There is something about Edgeworth that bothers me and I cannot quite put my finger on it. I know that Edgeworth has been deemed some kind of hero or pioneer or success of the Irish narrative, but I believe Rackrent can be viewed on a larger scale as a piece of elitist propaganda. In the case of Rackrent, the novel is less about racial fears and stereotypes, and more about the fear of those not worthy of the throne (or self-rule) taking over. There are two passages in Egenolf’s essay that remind me of this-
1. “Edgeworth felt quite anxious about her family’s relations with the native Irish and about the possibility of a peasant uprising… ‘that whilst our terrified neighbors see nightly vision of massacres, we sleep with out doors and windows unbarred. I must observe, though, that is it only those doors and windows which have neither bolts not bars we leave unbarred’” (849). This quote is taken from correspondence with Edgeworth’s Aunt Ruxton. In her letter, Edgeworth explains that they wished their doors and windows weren’t unbarred and she has fear of a potential uprising.
2. “The form of Castle Rackrent thus imitates the type of government the Edgeworths were advocating for the Irish-rational and fair Anglo-Irish land ownership which would benevolently guide the native peasants and commercially manage the land. Although the Edgeworths consistently supported education for all classes, Maria believed that the lower classes should not partake in governing” (851). This idea is further explained by Edgeworth, “But the point still to be proved, still to be enquired into, is whether the majority of numbers necessarily includes the majority of sense, judgment, moral feeling, and all that should form the legislative and governing preponderance in any nation” (851).
What a *loaded* statement!
I get the parallel Egenolf was making to “blackface” and dialect, and that’s not quite the direction I want to go in… rather I think for Edgeworth’s clear distain of peasants she maybe felt like she had to over-exaggerate people, places, and situations of Ireland. By further perpetuating the stereotypes the British had over the Irish, fear of the lower class would remain, and a true regime takeover not possible. At the same time, wanting to show an act of solidarity for the Irish (as a way to protect her from harm) she adds the voice of the Editor, thereby creating a balance between both parties.
I have a feeling I’m not truly conveying what I mean… What I’m trying to say about Edgeworth’s fake alliance with the Irish lower class is similar to how charities for the poor were run in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Much of the upper class felt they had a civic responsibility to pity and support people at a disadvantage. Charity was more for the social benefit of that wealthy person- “Oh, look at how great they are, giving time and money to that poor good for nothing person!” rather than a true desire to help economically disadvantaged persons.
Essentially, I think Maria Edgeworth was a classist, pushing her father’s agenda. She made fun of the Irish (in a tongue in cheek kind of way) to demonstrate they weren’t good enough to be anything but farmers and peasants serving a landlord or master. It’s like the idea of making something look bad on purpose, or making something look bad, to make you look good. (Last idea was started in Jason’s blog.) Now, if what I believe about Maria Edgeworth being a British snob, why is she considered an authority in Irish Literature?
Drea-
ReplyDeleteYou bring up so many interesting points. I too think I've changed my mind at least a dozen times on what I think Edgeworth is really trying to say and do.
You stated, "rather I think for Edgeworth’s clear distain of peasants she maybe felt like she had to over-exaggerate people, places, and situations of Ireland. By further perpetuating the stereotypes the British had over the Irish, fear of the lower class would remain, and a true regime takeover not possible. At the same time, wanting to show an act of solidarity for the Irish (as a way to protect her from harm) she adds the voice of the Editor, thereby creating a balance between both parties." I find this very interesting because it's a thought similar to one of my many "back and forth" opinions. At one point I was thinking that it's almost like Edgeworth was trying to "play" both sides in order to get the best of both worlds?
In Edgeworth's quote from Egenolf's article, “But the point still to be proved, still to be enquired into, is whether the majority of numbers necessarily includes the majority of sense, judgment, moral feeling, and all that should form the legislative and governing preponderance in any nation”. I'm not sure you can get more hypocritical than saying you support education for all classes while turning around as essentially stating that despite an education, the lower class likely lacks sense, judgment, and morals. Yikes!
As for you last question, I've been wondering the same thing myself. How does one of Anglo-Irish background who clearly has firm beliefs about native Irish "staying beneath her" become an authority in Irish literature????
TD-
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on your blog post and even agree further with you on your blog title! I also am finding it difficult to fully extract the meaning of the story just from reading the text, so I find myself reading it over and over again until it starts to mean something. That, well, with extensive internet research on Maria, Susan, and Ireland itself.
