Booked All Week

and next week, too

Between Women: Friendship, Desire, and Marriage in Victorian England, by Sharon Marcus

with 10 comments

I first became interested in this book when I saw Sharon Marcus speak at a conference last year on “The Body and The State” (or something like that). As soon as she started speaking, I knew I had to read this book. She said that it was written “in conversation” with Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire, which was published in the ’80’s and is also on my wish list. It was the perfect follow-up to The Invention of Heterosexuality by Jonathan Ned Katz as it can almost serve as a case study in support of his larger thesis.

Marcus, whose academic background is primarily in literature, expertly weaves together analyses of novels, life-writings, fashion plates, and more to get at the heart of women’s relationships, both sexual and asexual, in Victorian England. Marcus distinguishes between the erotic and the sexual (locating the sexual within the wider context of eroticism) and argues that because the specific binary heterosexual/homosexual understanding of sexuality we rely on now did not exist as such in Victorian England, homoeroticism among women was widely accepted as constitutive of normative femininity and did not in itself signify “deviance”. “Precisely because Victorians saw lesbian sex almost nowhere,” she writes, “they could embrace erotic desire between women almost everywhere” (p. 113). It was, in fact, encouraged, as the virtues that were understood to flourish within close female friendships, like sympathy and charity, were thought to aid women in fulfilling their duties as devoted wives and mothers. Close friendships were of central importance to women, both married and unmarried, and were expected to strengthen traditional gender roles.

One of Marcus’s most striking observations was about the Victorian marriage plot. Rather than merely the vehicle through which heterosexual marriage is achieved, female relationships are often central to Victorian courtship narratives. Marcus argues that contemporary readings of these stories may be skewed too far in favor of the heterosexual outcome, obscuring the ways in which women sought to become closer to one another through helping to secure husbands–and happiness–for their friends. She looks at Shirley by Charlotte Bronte and Aurora Leigh by Elizabeth Barret Browning, for example, and finds that the marriages that take place at the end of each novel are both the “cause and effect” of female friendship. Conversely, and by no coincidence, the protagonist of Charlotte Bronte’s Villete, Lucy Snowe, is disdainful of women’s company and remains both friendless and unmarried at the end of the novel. These ideas really changed the way I think about the Victorian literature I’ve read, and will definitely influence my reading of such novels in the future!

Female friendship also gave women outlets for expressing themselves in ways they couldn’t with men; for example, through competition and appreciation of feminine beauty. Marcus looks at fashion plates–which were like early fashion advertisements–and determines that Victorian women were great consumers and objectifiers of femininity. Fashion plates were popular collectible items amongst women who eagerly devoured imagery of all things feminine. This is a case in which women employed a “female gaze” to look upon and obtain visual pleasure from each other. Many of the images themselves, which are re-produced in the book, are overtly sensual and suggestive of desire. I was reminded a lot of women’s magazines today, which I think often serve a similar visual function even if all the textual focus is on men.

Marcus even extends her understanding of eroticism to the family, which made me vaguely uncomfortable, though apparently she’s not the first to do so (she cites Foucault). She discusses the ways in which women exerted power over one another and uses mother-dauther relationships as an example. Corporal punishment was a hot topic of the day, and women debated endlessly about how to discipline their daughters. There was a lot of focus on dressing and undressing them, with the infliction of humiliation as a central concern. Many women expressed pleasure in the ability to exert force on their daughters and, interestingly, the details that came out in these widely held conversations were also popular themes of that era’s pornography. At the same time girls, too, were seen to enact the same dominating urges on their dolls that they experienced from their mothers. Dolls, like fashion plates, became intensely popular items of commodified femininity desired and consumed by women and girls.

