The epistolary novel and intimacy are often branded as synonymous terms. The Coquette initially aligns itself as simply an epistolary novel, as the controlled expression of the writers, and limited point of view, offered by the letter form, allows the two leading men to reveal their true thoughts, whether they are the suddenly untempered passions of Reverend Boyer or the duplicitous libertinism of Major Sanford, in a limited and controlled way. However, the often stark contrast between these written confessions and other characters’ perceptions of the writers gives the reader a sense of intimacy, and involvement, in spite of the fact that deception is what has led them to the truth. The Coquette only further deviates from intimacy as Eliza’s downfall approaches, and the reader too is betrayed by Eliza’s written assurances, learning of her impropriety at the same time as the other characters. This revelation creates a more compelling case for the virtue and modesty prescribed at the end of the novel, a lesson that reinforces The Coquette’s other classification as a seduction novel. Hannah Webster Foster therefore plays with the epistolary form, deviating from its typical promotion of intimacy in order to create a more dramatic downfall for the Eliza Wharton to further assert Foster’s own cautionary message. In essence, while the epistolary form seems to suggest that the reader is gaining intimate access to the characters, by sharing their unique vantage point, and having the tale revealed through their voice, The Coquette’s surprise ending demonstrates that intimacy is illusive or difficult to achieve and so, at its best fiction.
The historical context for the novel is directly tied to the era for which it was written when understanding the characters, their motivations, and what is intimately revealed in their letting writing. The text is set in the late 18th century, a time which was ruled by a strict sense of social propriety. There were strict social rules, and inflexible definitions of propriety which served as a set of expectations for all members of the upper social classes, and so represent the expectations placed upon Eliza, and her peers. Novels were, according to author Susanna Haswell Rawson, designed as cautionary tales to prevent the “hapless fair” from making errors which would socially ruin them (xx). As such, the epistolary form is significant because it allows the author to reveal the secrets of the main characters’ social lives, and thought processes, which exist outside of their reputation, and the rules that govern their actions. Because the novel takes on the form of letters, the text is more capable of expressing unseemly truths that could not, or would not be revealed within public exchange. Unfortunately, not all secrets are revealed in this letter form, allowing the author to leave the most titillating, and most tragic detail of Eliza’s life in the final moments of the novel. As such, the epistolary form, while offering some intimacy ultimately still only allows the reader to see what the characters wish to reveal, which remains a kind of fiction, rather than the whole truth, of their existence.
At first glance, it appears that Eliza is willing to reveal herself in letters, and that her most honest view of herself, and her actions are expressed therein. For example, she states “I believe I shall never resume those airs, which you term coquettish, but which I think deserve a softer appellation” (Foster 7). She does not, at least, deny that she has put on airs, though she also does not admit to being a coquette. In this, she is wise, in that she pacifies or acknowledges the social expectation, or speaks to the public impression she has given, but also expresses that she does not honestly see herself as a coquette, but rather as lively. This is significant because she is not appeasing her audience, but engaging in a form of conflict. This speaks to her sense of honesty, and a certain willingness to be transparent. Further, she does not try to deny her behavior. Intimacy is thereby initiated, because she both agrees to behavior that is unbecoming, by acknowledging the social expectation, while denying the way it is characterized, and recharacterizing herself as lively. Further, the lack of detail included in her argument, makes the letter feel directed to her intended audience, and not the reader of the book. She is not justifying herself to the books audience, but rather conversing, personally, with her correspondence. This approach is continued throughout the rest of the book, and her secrets seem to be revealed through her letters.
This level of personal exposure, and intimacy of communication is not only true of Eliza, but also other major characters in the text. Sandford, for example writes: “Were I disposed to marrybut that you know is no part of my plan, so long as I can keep out of the noose” (23). This is significant because it allows the reader to know Sanford’s true motives where Eliza is concerned. It is clear that he has no intention to marry her. However, it is significant that he says “if I can keep out of the noose” because this also seems to indicate that he would do the marry if forced to, should the affair end in pregnancy, as it eventually does with Eliza, but that he sees it as a death sentence. As such, the audience is led, first to an intimate knowledge of his character, and even an anticipation of Eliza coming to some harm, which is consistent with the seduction novel form. This sense of intimacy supports the truth that Eliza will ultimately fall from grace because of him. The sense of honesty, or transparency which accompanies his writing about the desire to avoid marriage, however can only be revealed within the letters.
However, these types of passages allow the reader to make certain connections which they might not otherwise. For example, we know that Eliza is, in many ways, just as opposed to marriage as Major Sanford. She seems marriage as a trap, having stated “Marriage is the tomb of friendship. It appears to me a very selfish state.” (Foster 24). She expresses repeatedly that she has no desire to pursue marriage, but that she acknowledges it as a kind of social requirement. Through the intimacy of the letters, the reader becomes capable of making these kinds of connections between characters and their similar, or conflicting motivations and attitudes.