I have to say that I also believe that Edgeworth is just strange in a way that I can’t quite put my finger on either. It’s like, her stories seem upbeat and interesting (well, in my perspective) but when other, more experienced people criticize and read Rackrent, like Egenolf, I seem to see through their eyes and therefore I see what they mean when they criticize. I can agree with you that Edgeworth’s Rackrent involves discriminating misinformation or as you called it, elitist propaganda.
I also completely agree with you on what you wrote about “blackface” and dialect and how Edgeworth didn’t necessarily use the sole definition of those two things in her story, but yes, rather over-exaggerate life in Ireland and perhaps skew it a bit (or a lot!) She seems to me like she wanted to tell history as she saw it, like blackface minstrelsy, just without racist intentions and instead with authority and using lots and lots of satirical references to describe the people of Ireland. At least, that’s what I get from it. Then again everyone has different perspectives on things.
Hi Drea,
ReplyDeleteFirst, I would just like to commend you for doing research on Maria Edgeworth. I found the quote that says, “Edgeworth felt quite anxious about her family’s relations with the native Irish and about the possibility of a peasant uprising” quite interesting. And the other quote, “Although the Edgeworth’s consistently supported education for all classes, Maria believed that the lower classes should not partake in governing” (851). Wow! Like you said, “what a loaded statement.” This really makes me rethink a lot of things that are said in Castle Rackrent. Who does Maria support and who doesn’t she support? You said you believe that the voice of the editor created a balance between both parties…I’m confused.. Isn’t Maria known for her patronage towards Ireland?
Now I see where you are generating your ideas that Maria was a classist and a British snob, but like you said why is she considered an authority in Irish Literature? Or is she just considered an authority in Anglo-Irish literature? While doing a bit of research I found this quote,
“Richard Edgeworth, and subsequently Maria, were the epitome of the sort of responsible landlords they hoped would one day characterize Ireland. They were fair and forgiving in their dealings with tenants and were actively involved in the management of the estate. They eschewed the common practice of the day of hiring a middleman to manage the estate who in turn would attempt to squeeze maximum rent from the tenants. Maria and her father believed that better management and the further application of science to agriculture would raise food production and lower prices, ameliorating the conditions of the Irish countryside and thereby mitigating political unrest. In contrast to Ricardo, Maria felt the interests of the different social classes need not be opposed to those of landlords.”
I found this quote at the following website: http://www.cswep.org/edgeworth.html
The last sentence that states, “Maria felt the interests of the different social classes need not be opposed to those of landlords” caught my attention. Is this supporting what you said about Maria’s fear of a peasant uprising?
There are so many interesting things in this thread! I think all of you have touched on what makes me obsessed with Edgeworth--her ambivalence towards the Irish AND the members of the Anglo-Irish Ascendancy. What I think is important to note about Edgeworth was that she was a true child of the Enlightenment. She was the eldest of 20+ children, and through her experience of entertaining her father's prolific brood, she virtually invented what we now understand to be "children's literature." She revolutionized childhood education and her educational manuals such as _Practical Education_ were widely used throughout England and even on the continent. She and her father were known "reformers" in Ireland, but as Drea notes in her blog, that reformist impulse is inevitably a racist one that was more for the benefit of the reformer than than the "reformee." As Drea states, "Much of the upper class felt they had a civic responsibility to pity and support people at a disadvantage. Charity was more for the social benefit of that wealthy person- 'Oh, look at how great they are, giving time and money to that poor good for nothing person!' rather than a true desire to help economically disadvantaged persons." While I think Edgeworth did sincerely abhor England's imperial practices in Ireland, she and Anglo-Irish reformers like her in their pursuit to "improve" the Irish didn't really offer a fair alternative either. Furthermore, I think Drea picks up on the underlying anxiety that exists beneath the "benevolent improvement" impulse towards the colonial subject. Imperialism depends on the idea that the colonial subject must always be in need of "improving" or "fixing." If the subject did one day finally become "improved," then there would be no more need for an occupying force! Take our occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan, for instance. Much of our involvement there is contingent upon the invented notion that Iraqis and Afghans simply "cannot" rule themselves. On top of that anxiety is the fear that they might "improve," but they may not be what WE (the US) want them to be! I think much of Edgeworth's fear is that in spite of all her educational and reformists efforts, the Irish may just end up being, well, "Irish" after all.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Edgeworth being the "authority" on Irish literature, I think this is a very important issue to bring up and one that we'll continue to debate throughout the semester in terms of what denotes the IRISH tradition in regards to the novel. Many scholars in Irish Studies would NOT place Edgeworth in the Irish literary canon because she was Anglo-Irish and a member of the Irish Ascendancy. I think such moves make false and far too narrow demarcations as to what defines "Irishness." I'm not saying that anyone in this class is doing this at all, but we have to be cautious to not subconsciously construct a "pure" form of Irishness that includes some but excludes others in terms of literary output. There are many in Irish Studies who would shun James Joyce because he wasn't an Irish nationalist, for instance, or La Fanu because he was, like Edgeworth, Anglo-Irish. Yet, unlike Edgeworth La Fanu was very poor and was associated with the Young Ireland rebellion. It's so complicated! It's only been in recent years that Oscar Wilde has been included in the Irish canon. Perhaps this was because of some latent homophobia (?) or perhaps it was that he didn't really write about "Irish" themes (although some might argue otherwise). In any case, I want us to continue this debate about Irishness--how we construct it, and how we can begin to break it down.
