they reflect on themselves and their lives and as they reach decisions about how best to go on. When a woman speaks in her own voice, then she is articulating what she knows as a result of exercising these skills” (21). Jane’s struggle, then, is to find a way to interpret her experiences in a way that allows her to determine who she is, and confidently articulate what she believes to be true about her own self in a way that reflects genuine self-knowledge. Jane accomplishes this by developing a voice that is distinctly her own: an autonomous voice that is the product of an evolution of self- knowledge, and reiterated in her autobiographical self-narrative. But the path to self-knowledge and autonomy is not an easy one because it requires an agentic skill set that must be carefully fostered and maintained. In order to utilize agentic skills, Jane must first resolve the negative self-image—the cause of her vulnerable narcissistic personality—that is preventing her from maintaining the agentic skills necessary for self-knowledge, and speaking in an authentic and autonomous voice. 18 18

Jane internalizes oppression through subordinative treatment and the pressure to enculturate her oppressor’s characteristics. The effect of this internalization is the exaggeration of her self-portrait, which limits her capacity to deal with injuries to her self-esteem, thereby influencing narcissistic rage and withdrawal. Episodes of confinement play a significant role in the magnification of her vulnerable narcissism when her self-esteem is being threatened by a narcissistic injury, further exaggerating her self-portrait. Jane’s ability to act autonomously via agentic skills is impeded by her need for recognition and approval, and it is the desire to fulfill this need that fuels Jane’s vulnerable narcissistic personality. When her need for recognition and approval is endangered or withheld by patriarchal culture, the resulting oppression becomes internalized as a narcissistic injury, which she is unable to resolve. Moments of confinement, when Jane is pressured to enculturate or is subordinated by patriarchal culture, act as a catalyst that compels Jane to respond to narcissistic injury with rage or withdrawal. However, episodes of confinement may also trigger the revision of her self-portrait when the opportunity to resolve her narcissistic responses is presented, or inspire the progression of agentic skills that enable Jane to resolve her narcissistic dependencies, leading to autonomous growth. Much of the scholarship on Jane Eyre has focused on the differences between Jane’s authentic self and her enculturated self. Chris Vanden Bossche points out that “criticism of [Jane Eyre] has frequently noted the structure defined by the relation between an authentic narrated self—the Jane who rebels against the Reeds—and a narrating self that is repressed by, and succumbs to cultural norms” (Bossche 55). In terms of agency, this view implies that the narrated Jane that rages against the Reeds and escapes from Rochester is endowed with the necessary 19 19 self-knowledge to act with agentic skill. But I would like to reevaluate the moments where the young and rebellious Jane acts out, and reinterpret these moments, not as a demonstration of agency or autonomy, but as a symptom of internalized patriarchal oppression. However, the internalization of patriarchal oppression requires a domestic space if it is to occur. In “Abandoning and Re- inhabiting Domestic Space in Jane Eyre, Villette, and Wide Sagarsso Sea,” Susan Lydon argues that unsafe domestic spaces serve as catalysts for agency, and that a lack of “patriarchal protection” by those who would subordinate Jane prompts her to abandon these domestic spaces as she learns to rely upon herself, thereby throwing off her need for patriarchal protection. Lydon is quite right to pinpoint domestic spaces as stages that encourage autonomy, since autonomy is a necessary facet of freedom from patriarchal protection—and oppression. I would like to narrow the focus from domestic space to specific moments of confinement, where I believe that the same kind of patriarchal subordination that Lydon describes occurs. By analyzing Jane’s responses under the lens of the effect of vulnerable narcissistic personality disorder on agentic skill and autonomy, it can be determined whether or not Jane’s actions are motivated by agentic reasoning and introspection, or whether they are a reaction to a narcissistic injury that compels Jane to respond to oppression with narcissistic rage or withdrawal. In the case of narcissistic injury, Jane is unable to act with agency because she harbors unresolved narcissistic needs that force her dependence upon same patriarchal protection from which she is attempting to free herself. The origins of Jane’s narcissism can be pinpointed to her childhood experience, which has affected her relationship with autonomy throughout her adulthood. Jane’s oppressive childhood is the source of her vulnerable narcissism, and her confinement in the Red Room serves as the catalyst that augments it. Jane 20 20 is able to overcome much of her rage with the help of a homosocial environment. It is in this environment where Jane forges beneficial mentoring relationships with Miss Temple and Helen Burns, who help her to resolve some of the injuries to her self-esteem, and aid her in the development of social agentic skills. Although Jane becomes capable of utilizing agentic skills and experiencing moments of autonomy, she struggles with a resurgence of her vulnerable narcissism at Thornfield, where oppression and disappointment in her relationship with Mr. Rochester eventually lead to the revival of narcissistic injuries that provoke narcissistic withdrawal, which she uses as an avoidance coping mechanism. At Moor House, Jane is forced to abandon Diana and Mary’s homosocial environment at the behest of the oppressive St. John Rivers, who withholds approval and pressures Jane to enculturate. But through a spiritual rebirth, Jane is able to resolve the most self-detrimental aspects of her narcissistic behavior, and finally act as an autonomous woman. Jane’s vulnerable narcissism can be traced to her childhood, where the lack of recognition and approval and subordinative attacks to her self-esteem are internalized, and manifested through episodes of narcissistic rage. During her childhood with the Reeds, Jane is constantly neglected and devalued by those around her. Jane’s Aunt Reed, disregarding her late husband’s wishes, shuns her as an encumbrance with no place at Gateshead Hall. Certainly, Jane’s position at Gateshead is ambiguous since she is not considered a member of the family, nor is she a servant. This lack of approval and recognition is a burden for Jane as she becomes increasingly aware of her inability to belong to the Gateshead community. Jane must compensate for the lack of affection and recognition by developing an exaggerated sense of self—an exaggerated self-portrait—which is the foundation of her vulnerable narcissism. As a defense against these injuries to 21 21 her fragile self-esteem, Jane acts out in a narcissistic rage in order to insulate her exaggerated self-portrait from further harm. Jane’s subordination by the Gateshead community triggers the internalization of feelings of inferiority and negative emotionality, to which she responds through the creation of defense mechanisms. It is made clear at the beginning of the novel that Jane is not accepted by either the Reed family or their servants. To John Reed, Jane, devalued as an unwanted dependent, is underserving of charity, and “ought not to live here with gentleman’s children” (5). He dehumanizes Jane by calling her “rat,” implying that she is a parasite who should not eat “the same meals” and “wears clothes at mamma’s expense” (5). But while John asserts that she does not belong with the family, the servants snub Jane as “less than a servant,” because she does “nothing for her keep” (7). Mrs. Reed excludes Jane from the Reed family, despite being a relation, and constantly accuses Jane of being a “wicked and abandoned child” (26). To this, Jane responds: “I half believed her; for I felt indeed only bad feelings surging in my breast” (26). This shows the devastating effect that Mrs. Reed’s treatment has upon Jane’s self-portrait as it reveals just how much she has internalized feelings of inferiority by the negative emotionality that the feelings induce. Jane is nearly convinced that the “bad feelings” that she is experiencing are evidence of the wickedness of which she is accused by Mrs. Reed, and evidence of the negative emotionality commonly displayed by the vulnerable narcissist (Miller et al. 507). The fact that she “half believed” her indicates that the young Jane is actively seeking to obstruct the feelings of inferiority and negativity of the “bad feelings,” that Mrs. Reed and the rest of the community at Gateshead have induced. The insecurity that Jane develops through this lack of acceptance negatively impacts her self-portrait. Because of these experiences of social isolation and neglect, Jane 22 22 begins to idolize her late Uncle Reed as a defense mechanism: she clings to the idea that she would have received the love and acceptance from him that she lacks in her current environment at Gateshead. When she feels threatened, Jane refers to her “Uncle Reed,” who will chastise those who have wronged her, particularly Mrs. Reed, who has failed to live up to her promises to incorporate Jane into the family. Jane’s “Uncle Reed” defense is indicative of need to compensate for her insecure environment, but this is not Jane’s only defensive response to narcissistic injury. Jane’s confinement in the Red Room is a catalyst for the evolution of her narcissistic rage, which she ultimately concentrates upon Mrs. Reed. The consequence of Jane’s violent confrontation with John Reed is her confinement in the Red Room. At this time, Jane reaches a breaking point where she feels compelled to actively defend her shattered self-esteem from her cousin’s abuse. Jane describes the experience as being “beside myself, or rather out of myself” (6), and that she acted “like a mad cat” (6). What the narrating Jane is describing is a moment of explosive and intense anger that is indicative of a narcissistic rage (Krizan & Johar 2). But the frustration that incites Jane’s anger does not end with her incarceration in the Red Room; in fact, Jane’s confinement exacerbates the narcissistic injury as she loses herself in angry rumination and the dejection of her circumstances: “My blood was still warm; the mood of the revolted slave was still bracing me with its bitter vigor; I had to stem a rapid rush of retrospective thought before I quailed to the dismal present” (10). At first glance, this sounds as though Jane is describing agentic introspection; however, Jane is actually nursing feelings of negative emotionality as she dwells upon the injuries that she has received to her shattered self-esteem. The result of this diatribe provides Jane with an adversary, and she fixates upon Mrs. Reed and her failure to treat Jane as a 23 23 member of the family. As a result, Mrs. Reed becomes the focus of Jane’s outbursts of narcissistic rage. When Jane is provoked, she condemns her aunt for her failure to live up to her uncle’s dying wish: “What would Uncle Reed say to you if he were alive?” (25). Jane’s final confrontation with Mrs. Reed is perhaps the most significant, because it reveals the extent of her internalized subordination. Jane, antagonized by Mrs. Reed’s attack on her character, rages at her aunt, giving her “furious feelings uncontrolled play” (37). Initially, Jane is elated to have “accused and menaced Mrs. Reed,” revealing the vindictive nature of her indignation and anger against all of the wrongs that she experienced at the hands of her aunt: wrongs that she has been preoccupied with since her confinement in the Red Room. But just as Jane’s narcissistic rage is a product of internalized oppression, it is also a manifestation of enculturation, as her behavior resembles that of those who have been oppressing her. Jane’s narcissistic rage is reinforced by enculturation through the parroting of her oppressors’ behavior, indicating a loss of her authentic voice. In her devaluation of Jane, Mrs. Reed refuses to recognize her because she is “not worthy of notice,” and withholds her approval from Jane because she would prefer that her children not “associate with her” (25). Jane responds to her aunt’s degradation with a resounding “they are not fit to associate with me!” (25). This exemplifies the obfuscation of Jane’s own voice as she mimics that of Mrs. Reed’s. But what is most significant is that the adult Jane recognizes the enculturation of the actions and expressions of her oppressors. As the younger, narrated Jane taunts her aunt about the death bed promise made to Mr. Reed, the adult narrating Jane is careful to inform her audience that such behavior “was scarcely voluntary demand… I say scarcely voluntary, for it seemed as if my tongue pronounced words without my will consenting to their utterance; something spoke out of me over which I had no 24 24 control” (25). Although this lack of control is characteristic of narcissistic rage, it is interesting to note that Jane describes the moment as the loss of her voice, indicating the awareness of her loss of self. The allusion to the lost voice is revised later, when the ailing Mrs. Reed describes Jane’s “unchildlike look and voice” that “looked up at me with human eyes and cursed me in a man’s voice” (277). In discussing feminist voice theory, Meyers argues that it is important to consider context in order to ensure that the oppressed voice does not “mouth a patriarchal line” (17). Jane’s outburst reflects the same behavior that had previously been directed toward her by the Reeds, revealing that she has internalized the degrading experiences at Gateshead because she is speaking in the same patriarchal voice that the Reeds have used to devalue her. The narrating Jane, with the benefit of hindsight, understands that her child self has become enculturated by those that have oppressed her, and that this is manifested by Jane’s lack of an authentic voice. Between her narcissistic rage and lack of voice, Jane’s self-portrait becomes simultaneously exaggerated and undefined. The frustration that Jane feels for her lack of recognition and approval from others fosters her exaggerated self-portrait, and impedes the development of agentic skills. The most telling display of Jane’s frustrated need for recognition and approval is Jane’s admission that she only desires to be loved by Mrs. Reed: “you think that I have no feelings, and that I can live without one bit of love or kindness; but I cannot live so” (36). Jane’s need to maintain the approbation of others is a key trait of her vulnerable narcissistic personality; vulnerable narcissists are constantly seeking ways to affirm their own sense of self-worth through the approval of others (Otway & Vignoles 104). Jane displays a genuine need to be recognized by her aunt, and desires her approval because she has based the construction of her self-portrait upon these needs as a defense mechanism through 25 25 which she can defend herself from the internalized devaluation that she has experienced during her childhood at Gateshead. Since Jane’s self-portrait has become exaggerated, and based upon recognition-seeking behaviors that distort her self-esteem, Jane’s agentic skills are suppressed by her need for recognition and approval from patriarchal culture; she gravitates toward compliance unless these needs are not met, at which time, she rages. Essentially, the exaggerated self-portrait that Jane’s vulnerable narcissism has generated motivates her to engage recognition-seeking behaviors that distort her sense of self, and inhibit her agentic skills. The new homosocial environment at Lowood generates an atmosphere that is conducive to the development of agentic skills—communication and interpersonal skills—which Jane acquires by forging mentoring relationships with others. Laura Morgan Green has suggested that Jane is presented with “alternative pedagogies,” and among them, “the intellectual and familial companionship of [a] homosocial community” that exists as a separate feminine space (25). Sarah Maier illustrates this notion of a homosocial community, and claims that Jane’s experience at Lowood “includes a type of surrogate communal family of women that she looks to for exemplary behavior” (Maier 323). Diana Meyer would call this an autonomy-augmenting site that provides a nurturing environment for women to find and “speak in their own voices” (22). It can be argued that emulating the behavior of others in a homosocial community is an example of recognition-seeking behavior; however, the inclusion of mentoring relationships within the homosocial community serves as a vehicle for growth through instruction and enlightenment; further, mentoring relationships can augment agentic skills by encouraging resistance against hegemonic forces (Meyers 20-22). The homosocial community assists Jane with the resolution of her narcissistic rage 26 26 under her mentorship with Helen Burns, and fosters agentic skills with the help of Miss Temple and her quiet subversion of Lowood’s patriarch, Mr. Brocklehurst. Jane’s confinement on the stool is the primary event that inspires Jane to resolve her narcissistic rage, and encourages the advancement of agentic growth. Jane is exposed to an alternative belief system that assists her in the development of communication and volition skills, and prompts the resolution of her narcissistic rage. Jane is awed by Helen’s ability to withstand abuse, and remarks upon how Helen’s behavior differs from her own: “I expected she would show signs of great distress and shame; but, to my surprise, she neither wept nor blushed” (54). As their relationship progresses, Jane is lectured by Helen to resist acting out in anger and aggression with what Jane refers to as a “doctrine of endurance” (59). Jane is instructed “to endure patiently a smart which nobody feels but yourself,” rather “than to commit a hasty action whose evil consequences will extend to all connected with you” (59). She makes use of Helen’s doctrine when she is shamed in front of the other students by Mr. Brocklehurst, and incarcerated on the stool. Just as Jane feels the first spark of shame-based rage, she is able to stifle the emotional outburst when she is bolstered by Helen’s support: “just as they all rose, stifling my breath and constricting my throat… it was as if a martyr, a hero had passed a slave or victim, and imparted strength in transit. I mastered the rising hysteria, lifted up my head, and took a firm stand on the stool (72-73). Jane learns from Helen’s example and incorporates the doctrine of endurance into her own self-portrait in order to fight the narcissistic rage that threatens to take over. As Helen’s protégé, Jane has developed the communication skills necessary in order to benefit from the experience of her example. Additionally, the oppressive confinement on the stool acts as a catalyst for agentic 27 27 volitional skills in that Jane is able to maintain her composure as she resists the shame-based narcissistic rage that menaces her. The confinement on the stool becomes a critical experience for Jane because it becomes the mechanism that empowers both the subversion of patriarchal culture through an interpersonal relationship with Miss Temple, and a trigger for Jane to begin to nurture her self-portrait. After the episode on the stool, Jane is sought after by Miss Temple, who comforts Jane by giving her the opportunity to defend herself from Brocklehurst’s attack. Jane resists the impulse to complain about her punishment, staying “mindful of Helen’s warnings against the indulgence of resentment.” Because Jane is able to suppress the anger that she feels for the injury to her self-esteem, she seems “more credible” (77). Miss Temple then offers to help Jane redeem herself, subverting Mr. Brocklehurst’s chastisement, and negates his directive that Jane be shunned. This subversion of patriarchal culture inspires an interpersonal relationship between Miss Temple and Jane—which quickly evolves into an educational mentorship—as the vindicated Jane “relieved of a grievous load,” resolves “from that hour set to work afresh” and triumph “through every difficulty” under the guidance of Miss Temple (81). In order to accomplish this resolve, Jane reevaluates her self-portrait through the utilization of self-nurturing skills, which allow her to understand how her narcissistic rage is detrimental to herself and the people around her. Also, she becomes enlightened enough to recognize how her self-portrait has gone astray with her fixation upon the mistreatment from others, and is able to refocus her energy upon more constructive, self-nourishing behaviors. This provides Jane with the support she needs to maintain the self-respect that she has achieved with the vindication of her character, and receive an education. 28 28

