Pope and Wollstonecraft Should Be Friends-Rachael Gregson

Upon reading this, I instantly thought of the quote by Ella Wheeler Wilcox: "Laugh, and the whole world laughs with you; weep, and you weep alone." Pope's purpose in writing The Rape of the Locke was to discourage quick, reckless tempers by reminding readers to laugh at their own mishaps. Of that time, it was one of the first poems to actually be considered what is a mock-epic, about a woman called Belinda who gets a lock of her hair snipped against her will. In it, Pope pokes fun at a society that has lost all sight of what's truly valuable and makes the major minor and the minor major, using Belinda's appalled response to her cut lock as illustration to this.

While all three chapters were great, I have the most to say about Chapter 1, when it reminded me all too much of a recent read we had, The Vindication of the Rights of Women. I could almost hear Wollstonecraft's voice in some parts. It begins with Pope presenting us the "inner workings" of his poem in Belinda's dream-the paranormal powers that sway the actions of the characters from behind the scenes and are meant to represent Roman/Greek gods. Because Belinda is supposed to be an air sylph when she dies, this particular sprite watches over her closely. The descriptions of what the coquettes enjoy suggests that she is of a very social class. "The joy of gilded chariots" leads me to think these women only cared about glamor and looks while "love of Ombre"-a card game-hints that they also were superficial. In his poem, Pope is giving readers examples of what women should not be like. They should not be governed by the "social norm", but disciplined by morality, true morality. But Pope didn't just pick on girls. He hit the men with some hard truth too when he described their wigs and sword knots, revealing a battle of vanity and competition for the ladies.

While I feel Pope was way more lighthearted and humorous than Wollstonecraft's hard-hitting warnings (his purpose was more to entertain, hers was to inform), I felt like they were beating the same horse: people nowadays are using honor as just another social custom, an act to please and win approval, something to be taken off at the end of day like clothes. Though it appears to be there, it's not actually there, and that's what I feel bothered Pope and Wollstonecraft immensely.

I commented on posts by Drew Hedden and Rebecca Belew.

Comments

Eliza Colbert said…
I suppose it is a sign of just how much this problem had infected society if two different people acknowledged it. As you mentioned, Wollstonecraft and Pope had very different purposes, but they both knew that this was the state of things. When people start to recognize what is wrong with society and start putting it in their literature, that's when things are on their way to change. As they say, the first step is recognizing you have a problem.
Logan Turner said…
I honestly love the comparisons to Wollstonecraft. They both cover roughly the same topic, but yet, The Rape of the Lock is more approachable because of its satirical tone. The lightheartedness of Pope's writing convey the message better because people would be more willing to read it.
Luke Killam said…
This was a really good blog post! I think you hit the nail on the head. For that society, the mood needed to be lifted. As you said, they had lost sight of all that was truly valuable, switching minor with major and major with minor. Pope was being serious when he wrote this satire, even though he was poking fun. He, by no means, was taking these matters lightly. I admire someone who can speak in a way that's personal. When we laugh at other people's flaws, we immediately realize that they are our own.