Compare and contrast the presentation of masculinity in The Woman in White and Lady’s
Chatterley’s Lover.
Both Collins’ The Woman in White and Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D.H. Lawrence present varying
forms of masculinity, categorised by R.W Connell’s theory of the four masculinities “concern[ing] the
position of men in a gender order”1. These are: ‘Hegemonic,’ ‘Complicit,’ ‘Marginalised’ and
‘Subordinate’ 2. Masculinities “can be defined as the patterns of practice by which people (…
predominantly men) engage that position”3, thus, Marian and Hilda’s masculinity shall be analysed
also. These four strands present masculinity as a conceptually conflicted ‘umbrella term’ which
encompasses domination and its ability to undermine those who do not adopt hegemony, rather
than a binary collation of qualities. Men conventionally seek masculinity through aggression and
female domination, for which Percival serves as a microcosm in his “obstinate disposition and his
domineering temper” over Laura’s signing of the marriage contract. Albeit marginalised as one of the
“serving classes”, Mellors too aspires to hegemony through sexual dominance over Connie. Although
published 68 years apart and despite the Suffragettes securing the Equal Franchise Act 1928 4 (the
year Lady Chatterley's Lover was published), social inequalities were unaddressed until second wave
feminism5 and thus, toxically masculine behaviours prevailed amid both novels’ publication.
One characteristic of hegemonic masculinity is the objectification of women. As a complicitly
masculine man, Hartright enjoys the benefits of hegemony through objectification of his art students
despite their unknown identity – emphasising his objectification of women collectively, not just
individually, and the implications of conventional masculinity on wider society. Prior to his trip, Pesca
describes the benefits as “Four guineas a week, and, more than that, the charming society of two
young misses!”, advising he “Marry one of the two young Misses; become Honourable Hartright,
M.P”. This suggests an agenda to inherit a title through marriage; legitimising his masculinity and
allowing his progression to hegemony. Moreover, Pesca reduces the women to commodities by
stating their company would be most valuable in terms of satisfaction, and that relations would
provide a greater monetary opportunity than his career and meritocratic income. Pesca labelling
Laura and Marian as “two young misses” repeatedly strips them of identity and emphasises their
unmarried status: ergo objectifying them as mediums for social advancement. Before the Married
Woman’s Property Act 1882 deemed women “capable of acquiring, holding, and disposing... any real
or personal property as her separate property... without the intervention of any trustee 6”,
possessions were passed to her husband post-marriage 7. Pesca acknowledges male competition for
masculinity of which the subordination of femininity is a prerequisite; foreshadowing Percival’s
institutionalisation and claimed death of Laura instead of Anne’s for inheritance and viewing this
motive to be inevitably considered by other men for power and control.
1
Connell, R.W. (n.d). Raewyn Connell, Masculinities. Available at:
http://www.raewynconnell.net/p/masculinities_20.html (Accessed 17/11/2021)
2
Connell, R.W. (1995, 2005). Masculinities. Available at: https://books.google.co.uk/books?
id=C8zb0oBUZxcC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false (Accessed 17/11/2021)
3
Connell, R.W. (n.d). Raewyn Connell, Masculinities. Available at:
http://www.raewynconnell.net/p/masculinities_20.html (Accessed 17/11/2021)
4
The National Archives, 1928 Equal Franchise Act. Available at:
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/twenties-britain-part-one/equal-franchise-1928/
(Accessed on 08/01/2022)
5
National Woman’s History Museum, 2020. Feminism: The Second Wave. Available at:
https://www.womenshistory.org/exhibits/feminism-second-wave (Accessed on 08/01/2022)
6
Married Women’s Property Act 1882, Chapter 75. Available at:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/45-46/75/enacted (Accessed 19/11/2021)
7
Mallet, P. 2021. Women and the Law in Victorian England. Available at: https://victoriancity.wp.st-
andrews.ac.uk/women-and-the-law-in-victorian-england/ (Accessed 19/11/2021)
, Similarly, Mellors telling Connie “the man [Clifford] has no use for you at all” perpetuates the notion
that, without utilising women, men cannot assert dominance; she no longer serves a “purpose” in
upholding his hegemony. What Lawrence describes as “just a young female creature to him”
provides Mellors this source of hegemonic control which is unattainable through his gamekeeping
job and thus seeks it with women in the domestic sphere 8 for “she was only really a female to him”.
