Conlon 1

Carolyn Conlon

Dr. Lewis

ENG 345

9 November 2016

Challenging Tyranny: Movements of Defiance in Godwins Caleb Williams and Austens

Mansfield Park

Socioeconomic hierarchies are a significant influence in many works of English

literature, for class distinctions often lead to an imbalance of power and, consequently,

oppression. Writing is a way to criticize and defy oppressive structures, and this defiance can be

seen in both William Godwins Caleb Williams and Jane Austens Mansfield Park. Godwin is a

political radical seeking to defy the status quo, while Austen is a conservative who writes within

the scope of the middle class. Despite being on opposite ends of the sociopolitical spectrum, the

novels both depict an oppressed figure defying the existing power structures: Caleb Williams

actively fights against the far-reaching tyranny of Falkland, whereas Fanny subtly fights against

the oppression of her inferior station. Both novels criticize the effects of education on the

morality of persons, but Godwin focuses on the intentional evil and tyranny that class divisions

afford the gentry, while Austen criticizes the more subconscious evil and vanity that polite

society breeds.

In Godwins Caleb Williams and Austens Mansfield Park, the protagonists face a

complex body of power structures which manifest themselves in multiple characters. The

powerful antagonist of Godwins Caleb Williams is Falkland, while Mansfield Park features the

Crawfords and the Bertrams. These characters differ vastly, but despite the authors
 Conlon 2
sociopolitical differences, they have characteristics which provide similar experiences for Fanny

Price and Caleb Williams. In Caleb Williams, Mr. Falkland begins as a charitable and chivalrous

squire, but after Caleb discovers the truth about Mr. Tyrrels death, Falklands true tyranny

unfolds. He essentially ruins Calebs life by manipulating the justice system and getting Caleb

detained in prison for false charges of theft. These are explicit abuses of power, for which

Falkland suffers no repercussions. The powerful repeatedly circumvent the justice system, and

the innocent suffer because of it, as Caleb discovers through his time in jail. But Falklands

abuses continue past Calebs imprisonment and worm their way into almost every circumstance

after Calebs escape. Though Falkland is not always physically present in the book, the threat of

his power ever looms over Caleb, controlling every step he takes when he is on the run. In fact,

Falkland has a sort of omniscience, and at one point Williams wonders, Did his power reach

through all space, and his eye penetrate every concealment? (249). Whether it be using Gines as

an extension of his tyranny or through his influential connections, Falklands power remains

inescapable. Regardless of how chivalrous and reputable Falklands character appears, his

position in society provides the license to kill and destroy with no repercussions other than self-

imposed guilt or remorse.

The antagonists of Austens Mansfield Park do not have so obvious or intentional a

malevolence as Mr. Falkland, but they still engender oppressive situations for Fanny Price. Sir

Thomas is a stern father and guardian, but tyranny is too extreme a word for him, as he generally

has benevolent intentions. However, his position affords him substantial control over his family.
 Conlon 3
Sir Thomas almost immediately demonstrates his power when, consulting neither Fanny nor

Mrs. Norris, he decides to uproot Fanny and move her into the Mansfield parsonage. His power

finds a channel in his wife, who declares, So, Fanny, you are going to leave us and live with my

sister. How shall you like it? (Austen 24). This statement leaves no room for argument, but

Fanny finds a way to express her remorse while still striving to appear grateful and obedient. Her

very expression of remorse is an extremely subtle act of defiance amidst her powerlessness.

Though Sir Thomas decision was fruitless, it reveals Fannys lack of support from Lady

Bertram, Sir Thomas, and even Edmund. In the article Power in Mansfield Park: Austens

Study of Domination and Resistance, Marcia McClintock Folsom claims that the powerful

people violate the codes of conduct that the novel implicitly endorses: respect for peoples

feelings, respect for promises respect for the implicit values of a family, respect for integrity

above wealth or convenience (84). This observation reveals a key distinction between Caleb

Williams and Mansfield Park: Falkland grossly abuses his power, while Austens characters

make choices that appear good or convenient on the surface, but they harm the more lowly

Fanny Price. The former presents an active, intentional evil, while the latter depicts a more

unintentional wrongdoing brought about by the force of habit and expectation.

