Katelyn Ostby
ENG 467: English Capstone
Dr. Amy Taggart
9 May 2014
Female Subjectivity: Biblical Allusions in Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping
Abstract:
This project, a critical literary analysis, will be investigating Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping, a female-narrated novel, and how Robinson alludes to the Book of Ruth in order to illustrate female subjectivity. Robinson’s novel is set during the 1950s in Fingerbone, Idaho, a patriarchal society that places certain womanly roles on the main characters, Ruthie and Sylvie. In order for Ruthie and Sylvie to illustrate their own definition of their roles and find female subjectivity, they ultimately reject the societal norm and leave Fingerbone, becoming transients. It is in this transient state and Robinson’s allusion of the transient journey that the characters of Ruth and Naomi take in the Book of Ruth, that this project will be examining. In regards to that portion, this project will also analyze the comparisons between the two texts’ characters, the mother-daughter relationship, and the character’s involvement with and rejection of the domestic space that they are placed in based on their gender. Through this investigation, the Biblical allusion to the Book of Ruth will evidently help explain Robinson’s drive for female subjectivity within her novel.
Introduction:
“Literary allusions help to construct the worldview of the narrative. They provide clues to understanding ambiguous events and situations. They illuminate the attitudes and motivations of characters when the surface of the narrative is reticent” (Fewell & Gunn 233). This quote by Dr. Danna Fewell and Dr. David Gunn in their article “’A Son Is Born to Naomi!’ Literary Allusions and Interpretation in the Book of Ruth” illustrates the usage of a literary allusion and how it helps illuminate new understanding about certain aspects of a piece of text or narrative. In Marilynne Robinson’s novel Housekeeping, Robinson seems to use allusions from the Book of Ruth in order to illuminate female subjectivity and more specifically how the allusions help exemplify how her characters find female subjectivity. Dr. Heike Harting in her article titled “Globalization and Autonomy,” defines subjectivity as “a concept that refers to the cultural, social, political, and psychological processes that shape and determine who we think we are and how we situate ourselves in the world” (Harting). Therefore, through character similarity, the mother daughter relationship, the denouncing of the patriarchal space and the transient movement, Marilynne Robinson is able to exemplify how she uses allusions from the Book of Ruth in order to illustrate female subjectivity.
The questions this research will attempt to answer are as follows:
- For what reason does Marilynne Robinson allude to the Book of Ruth in her contemporary text, Housekeeping?
- How does Marilynne Robinson, in her novel Housekeeping, use the Book of Ruth to exemplify female subjectivity?
This research is significant because it ultimately exemplifies how a type of figure of speech, such as an allusion, is used in order to analyze and progress narrative. In that way, it pushes a reader to find correlations that an author purposefully makes to another text in order to illuminate a specific reason. This project is also significant due to the fact that it illustrates the Book of Ruth as a feminist narrative. Most readers have not read the Book of Ruth, nor would they interpret the story as a feminist text, therefore, by doing so, this project will help broaden the understanding of this text for a viewer.
Literary Review & Textual Analysis:
In light of this presentation’s discussion, this project has broken down the information based on topic of detail in order to differentiate what scholars are saying about the certain topic. For this portion, the research found in both Robinson’s novel and the Book of Ruth is broken down into the character similarity, the mother-daughter relationship, the denouncing of the patriarchal space of the house, and the transient movement that the characters in both texts take. Integrated into this literary review, will be the textual research from my two primary texts in order to add the portion of analysis and research that this project has done in order to further along the answer to the questions being examined.
Character Similarity:
Through alluding to character similarities from the Book of Ruth, Robinson is beginning the first steps in not only connecting the two pieces of work together, but also in setting up the stage to how female subjectivity is ultimately found in her work. The first character similarity that connects both Robinson’s novel and the Book of Ruth is the characters of Lucille and Orpah. Both have the similar act of following the rules of their society. Within Robinson’s Housekeeping, Lucille is described as desiring a more concrete family structure, and instead of following Sylvie and Ruthie’s transient lifestyle, she strives for the patriarchal structure that the society of Fingerbone, Idaho seems to require. Ruthie picks up on Lucille’s connection to this society stating that she had a “sense that Lucille’s loyalties were with the other world” (Robinson 95) and that Lucille ultimately had “begun her tense and passionate campaign to naturalize herself to [Fingerbone]” (95). Paula Geyh from her article “Burning down the House? Domestic space and Feminine Subjectivity in Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping” describes Lucille as being one who “absorbs the rules of society” (Geyh 108) rather than the family that she is placed in with Ruthie and Sylvie. Similar to her sister Ruthie, Lucille seems to be searching for something to attach to; however, Christine Caver in her article, “Nothing Left to Lose: Housekeeping’s Strange Freedoms” believes that Lucille “merely adopts the first conventional identity that appears to offer stability,” (Caver 124) where as Ruthie uncovers her true identity when her aunt Sylvie becomes their guardian.
