As we consider Jaffe's notion of scenes of sympathy, we see that one of the prerequisites for a scene of sympathy is the ability on the part of the sympathizer to project himself or herself onto the body of the object of sympathy. Jaffe argues that this essential basis of projection necessitates a de-personalization of the object of sympathy; that which we view in sympathy is merely a body. Because the object of sympathy is merely a body, pitiful to be sure, we are able to place that body within the realm of our personal emotional identification; there, but for the grace of God, go I. Jaffe notes Ruskin's assertion that the female, by virtue of her heightened sensibilities, is more suited than the male to practice "imaginative identification" (17). I wish to place Margaret within this discourse as a means of answering the second question concerning her role in the conflict between masters and workers.
I agree with Deirdre that Margaret, in many ways, functions as a reasonable mediator between the masters and workers. However, I would like to turn the focus from Margaret's use of reason to her function within the creation of scenes of sympathy. Though both Mr. Hale and Margaret had offered Mr. Thornton suggestions concerning the use of reason in dealing with the workers, it little availed. However, as the Milton workers are starting to riot, Margaret adjures Mr. Thornton to "speak to [his] workmen as if they were human beings" (177). Though Mr. Thornton's attempts to speak to the crowd fail, his excursion outside provides the opportunity for the shielding of his body by Margaret. When confronted with the suggestion that her actions were motivated by personal attraction, Margaret asserts that "any woman, worth of the name of woman, would come forward to shield, with her reverenced helplessness, a man in danger from the violence of numbers" and that "there was not a man - not a poor desperate man in all that crowd - for whom [she] had not more sympathy - for whom [she] should not have done what little [she] could more heartily" (195). Whether we believe that these "misplaced sympathies," as Mr. Thornton calls them, motivate Margaret, at least she claims they do, is unimportant for this argument. What is important is that it is only once Margaret performs this act of sympathy that Mr. Thornton begins to engage in scenes of sympathy himself. One possible reading is that Margaret, by pressing her body against him, transferred some of her feminine feelings to Mr. Thornton. The result is the same whether we argue for a physical transference of sympathetic ability or for the inspirational power of Margaret's sympathetic example: Mr. Thornton, in time, begins to assimilate a sense of sympathy into his business dealings. Therefore, in the framework offered earlier, Margaret functions to heighten the imaginative identification ability of Mr. Thornton. Put another way, Margaret allows Mr. Thornton to see the bodies of the workers as objects fit for self-projection in a scene of sympathy.
This is an interesting idea, though it's a rather literal reading of sympathy as a feminine quality that can be passed on through physical contact. And how does this discussion of sympathy fit into Jaffe's argument that it's essentially a power dynamic arising from middle-class anxiety about the instability of class identity? You seem to see Thornton's sympathy for the workers as a simply positive emotion.
ReplyDelete