my last dutchess

 According to Van Dijk  discourse is determined by society and cognition. CDA features such notions as power, dominance, hegemony, ideology, class, gender, race, discrimination, institutions, social structure and social order, besides the more familiar discourse analytical notions. The CDA researcher tries to answer two basic issues.

1. How do more powerful groups control public discourse?

2. How does such a discourse control mind and action of less powerful groups and what are the social consequences of such a control such as social inequality?

When discourse is  critically  analyzed, it is  studied at  macrostructure and microstructure level. Macrostructure is associated with the global meaning and microstructure is linked with local meaning. Global or superstructures  are overall canonical meaning and local forms are those of sentences and formal relation between sentences, ordering primacy and passive voice etc.

                                                                                              (The hand book of discourse analysis)

                     

The following analysis of the poem ‘’MY LAST DUCHESS’’ (For Text of the Poem See Appendix) investigates the power relation between  genders in Victorian society.

CDA ANALYSIS OF THE POEM

Ideology

            The poem reveals how women are considered as property and objects in possession of their husbands. The idea is heightened by the painting of the duchess in her husband’s possession even after her death and symbolizes duke’s desire to always maintain control over her and exert his powers. Throughout the whole poem the Duke’s obsession with control and power is revealed. He has his first wife murdered because she didn’t behave as he wanted her to. The most telling word is ‘my’ in ‘my last duchess.’ The expression and other descriptions in the poem present a disturbing psychological portrait of the Duke belonging to the Victorian period. The warm and outgoing personality of the Duchess threatens the Duke who is struggling with his own insecurities. He is more secure with the Duchess as an object than as a person.

            In the poem, woman’s own identity is also brought into question. Is she only an object to be controlled and manipulated by men? While the Duchess was alive, the Duke wanted to control her so much that his happiness depended on the Duchess conforming to his will. He wanted her smiles, laughter, and joy to be directed only toward him. The Duchess’s vibrant, friendly and humane personality threatened the Duke’s power. His control over her extended to such an obsession that he did not even want her to look towards anyone else. He was driven by the desire to imprint his own identity on the Duchess. The thought that the Duchess may have her own personality never occur to him and he is driven by the mad desire to plant only the seeds of his own identity. He displays no sympathy and is possessed with idealized self. 

            From the feminist perspective, therefore, the poem gives a gory picture of the Victorian age’s obsession with male supremacy. The Victorian women were considered failures by the society if they did not live their lives by the standards set by their husbands. They were expected to worship their husbands and live their lives within restrictive parameters defined for them in order to survive in the male world. The wife’s identity was determined by what the husband gave to her as the Duke arrogantly points out that the Duchess had his “gift of nine-hundred-years-old name.” This definition of her identity through his title reduces her own self image and identity. 

            The wife therefore becomes a commodity whose value lasts as long as it is useful. The Duke cannot change her so he decides to have her murdered with no moral qualms whatsoever. But he does not free her; he has her trapped forever, like his other possessions, in an engaging pose behind the curtain after her death. Now he controls her completely and his masculine power is satisfied.

            The closing lines of the poem further indicate the ideology behind his actions. As the Duke leaves with the ambassador, he points to a statue of Neptune “taming a sea-horse”(55) which he proudly admits to having “cast in bronze.”(56) In his arrogance, he may be likened here to the Neptune god and his late wife to the sea-horse.

Identity

            In the poem the female is not considered worthy of any sort of identity. The Duchess is the wife of the Duke and that is her only identity. Whatever she is, she must owe it all to her husband - ‘My favour at her breast.’(25) Moreover, she is not painted as one having any personality at all- ‘too soon made glad/Too easily impressed; she liked whate’er/ She looked on, and her looks went everywhere.’(22- 23) She does not even seem to have any sense or intelligence or skill like that of her husband in talking; she is depicted as having the intelligence of a small child - ‘all and each would draw from her alike the approving speech/Or blush at least.’(29-31) 

            Such a portrayal suggests the treatment of women in the Victorian age. The women were not expected to have any identity of their own. They were to be defined by their husband’s rank and status in society. They were expected to behave as their husbands commanded them to and subdue their own feelings and identity. Failing to conform could mean losing everything – their honour and their life. Under such circumstances the Victorian women lived their lives behind the cloak of false identity their husbands threw over them. The women were treated as objects of decoration and display devoid of wisdom and intelligence. In such a society the identity of a woman was seriously threatened. She was a nameless person whose only identity was her husband’s name.

            In the poem, the Duchess has no name. She is introduced as ‘my’ last duchess to readers. This introduction takes away her own identity and we only see her through the lens of the Duke. She has no voice in the poem, and is more like the ‘sea-horse’ in the Duke’s studio. The poem opens with these lines(3):

That’s my last Duchess painted on the wall,

Looking as if she were alive. I call

That piece a wonder, now…

            The Duke calls his wife ‘that piece’ and ‘a wonder.’ The terms appear derogatory and depreciatory when we understand that they are meant for his wife. It is not that the Duke does not understand the difference between a person and a painting; he intentionally blurs the boundaries between the person and the painting and in the process reveals a mindset that speaks of his arrogance and humanity. His wife living or dead has no human value and is like an object to be ridiculed and belittled. The reason he calls his wife’s painting a ‘wonder’ is because of the ‘the depth and passion of its earnest glance.’(8) Here again, the same ridiculing tone of the Duke is emphasized; he finds it surprising that the painter could find any depth and passion in her eyes at all! The meaning not all too apparent is that the women are devoid of ‘depth’ and ‘passion’ by which the Duke perhaps implies that they lack wit and intelligence. The wife, therefore, is a shadow figure lurking behind curtain devoid of voice and identity.

            In his desire to possess her completely, the Duke consumes her identity totally. She is allowed no freedom and is expected to confirm her identity to that of her husband. This controlling desire is evident from the Duke’s later description of his wife. We are told that in the lines (21-24):

She had

A heart—how shall I say?—too soon made glad,

Too easily impressed; she liked whate’er

 She looked on, and her looks went everywhere.

            Among others, this is the list of objections that the Duke raises against his wife. He wanted to control her actions and behavior and wanted her only for himself. And then, he says in these lines (43-45)

Oh, sir, she smiled, no doubt

Whene’er I passed her; but who passed without

Much the same smile?

            In his jealousy and possessiveness, he hates her individuality and independence. He hates her for not conforming and for not listening to him. He hates her fight for her identity and wants to suppress it at all cost. In his arrogance and filled with sense of male supremacy, he decides on an extreme act of removing altogether what he could not change: Lines (45- 46)

I gave commands;

Then all smiles stopped together.

Word Choices

            The selection of words in the poem depicts the hegemony and sense of supremacy of the husband. An analysis of the poem will reveal this.

            In the opening line of the poem the duke introduces his late wife to the servant as ‘my last Duchess.’ The word ‘my’ throws light on his possessive nature. At other places, his tone defies a sense of male supremacy and power e.g. ‘My favour at her breast’ to justify his control over her, or when speaking of her new consort he remarks ‘though his fair daughter’s self, as I avowed/At starting, is my object.’ The phrase ‘my object’ clearly undermines women as some show pieces devoid of any human emotions and human treatment. At another place, the duke’s controlling behavior is also evident - ‘I gave commands;/Then all smiles stopped together.’ The phrase ‘I gave commands’ reveals the full force of the male chauvinist mind set.

            In order to show his wife in a depreciating light, the Duke uses words that throw her character in a bad light as when he says, Lines (23-24)

She liked whate’er

She looked on, and her looks went everywhere.

            The use of phrase like ‘her looks went everywhere’ the Duke is insulting his wife and describing her as a flirt while as the first part reveals, this was a child like act of the Duchess. The Duchess as we are told ‘had a heart too soon made glad’ and in consonance with that enjoyed life with the youthful zest and possessed a loving heart. If at all these lines reveal how cold and proud the Duke is. The Duke’s lack of humanity, sympathy and love are all the more exposed through the words that he utters to tell the readers about his orders for her murder: ‘then all smiles stopped together.’ The choice of words here suggests cruelty and cold hearted brutality and extreme indifference. The Duke appears here as a psychopath who enjoys killing and taking an innocent human life. His cultivation of manner, his status, rank and his intelligence that he boasts of all fall to pieces. He is a cold blooded murderer.

            The closing of the poem depict the same tendency in word choice. The Duke once again refers to the female as ‘object’ who this time is the next wife he is planning to have: Lines (52-53)

Though his fair daughter’s self, as I avowed

At starting, is my object.