Tullamore Drea,
ReplyDeleteTHANK YOU. Your statement " Essentially, I think Maria Edgeworth was a classist, pushing her father’s agenda. She made fun of the Irish (in a tongue in cheek kind of way) to demonstrate they weren’t good enough to be anything but farmers and peasants serving a landlord or master. It’s like the idea of making something look bad on purpose, or making something look bad, to make you look good." is EXACTLY what I was trying to get at in my own blog. And since you referenced his blog I should probably go run and see what Jason said as well.
"I know that Edgeworth has been deemed some kind of hero or pioneer or success of the Irish narrative, but I believe Rackrent can be viewed on a larger scale as a piece of elitist propaganda." I find myself right along your line of thought here as well, it's scary how that happens sometimes. It thinly veiled propaganda at that, once again using a kind word as a great insult. It's lovely when that happens isn't it?
WS
Hey Drea,
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of changing opinions, here I go again!
When I finished reading the essay I found that I saw the novel in a whole new perspective after reading that Maria Edgeworth was apart of the Irish upper class. A light kind of went off in my head and I suddenly understood why she, as you said, “over-exaggerated people, places, and situations of Ireland.” I found Edgeworth to be such a hypocrite after reading that “Although the Edgeworth’s consistently supported education for all classes, Maria believed that the lower classes should not partake in governing.” (851) How can you be for education of all classes and not support the lower classes taking that education and using it every way they can? It seems as though Edgeworth was trying to play both sides of the…well in this case classes, pretending to appeal to the Irish lower class, while pleasing the Anglo-Irish class and British. It is obvious that Edgeworth only appealed to both sides in an attempt to cover her…butt. This false alliance with both classes further verifies my belief that she was a manipulative hypocrite.
To think that I thought that this story was merely about a crazy overzealous steward to an even crazier family with way to many footnotes to follow! The one nice thing that I can say about Edgeworth is that she was good at disguising her, as you call it, “elicit propaganda,” at least from me anyway.
To answer your last question I am not quite sure, but one thing I am sure of is if Edgeworth is considered an authority in Irish literature, it is not based off of this novel.
Good luck with Carmilla. Lets hope that this next author has more pure intentions behind his writing. Oh, and I absolutely love your title!
Hello there! I had some computer issues so here are my thoughts... as late as they may be:
ReplyDeleteI have felt something similar in my quest to understand, although it may take me longer to read the text I do fine at it but find myself jotting down things to look up later and finding myself building more and more of a puzzle as I do. This all makes my understanding of the text more muddled and makes me feel a tinge of frustration.
I found it interesting that you found something bothersome about Edgeworth, I feel that I was (and still am) too, I do however feel that Egenolf’s article let me look retrospectively with fondness.
I thought the quotes from the text were spot on in what I found to be not-quite-right with Edgeworth’s writing. I found the first one to be especially relatable. I kind of laughed at the elitist tone in Edgeworth’s letter. It seemed that her text was written from the view point of one from the upper class, stereotypes and all. The characters seemed over exaggerated which, aside from adding to the comic value of them, like you said seemed to perpetuate the stereotype!
All this said I am still perplexed by your last question, I hadn’t thought of this! How has Edgeworth become the staple she is in the genre of Irish literature? Have you gained any ground on this idea?