With gentle pace at last I close,
All hail! Thou friend of soft repose!
Welcome now, each social charm,
Welcome, free from all alarm;
For smiling now I can defy
The pain of sensibility.
Birch calls Sensibility a "pain," and smiles when she overcomes it. She thinks that not having any emotions at all is better than feeling pain. What do you think: Is Sensibility a curse or a blessing? How would your viewpoint change if you were a woman living in the 18th century?
4 comments:
If sensibility is the idea of heart over head, emotion over reason, or the focus on senses rather than intellect, then I could see why it could be both a curse and a blessing. Women of the 18th century were kept under control by men and were never really given a voice under any circumstances. Their role in life was to be an obedient wife and nurturing mother. Many women of the time period were not even allowed to choose who they married, the husband was selected (generally) by their father, therefore forcing the woman into a loveless marriage. However, this was not always the case, some women did find true love and married a man of her choosing.
Birch probably calls sensibility a "pain" because women were often influenced by sensibility and it easily weakened them. In a time when women were trying to have some control over themselves, sensibility teased them into thinking they were going to get something that they desired (passion). Maybe the reason why Birch smiles when she overcomes it is because she feels that she finally has power over something, her own senses, emotions, feelings. I think to a certain extent, women can still relate to Birch's thoughts that sometimes feeling nothing is better than feeling something. If you lack emotion then nothing is affecting you, to feel pain means you have no control.
It seems that the lines between sentiment and sensibility are blurred and I'm interested to see what writers of the 18th century believe to be the difference between the two. I'm not sure if I am on the right track here with "Ode to Insensibility," but it seems that if sensibility is something that is causing the speaker pain, then it must be something that is directly related to the senses and emotion.
The poem is framing sensibility as negative emotions. She wants to be free from alarm. In terms of emotions it seems that she wants to be free from anxiety, fear, and unhappiness. If sensibility were strictly unpleasant emotions I would also want to be free of them. However, the word encompasses a broader concept of emotions. A person's emotional response can also be pleasurable. For example, happiness, laughter, and calm are usually desired responses. So when she is smiling in the poem she is not void of emotion. She has just overcome the negative aspect of sensibility. Framing this in a completely cliche way: in order to feel the good a person also has to experience the bad emotions. Thus, I think sensibility is a blessing and that not experiencing any emotion would be a curse.
However, as a women living in the 18th century I can understand how sensibility could be viewed as a curse. For example, Wollstonecraft's Vindication details how a woman's emotions are viewed as a weakness. Men are viewed as reasoning creatures and woman as emotional creatures. Reasoning is held to higher esteems and in the 'polite' arguments reason and feeling are too different to compare. Thus, if feelings made the whole population of woman weak and inferior in the eyes of men, I understand why it was seen as a curse.
I think that sensibility is neither a curse nor a blessing. I suppose depending on the specific situation at hand, it could result in one of the extremes, but for the most part, a reasonable amount of sensibility keeps someone well-balanced. Life would be void of...happiness, love, affection if there were no sensibility. But it would also be void of sorrow, depression, and worry in the same circumstance. Emotions, regardless of whether they are positive or negative, make up humanity. Sure, sensibility can be seen as a weakness, or a curse. But what would life be, without experiencing emotion throughout life's journey? Emotion makes life personal. My viewpoint would not change if I were a woman living in the eighteenth century, as emotion was one of the few things women were allowed to...and expected to possess. Yes, they were often criticized for being overindulgent in their emotions, but they also were able to express their feelings through sensibility. Emotion is one thing which a male dominated society cannot repress.
I agree with most, that it would be both a curse and a blessing. I think it can be viewed on a continum. If I had to be at one end or the other I guess it would be a curse. I would never want to be that person who was constantly overcome with emotion. I think of Marianne and Elinor in Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility. With Marianne representing the one stricken with sensibility. it would be a miserable existance to never be able to control ones emotions. On the other hand I think that to be Elinor, the one who represents sense would be equally as miserable. To hold everything inside to fester and not be able to express one's self would be awful. I think that the ideal lies somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. I thinki the best situation is to have the emotions and beable to express them but also to be able to control one's self and choose when it is appropriate to display them.
I don't think that my view would change all that much if I were a woman of the eighteenth cetury. I thiunk this has always beent he ideal and those who have leaned toward one extreme or the other were merely buying into the social norms at the time. I would be interested to know at what point in the century was thsi piece written, because the social opinions of sensibility shifted as the century went on.
Post a Comment