In comparison to this character of Lucille, Orpah from the Book of Ruth also has the same characteristic of following tradition, especially in regards to the society that she is in. Her readily acceptance of going back to Moab rather than continuing on with Naomi illustrates the draw to a lifestyle that she is used to. In the text itself, this is illustrated when it is said that Orpah “has gone back to her people” (Holy Bible: NRSV, New Revised Standard Version, Ruth 1:15). From comparing these two characters and their similarities in personal traits, it can be seen that Robinson uses the character of Orpah to create her character of Lucille. Both seem to resort back to their society’s way of living and illustrate the contrasting character traits to their “sisters” of Ruthie and Ruth. Also, by alluding to this character similarity, Robinson is using Orpah’s desire to follow society’s rules against Ruth’s desire to follow Naomi, within her own writing, in order to exemplify her character of Lucille and how through her need to follow the patriarchal society, Ruth is able to find her own desired identity. Ultimately, like Harting asserts, through this “social process” (Harting) of having Lucille follow her patriarchal society, similar to Orpah’s obedience, Ruth is able to become one step closer at determining her own female subjectivity.
The second character similarity that connects both Robinson’s novel and the Book of Ruth is through the characters of Sylvie and Naomi. In regards to Sylvie, one scene in particular helps successfully exemplify her character. It is when both she and Ruthie are at the deserted house in the forest and Sylvie decides to abandon Ruthie for the night in order to test her individual strength. In this scene, it is stated by Karen Kaivola in her article “The Pleasure and Perils of Merging: Female Subjectivity in Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping” that Sylvie abandons Ruthie in order for her to “emerge newly empowered” (Kaivola 684) and to “achieve… self-reliance” (Ravits 654). After returning to her, Ruthie explains the situation saying that, “By abandoning me [Sylvie] had assumed the power to bestow such a richness of grace. For in fact I wore her coat like beatitude, and her arms around me were as heartening as mercy” (Robinson 161).
Similarly, Naomi, in the Book of Ruth, also regards Ruth in a comparable fashion. For Naomi, her way of abandonment was in the form of silence, where “she said no more to [Ruth]” (The New Revised Version, Ruth 1:18) on their way to Bethlehem. Phyllis Trible in her article “Human Comedy” states that “[Sylvie] does not speak again to Ruth in this scene; nor does she speak about her” (Trible 258). Ultimately, Trible believes that “throughout the exchange, [Naomi’s] counsel is customary, her motives altruistic” (171). This is Naomi’s way of molding Ruth and seeing how she will act as if Naomi was not present. In that way, despite Naomi’s silence, Ruth ultimately takes up work, “glean[ing] among the ears of grain” (Holy Bible: NRSV, New Revised Standard Version, Ruth 2:2). By having this common similarity between Sylvie and Naomi, it can be seen how Robinson alludes to Naomi’s character when creating Sylvie. The similarity in a form of desertion also helps illustrate how Robinson draws Naomi’s silence to exemplify Sylvie’s abandonment in order to persuade Ruthie to find a sense of female subjectivity. This subjectivity, ultimately, is found through the form of a “psychological process” (Harting) that in the end helps Ruthie and Ruth determine who they are.
The last character similarity that connects both Robinson’s novel and the Book of Ruth is through Housekeeping’s Ruthie and the Biblical Ruth. First when looking at the character of Ruthie, one immediately sees the devotion and attachment she has towards her family members, especially her aunt Sylvie. After losing both her mother and grandmother, Ruthie’s identity seems to be lost; however, once Sylvie enters as the new guardian, Ruthie absorbs Sylvie’s lifestyle. Before Sylvie’s presence in her life, Ruthie states that she feels “incompletely and minimally existent” (Robinson 105). Yet after connecting with Sylvie, Ruthie “identifies with her” (Chodorow 113) and ultimately “suspect[s] that Sylvie and [she] were of a kind” (Robinson 106). The identity loss that she was feeling could not be found in the patriarchal environment of the town or in another woman character of that society. Rather, she finds the connection and that fulfillment of identification, like Chodorow points out and what textual evidence supports, through her attaching personality to Sylvie.
