ETD-5608-018-MOORE-7874.32.Pdf (553.2Kb)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DAUGHTERS OF THE CHURCH: WOMEN’S PLACE AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICE IN VICTORIAN WOMEN’S RELIGIOUS NOVELS by Sarah Elizabeth Moore APPROVED BY SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE: ___________________________________________ Patricia Michaelson, Chair ___________________________________________ Pamela Gossin ___________________________________________ Erin A. Smith ___________________________________________ Michael L. Wilson Copyright 2017 Sarah Elizabeth Moore All Rights Reserved To my family DAUGHTERS OF THE CHURCH: WOMEN’S PLACE AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICE IN VICTORIAN WOMEN’S RELIGIOUS NOVELS by SARAH ELIZABETH MOORE, MA DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The University of Texas at Dallas in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN HUMANITIES – STUDIES IN LITERATURE THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS May 2017 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the members of my committee not only for their support during the writing of the dissertation but also for their skill at fostering intellectual curiosity. I appreciate how they modeled the pursuit of interdisciplinary study and continued growth as readers and scholars. I would like to acknowledge those, at libraries or as independent scholars, who made available access to texts, and to acknowledge those at the library at The University of Texas at Dallas for sustaining access to scholarship. I would also like to thank my colleagues in the Naveen Jindal School of Management for their support and encouragement. Finally, I would like to thank my family and particularly my husband for their support, and my extended family for demonstrating the value of education and persistence. February 2017 v DAUGHTERS OF THE CHURCH: WOMEN’S PLACE AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICE IN VICTORIAN WOMEN’S RELIGIOUS NOVELS Sarah Elizabeth Moore, PhD The University of Texas at Dallas, 2017 ABSTRACT Supervising Professor: Patricia Michaelson Using the lens of lived religion, I examine the religious novels of three Victorian women in order to contextualize their representations of religious practices and controversies. I extend prior work on Elizabeth Missing Sewell, Charlotte Yonge, and Margaret Oliphant. Close readings of a selection of their novels demonstrate the authors’ engagement with one of the period’s major religious controversies: the Oxford Movement. The dissertation counters previous suggestions that these women made anti-feminist statements and redundant claims about religion. These three authors confront the role of a daughter in the Church of England; they do not simply act as a mouthpiece of the male church hierarchy. Elizabeth Missing Sewell’s early major novels, Amy Herbert (1844), Gertrude (1845), and Margaret Percival (1847), emphasize the spiritual development of young women. Charlotte Yonge’s The Heir of Redclyffe (1854), The Daisy Chain (1856), and The Clever Woman of the Family (1865) suggest she acted independently of church authority and felt conflicted about the position of women. Margaret Oliphant’s Chronicles of Carlingford (1861-1876) address religious controversies. Understanding how religious women represented religious practices in their fiction helps to explain religion in works vi by canonical authors like Charlotte Brontë, Elizabeth Gaskell, and George Eliot. This dissertation concludes these three religious novelists make an important contribution to the history of women’s writing by presenting a religiously informed view of women’s power and autonomy. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................v ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... vi CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2 ELIZABETH MISSING SEWELL’S RELIGIOUS YOUNG WOMEN ...30 CHAPTER 3 CHARLOTTE YONGE’S CONFLICTED ANGELS ................................73 CHAPTER 4 MARAGARET OLIPHANT’S CARLINGFORD CRITIQUES OF THE CHURCH .........................................................................................................................121 CHAPTER 5 BRONTË, GASKELL, AND ELIOT: REWORKING, REBUKING, AND REVISING RELIGIOUS REPRESENTATIONS ...........................................................174 SECTION 1 CHARLOTTE BRONTË ..................................................................176 SECTION 2 ELIZABETH GASKELL .................................................................194 SECTION 3 GEORGE ELIOT ..............................................................................203 WORKS CITED ..............................................................................................................230 