Vanity Fair & Male Vanity Essay Example for Free

Vanity Fair Male Vanity Essay Through the course of history as gender relates to either sex, the flamboyance of either gender is dependent upon culture. The male birds of the Amazon are typically more colorful than their female counterparts, and their mating dance is very unique in its structure, and the female for her part does not have to ‘go through the loops’ of such ritual as the male does. This is true for other animals as well from the battle of rams to the dolphin fights in the ocean; the importance of strength and beauty has dominated the sexual history of animals. This is also true for the human race, and in no other culture and time in history as in the Victorian culture is the human male more ‘colorful’ than the female. The idea of vanity as it is expressed in Vanity Fair will be explored throughout this essay. William Makepeace Thackeray explores this concept in his characters and how vanity, or the ‘color’ of the male gender in the Victorian culture, is the motif of everyday living for such protagonists. This idea will be presented in this essay will textual support from Vanity Fair as well as Laura George’s article The Emergence of the Dandy and Russell A. Fraser’s Pernicious Casuistry: A Study of Character in Vanity Fair. Throughout the course of the novel, Thackeray employs the recurrent theme of the â€Å"dandy† or as George states, â€Å"†¦sparks, fops, beaux, swells, coxcombs, popinjays, macaroni, butterflies†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (George 2), a term that can be used to describe â€Å"men who aspire to be genteel. † The dandy was envisioned by a man who went by the name of George Beau Brummell, as George states, â€Å"†¦Brummell frequently represented all that was abjected by modern masculinity: love of fashion, of fabric, of the shape and cut of one’s clothes. Brummell himself bore a complex relationship to the emerging regime of masculine fashionable austerity† (George 1). By focusing upon this concept of the dandy and the effects it can have upon an individual’s personality, Thackeray decides to focus upon his male characters, Joseph Sedley and George Osborne, in particular. While the other characters within the novel are capable of accepting whatever amount of dandyism they might have, it is these two characters that remain transfixed upon their ability to maintain being dandy, which ultimately lead them to their unfortunate deaths. They were too consumed with thoughts about appearance both physically and socially to the extent it affected their ability to function in the world of â€Å"Vanity Fair†. In other words, these characters are seen being prime examples of how Thackeray’s novel is concerned with how each â€Å"character’s presentation will determine their success or failure†. Soon after Thackeray introduces his readers to the world of Vanity Far, the reader learns too quickly that these characters belonging to the middle class aspire to be part of the aristocracy hence the role of the dandy coming into play. It has often been said that the â€Å"aristocratic dandies, is at once a unique person- the model of dandyhood for all time- an embodiment of a common middle-class fantasy of aristocratic distinction† ( Cole, 137), which is why we see many of Thackeray’s characters constantly finding opportunities to better themselves, and their rank in society. Sir Rawdon Crawley, for example, was the one of few characters belonging to the aristocracy and was happily willing to give it up when he married Miss Rebecca Sharp. In the passage, â€Å"By these attentions, the veteran rake, Rawdon Crawley, found himself coveted into a very happy submissive married man† (191) indicates that while Joseph Sedley and George Osborne would be unhappy had they lost their rank in society, Thackeray illustrates at how some people are content with the simpler things in life, things not involving money. The dandy or in the case of Vanity Fair, Sedly and Osborne were distracted by other things in life, despite their apparent unimportance to livelihood and more to do with ambiance, as George states of the dandy (and as it illustrates the dandy’s vanity in Thackeray’s novel); There are traces of the man of fashion as ‘thing’ usage earlier, but the habit seems to coalesce around the time of the Restoration, and for good reason. Throughout the tumultuous seventeenth century, the relations between masculinity and fashion were violently contested, as the various Stuart courts were accused of conspicuous consumption, luxury, and effeminacy (along with a regrettable tendency to belive in their own divine rights); as Puritans pointed to the theological meanings of clothes; as domestic texatile manufactourers (as opposed to traders) sought an economic voice; and as the stakes and status of imported fabrics changed. It was in this context, as David Kuchta has argues, that Charles II adopted the three piece suit as the new sartorial model for masculinity (George 4) Joseph Sedley is the epitome of a dandy in Thackeray’s novel, and he illustrates of each of these points made by George. It seems that the gaining of wealth is the main preoccupation of the characters in Thackeray’s novel, and it was with the dandy that this wealth was displayed best to the public. Joseph Sedley’s nickname in the novel is ‘Waterloo Sedley’ because of his uncanny obsession with the Duke of Wellington. It seems that throughout the novel, Joseph Sedley, attaches himself to nobility purely on the grounds of their nobility as he relates himself with Lord Tapeworm despite his impecunious state merely because he is a lord. Joseph Sedley pays extra attention to his appearance, more so than the pages describing the women getting prepared to go out. In all, the essence of a dandy is one whose ego is larger than his humility and this is exceedingly true for Joseph Sedley as he does not concern himself with other’s judgments (except if they are noble) and eats and drinks and parties in a constant orgy around London (when he is in London). He does not like military life and is said to quaver at the sound of a canon at one point in the novel. Joseph Sedley fears any authority figure who could cut him down in front of nobility (such as his father) and he only pays attention to his own appearance and not to any politics, or other socially engaging conversation. Also, Joseph Sedley’s egoism is so large and his dandy state corresponds to this that he does not change throughout the course of the novel. Joseph Sedley believes that his state of being is appropriate and he is happy being who and what he is to care to change. It is through this fault of being a dandy