Mary
Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
argues that women and men, insofar as they are both granted a share
in humanity, are both equally entitled to the development and use of
reason. She frames her argument for woman's equal right to reason
through an attack on tyranny. She constructs an analogy between
political tyranny and despotism and the tyranny that men exert over
women in society. Reason is a right, and for Wollstonecraft rights
also entail duties; however, women cannot fulfill these duties unless
their right to reason is respected. Just as tyranny and despotism can
be vanquished through political revolution, so to can the tyranny
that is hindering women from developing their rational capabilities
be vanquished through social and educational revolution. The
revolution that Wollstonecraft argues for is a democratization of
education, “for only by the jostlings of equality can we form a
just opinion of ourselves.” (Wollstonecraft, 180) Women and men
should equally be taught how to develop their reason and
understanding. It is only through the use of reason that both sexes
can be proper moral citizens and fulfill their duties as
mothers/fathers and wives/husbands. Wollstonecraft asserts that it is
only through this equal opportunity education of both the body and
mind that the question of the extend and nature of male superiority
will be answered. She suggests that although men may exhibit superior
physical strength, there will be parity in terms of mental strength.
In the course of the following analysis I am bracketing off the
question of what other duties and roles Wollstonecraft thinks women
are capable of fulfilling. Instead, I am interested in the
anti-Islamic rhetoric that she sustains throughout the text,
specifically how this polemic centers around two erroneous beliefs
popularly held by Europeans at that time: that Muhammad's tomb is
suspended in air and that Islam does not grant souls to women. In
this brief analysis I will outline how the use of this islamicist
rhetoric allows Wollstonecraft to strengthen her argument for
educational reform and equality for women by playing her side against
images of Ottoman despotism.
In Wollstonecraft's text there
are over twelve references to Islam, Muhammad, and the
harem/seraglio. Two of these references are found in the Introduction
to the text. At the beginning of the Introduction she laments the
neglected and unhealthy state of women's minds in society.
“One cause of this barren blooming I
attribute to a false system of education, gathered from the books
written on this subject by men who, considering females rather as
women than human creatures...in the true style of
Mahometanism...,[treat them] as a kind of subordinate beings, and not
as part of the human species.” (Wollstonecraft, 6-7)
She is already working on winning the
reader to her cause by linking the current trend to regard women as
pretty objects and trophies and not as rational beings with the
prevalent European conception of Islam as a stunted and barbaric
religion. Essential she is setting up the rhetorical verdict that if
you do not see a problem with raising women as subordinate to men, as
linked to the body through beauty and childbearing, in compliment to
men being linked to the mind and reason, then you are no better than
the “Mahometan” who does not believe women have souls. The side
you want to be on, the rational Christian side, will stand by
Wollstonecraft's side and advocate for the rights of women and
educational reform. Towards the end of the Introduction this
rhetorical stance is referred to again when, after describing how the
current education of women sacrifices the body and mind to “libertine
notions of beauty” and to the “desire of establishing themselves”
through marriage, she exclaims: “Surely these weak beings are only
fit for the seraglio!” (Wollstonecraft, 9) This rhetoric at the
beginning of the text serves two purposes. First, it urges the
readers to align themselves with Wollstonecraft's side, since the
other side is “ in the true style of Mahometanism.” Secondly,
this aligning of sides allows the discourse on the dualism of
mind/body to shift from an association of men/mind and women/body to
Christianity/mind and Islam/body. The Introduction has set up a play
of associations that enables the body of the text to exploit
references to the seraglio and harem in order to strengthen the
negative association of the sensual and Islam. Wollstonecraft is then
able to more forcefully place her educational reform in line with
rational religion (Christianity) and democracy.
Near the end of the second
chapter of her text Mary
Wollstonecraft employs the image of Muhammad's coffin to re-emphasize
the necessity of choosing a side:
“If there be but one criterion of
morals, but one archetype for man, women appear to be suspended by
destiny, according to the vulgar tale of Mahomet's coffin; they have
neither the unerring instinct of brutes, nor are allowed to fix the
eye of reason on a perfect model. They were made to be loved, and
must not aim at respect, lest they should be hunted out of society as
masculine.” (Wollstonecraft, 33)
The “vulgar tale of Mahomet's coffin”
is the European tale, popularized in the Middle Ages, that Muhammad
is buried in an iron coffin that is suspended in air between two
giant magnets. This image was meant to be symbolic of Muhammad's role
as a false prophet; suspended in air, he is rejected by both earth
and heaven, since he can neither rest in the earth or ascend into the
heavens. Wollstonecraft is thus suggesting that women are in a
similar position. If the current order of European/Christian society
in correct then women are suspended between the poles of the body and
the mind. Women are not allowed to be purely associated with the body
and the animal world, since Christianity does grant women a soul, but
they are not allowed access to the world of the mind, the
distinguishing feature of humanity, except through their husbands and
fathers. This parallel between women and Muhammad as a false prophet
is not an association readers would want to sustain, therefore it is
incumbent on them to make a choice. But Wollstonecraft has
essentially already made the choice for them since choosing to align
women with earth/body is choosing the “true style of Mahometanism.”
The only choice left then is to acknowledge that women are also
rational beings and therefore should be allowed to cultivate their
minds.
In the next chapter
Wollstonecraft begins to develop these islamicist images in relation
to tyranny and despotism. Women, instead of being alluring and
passive objects in a harem, are like Turkish bashaws:
“Women...sometimes
boast of their weakness, cunningly obtaining power by playing on the
weakness of men; and
they may well glory in their illicit sway, for, like Turkish bashaws,
they have more real power than their masters: but virtue is
sacrificed to temporary gratification, and the respectability of life
to the triumph of an hour.” (Wollstonecraft, 39)
Wollstonecraft
is pitting the popular orientalist male fantasy against itself. Women
in their current state are taught to cultivate physical beauty and
charm in order to catch a husband. As sculpted objects of male desire
they exert a tyranny over the sensual weaknesses of men. The harem,
placed in a European context, becomes site of sensual despotism that
degrades and enslaves both women and men. Just as readers desire the
fall of the Ottoman empire, so to they should also desire the fall of
the current social order. A few pages later Wollstonecraft eases up
on this association with Turkish tyranny and writes “nor does the
despotism that kills virtue and genius in the bud, hover over Europe
with that destructive blast which desolates Turkey.”
(Wollstonecraft, 43) The state of affairs in Europe, one assumes in
regard to politics, religion, and the status of women, are not nearly
as bad as they are in Turkey. But this should not put readers' minds
at ease, for unless they work with Wollstonecraft to educate women,
Europe could end up like Turkey. It is through this rhetoric that she
sets up her educational reform as the antithesis or antidote to
tyranny, despotism and Mahometanism/the Ottoman Empire. The effect of
this rhetorical structure allows her her exclaim near the end of the
text, “If women are to be made virtuous by authority, which is a
contradiction in terms, let them be immured in seraglios and watched
with a jealous eye.” (Wollstonecraft, 194-5) The only path open to
the readers is to advocate for women's right to the development
and use of reason.
No comments:
Post a Comment