Jane develops the introspection skills necessary to reflect upon her experiences, and avoid reverting to narcissistic rage. As a mentee of Miss Temple, Jane is fostered in a homosocial environment that encourages her to challenge patriarchal oppression; more than this, Jane improves upon her introspection skills and is able to reflect upon her experiences in a way that increases her self- knowledge. When Miss Temple leaves Lowood, Jane is overwhelmed with feelings of dejection: “I was left in my natural element, and beginning to feel the stirring of old emotions” (93). She attributes her depression to the end of her mentoring relationship with Miss Temple: “From the day she left I was no longer the same, with her gone was every settled feeling, every association that had made Lowood in some degree a home to me” (92). What is most remarkable about these passages is Jane’s ability to recognize the resurgence of her narcissistic rage. Without Miss Temple, Jane no longer has the support of the homosocial community upon which she has come to rely; the loss is devastating, but Jane is able to work through the loss and avoid reverting to a narcissistic rage as a way to deal with her volatile emotions because she is able to recognize the resurgence— this is a solid demonstration of Jane’s ability to self-reflect as part of her introspective skill set. In order to avoid an episode of narcissistic rage after the completion of her mentoring relationship, Jane must utilize the agentic skill set and take her first autonomous step. Jane is able to make use of agentic analysis and imagination skills, indicating an ability to articulate what she wants in her own voice, furthering her journey toward autonomy. Jane decides that Lowood no longer has anything to offer her since she has completed her mentorship under Miss Temple, and she realizes that she must change her environment, or stagnate. She meditates upon her current circumstances: “I proceeded to think…What do I want?” (95). Jane’s 29 29 self-reflection and inquiry reveals that she has become aware of her wants and needs as she finds that she is able to articulate these to herself and can answer her self-inquiry: “I want this because” etc… (95). Jane’s ability to articulate what she wants and what she believes is best for her indicates, not only that she has found the power to act upon her desires, but that she is speaking with her own voice. Diana Meyers argues that the finding of one’s voice is a process, and that the object of autonomy is to foster “a rich understanding of what one is like and what one aspires to become and also to be able to adjust one’s desires, traits, values, emotions, and relationships if one becomes convinced that one should” (22). As Jane acquires self-knowledge, she is able to avert stagnation and narcissistic rage by affecting change that will fulfill her needs and desires, and acting upon these demonstrates Jane’s ability to act with autonomy. At Thornfield, Jane’s narcissistic desire for recognition and approval from others resurges, and her autonomy begins to devolve, making her susceptible to the same subordinative devaluation and enculturation that marked her childhood at Gateshead Hall. Jane develops a fascination for Mr. Rochester, and she begins to rely upon her association with him as a surrogate for her homosocial relationships at Lowood. When she learns that Mr. Rochester is entertaining thoughts of marrying a beautiful and accomplished woman from his own class, Jane’s disappointment triggers the rebirth of her vulnerable narcissism: “You… a favorite with Mr. Rochester? You gifted with the power of pleasing him? You of importance to him in any way? Go! Your folly sickens me… Cover your face and be ashamed” (183). This is a prime example of the negative emotionality, or negative self-view, which is commonly ascribed to vulnerable narcissism (Miller et al. 507). Jane’s negative self-view is physically manifested through the two portraits that she draws in order to formulate a comparison between herself and 30 30

Blanche Ingram: the dissimilarity between the two drawings gave “force and fixedness to the new impressions [she] wished to stamp indelibly on [her] heart” (185). Kathleen Miller suggests that Jane “uses her drawings to define herself in contrast to Blanche,” so that Jane may “remind herself of her physical and social inferiority” (257). The marked differences between herself and Blanche harken back to her childhood at Gateshead, where she was not pretty like Georgianna, too poor to be considered part of the family, and not poor enough to be a servant. Jane reestablishes this ambiguous position at Thornfield. She is not beautiful like Blanche, and as a governess, she is much too poor to be accepted by the upper class, yet she is not technically a servant, either. It is this ambiguous existence that is the root of the oppression and narcissistic injury that Jane experiences at the hands of the Ingrams—and by Rochester as well—in the form of subordination and enculturation. And as at Gateshead, Jane’s narcissistic need for recognition and approval is the motivating factor behind her vulnerable narcissism. The subordinative devaluation and dehumanization that Jane suffers from the treatment of Rochester’s aristocratic guests is internalized, and Jane’s self- portrait becomes increasingly negative. The Baroness Ingram dehumanizes Jane by faulting her character through the anatomy of Jane’s appearance: “I am a judge of physiognomy, and in hers I see all the faults of her class” (203). Blanche Ingram devalues Jane as a subordinate because of her occupation as a governess, and haughtily claims that governesses provide a “danger of bad example to innocence of childhood,” and impart “distractions and consequent neglect of duty” (205). As Jane internalizes the devaluation and subordinative oppression of the Ingrams, her ability to make sense of these experiences with self-nurturing and introspective skills becomes impeded, leaving her self-portrait unprotected from their cruelty. This is most evident in Miss Ingram’s dehumanization of Jane. Miss 31 31

Ingram refuses to call Jane by name, preferring to refer to her as “that person” (258), thereby dehumanizing Jane as an undesirable object. But Jane further decodes Miss Ingram’s dehumanizing remark: “Her eyes seemed to demand ‘what can that creeping creature want now?’” (258). This passage is particularly significant because, although Miss Ingram may indeed consider her a “creeping creature,” it is Jane who refers to herself as unhuman. The fact that Jane dehumanizes herself divulges the serious extent to which Jane has begun to internalize the oppression of the Ingrams, and indicative of the damage to her increasingly negative self-view. As at Gateshead, Jane’s internalization of this oppression feeds her vulnerable narcissistic personality as her self-portrait becomes exaggerated in order to defend herself. Jane resorts to appropriating Miss Ingram’s devaluation tactics, suggesting that she has internalized the abuse in order to defend her exaggerated self-portrait. The narcissistic injuries that she sustains as a result of Miss Ingram’s spitefulness prompt Jane to devise a defense mechanism in order to cope with the attacks on her self-esteem. Miss Ingram continues to devalue Jane, exclude her from Thornfield’s aristocratic society, and finally dismisses Jane’s intellect by asserting that she “looks too stupid” to be included in any of their patrician games (210). But for Jane, intelligence is one of the few points upon which she prides herself and is able to maintain some semblance of dignity. The insult is keenly felt as a narcissistic injury: a threat to her already fragile self-esteem which must be challenged (Thomas et.al 161). To answer this threat, Jane privately attacks Miss Ingram in a similar vein. With a detached and clinical tone, Jane concludes that Miss Ingram is “too inferior to excite” jealousy, and that “her mind was poor… she was not good, she was not original… she never offered, nor had, an opinion of her own” (214). Jane has appropriated Miss Ingram’s oppressive tactics in order 32 32 to defend her already negative sense of self-worth, showing that Jane has become enculturated as she reiterates the same contempt that Miss Ingram employs as coping strategy with which she may challenge the narcissistic injuries that she has sustained; further, this reveals Jane’s appropriation of the aristocrat’s voice, as a careful comparison shows the same attack on intellect in a similarly dismissive tone. The only difference, perhaps, is Jane is either too polite or too articulate to use the word “stupid.” But Jane lacks the volitional skill to ignore the slights, and as a result, she is compelled to devalue Miss Ingram in order to protect her vulnerable self-esteem, revealing that her self-portrait is becoming increasingly exaggerated as she systematically devalues the intelligence of her rival in order to assure her narcissistic self of her own. The resurgence of her vulnerable narcissism is aggravated by Rochester, who oppresses Jane through emotional manipulation, provoking an emotional response and narcissistic dependence. In the article, “From the Red Room to Rochester’s Haircut,” Judith Leggatt and Christopher Parkes argue that Rochester’s oppression is based upon patriarchal traditions of gender and class superiority, and despite the fact that he professes to be Jane’s equal, he oppresses her by playing with her emotions in order to force her to submit to his will (174). Certainly, Rochester does nothing to stem Miss Ingram’s hateful treatment of Jane; in fact, he forces Jane to endure it: “understand that so long as my visitors stay, I expect you to appear in the drawing-room every evening” (208). Not only does Rochester force Jane into a position where she is constantly devalued by her rival, Miss Ingram, he purposely misleads her into believing that he and Miss Ingram will soon be married in order to manipulate Jane’s feelings for him: “If… I lacked spirits and sunk into inevitable dejection, he became even gay” (287). This provokes a deeply emotional response in Jane as she is “obliged to yield” to 33 33

Rochester’s manipulations (293), triggering anxious emotions: ‘the vehemence of emotion, stirred by grief and love within me, was claiming mastery, and struggling for full sway and asserting a right to predominate” (293). Although this is not a narcissistic rage because it isn’t an anger-based response, Jane’s emotional anxiety and near loss of control is embedded within her narcissistic need for recognition; Jane begins to lose control over her emotions because she fears losing Rochester’s recognition and approval. This is the primary cause of her narcissistic dependence on him. Heather Glen argues that “those to whom Jane is drawn pose a far more insidious threat,” and that Jane’s narrative is inundated with images of “a potent, compelling other engulfing the independent self” (62). Rochester is the first threat to Jane’s independent self because his manipulations of Jane’s emotions are intended to ensure her dependence upon him. The effect of this emotional manipulation by Rochester is her fear of rejection. Immediately after she becomes engaged to Rochester, Jane is encumbered by the fear: “The feeling the announcement sent through me was something stronger than was consistent with joy, something that smote and stunned; it was, I think, almost fear” (300). She is further “irritated” by Mrs. Fairfax, who reacts to the impending marriage with words of caution: “Gentlemen in his station are not accustomed to marry their governesses” (307-308). In fact, throughout her engagement, Jane is inundated with “hypochondriac foreboding,” and begins to fear that her “hopes were too bright to be realized” (322). Jane’s reaction is to cling more closely to Rochester, and despite these feelings of foreboding, he becomes the center of Jane’s universe: “My future husband was becoming to me my whole world, and more than the world—almost my hope of heaven” (318-319). Jane becomes heavily dependent upon her relationship with Rochester and her exaggerated self-portrait begins to equate her self-worth with the new identity that comes with the impending 34 34 marriage, which she believes will fulfill her need to be recognized by Mr. Rochester as the object of his affection. Jane’s confinement in the library intensifies the narcissistic injury she receives from Rochester, and she is prompted to escape Thornfield through narcissistic withdrawal in order to protect her self-portrait. Jane had become dependent upon the belief that she and Rochester would be married, and her disappointment becomes a narcissistic injury to her self-esteem. Jane’s disillusionment is amplified during her confinement in the library, where Rochester imprisons her in an attempt to force her to stay at Thornfield as his mistress. But Jane realizes that if she stays with Rochester, he will eventually learn to despise her: “Hiring a mistress is the next worse thing to buying a slave; both are often by nature, and always by position, inferior, and to live familiarly with inferiors is degrading” (362). If Jane were to become Rochester’s mistress, she would no longer be recognized by him as an equal, which is something that she desperately requires: “he would one day regard me with the same feeling which now in his mind desecrated their memory” (362). In order to avert the shame of this narcissistic injury, Jane responds by preserving what is left of her shattered self-portrait, and chooses to “care for” and “respect” herself by falling back upon the “laws and principles” of her past education at Lowood in order to preserve her self-portrait from shame and disillusionment (368). Jane’s self- portrait responds to the narcissistic injuries that she has sustained by triggering a flight response—a narcissistic withdrawal. The narcissistic withdrawal serves a dual purpose: first, it acts as a coping mechanism that allows Jane to manage her disappointment through avoidance, permanently removing herself from the situation; second, Jane will not actually face the loss of Rochester’s recognition 35 35 and approval because she will not have become his “inferior” by lowering herself to a fallen status. Jane’s withdrawal from Thornfield is indicative of the regression of her ability to act autonomously because her agentic skills are re-obscured by her exaggerated self-portrait. It can certainly be argued that Jane’s flight from Thornfield is an agentic act, and that when she chooses to maintain her self- respect, she is acting as an autonomous individual; however, Jane’s self-respect is too embedded in her need to maintain Rochester’s approval: “what was I? in the midst of my pain of heart, and frantic effort of principle, I abhorred myself. I had no solace from self-approbation, none even from self-respect. I had injured, wounded, left my master. I was hateful in my own eyes” (373). This passage shows the extent of which Jane relies upon Rochester for the maintenance of her self-worth, and despite the fact that her leaving Thornfield has prompted the negative emotionality that is typical of the vulnerable narcissist, wounding her master by leaving him is much more preferable than eventually being left by him. Jane’s need to maintain Rochester’s recognition and approval inhibits her ability to properly analyze her situation, and interferes with her self-nurturing skills, which is evident by her ill-planned flight, loss of possessions, and her near death by starvation and exposure on the moors. Although she possesses the volition to resist capitulating to Rochester’s desires, Jane lacks the necessary introspection to make sense of her narcissistic injuries in a way that would allow her to interpret her experience with Rochester constructively, as displayed by the negative emotionality of her intense self-hatred for leaving Rochester. In order to resolve her narcissistic injuries, she must find a way to resolve her narcissistic need to maintain the approval of Rochester, and others as well. 36 36

