Female Writers in the 18th Century: The Power of Imagination

Female writers of the Eighteenth Century often focused on the role of the female imagination in novel writing, poetry composition, and as an outlet for temporarily escaping a harsh world.  In Maria, or The Wrongs of Woman, Mary Wollstonecraft focused mostly on the latter notion, the ability of a woman to employ her imagination in transcending the physical prison of an insane asylum, as well as the metaphorical prisons of a tyrannical marriage and an oppressive world.  Meanwhile, Anna Letitia Barbauld emphasized the artwork which the female imagination can fashion in her poem “Washing-Day;” however, she additionally hints at the dangerous male scientific imagination behind the invention of hot air balloons.  Finally, in Frankenstein, Mary Shelley draws a striking contrast between feminine uses of the imagination and the ruthless aims of a male-dominated scientific imagination.  Although Wollstonecraft presents imagination as the only outlet and sole alternative for women trapped in their homes, she champions feminine uses of imagination over male employments of the mind; Barbauld and Shelley expand on the uses of female imagination, displaying the artful creations of the feminine mind and simultaneously condemning male forms of imagination, especially in the realms of science and technology.

In Wollstonecraft’s novel, Maria initially finds solace in reading while imprisoned in an insane asylum.  Maria’s dependence on the occupation of reading reflects the plight of many domesticated women who relied on reading to engage their imaginations and transport them away from the realities of otherwise boring lives.  As for Maria, “the books she had obtained, were soon devoured, by one who had no other resource to escape from sorrow” (Wollstonecraft 14).  In this instance, Wollstonecraft highlights the feminine dilemma of immobility and even captivity, sometimes within their own households.  In Maria’s case, Wollstonecraft narrates the story of a woman placed into captivity by a tyrannical husband, an occurrence which proved far too common for women living in the Eighteenth Century.

After reading, of course, writing presented itself as the only other pursuit for Maria: “Writing was then the only alternative, and she wrote some rhapsodies descriptive of the state of her mind; but the events of her past life pressing on her, she resolved circumstantially to relate them” (14-15).  Writing even an autobiographical account proves helpful to Maria, distracting her from the reality of her imprisoned state.

Later, writing to Darnford, and actually connecting to another human being in similar circumstances, acts as a sort of therapy for Maria.  Wollstonecraft describes that in “writing to Darnford, she was led from the sad objects before her, and frequently rendered insensible to the horrid noises around her, which previously had continually employed her feverish fancy” (25).  Maria employs her mind in constructing letters to Darnford, and the occupation aids her in transcending imprisonment.  Besides reading and writing, Wollstonecraft illustrates the manner in which feminine imagination alone, without any outside influences, can transport women away from cruel circumstances.  Indeed, “Maria’s imagination found repose in pourtaying the possible virtues the world might contain” (33).  A harsh world forces Maria to imagine the existence of kindness in the world; of course, her meeting Darnford sparks a renewed hope in humanity.  Later, she even builds up the character of Darnford in her mind: “She […] combined all the qualities of a hero’s mind, and fate presented a statue in which she might enshrine them” (33).  Maria inflates the character of Darnford in her mind, exaggerating his good qualities and believing she might at least discover some happiness with him.  Due to her incessant imagining, Maria and readers alike often forget that Maria remains imprisoned; her mind refuses imprisonment and seeks freedom and serenity.

Nevertheless, Wollstonecraft seems to harbor some ambivalence concerning female uses of the imagination early on in her novel.  She narrates:

The youths who are satisfied with the ordinary pleasures of life, and do not sigh after ideal phantoms of love and friendship, will never arrive at great maturity of understanding; but if these reveries are cherished, as is too frequently the case with women, when experience ought to have taught them in what human happiness consists, they become as useless as they are wretched.  Besides, their pains and pleasures are so dependent on outward circumstances, on the objects of their affections, that they seldom act from the impulse of a nerved mind, able to choose its own pursuit. (33)

Here, Wollstonecraft mentions the futility of imagination, since the female mind can play tricks on itself.  Indeed, Maria exacerbates her situation at home by placing too much confidence in her husband.  Maria’s “fancy enlarged the boundary of his heart.  Fatal error!” (75).  In this instance, her feminine imagination leads Maria into greater heartache and suffering when her “fancying” her husband a better man proves wholly untrue and unfounded.  At the same time, Wollstonecraft owns, women must rely on their imaginations.  Otherwise, their husbands render them completely mindless.  In Maria’s letter to her daughter, she warns that men often turn to “profligate women,” because such women prove wholly physically-minded.  In her letter, she describes “the men who do not allow them [women] to have minds, because mind would be an impediment to gross enjoyment” (79).  Wollstonecraft portrays the willingness of men to reduce women to physical objects without a mind.  Maria combats such a notion in occupying her mind, even with mere “fancies.”