Presupposition

            The opening of the poem sets the tone and as the monologue progresses the readers are impelled to conclude that the Duke is a cold blooded monster who killed his first wife because of her humanity, passion and individuality. There are several places in the poem that lead the reader to this conclusion; some are discussed as below:

·         ‘that’s my last Duchess’(1)  the idea that she is only his, depicting the duke’s controlling nature and also that that the duchess was once his wife.

·         ‘looking as if she were alive’(2) – informs the readers that the Duke’s wife is dead.

·         ‘Sir, ‘t was not / Her husband’s presence only’(13 and 14) – seems to suggest that there was someone else in her wife’s life who was more special. The duke successfully suggests that his wife was not true to him.

·         ‘and her looks went everywhere’ (24)– suggests that she was frivolous and flirtatious by nature.

·         ‘even had you skill/In speech – (which I have not) – to make your will/Quite clear to such an one’ (36-37)– suggests that the duchess was not under his control entirely and this was upsetting for him.

·         ‘and I choose never to stoop’(42-43) – suggests the proud and egotistical nature, and reveals that he never changed for the sake of his wife or tried to understand her or ever communicate with her but considered all that beneath his dignity

 

Hence, it is proved from the CDA analysis of the poem that in Victorian society women were considered as property and objects in the possession of men. Men had the desire to maintain control over women and exerted their power on them. Females were not given any voice, the power of speech was   taken away from them. So whatever was happening in the Victorian  society  was reflected in the discourse.  

   

                                                  WORK  CITED

   1.Poem Hunter.N.p, n.d web.Apr.2014

   2.schiffrindeborah,tannen,Hamilton.the handbook of discourse analysis. john wiley and sons,2008.

           

APPENDIX

My Last Duchess by Robert Browning

THAT’S my last Duchess painted on the wall,
Looking as if she were alive. I call
That piece a wonder, now: Frà Pandolf’s hands
Worked busily a day, and there she stands.
Will’t please you sit and look at her? I said
"Frà Pandolf" by design, for never read
Strangers like you that pictured countenance,
The depth and passion of its earnest glance,
But to myself they turned (since none puts by
The curtain I have drawn for you, but I)
And seemed as they would ask me, if they durst,
How such a glance came there; so, not the first
Are you to turn and ask thus. Sir, ’twas not
Her husband’s presence only, called that spot
Of joy into the Duchess’ cheek: perhaps
Frà Pandolf chanced to say, "Her mantle laps
Over my lady’s wrist too much," or "Paint
Must never hope to reproduce the faint
Half-flush that dies along her throat": such stuff
Was courtesy, she thought, and cause enough
For calling up that spot of joy. She had
A heart – how shall I say? – too soon made glad.
Too easily impressed: she liked whate’er
She looked on, and her looks went everywhere.
Sir, ’twas all one! My favor at her breast,
The dropping of the daylight in the West,
The bough of cherries some officious fool
Broke in the orchard for her, the white mule
She rode with round the terrace – all and each
Would draw from her alike the approving speech,
Or blush, at least. She thanked men, – good! but thanked
Somehow – I know not how – as if she ranked
My gift of a nine-hundred-years-old name
With anybody’s gift. Who’d stoop to blame
This sort of trifling? Even had you skill
In speech – (which I have not) – to make your will
Quite clear to such an one, and say, "Just this
Or that in you disgusts me; here you miss,
Or there exceed the mark" – and if she let
Herself be lessoned so, nor plainly set
Her wits to yours, forsooth, and made excuse,
– E’en then would be some stooping; and I choose
Never to stoop. Oh sir, she smiled, no doubt,
Whene’er I passed her; but who passed without
Much the same smile? This grew; I gave commands
Then all smiles stopped together. There she stands
As if alive. Will’t please you rise? We’ll meet
The company below, then. I repeat,
The Count your master’s known munificence
Is ample warrant that no just pretence
Of mine for dowry will be disallowed;
Though his fair daughter’s self, as I avowed
At starting, is my object. Nay, we’ll go
Together down, sir. Notice Neptune, though,
Taming a sea-horse, thought a rarity,
Which Claus of Innsbruck cast in bronze for me!