The very form of the sentence does not suit her. It is a sentence made by men; It is too loose, too heavy, too pompous for women's wear. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay by Virginia Woolf, in her collective essays, "Modern Fiction." Eliza Haywood's novels are important documents not only in women's history, but also in literature. , social and moral tensions of their time. Her stories are typically told with a considerable amount of what Mary Anne Schofield calls "narrative energy" (116), detailing the plight of a woman whose stories of passion and conflict are detailed by a world indifferent to her in as a woman. She was an “aggressive writer” who made important comments on the position and role of women in the 18th century. It was a crucial period in history for women writers. They had absolutely no rights, no individual existence or identity, and the very act of writing, especially for a public audience, was in essence an assertion of their individuality and autonomy, and often an act of defiance. To write was to be; it was about creating and existing. It was about constructing and controlling a worldview without the interference of men. No woman writer could ignore this notion, they had to know the consequences of writing and being a woman, and almost all felt compelled to defend themselves against this attack (Spender 3). Dale Spender, author of The Mothers of the Novel, suggests that because early novelists and playwrights came from all walks of life, they did not belong to a small, privileged class; their writing experiences were more representative of their gender as a whole (3-4). He also discusses the idea that the majority of novels written in the 18th century were written by women and that men "were not amused by the importance of women" and used female pseudonyms to try to find a privileged path to the entrance. print, which was quite the opposite a hundred years ago (4). Ros Ballaster has a different take on the foundation of women's writing, stating: "The novel, identified at each stage as a 'feminine form,' was, at this time, refined by purging it of its unsavory associations with the female sexuality and the subversive spirit. power of the “spirit” or feminine artifice” (Balaster 3) If women's writing is important for the history of the novel, the novel is no less important for the history of women's research for a public voice. In the 18th century, it was an important means of expressing women's concerns, and its rise was primarily linked to the growth of an acceptable female literary voice within a patriarchal society. Jane Spencer, a feminist and author of a book attempting to empower the voices of women writers, states in her book The Rise of the Woman Novelist: "Any study that treats women writers as a distinct group must explain the reasoning who is behind such a procedure. [Women writers] entered a realm of discourse that had long been dominated by men; their work imitated, countered, or influenced the work of their male contemporaries, and it could be argued that they would be better studied alongside these. men” (ix). Spencer attempts to prove in his speech that women's writings were no different from men's, in style, theme, or content, and that women in fact held a special position in their writings because they were able to use theirwork to influence and counteract stereotypes within their writing. Their position as female authors, placing them above their contemporaries. Because "feminist" was not a word at that time, it is difficult to read 18th-century women's writings as feminist writings. The nature of women and their role within society have always been the subject of serious debate, and many women have taken positions that could have been described as feminist roles. Due to the very low opinion of the intellectual abilities of women in general, according to the masculine cultural tradition, a woman writer seemed, through the very act of writing, to question received notions of femininity and therefore to engage in what Spencer defines it as a “feminist discourse” (x). When women writers were accepted, it was on the basis of their femininity, and the type of praise they received varied depending on their readers' conception of this quality, so that for some people, writing feminine implied eroticism, for others, purity. should confine itself within the circle drawn by dominant notions of the feminine, and women authors should turn away from the examples of those precursors whose femininity did not fit the fashionable definition (Spencer 75). Modesty among women writers became an important term of praise, limiting female desires. Spencer writes that in the 18th century, “the morality expected of a woman was stricter, her style had to be limited to natural simplicity, unlike that of a man; and his modesty was of a very different order” (78). Women's writing was bound to be affected once fear about what they did was seen as desirable proof of their worth, and the demand for female modesty might even have negated the effects of all other encouragement and prevent some women from writing or publishing. . It was thought that reading women made them more rational; to enable them to think rather than feel, and to make them better equipped to fulfill their domestic function (Balaster 198). Haywood's ability to use her writing to motivate and empower the voice of female desire during this time was revolutionary for all women. . Haywood believed that women should have the same educational opportunities as men. “Eighteenth-century society associated female authorship with inappropriate public exposure, sexual transgression, and the production of substandard texts” (Saxton 8). Haywood defended the treatment of her texts as inferior by accusing women of not being properly educated and therefore should not be