Indeed, Wollstonecraft often praises the effects of imagination: “Imagination!  who can paint thy power; or reflect the evanescent tints of hope fostered by thee?  A despondent gloom had long obscured Maria’s horizon – now the sun broke forth, the rainbow appeared, and every prospect was fair” (35).  The love developing between Maria and Darnford only serves to facilitate “fancying,” and Maria, Darnford and Jemima find themselves transported by their feelings and imagined happiness.  While Wollstonecraft admits that “they even chid themselves for such apparent insensibility; still the world contained not three happier beings” (35).  Maria and Darnford remain well aware of their imprisoned states and even hear the cries of their fellow madhouse residents; nevertheless, all of them indulge their imaginations, choosing a temporary, happier, albeit fake reality over the true state of their situations.  Such an occurrence reflects once again Wollstonecraft’s ambivalence towards imagination.  While fancying can lead to a complete denial of reality, it can nevertheless foster happiness and true joy.

Thus, Wollstonecraft endorses female reliance on imagination, acknowledging that women have no other outlet.  She condemns the men who remove the minds of women, and champions the notion of female intelligence.  Wollstonecraft emphasizes the unfairness of reality, the fact that men can use their minds in the workforce and beyond, but can effectively eliminate the female mind, debasing women into mere objects.  In fact, Maria declares in her letter, “I allowed myself to be duped by Mr. Venables’ shallow pretences, and hypocritical professions” (91).  Mr. Venables employs his mind in concocting lies with which to “dupe” his wife.  Maria finds herself ensnared by his false professions, a cycle in which many women find themselves and which only increases male notions of female stupidity.  Ultimately, Wollstonecraft encourages women to use their minds, even if only for imagining and fancying, and denounces males who use their minds for the purpose of reducing the female mind.

Barbauld and Shelley adopt a similar perspective in their respective works; however, they emphasize the fruits of female imagination in the realms of poetry and writing and depict the ways in which male ambition and imagination in the scientific arena quite often lead to destruction.  Barbauld takes a more subtle approach than Shelley, but the same themes emerge nevertheless.  In her rather tongue-in-cheek poem, “To the Poor,” Barbauld tells the poor to become comfortable in their situations, because they can expect no relief in this life; they must wait for their rewards in heaven.  Towards the end of the poem, Barbauld becomes somewhat bolder in proclaiming, “Nor deem the Lord above, like Lords below” (line 18).  Barbauld places the brunt of the blame for the plight of the poor on aristocratic men.  The rich men hold all the power, and render the poor, especially poor women, utterly powerless and paralyzed in their social class.  She castigates a male aristocratic society that prevents any social mobility.  In her final line, “Nor fear the God whom priests and kings have made,” Barbauld suggests that the actual God proves much kinder than the organized politics which men have created.

In her poem, “Washing-Day,” Barbauld seems to change her own approach, as well as her advice to the poor concerning social immobility.  While people are meant to read “To the Poor” sarcastically, Barbauld never provides a solid solution as to how to deal with social immobility and oppression by a male aristocracy.  However, in “Washing-Day,” rather than advising the poor to wait for heaven, Barbauld gives women an “out,” so to speak, in the form of imagination.  From the onset, Barbauld mocks male pretentiousness; indeed, the poem takes the form of a mock-heroic poem as she pokes fun at Milton’s invocation of a muse and inflated tone apparent throughout Paradise Lost.  Barbauld tries to burst Milton’s “bubble” through her own supplication of a muse to “sing the dreaded Washing-day” (8).  She approaches the arrival of washing-day with a mock serious tone, mimicking Milton’s solemn and lofty tone regarding the Fall of Man.  Washing-day turns into a day to fear; black clouds mark its advent and “Nor pleasant smile, nor quaint device of mirth, / E’er visited that day” (15-16).  Barbauld effectively laughs in Milton’s face; her poem demands attention, just as Milton’s Paradise Lost did.  She writes with a strong sense of poetic authority and approaches the act of washing laundry as seriously as Milton approaches the act of Eve tasting the forbidden fruit.