and having such a large ego and such a selfish personality that Becky is able to ensnare him into marriage. With Rawdon Crawley’s rejection of the aristocratic ideal, Thackeray uses this to portray the idea of the dandy being solely a middle-class virtue. It appears that this â€Å" flamboyant aristocratic model of the eighteenth century was gradually rejected and supplanted by a restored and virtuous† (Reed) high class, which is why characters like Lord Steyne can still be considered dandy without sacrificing their own ideals; even though, he tries to exude his fantasies of Rebecca. Again, none of his actions can be compared to those of George Osborne. For example, when Dobbin publicly embarrasses George about the lack of affection he has towards his fiancee Amelia, George decides to prove his affections by purchasing a gift for his dear Amelia. Although George’s act of kindness is provoked as a gesture to prove his feelings for Amelia to the ever judgmental William Dobbin, he still decides to pursue what Thackeray displays as being a mockery of the middle-class gentleman. A true gentleman would not need to borrow money from his friend as George is seen doing when deciding to buy Amelia’s gift, to a man he is already trying to prove himself. George’s inability to conjure up the sufficient funds indicates his lack of knowledge of what it means to be dandy. In order to truly exude the essence of being a dandy, the use of flamboyance displayed in clothing as well as a countenounce of style must be utilized, which it seems George lacks as his countenance is spurred by jealousy and a certain essence of revenge and a little pride in his buying Amelia a gift, not as a dandy would buy a gift for the purpose of sharing their flamboyance but more to prove another man wrong, which is more ‘white-collar’ than noble (as the nobility in the definition of the dandy was the main element in society they wanted to portray). Here it seems that George, in the analogy of the animal kingdom and the male having to display his power and beauty in order to waylay other men from taking his choice in female, George is truly playing the part of the dominant male. Thus, his definition of a dandy may be split in half. His actions speak towards being too masculine and paying too much attention to the jealousy and revenge and pride in his nature on how much he loves his girl, while the other part of him is paying strict attention to his dandy nature in him buying her a gift in order to win her affections, thus ‘dancing’ for her. However it is in his intentions with the gift that George can most decidedly not be a dandy. In order to have a true lack of definition of a dandy to apply to George Osborne, a more thorough review of the main definition of a dandy is needed, as George writes, Anxieties about young sparks selling land in order to waste money on the transitory notions of fashion date at least to the Renaissance, but in the wake of the Puritan Commonwealth and in the midst of concern about Stuart affiliations with the French court, the political stakes of fashionable choices seemed particularly stark†¦Addison and Steel were particularly annoyed by the fops who troubled boundaries they were working to stabilize. That is, as fashionable consumption enriched manufacturers and shopkeepers at the expense of the aristocracy, Addison and Steele sough tot portray fashion itself as feminine in particular ways: as prone to ungovernable appetites, unreasonable fancies, and as generally wasting in its seductive powers. Men who gave into its allure risked becoming feminine, or risked losing their humanity altogether. The figure of the Romantic –era dandy, then, addressed old concerns, stirred up old fears, and challenged strongly defended distinctions between masculinity and fashion (George 5). According then to this statement, George’s obsession with proving himself to his fellow male friends would put him the category of half a dandy as he does not display all of the necessary traits that being a true dandy entails. However, it is his vanity that truly defines George’s personality. His vanity on how he will appear to his friends is what initiates his gift-giving and thus, it is vanity that is the main propellant to this character’s impetus on most of his actions in the course of the novel. His vanity in his own ego just like Sedley’s drives this character forward in Thackeray’s work, and it is vanity which engulfs him in relationship with Amelia. By failing to exhibit many of the traits of what defines a gentleman throughout the novel, George is seen trying to hold on to this idea of being a dandy, a trait he obviously lacks. It is in his pursuits that Thackeray appears to be a making a mockery of George and what he believes makes him superior to his much hated rival, Rebecca. However, the two of them are very much alike, each character is seen as taking advantage of each opportunity to better their position in society, and it is their pursuits that Thackeray allows the English class system to shine through in his novel. For instance, when Rebecca is seen writing a letter to her beloved Amelia about her first encounter with Rawdon Crawley where she writes â€Å"Your Indian Muslin and your pink silk, dearest Amelia, are said to become me very well. They are a good deal worn now; but you know, we poor girls cannot afford des fraiches toilettes† (Thackeray 115), Thackeray has her ending the letter with the story of her scarf. This scarf does not represent a gift, but a class distinction. He wants to remind his audience of the different privileges available to the middle class, and it is through the use of the dandy that his message is conveyed. In Rebecca’s position as a â€Å"penniless governess† her only exposure to anything Indian would be this scarf that Amelia herself did not want. This scarf appears to be Amelia indirectly displaying her thoughts of the lower class believing them to only be worthy of her trash—or it could also be her tactless manner and her own inability to see beyond the scope of her own world and thus her giving this as a gift is her ignorance being displayed in Thackeray’s novel and how privileged women are not always the smartest despite their positions. Interestingly, Rebecca took it as an act of kindness, and as something of value. It appears that by her taking advantage of the scarf it is her way of holding on to some piece of the middle class, her wearing of the garment is a way to fool people of the reality of her situation. Despite her tactless manner, it seems that Amelia is one of the only redeeming character’s in Vanity Fair, again this may be attributed to her ignorance, as Fraser writes