At the same time, though, Marcus argues against the “lesbian continuum” theory that all female relationships reside on a spectrum of sexual ambiguity. Female couples, and even marriages, were largely known and mostly accepted. Of course, there is always some degree of impossibility in determining whether or not specific relationships were ever engaged sexually or not; in general, though, Victorians were quite able to distinguish between women who were friends and women who were lovers. Female couples behaved around others as male-female couples did: instead of lavishing affection on one another as friends would, they kept a polite physical distance. If living together in marriage, they signified the status of their relationship by buying and sharing pets. They constructed “ad hoc legal structures” which allowed them to share material resources and helped influence the feminist idea of marriage as a social, contractual agreement which could be modified and rescinded, giving women more agency within marriage. She cites many well-known couples who lived this way in what look a lot like domestic partnerships do now, and were met with general respect.

This book was very academic. While reading the introduction, I was worried that a lot of it would go right over my head. It got easier to follow, though, and I think that reading The Invention of Heterosexuality right before this provided the right conceptual tools with which to tackle this book. Marcus is an impressive thinker, and I really appreciated the wide variety of resources she was able to incorporate. The question of women’s relationships in Victorian England is huge and complex, but Marcus is very thorough, so whatever generalizations appear in this post are likely mine. Her close readings of female relationships that drive Great Expectations and other novels will probably be the most interesting to fellow book bloggers and I can almost guarantee they will change the way you read these books, but the whole thing is really fascinating and highly recommended!

Written by Emily Jane

November 6, 2011 at 6:55 am

Posted in Non-fiction

Tagged with ,

10 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I WANT THIS BOOK SO BADLY. It’s going straight on my Christmas list. Thank you so much for bringing it to my attention, and also for the excellent review!


    November 6, 2011 at 10:31 am

    • Hehe, you are more than welcome. That’s exactly what I thought when I first heard about it too. Hope you get it, would love to hear what you think!

      Emily Jane

      November 6, 2011 at 5:50 pm

  2. Sounds fascinating! I love Victorian literature, with all its overblown craziness, and I am always up for being told a different way to read those books. 😀


    November 6, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    • Me too Jenny! And Marcus is truly insightful on that front (and others). I think my reading of Victorian literature will be much deeper now!

      Emily Jane

      November 6, 2011 at 5:54 pm

  3. Sounds like a really interesting book Emily and you are right, definitely goes with your last read well. I’ll have to look out for both of them.


    November 7, 2011 at 5:39 pm

  4. It is, Amy! I think you would enjoy them both, too 🙂

    Emily Jane

    November 7, 2011 at 6:58 pm

  5. Fantastic review, which has made me want to read a book that has been languishing on my shelves for ages. I bought it in a university library sale a while ago, along with loads of other interesting sounding books about feminism and sexuality. A huge boatload of books had been donated that the library already had copies of, and so they sold the duplicates off to staff at £1 a book. A £1! I got loads, and this was one of them. Now I’ll definitely have to read it.


    November 10, 2011 at 9:32 am

    • Thanks Victoria! Library sales are great, sounds like you hit the jackpot! I hope you find this one as engrossing as I did 🙂

      Emily Jane

      November 10, 2011 at 3:18 pm

  6. They signified the status of their relationship by buying and sharing pets??? This is awesome.

    Also, so many books like this (J. Halberstam’s books are a great example) have SUPER HARD intros, but then the rest of the book is very readable. It’s almost like they’re DARING you to get through the intro and into the easier stuff. I kind of love that.

    Have you read/heard of Emma Donnoghue’s book from last year, Inseperable? It discusses similar topics but with a solid focus on literature.


    November 14, 2011 at 1:43 am

    • Yes, and not only that, but popular married women’s pet’s names were often clearly innuendo…like “Bushie”. *giggle* Seriously!

      Good to know about Halberstam…I haven’t read her yet but would really like to. I’ll keep that in mind for when I start to worry during her introductions 🙂

      And I haven’t heard of Inseperable before, but it sounds great! Thanks so much for mentioning it!

      Emily Jane

      November 16, 2011 at 3:27 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: