Gender Politics in Victorian Literature: The Treatment of the Angel in

the House in A Study in Scarlet, The Moonstone and Middlemarch

By Bianca van de Water

In the nineteenth century, the concept of femininity,

a socially-determined set of strictures prescribing

behaviour and appearance deemed womanly

(Heilmann and Sanders 290), was under significant

societal pressure to change due to the popularity of

the novel; women authors successes; and, female readerships exceptional growth (Vicinus 473).

Nonetheless, the Angel in the House was a persistent and pervasive Victorian socio-cultural

stereotype (Langland 290), which represented women as domestic angels who naturally radiate

charm and order that turn the home into a refuge (298) due to the womans devotion to her family

(Vicinus 471). Virginia Woolf defined the Angel in the House as a woman who was intensely

sympathetic, immensely charming, and so utterly unselfish that she never had a mind or wish

of her own, but preferred to sympathize always with the minds and wishes of others (loc. 80050).

The present essay discusses how three Victorian texts, namely A Study in Scarlet by Arthur Conan

Doyle, The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins, and Middlemarch by George Eliot treat this Victorian

stereotype so as to determine how normative nineteenth-century discourses on femininity have been

supported or subverted. The discussion will be limited to the main female protagonist in each text,

whereby it will be demonstrated that the maiden in Doyles detective novella conforms to stereotypes

of the true woman of Victorian fiction; the sensation heroine in Collinss novel problematizes both

angel and demon stereotypes; and the seraph in Eliots realist tome exposes the undesirability of the

social ideal of the Angel in the House.

Page 1 of 10
The Geographically-Displaced Angel

Religious fanaticism, polygamy and murder form the main preoccupations of A Study in Scarlet,

whereby possession of a female character, Lucy Ferrier, constitutes the underlying cause for the

novellas double murder. Lucy comes of age in a rural American Mormon community, where women

are considered possessions and commodities as demonstrated by Elder Brigham Young, who refers to

the Elders wives as heifers (Doyle 95). Furthermore, he refers to their sons romantic unions as a

situation that must also be provided (Ibid.) as if love can be purveyed and purchased like cattle or

farm produce. Lucy intends to marry Jefferson Hope, a non-Mormon, which would have been a

grievous sin as interfaith unions are forbidden according to the Mormon creed. The young lovers

wishes are utterly disregarded by Young, who decides Lucy must marry either of two available men

from the religious community, Enoch Drebber or Joseph Stangerson, even though both already have

multiple spouses. Disregard of Youngs edict will be thus severely punished that it would be preferable

to be blanched skeletons lying upon the Sierra Blanco (95). Ultimately, Lucys heroic escape

attempt is thwarted by a Mormon posse, resulting in her father John Ferriers assassination and Lucys

forced marriage to Drebber, who desired her principally for the sake of John Ferriers property (114).

These events send Lucy to an early grave, which in turn ignites Jefferson Hopes determination to

avenge his lover and her father. In sum, Lucy could be considered a stock character as a wronged

maiden (Agathocleous 129) or a stereotypical heroine of romance (qtd. in Dearinger 58).

Dearinger (59) argues that Lucy emblematizes Conan Doyles idea of a quintessential American

beauty, in that the narrator describes her as a fair specimen of American girlhood as could be found

in whole Pacific slope (Doyle 86). Contrarily, her characterisation demonstrates that she resembles a

Victorian Angel in the House rather than an American stereotype. Firstly, Lucy is described by the

narrator as having a pure soul (114), a quality that was considered the Victorian Angels chief

beauty, desirable above all other qualities (Woolf loc. 80053). According to Woolf, this quality was

demonstrated through blushes and great grace (Ibid.). Indeed, Lucy displays this behaviour, as she

Page 2 of 10
has a blushing cheek and . . . bright, happy eyes in the presence of her lover Jefferson (Doyle 90).

Secondly, Lucy appears remarkably obedient and voices few own opinions as demonstrated in indirect

representations of her speech. In a dialogue with Jefferson on their future relationship, she replies to

his plans, if you and Father have arranged it all, theres no more to be said (Ibid.), which

demonstrates that she is prepared to comply with mens decisions rather than formulate own

initiatives. This speech evidences Lucys adherence to the English social stereotype, in that Victorian

women were subservient to men (Langland 294). Thirdly, Lucy practices little agency, even when

others actions harm her wellbeing. For instance, she takes no action to improve her lot once forced

into marriage with Drebber. Instead, she complies with the wishes of the Mormon community even

though she physically and emotionally withers away, in that she never held up her head again, but

pined away and died within a month (Doyle 114) of the wedding. Lastly, Lucys sexual desires have

been omitted in the text, contrary to male sexual desire, in that Jeffersons feelings have been

described in vivid imagery. The sight of the maiden had stirred his volcanic, untamed heart to its

depths (89). By contrast, Lucys thoughts and feelings have been omitted in compliance with the

stereotype of the pristine, desexualised Angel of the House (Bernstein 214). Hereby, her

characterisation further reinforces the notion that women have no mind, opinions or desires of their

own. In sum, Lucy has been depicted as pure, passive, obedient and asexual. As such, she represents

a stereotypical, unproblematic Victorian Angel in the House even though her social milieu is set in a

geographically-distant location.

The Sensation Angel

The Moonstone is concerned with a notorious yellow diamond from India, which has been bequeathed

to Miss Rachel Verinder upon her eighteenth birthday. The jewel mysteriously disappears the night

after her birthday party. The text is purportedly a written record of the facts, (Collins 5), consisting

of written testimonies of seven narrators, with the purpose to generate new insights into the crime

and possibly exonerate innocent people. Initially, Rachel has been implicated, in that Sergeant Cuff

Page 3 of 10
claims to know that she has been in secret possession of the Moonstone from first to last (79).

Miss Clack, one of the narrators, casts further aspersions on her character by stating that Rachel had

been unregenerate from her childhood upwards, which might have gone on from bad to worse till

it ended in Murder (119). Hereby, it is suggested that Miss Verinder is a sensation heroine, a

problematic character that embodies binary oppositions as an outwardly quintessential Victorian

Angel in the House, which disguises her true nature as a demon of domestic crimes (Bernstein 216).

Rachels dual nature is foreshadowed by her mother Lady Verinder, in that she stated Rachels best

friend and Rachels worst enemy are . . . Rachel herself (Collins 32). Indeed, the novel contains

evidence that demonstrates she is both a transgressive vixen as well as a Victorian angel.

Initially, Miss Verinder is depicted as the transgressive madam monster of the marketplace, the

woman dazzled by her desires for material acquisitions and sensual pleasures (Bernstein 217).

Sergeant Cuff surmises she has taken the Moonstone, as in his experience young ladies of rank and

position have occasionally private debts which they dare not acknowledge to their nearest relatives

and friends (Collins 97). Women incur debts at fashion boutiques such as the milliner and the

jeweller (Ibid.). Rachel may be a materially acquisitive woman who spends beyond her means, in that

on one occasion she was very nicely dressed in a yellow outfit that emphasized her dark

complexion and slim waistline (89). Her costume was complemented by a smart little straw hat,

that made her beautiful black hair look as smooth as satin, and primrose-coloured gloves that

fitted her hands like a second skin (Ibid.). As such, her appearance suggests she may be a spendthrift,

in contrast to the female thriftiness required of domestic angels (Bernstein 217). Her lust for

commodities could even be considered transgressive, in that she exclaims having the prettiest bonnet

in London (Collins 124-125) upon leaving for the flower-show together with three of the most

audaciously dressed women (Ibid.). These descriptions suggest Rachel and her companions may be

advertising females, an unappealing appellation, in that Victorian society considered such women

akin to street prostitutes (Bernstein 220). Additionally, Rachel demonstrates a capricious, if not

Page 4 of 10
promiscuous, attitude towards men. Initially, she favours Franklin Blake, whom she rejects later. Next,

she accepts Godfrey Ablewhites marriage proposal, whereby she passionately submits to his pleas,

after exclaiming Take me! (Collins 140). This scene suggests that she was driven wild with love,

behaviour that was considered an affront to the domestic ideal of the genteel heroine of mainstream

fiction (Bernstein 213). However, Rachel breaks the engagement, as she considered it a rash

promise (Collins 148), which was made in hopes of putting the man she loves out of her head (149).