Jane finds herself immersed in a new homosocial community with her newly-discovered cousins, and forges a new mentoring relationship under Diana, which reawakens her communication and interpersonal relationship skills. But the mentorship is compromised by St. John, who becomes a threat to the homosocial environment. Laura Morgan Green maintains that the homosocial community that Jane, Mary, and Diana create becomes “weakened from without by patriarchal imposition, [and] dissolved from within by its members’ acquiescence to their own roles within that patriarchal structure” (31). This is especially true for Jane because this is her first real familial experience in a family with a male patriarchal head; therefore, it is no surprise that she readily submits to St. John’s appropriation of her education, primarily because he “was not a man to be lightly refused” (462). St. John, the second patriarchal threat to Jane’s “independent self” (Glen 62), subordinates Jane as he attempts to take ownership of her. Although he does not physically confine Jane at first, she finds herself intellectually and emotionally isolated from the homosocial community of her female cousins, and increasingly pressured to enculturate to St. John’s ideal through the rejection of her own sense of self. But Jane is able to sense the danger, and she finds herself struggling to resist him as he withholds the recognition and approval that her vulnerable narcissism desperately requires; however, she is able to reflect upon her experiences during confinement, and find a way to resolve her narcissistic needs in order to utilize the agentic skills necessary to revise her self-portrait. Jane’s emotional confinement under St. John’s tutelage sparks renewed self-nurturing skills as she realizes her narcissistic needs have become detrimental to her self-portrait. St. John wants to take ownership of Jane by enculturating her into his missionary work as his submissive wife. In order to accomplish this, he takes possession of Jane’s education and takes over as her educator and mentor. 37 37

Jane becomes restrained by his appropriation of her “liberty of mind,” and she finds herself restricted from being able to “talk or laugh freely” (463). Jane finds herself resenting her “servitude,” and “wished, many a time, that [St. John] had continued to neglect” her (432-463). While Jane’s need for recognition and approval still determines some aspects of her behavior, she awakens to the reality that she will have to allow herself to be subordinated and enculturated by St. John in order to acquire fulfill those needs: “as for me, I daily wished more to please him; but to do so, I felt daily more and more that I must disown half my nature, stifle half my faculties, wrest my tastes from their original bet, force myself to the adoption of pursuits for which I had no natural vocation” (463). This key passage illustrates how Jane’s oppressive confinement has sparked her renewed interest in preserving and maintaining her own sense of self that determines her self-portrait, and it is evidence of the introspective realization that her need for recognition and approval from St. John is contrary to her best interests. This, in turn, reveals Jane’s self-nurturing ability to recognize that the narcissistic need for approval is misguided, indicating the potential for a revision of her self-portrait. Jane’s struggle with the volition to refuse the respectability of St. John’s marriage proposal, and his subsequent oppressive retaliation, ultimately demonstrates the agentic ability of her self-portrait to choose self-respect over the narcissistic need to maintain his recognition and approval. Jane has the self- nurturing and analytical skills to understand that a loveless marriage is not what she wants. She is certain that she cannot live without love on a spiritual level, and she does not believe that she can physically survive missionary work in India. But because St. John’s proposal is cloaked in religious duty, resistance becomes all the more difficult for Jane to maintain (Phillips 208). As Maria Lamonaca points out, “the difficulty of Jane’s position at this point of the novel only becomes evident 38 38 once we accept that Jane truly and sincerely regards her cousin as a saintly devoted Christian,” (Lamonaca 249-250). And because she fervently believes in St. John’s Christian righteousness, his act of withholding recognition and approval is particularly devastating to Jane: “Without one overt act of hostility, one upbraiding word, he contrived to impress me momently with the conviction that I was put beyond the pale of his favor” (477). St. John inflicts an even deeper injury by excluding Jane from his familial unit: “to his sisters, meantime, he was somewhat kinder than usual as if afraid that mere coldness would not sufficiently convince me how completely I was banished and banned” (478). Although this is reminiscent of Mrs. Reed’s treatment, Jane does not show any resentfulness or anger toward St. John because she firmly believes that he was motivated “not by malice, but on principle” (478). But this shows that, despite her difficulty, Jane’s agentic volition to refuse St. John remains steadfast because her narcissistic need for approval is overruled by a self-portrait that seeks to maintain self-respect and her own sense of self. This is most evident in the fact that Jane exhibits none of the negative emotionality that Jane displayed upon leaving Rochester at Thornfield, nor any of the resentment that she felt toward Mrs. Reed at Gateshead Hall. It is the last experience in patriarchal confinement that sparks a moment of introspection that prompts Jane to take control of her spirituality through rebirth, enabling autonomy. St. John makes one last attempt to convince Jane to marry him by taking physical possession of her, “as if he claimed” her (487), and attempts to spiritually manipulate her into acquiescing to his will. This proves to be a powerful experience for Jane, as she is awed by St. John’s ability to “subdue and rule,” she is inundated with “feelings of veneration” for him, and finds herself “nearly tempted to cease struggling” against his patriarchal power (486). Jane is 39 39 thrust into a spiritual passion, where she experiences a flash of introspection and hears Rochester’s voice calling for her. At first, Jane is uncertain how to interpret this cryptic message—assuming it is an internal process as opposed to a preternatural one—but the immediate effect is the complete rejection of St. John’s spiritual authority in favor of her own: “I broke from St. John, who had followed, and would have detained me. It was my turn to assume ascendency. My powers were in play, and in force” (488). Rather than achieving her subordination and enculturation into his religious dogma, St. John’s physical confinement provides Jane with the strength she needs to reject him by empowering herself to take possession of her own spiritual destiny. This moment of spiritual rebirth and introspection is extended into a “Dark Night of the Soul,”1 through which Jane is able to utilize her current crisis and create a feminized spiritual space apart from the patriarchal space that St. John represents: “I… fell on my knees, and prayed in my way—a different way to St. John’s—but effective in its own fashion I seemed to penetrate very near a Mighty Spirit, and my soul rushed out in gratitude at His feet” (488-489). With introspective skill, Jane interprets her spiritual experience as “an inspiration” that “opened the doors of the soul’s cell, and loosed its bands” (490). After “loosing” St. John’s hold over her, Jane is able to act in a way that serves her own best interests as an autonomous individual. By taking charge of her own spirituality, Jane clearly demonstrates that she no longer requires St. John’s recognition and approval, thereby resolving this narcissistic need that has plagued her since childhood. No longer thus burdened, Jane is now able to face the injury

1“The Dark Night of the Soul” is a poem by St. John of the Cross. It has become a term commonly used in reference to a spiritual crisis that leads ultimately leads to a greater spiritual understanding and growth. 40 40 inflicted by Rochester, which led to her withdrawal from Thornfield, and the last narcissistic impediment to the realization of autonomy is finally removed. The end result of Jane’s experience is that she has taken possession of her own voice, which is essential to the realization of her self-narrative. Diana Meyers argues that it is “a process of skillful self-discovery, self-definition, and self-direction,” that allows autonomous individuals to evolve by taking charge of their own destinies” (22). The ultimate significance of Jane’s self-narrative is the fact that she no longer requires the validation of patriarchal culture to determine her self-worth.; Jane becomes free to build a culture apart from the patriarchal, either through a homosocial community that fosters resistance against patriarchal oppression, or the foundation of a Christian spirituality apart from the patriarchal ideology. Because Jane ultimately rejects the internalization of patriarchal oppression and ideological enculturation, she is able to free her own female voice. The liberation of her voice is the tool with which Jane’s agentic skills are realized, and the foundation of her self-narrative. Through self-narrative, Jane is able to articulate, in her own voice, her journey toward autonomy, communicate her life- story in order to share her perspectives and insights, and interpret her experiences in a way that allows her to maintain a self-portrait that ultimately projects the autonomous individual she believes herself to be.

CHAPTER 3: PROVOKING AUTONOMY: RESOLVING THE ILLUSIONS OF THE GRANDIOSE NARCISSIST IN THE TENANT OF WILDFELL HALL

In The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, the journal of Helen Huntingdon is sandwiched inside the narrative of a patriarchal voice. In a sense, this becomes a metaphor for Helen’s struggle to find her own voice in the pages of her journal, because the paternal abandonment of her father and her generic adherence to patriarchal religion envelop and obfuscate her own voice, inhibiting her ability to articulate who she is because she relies on stereotypical patriarchal images to speak for her. Although Helen appears to be a strong-willed young woman, much of her behavior is determined by the need to mask the feelings of inferiority that stem from her father’s rejection. Because of this, Helen finds difficulty in self- reflection, and is unable to make decisions that are based on her own best interests because she is prohibited from doing so by a narcissistic grandiose illusion that determines her actions and undermines her self-worth. But Helen’s confinement at Grassdale triggers a spiritual rebirth that enables Helen to overcome her grandiose illusions, and acquire the ability to speak in her own authentic voice. In the beginning of her journal, Helen exhibits a grandiose narcissistic illusion of power that has been fostered by her enculturation into patriarchal religion. This illusion of power is manifested through Helen’s idealization of her marriage to Arthur Huntingdon, and the overstated belief in her ability to deliver Huntingdon from his shameless debauchery. The illusion is dispelled early in their relationship, and Helen eventually finds herself confined to Grassdale, where she routinely suffers subordination, neglect, and abuse by Huntingdon. But Helen’s confinement at Grassdale becomes the vehicle through which Helen is able to come to terms with both her religious enculturation and her grandiose illusion, 42 42 enabling her to revise her exaggerated self-portrait. This resolution of her grandiose narcissism allows Helen to cultivate the necessary agentic skills—skills that had previously been impeded by her need to maintain the illusion —in order to escape her patriarchal confinement at Grassdale, and find autonomy though self-empowerment. Most of the scholarly discussion on narcissism in The Tenant of Wildfell Hall surrounds Arthur Huntingdon, but the discussion that Helen Huntingdon may suffer from a narcissistic personality is conspicuously absent. But of course, with a textbook narcissist like Arthur Huntingdon, Helen’s own narcissism is obfuscated by Arthur’s magnificence. However, a recent essay by Ayşegül Kuglin comes very close to hitting the narcissistic mark. According to Kuglin, Helen goes through a “disillusioning process” when confronted with her own expansive behavior, but Kuglin falls short of calling Helen a narcissist; instead, the term is applied exclusively to Arthur Huntingdon while suggesting that Helen suffers from neurotic tendencies. Together, both Huntingdon’s narcissism and Helen’s neurotic tendencies inhibit their ability to form a healthy, mutually beneficial marital relationship. She argues that Helen’s reconciliation of her neurotic tendencies begins with the realization that she wishes she had not married Arthur, and the disillusionment is completely resolved when she manifests agency by choosing to leave Arthur. Helen’s choice to reject her oppressive circumstances and leave her husband is a primary focus of the scholarly discussion on Helen’s agency. Lisa Surridge envisions Helen’s marriage as a drawn out battle to assert “her own moral agen[cy]” (91), which is manifested through her progressive disregard of contemporary marriage laws, culminating in her outright rejection of domestic law when she flees Grassdale and kidnaps her own son in order to live a secluded life 43 43 as a painter. But Meghan Bullock sees Helen’s escape from Grassdale as a mere physical liberation. She suggests that Helen is not truly liberated until she breaks her silence on the matter of her abuse to Gilbert, thereby acting as her own agent by disregarding the culture of silence surrounding marital abuse. But I argue that Helen is only able to break her silence on the matter of her abuse after she has been able to develop the necessary communicative agentic skills that enable her to do so, which occurs after she is able to resolve the grandiose narcissism that has been impeding her ability to utilize agentic social skills. Helen displays multiple characteristics of a grandiose narcissistic personality and a grandiose illusion that inflates her sense of self-worth and confidence in her abilities. Much like Jane, Helen’s narcissism is rooted in her childhood. But whereas Jane’s narcissism is the vulnerable aspect, and stems from the devaluation and neglect of her childhood at Gateshead Hall, Helen’s grandiose narcissism originates with the rejection and abandonment of her estranged father. For Helen, this careless abandonment is internalized, producing feelings of inferiority that Helen is compelled to mask; it is this internalized subordination that prompts the development of Helen’s grandiose narcissistic personality and the exaggeration of her self-portrait. Helen’s exaggerated self-portrait induces her to reject authority figures, refuse to take responsibility for her action, and overstate her abilities. Most importantly, these behaviors are symptomatic of, and play into, a grandiose narcissistic illusion that acts and an impediment to the development and utilization of her agentic abilities, and which influences her to make decisions that are detrimental to her well-being. The origin of Helen’s grandiose narcissism can be traced back to the rejection and abandonment by her father, triggering the internalization of feelings of inferiority that become the root of her grandiose narcissistic personality. Unlike 44 44

