THE COQUETTE OXFORD PAPERBACKS怎么样

THE COQUETTE OXFORD PAPERBACKS怎么样
THE COQUETTE OXFORD PAPERBACKS怎么样

THE COQUETTE OXFORD PAPERBACKS怎么样
文章写给未来的自己顺便造福一下全人类. Hidden in the back-and-forth letters from the main characters in The Coquette, the social concerns of marriage inwardly boosts the progress of the story and even influences the personal life of the main characters in the book. Furthermore, this epistolary novella pointed out the public concern of men and women’s duty of marriage under the social hierarchy. To be more specific, the social preoccupation of duty where husbands take charge of instructing and obliging their wives to behave obediently and dependently, influences the characters. The preoccupation of public duty influences Eliza’s private desire for a companion instead of a guardian in regards to marriage. The pressure to fulfill the social obligation also influences Major Sanford to escape duty and love in his marital choice. Through both character’s inner conflict regarding duty and fancy, the author concludes that it is always better to follow duty rather than to pursue fancy. The social preoccupation of duty, which requires women to be obedient and dependent to their husband, conflicted with Eliza’s personal pursuit of happiness and thus stimulated her willingness to be engaged to Mr. Haly. In the first letter she wrote to her friend Lucy after her fiancée’s death, Eliza wrote: “Both nature and education had instilled into my mind an implicit obedience to the will and desires of my parent. To them, of course, I sacrificed my fancy in this affair.” (5) Such a sentence from Eliza at the beginning of the novel, indicating her inner contradiction when engaged with Mr. Haly, reflected Eliza’s entanglement in mind. In the former sentence, the word “nature”, is explained by OED as “an unmanufactured action”, which indicates Eliza’s preoccupation in obeying her parents’ choice for her own marriage. Such nature of obedience comes from Eliza’s own internal preference. Moreover, the use of word “education”, which from OED explained as “the culture or development of personal knowledge or understanding, growth of character, moral and social qualities” is an intellectual instruction gained from external environment. The word “education” indicates that the public opinion had already long existed in Eliza’s mind. For her “education”, marrying Mr. Haly, the man her parent chose for her, is the right and reasonable decision that she should obey. On the contrary, what confronted with her “education” is the word “fancy”, which she “sacrificed in this affair” because of duty. From the OED, “fancy” means “individual taste and inclination”, which indicates she had her own opinion towards the pursuit of happiness. However, when she “sacrificed her fancy” for the “education”, she used the word “obedience”, which the dictionary explained as “submission to the rule and compliance of a command”. This word suggested Eliza was forced to obey the rules and shackles of social preoccupation. As a result, when Eliza tried to pursuit her own “fancy”, her education and nature which she gained from the social background contradicted with her own will. In consequence, when Mr. Haly died, she felt “pleasure on leaving her paternal roof”(5) because she no longer needed to obey those duties and was able to pursue for her own fancy. This description shows that Eliza’s obedience to her “education”, her preoccupation with duty, controls her action although she desires the freedom in making her own choices. Eliza’s inner conflict was temporarily relieved as a result of Mr. Haly’s death. Eliza’s happiness only lasted until there was another man on the horizon. When Mr. Boyer, an honorable clergyman, shows up in Eliza’s life, she found that her “fancy” needed to be sacrificed again for the social duty if she engaged with him. In the letter from Eliza to her mother, “there are duties arising from the station, which I fear I should not be able to fulfill.” (39) She complains about Mr. Boyer’s seriousness towards life, which she thinks will control her to follow the conservative rule of married women in the future. And such serious restraints are something she is not able to obey. Instead, Eliza pointed out her idea that she wants to find her future partner as “pleasing in their persons” (39). In an attempt to convince Eliza to accept Mr. Boyer, Mrs. Wharton replied to her: “Are we not all links in the great chain of society, some more, some less important; but each upheld by others, throughout the confederated whole? In whatever situation we are placed, our greater or less degree of happiness must be derived from ourselves. Happiness is in a great measure the result of our own disposition and actions.” (41) Here Mrs. Wharton tells Eliza that instead of pursuing personal pleasure, Eliza has to look into her happiness in relation to the view and regulation of the society. Moreover, true happiness comes from behave and act properly in the society. The words “disposition and actions”, which OED explained as “inclination or tendency and “conduct” represent her mother’s idea of how Eliza should behave in the society. Such description matches the word “duty” in the second paragraph because they both imply the social obligation in making actions and decisions. On the other hand, “happiness”, meaning “successful or felicitous aptitude” in OED, matches Eliza’s use of word “fancy” as they both imply their personal pursuit of pleasure. Mrs. Wharton thinks that Eliza is not free to follow her own individual desires and externally pursue their own vision of happiness; she should find happiness through obeying societal duty. For Eliza’s mother who represented the society’s attitude, the marriage relationship of a couple means a lot to the society. In the sentence she tried to convince Eliza that her “fancy” and “happiness” should be linked to her obedience to her “disposition” and “duty” of society. The word “chain” in the beginning of