Comparatively, in the Book of Ruth, Ruth also feels that need for attachment and finds solace through her mother-in-law Naomi. There it is said by Edward L. Greenstein in his article “Reading Strategies and the Story of Ruth” that Ruth “abandons her homeland” (Greenstein 215) in order to “bind herself to Naomi” (215). Like Ruthie’s attaching behavior, Ruth too has the desire to connect with Naomi and truly does identify with her. Ruth ultimately expresses this binding personality trait of her by telling Naomi:
Do not press me to leave you
or turn back from following you!
Where you go, I will go;
where you lodge, I will lodge;
your people shall be my people,
and your God my God.
Where you die, I will die –
there will I be buried (Holy Bible: NRSV, New Revised Standard Version, Ruth 1:16-17).
Through this textual support, it is evident that Ruth’s binding qualities are successfully illustrated. She would willingly give up her own home, people, and even her own religion in order to follow and identify herself with Naomi. In that way, between these two characters, they both illustrate their attaching personality trait. By doing so, it can be seen that Robinson successfully alludes to the Biblical Ruth in order to set up the identity-seeking and attaching personality in her character of Ruthie as well as promote her, through her personality, to attain a form of female subjectivity. Ultimately this female subjectivity is formed through the “cultural and social processes” (Harting) that Robinson alludes from Ruth and places upon her character of Ruthie in order for her to be able to find her sense of identity.
Mother-Daughter Relationship:
When looking at how both Ruthie and Ruth have a similar attaching personality to Sylvie and Naomi, it can lead into expressing this connection that they have with one other. Robinson alludes to the mother-daughter relationship of Ruth and Naomi in order to exemplify the mother-daughter relationship of Ruthie and Sylvie, within her own novel. She too ultimately exudes how through this use of allusion, Robinson asserts that Ruthie and Sylvie find female subjectivity through the form of a “social and psychological process” (Harting) that the mother-daughter relationship places upon them.
In regards to Robinson’s novel, there is an assertion that Ruthie’s character is persistent in attaching herself to the character of Sylvie. In scholarly writer, Martha Ravitz’s article “Extending the American Range: Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping,” she believes Ruthie to be having a difficult time dealing with both the loss of her mother and her grandmother. Ruthie is in need of something to fill the void in which is made when both her loved ones die. Ultimately, however, Ravitz believes that “Ruthie’s internalized struggle against the sense of abandonment is resolved in her kinship with Sylvie” (Ravitz 666). Textually this can be seen in the scene after Sylvie abandons Ruthie at the deserted house. Ruthie goes to state, “I walked after Sylvie down the shore, all at peace, and at ease, and I thought, We are the same. She could as well be my mother” (Robinson 145). This line helps to represent how vital Sylvie’s role is to Ruthie and her life. She ultimately regards Sylvie as the mother figure that is able help complete the part of Ruthie that she feels is missing.
Similarly, in the Book of Ruth, Ruth identifies more so with her mother-in-law, Naomi, rather than her own mother. This is evidently true because of the fact that Ruth denies her own home in order to be with Naomi. In this case, Ravitz believes Naomi to be a “mother-substitute” (Ravitz 652) for Ruth. Their relationship over time connects and even though Ruth finds Naomi as her mother figure, she eventually bonds with Ruth, stating that Ruth is “a daughter-in-law who loves her, who is more to her than seven sons” (Holy Bible: NRSV, New Revised Standard Version, Ruth 4:15). In that way, their connection as a mother-daughter relationship is apparent. Through this similarity of the mother-daughter relationship that is evident in both texts, it can be seen that Robinson alludes to Naomi and Ruth’s relationship from the Book of Ruth in order to create and shape her own mother-daughter relationship of Sylvie and Ruthie, in her own text.
The issue of how this allusion exemplifies female subjectivity is then discussed within the last area of Ravitz’s article. She concludes by saying that she believes that both mother-daughter relationships have a “courage [that] consist… of courageous subjectivity in the face of isolation and neglect, inner assaults to selfhood sustained over time” (Ravitz 659). In the case of the mother-daughter relationship between Ruthie and Sylvie, their “isolation” that they face is the patriarchal society of Fingerbone. Despite this neglect that they feel from the townspeople, Ruthie and Sylvie remain together in not only their lifestyle, but also in their mother-daughter bond, successfully promoting their “courageous subjectivity” (659) as a result of that. Similarly, Ruth and Naomi’s isolation is a cause from their husbands’ deaths. Yet, despite their losses, they remain together in their bond and ultimately illustrate a sense of “courageous subjectivity” (659) by sticking together.
