Helen ‘s prowess plays a more critical function than the mere disclosure of her feelings, and it is thematically and technically connected to Bronte ‘s statement. This manner of reading of Helen ‘s graphics should assist scholars attack Bronte ‘s feminist docket in the novel more critically and analyze her building of Helen as a adult female creative person more extensively.
For one thing, Helen ‘s prowess maps as a agency of self-definition. The fact that Helen puts so much of herself into her pictures and drawings authenticates this thought. In fact, Helen devotes considerable infinite in her diary to depicting this picture. Helen besides employs it to set up herself as a fully fledged creative person. She writes: “ I wanted to complete the image. It was one I had taken great strivings with, and I intended it to be my master-piece ” ( 150 ) . Helen views herself as an creative person making a chef-d’oeuvre. It is truly important that Arthur himself acknowledges her artistic ability, naming her “ the creative person ” ( 151 ) .
After her matrimony to Arthur, Helen has less clip for painting. She notes that “ the reading and answering of my letters and the way of family concerns afforded me ample employment for the forenoon ; after tiffin, I got my drawing, and from dinner boulder clay bedtime, I read ” ( 200 ) . It is truly clear that before her matrimony, the description of her pictures and the exchanges with Arthur over the pictures used to busy longer transitions of her diary ; nevertheless, after her matrimony those long transitions were abbreviated to shorter statements like “ I got my drawing. ” Even sometimes she used to jump a long period of clip by composing “ another twelvemonth is gone ” ( 232 ) .
This shows that, after her matrimony, Helen ‘s individuality as a married woman takes over her individuality as an creative person. In other words, portion of her individuality is concealed, and the lone mercantile establishment for her emotions is about blocked. Clearly plenty, one time she has assumed her place as a married woman, Helen seldom refers to herself as an creative person. The mentions to her graphics are really few ; other than the briefest reference of “ my books and pencil ” ( 235 ) . It is truly important that this goes on until she to the full recognizes the suffering state of affairs her matrimony has had on her. Recognizing that she may stop up losing her artistic accomplishment and even her individuality, Helen decides to get away her stultifying state of affairs and to sell her graphics in order to finance this flight.
Up to that point, Helen as an creative person about disappears. Her diary chiefly narrates her suffering experience as a married adult female with her crumpling duties as a married woman, a female parent and a housekeeper. A speedy expression at her journal entries during this period shows that she has nil that would put her apart from the typical domestic married woman who conforms to the socially-constructed image of the adult female perpetuated by the patriarchal political orientation. Helen reads, visits the hapless and interacts with her invitees, but there are no clear mentions to her as an creative person. In other words, Helen has embraced the nineteenth-century image of the adult female that instructs her to go to to everything except herself, her being and her true individuality. As Elizabeth Langland observes, this patriarchal political orientation “ endorsed public direction behind a facade of private retirement ” ( Nobody ‘s Angels 63 ) , coercing the adult female to be occupied with responsibilities far from lending to the building of her ain individuality.
Not merely are Helen ‘s individuality and artistic accomplishments repressed with her matrimony, but she besides comes to acknowledge her hubby ‘s true character as a violent and foolhardy adult male who embodies the rules of the patriarchal society. That is why her diary becomes dedicated to demoing the smothering behaviour of Arthur in footings of his inordinate imbibing, his verbal maltreatment of her, his insensitiveness to her feelings, and his extra-marital matter. In other words, the conditions of Helen ‘s life as a married adult female maintain her off from heightening her artistic accomplishments or even composing about them. That is because her duties as a married woman, female parent, and housekeeper erase her function and individuality as an creative person. She embraces the recognized societal function for adult females at the disbursal of her function as creative person. In this manner, Helen ‘s prowess helps Bronte concept matrimony as a hegemonic patriarchal rule that constitutes a strong obstruction against the procedure of achieving self-definition.
This position of matrimony is farther intensified as Bronte brings in an extra complications ; viz. the possibility of a 2nd matrimony to a adult male whose intervention of Helen is no less stamp downing than that of her first hubby. In this facet, Bronte employs Helen ‘s artistic accomplishments and aspirations to make the comparing between Arthur and Gilbert. This establishes art as a tool that facilitates Bronte ‘s crisp onslaught against patriarchal rules.
Helen ‘s function as an creative person and her artistic aspirations figure conspicuously as the major agencies of comparing between matrimony and remarriage, and it sets up the dimensions of the power dealingss between Helen, Arthur and Gilbert. The first facet of comparing between the two work forces emerges when Gilbert foremost intrudes into Helen ‘s life after her flight to Wildfell Hall. For illustration, Gilbert ‘s observation of Helen ‘s artistic accomplishments every bit good as her pictures reminds Helen of Arthur and the limitations he has imposed on her artistic aspirations that she has endured as a married woman. Interestingly plenty, both work forces rifle through Helen ‘s work violently. Gilbert rummages through Helen ‘s pictures and finds one of Arthur. Similarly, During Arthur ‘s wooing of Helen, he snatches up a picture of himself and subsequently goes on looking for others.
