From Status to Contract: Domesticating Modernity in Wuthering Heights, The Mill on the Floss and Dracula
Abstract
In England, the nineteenth-century was a time of change. The social developments instigated
by the French Revolution in France were making way across the channel, intensified
by the technological innovation generated by the Industrial Revolution. As social
hierarchies were altered by the rise of the middle class, so too was political organization
disturbed with the passage of the Great Reform act of 1832. The final transition to
a constitutional monarchy at home, together with the fall of the ancient Spanish,
Chinese, Holy Roman, Portuguese and Mughal empires abroad, made the period a time
of unprecedented and fundamental change. Modernity, with a unique concentration on
the present rather than the glorification of the past found in classicism or romanticism,
would become the measure of social life. While the principles that would define modernism
were evolving, as Bram Stoker notes, “the old centuries had, and have, powers of their
own which mere ‘modernity’ cannot kill.” The literature of the time reflected the
transitional phase within the realism of the newly popular medium – the novel. Exploring
the role of self and society, the novel, with the genre of realism as its distinguishing
feature, allowed for a theoretic space in which social change could be understood
and mastered. With antecedents in autobiographic and epistolary works, the novel
offered an intimate and ‘real’ microcosm of the contemporary social landscape, contributing
new, or literally novel, case studies that reflect how individuals could, and did,
come to terms with modernity.
Literary critics often use twentieth-century theories of social or psychological development
to explicate character motivations or plot progression in the nineteenth-century.
Yet, would not such analysis be more fruitful if the works were read in context of
Victorian theory that is able to offer a glimpse into how Victorians themselves understood
their relation to history and their role in society? To capture this very notion I
will turn to the Victorian comparative jurist and historian Sir Henry Maine and his
book Ancient Law (1861), which will provide the theoretical framework to my analysis.
Henry Maine is pertinent to this study because his legal theories reveal how writers
of the period theorized the emergence of modernity. The novels I have chosen precede,
are concurrent with, and follow the publication of Maine’s work, so that the impact
and progression of social development can be perceived over the span of the century.
It is known that George Eliot read Maine’s work and thus his influence can be more
directly surmised in The Mill on the Floss. By the time Bram Stoker published Dracula
in 1897, Maine’s theories were ubiquitous and although it is unknown whether the author
encountered Maine’s work personally, the ideas put forth in Ancient Law would inevitably
have influenced Stoker via popular culture. In the case of Emily Brontë, however,
Wuthering Heights predates the insight offered by Maine, but in some ways it follows
Maine’s thesis. The work of both authors can be seen as a response to the issues of
1840s-1850s. The move from status to contract that Maine identified, was not isolated
to the time of his publication, but was the impetus behind the French Revolution,
and the ideals of liberté, égalité, fraternité that were expressed almost a century
earlier. While Emily Brontë, unlike George Eliot, would not have read Maine’s work,
the social changes later identified by Maine could not have escaped her. Wuthering
Heights explores concepts later solidified in Ancient Law and thus Maine’s theory
is critical in explicating the novel.
The achievement of Henry Maine is perhaps best summarized by John Hartman Morgan who
introduced Ancient Law with the following lines:
Published in 1861, it immediately took rank as a classic, and its epoch-making influence
may not unfitly be compared to that exercised by Darwin's Origin of Species. The revolution
effected by the latter in the study of biology was hardly more remarkable than that
effected by Maine’s brilliant treatise in the study of early institutions.
Discussing the development of law in the nineteenth century A.W.B. Simpson went so
far as to claim that Henry Maine “wrote the only legal best seller of that, or perhaps
any other century.” Immensely well written, the book had a cross-generational appeal,
as well as the propensity to reference multiple topics fashionable at the time. It
participated in the contemporary debate about progress, as Maine sought “constantly
to assess whether or not certain practices encouraged or impeded the development of
societies.” Unlike previous, prominent jurists, such as Jeremy Bentham and John Austin,
who perceived law as a wholly abstract entity “independent of any particular place
in which it functions,” Maine understood law as inextricable from social practices
and historical events. Hailed as one of the forefathers of modern sociology of law,
as well as anthropology, Maine’s project was to trace the emergence and development
of the modern concepts of contract and the Individual.
