Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Would Tess of the D'Urbervilles have been raped or seduced, according to today's laws in the UK?

56 replies

KindDogsTail · 06/05/2016 23:48

Tess of the D'Urbervilles was discussed by Melvin Bragg and his guests yesterday on radio 4 In Our Time www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078zcrr
The question came: was she raped or seduced? One speaker said it was clear that Tess had not wanted it to happen, but consensus seemed to be that it is not clear whether she was raped or seduced.

I re-read Chapters 11 and 12 and it seemed to me that it was certainly rape. In my opinion the book, though in a subtle way, describes acquaintance rape. It even seems that Tess was half asleep when it happened.

I understand that when it was written Tess herself would have been blamed for having been with the perpetrator, and for not fighting him. Also, as she was not attacked, in those days, (and in these as far as some are concerned) this would have been evidence that she just seccumbed to seduction but not actually been raped. Now, however I feel sure she had not given consent.

Some people who may have been raped in this way might have been listening and felt rather concerned that the people discussing the book seemed so uncertain.

I was wondering what other people think.

OP posts:
LurcioAgain · 07/05/2016 09:17

Fascinating discussion, and I love your modern day re-write, AlltheDrama. Absolutely, it is rape, and I think not just in retrospect applying modern standards - I think Hardy wants us to see it that way.

Interesting about you seeing it as Hardy torturing his character, Trills - I read it as a very clever piece of writing in a time where the surrounding moral values would typically have pre-disposed the reader to have no sympathy with a girl who "lost her virtue." I think Hardy gets the reader inside her head brilliantly. You see the "grooming" process for what it is, the careful way D'Urberville corners her in a web of financial obligation, the way he offers "help" which turns out to be a pretext to get her alone in the middle of nowhere, still does the "nice guy" pretence (coat round shoulders), tries to guilt-trip her ("I'm so in love with you, I've been so nice to you, why don't you love me?") then rapes her. (And then most chillingly, leaves her feeling guilty because, after all, he's done so much to earn her love, and she's said to him several times that she can't love him... and in a patriarchal society that puts her in the wrong for pouring scorn on an honest man's attentions, so what's any decent red blooded male gonna do then? Ugh.) And you see it how it seems to Tess - alarm bells are not just ringing, they're going full klaxon, but because of the web of obligation, social expectations, the power structures surrounding her, she can't do anything about it. I find it chilling because I've had a couple of near-misses in terms of situations which could have ended in date rape, and which started exactly that way, with the man engineering a situation where I felt socially obliged to let him walk me home because he was doing it "for me".

I actually think in a society where if Hardy had said outright "and then he raped her", most people would have gone "you what?", it's a very clever piece of writing to get people to question the wrongness of D'Urberville's behaviour when they might well have started out saying "oh, that's just how things go for girls from the lower orders who aren't as virtuous as our daughters".

claraschu · 07/05/2016 09:26

I remember it as rape too (read it 35 years ago). I think if it were seduction, the reader would feel a bit seduced too (if you know what I mean); as the book stands, the reader feels disgusted and repulsed.

Very interesting about the two versions- really shows how Hardy was thinking.

KindDogsTail · 07/05/2016 10:43

That is very interesting THeOnlyLivingBoyIn NewCross That is so absolutely rape too.
AyeAmarok Thanks for answering.
I am going to listen again now to see if they said anything to make it clear that, though in Victorian times people might not have been clear that Tess had not consented to the sexual act that took place, in our own time it is clear she had not consented to this and it would have been rape.

I'll listen out to which text they might have been referring to also OnlyBoy

As the programme is called In Our Own Time, you would have thought some clear mention would have been made that it was definitely rape according to modern ethics and law.

Young people, among whom some will have recently been victims of un-reported 'date' rape at school and university even as we have this discussion, and older people who were raped in a similar way, might have heard the programme and felt confused and let down that the speakers said it was not clear.

A fictional character can stand for real paradigms. The programme
not defining it as rape ( at least in our own time) adds to rape culture in my opinion.

If an say, Eastenders rape had been discussed, there would have also been an advice line mentioned after the programme and on the website. I was not aware of one. I'll check that again.

OP posts:
KindDogsTail · 07/05/2016 11:11

Thanks very much Lurcio. What a wonderful analysis you have written..
You and AllltheDrama have explained it so very lucidly, and AllTh's updated version is a brilliant explanation of the events for any younger readers.

Both should be in literature study guide books in my opinion.

From other people's answers, I feel vindicated in being upset by the programme not having taken more of a stand.

Before posting this thread, I wrote in to the In Our Own Times contact last night. I hope the message gets through.