Nonetheless, ultimately, she marries her true love, i.e. Franklin Blake, when his innocence in the

disappearance of the diamond has been proven. These depictions demonstrate that Rachel may

indeed have transgressive appetites in regards to material goods and men.

Furthermore, Rachel evidences character traits that could be considered unbecoming of a Victorian

Angel of the House. Firstly, she demonstrates traits of madness and hysteria, which contradict the

socially-prescribed qualities of the true Victorian woman, who ought to be serene, tender, and free

from rancour and anger (Vicinus 471-472). Contrarily, Rachel has frequent angry and passionate

outbursts, as demonstrated in the scene in which Godfrey Ablewhite states he has been accused of

pawning the Moonstone:

She started to her feet with a scream. She looked backwards and forwards from
Mr Godfrey to my aunt, and from my aunt to Mr Godfrey, in such a frantic manner
that I really thought she had gone mad. Dont speak to me! Dont touch me! she
exclaimed, shrinking back from all of us (I declare like some hunted animal!) into a
corner of the room (Collins 123).

Additionally, Rachel demonstrates a certain obstinacy, in that she occasionally refuses to submit to

others wishes as expected of a Victorian domestic angel. On the contrary, she has ideas of her own,

and was stiff-necked enough to set the fashions themselves at defiance, if the fashions didnt suit her

views (Collins 31). This intransigence is demonstrated in her refusal to cooperate with Sergeant Cuff,

in that contrary to his request to remain on the premises and cooperate with his investigation, she

pulled down the veil over her face so vehemently she tore it, ran down the steps and rushed into

the carriage to visit her aunt (89). This scene evidences a genuinely feminist treatment of women,

Page 5 of 10
in that Rachels behaviour subverts the conventions of female decorum (Kemp loc. 220). As such,

women ought to submit to authority (Vicinus 472) and display subservience to men (Langland 294).

Nonetheless, Miss Verinders characterisation is problematic, in that her behaviour is neither

consistently feminist nor sensational in that she also possesses the outward virtues of a true Victorian

angel. As such, she is described as the most charming girl (Collins 28), in possession of a host of

graces and attractions, including the graces of her figure (31). Like Lucy Ferrier in A Study in Scarlet,

she also blushes, occasionally a deeper red than ever (16) at the sight of a desirable male, on this

occasion, Franklin Blake. Perhaps as a consequence of Rachels appropriate demeanour, her

reputation is deemed pure and sacred (124). It could be argued that these appearances constitute

a deceitful performance, in that the sensation heroine uses her charm to disguise her true,

transgressive nature (Bernstein 216). Contrarily, it could also be proposed that Rachels graces

reflect her angelic nature, in that the novels resolution demonstrates that her reticence was intended

to protect Franklin Blake rather than herself. She states that a ladys tongue is a privileged member

(Collins 60) and her narration regarding the Moonstones disappearance is conspicuously absent.

Hereby, Rachel could be considered high-strung, but honourable, which is proven in the denouement,

in which she marries her beloved, whom she loved throughout the estrangement between them

(234). In sum, Rachel constitutes a complex, particularised character, who has characteristics of the

Victorian angel, the histrionic demon and the proto-feminist. In doing so, The Moonstone critiques

two-dimensional, stereotypical characterisations of women as either transgressive vixens or

subservient seraphs and demonstrates that contemporary women may be both sensational and

angelic.