By using Maine’s work, we are able to understand the status quo and status quo ante
as Victorians themselves did. It is important to note, however, that Ancient Law divulges
the evolution of modern law from an earlier Roman prototype, rather than analyzing
ancient jurisprudence in isolation. Indeed, Maine’s objective is “to indicate some
of the earliest ideas of mankind, as they are reflected in Ancient Law, and to point
out the relation of those ideas to modern thought (italics mine).” The transformations
his book takes into account can be said to project the metamorphosis of his own culture
onto that of antiquity. The need to rationalize the breach between modes of association
is evident in the work of Maine and the literary authors in question. While Brontë,
Eliot, and Stoker address the changing social landscape in the private sphere, Maine
does so in the public. Putting the texts into dialogue will reveal a more complete
understanding of how the novelists rationalized the developments of the milieu. By
extrapolating Maine’s theories of social progression and applying them to Wuthering
Heights, The Mill on the Floss, and Dracula, we are able to understand character motivations
as products of complex historic transformations.
In the pre-modern past, social and economic life was organized in terms of kin. The
attainment of prestige and influence of certain independent, but consanguine groups,
over time, led to the development of aristocracies. In history, membership in this
privileged class offered status and power, but as Maine argues, its benefits were
bestowed at the cost of individualization. At such a point in societal development,
according to Maine, a person’s “individuality was swallowed up by his family,” never
was he “regarded as himself, as a distinct individual.” Thus, a society like ancient
Rome, “[had] for its units, not individuals, but groups of men united by the reality
or fiction of blood-relationship.” Modernity, however, provided an opportunity for
volte-face; it nurtured individualization.
In multi-national, multi-ethnic imperial societies, like Imperial Rome and Modern
Britain, kinship was no longer a viable way of social organization. In Britain, “the
decline of kinship solidarities was understood as a necessary consequence of the economic
specialization and bureaucratic rationalism associated with modernity and industrial
development.” Status was no longer “colored by, the powers and privileges anciently
residing in the Family,” as was the case in ancient Rome and pre-industrial England,
according to Maine. Instead, there appeared a “gradual dissolution of family dependency,”
replaced by “the growth of individual obligation in its place.” As Maine concisely
stated, “the movement of progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from Status
to Contract.” Contract refers to the “tie between man and man which [replaced] by
degrees those forms of reciprocity in rights and duties which have their origin in
the Family.” The “free agreement of Individuals” superseded ties of affinity. With
the move towards a contract-based society came new forms of social association. People
were no longer grouped though blood, rather, they were organized via the places they
shared. The move from consanguinity to contiguity was crucial to the individualization
of modern society.
Maine defined the development of social categories that the novels explore in the
microcosm of a fictional reality. In novels we are able to see Maine’s ideas set in
motion, affect characters as they would real people, and determine a range of outcomes
depending on the characters’ individual proclivities, prejudices, adaptive capacities
and environment. The genre of realism that gained prominence in the nineteenth-century’s
prevailing medium, the novel, allowed for “new realities” that mirrored the non-fictional
world, but which also attempted to solve or fathom change. This need for reflection
is a search for something to ground reality in a world that was rapidly and fundamentally
changing from old sensibilities of custom, family ties, nobility, and other sentiments
of the old order, to the new rationale of independence in the public and private spheres.
Maine’s narrative is theoretic in nature and seeks to give meaning to the nineteenth-century
developments that the novelists addressed within the private spheres of each narrative.
The novel’s relation to the social is unique, for it can be both descriptive and speculative,
without being merely reflexive. It is able to go beyond mere representation by exploring
novel scenarios in which new realities pose new challenges for the characters, and
offer new ways of mastering social change. While Maine abstracted the development
of the Individual in law, the novels depicted his relation to society.
In the chapter on Wuthering Heights, I identify Heathcliff as a product of both antiquity
and modernity, which differs from the critical precedent that attempts to pigeonhole
his identity. At the outset, I explore the implications of his absent surname, which
I argue qualifies him as an individual who is independent from familial ties. I then
explore the subject of kinship, particularly the ways in which the adoption of individuals
into the family unit, discussed by Maine, is played out in narrative form of Wuthering
Heights. Additionally, I argue that there is no clear marker in the novel to identify
which moment in history the Heights belongs to, for it could function as both a feudal
and modern manifestation of an estate. In the third section, I look at Heathcliff’s
largely capitalistic maneuvering. By targeting the Linton and Earnshaw families Heathcliff
is acting as an individual capitalist pivoted against the old symbol of social order
– the family – as identified by Maine. Next, I analyze Heathcliff’s entanglement with
revenge and patriarchy both of which cast him as an individual tied to ancient forms
of social relations. Finally, in the last section, I take on the subject of Hareton
and Catherine, arguing that their union is characterized by the creation of a nuclear
family, one that is independent from generational ties and its symbols in the form
of heirlooms.
