Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-n7qbj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-11T22:14:50.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Raising Lilies: Ruskin and Women

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

Jennifer M. Lloyd
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

John Ruskin, art and social critic, master of English prose, is one of the most infuriating yet attractive Victorian figures. In the last twenty years, a revival of interest in his work after years of neglect has stimulated a considerable body of scholarly analysis and several biographies. As Ruskin himself would have hoped, historians have been most interested in his trenchant attacks on the assumptions and effects of nineteenth-century political economy, but paradoxically he appears in women's history only as the author of “Of Queens' Gardens,” promoting a fundamental Victorian paradigm, the ideology of pure womanhood. Yet the anthologized excerpts which are all most people read of Ruskin do not do justice even to “Of Queens' Gardens,” an admittedly cloying piece, and although biographers have analyzed his tortured relationships with Effie Gray and Rose La Touche almost to the point of tedium, there is no extended general study of his many relationships with women and the expectations he had of them. An adequate analysis of Ruskin's view of women requires familiarity with all his works, an understanding of his fears for the state of England, and a greater knowledge of his relationships with women than provided by the lurid details of his failed marriage and predilection for adolescent girls. The following is an attempt to sketch an outline of such an account.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 34 , Issue 3: Victorian Subjects , July 1995 , pp. 325 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Davidoff, Leonore and Hall, Catherine, Family Fortunes: Men and Women of the English Middle Class, 1780–1850 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987)Google Scholar.

2 Cook, E. T. and Wedderburn, Alexander, eds., The Library Edition of the Works of John Ruskin, 39 vols. (London: George Allen, 1903–1912), 35:220Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Ruskin).

3 Moore, T. Sturge and Moore, D. C. Sturge, Work and Days: From the Journal of Michael Field (London: John Murray, 1933), p. 143Google Scholar.

4 Surtees, Virginia, ed., Sublime and Instructive: Letters from John Ruskin to Louisa, Marchioness of Waterford, Anna Blunden and Ellen Heaton (London: Michael Joseph, 1972), pp. 99–103Google Scholar.

5 Ibid., pp. 157, 181–82. Although Ruskin's references to Siddal in his letters to Heaton are sometimes patronizing, he treated Siddal in much the same way as other male pre-Raphaelite painters, whom he expected to listen to his advice, trust his judgment, and accept and act on his criticism.

6 She later became Mrs. Cowper-Temple, then Lady Mount-Temple.

7 Ruskin, 15:8–9Google Scholar.

8 John Ruskin, diary, 1858, Rumin Galleries, Bembridge, Isle of Wight, MS 11, p. 3.

9 See Lloyd, Jennifer M., “Thunder on the Horizon: John Ruskin's View of History” (Ph.D. diss., University of Rochester, 1992)Google Scholar.

10 Poovey, Mary, Uneven Developments: The Ideological Work of Gender in Mid-Victorian England (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), p. 9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Ruskin, 17:105, 112Google Scholar.

12 In his discerning “Ruskin and the Matriarchal Logos,” Paul Sawyer writes of Ruskin's “paradoxical combination … of submissiveness and economic power” (in Victorian Sages and Cultural Discourse: Renegotiating Gender and Power, ed. Morgan, Thaïs E. [New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1990], pp. 134–35)Google Scholar.

13 Ruskin, 17:113Google Scholar.

14 Ibid., pp. 147, 139.

15 In the 1871 edition he added a third lecture, “The Mystery of Life and Its Arts,” given in Dublin in 1868.

16 Helsinger, Elizabeth, “John Ruskin and ‘Of Queens' Gardens,’” in The Woman Question: Defining Voices, 1837–1883, ed. Helsinger, Elizabeth K., Sheets, Robin Lauterbach, and Veeder, William (New York: Garland, 1983), pp. 96–97Google Scholar.

17 Conner, Patrick, Savage Ruskin (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1979), p. 141CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Helsinger, p. 96.

