Mary Barton: Contemporary Criticism

For this blog on the more contemporary criticisms of Mary Barton I chose to read the article Maternal Authority in "Mary Barton" by Hilary M. Schor. I chose this article mainly because it sounded interesting and unlike anything we have talked about so far in class. The main point of Schor's essay was the importance of a mother or at least a mother-like authority. Although Mary's mother dies in only the second chapter, she still has her long lost Aunt Esther who does everything in her power to look after Mary's best interest, even though Esther herself is a lowly prostitute. When Mary believes her mother has come back from the dead, she is surprised to find Esther instead, as if Esther has actually replaced Mary's mother altogether. To the working class in the novel, a mothers authority is a comfort rather than a constraint. To have a mother watch after you is to have someone care for you and "freedom [there] seems to be nothing more than desolation-- the desolation of the unloved and unwatched over," (559). Esther took on the motherly role by watching over Mary, even if it was from afar. She did everything in her power to make sure Mary did not suffer the same fate that Esther had, she even ended up in jail trying to help Mary. 

Schon goes on to argue that in order for the characters in the book to turn towards a motherly authority, they had to make themselves children, for there are no mothers without children. After Mr. Carson refuses to forgive John Barton, he watches a young girl forgive a boy who knocks her over. The girl forgives him instantly saying he didn't know what he was doing. This leads Carson to the Bible, and ultimately to forgiving John Barton. When John asks for forgiveness he is making himself the child and by forgiving him Carson makes himself "Christ-as-mother," ("Christ" because he came to the conclusion through the Bible) (563). The characters of the novel had to assume one of two roles: the protected or the protecter; the mother or the child. Many of the people in the novel assume each of the roles at different times and after doing so undergo a change in character that often turns the tides of the novel itself.

Geskell began writing Mary Barton in order to distract herself from the death of her infant son, at the insistence of her husband. Because she was writing through a pain no mother should ever have to endure, it makes sense to me why a "mother authority" is so present throughout the novel (although I never thought about it that way before reading this article). I though Geskell did a great job incorporating her heartbreak in the book without making it the main focus. The death of the infants in the beginning of the novel, Mrs. Wilson's devastation over Jem's arrest and Alice's attachment to her foster son were all great examples of the struggles mothers endure, although they were not by any means the central theme of the book. It was not until I read this article did I even consider the role of maternal authority in this novel. 

Work Cited

Gaskell, Elizabeth. Mary Barton. Ed Thomas Recchio: A Norton Critical Edition. New York: W. W. Norton, 2008. Print.

Mary Barton

In this blog, I will summarize and analyze two essays regarding Elizabeth Geskell's Mary Barton, both of which were written a year after the novel was published.

Summery:

The first essay was an unsigned review from the British Quarterly that was written in 1849. Shortly into the critical review of Mary Barton, the critic states, "The author of 'Mary Barton' has given by no means a fair picture of the attitude which the two contending partied (workers and masters) usually assume towards each other," (369). He (assuming the author of this particular review is a man) goes on to describe the parallels between the murder of an actual mill owner, Mr. Thomas Ashton, and the murder of Harry Carson in Mary Barton. Some of the similarities include the fact that Carson was shot close to his father's home, as was Mr. Ashton and also that a reward of £1000 for the discovery of the murderer. He also mentions how Mr. Ashton was in fact a fair master and his workers were not even involved with the strike during the time of his murder. He then goes on to describe the violent natures of the workmen and how they would often spend any money they earned, regardless of the wages they earned. 

Throughout the rest of the essay, the author talks about the working conditions of the mill. He says that the conditions depicted in Mary Barton were inaccurate, claiming "that the labour in a cotton-mill, especially for the women and the young people, is extremely light," (372). He also lists various statistics regarding the amount of reported accidents in the mills. 

By contrast, the second essay is full of praise for Mary Barton. Also anonymous, the writer of this essay says, "the authoress has chosen an exceptional instead of the normal condition of social feeling, as the subject of her fiction," (374). He goes on to praise Gaskell's use of imagery, her development of characters, as well as her overall organization of the the novel. Although the essay overall applauds Mary Barton, the author also touches on a few criticisms as well. He says, "Mary Barton is so strong in genuine excellence, that it can well bear a faithful criticism," (378). The author mentions inconsistencies to characters of both Mary and John Barton as well as touching on the unfair depiction of the masters that was the topic in the first essay.

Analysis:

I thought the first essay I read was very interesting. While reading the novel, it is hard to see the masters as anything but selfish and greedy with no thought about the people they employed. After reading the first essay, I began to rethink the way I saw the masters. I began to wonder if they were really as bad as they were portrayed in Mary Barton. Even though the essay was successful in making me stop and think, I still noticed how the whole essay was almost dripping bias. It was almost as if the writer of the essay was a mill-owner himself. I think he made fair points that not all masters were horrible to their workers, but I feel like he discredited himself when he began to "bash" the workers in the same way that Gaskell shed a negative light on the mill-owners. I think there are two extremes in the situation, but Geskell's novel was closer to the middle than the essay. There was one point however that the author made that I thought was good. He mentioned how it was very unlikely that the workers would go on strike when there was little work. Man will do almost anything to survive and it does not seem to be in our nature to make hard times even harder. Going on strike during prosperous times, however, could very well have the desired outcomes. This is the one valid point made by the first author. 

The second essay was full of praise and I agree with that praise on all levels. The one areas where I disagreed with the essay was when the author criticized the inconsistencies in Mary and John's characters. I believe it is those very inconsistencies that gave Mary and John and believable aspect. There are very few people who are exactly the same no matter who they are around. Mary's change in character between her two lovers is exactly how most young women would act, even today. John's changes throughout the book are just testaments to how hard times can change even the most sturdy of men. Without these inconsistencies in character, I don't think the story would have the depth that is otherwise does. It would not have been as believable. 

Work Cited

Gaskell, Elizabeth. Mary Barton: Norton Critical Edition. W.W. Norton & Company. 2008.