VICTORIAN FEMALE BEAUTY: CULTURAL DICHOTOMIES AND LITERARY ARCHETYPES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/2522-4077-2025-214.1-10Keywords:
Victorian literature, female beauty, gender ideology, intercultural communication, cultural archetypes, aesthetic representationAbstract
This article offers a nuanced linguistic analysis of the sophisticated lexical strategies used to portray female beauty as a moral and ideological concept in Victorian novels and their Neo-Victorian reinterpretations. Through a comparative study of works by Charlotte Brontë, George Eliot, Thomas Hardy, and William Makepeace Thackeray – alongside key Neo-Victorian responses by John Fowles and A. S. Byatt – the analysis uncovers a pervasive Victorian duality: the clash between superficial physical attractiveness and deep spiritual virtue. This contrast functioned as a subtle means of social control, connecting a woman’s appearance to assumptions about her intellect, morality, and social standing within patriarchal systems. The research identifies recurring antonymic lexical pairs (e.g., “material” vs. “spiritual,” “rosy” vs. “pale”), highlighting the moral and emotional meanings embedded in descriptions of female beauty. While terms for physical attractiveness often suggest frivolity or moral weakness, references to “pale” or “subdued” beauty raise spiritual qualities as signs of true worth. Special focus is given to the symbolism of body parts – especially eyes and mouth – as well as the gendered views of beauty and the frequent personification of the “soul.” In Neo-Victorian texts, this contrast is partly challenged through efforts to connect outer and inner beauty, reflecting shifting attitudes and showing how literature can help shape changing cultural conversations about femininity. By tracing how Victorian and Neo-Victorian authors negotiated beauty ideals, the study highlights the enduring influence of literature in shaping and contesting cultural archetypes. These findings underscore the continued relevance of Victorian notions of beauty in contemporary discussions of gender, objectification, and empowerment, and call for further interdisciplinary research into how language reflects and constructs norms across cultures and historical eras.
References
Heller T., Moran P. Scenes of the Apple: Food and the Female Body in Nineteenth-Century Women’s Writing / edited by Tamar Heller, Patricia Moran. Albany: SUNY Press, 2003. 288 p.
Fraser H. Beauty and Belief: Aesthetics and Religion in Victorian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. 306 p.
Inglis K. Physiologies of the Modern: Classical and Early Victorian Discourses on Health and the Body. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. 216 p.
Hadley L. Neo-Victorian Fiction and Historical Narrative: The Victorians and Us. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. 208 p.
Mills V., Tilley H. Victorian Beauty. 19: Interdisciplinary Studies in the Long Nineteenth Century. 2023. No 34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.10223.
Priestley J. B. Victoria’s Heyday. London: Penguin Books, 1974. 296 p.
Brontë Charlotte. Villette. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 640 p.
Eliot George (Mary Ann Evans). Adam Bede. London: Penguin Books, 2008. 704 p.
Hardy Th. Tess of the d’Urbervilles: A Pure Woman Faithfully Presented. London: Penguin Books, 2006. 528 p.
Thackeray William Makepeace. Vanity Fair: A Novel Without a Hero. London: Penguin Books, 2003. 912 p.
Gaskell Elizabeth. Mary Barton: A Tale of Manchester Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 480 p.
Meredith George. The Egoist. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 704 p.
Eliot George (Mary Ann Evans). The Mill on the Floss. London: Penguin Books, 2003. 592 p.
Brontë Charlotte. Jane Eyre. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 592 p.
Fowles John. The French Lieutenant's Woman. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1969. 467 p.
Byatt A. S. Possession: A Romance. London: Vintage, 2009. 576 p.
Ingham, P. Introduction. Hardy, T. Tess of the d’Urbervilles. London: David Campbell Publ. Ltd., 1991. P. 11–31.
Кисельова, А. Л. Концепт "Жіночість" у вікторіанській лінгвокультурі: дис. ... канд. філол. наук: 10.02.04 / А. Л. Кисельова; Київ. нац. ун-т ім. Тараса Шевченка. Київ, 2007. 218 c.