The Socialist Angel

Dorothea Brooke is the central female character in Middlemarch, focussing on her naive romantic

desires. The novel commences with her unfulfilling marriage to Reverend Edward Casaubon, a dried

Page 6 of 10
bookworm towards fifty (Eliot 14), and finishes with her socially-inappropriate second marriage to

Will Ladislaw, a dilettante, with no property, and not well-born (489.). The narrator summarises her

love life as the mixed result of a young and noble impulse struggling amidst the conditions of an

imperfect social state, in which great feelings will often take the aspect of error, and great faith the

aspect of illusion (Ibid.). Although Dorothea seems the paragon of the Victorian Angel in the House,

she demonstrates several characteristics that subvert the stereotype.

Dorothea possesses several virtues, including charm and sympathy, as required for a stereotypical

Victorian Angel of the House (Woolf loc. 80050). She has been described as the most perfect young

Madonna (Eliot 115) and an undeniable beauty (58), who is rich in mingled graces (31) and

evidences fanaticism of sympathy (132). However, her appearance is problematic. On the one hand,

her dress sense highlights her frugality as required of the thrifty housewife of domestic ideology

(Bernstein 217). Thus, she has poor dress comprised of plain garments with sleeves bare of

style (Eliot 5). Her simple dress sense reminds Adolf Naumann of a Quaker (114). On the other

hand, her sartorial asceticism could be interpreted as somewhat transgressive. Her refusal to wear a

pearl cross, the last thing she would wear as a trinket (8), illustrates individualistic disinclination

to comply with established gender codes (Moscovici 520). Her subversion is so subtle it would fail to

shock readers, but is sufficiently obvious and explicit to be noticed (Ibid.).

Likewise, Dorotheas spirituality is problematic. The Victorian womans angelic mission consists of

philanthropy, involving house-to-house visits as spiritual missionaries, managers and employers

(Langland 296). Indeed, Dorothea has ambitious ideas for building good cottages (Eliot 18) for the

poor, which would be real houses fit for human beings from whom we expect duties and ambitions

(19). Sequentially, James Chettam commences to build model cottages on his estate under Dorotheas

guidance. However, Dorothea appears to be as much informed by religious zeal as socialist intentions.

Repeatedly, she refers to her architectural drawings as the plans, which may be an allusion to The

Page 7 of 10
Plan, a blueprint for the ideal community envisaged by Robert Owen, the founder of British socialism

(Allison 717). Dorothea intends use her inheritance, to take a great deal of land, and drain it, and

make a little colony (Eliot 322), like the real-life Victorian socialist Owen. At this colony, Dorothea

imagined everybody should work, and all the work should be done well and she should know every

one of the people and be their friend (Ibid.). As such, she extends her role from a harmless

proselytizer to community manager, a role that might have been perceived as unbecoming for a

proper Victorian angel, in that a woman performed no useful work and pursued careers of

sociability only, to complement her husbands career of financially-renumerated work (Langland

294).

Lastly, Dorotheas socially-sanctioned role as the devoted spouse has been problematized. She

appears genuinely devoted to Casaubon, his knowledge and authority, as was considered becoming

of a Victorian angel (Vicinus 417). She had accepted his marriage proposal with effusion, which was

only natural (Eliot 166). She considered him a great soul (13) and the most interesting man she

had ever seen (11). As a true domestic angel, she is in awe of his knowledge and authority as he

thinks a whole world of which my thought is but a poor two-penny mirror (16). Even though Dorothea

wished to be wise herself (39), she subsumed own ambitions to those of Casaubon, as a lamp-

holder assisting him in reconstructing a past world, doubtless with a view to the highest purposes

of truth (11). Upon marriage, her useful occupations gradually decrease, leading to a hollow,

misspent existence. First, she experiences disappointment that there was nothing to do for her at