Now I am going to double check and listen again, but other listeners seem to have had the same impression as I did.

It is quite extraordinary that Hardy was so ahead of his time in showing the incremental grooming - just as Lurcio described.

Back to the book: It is also horrible that the end of Chapter 12 makes it clear that Tess's mother had set her up as bait - knowing full well what the implications might be, while also being too stupid to realise Alec would not have bothered marrying her any way - but had purposely not told her.

OP posts:
shinynewusername · 07/05/2016 11:28

I still dislike Angel Clare even more

Agree, I loathe the self-righteous Angel.

KindDogsTail · 07/05/2016 15:38

I have listened to the programme again. This does not include a transcript of the whole programme which was 49 mins long, but just the parts talking about the rape scene which came mostly near the end of the discussion.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078zcrr

We were told that the novel as Thomas Hardy first wrote it was rejected by two publishers, to whom he had submitted the first half of the novel, by one on the grounds that it was immoral and the other because it was too succulent. The third accepted it as a serialised graphic novel in a bowdlerized version and published it in 1891.

Hardy reissued it as the novel we have now in1892 (13:00 mins).

Melvyn Bragg was the host. There were three speakers:
Francis O'Gorman University of Leeds
Jane Thomas University of Hull
Dinah Birch University of Liverpool

In discussing why the novel was rejected by the first two publishers for immorality and succulence, we were told that Hardy had submitted the first half which contained the scene that,

Might have been a rape, or might have been a seduction but we can argue about that if we have time Melvyn Bragg 11:55mins

Melvyn Bragg went on to explain that the novel was intended to evoke our sympathy and compassion for a pure woman and her inexorable fate. He mentioned

'How her body speaks to others 15: 40 and was both an invitation and a threat.' MB

He began to talk about Alec Durberville:

32:53
^Alec's lust enabled him to act very badly. Did he or did he not rape her?..we've got to ask that
question, it's got to come up. Please, we have not got..^MB

34:17
Now then, what happened? MB

34:33
We can't know. The one thing we can be certain of is that whatever happened was not of Tess's choosing. That, ..uh, whether it was explicitly physical rape, or whether because her resistance was worn out because she was exhausted, we can't know. Because of course there's a sense in which nothing happened except in our imagination. (Jane Thomas or Dinah Birch)

But a baby comes out of it. That's quite something. M B

Yes, yes, but the baby....all of these things are fictional constructs....if you take my point.'JT or DB

35:00
But I'm reading the novel. I think novels are not just fictional constructs, they are the life of people we believe in...MB

True JT or DB

'Our imagination goes out to them and they become just as real as you three...Tess is as real as any of you here.' MB

35:20
We can never come up with an explicit answer as to what happened in The Chase.. JT

' just asked you why not MB

Because...because...because, as Francis has said, a lot of the crucial actions take place, as it were, off stage. It is one of the things he learnt from Greek Tragedy. You know..that you don't actually perform in front of the eyes of your audiences or reader. Because, in a sense, the consequences are so disastrous you could say that the question of whether it was an explicit rape, or whether it was some kind of forced seduction, ..doesn't in the end matter to what happened to Tess. JT or DB

Francis wants to say something MB

I think that it's worth saying that the first readers of the graphic version did experience a very different account of this. Because in that version we don't see anything of....seduction, rape...whatever it is. What we know is that Tess goes back home, that she says she had been tricked by Alec into a false marriage by a false registrar and she had lived with Alec for a week, But there was no baby Francis O'Gorman.

The woman speaker seems to evade a lot of the question by means of the academic trope that we can't know because Hardy uses the devise of Greek Tragedy to have events happen outside our view. In practice Hardy makes it clear enough what happened.

Francis O'Gorman's remark that in the original we don't see anything of seduction rape, whatever it is, it was only clear that Tess had been tricked into a false marriage - begs the mention that this would in modern times this would be rape too. Moreover, though F O'G was talking about the Graphic 1891 version, he failed to mention that in this Alec had also drugged Tess - another act of rape by modern standards.

In The Sense of Sex: Feminist Perspectives on Hardy
By Margaret R. Higonnet
we would have seen another expert who clearly recognises that Tess was raped
.
books.google.co.uk/books?id=0AVXa3y4ghsC&pg=PA104&dq=thomas+hardy+tess+ingham&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwip4rmIiMjMAhXrCsAKHanj

OP posts:
FreshwaterSelkie · 07/05/2016 18:18

Those bits that you've quoted contain exactly the phrases that set me off, kinddog.