These wrongdoings continue throughout the novel in each instance of Fannys oppression

and defiance. When she refuses to participate in the play, everyone around Fanny pressures her

to succumb for their own convenience: Tom and Maria Bertram, Mary Crawford, Mrs. Norris,

and even eventually Edmund attempt to exert their influence. This incident prefigures Fannys
 Conlon 4
most difficult power struggle in the novel: her refusal of Henrys proposal. In this instance,

McClintock Folsom accurately claims that Fanny resists the enormous pressure of Henry

Crawford, Sir Thomas, even Lady Bertram, and, more shockingly, Edmund as they all try to

persuade or shame her into accepting Henrys marriage proposal (89). In each persons

insistence on her marrying Henry, they reveal their own vanity and ignorance. Sir Thomas claims

that Henry has everything to recommend him; not merely situation in life, fortune, and

character, but with more than common agreeableness, with address and conversation pleasing to

every body (291). Despite Fannys insistence that she could never love him, Sir Thomas

obdurately persists in his ignorant evaluation of Henry. Edmund reveals an equally inaccurate

perception, for if he knew Henrys true character, he would never think Henry worthy of Fanny.

Ultimately, each person reveals, as McClintock Folsom observed, that they undervalue Fannys

feelings and integrity and instead view wealth and convenience as the most important factor in

her decision (84). Though damaging to Fanny, this selfish and harmful vanity of the Bertrams

and Crawfords is a vast departure from Falklands conscious control and cruelty.

The power struggle that ensnares both Fanny and Caleb not only manifests itself in

characters but also in more intangible ways: both novels involve a manipulation of truth that

effectively perpetuates the oppression of the protagonists. The power of narrative is a major

source of conflict and, in fact, drives the story of Godwins Caleb Williams. The most harmful

feature of Falklands power is his ability to control the truthto produce narratives about

Caleb Williams that haunt him wherever he goes. These narratives make people think that there
 Conlon 5
was no criminal upon the face of the earth, no murderer, half so detestable as the person who

could prevail upon himself...against so generous a master (Godwin 258). No matter where

Williams runs, this harmful perception follows him, and the very reason he wrote his story was

to reclaim the truthto have the power over his own narrative. In fact, he views his story of truth

as his greatest defense against Falklands tyranny: Caleb exclaims, He may hunt me out of this

world. In vain! With this engine, this little pen, I defeat all his machinations; I stab him in the

very point he was most solicitous to defend! (323).

The Crawfords provide a telling parallel with Falkland, for rather than the truth itself,

they value the censorship of truththe ability to control the image that they present to the world.

Their vanity and lack of virtue reflect the emptiness of Falklands chivalry. To them, truth has no

objective meaning, and the division between private and public morality causes Falkland and the

Crawfords alike to rely on acting. Henry is an excellent actor on the stage, and this skill extends

to his everyday life. Henry fools Maria and Julia Bertram, Sir Thomas, and even Edmund. In

fact, Henry arguably even fools himself into believing that he [sees] things differently now,

and that he is a changed man because of his love for Fanny (Austen 226). By presenting so

convincing an image, he heightens the pressure on Fanny to accept his hand. This image spurs

characters into a determined effort to persuade, coerce, threaten, scold, or manipulate Fanny

into marrying Henry (McClintock Folsom 84). However, in both the case of Falkland and the

Crawfords, their vacuous system of morals proves to be their downfall, for the truth triumphs.
 Conlon 6
Despite the multifaceted influences that oppress Price and Williams, these characters

fight back in both subtle and direct ways. In these suffocating circumstances, what gives these

characters power? In the case of Fanny, it is primarily her upbringing. The Bertrams accept

Fanny into Mansfield Park, but they consistently uphold her inferior social status, which leads to

a degree of isolation. She is somewhat of an outsider, which, rather than contributing to her

oppression, actually gives her a measure of freedom. Her isolation leads to independence rather

than despairit provides her with a moral autonomy and integrity free from the societally

enforced vanities of her cousins. In addition, her lack of involvement in the Bertrams social life

often puts her in an observational position. Her skills of observation enable her to have a keener

understanding of persons, such as in the case of Henry Crawford, for her ill opinion of him was

founded chiefly on observations (293). The lack of attention paid to her while Edmund is

infatuated with Mary Crawford allows her to witness Crawfords immoral behavior with Maria.

Without the limitations of her social status, her moral autonomy would not be possible, and she

perhaps would not have the strength, nor the desire, to resist Henrys proposal. In addition,

Fannys secret knowledge of her love for Edmund enables her to defy her inferior status.

Through this secret, others repeatedly misunderstand her as a person, which affords her the

power to subvert expectations. Mary Crawford assumes that she will dutifully accept Henrys

proposal, while the Bertrams cannot understand why she would possibly refuse this

advantageous offer. The key piece of information that they lack is her love for Edmund, which
 Conlon 7
strengthens and elevates her morally: she knows what love is and thus will not settle for an

economically advantageous arrangement.

