Religion and Social Division in the Victorian Era

Religion and Social Division in the Victorian Era

The Victorian Era was a period in which there was a clearly established and stratified social hierarchy. There existed a strict adherence to the social conventions of the time, and one’s social standing was primarily based on inheritance: ancestral lineage took precedence over virtually everything else. Similarly, established religious beliefs and – primarily – those who followed them shared a mindset which echoed eerily close to those of the general public. Both parties seemed to simply accept their prescribed dogmas as somewhat infallible – be it in the form of social conventions or religious doctrines. In the latter part of the Victorian Era, however, there appears a great divide in religious belief; an era of questioning – of awakening. Spurred forth by the ubiquitous – and dangerous – “yellow book” (Darwin’s On the Origin of Species), many scholars and academics found themselves wrestling with what to believe: their religious doctrines and dogmas, or science and academia (class notes, 11-19). This tumultuous time allowed many Victorian Era authors to see a parallel between both established beliefs and existing social conventions, while also prompting readers to question the validity of said establishments.

In Flatland, Edwin A. Abbott presents a society in which all inhabitants are simple, two dimensional figures. Within these various shapes, however, there, too, exists artificially created divisive social regulations. Abbott clearly illustrates the defining characteristics of each class. The lowest class, the Soldiers are triangles – specifically isosceles triangles. Next are the equilateral triangles, the “tradesmen of the respectable class.” Squares and Pentagons represent the “professional men and gentlemen” of the society. Nobility, “of whom there are several degrees,” is made up of hexagons and “from thence rising in the number of their sides till they receive the honourable title of Polygon.” The highest order of all is made up of the “circular” shapes; called the “priestly order” (Abbott, 7). The stratification of this society is based on a convention which we – the readers – would find somewhat arbitrary or pedantic: the number of sides comprising each shape and how equally each side is configured in terms of length. Still, there exists a simple form of upward social mobility; the Law of Nature, which states that: “a male child shall have one more side than his father.” The fundamental Law upon which the entire society is built clearly illustrates that there is no means for females to progress socially, aside from the prospect of marriage. The exceptions for the Law do not end there, however, as “this rule applies not always to the Tradesmen, and still less often to the Soldiers, and to the Workmen; who indeed can hardly be said to deserve the name of human Figures, since they have not all their sides equal” (Abbott, 7). Although Abbott’s fictional society exists solely in their two dimensional realm, the narrator of the story is taken on a journey through realms of many more (and less) dimensions by a prophetic Sphere. As he attempts to inform others of his findings, he hears a public announcement “of the Resolution of the Council, enjoining the arrest, imprisonment, or execution of any one who should pervert the minds of the people by delusions, and by professing to have received revelations from another World” (Abbott, 77). Abbott explores and illustrates the fact that a governmentally enforced doctrine leads to an extremely repressed society. The Law of Nature is both their religious dogma and their government charter, and upsetting that which the society is based upon – despite its arbitrary foundation – is punishable by death.

Thomas Hardy illustrates the dangers of conflicting social and religious ideologies on a more personal level in Tess of the D’Urbervilles. Tess’ father John (then a Durbeyfield) learns from the town parson that he is descended from a noble blood line and declares himself “Sir John d’Urberville” (Hardy, 4). Despite his newfound royal lineage, John and his family are no better off as d’Urbervilles than they were as Durbeyfields. They live in a society so completely and utterly obsessed with upward social mobility, that at times it necessitates a financially successful family to seek out and purchase a nearly extinct family name with which to replace their own, non-noble surname. This leads directly to a propagation of this societal bias and segregation. Alec d’Urberville, who is of noble blood in name only, continues this cycle of division through his rationale and justification for the rape of Tess. Alec states that, “doubtless some of Tess d’Urberville’s mailed ancestors rollicking home from a fray had dealt the same measure even more ruthlessly toward peasant-girls of their time” (Hardy, 58). There is a bitter irony in the fact that the individual who is descended from noble blood is the one taken advantage of by the false-Nobility with which Alec justifies his actions. Additionally, Alec further rationalizes his actions through religion, commenting on the absence of divine intervention that was “the providence of (Tess’) simple faith?” (Hardy, 58).

Despite its origin, late Victorian era authors make effective use of religious and societal parallels in order provoke readers to actively think about institutions. In Tess, Hardy utilizes harsh ironies and misplaced faith to provide readers a certain cynicism with which to view societal norms. Abbott approaches the situation at a macro-level, viewing the issue systemically and allowing readers to gather insight into how arbitrary and antiquated some divisive conventions may be.

 

Bibliography:

Abbott, Edwin A. Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, 1992. Print.

Hardy, Thomas. Tess of the D’Urbervilles. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, 2001. Print.