"explicitly physical rape"
"explicit rape, or whether it was some kind of forced seduction"
and
"seduction, rape...whatever it is".

It really disappointed and angered me because basically I bloody love IOT and hearing rape myths on it, from women no less, pissed me right off. I was walking the dogs while listening and they were arsing about and I hoped that while I was dealing with that I'd perhaps missed the bit where they had prefaced what they were saying with "Hardy's audience would have thought...", but no, it stands as I heard it. Gah. I might have to write in.

VestalVirgin · 07/05/2016 20:21

In the version I read it was definitely rape. It was not described in detail, but we knew that a) he was lusting after her and b) she didn't like it one bit.

There is no way she would have consented. If I remember it correctly, she only accepted to go with him because she feared for her life, or at least very seriously for hear health, in the fight she was in.

It is very ironic that the author wrote it clearly as rape (he is very insistent that Tess is innocent), probably in an attempt to educate his contemporaries ... and it is STILL argued about. Confused

KindDogsTail · 07/05/2016 20:40

FreshwaterSelkie
Gah. I might have to write in
Yes, it might be worth it.

I have tried. I particularly don't like it that some listeners will have been raped in a similar way.

VestalVirgin
It is very ironic...isn't it!

OP posts:
Mama1980 · 07/05/2016 20:51

I always read it as rape, and it was taught to me that way at school, I remember because it led to a discussion about consent.
I believe there has been some literary discussion about whether or not Hardy was made by his publishers, to 'soften' and blur the lines/words surrounding the rape scene so it didn't fall foul of public decency laws then. I will try to find where I read that argument.
Totally agree by the way, despise Angel more and more every time I re read it,

LifeOfBriony · 07/05/2016 21:05

I didn't hear the programme.

I read Tess for A level and read it again in my 20s - I've always believed it to be rape. This was what we concluded after discussion In class. I remember going to see the (Polanski?) film in the early 1980s, and commenting to the friend I was with that in this film it wasn't made clear that she didn't want to.

KindDogsTail · 07/05/2016 21:15

Mama1980
Its interesting it led to a discussion about consent at your school.
I worry that school/university aged victims of rape may have been listening as the book is particularly popular for that age group.

It may be that Hardy was asked to blur and soften the words in the rape scene as you may have read once.

Even as it is, it is very clear what Hardy wants us to think. Tess's intention had been to get away as fast as possible. It was pitch dark.
She was, completely exhausted and sound asleep when he bent down and his cheek touched her face. We are told she had no guardian angel. The rape of peasant girls in the past is then alluded to. She knew that a serpent hissed where birds sang. A little later Alec told her he had done her wrong. She had a baby.

It's unfathomable why some of the speakers on the programme were quibbling about whether she had been raped or not!

OP posts:
KindDogsTail · 07/05/2016 21:21

LIfe of Briony
So you too thought it was rape and discussed that it was in class.
How annoying of Polanski. Of course he had his reasons for that as he had been indicted for statutory rape of a young girl in America.

You can still hear it if you would like to on radio 4 iplayer; also I wrote a transcript out of the relevant part of the discussion earlier on in the thread.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078zcrr

OP posts:
LurcioAgain · 07/05/2016 21:56

Polanski's crime is creepily and hideously similar in some ways - he groomed a young girl, got her drunk/high so that she was unconscious (cf. post upthread about Hardy's two versions of the scene - in one version, D'Urberville does drug her), then anally raped her. (Apologies for being so explicit, but my understanding is that the American crime of "statutory rape" can apply to consensual sex between underage teenagers - just wanted to make clear to anyone not familiar with the Polanski case that his actions were rape under pretty much any legal and moral definition of the word rape).

KindDogsTail · 07/05/2016 22:15

Thanks for making that clear about Polanski Lurcio. I had even realised the extent of how awful he had been, but had known the girl was underage.

OP posts:
TinklyLittleLaugh · 07/05/2016 22:26

Yes Polanski's defence team tried to present the anal rape as consideration to not get her pregnant. Vile, vile man.

CeeBeeBee · 07/05/2016 23:08

Tess was definitely raped. I've read the book at least twice and have watched 3 adaptations including the Polanski version. Polanski's version seems to show Tess as a willing partner who later regrets responding to his advances. I don't think it reflects the Hardy's intention of the book.

I think that with Tess being working class, she didn't stand a chance of being vindicated against a socially powerful man like Alec; she was going to get the blaming and shaming either way. Angel is a hypocrite.

Wolpertinger · 08/05/2016 08:36

I'm glad I only heard the first few minutes of the programme then, I'd have been seething.