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...........................................................................................238 CURRICULUM VITAE viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In an early letter that encourages the recipient to focus on reading non-fiction, George Eliot discusses a then-popular but now-neglected genre of Victorian literature, religious novels, which were written by men and women and popular enough to earn even Eliot’s scorn: Religious novels are more hateful to me than merely worldly ones: they are a sort of centaur or mermaid, and like other monsters that we do not know how to class, should be destroyed for the public good as soon as born. The weapons of the Christian warfare were never sharpened at the forge of romance. Domestic fictions, as they come more within the range of imitation, seem more dangerous. (1839, 27) Her label of “monsters” has been retained by some scholars to describe all of women’s religious novels of the Victorian period, despite the fact Eliot wrote this prior to the publication of some of the most well-known religious novels of the Victorian period.1 Later, in her 1856 essay “Silly Novels by Lady Novelists,” Eliot classifies the silly novels into the following categories: “the frothy, the prosy, the pious, or the pedantic” (179). Eliot explains that while calling religious novels silly “may seem impertinent” since they address significant subjects, she uses the epithet 1 In her introduction to Victorian religion, Hilary Fraser (2002) points out Eliot calls them “hateful books” and “monsters” but shifts to point out the novels should not be denounced (102). In George Eliot’s Intellectual Life, Avrom Fleishman points out her severity “on fiction, both secular and religious” (15), but he focuses on the secular themes of the dismissal. In her book on religious novels, Margaret Maison suggests Eliot represents “the majority of serious-minded people of her day” (2). See also Rainof (63). 1 “advisedly” since the novels contain a “mediocre amount of instruction” and prevent “more solid education” (195). “Dangerous” “monsters” have become “silly” and “frivolous.” Some literary critics use Eliot’s concern about the texts as part of a wider dismissal of women’s religious novels. Her label of “monsters” is invoked on occasion, and her classification of these novels as “silly” has helped in part to relegate these works to outsider status. This dismissal extends to Eliot’s non-religious novels. Even Eliot’s most religiously themed works like Scenes of Clerical Life and Daniel Deronda are not considered as canonical as her other works, which can be read as addressing more popular topics in Victorian studies. Scholars of religion have seen religious women’s novels as derivative of the big ideas of important men and therefore insignificant.2 Feminist scholars have seen these novels, specifically the “domestic fictions,” as part of an “anti-feminist” experience.3 Traditional literary scholars have dismissed them due to their lack of high literary pretensions or the didactic intent of the authors.4 2 In Religious Thought in the Victorian Age, James C. Livingston mentions some male novelists, but in his focus on “important” critical controversies, he does not address women or their publications. Religion in Victorian Society by Richard Helmstadter and Paul Phillips does not include Victorian women. Timothy Larsen’s Crisis of Doubt focuses on men. Rosman notes the “religious work undertaken by Victorian women related to their accepted domestic and maternal roles” (227); she does not include religious novelists. J. Russell Perkin sees an authority in religious novels but finds them to be derivative of theologians. In contrast, in Victorian Religion: Faith and Life in Britain, Julie Melnyk sees religious novels as “an important forum for theological debate” and “particularly important for women” (110). Finally, Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall see the Oxford Movement as “a search for a male-bonded culture” that placed “women firmly in separate sisterhoods as men recreated the religious world of ritual without female interference” (451). Davidoff and Hall reference women’s religious writing but focus on self-published or personal documents; they do not reference religious best sellers. 3 Tamara Wagner notes this preference for feminist or subversive texts in the opening of Antifeminism and the Victorian Novel (6) and suggests some critics have shifted to consider popular works (10). Antifeminism and the Victorian Novel presents Oliphant and Yonge as antifeminist. In The Religious Press in Britain, 1760-1900, Altholz focuses on publications by or for men. Gilbert and Gubar dismiss women’s religious novels as conservative. 4 In their book Nineteenth-Century Religion and Literature, Mark Knight and Emma Mason discuss