Lanyer

A lot of what we read of Aemilia Lanyer’s work was decidedly feminist, but I don’t know that I agree with her tactics. In fact, I found her brand of defence of women quite curious. She puts men down quite a bit, while contrasting them with shining instances of famous women, but the examples she uses are so exaggerated it’s hard to take her seriously. An example of this can be found in “To the Virtuous Reader” – “As was cruel Cesarus by the discreet counsel of noble Deborah, judge and prophetess of Israel: and resolution of Jael wide of Heber the Kenite: wicked Haman, by the divine prayers and prudent proceedings of beautiful Hester…” At the same time, Lanyer constantly apologizes for being a woman, and for the defects she must certainly have because of it. Underneath her hearty defense and protest it seems like she partially believes that women are weak and defective. In “To the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty,” she asks the Queen to read her work “though it defective be,” describing herself as having a “weak distempered brain and feeble spirits [and] unworthy of grace.” She also asks all defects in woman to be excused, implying that there are defects that need to be apologized for.

This hypocritical attitude is further seen in “To the Virtuous Reader.” Lanyer says “in danger to be condemned by the words of their own mouths, fall into so great an error, as to speak unadvisedly against the rest of their sex; which if it be true, I am persuaded they can show their own imperfection in nothing more.” However, I argue that this is pretty much exactly what she does.  In “Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women,” Lanyer blames Adam for taking the apple from Eve, but she does so because she says Eve was weak and Adam was strong, and therefore the onus was on Adam: “what weakness offered, strength might have refused.”  She says that he has more to be sorry for (“the greater was his shame”), being “lord of all,” while Eve is less important somehow. Then she goes on to say that Adam lacked discretion. I found this back and forth defense hard to get on board with. I felt that it contrasts heavily with Cavendish, whose voice and opinion apologize for nothing. She even goes as far as to compare her imaginary conquests with those of men in the real world, whereas I feel Lanyer would have apologized ten times over before even getting to the point. But that might just be my reading.

Apart from theme and content, which I wasn’t a big fan of, I liked Lanyer’s writing style. Her use of rhyme and regular meter is easy to read. The gorgeous imagery she uses in some places reminded me of the style of Herrick and Marvell: in particular, in “The Description of Cookham” Lanyer’s lines “The trees with leaves, with fruits, with flowers clad, Embraced each other, seeming to be glad, Turning themselves to beauteous canopies, To shade the bright sun from your brighter eyes; The crystal streams with silver spangles graced, While by the glorious sun they were embraced; The little birds in chirping notes did sing, To entertain both you and that sweet spring. “