In both novels, the authors explore the theme of confinement, portraying it as significant when considering how and to what extent social conventions are harmful in their influence on morality. In, majority of the characters are restricted with their own self-imposed rules on behaviour. Failure to comply would result in ostracization. Wharton conveys this imprisonment through metaphorical language and satire through the use of complex sentences structures, displaying the degree of irrationality of conformity within these social interactions: Wharton presents each of Lily’s actions as tactical and in excruciating detail. Combined with language that creates the impression she does this to survive (highlighting the importance) with the noun and the verb, the complexity of the sentence structure causes the description of her behaviour to emphasize the great amount of thought and effort it takes to confine oneself this way, but also how it is necessary in this social circle. Wharton swathes Lily’s behaviour in self-interest defining the time spent among other socialites to be purely transactional, lacking the sincerity and genuine connection or care an empathetic person would possess. However, Wharton’s presentation of Lily’s own imprisonment can be interpreted, through a feminist viewpoint, as mostly rooted in the societal misogyny – her lack of security being caused by the path in marriage and money she must take as a woman. Thus, confinement hinders the female experience, alongside morality, and is presented by Wharton as a result of these detrimental social rules. It can be argued that, the character Lawrence Selden (considered to be on the out-skirts of the ‘upper-crust’) is the least confined due to his lower-class; opposing the expectations of the freedom associated with material wealth. The exploration of social determinism through the contrast Wharton creates between the lifestyle of the protagonist and her love interest Selden, illustrates the fragility and absurdity of the class system and how it greatly affects social interaction and forming connection, therefore rendering morality as insubstantial within society.
In comparison, Wilde demonstrates the consequences of the manacles of social confinement through Dorian’s decadent and murderous lifestyle – its key element being its duality and also through the constant conflict between aestheticism and morality. Wilde greatly exaggerates the consequences of the repression of desires- Lord Henry, Wilde builds a tone of desperation through repetition of the nouns and, conveying the mental instability associated with confinement. This creates a hell-like image of decadence and excess but also highlights duality as a necessity, a rejected form of human nature; thus, conveying the idea in an alarming manner that keeping these desires controlled leads to confinement through internal moral conflict. This is further emphasized by the effect of repetition on Lord Henry’s speech, it causes Wilde’s choice of sentence structure to appear with a sense of fluidity, conveying duality as natural. The character of Lord Henry can be perceived as a symbol of the dual lifestyle, as an inner voice of temptation, dragging Dorian into moral decay for his own interest, in the name of ‘freedom’ and pleasure. This progresses into his soul deteriorating till it is completely confined to the portrait. Through this, Wilde personifies the upper-class, dual lifestyle that many Victorian ‘gentlemen’ partook in as a form of escapism from the social pressures, regulations and repressive attitudes of the Victorian era. Similarly to the ‘upper-crust’ of the House of Mirth, one’s reputation could secure or destroy any opportunities and it ultimately determined the quality of life – for example, being wealthy with a bad reputation was known to be near impossible. Victorian society had a nature of gossip, so the maintenance of appearances (of all kinds, as discussed previously) held high importance. Overall, Wilde critiques the social repressiveness of Victorian society, presenting this factor as a hinderance despite the belief that it breeds good morals.
The authors use symbolism through the subversion of gender roles to convey the hidden conflict of the duality of morality, presenting it as ingenuine and thus dependent on social roles. Both writers incorporate illustrations of gender roles in a light that subverts them and explores their traditions – the subversion of these attitudes was commonly associated with lack of morality. Oscar Wilde explores masculinity and the rejection of traditional ideas of marriage in. Marriage is dismissed as Lord Henry teaches Dorian the lack of importance these relationships hold – Wilde uses paradoxical language to emphasize Henry’s devil-like qualities, reminiscent of the biblical description of the devil’s persuasions and ‘half-truths’:, alongside Henry’s distaste for women, centering the novel around the male characters: ‘In addition, Wilde’s description of women as aligns with the theory of the male gaze, a woman’s identity being rooted in her appeal to men, which Lord Henry rejects. The centering of the male characters and Lord Henry’s dismissal of heteronormative relationships, creates possible homosexual undertones within the novel and subverts gender roles; homosexuality being associated with immorality, symbolizing morality’s duality. Wilde further subverts ideas of what was deemed acceptable in romance during the Victorian era: The technique of paradox conveys the ingenuine qualities of societal moral standards – true passion is illustrated as breaking the societal standards that interlink with morality. To an extent, this both aligns and contrasts typical Victorian views on marriage. People married most often for money and status, very rarely for love. Arguably, the lack of passion in these relationships is what caused many upper-class men to also see prostitutes. Through the dialogue on morality between Dorian and Lord Henry, Wilde conveys the root causes of immorality in the societal mindset of the Victorians. Apart from the little presentation of women in the novel (Sibyl Vane and Lord Henry’s wife), the novel mainly focuses on the male characters’ admiration for Dorian. These homoerotic undertones and unconventional gender roles build an atmosphere that would connote immorality to a typical Victorian reader, thus symbolizing the duality of morality.