Caleb has a secret knowledge as well: his knowledge of the truth about Falklands

murder. The possession of this secret knowledge is the impetus for his defiance of Falkland

which remains active and uncompromising from the moment of his fateful discovery. This

knowledge strengthens him to persist despite his extreme misery: he wholeheartedly clings to his

absolute innocence, which emboldens him to persevere in defying Falklands tyranny. However,

it has a much different result than Fannys secret, for his knowledge of the truth is the indirect

source of his calamitythe direct source being Falklands tyranny itself. While empowering to a

degree, this secret knowledge forces him to flee without ceasing, plunging him further into a

cruel and unrelenting isolation. Rather than leading him to independence like Fanny, his isolation

causes him despair with no respite. Falklands intentional evil creates a hopeless situation for

Caleb, while in Mansfield Park, Fanny has hope of overcoming the unintentional evil of the

powerful characters.

Fanny Price and Caleb Williams approach their defiance in different ways, and they

consequently have vastly different results which clarify the authors critical perspectives: Austen

provides an optimistic moral instruction, while Godwin presents a scathing criticism of society.

Fannys defiance is triumphant, while Calebs is essentially futile. By staying true to her values

and identity, Fanny eventually gains a home in her former place of oppression. While at

Portsmouth she realizes, Portsmouth was Portsmouth. Mansfield was home (Austen 400).
 Conlon 8
Contrarily, Falklands tyranny robs Caleb of a home forever. Due to Falklands distortion of the

truth, Caleb can no longer build community or a sense of home regardless of his location.

Mansfield Park comes to a happy, neat, morally just and satisfactory ending: Henry and Mary

Crawford, Mrs. Norris, and Maria Bertram are punished, while Fanny and Edmund receive their

just rewards. However, in Caleb Williams Falkland admits, Williams...you have conquered!

but Caleb feels no personal satisfaction for finally defeating him (Godwin 335). Despite the

hardships and suffering he endured for the truth, when it is finally revealed, the victory is empty.

Furthermore, in both novels, the tyrant figures come to respect the oppressed. As cited,

Falkland submits to Williams victory, and in Mansfield Park, Sir Thomas realizes Fannys true

value. Austen gives this change of heart significance, whereas Godwin portrays it as

meaningless. Caleb views himself as undeserving: he regrets his final act of justice, referring to it

instead as the baseness of my cruelty (Godwin 336).

At the heart of these distinctions lie Austens and Godwins social commentaries.

Godwin criticizes socioeconomic divisions and the abuse of power in the upper and middle

classeshe criticizes a society that allows such license and power to groups of people, whose

very education encourages vice and the appearance of virtue over virtue itself. Mansfield Park

critiques the vanity and value system of certain members of the middle class, which is formed by

associations and upbringing. This upbringing is situational, whereas the upbringing that Godwin

criticizes is societal. Austen criticizes individuals within society, not necessarily society as a

whole, while Godwins criticism is much more all-encompassing. Falklands intentional evil
 Conlon 9
indicates a deeply rooted structural issue in society, while Fannys ability to overcome the less

intentional evil of the Bertrams and Crawfords demonstrates a conquerable, situational problem.

The systems of oppression in Austens Mansfield Park and Godwins Caleb Williams

present narratives of defiance in the characters of Fanny Price and Caleb Williams, respectively.

Though their circumstances differ, they represent a kind of rebellion against societal structures

that result in the abuse or mistreatment of socially inferior individuals. These two instances of

defiance and the outcomes thereof reveal Austens and Godwins vastly different sociopolitical

beliefs. Mansfield Park presents a triumphant depiction of Fanny Price finding happiness and

independence despite pressure and powerlessness, while Caleb Williams demonstrates a bold but

ultimately futile effort to defy the tyranny of the gentry. However, despite the perhaps

unrealistically hopeful ending of the former and the bleak conclusion of the latter, both novels

depict resonating narratives of valiant, worthwhile struggles against oppression.

Word Count: 2330

 Conlon 10
Works Cited

Austen, Jane. Mansfield Park. Edited by Kathryn Sutherland, London, Penguin Books, 2003.

Folsom, Marcia McClintock. "Power In Mansfield Park: Austen's Study Of Domination And

Resistance." Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal, no. 34, 2012, pp. 83-98. MLA

International Bibliography. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.

Godwin, William. Caleb Williams, or, Things as They Are. Edited by Maurice Hindle, London,

Penguin, 2005.