the paragraph emphasizes her mother’s opinion of how society is linked to the individual by duty. Women in the society, part of a chain, need to regulate their behavior and conduct under the rules, which is to get married as a social destiny and be obedient and dependent to them. Instead of thinking about her own “fancy”, her mum wanted her to play her part in that chain, marry a responsible man to be her guardian, thus she will feel the happiness by following the rule. From the two examples above, as a result, the public concern of duty in marriage and Eliza’s own dream of fancy did conflict with each other in this novel and result in Eliza’s hesitation of engaging with her old fiancée Mr. Haly and the new candidate Mr. Boyer. The public opinion towards marriage relationship not only became a constraint for women at that period of time, but also requires men to follow their duty to guide and take in charge of their wives. The duty of marriage not only confronted with Eliza’s own view of marriage, but also conflicted with Major Sanford’s own “fancy”, which resulted in his different decision in future partner. When Major Sanford wrote to his friend about whether he would marry Eliza, he said: “But it will never do. If my fortune, or hers were better, I would risk a union; but as they are, no idea of the kind can be admitted.” (35) The word “risk” here indicates that Major Sanford will intend to overcome the danger of impoverishment to get married with Eliza if one of them got some fortune. Moreover, it also shows that money is the first factor that Major Sanford concerned about when choosing the future partner, though in his fancy, he would like to marry Eliza. Such behavior pointed out men’s duty in the marriage. They are in charge of all the conduct and living of their wives, including their fortune. Major Sanford, however, the outliers of such discipline, got married only in pursuit of the fortune from his future wife, while meantime pursue his own “fancy” to have affair with various women. In action of seducing women, he enjoyed his own happiness without performing the duty he should obey to those women who is “fallen” to the society. Such schemes, which encourage women to pursue their temporary happiness instead of obeying their social destiny, become a danger of society. To the opposite, marriage becomes a safe choice for the society. “It is the glory of the marriage state, she rejoined, to refine, by circumscribing our enjoyments. Here we can response in safety” From this sentence from Mrs. Richman we can see that by following the duty of marriage, women will be in the status of “safety”, which OED explains as “the state of being protected from or guarded against hurt or injury”. Under the social duty of marriage which women followed their husbands obediently and dependently, men protected women from being mental and physical damaged. Such public rule not only secure women’s safety, but also enhance the safety of the society. As a result, when Major Sanford, the libertine appeared as a candidate for marriage, received strongly rejected and disdained by the society of women. In the letter of Lucy wrote to Eliza, she says “I took upon the vicious habits, and abandoned character of Major Sanford, to have more pernicious effects on society, than the perpetrations of the robber and assassin.” (63) The words “vicious” and “pernicious”, which mean “contrary to moral principles” and “extremely severe and harmful”, provided Lucy’s direct resentment towards such men and concerns about the harm and danger to women and society. Instead of encouraging women to live according to social norms, Major Sanford broke this obligation and stimulated women to pursue the temporary happiness, which totally affected social order. As a result, though Major Sanford satisfied Eliza’s aspiration of happiness, the social opinion pushes Eliza to accept Mr. Boyer, the man of worth and tries to prevent her from being fallen. Moreover, public concern, which Major Sanford escapes to undertake the duty, pushes him choosing not marrying Eliza. The influence of Eliza and Sanford’s personal choice of marriage, at the end of the book, the author gave the message that it is better to follow duty instead of pursuing fancy. According to Eliza, “May my unhappy story serve a beacon to warn the American fair of the dangerous tendency and destructive consequences of associating with men of your character, of destroying their time, and risking their reputation but the practice of coquetry and its attendant follies!” (159) From the word “warn” we could see Eliza’s realization of Sanford’s scheme and her destruction of her own “fancy”. Also as she wrote, she used “dangerous”, “destructive” and “destroying” to describe her outcome not following her duty, which really urgently “warned” the society. Moreover, after Eliza died Lucy exclaimed such sentence: “From the melancholy story of Eliza Wharton, let the American fair learn to reject with disdain every insinuation derogatory to their true dignity and honor.”(168) Here the use of the word “derogatory” pointed out the conduct of Major Sanford, who disobeyed the duty of men towards marriage. By contrasting the two sentences, the author shows the importance of obedience of social obligation and the terrible outcome of ignoring it to the pursuit of fancy. The personal story of Eliza highlights the society’s way in controlling women’s destiny of obedience and men’s power and duty in the marriage. The Coquette in all combined the individual story and the social concern together by instilling the judges and rules of the society into the main character’s social preoccupation. By showing the conflicts of the public duty and private desire towards marriage, enhancing the importance of being obedient to the social rule, the author pointed out it is better to follow the duty instead of fancy. Works Cited Foster, Hannah Webster, and Cathy N. Davidson. The Coquette. New York: Oxford UP, 1986. Print.