Arthur ‘s strikingly different attitude towards Helen ‘s prowess appears after matrimony and starts to impact Helen extensively. Before matrimony, Helen used to exercise a step of control over her art with Arthur. She has the right to possess and destruct the drawing. During this stage of their relationship, Arthur apparently allows Helen to hold this control, both as an creative person and as his future married woman. Legally, Helen may claim her pictures as her ain belongings. Indeed, Arthur does return the drawing to her. After her matrimony, nevertheless, such personal belongings becomes Arthur ‘s.
It is this common jurisprudence sing matrimonial belongings that countenances Arthur ‘s ownership of Helen ‘s pictures after matrimony. Although in nineteenth-century England there were some commissariats that would let married womans to set up separate belongings in trust for their usage, clearly no such trust is in topographic point for Helen. Therefore, as a married adult female, Helen does non bask any of the rights sing her graphics as she did prior to marriage. Subsequently, the matrimonial Torahs subsequently empower Arthur to destruct Helen ‘s pictures. In other words, Bronte constructs matrimony as a beginning of denial of artistic endowment, loss of the right of ownership, and want of the beginning of earning.
Merely like the instance with Arthur, Gilbert as a suer does non hold the legal rights to manage or possess Helen ‘s pictures, but he will hold full ownership of them one time he is her hubby. In fact, Gilbert ‘s overall attitude towards Helen ‘s prowess echoes that of Arthur and therefore defines him as a potentially controlling hubby. This clearly shows that remarriage to Gilbert may non keep any greater promise for Helen ‘s self-definition as an creative person than did her first matrimony. Gilbert ‘s handling of Helen ‘s prowess underscores Helen ‘s place as a adult female creative person and warns her against remarriage where such neglect for her ownership will be legal and where discourtesy for her artistic accomplishment will be normal.
Apparently, Helen ‘s pictures and her artistic accomplishments constitute the basic tool that helps Bronte develop the comparing that defines remarriage as a societal concept. It is through Helen ‘s prowess that Bronte creates graphic analogues between Gilbert and Arthur.
For Helen, so, remarriage does non stand for any chance for love, felicity or self-definition ; it is simply a societal responsibility that she has to execute as prescribed by the patriarchal society. This responsibility will finally ensue in losing the freedom to have and pattern her art and therefore losing the chance to make her ain individuality. Helen is partially cognizant of this danger on her individuality ; that is why when she foremost meets Gilbert, she has already redefined herself as a widow in order to recover the control of her art, and herself, which she has already lost in matrimony.
Helen ‘s determination to place herself as a widow benefits her in many ways. First, it enables her to liberate herself from the subjugation of her hubby without obtaining the impossible divorce. Second, her pick helps her circumvent some of the common Torahs blockading married womans ‘ rights at that clip. Within the matrimony, the personal belongings of the married woman is perfectly the hubby ‘s ; a widow, on the other manus, can repossess these ownerships if this does non run contrary to the hubby ‘s will. In other words, as a widow, Helen can now command her ain personal belongings such as her pictures and goes on in her personal and artistic aspirations.
In add-on to holding the right to have her personal belongings, Helen now can hold the right to have her kid as good. Little Arthur, who helps his female parent concept herself as a widow, is now the belongings of Helen as she identifies herself as a widow. In other words, Helen ‘s building of herself as a widow allows her to set up herself as fully fledged adult female with all the personal and artistic rights she aspires to hold. In this manner, Bronte emphasizes the distinguishable legal rights of widows opposed to married womans with Helen ‘s new function as widow creative person. Once Helen has escaped to Wildfell Hall, no 1 inquiries her rights, as a “ widow, ” to her kid, Arthur, or to her art.
Most significantly, Helen ‘s pictures as a widow creative person undermine the nineteenth-century prescribed image of the adult female and the restrictions imposed on them in the populace sphere. As the rubrics for these pictures suggest, Helen now paints for far more useful intents than self-expression of interior emotions ; she paints to last. This displacement in Helen ‘s function and her battle in gaining rewards, particularly to back up a kid, underscore its relation to remarriage. Helen is able to hold ownership of her graphics and her kid and accomplish self-realization as she has defined herself as an independent adult female, a widow creative person.
True, as a widow, Helen has the freedom to set up her ain individuality, have a ownership of her ain belongings and go a working-class creative person who can prosecute an business outside the domestic domain as she is no longer socially defined as an angel of the house. However, while Helen ‘s prowess helps her achieve her aspirations, it besides functions as a review of adult females ‘s place in society by conveying remarriage into consideration. Helen ‘s place as an artistic widow invites Gilbert ‘s involvement since she has besides constructed herself as eligible for remarriage, for re-entry into the really domestic universe which she has been endeavoring to liberate herself from. Her effort to hide the truth through her picture emphasizes her unstable matrimonial state of affairs as a married woman on the tally from one adult male and a widow pulling the attending of a 2nd suer. Ironically plenty, Helen ‘s pictures reveal the truth of her state of affairs even as she attempts to hide it: merely as her early study Lashkar-e-Taiba Arthur cognize of her love, so excessively the picture of Wildfell Hall, deceivingly labeled “ Fernley Manor, ” attests to her despairing function as widow.
Helen ‘s graphics frames the definition of her function as “ married woman ” and sets up extra comparings between Arthur and Gilbert in the novel. In Helen ‘s first matrimony, she utilizes her artistic accomplishments as a agency of repossessing some power that has been confiscated by her oppressive hubby. More exactly, she intends to paint in order to sell the pictures and fund her flight.
Helen manages to repossess her artistic endowment and graphics as her ain, off from her hubby ‘s ownership of her art, and of her. However, harmonizing to jurisprudence, Helen ‘s effort to dispose of what is lawfully Arthur ‘s belongings could be considered a fraud. As mentioned above, the jurisprudence gives Arthur the legal right to possess all her belongings and even to destruct the pictures and to take her money upon detecting her strategy. Helen ‘s is cognizant of this and that is why she asks Arthur “ have I attempted to victimize you? ” ( 351 ) . He tells her, “ you thought to dishonor me, did you, by running off and turning creative person, and back uping yourself by the labor of your custodies ” ( 351 ) . In queering her effort, Arthur now deprives her of the chance to specify herself as an creative person and redefines her as a subsidiary and dependent married woman. In this manner, Bronte illustrates how matrimony and common jurisprudence sing matrimonial belongings restrict adult females ‘s bureau, peculiarly with respect to their endowments.
In consequence, Arthur reduces Helen to a state of affairs worse than that before her effort ; she becomes a captive in her ain place. Arthur addresses her stating “ you ‘ll happen nil gone but your money, and the gems — and a few small trifles I thought it advisable to take into my ain ownership ” ( 351 ) . As an look of her rejection of this state of affairs, Helen states, “ I am tired out with his unfairness… . I am no angel, and my corruptness rises against it ” ( 256 ) . She looks “ frontward to a speedy emancipation ” ( 347 ) . There is a nexus that can be drawn between Helen ‘s linguistic communication and her prowess. Both come as a rejection of the domestic domain and its smothering influence on Helen as a adult female creative person. That is why when she realizes that her linguistic communication does non assist her in achieving her emancipation ; she decides to repossess herself by presenting as a widow creative person.
Helen ‘s prowess and pictures enable her to dispute her place as a dependent married woman and present herself as a widow who can hold full ownership of herself and her belongings. However, it is these same pictures that set up the turning attractive force between her and Gilbert, taking to her ruin through remarriage. Gilbert ‘s attendings and his involvement in converting her to remarry endanger to expose the delicate image of an independent widow creative person that Helen has drawn for herself. In other words, matrimony to Gilbert represents the failure of all her attempts to set up her artistic individuality.
In fact, from the beginning, there are many indicants demoing that this matrimony is non advisable for Helen. First, remarriage for Helen at this clip is lawfully impossible. Second, remarriage to Gilbert has the possible to re-establish the restrictive redefinition of widow as married woman instead than creative person. Additionally, Helen ‘s pictures enhance the comparings between Gilbert and Arthur in footings of their attitude to her artistic accomplishments, which makes Gilbert and remarriage less than desirable. Both use the pictures as portion of their wooing and this reinforces a connexion between them. For illustration, by inquiring Helen about her rubric of “ Fernley Manor, ” Gilbert inadvertently alludes to the world of Helen ‘s position as at large married woman and her fraud and reminds her of Arthur ‘s accusal of Helen ‘s effort to “ dishonor ” him.
Gilbert, on his portion, besides realizes that there are many obstructions against his matrimony to Helen. He knows from Helen ‘s diaries that she is still married. He is besides cognizant that she is immune to his attendings. Before reading Helen ‘s diary, he wonders about her extra love for her first hubby. However, he understands that her antipathy for remarriage is due non to love for Arthur, but due to his atrocious intervention of her. This really helps Gilbert dismiss Helen ‘s feelings, merely like Arthur did. Gilbert writes: “ I attributed it, non so much to any disfavor of my individual, as to some absolute declaration against a 2nd matrimony formed prior to the clip of our familiarity ” ( 67 ) . In malice of all these obstructions, Gilbert and Helen ‘s rapprochement at Staningley Hall after Arthur ‘s decease is full with emotion. Their exchange over the rose, which Helen must explicate “ was an emblem of my bosom ” ( 466 ) , gives rise to emotions of joy and fervent desire in both of them.