Lowick (47), as the cottagers were relatively comfortable. Next, she discovers during the honeymoon

that Casaubons seemingly superior knowledge is outdated, which caused a pang of pity thinking

that her husbands life might be void (125). This painful awareness likewise renders her wifely

devotion as a lamp-holder pointless as those enlightening purposes of truth will not and cannot be

achieved. Lastly, she discovers that married life severely circumscribes her social life, as she seldom

left home without her husband (253). Despite the obvious disappointments of married life, Dorothea

Page 8 of 10
wilfully upholds her role as a domestic angel and repeats identical errors and illusions in her second

marriage with Will Ladislaw, in that she could have liked nothing better than giving him wifely help

(488), hereby once more subjugating herself to her husband. In sum, Dorothea constitutes an

authentic Victorian Angel of the House in regards to subservience and obedience. Nonetheless, this

stereotype has been critiqued, in that the narrator comments that many who knew her, thought it a

pity that so substantive and rare creature should have been absorbed into the life of another, and be

only known . . . as a wife and mother (Ibid.). In doing so, Middlemarch exposes the Victorian ideal as

a disillusionment and domestic tyranny.

Conclusion

The novels discussed above feature three different representations of the Victorian Angel in the

House. Doyles inflexible adherence to the social stereotype in A Study in Scarlet may confirm

Heilmann and Sanders (290) argument that the need to keep telling women how to be feminine

indicates a fear that this was an endangered quality. Indeed, The Moonstone and Middlemarch argue

for enlightened perspectives on womens psychology and social responsibilities respectively by

depicting transgressive but likeable female characters. In conclusion, the three novels demonstrate

that Victorian gender politics were characterised by contesting, contrasting discourses. The idealised

Angel in the House may have been ubiquitous (Langland 290), but certainly not unanimously accepted

as the only option available to be a true woman in Victorian-era England.

Page 9 of 10
 Works Cited

Agathocleous, Tanya. London Mysteries and international conspiracies: James, Doyle, and the
aesthetics of cosmopolitanism. Nineteenth-Century Contexts 26.2 (2004): 125-148. Taylor &
Francis Online. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Allison, Mark. Utopian Socialism, Womens Emancipation, and the Origins of Middlemarch. ELH 78.3
(2011): 715-739. Project Muse Standard Collection. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Bernstein, Susan D. Dirty Reading: Sensation Fiction, Women, and Primitivism. Quarterly for
Literature and the Arts 36.2 (1994): 213-241. Periodicals Archive Online. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Collins, Wilkie. The Moonstone. London, England: Penguin Books, 1998. Kindle file.
Dearinger, Lindsay. Mormonism in A Study in Scarlet: Colonization on the Frontiers (of Sherlockian
Logic). CEA Critic 76.1 (2014): 52-71. Project Muse Standard Collection. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Doyle, Arthur Conan. A Study in Scarlet. London, England: Penguin Books, 2014. Kindle file.
Eliot, George. Middlemarch. London, England: Penguin Books, 2014. Kindle file.
Heilmann, Anne, and Valerie Sanders. The rebel, the lady and the anti: Femininity, anti-feminism,
and the Victorian woman writer. Womens Studies International Forum 29.3 (2006): 289-300.
Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Kemp, Sandra. Introduction. The Moonstone. London, England: Penguin Books, 1998. Loc. 30-603.
Kindle file.
Langland, Elizabeth. Nobodys Angels: Domestic Ideology and Middle-Class Women in the Victorian
Novel. PMLA 107.2 (1992): 290-304. JSTOR. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Moscovici, Claudia. Allusive Mischaracterisation in Middlemarch. Nineteenth-Century Literature
49.4 (1995): 513-531. JSTOR. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Vicinus, Martha. Revisiting the Angel in the House: Revisions of Victorian Womanhood. The New
England Quarterly 60.3 (1987): 466-483. JSTOR. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.
Woolf, Virginia. Professions for Women. Delphi Complete Works of Virginia Woolf. Hastings, United
Kingdom: Delphi Classics, 2014. 80027-80108. Kindle file.

Page 10 of 10