Jane, who has no paternal authority figure to reject her, Helen is abandoned by her father early on. Although both live with their aunts, Helen’s experience is more positive in that she receives the approval and recognition from Aunt Maxwell that Jane desperately desired from Mrs. Reed. It is this key difference that explains Jane’s vulnerable narcissism and Helen’s grandiose dimension. While Helen suffered the rejection of her father, she was nurtured through her childhood while Jane was neglected and shunned. After the death of her mother, Helen goes to live with her Aunt and Uncle Maxwell: “My father has entirely given me up to their care. I have never seen him since dear mamma died when I was a very little girl, and my aunt, at her request, offered to take charge of me, and took me away to Stanningley, where I have remained ever since” (175). This early abandonment is the origin of Helen’s feelings of devaluation, and is magnified by the fact that her father has made no attempt to continue his paternal relationship with her: “I don’t think he cares enough about me” (175). The paternal rejection that Helen experiences triggers feelings of inferiority, which are exacerbated by the fact that her father appears to maintain a healthy relationship with her brother, Frederick. In the article, “The Narcissistic Mask: an Exploration of ‘The Defensive Grandiosity Hypothesis’,” Thomas et al. discuss how grandiosity is the masking of “underlying feelings of ‘inferiority’ or some variant form of negative self-schema” (161). It is these internalized feelings of inferiority caused by parental rejection that Helen feels compelled to mask; Helen’s self-portrait begins to block feelings of inferiority and devaluation with feelings of superiority and overvaluation. As her self-portrait becomes increasingly exaggerated, Helen displays more traits of the grandiose narcissistic personality, and her ability to develop and utilize agentic skills is inhibited. 45 45

Helen’s narcissism is manifested through her feelings of superiority over others, which acts as an impediment to her ability to form social relationships. After being introduced to London society, Helen quickly loses interest in the people of the community around her: “My new acquaintances, both male and female, disappointed my expectations, and veered and depressed me by turns; for I soon grew tired of studying their peculiarities, and laughing at their foibles… the ladies especially—appeared so provokingly mindless, and heartless, and artificial” (133). Clearly, Helen holds herself above this perceived pettiness because, as a grandiose narcissist, she believes herself to be more intelligent than the mindless, more caring than the heartless, and much more intense and interesting than the artificial socialites of whom she is forced to endure. This is bothersome to her, “particularly as I was obliged to keep my criticisms to myself, for my aunt would not hear them” (133). What this really reveals is her inability to relate to others. Helen adheres to an illusion of her own superiority because she lacks the interpersonal agentic skills necessary to form the kind of relationships that she would be able to draw upon in times of need. Although she eventually forges a lasting friendship with Millicent Hargrave, Helen’s inability to attain intimacy is revealed in her diary: “This paper will serve instead of a confidential friend into whose ear I might pour forth the overflowings of my heart. It will not laugh at them, and, if I keep it close, it cannot tell again; so it is, perhaps, the best friend I could have for the purpose” (154). This passage reveals that Helen does not feel comfortable forming intimate relationships because she fears the vulnerability of intimacy, and she does not wish anyone else to judge her or “laugh” at her, inducing feelings of inferiority. Helen’s exaggerated self-portrait prompts her to maintain superiority and be critical of others by encouraging the belief that others 46 46 may be equally critical; hence, Helen’s best and only friend is her diary, which becomes a window to her exaggerated self-portrait. Helen’s grandiose belief in her superiority is made apparent by her inability to take responsibility for her actions or empathize with others, indicating a lack of developed communication skills. Helen conceives a particular distaste for the suitors that her aunt has pushed on her, and her rejection of Mr. Boarham is a primary example of how her lack of empathy and responsibility are linked. After she rudely refuses Mr. Boarham, Helen writes “…he wished me a good morning and withdrew, disconcerted and offended, no doubt; but surely it was not my fault” (142). She does not see that it was her behavior that offended Mr. Boarham, nor is she capable of comprehending his anger, which his indicative of her lack of empathy. According to Susan Fiske, empathy is dependent upon the understanding that others have minds, and experience the same “capacity for thought, emotion, desire, intention and self-awareness,” and goes on to say that “without appreciating others’ minds, empathy makes no sense” (31). The inability to appreciate that Mr. Boarham has a mind is an example of this deficiency: “ He is narrow minded and bigoted in the extreme… his tastes and feelings are wholly dissimilar to mine… his looks, voice, and manner are particularly displeasing to me… I have an aversion to his whole person that I never can surmount” (138-139). This passage is suggestive of both Helen’s grandiose belief in her own superiority and her lack of empathy that is typical in grandiose narcissists. But this also shows how her lack of empathy impedes her communication skills; if she cannot empathize with others, she cannot reap the benefit of the experiences, perceptions, and insights that come with authentic communication. As a result, Helen’s communicative skills are limited to shallow contact, as her lack of empathy inhibits her ability to relate to others. 47 47