This kind of conflict occurs when opposing viewpoints, or motivations are exposed in the letters. For example, Lucy works to warn Eliza off of Sanford, and demonstrates to the reader how an outsider might perceive Lucy’s interest in him, stating: “You seem particularly charmed with the fortune of Major Sanford; with the gaiety of his appearance; with the splendor of his equipage; with the politeness of his manners; with what you call the graces of his person! These, alas! Are superficial, ensnaring endowments” (58). However, in contrast Eliza seems to be clear minded when she considers Sanford, she is not charmed, or ensnared, as described by Lucy, but is rather fully aware of the complexity of her attraction to him, she states that, when she considers him her “fancy and [my] judgement are in scales. Sometimes one preponderates, sometimes the other. Which will finally outweigh, time alone can reveal.” (Foster 51). This is significant because Eliza demonstrates that she is not being mislead, or seduced by Sanford, but rather that she is aware that he is “fancy” and that choosing him would go against her better judgement.
The use of the letter form also reveals the conflict between what is personal or intimate, and what is public. This is significant as it relates to the social standards of the society that the characters are living within, and draws a contrast between public and private life, or between the fiction or real life, versus the truth found in letters .For example, in a real life exchange, Sanford is forced to say to Eliza that he feels only a passing attraction to her. This is significant because he denies her, making little of the level of connection he feels to her, which places his visible actions well within the expectations of his social position. In contrast, however, he writes “My heart is in her possession. She has perfect command of my passions” (77). Her feelings, even if they are only attraction, are much stronger, when he is intimately communicating through letters, than he lets on in real life.
Ultimately, however, even Eliza, in her depression seems to realize that she does not have the ability to be intimately honest in her letters, and that even they are not removed enough from society to reveal certain truths. Rather than using her letter to reveal to her closest friends that she is pregnant, and come to terms with how far she has fallen, she writes “Writing is not so agreeable to me as it used to be. I love my friends as well as ever; but I think they must be weary of the gloom and dullness which pervades my present correspondence. When my pen shall have regained its original fluency and alertness, I will resume and prolong the pleasing task.” (Foster 127). She eventually chooses to die alone, rather than continue intimate honesty with either the reader, or her friends, whom she addressed in the letters, demonstrating that the fiction, which meets the expectation of society, is ultimately more important than the truth.
What is means is that the appearance of propriety, and maintaining an unstained public image, is more importance in terms of acceptance, than the honesty and intimacy that is experienced through the letters. This concept, as it relates to an individual’s public image, is best explained by Lucy who states “No female, whose mind is uncorrupted, can be indifferent to reputation. It is an inestimable jewel, the loss of which can never be repaired. While retained, it affords conscious peace to our own minds, and ensures the esteem and respect of all around us.” Ultimately the intimacy with which Eliza was able to reveal herself, up to this point is undermined by her need to maintain her reputation, and to prevent all her associations from knowing the extent of her coquetry.
This underlying theme is revealed in the final passage of the text, in the epitaph on Eliza’s tombstone. It states “LET CANDOR THROW A VEIL OVER HER FRAILTIES, FOR GREAT WAS HER CHARITY TO OTHERS. SHE SUSTAINED THE LAST PAINFUL SCENE, FAR FROM EVERY FRIEND; AND EXHIBITED AN EXAMPLE OF CALM RESIGNATION.” (169). This works to praise her in the last, allowing her to maintain the fiction that she wrought out in the secrets that she kept. While at first, the compassion in these lines seems to belie the point of the novel, which is also seen as a chastisement of her behavior, in fact, it continues the intimate understanding of Eliza that has been carried out through the epistolary form. Eliza’s level of candor has often been used to veil her darker secrets, just as it is in her death.
The Coquette is a novel that focuses, in many ways, on the social expectations and rules of the day. It is heavily rooted in the historic period from which it comes and the strict sense of upright behavior that ruled the social peers of that era. However, Eliza, in many ways, challenges these social norms, demonstrating that she is not the victim, or a seduced young women, but rather the master of her own fate. She reveals much of her personal truth through candor, in a series of letters, but saves certain secrets which even she knows are beyond the “veil” which candor has allowed her to draw down over her life. Ultimately, even apparent truth becomes fiction, in the contrast drawn between the intimacy of the letter form, and what is known to be true, in her final demise.
Works Cited:
Foster, Hannah Webster. The coquette. New York: Oxford U Press, 1986. Print.
Rowson, Susanna Haswell. Charlotte Temple, a tale of truth; reprinted from the rare first American edition Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library. 1794. Web.
=