Overall, through this mother-daughter relationship, both sets of characters find female subjectivity through the “psychological process” (Harting) of forming the bonds together and also through the “social process” (Harting) of overcoming their “isolation and neglect” (Ravitz 659). Ultimately this helps show how Robinson draws from the mother-daughter relationship between Naomi and Ruth, in order to portray female subjectivity through the mother-daughter relationship between Sylvie and Ruthie.
The Denouncing of the Patriarchal Space:
Through this female bond that these characters create, they then lead to find even more subjectivity through the denouncing of patriarchal space, especially that of the home. With the text of Housekeeping the structure of the home is thought to be by Ravitz as a “materialistic society that falsifies the notion of female identity by equating female well-being with domestic life” (Ravitz 665). In the society of Fingerbone, women are portrayed in relation to their home, where as in Ruthie and Sylvie’s case, they “[renounce] the shelter of the familial home” (662) and instead choose “the unfettered freedom that in America fiction has been reserved for males” (662). Basically Ravitz it touching on the fact that “society has dictated that the male hero roams the frontier… while his female counterpart… remains behind in town, securely tucked away at home, herself the very embodiment of the stability and restraints of civilization” (662). Therefore, Sylvie and Ruth go against that societal role that involves the home, because of its “representation…as [a] material bond and metaphysical constraint for women in traditional sex roles,” (663) and ultimately burn the house down. Textually it is said that “Sylvie set[s] fire to the straw of the broom, and held it blazing to the hem of the pantry curtain, and to the fringe of the rug” (Robinson 209). This line illustrates how when Ruthie and Sylvie begin to burn down the house, they chose to start but lighting three items that illustrate womanly household objects. By setting fire to them, Robinson is illustrating how they are ultimately setting fire to what the patriarchal society deems appropriate for gender role. This is also expressed by William Burke in his article, “Border Crossings in Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping” where he states that “the rejection of the [house] is a rejection of the patriarchal notion of housebuilding and housekeeping” (Burke 106).
Similarly, the Book of Ruth deals primarily with the topic of a house in the beginning of the text. Before beginning their journey, Naomi tells both of her daughter-in-laws to “Go back each of you to your mother’s house” (Holy Bible: NRSV, New Revised Standard Version, Ruth 1:8). Yet despite Naomi’s desire for them to return to Moab, only Orpah finally listens. Ruth, on the other hand, said no and was “determined to go with [Naomi]” (Ruth 1:18). This type of action was seen to be more radical in a sense because like Ilona Rashkow in her article, “Ruth: The Discourse of Power and the Power of Discourse” states, “widows normally return to their ‘father’s house’” (Rashkow 29) after their husbands death. However, by not returning to her homeland, Ruth is pushing her limits in not only not following Naomi’s demands, but also in denying their society’s “norm.” In this way, it can be seen how Robinson alludes to Ruth’s denouncing of her homeland when illustrating Ruthie and Sylvie action of burning down their house. It can also be seen that Robinson’s use of allusions in this context is asserting female subjectivity through what Harting would call a “cultural and social process.” Both texts deal with denouncing of their patriarchal space that their cultures and society’s have deemed necessary for these characters to deal with based on their female gender. However, by denouncing this space, Robinson’s allusion and connection between the two texts helps promote female subjectivity for her characters.
The Transient Motion:
After ridding themselves of the patriarchal space of the house, both sets of characters begin their transient movement. In Joan Kirkby’s article, “Is There Life After Art? The Metaphysics of Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping,” Kirkby illustrates how the women transcend “the activities… of man as artist ordering and subjecting the forces of nature to his power” (92) and instead follow their own way of living despite the other women of the town. The city of Fingerbone, Kirkby believes has “the conventions of the society” (94) in which Ruthie and Sylvie are both trying to rid their identities from. In relation, Maggie Galehouse in her article “Their Own Private Idaho: Transience in Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping” also touches on the positivity that the transient motion has on the women in Robinson’s text. She believes that the novel “portrays drifting as a kind of liberation, an unencumbering, a casting-off of unnecessary objects and social responsibilities” (Galehouse 119). This is apparent in Robinson’s text when Ruthie and Sylvie decide to burn the house, Ruth says, “Now truly we were cast out to wander, and there was an end to housekeeping” (Robinson 209). She also believes that through their transient lifestyle, they are “chipping away at conventional notions of vagrancy, Robinson fashions a nonidealized alternative to the nuclear family and to the spatial and cultural restrictions within which it ordinarily moves” (Galehouse 119). Galehouse also asserts that “it is only when Sylvie and Ruth drift outside of convention that they realize – that is, become real to – themselves” (123).