I've always thought Hardy loved Tess, she was raped and he was writing as best he could to highlight the situation of ordinary women and rape in a time when they didn't make it into books and were thoroughly blamed for their fate. At the end of the book you are left furious it's taken Angel so long to make her happy and that the law can't see what she has gone through.

Errata · 08/05/2016 08:51

Of course it was rape - I didn't hear the programme, but it's pretty depressing that that conversation was had in 2016 with potentially rape survivors listening and hearing academics discussing a famous literary rape and downgrading it to a 'seduction where one party is not wild about the situation'.

Hardy is actually very good on the power dynamic and the grooming and guilting process that makes Tess - as with so many women in 2016 - feel confused about their own consent, because they briefly responded sexually/or were acquiescent to their rapists at some point previous to the rape. (The 'was stirred to confused surrender awhile' surely makes that clear - that her response was both confused, acquiescent and, crucially, finite, and that it was at some point before the rape took place, but that she was definitely not acquiescent or consenting when he raped her.)

When the narrator says Alec's ancestors dealt even more brutally with peasant girls, it seems implicit that what he means is simply raping them without the minimal 'attentions' of offering them a ride home from somewhere they are stuck and a jacket. So rape without the trappings of 'date rape', though as we all know, that's a false opposition, anyway.

KindDogsTail · 08/05/2016 09:53

Thanks everyone
CeeBeeBee
I don't think it was Hardy's intention either. He makes it clear. Yet one of the academics said 'We could not know'. Her reason? It seems to boil down to the fact that Hardy did not describe the actual raping step by step. 'He was using Greek tragedy techniques where we do not see'

Wolpertinger
I think that is right too. He is extraordinary in seeing the outrage of what can happen to women in a time when they were always blamed.

Errata
It is absolutely depressing. Many sixth form girls and university students - the very girls who often read this book - will have been raped in a similar way. Possibly very recently.
Thanks for describing that process of how self blame comes about, how Hardy described how Tess was drawn into that and your analysis of the text to explain what Hardy meant.

I wrote into the programme's Contact but they probably won't pay much attention.

OP posts:
KindDogsTail · 08/05/2016 12:28

So many people here have given very lucid answers and the consensus here has been that Tess was raped. Quite a few were told this by their teacher at school too.

I was a bit surprised though, as Tess of the D'Urbervilles is such a famous and well loved character, more people did not respond. So I posted in Books in case people who looked there had not happened to look in feminism.

OP posts:
TinklyLittleLaugh · 08/05/2016 12:36

How interesting. I read Tess about 30 years ago (for pleasure not study) and I've never really thought about what a feminist slant Hardy puts on it. In the constraints of the attitudes of the time, Hardy wrote a really radical book didn't he? How awful that the whole grooming, disbelieving, victim blaming thing still goes on today.

Pedestriana · 08/05/2016 12:36

I agree with Patty - I have always seen it as rape. Not in terms of brutal rape by a stranger, which is the archetypal stereotype, but as the more 'subtle' date-rape which causes such controversy.
Hardy portrays well the double standards of the time, and when I have read it, I feel he is soundly on the side of Tess.
I wasn't aware of the alternative versions of the text. If this is the case (not casting aspersions on that, just something I wasn't clued up on) then clearly it is rape.

Elizabeth Gaskell uses similar techniques (see "Ruth") to contrast the naiivety of women at a certain period of history against common misconceptions that 'spoiled goods' are just that, and if a woman didn't know she was "doing wrong" then she should have. But obviously to know about sex would have made her "forward" and probably "wicked."

KindDogsTail · 08/05/2016 12:49

Tinkly

In the constraints of the attitudes of the time, Hardy wrote a really radical book didn't he?

That's what I've been thinking too, Tinkly. It is quite extraordinary.

In the start of the programme before it became so annoying, it was discussed that Hardy had a very good relationship with his mother and his knowledge of women came from her.

He was also so honest about himself that when he was about seventy he wrote of an experience when he was a young man: He had watched a very beautiful young woman being hanged and had felt sexually aroused while watching her swinging there. If he had the bravery and the integrity to admit this dark side of himself it explains why he could take on anything.

Perhaps it made him realise how men blame women for the parts of themselves they find unacceptable. So perhaps he wrote Tess because he needed to show that the hanged girl/Tess was the innocent one.

OP posts:
KindDogsTail · 08/05/2016 12:54

Thanks, Pedestrians
Yes, I think what you and Patti say is right.
That is very interesting about Mrs Gaskell.

The first 1891 version was not what Hardy had first written, but even there it had a false marriage with a false registrar (rape in modern times I believe) and drugging (rape in modern times).

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread