Charlotte Temple - Ideas of Love

Charlotte Temple - Ideas of Love

In the 18th century, when Charlotte Temple was written, society’s ideas

about women, love, and obligations were extremely different from views

held in the 20th century. Women did not have many rights, and society

made them think that their place in life was to marry well. They were

not supposed to have desires or hopes for an amazing kind of love. They

were merely supposed to marry the man who their families intended them

to marry, and live their lives being a dutiful wife and mother. Love

had a similar essence in the 1700’s. It was not looked at as being

essential to a relationship; convenience and social status was more

important than love in an 18th century marriage. Finally, social

obligations were almost completely opposite then to what they are now.

As opposed to 20th century obligations to the self, education, and

wealth, the 18th century focused more on social status and family, and

not so many personal or independent obligations. (“Eighteenth”) In

Charlotte Temple, a radical idea concerning a breakdown of social norms,

and a restructuring of important obligations was presented. Familial

and social responsibilities seemed to take a backseat to Charlotte’s

(and other characters) independent and personal lives. For this reason,

Charlotte Temple was a revolutionary novel that gave people in the 18th

century a new way of looking at life. It emphasized love and emotions,

while disregarding normal cultural ideas.

In the beginning of the novel, familial or social obligations were

told through the stories of Mr. Temple, Charlotte, and La Rue. The

narrator remarked that Mr. Temple’s brother was “made completely

wretched by marrying a disagreeable woman, wh...

... middle of paper ...

...iserable and alone.

The two women began Charlotte Temple in the same fashion: looking

for independence and self-worth. However, then endings of the two women

were different. It seemed as if the narrator is saying if one never

leaves or even returns to social obligations, the end result will be

happiness. If one denies obligations, then the end result will be

misery. This novel, however radical it was regarding the risks of

social and familial obligations for personal attribution, basically

stated at the end that the one who does adheres to obligations will be

happy in the end. So, in conclusion, Charlotte Temple did break down

social norms by presenting the idea that people could have resisted

“normal” social obligations to pursue personal happiness. However, it

was not so radical as to say that one would have been happy if they

denied their duties.