Sexual objectification is further displayed by Hartright. On his journey, he “had become completely
absorbed in [his] own fanciful visions of Limmeridge House, of Mr. Fairlie, and of the two ladies”
wondering “what the Cumberland young ladies would look like” and "What shall I see in my dreams
to-night?". Possessing a pre-determined sexual analysis, Hartright describing Marian's "waist,
perfection in the eyes of a man” blatantly through the male gaze is predictable, empowering his
masculinity by diminishing women as it “projects its fantasy onto the female figure” 9. Whilst
Hartright “allowed [himself] the luxury of admiring her for a few moments”, Mellors more assertively
“took no notice of Constance or of Lady Chatterley; he just softly stroked her loins or her breasts”
unprovoked due to the pre-establishment of their relationship, exercising power he perceived this
gave him, whilst ignoring the woman behind the body.
However, both men overcompensate their lack of legitimately achieved masculine power through
sexual predate. Comparably, Hartright speaks of “one time to be bending over her [Laura], so close
to her bosom as to tremble at the thought of touching it” and Lawrence describes Mellors’ “hand
[as] he softly brushed her breast upwards, from underneath”, neither detailing a consensual act.
Escalating, Hartright admits his “hardly-earned self-control was as completely lost to [him] as if [he]
had never possessed it; lost to [him], as it is lost every day to other men, in other critical situations,
where women are concerned”. Hartright condones his actions by claiming his self-control was a
“hard trial” to maintain, thus deserving praise for ever doing so, and that he is no worse than others.
To a modern-day feminist reader, Hartright is not excused, but resented for acknowledging toxically
masculine behaviours whilst still participating. However, the depiction of Lady Chatterley’s Lover as
an erotic fiction about a woman’s sexual desires, which the 2015 film adheres to 10, as opposed to a
novel surrounding the dangers hegemonic masculinity poses towards women, indicates society still
overlooks toxic masculinity – which feminists condemn.
Whilst Hartright insinuates his lack of sexual control when describing “that dangerous intimacy of
teacher and pupil”, Mellors arguably commits rape. With his “groping” hand which knew “how to
unclothe her where it wanted”, it is unclear whether the word refers to a blind, searching movement
or unconsented fondling for sexual pleasure. This becomes clear as Connie “lay still, in a kind of
sleep, always in a kind of sleep” unable to truthfully claim her enjoyment “for she had not been
conscious of much” showing inability to provide consent. This is reaffirmed in that “she was afraid,
afraid of his thin, smooth, naked body, that seemed so powerful, afraid of the violent muscles”; the
last clause emphasising the harm that “the strange potency of manhood” has inflicted for Connie to
be “Afraid of that strange, hostile, slightly repulsive thing that he had been to her, a man”. Despite
the consequences of Mellors’ masculinity far exceeding that of Hartright’s, both men possess similar
urges as Hartright recounts “My heart beat violently as I turned round. Miss Fairlie was approaching
me from the farther end of the room”, potentially alluding to his uncontrolled sexual passion. Collins
relates Hartright’s desires to the reader by urging them to “think of her as you thought of the first
woman who quickened the pulses within you that the rest of her sex had no art to stir,” provoking
8
Messerschmidt, J.W. 1993. Men, Masculinities and Crime, Page 198. Available at:
http://xyonline.net/sites/xyonline.net/files/2020-05/Kimmel%2C%20Handbook%20of%20Studies%20on
%20Men%20and%20Masculinities%20%282005%29.pdf#page=203 (Accessed on 22/11/2021)
9
Mulvey, L. 1973. Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, Page 19. Available at:
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/architecture/ockman/pdfs/feminism/mulvey.pdf (Accessed on 19/11/2021)
10
Fletcher, H. 2015. Digital Spy. Lady Chatterley's Lover producer "shocked" by raunchy sex scenes - but writer
Jed Mercurio promises emotion, too. Available at: https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/a663697/lady-chatterleys-
lover-producer-shocked-by-raunchy-sex-scenes-but-writer-jed-mercurio-promises-emotion-too/ (Accessed on
09/01/2022)