Ironically, he stands as a perfect illustration of the individual he wished to decease. Gilbert really echoes Arthur ‘s attitude to a great extent in both linguistic communication and behaviour. Both work forces employ a linguistic communication that is fraught with genitives, underpinning their belief that they own both Helen and her belongings. Arthur claims Helen as his “ angel monitress ” and her pictures as his ain. Similarly, Gilbert calls her “ My favorite angel — my ain Helen ” ( 467 ) and exclaims that “ you will be mine ” ( 467 ) . If Gilbert ‘s linguistic communication mimics Arthur ‘s, his behaviour will non be any different.
Consequently, Helen loses the artistic freedom that she has been eager to accomplish when she left Arthur. Once she is married woman once more, Helen has given up ownership of her pictures. Under common jurisprudence, Helen ‘s pictures are no longer her ain ; they are Gilbert ‘s. As a hubby, Gilbert now has the freedoms and legal protection to presume his function with full ownership of Helen and her prowess. He may even, like Arthur, control Helen ‘s entree to her graphics ; which completes the comparing between the first hubby and the 2nd hubby.
A critical reading of the stoping proves a different position. Bronte ne’er intends to abandon her review of the hegemonic patriarchal system. Rather, she veils it, bordering Helen ‘s narrative within Gilbert ‘s missive to Halford.
Gilbert ‘s missive is imbued with some insinuations that authenticate his image that has been drawn through the novel. First, it is truly important that Gilbert ends the missive by adverting Halford and Rose ‘s at hand visit: “ the clip of your one-year visit draws near, when you must go forth your dusty, smoky, noisy, laboring, endeavoring metropolis for a season of inspiring relaxation and societal retirement with us ” ( 471 ) . This is a clear nexus to Helen ‘s ordeal with Arthur ‘s soirees. These visits, merely like Arthur ‘s soirees, cast Helen into the function of hostess. Just like letter-writing and other domestic responsibilities kept her from her picture in her first matrimony, hosting Gilbert ‘s invitees will certainly make the same in this 2nd matrimony.
Furthermore, Gilbert ‘s mentioning of “ the promising immature scions that are turning up about us ” ( 471 ) is important. With small Arthur now married to Helen Hattersley, it can be said that these “ scions ” are Helen and Gilbert ‘s kids. This shows that small Arthur has non been the lone kid necessitating Helen ‘s attending during her old ages of matrimony to Gilbert, Now that Helen has more than one little kid to look after, it is sensible to reason that her function as an creative person has been wholly abolished and her function as married woman and female parent has become the most overriding function. In this sense, Gilbert ‘s missive authenticates his image as a patriarch and proves his negative attitude towards, and carelessness of, Helen ‘s artistic accomplishments.
In a nutshell, Helen ‘s prowess and pictures are employed to ease Bronte ‘s affecting onslaught against the male-dominated universe as represented by Arthur and Gilbert. In add-on to sing Helen ‘s pictures as a signifier of look of her inner ego, Helen ‘s prowess helps pulling links and set uping similarities between these two work forces and shows how patriarchy inherently annihilates adult females ‘s artistic endowment. In this sense, it can be said that Bronte, with her narrative acumen, dextrously promulgates her feminist subject from within Helen ‘s pictures. Helen ‘s graphics and her battle to set up her artistic individuality aid Bronte frame The Tenant of Wildfell Hall as a work that uncovers the atrociousnesss of the patriarchal political orientation and chastise the restrictions it imposes on adult females ‘s artistic chances.
This attack of analyzing Helen ‘s prowess is non meant for the mere intent of a close reading of the text. As mentioned above, non merely does this manner of reading Helen ‘s artistic accomplishments contribute to understanding Bronte ‘s feminist statement in the novel, it besides helps in appreciating the significance of art and graphics as employed by nineteenth-century adult females authors in general. Women ‘s prowess is non simply an mercantile establishment for their pent-up emotions. As shown in Bronte ‘s text, adult females ‘s artistic aspiration can work both thematically and technically. On the thematic degree, it serves as a method of self-establishment and a manner of achieving emancipation. Technically talking, it is a tool that is employed by the adult female author to ease her review of the hegemonic patriarchal system. All in all, it contributes to understanding the manner nineteenth-century adult females authors constructed their female characters in general and the adult female creative person in peculiar.
