Gender Roles In H. Rider Haggard's Novel '

Does H. Rider Haggard’s novel ‘She: A History of Adventure’ promote gender equality?

“She” tells the story of three white Englishmen who become shipwrecked during their voyage to Africa, leaving them amongst the predominantly black Amahagger tribe, who are supremely ruled by a white goddess, Ayesha (or ‘She’). In the many years since its first publication, critics have, for the most part, focussed on the racial aspect of the novel, due to Haggard’s presentation of the black characters and how they relate to the white characters. However, after close inspection, it is also apparent that the issue of gender roles and powers within the novel are an equally interesting talking point, not least to feminist critics. The fact that the tribe is
supremely ruled by a woman means that the book seems, on the surface, to be about female empowerment and authority, and even that it would perhaps appeal to feminists, however after delving deeper into the novel, it could be said that the novel is as misogynistic as it is racist.. Haggard has received extensive praise and criticism alike for his portrayal of women and their roles in the novel.
During the period of the novel’s creation, Britain was dealing with various issues brought about with the turn of the century. Men feared a decline in their status caused by the gradual emergence of women into society, and were apprehensive over the ever-increasing independence and freedom of the ‘New Woman’. The position of women was changing rapidly towards the end of the nineteenth century, as the female gender became progressively more liberated. They began to contradict the status quo of the traditional Victorian woman, through entering the workplace and gaining better educations. This unnerved many males. Haggard himself expressed his opinions in 1894 that women should be married or deemed a failure in life: “it is the natural mission of women to marry; if they do not marry they become narrowed, live half a life only, and suffer in health of body and mind”. These thoughts
suggest a misogynistic view on his part, however are these sentiments echoed during ‘She’? Do Haggard’s portrayals of his characters and events advocate equality between genders?

In some parts of the novel, Haggard can be seen as an almost ‘protofeminist’. He shows that men can be sensitive, caring beings as well as women, and also that women can be equally as harsh and forceful as their male counterparts. At the beginning of the narrative, Haggard introduces the character of Holly to the reader, describing him as “as ugly as his companion was handsome”, contrasting him to the ‘splendid man’, Leo. Holly himself states that women “hated the sight” of him, overhearing a female call him a “monster” and that he had “converted her to the monkey theory”, comparing his features to those of an ape. This harsh treatment by the female gender due to his looks is shown to depress Holly greatly, especially the acrimonious circumstances in which he parted from a woman which he loved and lavished his affections upon. Holly, the narrator, explains how he was “discarded” by her after his money “went elsewhere”. He also describes how he begged her not to leave as he has “never pleaded with any living creature before or since”. This dominance by the female part of the relationship clearly contradicts the stereotypical situation of Victorian times in which the man would be very much in charge of his partner, or certainly the dominant half of the relationship. However, as previously mentioned, women began to challenge this stereotype towards the end of the 19th century, as they began to get jobs, smoke cigarettes, ride bikes and generally become more liberal. Haggard’s presentation of Holly’s distress at this situation, coupled with him being undermined by a woman could be seen as a representation of the ‘New Woman’ and the common male fear that women were beginning to challenge social norms and stop being the submissive and obedient gender. This portrayal shows that women can be in charge, very much promoting the idea of gender equality.

However, there are many instances throughout the novel in which Haggard’s writing offers very little in the way of gender equality, reverting to the status quo of male dominance and female oppression.
An example of this is through the character of Ustane. When Ustane is first encountered, Holly remarks that “women among the Amahagger are not only on terms of perfect equality with men, but are not held to them by any binding ties”. However, Haggard’s presentation of Ustane’s subsequent relationship with Leo suggests the author’s view that even when not forced, a woman’s natural instincts cause them to serve their male counterparts. This is shown firstly through her (and the rest of the young Amahagger girls’) immediate and uncontrollable “excitement” at first glance of Leo’s “tall, athletic form” and his “curling yellow hair”. The “vexation” of the other girls when Ustane kisses Leo suggests an involuntary but inexorable female attraction towards men. Ustane subsequently remains at Leo’s side as far as possible, as she “stuck to him like his own shadow”. Ustane herself echoes the common nineteenth century English viewpoint of submissive women, degrading herself in claiming she is “not fit to wash [Leo’s] feet”. When Leo is gravely injured in the struggle which ensues between the Englishmen and the Amahagger tribe, none other than Ustane is there to tend to his every need, even though the injuries have been brought about by her own people. She shows no hesitation and devotes
herself entirely to Leo, serving his every need. Haggard’s creation of this submissive and controllable Ustane contradicts the idea of the ‘New Woman’ and suggests that there is no real gender equality within the world of the novel ‘She’.

