Charlotte's Web Of Power Struggles Essay

Stephanie Coontz is a sociologist who is interested in marriage and the change in its structure over the time-span as love became a main proponent of the relationship involved in marriages. In her article, “What 's Love Got to Do With It,” Coontz argues that the more love becomes a part of the equation the less stable the institution of marriage becomes. Marriage at one point was a social contract that bound two families together to increase their property and wealth as well as ally connections. Each party entered into the contract knowing their roles and if one partner failed to meet the expectations, they were still contractually obligated to one another and were not allowed to divorce. As love became part of the equation, each partner was less sure of their obligations and often chose to end their marriages if at all possible.

Charlotte Temple is a seduction novel written by Susanna Rowson that tells a story about a British soldier, Montraville, who seduces a British schoolgirl, Charlotte, into falsely loving him and following him away to America, where Charlottes tragic life will unfold. Montraville takes advantage of Charlottes love for him and promises her that he will marry her one day and he also tells Charlotte that her parents would be proud and happy to hear that their daughter ran off with a man of honor. This manipulative and strategic doing of Montraville will continue up until the day Montraville leaves Charlotte due to the mistrustful actions of Belcour and Charlotte. The treatment and equality that the women have, or do not have, in the 18th century is evident in the novel by Rowson which is displayed by many factors such as Charlottes inability to live a happy life simply because the expectations of women during this time were standardized by men. Most jobs in the 18th century needed quite an amount of physical strength so jobs were mostly occupied by men, married women mostly did not work and many single women were private servants. The expectations of women in the 18th century that were set by men, halted the progress women were taking to try and step by step, alter the time ahead of women’s rights and equality so that the tales of Charlotte Temple would be one short told by women in the future.

that his perception was wrong. Though Charlotte had no fortune, her previous commitment to virtue is rich. Womanhood was miserable for this young woman. She faces tough decisions, and she does not make the best choices when forced to do so on her own.

For the first fifty years after its publication, Charlotte Temple by Susanna Rowson endured as the bestselling novel in America. Its popularity in part came from concerned parents who wanted their daughters to learn the lessons that the novel had to offer. The character of Mademoiselle La Rue from this story helps to convey one of these lessons. Susanna Rowson uses the morally corrupt, yet socially successful, character of La Rue in Charlotte Temple to show that human beings should not confuse moral virtues with societal virtues.

Charlotte Temple is introduced in the novel as a moral girl with a good foundation of genuine love from her family. This moral foundation is evident in her countenance. Even after Charlotte has compromised her morals to run away with her seducer, Montraville, she maintains this look of innocence. Montraville’s companion, Belcour, turns his romantic

Charlotte continually disregards her dream of love and to belong to someone and surrenders to that which she believes will make society approve of her. Charlotte is the only character that appears to be level-headed when acting what seems to be ridiculous. She does not marry for love, but she still seems to be reasonable and she has thought through this decision. Charlotte arrives at approval from society, but only after she surrenders her dream to that of her superego and

Her battle finishes in an overdramatic death, portraying a symbol of moving past the adversity. She is completely impacted by the inequality present in their civilization, yet the pressure does not terminate at simple influence but the inequality of the male individuals and the presence of a judgmental community strongly shift the plot. By examining the shame burdened on Charlotte and its impact on the hastening of her destruction, the pure nature of females in the eyes of Rowson and the result to Charlotte’s calamity shows a greater representation of sexism’s role in Charlotte Temple. It was not a lack of caution that brought calamity to the women, but it was rather the inequality of their community, society and friends that left the antagonist free to embarrass and

Anne Bronte makes a bold statement of rebellion against the typically accepted yet deplorable behavior of Victorian males in her book “The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.” In her novel, Helen Huntingdon breaks the rules of Victorian society with punishable offenses; such as, scandalously escaping from her abusive and philandering husband, refusing his demands for custody and fleeing with their only child, and absconding with much of her personal property. Helen’s imprudent decision to marry Arthur Huntingdon is uncharacteristic of Bronte’s heroine; however, rectitude and integrity eventually lead her to happiness. The domestic and social criticism of Helen’s husband, Arthur Huntingdon and his perfidious ways, is pitted against the ideals of loyalty and integrity found in Helen’s honorable neighbor, Gilbert Markham, when she flees to Wildfell Hall. Bronte, utilizes these characters to incite the need for social reformation with fresh inclusion of the redeeming values of biblical virtues.

Charlotte tries to maintain certain "airs" in order to appear to be something she is not. As a wife, a mother, and a member of the community, she always acts as she believes she is expected to act. Her values are heavily influenced by this attitude, and therefore, they are hypocritical and ambiguous; yet Charlotte seems inanely unaware of the hypocrisy and contradiction in her life.

Charlotte’s marriage was not a happy marriage, and was rather an arrangement of convenience. It is, however, one of the most accurate portrayals of what marriage was like for

“Marriage and Love”, a short essay by Emma Goldman, gives a wonderful argument regarding love and marriage, in fact, she nails it. Marriage does not equal love or has anything nothing to do with it. Not only that, but the marriage could also easily kill whatever relationship was there prior to the declaration. Marriage is simply a social construct, one that imposes control by religion, tradition, and social opinion (Goldman 304). However, if marriage is such the ball and chain that we all joke about, then why do people get married?

There are many ways in which one can describe and define marriage. There are legal, biblical and personal definitions, each with its own distinct basis for its definition, but which is the right one? The decision of which definition is the right one depends on where one lives and what one believes. Marriage has evolved throughout history. In today’s society there are many different types of unions that can be viewed as marriage. Today, when one thinks of marriage, they usually think of two people, deeply in love, who decide to bind their lives together through a legal process. Such is not always the case, with “common-law marriages” (as it is not a legal process). There are many reasons other than love that can constitute the bond

Charlotte and Mr. Brand are both vehemently opposed to change. They like to uphold tradition, and would rather keep their lives calm than take a risk. Charlotte is always concerned with duty, and thus takes this attitude when her foreign cousins come to visit. James depicts the situation: It was an extension of duty, of the exercise of the more recondite virtues; but neither Mr. Wentworth, nor Charlotte, not Mr. Brand, who, among these excellent people, was a great promoter of reflection and aspiration, frankly adverted to it as an extension of enjoyment. This function was ultimately assumed by Gertrude Wentworth (37).

Marriage or a relationship similar to, is a tremendous component of the human experience. Its function is practiced in every culture worldwide; but in very different forms

“ Why people need to marry with someone? Why do we need a piece of paper to prove that I love you ? Marriage does not mean anything. We are living together now. Is not it good enough for us” my friend’ boyfriend said to her when she mentioned she want a marriage. After he had said that, she broke up with him soon. I began to wonder what is the meaning of marriage ? Even though I understand why people think marriage means nothing, I disagree. A marriage license is a piece of paper but it is not just a piece of paper; marriage means a lot to yourself, your family, and society. Marriage has many social and economic value that could help the development of any country.