expected to write on subjects beyond their general knowledge. In her writings, she spoke about much more than love and desire; she was making a statement about female sexuality and gender inequality. Janet Todd points out: “By the mid-eighteenth century, the woman writer who wanted to please the public understood that she had to describe feelings, not sex” (146). But Haywood defies this notion and writes her novels filled with girls at the mercy of men, ravaged by their own desires and the vulgar suggestions of sexuality from those who have already fallen. George Whicher describes Haywood as someone who exploited a form of libertine sexuality, attached to the acquisitive motives of men, which would ruin the unfortunate virgin (16). Contrary to this belief, Haywood is content to embrace the form of female desire, protesting against the confinement of women which characterized them in the 18th century. She showed the impact of her time by treating marriage, and not the love story, as theideal outcome of love. Fantomina illustrates many of the same themes as Love in Excess, but changes the characters' roles to give the power of desire. to the female character rather than the male character through the art of masquerade. In her novels, Haywood looks at the lives of single women in the 18th century and shows that single women who did not conform to the standards set for them were treated as bad examples of their sex and even as immoral and immoral women. scandalous. If a woman didn't want to spend her entire life being treated like a possession, she had to find a way to escape the bonds of tradition and patriarchy. Through the use of masquerade and deception, many of Haywood's characters manage to achieve this. The idea of ​​virtue is seen as a burden on women, and some characters freely abandon their virtue, while others hold tightly to it, making them vulnerable and subject to greater consequences. Masquerade is a important element of Haywood's novels. It is used by female characters as a way to gain control or power. Specifically, Haywood's female characters often mispresent themselves as a means to sexual power and even sexual gratification. Many of Haywood's female characters are unable to distinguish truth from lies, or to pierce the veil that divides reality and appearance; therefore, their ability to protect themselves against abuse of power is limited (Merritt 22). However, Haywood's most interesting female characters are those who find ways to exercise their power within their roles as sexual objects or who attempt to appropriate the advantages of male subjectivity outright. Fantomina and Love in Excess are not simple tales of sexual escapades, they represent women as beings just as capable of desire as men. Theories of masquerade frequently emphasize its capacity to challenge gender, political, and social hierarchies. In his influential study, Terry Castle makes extensive claims to the subversive potential of masquerade, particularly for women: "With the anonymity of the mask...the 18th-century woman made an abrupt exit from the system of sexual domination... In the exquisite round In the meeting room, a woman was free to move, not as a commodity put into circulation by men, but at her own pleasure. The masquerade was in fact a microcosm in which external forms of sexual subordination had ceased to exist. The masquerade symbolized a realm of women unmarked by patriarchy, unmarked by the signs of exchange and domination, and independent of the dominant sexual economy of eighteenth-century culture” (255). Love in Excess is arguably the novel that critics say first established Haywood's reputation. as an authority on the “vicissitudes of erotic desire” (Merritt 27). This story is filled with passion, with predatory men, often motivated by ambition or interest, and innocent, victimized women. It has three parts, and the first two report the marriage of the Earl of Elmont to a woman he loves. They are dominated by Alovisa's attempts to manipulate and control the court with his gaze. The story begins with Alovisa's attempt to direct D'Elmont's gaze precisely because he does not see her as the object of his desire. He is “not an object that one can gaze upon in complete safety” (114), as all the female characters who encounter him fall madly in love with him. In the story, he is a man who cannot be trusted (Williamson 229). Haywood says thatit is the kind of love “that considers its own gratification more than the interest or peace of the beloved object” (131). Williamson says that Haywood's criticism of male behavior is consistent and that she "comments that although D'Elmont would be unfaithful to Alovisa, he blames her for her transgression" (229-230): "Man is too arbitrary a creature to be supported. the slightest contradiction, where he claims absolute authority, and this woman who thinks out of bad humor and perpetual taunts, to tire him of what she would like to claim him for, only makes herself more odious and makes justifiable what previously was blameworthy in him" (133). D'Elmont sees his marriage as an obstacle to the fulfillment of his marriage to Melliora, another of his transgressions, as he is constrained by his marriage to Alovisa, whom he marries solely because of her Haywood uses D'Elmont as a female character to prove that men can manipulate women as easily as women can men. Women were often the product of a loveless marriage for financial security, and trading. These gender roles, Haywood is able to place the blame on the man's character, rather than on the woman. The female characters in Haywood's novels are most often presented in the show as eroticized objects of desire, seen from. voyeuristic manner by men, making them become the helpless victims of the male characters. Alovisan escapes this role only to become another form of