COSMONAUTiCAL•net Science & Semantics
In Wives and Daughters, Elizabeth Gaskell writes about the town of Hollingford and the people, Molly Gibson and her relations in particular, that make up the population of the town. The novel follows Molly over many years as she grows up and falls in love in a society in which she has very little control over her circumstances and so must learn to adapt to them. She must, in the words of Herbert Spencer, “adjust [her] internal relations to external relations” (289). This is part of Spencer’s definition of an individual. He says that “any concrete whole having a structure which enables it, when placed in appropriate conditions, to continuously adjust its internal relations to external relations, so as to maintain the equilibrium of its functions” (Otis, 289) can be considered a distinct individual. It is easy to assume that all human beings (or characters, if we accept that they are independent of their authors within the context of their stories) can be considered individuals in Spencer’s definition; indeed, Spencer himself seems to take this assumption for granted. Spencer says that “as applied to a man … the word individual has a clear meaning” (Otis 285, emphasis added). But what of women? Can the women and girls in Wives and Daughters really be considered individuals? Using the setting of the novel in general, and the character of Molly Gibson in particular, I propose to show why, not only in spite of but because of the social limits placed on women during the Victorian era, the women in Wives and Daughters can be considered individuals, perhaps even more-so than the men, because it is the women who learn to adapt to their environments.
It is easy to understand why Spencer would make his assertion that “as applied to a man … the word individual has a clear meaning” (Otis 285, emphasis added). Culturally, this is a logical way of thinking about the subject. The title of the novel is Wives and Daughters, not Husbands and Sons. The women in the novel are defined by their relations to men, right up to Lady Cumnor, who takes her husband’s title, though we can assume that she was of the aristocracy as well. (Although Osborne marries Amiee, their relationship was not the norm and the aristocracy in particular rarely married outside that elite circle.) Furthermore, it is the men who are free to propose, for example, thereby changing their environments to suit their emotions. It could be argued, however, that the power to adjust external relations actually inhibits men from being individuals under Spencer’s definition.
Roger and Mr. Coxe both, in the course of Wives and Daughters, fall in love with both Cynthia and Molly. Both men, at one point or another in the novel, propose or attempt to propose, to both girls. For Mr. Coxe especially to attempt to express his interest in Molly, but he was unable to adjust his internal relations to his external relations and not only further disrupts his own equilibrium, but throws off the balance of the household as well.
Some of the men in Wives and Daughters can be considered individuals. Mr. Gibson, having married Mrs. Kirkpatrick, discovers in her a number of irksome qualities and learns to deal with them without disrupting his whole family. He internalizes his annoyance and does not express it to anyone else. In this case, Mr. Gibson is able to adjust his internal relations to external ones. However, because of the legal prohibition against divorce, socially limiting circumstances that force Mr. Gibson to “adjust [his] internal relations to external relations,” the same way social limitations force the women of Wives and Daughters to adapt their emotions to their environment.
Whether or Molly can be considered an individual comes down to how we define “equilibrium,” the cornerstone of Spencer’s definition of individuality. Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary defines equilibrium as “a state of balance between opposing forces or actions,” or “a state of intellectual or emotional balance.”
Molly Gibson, having grown up in this era of limited freedom for women would have learned to balance her emotions and needs (internal relations) against social norms (external relations) and have become adept at it by necessity. It is easy to disparage Molly for her actions immediately following the news that Roger has proposed to Cynthia. She cries at the windowsill but she is able to rouse herself and at least put on a façade and pretend to be “unconcerned” with the news, when in fact it wounds her deeply (Gaskell, 373). That she has the presence of mind to take actions to maintain the equilibrium of the household speaks volumes about her personal equilibrium; she was not so far gone as to completely forego social conventions. Though Molly, a modest heroine, is unaware of her love for Roger, she is upset that he has proposed to her step-sister. She could have mentioned this to Mr. Gibson, or to Cynthia, or to Roger, to whom she was as close as could be, but she chose not to. In fact, it did not even occur to her to speak with them about it. As a girl, with no power over her environment (external relations), Molly had learned how to balance her emotions (internal relations).
In keeping her feelings to herself and thereby preserving the equilibrium of the household as well as was within her power, Molly is also striving to maintain her own equilibrium. Letting her family or Roger know her innermost feelings would only further disrupt her and her family, still startled and in some disarray after Roger’s proposal. Molly has to keep the balance in her family and in herself.
Spencer’s definition of life, is essentially a way of saying “homeostasis,” which is in turned defined, by Merriam-Webster as “a relatively stable state of equilibrium or a tendency toward such a state.” The Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary defines “homeostasis” as “the maintenance of relatively stable internal physiological conditions.”
It is this “tendency towards such a state” of equilibrium that allows us to say that Molly is an individual. Although she is not in a state of equilibrium upon hearing the news that her beloved Roger has proposed to her step-sister, she struggles back to it in the following chapter.
Spencer’s definition makes an allowance for this struggle or tendency in that he says that individuals “continuously adjust” (Otis, 289) to external pressures or stressors. Molly’s “equilibrium” is compromised by Roger’s proposal to Cynthia, “external relations” over which she has no control, but she is able to “adjust [her] internal relations” accordingly.
Molly, as a modest heroine, cannot express her interest – is not even aware of her interest – in Roger and so must learn to live with her feelings, or to continue to not acknowledge them. Coxe and Roger on the other hand are free to acknowledge and express their emotions and change their environment to suit their emotions. Contrary to the obvious assumption that in the Victorian era women and girls, including Molly Gibson, could not be individuals because of their limited freedoms, it is these limited freedoms that forces them to be “individuals” under Spencer’s definition, because the only way for them to survive and thrive is to adjust their internal relations to their external relations, as they have little to no control over their external relations. This compared to the men, who are relatively free to adjust their external relations and therefore not so apt to adjust their internal relations instead, makes the women even more of an individual in Spencer’s definition.
Spencer’s definition was mostly about animals and plants of lower orders; he takes for granted that human beings (if we assume that by “man,” Spencer means “human”) are undoubtedly individuals. Spencer’s definition was written from a scientific, not social, point of view. However, individuality is very much a question of semantics, both in the sciences, as with the “mulitaxial plants” and the strawberry runners (Otis, 286), as well as in literature and broader human individuality. The scientific world was changing as Gaskell was writing Wives and Daughters. New theories and ideas were challenging the Victorian’s world view, and Gaskell was not immune to her environment. She had to adjust her internal relations, her understanding of the world, to her external relations, the challenges to that worldview presented by radical new scientific theories. Intentionally or not, she wove contemporary theories like Spencer’s into Wives and Daughters.
Works Cited
Gaskell, Elizabeth. Wives and Daughters. Penguin Books: New York, New York, 2001.
Spencer, Herbert. “Principles of Biology.” Literature and Science
in the Nineteenth Century: An Anthology. Ed. Laura Otis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2002.