Helen gratifies her grandiose narcissism and stays true to her exaggerated self-portrait by rejecting her aunt’s authority, obscuring her introspective and self- nurturing skills. From the beginning of her diary, it is clear that Helen does not take her aunt’s advice too seriously. While Aunt Maxwell warns her of the dangers of falling victim to “reprobates and fools” through a rash marriage, she chooses not to take the conversation too seriously, as her aunt angrily points out, “matrimony is a serious thing” (132). Marriage is so serious, in fact, that Helen’s aunt foists much older suitors upon her in an effort to save her from a bad match. But as Aunt Maxwell continues her attempts, Helen begins to feel threatened by her aunt’s interference and goes on the defense. By rejecting the suitors, she is symbolically rejecting her aunt’s authority over her. Helen further rejects her aunt’s authority when she takes pleasure in defending Huntingdon, of whom her aunt does not approve, and goes out of her way to defend him. Helen is particularly gratified by her ability to use religion as a means to justify her defense of Huntingdon, because she is able to appeal to the ultimate cultural authority as a means to resist her aunt’s wishes. This allows Helen to gratify her narcissistic personality as she finds ways to resist her aunt’s authority because it adds to the over-blown self-esteem generated by her exaggerated self-portrait. However, Helen’s need to rebel against her aunt obscures her introspective skills because the need to dissent trumps her ability to self-reflect in a way that would allow her to determine if the choice she has made will benefit her future; Helen is simply too caught up in her own dissent to self-reflect, or secure her own well-being. Helen’s improprietous behavior is based upon her need to resist her aunt’s authority, and fulfills her narcissistic desire for attention and admiration. Helen’s battle of wills with her aunt prompts her to engage in inappropriate behavior, pushing her closer to Huntingdon, and gratifying her narcissistic need for 48 48 attention. She becomes furious with her aunt’s attempt to place a wedge between Huntingdon and herself, and sees the interference as a personal affront, believing that her aunt interrupts conversations “on purpose to wrest his attention from me— on purpose to vex me as I thought” (145). Although Aunt Maxwell is acting upon her best interests by shielding her from gossip, Helen is hypersensitive to her Aunt’s interference because she interprets it as a form of criticism. As a result, Helen perceives her aunt’s actions as spiteful, prodding her to engage in more inappropriate behavior. Helen allows Huntingdon the impropriety of referring to her by her Christian name: “he frequently called me Helen, and I never resented the freedom” (146). Helen also permits herself to be inappropriately cornered by Huntingdon, pushing her aunt into a state of constant vigilance, as Aunt Maxwell attempts to scold Helen for her inappropriate behavior: “stay here a little till that shocking colour is somewhat abated, and your eyes have recovered something of their natural expression. I should be ashamed for anyone to see you in your present state” (147). Helen uses her improprietous behavior to fulfill her need to reject her aunt’s authority, which she accomplishes by further encouraging Huntingdon’s inappropriate attention. But Helen’s desire for attention from Huntingdon creates the opportunity for her to reject her aunt’s authority; hence, her improprietous behavior is perpetuated and magnified by her narcissistic desire to both reject authority and attention gain. Helen fosters a grandiose illusion of power through the idealization of her relationship with Huntingdon, which is rooted in the internalized rejection of her father and her religious enculturation. Because she was rejected by her father, Helen uses Huntingdon to compensate for her that rejection by becoming dependent upon him as a substitute for the approval that she lacked from her father. Because of this, Helen begins to overvalue Huntingdon. As discussed 49 49 above, Helen’s exaggerated sense of superiority compels her to oppose her aunt’s authority by engaging in a courtship with Huntingdon. Because the courtship is strengthened by these narcissistic needs, Helen begins to idealize Huntingdon and their relationship together. The rationalization for her idealization is based upon both the rejection by her father and her enculturation by patriarchal religion. Helen finds a second way to compensate for her father’s rejection by overvaluing Huntingdon; she projects her own needs onto Huntingdon as a means through which she can cope with her father’s rejection. But this idealized relationship is maintained by the grandiose illusion that is facilitated by her enculturation into patriarchal religion, as Helen employs her religious beliefs to perpetuate the illusion that she is going to steer Huntingdon away from depravity and save him from eternal damnation. Rather than saving Huntingdon, Helen finds herself confined to Grassdale, where Huntingdon abandons her for the very same lifestyle from which she vowed to liberate him. Although Helen is confined and subordinated at Grassdale by Huntingdon, Helen finds a way to free herself from the religious enculturation that impedes her agentic skills, allowing her to a reject Huntingdon’s oppression, and find empowerment through motherhood. Helen’s enculturation into patriarchal religion is significant in two ways: First, it shows that her adherence to patriarchal religion makes up a large part of her exaggerated self-portrait in that she constantly professes to turn to religion for guidance; second, it reveals how her exaggerated self-portrait relies upon patriarchal religion in a way that allows her to justify her actions, and the foundation upon which she weaves her grandiose illusion of idealization and power. Helen exhibits a very devout faith in her religion, to which she constantly refers, by promising to act “without offending a higher authority” (204). In fact, she appears to remain faithful to her religion above others: “I will give my whole 50 50 heart and soul to my Maker if I can” (204). This devout statement indicates a deep attachment to her faith, but a closer look at her behavior suggests it is less a spiritual conviction as it is an enculturated patriarchal dictation. When Helen declares that she hates Mr. Boarham, her aunt questions her faith: “Hate him, Helen? Is this a Christian spirit?” (138). Also Helen is quick to vocalize her judgmental condemnation of others, indicating that she is less willing to abide by Christian ethics if it does not suit her grandiose purpose. What this reveals is that Helen’s enculturation into patriarchal religion is a social construction, and not the spiritual one it is intended to be. She is a Christian because it is the social norm of patriarchal culture, not because she is motivated by any sense of personal spirituality. Helen uses her enculturation to maintain superiority over Huntingdon, which is also how she rationalizes and maintains her illusion of power over him. Helen deludes herself into believing that she has the power to change Huntingdon, and her religious enculturation provides the foundation for her grandiose narcissistic illusion. Helen’s willful denial of the severity of Huntingdon’s debauchery substantiates the notion that she suffers from an idealized illusion based upon her religious enculturation. Her use of patriarchal religion contributes to both the idealization of her relationship with Huntingdon, and the illusion that she has the power to reform him. Helen idealizes Huntingdon and his “ineffable but indefinite charm, which cast a halo over all he did and said, and which would have made it a delight to look in his face, and hear the music of his voice” (145). Although she understands that Huntingdon has a myriad of faults, Helen considers her relationship with him an idealized holy crusade: “I will willingly risk my happiness for the chance of securing his… I shall consider my life well spent in saving him from the consequences of his early errors, and striving to recall him to the path of virtue—God grant me success!” (150). This 51 51 illusion, coupled with her idealization of Huntingdon, prevents her from comprehending the severity of his faults, even when they are reported to her by her aunt: “but if I hate the sins I love the sinner, and would do much for his salvation, even supposing your suspicions to be mainly true—which I do not and will not believe” (150). But Helen chooses denial, and it isn’t until she is confined and abandoned at Grassdale that her grandiose illusion begins to crack. Helen’s feelings of isolation during her confinement at Grassdale initially impede her introspective ability, but the longer she is oppressed, the more she is forced to self-reflect. Huntingdon, tired of Helen’s attempts to conform him into her religious ideal, confines her to Grassdale while he remains free to engage in his favorite excesses: “oh, it is so cruel to leave me so long alone! He knows I have no one but Rachel to speak to, for we have no neighbours here, except the Hargraves” (219). As Huntingdon leaves her isolated at Grassdale for months at a time, she is, in a sense, reliving the abandonment that she experienced at the hands of her father, which triggers new feelings of inferiority from being left alone. Huntingdon intensifies this isolation when she wishes to go to her father’s funeral: Huntingdon “would not hear of my attending the funeral, or going for a day or two, to cheer poor Frederick’s solitude. It was quite unnecessary, and I was unreasonable to wish it” (268). But Huntingdon’s oppressive treatment does not compel Helen to act against her confinement. According to Meyers, “the agentic skills one possesses and uses with ease secure a measure of self-understanding and self-determination. Lacking agentic skills or possessing agentic skills that are poorly developed or poorly coordinated with other skills constrains self- understanding and self-determination” (24). Helen’s grandiose illusion impedes her ability to gain some measure of introspective skill because she is inhibited by an exaggerated self-portrait that is constantly misinterpreting her experiences 52 52 through a narcissistic filter. But the more cruel and isolated Helen’s confinement becomes, the more likely it may act as a catalyst to force introspective thinking and self-reflection. As Helen’s lengthy confinement at Grassdale continues, she gradually becomes more self-aware through forced introspection, particularly as her isolation and Huntingdon’s cruelty grows. But Helen’s subordination is not just limited to Huntingdon’s attempts to isolate and confine her; he engages in several subordinating tactics, and with each successive attempt, Helen’s grandiose narcissistic illusion gradually weakens, and she begins to respond to her subordination through the development and coordination of agentic abilities. Helen develops the volitional agentic ability to combat Huntingdon’s manipulative subordination by ceasing to idealize him. Early in their marriage, Huntingdon subordinates Helen by manipulating her emotions for his amusement. When Huntingdon regales Helen with stories of his sordid past, Helen writes that she “used to fly into passions or melt into tears at first, but seeing that his delight increased in proportion to my anger and agitation, I have since endeavoured to suppress my feelings and receive his revelations in the silence of calm contempt” (208). Helen develops the volition to resist Huntingdon’s attempts to manipulate her by schooling herself to remain unaffected by the revelations from his past. More importantly, this passage reveals the first crack in Helen’s idealization of Huntingdon. As she begins to realize that her passionate responses only serve to gratify Huntingdon’s own narcissistic need for flattery and amusement, she refuses to capitulate to Huntingdon’s manipulations, but her tempered passion also reveals her first attempts at taming her exaggerated self-portrait. As a grandiose narcissist, Helen’s reactions to learning the truth about the severity of Huntingdon’s debaucheries are angry and violent, suggesting that her “passions” are incidents of narcissistic rage. But she forces herself to temper these rages, she 53 53 displays the agentic volition to resist capitulating to Huntingdon’s attempts to manipulate her emotions. Huntingdon’s attempt to isolate Helen from her religion, coupled with her revelation of his betrayal, prompts her to develop the agentic self-nurturing power she needs to overcome her religious patriarchal enculturation. Huntingdon attempts to further subordinate Helen by isolating her from religion because it diverts her attention away from him too often: “What are you sir, that you should set yourself up as a god, and presume to dispute possession of my heart with him to whom I owe all I have and all I am, every blessing I ever did or ever can enjoy—and yourself among the rest—if you are a blessing, which I am half inclined to doubt” (205). This marks the point where her grandiose illusion to save Huntingdon from himself becomes unreasonable, even to herself. Because Helen has been trained to refer to God above all things, she cannot conceive of placing Huntingdon above God, or diminishing her beliefs at his request. But it is when she realizes that Huntingdon is carrying on an affair with Lady Lowborough that her grandiose illusion to save Huntingdon has failed, prompting a spiritual crisis. When Helen discovers the infidelity, her “burning, bursting heart strove to pour fourth its agony to God, but could not frame its anguish into prayer” (304). At the beginning of this moment of crisis, Helen finds herself unable to channel the religious support upon which her exaggerated self-portrait has grounded her grandiose illusion, but it is also at this moment that Helen experiences the death of her grandiose illusion, and experiences a spiritual rebirth. Helen’s initial inability to evoke God suggests that her faith, up until now, had been disingenuous. But the death of Helen’s illusion brings about the death of her enculturation. As Helen lifts “up her soul in speechless, earnest supplication” (303), she throws off the patriarchal voice through which she had been speaking in favor of the silence of 54 54 raw emotion. A “gust of wind” scatters the remnants of her grandiose illusion, and Helen’s soul is refilled with true spirituality as she senses a “heavenly influence” that “seem[s] to strengthen” her (303). This moment is not unlike Jane’s spiritual rebirth when she becomes empowered to reject St. John’s attempt to enculturate her and “prayed in [her own] way” (Brontë 488-489). Helen’s spiritual rebirth is the first step in assuring herself that she has the self-nurturing agentic ability to rewrite her shattered self-portrait, and find a way to carry on despite the agonizing blow of Huntingdon’s infidelity to her self-esteem. The spiritual rebirth and dissipation of the grandiose illusion prompts Helen to rewrite her self-portrait, which further removes the impediments to her ability to develop agentic skills. Helen’s exaggerated self-portrait had prevented her from interpreting her experiences in a way that allowed her to validate her own experiences in a meaningful way because these experiences were always interpreted through a narcissistic lens. When the grandiose illusion is dispelled, and the subsequent spiritual rebirth occurs, Helen’s exaggerated self-portrait is crippled; all of her predetermined notions come into question, and everything she believes to be true about herself is suspect. But this also provides Helen the opportunity to re-evaluate her needs and desires. According to Diana Meyers, one must be able to “differentiate one’s own desires, values, and goals from the clamor of subordinating discourses and overwhelming social demands” in order to clear the way for the cultivation of agentic skills (20). When Helen is no longer impeded by her religious enculturation and grandiose illusion, she is able to distinguish between her own desires, and the desires of patriarchal culture. As a result, the remainder of her confinement at Grassdale is spent developing the necessary agentic skills that she needs to discern her own needs and desires from 55 55 that of patriarchal culture, and articulate those needs and desires in her own voice in order to liberate herself from her oppressive confinement. Helen’s assertion of her new role as mother and housekeeper is a vocalized commitment to her new self-portrait: a commitment that she is able to affirm with introspective agentic skill as she interprets the reality of her marriage. The revelation of Huntingdon’s infidelity inspires more than her freedom from the enculturation of patriarchal religion as Helen finds new empowerment through the revision of her new self-portrait. When Helen confronts Huntingdon about his infidelity, she establishes a new identity aside from her subordinative marriage to Huntingdon: “I am your child’s mother, and your housekeeper—nothing more. So you need not trouble yourself any longer, to feign the love you cannot feel: I will exact no more heartless caresses from you—nor offer—nor endure them either” (306). This passage is indicative of her newfound empowerment as she establishes a new identity for herself. She is no longer Arthur Huntingdon’s subordinate wife; rather, Helen re-identifies herself as the mother of her child, and symbolically demotes herself from wife to housekeeper. The introspective realization and interpretation of her circumstances compels her self-portrait to rewrite itself in order to fit a new identity that empowers her to dispossess herself of her former married life. Through her spiritual rebirth, Helen begins to develop the introspective skills that allow her to come to terms with her feelings, emotions, and past experiences in a way that encourages growth. Helen learns to reflect upon her past behavior by making sense of her experiences, and sensitizing herself to the feelings and images of those experiences. Helen begins to judge her feeling and emotions in a constructive way: “God pardon me for it—and all my sinful thoughts! Instead of being humbled and purified by my afflictions, I feel that they 56 56 are turning my nature into gall. This must be my fault as much as theirs that wrong me. No true Christian could cherish such bitter feelings as I do against him and her” (313). Although her thoughts are somewhat negative, this passage demonstrates Helen’s introspective ability to come to terms with feelings and emotions that she finds wanting, inviting the opportunity for change; she is able to analyze her feelings and emotions and finds that they fail to live up to the image of the “true Christian” image that she is working toward. Certainly, Helen never saw past her grandiose illusion to sense her fault in her dislike and ill-treatment of Mr. Boarham. Helen is also able to process her past experiences that led her to marry Huntingdon, and judge her behavior for herself: “I was infatuated once, with a foolish besotted affection that clung to him in spite of his unworthiness, but it is fairly gone now” (321). Helen’s newfound ability to reflect upon her thoughts, draw meaning, and perhaps more importantly, learn from her experiences is a signifier of a revised self-portrait. Because she is now able to admit to herself that she is not quite the person that she wishes to be, she is able to reflect upon how she can affect change. This new self-knowledge and understanding allows Helen the opportunity to acquire and utilize additional agentic skills for self-growth. Helen’s commitment to motherhood and her spiritual rebirth is the foundation of the volitional skills that enable her to escape confinement. Helen has based much of her self-worth on her role as a mother, and she vows that “the well-being and culture” of her son is her first priority, and “all [she has] to live for” (324). But Helen’s ability to maintain the wellbeing of her son is undermined by Huntingdon, who corrupts young Arthur in order to injure her: “I should see my influence destroyed by one whose selfish affection is more injurious than the coldest indifference or the harshest tyranny could be” (324). Jessica Cox argues that Helen believes that Huntingdon is a moral threat, not only 57 57 to her son, but to her identity as a mother (33); Helen must eliminate this moral threat by removing her son from his father’s influence, and herself from his attacks on her motherhood. This way, she is able to reaffirm her decision to preserve her newly revised self-portrait, particularly as her commitment to the wellbeing of her son is one of the primary facets upon which her self-portrait is being revised. Helen chooses to escape from Grassdale with young Arthur, but the decision to escape is a dangerous one: “I am fully alive to the evils that may and must result upon the step I am about to take,” (362). The “evils” of which she speaks is the potential hazard of being caught. But despite the illegality of taking her son away from his legal guardian, his father, Helen staunchly believes that her decision is the moral one (Ward 161), and she “never waver[s]” in her “resolution” (362). Helen’s willingness to risk losing her son in order to save him is indicative of her spiritual rebirth in that she is prepared to martyr herself, if necessary, by defying the laws and challenging the norms of patriarchal culture in order to assure that her son is spared from Huntingdon’s iniquities: “I could endure it for myself, but for my son it must be borne no longer” (352). The moral code of her revised self- portrait, which is grounded in her commitment to motherhood and new spirituality, is the foundation of Helen’s volition to refuse to capitulate to the patriarchal pressure to stay confined to Grassdale. The utilization of imagination and analytical skills enable Helen to reject the pressure of patriarchal culture, and allows her self-portrait to adopt a new social identity. Patriarchal culture pressures Helen to submit to Huntingdon’s authority in return for the accommodation of “social and economic security” (Lin 134). In order to effectively reject her life at Grassdale, Helen must find a way to provide these structures herself. First, she makes use of her imagination skills in order to create a new social identity that she can adopt, and that will also be 58 58 acceptable to the new societies she will come into contact without when she leaves Grassdale. Helen imagines the persona of a young widowed artist and mother. The choice of widowhood is necessary in order to ensure social acceptance. Because she will be living with her son and no husband, the only appropriate persona with which she may identify is a widow; she will to have some contact with society at large, and widowhood would—hopefully—alleviate suspicion. Her choice to become a professional painter is made with more analytical forethought. Helen ponders her artistic skill logically, and considers her painting skill a commodity because it is the means through which she can provide the economic security that she requires in order to raise her son. But the problem is, as with most women in the time period, that Helen’s skill was intended as a domestic accomplishment, and not a means through which to support herself and her son (Bellamy 256). But with analytical skill, she is able to weigh the advantages, and assess the disadvantages of the scheme: “I must wait a little; I must labour hard to improve my talent and to produce something worthwhile as a specimen of my powers” (352). With the necessary improvement, Helen adopts an identity that empowers her self-portrait to reject the economic and social safety of Grassdale, and with a small community of conspirators, affect eventual self- sufficiency. Helen’s revised self-portrait enables her to develop interpersonal and communication skills that allow her to reevaluate her relationships with others, and obtain their assistance to escape confinement. In order to accomplish her goal of undermining Huntingdon and escaping Grassdale, Helen must do the unthinkable: she must ask for help. Helen’s grandiosity inhibited her ability to forge close relationships with others, but the more unbearable her position at Grassdale becomes, the more she finds herself willing to confide in a small coterie 59 59 of individuals upon whom she learns to rely upon for aid and support. Before the grandiose illusion is dispelled, Helen does not often rely upon her confidential relationship with her lifelong servant, Rachel. But after her spiritual rebirth, Helen is no longer impeded by her grandiose pride, and she is able to accept Rachel’s support, which she desperately needs to escape Grassdale. Later, Helen is forced to reevaluate her relationship with her brother, Frederick, who also becomes a co- conspirator after Huntingdon confines her further by taking away all of her monetary means. Helen “is obliged to enter further details” about her circumstances to Frederick (372), showing a new capacity to put aside the grandiose pride that had previously dominated her self-portrait. Together, the interpersonal support network—Frederick, Rachel, and Helen—devise the means through which they are able to challenge and subvert Huntingdon’s patriarchal authority by facilitating Helen’s and young Arthur’s escape from Grassdale, and taking them beyond the reach of Huntingdon’s oppressive confinement. Helen achieves real autonomy through her subversion of Huntingdon, which is facilitated by agentic growth. Helen’s return to Grassdale to nurse Huntingdon has been perceived as a lapse in her autonomy. Lidan Lin argues that Helen’s subversion—and hence her autonomy—is “dimmed by her subsequent return to her dying husband” and that Helen’s commitment to duty is the primary cause of this because Helen ultimately fails to reform Huntingdon, thereby maintaining his patriarchal dominance over her (135-36). However, what Lin does not consider is that Helen doesn’t realistically expect to reform Huntingdon after her return to Grassdale. Helen’s actions are indeed embedded in her sense of duty, but this is because the nature of her sense of duty has changed. Originally, her duty to reform Huntingdon was based upon a grandiose illusion of power that was partially driven by religious enculturation. But after her spiritual rebirth, 60 60

Helen’s sense of duty is revised along with a new self-portrait that rebuilds her identity. Helen’s return to Huntingdon does not stem from wifely duty, but from her own revised sense of spiritual duty: “It is well for me that I am doing my duty… for it is the only comfort I have; and the satisfaction of my own conscience, it seems, is the only reward I need look for!” (428). Perhaps most indicative of Helen’s autonomy is the fact that the first thing Helen does upon her return to Grassdale is to force Huntingdon to sign away his rights to his wife and child: “you will not see him till you have promised to leave him entirely under my care and protection, and to let me take him away whenever and wherever I please, if I should hereafter judge it necessary to remove him again” (426). Helen’s volition to resist Huntingdon and force his hand displays the self-nurturing skills she needs to secure her rights over her son and her own person, negating her need to hide by cloaking herself in the identity of a widow—even though she becomes a real widow soon enough. Helen has secured her son and herself, and maintained her spiritual commitments to her self-portrait, and her motherhood. Helen Huntingdon finds the strength to take back her authentic voice. For much of her life, Helen allowed herself to be subordinated by the memory of her father’s rejection. The paternal rejection that Helen experiences is shared by Catherine Earnshaw, who, like Helen, must compensate for her feelings of inferiority through a grandiose narcissistic illusion of power. Not only did her paternal rejection cause the feelings of inferiority that spawned her grandiose narcissism, but it was also the root cause of her grandiose illusion to fix Arthur Huntingdon. Helen unconsciously believed that if she could fix Arthur and make him worthy of her, she would somehow make up for her father’s abandonment by making herself worthy of her father. But the religious mechanism with which Helen chooses to save Huntingdon reveals the extent of enculturation into 61 61 patriarchal society. She had to throw off her religious enculturation in order to put away the grandiose illusion and revise her exaggerated self-portrait in order to find the path to autonomy and speak through her authentic voice.