18 Millett, Kate, Sexual Politics (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970), p. 89Google Scholar. As Millett points out (p. 89n.), Walter Houghton had made much the same observation (in more detached language) in The Victorian Frame of Mind (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1957), p. 343nGoogle Scholar. See also, e.g., “The classic statement of the doctrine of women's role” (Conner, p. 141)Google Scholar and “this now classic (and for some classically repulsive) statement of the ideology of separate spheres” (Sawyer, p. 134). Helsinger, one of the most perceptive of recent Ruskin scholars, recognizes Ruskin's radicalism, while Sonstroem, David, “Millet versus Ruskin: A Defense of Ruskin's ‘Of Queens' Gardens,’” Victorian Studies 20 (1977): 283–97Google Scholar, tries too hard to rehabilitate Ruskin as a feminist.

19 de Pisan, Christine, The Treasure of the City of Ladies, trans. Lawson, Sarah (New York: Penguin, 1985), pp. 62–63Google Scholar.

20 Ruskin, 18:122–23Google Scholar.

21 Ibid., 111.

22 See Sawyer (n. 12 above), p. 135.

23 In her The Girlhood of Shakespeare's Heroines (1850–51), Mary Cowden Clarke also used Shakespearean women to suggest a wider interpretation of women's domestic responsibilities and deplore the poor state of women's education (Johnston, Susan, “Family Values? Education and Domestic Ideology in Mary Cowden Clarke'sThe Girl hood of Shakespeare's Heroines,” unpublished paper given at the Midwest Conference on British Studies, Toronto, October 1994Google Scholar).

24 See Poovey (n. 10 above), p. 11.

25 Ruskin, 18:140Google Scholar.

26 Poovey, p. 11.1 am grateful to Stewart Weaver for pointing out this transition in “Of Queens' Gardens,” also noted by Helsinger (n. 16 above, p. 90).

27 Brooks, Michael, “Love and Possession in a Victorian Household,” in The Victorian Family: Structure and Stresses, ed. Wohl, Anthony S. (London: Croom Helm, 1978), p. 90Google Scholar.

28 Abse, Joan, John Ruskin: The Passionate Moralist (London: Quartet, 1980), p. 216Google Scholar.

29 Cook, Edward T., The Life of John Ruskin (London: George Allen, 1911), 2:549Google Scholar.

30 Bell, Susan Groag and Offen, Karen, eds., Women, the Family and Freedom: The Debate in Documents (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1983), 1:87Google Scholar.

31 Hunt, John Dixon, The Wider Sea: A Life of John Ruskin (New York: Viking, 1982), p. 283Google Scholar.

32 Bell and Offen, eds., p. 175.

33 Ruskin, 18:128–29Google Scholar.

34 Sawyer (n. 12 above), p. 131.

35 Ruskin, 18:304–5Google Scholar.

36 Ibid., p. 301.

37 Ibid., p. 267.

38 Ibid., p. 337.

39 Ibid., pp. 296–98.

40 Sawyer, p. 138.

41 Burd, Van Akin, ed., The Winnington Letters: John Ruskin's Correspondence with Margaret Alexis Bell and the Children at Winnington Hall (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press, 1969), pp. 533, 599CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42 Burd, Van Akin, The Christmas Story: John Ruskin's Venetian Letters of 1876–1877 (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1990), pp. 71–76Google Scholar.

43 Ruskin, 19:129Google Scholar.

44 Ibid., pp. 305–6.

45 Ibid., p. 424.

46 Ibid., 20:359.

47 Ibid., 19:400.

48 Ibid., 18:495.

49 Ibid., p. 502.

50 Burd, , ed., Winnington Letters, p. 662Google Scholar.

51 Whitehouse, J. Howard, The Solitary Warrior: New Letters by Ruskin (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1930), pp. 42, 114Google Scholar: Bradley, John Lewis, ed., The Letters of John Ruskin to Lord and Lady Mount-Temple (Athens: Ohio State University Press, 1964), p. 201Google Scholar. The first Whitehouse letter is misdated 1859 (all the internal evidence shows clearly that it was written in 1869) and is not included in Burd's Winnington Letters.

52 Bradley, John Lewis and Ousby, Ian, eds., The Correspondence of John Ruskin and Charles Eliot Norton (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987), p. 138Google Scholar.