In comparison, the journey scene between Ruth and Naomi also reveals a sense of renewal and stage of becoming. In her article, Kirkby believes that once Ruth and Naomi begin their journey to Bethlehem, they are becoming “de-civilized” (Kirkby 97) from the society of Moab that they have been accustomed to and have followed the rules of. However, by ridding themselves of their past lives and beginning a journey together, Ruth and Naomi are de-civilizing themselves of the past culture they once understood, to ultimately find something new. After both her husband and sons’ deaths, Naomi is in an economically and socially low status and at loss of who she really is. Therefore, this desire to find something new and “de-civilize” oneself can be textually seen when Naomi hears “that the Lord had considered his people and given them food” (Holy Bible: NRSV, New Revised Standard Version, Ruth 1:6) in Bethlehem and she ultimately decides to travel there. In this way, it can be seen how Robinson uses this “de-civilizing” journey of Ruth and Naomi’s in order to depict Ruthie and Sylvie’s transient motion out of Fingerbone and to ultimately illuminate the female subjectivity that they gain by doing so. This form of female subjectivity is found through the “political and social process” (Harting) of Ruth and Naomi’s journey and Ruthie and Sylvie’s transient movement. By going beyond their social constraints to pursue their own desires, Robinson’s allusion helps illustrate this female subjectivity and ultimately portrays how both sets of characters are able to “become real to – themselves” (Galehouse 123).
Conclusion:
Through the help of scholarly articles as well as the main two texts, the idea of female subjectivity, the “processes that shape and determine who we think we are and how we situate ourselves in the world” (Harting), is evidently portrayed through Robinson’s allusions to the Book of Ruth. In this case, Fewell and Gunn’s statement on how literary allusions “help to construct…[and] provide clues to understanding… [a] narrative” (Fewell & Gunn 233) can successfully be seen in this circumstance. Ultimately, Robinson’s reason to use Biblical allusions was to illustrate and bring light to the female subjectivity that is being gained by her characters. In this way, through character similarity, the mother daughter relationship, the denouncing of the patriarchal space and the transient movement, Marilynne Robinson is able to exemplify how she uses allusions from the Book of Ruth in order to illustrate female subjectivity.
Works Cited
“Book of Ruth.” Holy Bible: NRSV, New Revised Standard Version. New York: Harper Bibles, 2007. N. pag. Print.
Burke, William M. “Border Crossings in Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping.” MFS Modern Fiction Studies 37.4 (1991): 716-724.
Caver, Christine. “Nothing Left to Lose: Housekeeping’s Strange Freedoms.” American Literature 68.1 (1996): 111-137.
Fewell, Danna N., and David M. Gunn. “‘A Son Is Born To Naomi!’: Literary Allusions and Interpretation in the Book of Ruth.” Women in the Hebrew Bible (1999): 233-39. Print.
Galehouse, Maggie. “Their Own Private Idaho: Transience in Marilynne Robinson’s Houskeeping.” Contemporary Literature 41.1 (2000): 117-37. JSTOR. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
Geyh, Paula E. “Burning down the house? Domestic space and feminine subjectivity in Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping.” Contemporary Literature 34.1 (1993): 103-122.
Greenstein, Edward L. “Reading Strategies and the Story of Ruth.” Women in the Hebrew Bible (1999): 211-232. Print.
Harting, Heike. “Subjectivity.” Globalization and Autonomy. University of Montreal, n.d. Web. 01 May 2014. <http://www.globalautonomy.ca/global1/glossary_pop.jsp?id=CO.0036>.
Kaivola, Karen. “The Pleasures and Perils of Merging: Female Subjectivity in Marilynne Robinson’s ‘Housekeeping.’” Contemporary Literature. 34.4 (1993): 670-690.
Kirkby, Joan. “Is There Life After Art? The Metaphysics of Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping.” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature 5.1 (1986): 91-109. JSTOR. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
Rashkow, Ilona. “”Ruth: The Discourse of Power and the Power of Discourse.” A Feminist Companion to Ruth. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1993. N. pag. Print.
Ravitz, Martha. “Extending the American Range: Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping.” American Literature 61.4 (1989): 644-66. Web.
Robinson, Marilynne. Housekeeping. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux, 1980. Print.
Trible, Phyllis. 1978. “A Human Comedy.” God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality. Philadelphia: Fortress. 166-99.
Katelyn Ostby's Undergraduate Years 