CHAPTER 4: THE GRANDIOSE NARCISSIST IN CONFINEMENT: NARCISSISTIC RAGE, WITHDRAWAL, AND THE ILLUSION OF POWER IN WUTHERING HEIGHTS

Catherine Earnshaw’s experience in confinement is very different from Jane or Helen’s. Catherine, like Helen, experiences the injury of paternal rejection which negatively impacts her self-esteem. And like Jane, Catherine reacts to injuries inflicted on her self-esteem through rage and withdrawal. But Catherine’s experience in patriarchal confinement prompts a much different outcome than both Helen and Jane. During her first confinement at Thrushcross Grange, a young Catherine is confined and encouraged to give up her hoydenesque self in favor of a more socially acceptable image. Catherine is pampered, given new clothes, constantly flattered, and taught how to be a proper young lady. Because she has been rejected as a child, Catherine readily accepts the attention and flattery that the residents at Thrushcross Grange heap upon her. This deceives her into believing that she maintains absolute power over the Lintons, who enable this illusion by giving in to Catherine’s whims. This, in turn, strengthens the mask that she has created to repress the feelings of inferiority that her father’s rejection has created. Catherine’s childhood oppression oscillates between neglect and overvaluation, laying the groundwork for enculturation, and the development of a narcissistic personality. But this life leaves little room for Heathcliff, whom Catherine believes to be under her power, and whom she also idealizes as a second self in order to compensate for her father’s lost love. When forced to choose between the Heathcliff and her life at Thrushcross Grange, Catherine lacks the autonomy to choose: unable to cope, she self-destructs. Catherine fails to evolve into an autonomous individual because her ability to develop agentic skills is obstructed by a grandiose narcissistic illusion that she 63 63 creates in order to compensate for feelings of low self-worth. For Catherine, confinement does not function as a catalyst for the development of agentic skills and autonomy as it eventually does for Jane and Helen; rather, confinement acts as an enabler for the preservation of her grandiose illusion. Catherine’s childhood is marked by periods of confinement where she experiences internalized oppression through subordination and enculturation, the effect of which is the development and maintenance of a grandiose narcissistic personality. Catherine’s rejection by her father provokes feelings of inferiority, and to compensate and mask these feelings, she willingly allows herself to be enculturated. This deludes Catherine into developing a grandiose illusion that influences the belief that she holds power over everyone around her, rendering her incapable of reflecting upon her own experiences and accounting for her own actions, which, in turn, impedes the development of agentic skills, and autonomous growth. The dispersal of Catherine’s grandiose illusion becomes a narcissistic injury to which she violently responds with rage, and narcissistic withdrawal into confinement, ultimately leading to her self-destruction. Many scholars have read Wuthering Heights through the lens of confinement, both as a physical incarceration within the penitential walls of Wuthering Heights, and the figurative mirror of psychological and social oppression (Crouse 180). In fact, one would be hard-pressed to find a character in Emily Brontë’s only novel that hasn’t been confined or imprisoned in some fashion; it can be argued that structure of Wuthering Heights itself is a metaphorical prison, and that each of its residents are the inmates. In speaking of both structures in Wuthering Heights, Paul Marchbanks considers the houses of Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange as figurative asylums that breed the “idiocy” of the Earnshaws, and that are staffed by Nelly as a long-suffering 64 64 caregiver (66-67). I see Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange as patriarchal prisons where Catherine is confined, subordinated, and enculturated by patriarchal society. But Catherine’s confinement at both locations also serves as a catalyst for the development and magnification of her grandiose narcissistic personality, and as enablers for her illusion of power. The discussion on Catherine Earnshaw’s grandiose narcissism has been well established. Morteza Jafari offers a Freudian reading of Wuthering Heights by showing that Catherine Earnshaw develops a divided self. Jafari reveals how Catherine’s narcissistic ego uses mirror imagery to create doubles as an unsuccessful defense mechanism. The most current and thorough discussion on Catherine’s narcissism is by Michelle A. Massé’s, who applies a Freudian lens in her reading of Wuthering Heights. Massé argues that Catherine’s narcissism is rooted in the preoedipal phase, and is exhibited as a childlike need to be loved by those around her. Massé notes that the adult Catherine is unable to transition into a “healthy” narcissism, which results in the fragmentation of her identity (144). Massé sees Catherine as “a female narcissist who attempts to fulfill the traditionally masculine aims of Bildung,” yet fails, owing to her inability to achieve self-love “through the roundabout route of ‘the man’s love’” (136). While Massé is certainly correct that Catherine’s narcissism is the cause of her shattered identity and death, Massé’s Freudian reading that roots Catherine’s narcissism in an unwavering need to be loved is too limiting; she also desires absolute power over everyone around her, and she will rage if she doesn’t have it. Also, it does not fully consider the important role that her desire for power and control over others plays in the evolution of her narcissistic personality, or how it serves as the foundation for these illusions of power. While Catherine certainly demands attention and admiration from those around her, and their full compliance to her 65 65 whims, the role that her narcissistic personality plays in the creation of a grandiose illusion of power over those that have enculturated her must be explored. Confinement is also discussed in research on Wuthering Heights, particularly when it is seen as a condition of narcissistic withdrawal. The current discussion on confinement and power in Wuthering Heights is headed by Jamie Crouse, who considers images of confinement and power within the context of gender roles. Crouse argues that both Heathcliff and Catherine, operating within the confines of their traditional gender roles, use confinement and incarceration as a means to have power over others. Crouse sees Catherine’s final episode of self- confinement as a desperate attempt to regain the power she has lost over others. It is true that Catherine’s last confinement is a desperate last attempt to gain control over others, but, for Catherine, power is an illusion; hence, Catherine’s last episode of self-imposed confinement becomes a reaction to the narcissistic injury of her failure to maintain the illusion of power that she believes she holds over others, prompting her narcissistic withdrawal into confinement where she eventually self-destructs. Grandiose narcissism is a major impediment to the development of agentic skills and autonomy. According to Diana Meyer’s theory on autonomy, those who cannot develop and maintain the necessary agentic skills fail to achieve autonomy and speak through an authentic voice. Meyers argues that those who submit to enculturation “will rely on stereotypical images and scenarios to ascribe needs to them and to interpret their conduct” (21). Further, those who cannot achieve a semblance of autonomy or self-determination are unable to discover the authentic voice that they need in order to “articulate what they are doing and what they stand for to themselves, their control over how they are engaging with the world is diminished” (21). Catherine’s grandiose narcissism demands her enculturation 66 66 into patriarchal society because she craves the social position that comes with it. At the same time, her dependence upon Heathcliff obstructs her from being able to speak in the authentic voice that would enable her to determine her own wants and needs apart from Heathcliff’s. Catherine’s grandiose illusion encumbers her ability to recognize her danger, as her agentic skills, particularly her introspective and volitional skills, are impeded by her need to maintain the mask that is her exaggerated self-portrait. The effect of this inhibits her capacity for self- reflection, and her ability to act upon that self-reflection. Without these agentic skills, Catherine’s ability to choose and determine what is best for her is undermined by her narcissistic need to maintain both her illusion of power, and her social status. It is arguable that Catherine’s grandiose narcissism can be traced to parental rejection and overvaluation. Sigmund Freud theorized that unhealthy forms of narcissism can be traced back to one’s childhood as a consequence of parental rejection or overvaluation, and that narcissism is the product of indifferent or even hostile parenting. Upon reaching adulthood, those who exhibited narcissistic tendencies had developed an overinflated ego as a result of the parental rejection they had experienced, because it acted as a defense mechanism through which they could protect themselves from the feelings of abandonment that they experienced during their childhood. Because feelings of abandonment diminish their self-esteem, narcissists are compelled to compensate by producing an over- inflated sense of self-worth, which I will refer to as the exaggerated self-portrait. The exaggerated self-portrait may also develop through parental overindulgence by creating a false sense of self-worth that becomes an unrealistic belief of self- importance that is not shared by society at large (Otway & Vignoles 105). Catherine experiences the rejection of her father, who abandons her in favor of his 67 67 adopted son, Heathcliff. Catherine masks the pain of this paternal rejection with an overinflated sense of self-worth that is the foundation of her grandiose narcissistic personality. Catherine’s grandiose narcissistic personality affects her character and behavior, but most of all, it affects her ability to develop agentic skills. Catherine’s character, as it is described by Nelly Dean, indicates that she has an inflated sense of self-worth, that she is often arrogant, and that she often self- centered and mostly interested in fulfilling her own needs. Grandiose narcissism, as opposed to the vulnerable dimension that Jane develops, is perhaps best revealed by her lack of empathy with those around her, and her anti-authoritarian behavior. Helen, too, displays the lack of empathy and anti-authoritarianism that characterizes the grandiose narcissist; however, Helen does not display the same aggressive behaviors that mark Catherine’s personality. Catherine’s grandiose narcissism is also demonstrated by her demand for love and admiration from those around her. Because of this, she is unable to forge the social relationships that she needs in order to construct and maintain introspective and communicative agentic skills because she constantly focuses upon the gratification of her own needs, disregarding the needs of others. This need for constant gratification triggers the inflated sense of self-worth that exaggerates her self-portrait, affecting the way she interprets her subjective experiences. Catherine’s exaggerated self-portrait prevents her from utilizing or developing any agentic skills, or allowing her to make informed agentic decisions. The lack of agentic skills makes Catherine even more even susceptible to enculturation and subordination. Early on, Catherine displays evidence of grandiose narcissism through her rejection of confinement and defiance toward authority figures. Her first appearance in the novel is actually an extract from her journal, as read by the 68 68 novel’s primary narrator, Lockwood, who passes along Catherine’s ordeal in the garret with the tyrant-servant, Joseph. Joseph attempts to enculturate Catherine and Heathcliff by confining them to the garret where he forces them to endure a three-hour religious lecture. She refuses to conform to this attempt to enculturate her into the religious patriarchy by declaring her intent to revolt: “H. and I are going to rebel—we took our initiatory step this evening” (20). Although her insurrection may seem agentic because she is refusing to be religiously enculturated, her actions are based upon her need to reject authority rather than refusing to engage in religious dogma. Catherine is often described as intractable and insubordinate, and as showing a marked antipathy toward familial authority. Nelly reveals that Catherine: “was never so happy as when we were all scolding her at once… defying us with her bold, saucy look, and her ready words” (43). Catherine’s defiance of authority is a direct result of her parental rejection by her father, which also serves as the root cause of her grandiose narcissistic personality. Mr. Earnshaw’s rejection of Catherine and her subsequent internalization of subordinative treatment triggers her negative attention-seeking behaviors of grandiose narcissism, and isolates her from the ability to build an authentic self- portrait. Catherine is six years old when Mr. Earnshaw returns to Wuthering Heights with Heathcliff in tow, and he immediately begins to show a marked preference for him, “petting him up far above Cathy,” who became “too mischievous and wayward for a favourite” (38). Mr. Earnshaw devalues Catherine and vocalizes his rejection by declaring; “I cannot love thee; thou’rt worse than thy brother. Go, say thy prayers, child, and ask God’s pardon. I doubt thy mother and I must rue that we ever reared thee’” (43). Catherine’s response to this subordinative devaluation is to act out, and to do “just what her father hated most…” (43). She is compelled to misbehave and engage in negative attention- 69 69 seeking behaviors in order to compensate for her this rejection by her father: “she put us all past out patience fifty times and oftener in a day: from the hour she came down stairs, till the hour she went to bed, we had not a minute’s security that she wouldn’t be in mischief” (42). Catherine’s attention-seeking behavior is symptomatic of the grandiose narcissist’s defense mechanism that obfuscates feelings of inferiority with an over-inflated sense of self-worth (Thomas 161). Essentially, the paternal rejection that she experiences becomes internalized, and as a consequence, her self-portrait becomes exaggerated. Catherine’s exaggerated self-portrait and grandiose narcissism are further aggravated through enculturation because, the more attention that she receives by acting out, the more she her self- portrait is pressured to conform to an self-image that receives the attention she needs; she becomes what others have made her. This robs Catherine of an authentic voice through which to speak and creates an identity that is molded by the introspective interpretation of her experiences. This lack of agentic introspection impedes her ability to make sense of, and interpret, her own experiences, and mold an authentic self-portrait. Catherine reciprocally rejects her own father and seeks narcissistic gratification through her relationship with Heathcliff, which initiates her grandiose illusion of power. Catherine exhibits a reciprocal rejection of her father, the result of her narcissistic rejection of authority. Nelly points out that Mr. Earnshaw’s devaluation and criticisms “made her cry, at first; and then, being repulsed continually hardened her” (43). As Catherine becomes more desensitized to her father’s rejection, her injured self-portrait demands that she reciprocate it. While Catherine is confined to the Heights during an illness, Mr. Earnshaw asks, “Why canst thou not always be a good lass, Cathy?” to which she responds “Why cannot you always be a good man, father?” (43). Catherine’s reciprocal rejection 70 70 exacerbates her narcissistic defiance of authority, and she begins to seek an additional way to cope with the blow to her self-worth. It is not surprising, then, that Catherine directs all of her energy into her relationship with Heathcliff who “had more power over Heathcliff than [Mr. Earnshaw’s] kindness” (43). Catherine’s rejection of her father and concentration on her relationship with Heathcliff presents her with the first sensation of power over another individual, particularly as Heathcliff “would do her bidding in anything,” (43). Catherine’s relationship with Heathcliff serves a dual purpose; it promotes an illusory sensation of freedom and temporary escape from the constraining criticisms of her deteriorating father, and it initiates her first grandiose illusion of power and superiority over Heathcliff. Hindley’s return to Wuthering Heights after her father’s death magnifies Catherine’s illusion of freedom and power over Heathcliff as Hindley’s oscillation between oppressive tyrant and neglectful guardian becomes yet another enabler for Catherine’s grandiose narcissism. Hindley’s initial attitude toward Catherine is one of almost absolute indifference, allowing both Catherine and Heathcliff to “grow up rude as savages,” with Hindley, being “entirely negligent” about “how they behaved, and what they did” (46). When Hindley is enraged, they are induced to keep “clear of him” (46). This amplifies Catherine’s illusion of freedom as she and Heathcliff run away in search of independence, increasing her dependence upon Heathcliff’s as a co-conspirator in her defiance of authority. But this illusion of freedom is dependent upon Heathcliff. Without him, the illusion is soon subverted by her enculturation into patriarchal society. Catherine’s isolation from Heathcliff and confinement at Thrushcross Grange initiates her enculturation into patriarchal society. Catherine is isolated from Heathcliff and placed in a five-week confinement at Thrushcross Grange, 71 71 which provides the Lintons and the Earnshaws with an opportunity to enculturate her into patriarchal society. After being bitten by the Linton’s dog, Catherine is forced to recuperate at Thrushcross Grange, where she experiences the nurturing and overstated admiration that has been markedly absent at Wuthering Heights. As a consequence, she trades in the illusion of freedom by turning away from the hoydenesque behavior that she had previously indulged in, and begins to comply with more socially appropriate behavior for her age and gender. This shift from non-conformist hoyden to a socially appropriate young lady is carefully fostered by the people around her who wish to tame her wildness; in short, she is being enculturated into patriarchal society through the internalization of stereotypical images of social propriety that are being impressed upon her: the same event that Diana Meyers warns will alienate a woman from her own authentic voice (21). But this is only made possible because of the separation of Catherine and Heathcliff. Even though Heathcliff has been demoted to a servant, his presence still provides her with an alternative outlet to patriarchal culture. The complete isolation from Heathcliff during her confinement is the event that ensures Catherine’s enculturation. The Lintons and the Earnshaws successfully persuade Catherine to behave through flattery and over-indulgence, which acts as an enabler to her already over-inflated sense of self-worth because it appeals to her grandiose narcissistic desire to be the center of attention of everyone around her. Catherine’s grandiose narcissism prevents her from perceiving her enculturation because the overvaluation and increased grandiosity impede her ability to utilize analytical skills in order to evaluate the motives of those around her. Catherine’s overvaluation is carefully fostered by the Lintons and Francis Earnshaw who manipulate her with flattery and indulgence in order to enculturate her into patriarchal society. The Lintons begin indulge her in repentance for the 72 72 canine attack, but also because they become intrigued by her. Francis, Catherine’s sister-in-law, uses Catherine’s confinement at the Grange to her particular advantage as a way to remake Catherine into the object of sisterly affection that she had originally hoped for when she arrived at Wuthering Heights. As Catherine begins to show increased pleasure in the indulgence of the Lintons, Francis exploits Catherine’s fascination for the Linton’s lifestyle by “employing art not force,” as a means to enculturate her into the patriarchal ideal (51). During the confinement, Francis “visited her often” and “commenced her plan of reform by trying to raise her self-esteem and self-respect with fine clothes and flattery, which she took readily” (53). This flatters Catherine’s vanity because the extravagant attention appeals to her grandiose narcissism because this is a more preferable way to receive the attention that she desires, particularly in lieu of the punishments she received for acting out at Wuthering Heights. The constant overvaluation and enculturation by Francis and the Lintons generates a narcissistic sense of entitlement in Catherine, and her self-portrait becomes further exaggerated, prompting her to believe in an overblown sense of her own superiority. But this occurs because Catherine is incapable of recognizing that she is being manipulated by Francis and the Lintons because she is blinded by her desire to be the center of attention. This demonstrates her lack of analytical agentic skills which negates her ability to question her experience at the Grange. Catherine lacks the volitional skills to resist the pressure to conform to patriarchal culture, because conforming feeds her narcissistic sense of entitlement. Catherine’s decision to marry Edgar Linton is rooted in her narcissistic sense of entitlement and exaggerated self-portrait: Edgar “will be rich, and I should like to be the greatest woman in the neighborhood, and I shall be proud of having such a husband” (78). This passage underscores her pressure to conform to patriarchal 73 73 culture as it indicates that she has a clearly developed sense of class consciousness, and has come to value the high social status that marrying Edgar Linton will provide. The pressure to maintain a high social status compels her to reject Heathcliff because his fall to servant status makes their relationship problematic: “It would degrade” her “to marry Heathcliff” (79). She bases her decision on her fear of poverty: “if Heathcliff and I married, we should be beggars” (82). Catherine’s fear of poverty is driven by her narcissistic sense of entitlement because she has come to expect wealth and status in order to flatter her exaggerated self-portrait, a common goal of the grandiose narcissist. This does not suggest, however, that she is releasing her hold on Heathcliff; instead, she hopes to hold power over both of them by using Edgar’s wealth to “aid Heathcliff to rise” (82). This way, she is able to monetarily bolster her hold over Heathcliff while cementing her power over Edgar through marriage—and helping herself to his wealth as well. Catherine readily admits that her “love for Linton is like foliage in the woods,” whereas her “lover for Heathcliff resembles the eternal rocks beneath” (82). Although this passage suggests a marked preference for Heathcliff, she lacks the volition to act upon that love because her enculturation into patriarchal society has magnified her desire to acquire wealth, status, and power. Further, Catherine is incapable of understanding the impropriety of using Edgar’s wealth to attempt to raise Heathcliff in social status because her narcissistic sense of entitlement prevents her from anticipating any objection from Edgar. Although she has the imagination to conceive of such a scheme, she does not have the analytical skills necessary to consider the outcome. This lack of foresight is a product of her grandiose illusion, which stems from Catherine’s narcissistic desire to keep both Edgar and Heathcliff under her influence: Edgar through marriage and Heathcliff through obligation. 74 74