53 See Cate, George Allen, ed., The Correspondence of Thomas Carlyle and John Ruskin (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar.

54 Ruskin, 27:645Google Scholar.

55 Wilson, Olive, ed., My Dearest Dora: Letters to Dora Livesey, her Family and Friends, 1860–1900, from John Ruskin (Kendal: Olive Wilson, n.d.), p. 106Google Scholar.

56 Sturge Moore and Sturge Moore (n. 3 above), p. 145.

57 Spence, Margaret E., ed., Dearest Mama Talbot: A Selection of Letters from John Ruskin to Mrs. Fanny Talbot (London: Allen & Unwin, 1966)Google Scholar, passim.

58 Sturge Moore and Sturge Moore, p. 145.

59 Spence, Margaret E., “Ruskin's Correspondence with Miss Blanche Atkinson,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 43 (March 1961): 215Google Scholar.

60 Ruskin, 27:80Google Scholar.

61 Claiborne, Jay Wood, “Two Secretaries: The Letters of John Ruskin to Charles Augustus Howell and the Rev. Richard St. John Tyrwhitt” (Ph.D. diss., University of Texas at Austin, 1969), pp. 365–67Google Scholar.

62 Ruskin, 29:358Google Scholar.

63 Sturge Moore and Sturge Moore, p. 165.

64 Spence, , “Ruskin's Correspondence,” p. 196Google Scholar.

65 See Poovey (n. 10 above), pp. 1–2.

66 Morley, Catherine, John Ruskin: Late Work, 1870–1890. The Museum and Guild of St. George: An Educational Experiment (New York: Garland, 1984), p. 36Google Scholar; italics in the original.

67 Spence, , ed., Dearest Mama Talbot (n. 57 above), p. 56Google Scholar.

68 Sturge Moore and Sturge Moore (n. 3 above), pp. 157–58.

69 Jameson, Anna, Sacred and Legendary Art, 3d ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1857), 2:106–22Google Scholar. Ruskin was familiar with Jameson's work.

70 Ruskin, 29:740Google Scholar; 27:344–45, 347.

71 Ibid., 25:420.

72 Ibid., 27:619.

73 Ibid., 23:405; 37:350.

74 Ibid., 28:265; 23:387.

75 Ibid., 31:505.

76 Ibid., 32:74.

77 Ibid., 29:491.

78 Ibid., 32:68, 65–66.

79 Ibid., p. 74.

80 “A tragedy … recognized as such by most of those who attended them” (Evans, Joan, John Ruskin [New York: Haskell House, 1970], p. 395)Google Scholar; “a failure of adult emotion and adult aesthetic response” (Rosenberg, John D., The Darkening Glass: A Portrait of Ruskin's Genius [New York: Columbia University Press, 1980], p. 211Google Scholar).

81 For an analysis of Ruskin's treatment of popular art in these lectures, see Austin, Linda M., The Practical Ruskin: Economics and Audience in the Late Work (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), pp. 34–43Google Scholar.

82 Ruskin, 33:341Google Scholar.

83 Ibid., p. 361.

84 Ibid., 37:337–38.

85 Ibid., p. 357; Cook (n. 29 above), 2:379–80. Vestiges of the tradition remained in the schoolgirl stories written by Elsie Oxenham in the 1930s.

86 See Cook, 2:488–94; Abse (n. 28 above), pp. 302–3.

87 Spence, , Dearest Mama Talbot (n. 57 above), p. 16Google Scholar, n. 2.

88 Ferguson, Oliver W., “Ruskin's Continental Letters to Mrs. Severn, 1888,” Journal of English and Germanic Philology 51 (October 1952): 535Google Scholar.

89 Unwin, Rayner, ed., The Gulf of Years: Letters from John Ruskin to Kathleen Olander (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1953), p. 78Google Scholar.

90 See the extracts from his letters to Severn, Joan Agnew in Birkenhead's, SheilaIllustrious Friends (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1965)Google Scholar.

91 Ruskin, 29:176Google Scholar.

92 14:496.

93 Wilson, ed. (n. 55 above), p. 70.