passive spectacle, which is the “hysterical female body”. Indeed, in terms of the ability to master the spectacle position, for Haywood, it is men who can manipulate the spectator/spectacle structure to inhabit one or the other position at will (Merritt 39). Melantha's character takes the element of masquerade to the extreme when she switches rooms with Melliora and pretends to be the woman D'Elmont desires most in order to have her sexually: although the Count was only very a short time in the arms of his supposed Melliora, he had nevertheless taken advantage of it so well, and had benefited so much from her complacent humor, that. . .he now believed himself to be the luckiest of all humanity; . . His behavior towards Melantha was nothing but rapture, murderous ecstasy. (157). By making Melantha the character who deceives the Count, it's quite a role reversal. She pretends to be Melliora and willingly lets herself be raped by the count. Perhaps she is the only female character in the novel truly capable of enjoying the affection she seeks. She is as much the opposite of Melliora as any other character. Once the Count is satisfied and believes he has taken Melliora's virtue, he is shocked when Alovisa bursts in, followed by Melliora. When he realizes what is really happening, he is shocked. By having Alovisa viciously killed, Haywood is able to conclude part two with Melantha getting exactly what she desires, From Elmont, and not being punished at all for it. In fact, the reader believes that she is flourishing. Haywood does not punish his characters for resorting to masquerade to get what they want most. The heroines of Haywood's novels who do not fall prey to the male plotter are those who manage to compete with this plot power in their own person. Thus, the nameless heroine of Fantomina learns to maintain the interest of the young man who first seduces her by presenting himself to him for seduction in a series of "masquerade" disguises: a servant, a lonely widow, a mysterious masked aristocrat (Balaster 205). The heroine notices men's reaction to prostitutes and realizes that she will never get the same reaction from them due to her bourgeois status.She decides to disguise herself as a prostitute in order to find out how men approach these women. Behind the deception of the mask, she can enjoy this freedom that Castle calls “a kind of psychological latitude normally reserved for men” (44). Only the masquerade offers a sanctioned space for “Fantomina,” for “a lifting of restrictions on the social mobility of women” (Balaster 188). The theme of rape appears in both Love in Excess and Fantomina. It seems that female characters who feel desire often find themselves rebuffing the advances of the men they so desperately desire. The characters of “Fantomina” and Melliora. It is clear to readers that Melliora wants D'Elmont, but she does not allow herself to act on this desire. She even resorts to manipulation to prevent him from raping her by telling him: “O cruel D’Elmont! Will you then take advantage of my weakness?... Leave my honor free! (145-146). Similar to “Fantomina,” Beauplaisir strips her of all her virtue under the threat of rape. However, her character is largely responsible for the rape as she is disguised as a prostitute. Likewise, what happens to “Fantomina” is exactly what she was looking for in the first place: the desire to be desired. And what's quite confusing about these characters is how completely vulnerable they are with their emotions because they are women. They belong to the weaker sex and can be raped. In the end, “Fantomina” loses her virtue, but realizes that she has nothing to do but continue to show that she can still be desirable. Using a second disguise, the heroine decides to continue her act of seduction through masquerade. She is no longer a virgin, and can take charge of the next masquerade, no longer being Beauplaisir's innocent victim. At this point, she knows what she wants and pursues it vehemently. Madhuchhanda Mitra points out that Haywood "gives the heroine the ability to act on her desires by also giving her skills 'in the act of pretending'" (155). By the time Beauplaisir is ready to move on to his wife, the heroine quickly moves on to the next disguise, unable to yet succumb to the truth of her identity. Disguised as a poor and unhappy widow, she once again succeeds in seducing him while letting him believe that he is in reality the seducer. Haywood succeeds in allowing his male characters to fall strong while his readers are still able to figure out who the fool really is. However, Haywood seems to punish his heroine, ending her game with Beauplaisir, by announcing that "She was with a child" (68). The character becomes helpless, unable to continue his game of masquerade, because he is unable to hide something as obvious as a pregnancy. Is Haywood punishing her character for losing her virtue due to her loss of virginity? Yes and no. Sooner or later, Beauplaisir would lose interest, or catch up (although his intelligence is called into question by the fact that he was unable to find any similarities between these four characters). The game couldn't last forever, because it started with deception. Perhaps if the heroine had seduced Beauplaisir under other circumstances with her honor and virtue still intact, they could have lived happily within the confines of marriage. Perhaps Beauplaisir's wandering eye (similar to D'Elmont's) would always have been looking for something new and exciting. Haywood emphasizes the fact that true love can never last based on lies and disguise. Alovisa and D'Elmont did not marry for the right reason, and their marriage was not successful. Although women's fantasies, especially in fiction, include that women can become pregnant in romantic relationships, they imitate men in, 1990.