Heathcliff’s abandonment subverts Catherine’s grandiose illusion, prompting her exaggerated self-portrait to respond with narcissistic withdrawal and rage, indicating her inability to cope with the use of agentic skills. Heathcliff’s departure from Wuthering Heights stirs up feelings of inferiority from parental rejection in Catherine, and she fixates upon Heathcliff’s departure as a form of abandonment: “she kept wandering to and fro, from the gate to the door, in a state of agitation which permitted no response” (85). The immediate effect of the loss is Catherine’s withdrawal via a self-confining illness. But this coping mechanism does little to resolve her feelings of abandonment, and it magnifies the fragility of her exaggerated self-portrait because it is an extension of her father’s rejection. Because Catherine’s grandiose narcissism first began to develop as a result of parental rejection, she had shifted her focus to Heathcliff, whom she comes to rely upon in order to compensate for that that rejection. The long -term effect of Heathcliff’s abandonment on Catherine is later manifested through bouts of narcissistic rage. After she emerges from her confinement, Catherine “would not bear crossing much, she ought to have her own way; and it was nothing less than murder, in her eyes, for any one to presume to stand up and contradict her” (89). Catherine’s narcissistic rage-based outbursts indicate that Heathcliff’s departure seriously threatens her grandiose illusion of power because her exaggerated self-portrait isn’t capable of interpreting or resolving the loss with either introspective or self-nurturing skill. Further, Catherine’s rage impedes her ability to utilize these agentic skills because she is unable to reconcile or admit to her role in Heathcliff’s departure in a way that will allow her to carry on despite the shock to her exaggerated self-portrait. Catherine’s life after her marriage becomes a mirror image of her childhood confinement at the Grange, as the Lintons’ indulgence enables her to refocus her 75 75 grandiose illusion of power after Heathcliff’s abandonment. Catherine bases her refocused grandiose illusion upon two facets: the exaggerated belief in her superiority over others and her belief in her power over others. This is enabled through the efforts of the Lintons, whose careful indulgence of her whims is meant to help avoid episodes of narcissistic rage, but this indulgence also maintains her exaggerated self-portrait by encouraging her belief in her superiority. Edgar and Isabella become “very attentive to [Catherine’s] comfort, certainly. It was not the thorn bending to the honeysuckles, but the honeysuckles embracing the thorn” (92). This metaphor perfectly describes the dynamic of her relationship with the Lintons: Catherine, the thorn, is carefully surrounded and protected from the outside world by Edgar and Isabella. It also suggests a form of confinement; the flowers strive to hold the thorn at bay in order to prevent injury. As a consequence, Catherine becomes the center of the Lintons’ universe, and while the Lintons’ actions may be seen by others as nurturing or indulgent, she sees this special treatment by Edgar and Isabella as a prerogative, stemming from her narcissistic sense of entitlement which feeds her belief in her superiority over the Lintons. This also allows her to refocus her grandiose illusion of power onto the Lintons. Catherine’s response to the narcissistic injury of Heathcliff’s abandonment opens a hole in her grandiose illusion of power, and the Lintons fill it with their willingness to encourage her exaggerated self-portrait through overvaluation, permitting an easy transition for her to exhort her illusion of power over the Lintons. Catherine’s belief in her superiority interrupts her interpersonal and communicative agentic skills, further inflating her grandiose illusion. Otway and Vignoles claim that narcissists demand “attention and admiration… are unwilling to return favors, show a lack of empathy, and are interpersonally exploitative” 76 76

(Otway & Vignoles 104). Even as Catherine’s grandiose illusion is carefully maintained by Isabella and Edgar, she is unable to empathize or reciprocate their affection. When Isabella proclaims her love for Heathcliff to Catherine, she vows: “I love him more than ever you loved Edgar” (102). But later, when Catherine repeats the event to Heathcliff, she substitutes herself for Edgar as the object of affection: “Isabella swears that the love Edgar has for me is nothing to that she entertains for you” (105). Two very important details come to light in this statement. First, Catherine is not bothered by the mortification that Isabella feels when she reveals Isabella’s feelings for Heathcliff, indicating that she is completely indifferent and unsympathetic to Isabella’s feelings. Second, the corruption of the original message by unconsciously—or consciously—replacing Edgar with herself as the object of devotion demonstrates that Catherine is incapable of reciprocating the affection of her husband. Because Edgar and Isabella Linton allow Catherine to mistreat them in this way, they continue to enable her grandiose illusion of power, which, in turn, encourages her to exploit her personal relationships with them. Because of this, Catherine is not capable of building the healthy, mutually beneficial relationships that are necessary to maintain the communicative skill she would need to return her husband’s affection, nor can she benefit from the interpersonal skills that would enable her to empathize with Isabella’s problems with Heathcliff. But Catherine does not perceive her relationship with the Lintons as a social experience because her feelings for Edgar and Isabella are materialistic, not social. Heathcliff’s return puts Catherine on the defense as she shows increased objectification of the Lintons, indicating she lacks the analytical and introspective skills to deal with an assault to her grandiose illusion. Catherine’s increasing objectification and feelings of entitlement of others is a response to a threat to her 77 77 grandiose illusion, which is symptomatic of her need to mask feelings of self- worth. When Isabella begins to show an interest in Heathcliff, her power over Isabella becomes threatened, and she responds to the threat accordingly: “You are too prone to covet your neighbor’s goods: remember this neighbor’s goods are mine” (107). This reveals both Catherine’s underlying feelings of low self-worth, and her proprietary attitude toward the Lintons. The threat of losing power over Isabella stirs up her childhood feelings of parental rejection and abandonment, so her response is to attempt to increase her hold on Isabella and to declare ownership; she sees Isabella as an object or a possession instead of an individual. Because Catherine’s response is a defense mechanism that she employs to preserve her grandiose illusion, she is impeded from analyzing the situation and responding reasonably: she doesn’t think about potential outcomes, she simply acts to preserve her illusion by attacking Isabella’s feelings. But the preservation of the illusion is dependent upon the objectification of others, and the more she feels threatened, the more Catherine must set herself apart from others in order to keep up the illusion of her self-esteem. Catherine begins to defend her threatened grandiose illusion through projection and denial, indicating a lack of introspective, analytical, and imaginative skills. In order to maintain the grandiose illusion of power and her exaggerated self-portrait, Catherine defends them by projecting her own faults onto the Lintons. When Catherine’s power over the Lintons is threatened, she unconsciously projects her own narcissistic traits onto them: “they are very much alike: they are spoiled children, and fancy the world was made for their accommodation and, though I humour both, I think a smart chastisement might improve them, all the same” (98). Catherine does this in order to bolster her belief in her superiority over the Lintons. On some level, she is aware of her behavior, 78 78 but she lacks the introspective skill to process that behavior in a meaningful way that will affect change; her exaggerated self-portrait must maintain the illusion of superiority at all costs. She appropriates the behavior of the Lintons, and projects it back onto herself: “I yield like a foolish mother—I call [Isabella] darling, and flatter her into a good temper” (98). Catherine creates a false self-martyrdom in order to defend her belief of her superiority over the Lintons because she simply cannot reflect upon her own behavior in a way that will affect real, positive change. But projection becomes denial when her own actions destabilize her illusion of power over others. When Catherine forces the altercation between Heathcliff and Edgar in the kitchen, she lacks the analytical and imagination skills to envision the potential fallout of her actions. As a result, she refuses to acknowledge her culpability in the matter: “You are aware that I am in no way blamable in this matter” (116). Instead, Catherine projects the fault onto Edgar. But the real danger is that she has triggered a chain of events that threaten her hold over Edgar, because his actions indicate that he moving outside of the influence of her power. The potential loss of Edgar provokes a narcissistic injury of which Catherine is compelled to respond. Catherine’s lack of volition to choose between Heathcliff and Edgar reveals her struggle between internalized rejection issues and enculturation. After the altercation in the kitchen, Edgar gives Catherine an ultimatum: “Will you give up Heathcliff hereafter, or will you give up me? It is impossible for you to be my friend , and his friend at the same time; and I absolutely require to know which you choose” (117). Catherine is being asked to choose between two forms of internalized oppression. Because she compensated for parental rejection by inventing a grandiose illusion of power over Heathcliff, she depends upon him to maintain her feelings of power over others. Her marriage to Edgar, on the other 79 79 hand, is a product of her overvaluation and enculturation into patriarchal society which is the foundation of her need to maintain the illusion of superiority over others—even though Heathcliff is now wealthy, he cannot provide the social status that Catherine craves through her marriage to Edgar. The problem is that her entire exaggerated self-portrait is founded upon both her desire for power and her need to maintain superiority. Her inability to choose between Edgar and Heathcliff reveals a lack of volition, because she cannot resist the pressure to maintain both aspects of the internalized oppression that spawned her grandiosity. Rather than face the destruction of the grandiose illusion, she retreats into confinement: “I require to be let alone!” said Catherine, furiously. “I demand it! Don’t you see I can scarcely stand? Edgar, you—you leave me!” (117). Edgar’s ultimatum becomes a narcissistic injury for Catherine, to which she responds by confining herself in her room, where she experiences alternating episodes of narcissistic rage and withdrawal. Catherine responds to the narcissistic injury to her exaggerated self-portrait by confining herself in a narcissistic rage because she lacks the self-nurturing skills to cope with the loss of her narcissistic illusion. Edgar’s ultimatum reveals his independence from Catherine’s influence, and it becomes a narcissistic injury because it threatens the illusion that she has created in order to compensate for her fragile self-esteem. When the illusion is threatened, a narcissistic injury occurs, and Catherine’s response is one of rage: “She rung the bell till it broke with a twang: I entered leisurely. It was enough to try the temper of a saint, such senseless, wicked rages! There she lay dashing her head against the arm of the sofa, and grinding her teeth, so that you might fancy she would crash them to splinters” (118). Catherine’s anger and aggression is a result of the internalization of the feelings of inferiority that she experienced after her father’s rejection. 80 80

Edgar’s ultimatum serves as a reminder of that rejection. This is evident in her attempt to manipulate him into responding to her threats of self-harm: Should… any one else aggravate my anger at present, I shall get wild. And, Nelly, say to Edgar, if you see him again to-night, that I’m in danger of being seriously ill—I wish it may prove true. He has startled me and distressed me shockingly! To this point he has been discreet in dreading to provoke me; you must represent the peril of quitting that policy; and remind him of my passionate temper, verging, when kindled, on frenzy. (117) When faced with the disappointment of losing power over Edgar, Catherine is unable to cope with self-nurturing skills in a way that will ensure her ability to preserve some semblance of her self-portrait. Instead, she invokes self-harm and physical aggression as a means to cope with the loss. Catherine’s confinement and narcissistic withdrawal is the catalyst that dispels the grandiose illusion, but because she is unable to cope with agentic skill, she loses touch with reality. Edgar’s ultimatum is also an attack on her belief in her superiority over others, and Catherine responds to this injury to her exaggerated self-portrait with narcissistic withdrawal. The effect of Edgar’s ultimatum on her grandiose illusion is quite clear: she can relive parental rejection by giving up Heathcliff again, or she can lose her superior social status by giving up Edgar. She uses the narcissistic withdrawal as a way to cope with her indecisiveness by shutting herself away, choosing instead to deny the reality of the ultimatum. Catherine intends for her withdrawal to bring Edgar back under her power, but unfortunately, it does not bring about the expected outcome: “Among his books! She cried, confounded. “And I dying! I on the brink of the grave! My God! Does he know how I am altered?” (121). But it is Nelly Dean that provides 81 81 the lynchpin that devastates Catherine’s grandiose illusion. Upon her first interaction with Nelly during confinement, Catherine becomes increasingly aware of Nelly’s aversion: I begin to fancy you don’t like me. How strange! I thought, though everybody hated and dispised each other, they could not avoid loving me” (122). This passage reveals the extent of which Catherine’s grandiose illusion is endangered: first, she is actually able to perceive that Nelly dislikes her; second, she is genuinely surprised that Nelly’s dislike is possible. This becomes a paradox for Catherine because she lacks the analytical and introspective skills to make sense of Nelly’s dislike; she needs to believe that “everybody” loves her, but now she has come to understand that “everybody” doesn’t. This, coupled with the fact that Catherine believes Edgar is now disinterested, proves too much for her, and it is immediately after this that she begins to reject reality altogether. Catherine’s inability to reflect upon her circumstances and envision a rational method through which she can salvage the vestiges of her self-portrait reveals an utter lack of autonomy. Because she is unable to manage the loss of her grandiose illusion, Catherine magnifies it, and turns to self-injury as a coping mechanism, indicating a complete lack of autonomy. Because her identity is based upon her grandiose narcissism, she cannot desert her narcissistic strategies; rather than cope with the loss of her grandiose illusion, she amplifies it (Massé 148). When first threatened with the loss of the grandiose illusion, Catherine indicates that she will attempt self-injury if the needs of her exaggerated self- portrait are not met: “I’ll try to break their hearts by breaking my own. That will be a prompt way of finishing all when I am pushed to the extremity! But it’s a deed to be reserved for a forlorn hope” (116-117). After three days in narcissistic withdrawal, and with no Edgar to come and placate her, Catherine plans self- injury: “If I were only sure it would kill him… I’d kill myself directly!” (121). 82 82