In the second chapter, I argue that Eliot’s realism in The Mill on the Floss embarks
on a demystification of ancient social paradigms, focusing on the evolution of power,
function, and structure of the family. The “givens” of the past familial social
structure are no longer viable, according to Eliot, so that the archetypes of Gemeinschaft
– consanguinity and hereditary status – are undermined in the novel. In their place,
Eliot introduces a new kind of “objectivity,” in which I suggest, identity is no
longer colored by family name, status is not derived from ancestry, education is removed
from family dominion, and extended kinship alliances are supplanted by the nuclear
family. In The Mill on the Floss this new “objectivity” is firstly exemplified by
Mr. Tulliver’s lawsuit and Mr. Deane’s rise to prominence, both of which signify the
rise of contractual modes of association outside the bounds of status derived from
heredity. Secondly, the new order is epitomized by Tom’s remote education, which,
I will argue, signifies the birth of the Tulliver nuclear family. This differs from
Joshua Esty’s argument, which identifies the premature birth of the Tulliver nuclear
family as the result of the bankruptcy. Thirdly, the new objectivity is represented
by Mrs. Glegg’s financial independence, a point contrary to critical precedent thus
far, which places Mrs. Glegg in the “givens” of the past social structure. I will
prove that Mrs. Glegg’s financial autonomy is not only a foil to Mrs. Tulliver’s fiscal
dependency, but Eliot’s commentary on women’s property rights. Finally, I will discuss
the Dodson family as an example of the status quo ante that is not entirely untouched
by the new objectivity, as well as Maggie’s ahistoric station as a consequence of
insufficient discernment. Focusing the discussion on secondary characters, I hope
to avoid the idiosyncratic tendency of many scholars who center their study exclusively
on Maggie. Invoking the theories of Eliot’s contemporary, Henry Maine, I will show
the ways in which the subjects of Eliot’s social experiment grapple with individuation
wrought by modernity and obligation to consanguinity imposed by kinship.
In the chapter on Dracula, I argue that the Count displays dualistic tendencies not
unlike Maggie and Heathcliff. First, I analyze the relations of the human characters
stressing the egalitarian nature of their union and identify Quincey Jr. as a foil
to Dracula. Secondly, I turn to the family structure of the un-dead, classifying their
union in terms of Maine’s theory concerning the adoption of individuals into the family
unit. I then explicate the familial roles arguing that not only does incest cast the
coterie in an antiquated light, but that the type of incest committed can further
tie the union to an older model of social relations, explored in Romanticism. In the
section on Dracula’s domesticity and sociality, I identify his opulent castle, as
well as his commitment to hospitality and revenge, as antiquated penchants that reveal
the Count’s reliance on outmoded social obligations. In the following section, the
discussion on patriarchy and nationality centers on Dracula’s understanding of society,
which reflects Maine’s theories of consanguinity and contiguity. The final section
focuses on the juxtaposition of Dracula’s embodiment of the family corporation, with
the individuality he displays in his single-handed invasion of England.
Coming to terms with modernization and the resulting social evolutions are the subjects
that Brontë, Stoker, and Eliot explore, whether consciously or unconsciously, in their
respective novels. The temporal setting of both Wuthering Heights (1847) and The
Mill on the Floss (1860) is antecedent to the novels’ publication, while Dracula’s
(1897) setting is conspicuously concurrent. If looking back is a form of coming to
terms with the present, Brontë and Eliot had, perhaps, more reason to do so, for at
the time of the novels’ publication the gears of change were spinning arguably faster,
fueled by its novelty, while at the fin-de-siècle, when Stoker penned Dracula, pervasive
change was ubiquitous requiring less rationalization. Stoker, of course, is no exception,
for he too turned to antiquity, and in particular, the medieval past in constructing
the novel. Even Maine, as discussed previously, referred to the ancient Roman jurisprudence
to draw comparison and contrast to modern law. Rationalizing modern developments by
turning to the stability of antiquity is a pervasive theme in the nineteenth-century.
As people grapple with modern advances in virtually every area of life, the past provides
a safe haven to which habit or fear often reverts. Indeed, the main, and even some
secondary, characters of the three novels repeatedly conflate antiquity and modernity.
They, however, must pay with their lives for their muddled fluctuations, for regression
cannot belong to a world of progress, and if survival of the fittest truly describes
the human condition then in the case of these novels the fittest are the most adept
at assuming change.
Type
Honors thesisDepartment
EnglishSubject
Henry MaineWuthering Heights
The Mill on the Floss
Dracula
Emily Bronte
George Eliot
bram stoker
contract
status
consanguinity
modernity
ancient law
family
individual
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/3393Citation
Foreman, Violeta (2011). From Status to Contract: Domesticating Modernity in Wuthering Heights, The Mill on
the Floss and Dracula. Honors thesis, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/3393.Collections
More Info
Show full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Undergraduate Honors Theses and Student papers
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info