Wharton subverts gender roles in ‘The House of Mirth’ through use of symbolism and irony to convey a conflict between the conventions of them. She introduces Lily’s questioning of the established gender roles from chapter one (highlighting the significance of this): Wharton’s use of irony in and emphasizes both Lily’s awareness and disapproval of female gender roles, conveying her own criticisms of the limitations these roles pose on women. The atypicality of Lily’s opinions in the early 20th century and the contrast between them and her efforts to appeal to every man in the novel, symbolises a conflict between the conventions, thus Wharton shedding light on another unrealistic societal expectation. Lily symbolises this critique and her conflicting efforts to conform is interpreted in this way by critic Elaman-Garner: . Marriage was a restricting element in society, it determined the fate of men and women. Both novels were written during a time where marriage was a tool for economic security. This is evident in as Lily turns down every man, implying everlasting unsatisfaction as subconsciously she would be only satisfied with Selden. Wharton presents her outlook as partly distorted, favoring wealth over true love, despite knowing that this is unsatisfying. Lily’s inner conflict mimics the duality of these expectations in wider society as atypically, women are presented in the novel to have affairs with men, especially those who are of lower material status – when a typical presentation would be male dominance over affairs and relationships. Similarly, to , ‘correct’ adherence to the established gender roles typically connotes a sound moral attitude, therefore interlinking Wharton’s presentation of the duality of these gender roles, with the duality of morality. This interlink can be supported by the critical interpretation of N. Smith: The promotion of the idea that wealth holds great power alongside appearances and hence the importance of marriage for women is therefore challenged and conveyed as an ingenuine tradition in society. This societal moral duality; is conveyed by the authors to demonstrate the overall instability of societal expectations and how they are constantly changing, presenting society overall as corrupt.
To conclude, it can ultimately be argued that society is presented by Wharton and Wilde to be corrupt. It can be categorized as such due to the portrayal of its shifting moral duality and confining social expectations – therefore requiring the characters to create a façade that leads to a hamartia. Both protagonists can be viewed as victims to the unattainable standards of society, confined by the strict social regulations and a necessary, rigorous maintenance of outward appearance. Wharton and Wilde utilize their downfall to symbolize society’s instability, demonstrating the dependance of morality on society through their decline. Therefore, supporting the contention. However, initially they may both seem to be at fault for their downfall – underlining a comparison between the protagonist’s moral compass and societal influences. Dorian’s descent into wickedness manifests into his death. Whilst striving for stability both socially and economically, Lily’s rejection of male proposals reflects feelings of confinement and unsatisfaction of her assigned gender role, being forced to place her real lover out of reach. This internal conflict between her desires, translates to her struggle to conform, possibly contributing to her end. Both authors utilize the protagonists’ inner conflict to symbolize the unattainability of society’s ideal. Yet, contrastingly, Wilde illustrates his critiques through metaphorical imagery of the supernatural. Arguably, Dorian’s wish to trade in his soul for eternal youth was not intended to such a great extent. He only realized how valued his beauty is and the negativity associated with its transience due to societal influence; symbolized by Lord Henry’s own absence of moral judgement. Thus, it can be questioned if Dorian’s character development would differ without these influences. In contrast, Wharton’s use of symbolism is conveyed through satirical interactions between the characters. But Similarly, both writers emphasize their critique through exaggeration. Inspired by the (popular at the time) ‘Novel of manners’ genre, a prominent influence: Jane Austen’s, Wharton aimed to convey the difficulties of conformity in an American setting, atypical of the genre as there were no outlined classes or aristocracy. However, she adapted this through the creation of the novel’s social circle, Lily Bart’s downfall, providing a realist element that challenges the typical presentation of the place of morality in society. Wharton believed the genre lacked the dark presentation of the real consequences of not marrying or running out of money, as these novels typically ended with a happy marriage or death from childbirth. Therefore, both authors highlight the moral-void that the duplicity and instability of society constructs.
2021-11-7-1636292026