Catherine is reeling from the belief that she is being abandoned and rejected by Edgar, and this latest blow to her exaggerated self-portrait is more than it can bear, and she is faced with the reality of losing both Heathcliff and Edgar. Catherine’s need to maintain the grandiose illusion indicates how much it has become entrenched, and that she cannot exist without it; her lack of autonomy is revealed as she loses herself in the remnants of her grandiose illusion until she achieves her own death. Catherine ultimately lacks autonomy because she is entrapped by her idealization of Heathcliff, and her need to maintain her social position through patriarchal enculturation. Catherine has idealized her relationship with Heathcliff, and she believes their relationship to be far superior to others: “he shall never know how I love him; and that, not because he’s handsome, Nelly, but because he’s more myself than I am. Whatever our souls are made of, his and mine are the same, and Linton’s is as different as a moonbeam from lightning or frost from fire” (79). She describes her relationship as having a supernatural quality, which is symptomatic of her grandiose narcissism. Because of the experience of her father’s rejection, Catherine idealizes Heathcliff in order to compensate; she could not idealize her own father, so she transferred that idealization onto Heathcliff. When Heathcliff returns from his travels, the idealization is rekindled and intensified, which is easily accomplished because she does not idealize Edgar, only the social position that her marriage to him offers. But Catherine’s dependence upon her relationship with Heathcliff is a form on internalized subordination; she is not subordinated by Heathcliff himself, she is subordinated by her idealized version of Heathcliff and the level of intimacy that she perceives as defining her relationship with him. The consequence is that she becomes entrapped between two forms of oppression. The enculturated Catherine does not 83 83 want to give up her social status or the wealth that comes with her identity as Mrs. Edgar Linton. But the subordinated Catherine wants to continue her idealized relationship with Heathcliff. Catherine’s inability to achieve autonomy is based upon her powerlessness to resolve her grandiose narcissism, and her inability to find her authentic voice. Unlike Jane and Helen, who are able to resolve their narcissistic personalities by finding and asserting their own authentic voices, Catherine is utterly thwarted from this because she cannot separate her own identity from Heathcliff. Before Heathcliff’s departure from Wuthering Heights, Catherine tells Nelly “If all else perished, and he remained, I should still continue to be; and, if all else remained, and he were annihilated, the Universe would turn to a mighty stranger… Nelly, I am Heathcliff—he’s always, always in my mind—not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself—but, as my own being” (82). The fact that Catherine cannot separate her own identity from Heathcliff is indicative of her inability to find and maintain her authentic voice. Without her own authentic voice, Catherine’s autonomy and self-reflection is not possible. The only path left to Catherine is self-destruction.

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION

The question that must now be asked is why is it that, if Jane and Helen are able to resolve their narcissistic impediments, why has Catherine failed? What is essentially different about Catherine’s experience that she is unable to locate her own authentic voice? The answer is that, in Wuthering Heights, Catherine Earnshaw doesn’t have an authentic voice to find. Diana Meyers asserts that “the autonomous individual is an evolving subject—a subject who is in charge of her life within the limits of imperfect, introspective decipherability… a subject who fashions her self-portrait and shapes her self-narrative through a process of skillful self-discovery, self-definition, and self-direction” (22). It can be argued, then, that introspection is the most important item in the agentic skill set, and the best vehicle through which introspection can be achieved is with self-narrative. If introspection is the necessary ingredient upon which autonomy is realized, then introspection through self-narrative can becomes the pathway that enables one to find one’s authentic voice—and why Jane and Helen evolve into autonomous individuals, and why Catherine does not. Jane Eyre is Jane’s autobiographical self-narrative that includes an older, narrating Jane, that looks back upon her younger, narrated self. Throughout the self-narrative, Jane is reflecting upon her actions, and giving an account of herself, coming to terms with her emotions, pointing out where she went wrong, and finding ways to adjust her attitudes and beliefs in order to gain the knowledge necessary to speak with own voice. We can see Jane’s introspective skill as the narrating Jane gives an account of her actions as she looks back upon her childhood self: “I could not answer the ceaseless inward question—why I thus suffered; now, at the distance of—I will not say how many years, I see it clearly” (11). This is indicative Jane’s retrospective self-reflection that enables her to 85 85 provide a voice that her younger self lacked. Through self-narrative, Jane taps her authentic voice which enables her to make sense of, and interpret her childhood experiences: a necessary introspective ingredient for autonomy. In The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, Helen’s journal is a vehicle for describing her life events almost as they happen. We can see the introspection and growth throughout the self-narrative of her journal, particularly when comparing her attitudes from before and after her spiritual rebirth. Before, Helen is all too willing to vocalize her disdain for Mr. Boarham, whom she passionately hates. Even after her spiritual rebirth, Helen feels hatred for Huntingdon, but she is able to reflect upon her hatred as something that she finds wanting in herself: “Instead of being humbled and purified by my afflictions, I feel that they are turning my nature into gall. This must be my fault as much as theirs that wrong me” (313). This is evidence of the evolution of Helen’s introspection, and an example of her ability to explain her experiences in a constructive way, and recognize, and to vocalize where she finds herself wanting in order to affect change. But Catherine’s story in Wuthering Heights is not actually her own; it is revealed through the musings of Nelly Dean, as told to Mr. Lockwood. The only self-narrative we have of Catherine is from a scrap of journal written during Catherine’s childhood while she was confined for acting out. But even that is given to us through the lens of Mr. Lockwood. With this lack of self-narrative, it isn’t really possible to determine whether or not Catherine was capable of introspection, because we are not privy to the cognitive window that self-narrative provides. Because her story has been appropriated, she cannot have an authentic voice. The fact that Catherine fails to secure an authentic voice because she lacks her own narrative prompts questions about how agency is analyzed in Victorian 86 86 narratives. As this study has shown, agency and autonomy cannot be demonstrated unless self-knowledge through introspection is verified. This is why self-narrative is such an essential facet in the establishment of autonomy; a window into the mind of the agent must be available to the reader in order to determine the agent’s ability to self-reflect, thereby revealing agentic growth. The narratives of Jane’s autobiography and Helen’s journal provide this window into the mind of the agent, which allows for a reading through the lens of autonomy theory. This offers a fresh perspective in determining the process through which women become autonomous individuals in the genre of Victorian narratives.

WORKS CITED

Brontë, Anne. The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. London: Penguin Classics, 1996. Print.

Brontë, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. New York: Barnes & Noble Classics, 2003. Print.

Brontë, Emily. Wuthering Heights. London: Penguin Classics, 1995. Print.

Bellamy, Joan. “The Tenant of Wildfell Hall: What Anne Brontë Knew and What Modern Readers Don’t.” Brontë Studies 30 (2005): 255-257. MLA. Web. 28 Sept. 2011.

Crouse, Jamie S. “‘This Shattered Prison’: Confinement, Control and Gender in Wuthering Heights. Brontë Studies 33 (2008): 179-191. Academic Search Complete. Web. 1 May 2014.

Fiske, Susan T. “From Dehumanization and Objectification to Rehumanization: Neuroimaging Studies on the Building Blocks of Empathy.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1167 (2009): 31-34. Academic Search Complete. Web.18 Nov. 2014.

Glen, Heather. Charlotte Brontë: The Imagination in History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Print.

Green, Laura Morgan. Educating Woman: Cultural Conflict and Victorian Literature. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2001. Print.

Jafari, Morteza. “Freud’s Uncanny: The role of the Doubile in Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights.” Victorian Newsletter 118 (2010): Literature Resource Center. Web. 8 May 2014.

Krizan, Zlatan and Omesh Johar. “Narcissistic Rage Revisited.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (2014): 1-18. PsycARTICLES. Web. 2 Feb. 2015.

Kuglin, Ayşegül. “The Most Attractive to the Worst Kinds of Men:” Self- Importance and Romantic Relationships in The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.” Victorians Journal 126 (2014): 46-62. Literature Resource Center. Web. 16 Dec. 2014.

Lamonaca, Maria, “Jane’s Crown of Thorns: Feminism and Christianity in Jane Eyre.” Studies in the Novel 34.3 (2002): 245-263. MLA. Web. 7 Oct. 2012. 88 88 Leggatt, Judith, and Christopher Parkes. “From the Red Room to Rochester’s Haircut: Mind Control in Jane Eyre.” English Studies in Canada 32.4 (2006): 169-188. Literature Resource Center. Web. 12 May 2014.

Lin, Lidan. “Voices of Subversion and Narrative Closure in Anne Brontë’s The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.” Brontë Studies 27 (2002): 131-137. Literature Resource Center. Web. 31 Jan. 2015.

Lydon, Susan. “Abandoning and Re-inhabiting Domestic Space in Jane Eyre, Villette, and Wide Sargasso Sea.” Brontë Studies 35.1 (2010): 23-29. Academic Search Complete. Web. 12 May 2014.

Maier, Sarah E. “Portraits of the Girl-Child: Female Bildungsroman in Victorian Fiction.” Literature Compass 4.1 (2007): 317-335. MLA. Web. 17 Sept. 2012.

Marchbanks, Paul. “A Costly Morality: Dependency Care and Mental Difference in the Novels of the Brontë Sisters.” Journal of Literary & Cultural Studies 4.1 (2010): 55-72. Literature Resource Center. Web. 8 May 2014.

Massé, Michelle A. “‘He’s More Myself than I Am’: Narcissism and Gender in Wuthering Heights.” Psychoanalyses/Feminisms. Ed. Peter L. Rudnytsky and Andrew M. Gordon. New York: State University of New York Press, 2000. Print.

Meyers, Diana Tietjens. Gender in the Mirror: Cultural Imagery and Women’s Agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Print.

Miller, Joshua et al. “Grandiose and Vulnerable Narcissism from the Perspective of the Interpersonal Circumplex.” Personality and Individual Differences 53 (2012): 507-512. Science Direct. Web. 9 Dec. 2014.

Miller, Kathleen A. “‘Well that Is Beautiful, Miss Jane!’: Jane Eyre and the Creation of the Female Artist.” Brontë Studies 35.3 (2010):248-266. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Jan. 2015.

Otway, Lorna J. and Vivian L. Vignoles. “Narcissism and Childhood Recollections: A Quantitative Test of Psychoanalytic Predictions.” PSPB 32.1 (2006): 104-116. Secondhandcouch.com. Web. 8 May 2014.

Phillips, James. “Marriage in Jane Eyre: From Contract to Conversation.” Brontë Studies 33 (2008): 203-217. Academic Search Complete. Web. 14 May 2012. 89 89 Surridge, Lisa. Bleak Houses: Marital Violence in Victorian Fiction. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2005. Print.

Tappan, Mark. “Reframing Internalized Oppression and Internalized Domination: From the Psychological to the Sociocultural.” Teachers College Record 108.10. (2006): 2115-2144. Web of Science. Web. 16 Jan. 2015.

Thomas, Justin et al. “The Narcissistic Mask: An Exploration of ‘the Defensive Grandiosity Hypothesis’.” Personality and Mental Health 7.2 (2013): 160- 167. Wiley Online Journals. Web. 8 May 2014. and the Novel.” Narrative 13.1 (2005): 46-66. JSTOR. Web. 17 Sept. 2012.

Ward, Ian. “The Case of Helen Huntingdon.” Criticism 49.2 (2007): 151-182. Project Muse. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Wegner, Daniel M. “The Mind’s Self-Portrait.” Annals New York Academy of Sciences 1001 (2003):1-14. Wiley Online. Web. 20 Jan. 2015. Fresno State

Non-Exclusive Distribution License (to archive your thesis/dissertation electronically via the library’s eCollections database)

By submitting this license, you (the author or copyright holder) grant to Fresno State Digital Scholar the non-exclusive right to reproduce, translate (as defined in the next paragraph), and/or distribute your submission (including the abstract) worldwide in print and electronic format and in any medium, including but not limited to audio or video.

You agree that Fresno State may, without changing the content, translate the submission to any medium or format for the purpose of preservation.

You also agree that the submission is your original work, and that you have the right to grant the rights contained in this license. You also represent that your submission does not, to the best of your knowledge, infringe upon anyone’s copyright.

If the submission reproduces material for which you do not hold copyright and that would not be considered fair use outside the copyright law, you represent that you have obtained the unrestricted permission of the copyright owner to grant Fresno State the rights required by this license, and that such third-party material is clearly identified and acknowledged within the text or content of the submission.

If the submission is based upon work that has been sponsored or supported by an agency or organization other than Fresno State, you represent that you have fulfilled any right of review or other obligations required by such contract or agreement.

Fresno State will clearly identify your name as the author or owner of the submission and will not make any alteration, other than as allowed by this license, to your submission. By typing your name and date in the fields below, you indicate your agreement to the terms of this distribution license.

Embargo options (fill box with an X).

Make my thesis or dissertation available to eCollections immediately upon X submission.

Embargo my thesis or dissertation for a period of 2 years from date of graduation.

Embargo my thesis or dissertation for a period of 5 years from date of graduation.

Jennifer Wolfe Lewis

Type full name as it appears on submission

May 5, 2015

Date