The eponymous character of Ayesha is an extremely interesting one, which gives evidence to suggest that Haggard’s characterisation both supports and contradicts the idea of gender equality. For example, Ayesha is portrayed as a fearsome and omnipotent leader of the Amahagger tribe. They obey her unconditionally, shown by Bilali stating “her word overrides all rights”. This shows that whilst the entire Amahagger tribe have equal rights, the female leader has complete freedom to revoke these as she sees fit. The name often used for her, ‘She-who-must-be-obeyed’ clearly represents her immense power over both men and women alike. The freely misogynistic Holly, who has closed his heart “away from such vanity as woman’s loveliness” even bows to the power of Ayesha, worshipping her “as woman was never worshipped”, and immediately addressing her as “Queen” when he is initially introduced. His instinctive obedience and respect despite her gender shows Ayesha’s immense power, and suggests that the ways of the Amahagger tribe- equality for both genders- are beginning to rub off on Holly. Indeed the extremely masculine Leo even falls quickly and involuntarily under the will of Ayesha, regardless of the fact that she had killed the loyal Ustane. Her complete command and power over the male sex was arguably the most startling and frightening aspect of the book during the years in which it was initially published.

On the other hand, Ayesha is also seen to display certain characteristics which emulate the typical Victorian woman. For example her undying and incredibly powerful devotion to Kallikrates, her late husband is clear right from her introduction. Despite the fact that Kallikrates died over two thousand years earlier, her devotion to him is still as strong as ever, as she waits every day for his return. This is epitomized through her treatment of Leo, who she believes to be the embodiment of Kallikrates, as she bows to him and says “Behold! In token of submission do I bow me to my lord! Behold! In token of my wifely love do I kiss my lord.” This offering of herself to Leo suggests that despite her power and authority, Ayesha remains a typical woman, and retains the characteristics of a typical Victorian woman. Ayesha’s intentions to go to England are shown to worry Holly greatly. Ann Ardis, a feminist author, describes these fears as “exactly those voiced about the New Woman’s entrance in the public arena”. This comparison links Holly’s apprehension towards Ayesha travelling to England with the possibility of a widespread and powerful female movement, a great fear of men during the late nineteenth century. It seems that Holly is worried that the presence of the powerful and dominant Ayesha in England could cause somewhat of a revolution amongst the female gender. Ayesha’s death, according to Ardis (who likens it to a “witch-burning”), acts as a judgement of her “transgression of Victorian gender boundaries”. Her death is vividly described by Haggard, and is shown to be painful and gruesome as she “[shrivels] up” whilst she “rolled upon the floor and shrieked”. Her indescribable beauty turns in the space of just a couple of minutes to being “too hideous for words”. This is perhaps the most powerful reference to gender equality during the novel, as Ayesha pays the worst price of all for her disregard of typical Victorian customs: a painful death as she withers away in a pit of flames.

There is some evidence in the novel to reinforce the argument that Haggard promotes gender equality in his writing; however after close analysis it is clear that the majority of the novel portrays men as the dominant gender, whilst women are illustrated to be subservient and submissive, despite the fact that the Amahagger tribe have tried hard to introduce a system of equality between genders. Feminist critics of the novel have often cited the death of Ayesha, and her absolute devotion towards Leo and Kallikrates (and similarly Ustane’s devotion towards Leo) as factors which demean women, and portray them as the weaker and more dependant gender. On the other hand it could also be argued, due to Ayesha’s extreme power and authority over many men, particularly the firm misogynist Holly, that Haggard has used ‘She’ as a device to promote gender equality, and to challenge the rigid social norms of Victorian England, although after close textual analysis this seems less likely. Since publication, many critics have vilified and condemned the novel for its racist undertones, so why are the sexist aspects permitted? Should the novel not be equally rebuked for its misogyny?

WORD COUNT: 1695
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

- “She” - H. Rider Haggard
- New Women, New Novels: Feminism and Early Modernism - Ann Ardis