Trollope: Bad Marriages and Toxic Masculinity

Trollope’s Bad Marriages

Anthony Trollope was an advocate of marriage, having famously said that a woman’s “best right” was to a husband, not the vote. I’d argue that he meant “a good husband”, which he strove to be himself, unlike his father (who was both angry and ineffectual, a dangerous combination). And in his works, Trollope uses negative examples to show that, while a good husband is an overall benefit to a woman, a bad husband is far worse than no husband at all.

I won’t go into the good husbands much today—let’s start with those fascinating negative examples. Bad husbands like Robert Kennedy and Louis Trevelyan could be used as Parliamentary case studies for the need of women rights to own property and obtain a divorce (both of which were in contention during Trollope’s career).

The “Why” of Bad Husbands

What makes a husband bad? Trollope’s stories were prescient in showing what is called “toxic masculinity” in the 21^st Century, and he clearly places the blame for this on the patriarchal system of laws, custom, and wealth. Men of any class had near-total dominion over their wives and children, and men of wealth had dominion over nearly everyone.

Trollope shows many main causes and aspects of bad husbandry, and notice how many of these were enshrined in the law until, well, more recently than we might want to acknowledge:

Possessiveness— A man of this time could easily come to believe that he owned his wife, her property, and her children. That was, after all, pretty much what the law specified. So a wife who “transgressed” in some way was violating her husband’s rights. In the aptly named He Knew He Was Right, Louis Trevelyan became obsessed with his wife’s minor flirtation and spent years raging at her before dying of his own madness.

 Patriarchy—literally. That is, a man owned his children, and could deny his wife access to them This was another way Trevelyan punished his wife, by abducting their son, though he was incapable of caring for the boy. To regain custody, she had to resume her role as Trevelyan’s wife, even as he became ever more insane.

“Conjugal rights”—Marital rape was legal as a woman was expected to “submit” to her husband sexually. This could result in many little hostages, as a lack of effective contraception meant a women like Mrs. Crawley and Mrs. Quiverful were forced to give birth year after year. Both of their “moral” husbands (parsons) felt justified both to take their supposed marital right and also to refuse any contraceptive method at all. This could destroy the wives’ health and consign the families to dire poverty.

Power and powerlessness—Power feeds on itself, becoming an imperative. But it’s a limited quantity. Men were all-powerful in their own household, but they were subject to a hierarchy outside. Most men had to answer to other men. Even the prime minister had to answer to his party and cabinet. Unfortunately, men who felt powerless—as Trevelyan was to his obsession— often took it out on their wives. Robert Kennedy, in the Phineas novels, believes that  he has “the absolute and almost divine right which it was intended that a husband should exercise over his wife.” But this belief in his deserved power destroys him. When he senses he is powerless to completely subjugate his wife Laura, he ends up driving her away, ruining his career, and dying in misery.

Rage— Rage creates the illusion of power, fueling violent action that can temporarily feel like domination. Even when the rage turns against someone other than a wife, a man filled with fury is incapable of rational behavior or love. Sometimes the fury is aimed at a romantic rival. Poor handsome Phineas Finn was the target of two men – his supposed best friend Lord Chiltern, who shot him in a duel when the wealthy woman he coveted preferred Finn, and Robert Kennedy, who blamed him for Laura’s escape.

Pride—Even non-evil men can be bad husbands, if they allow pride to rule them. Reverend Crawley is called “Trollope’s Jean Valjean” by Professor Ellen Moody, prosecuted for a minor crime, a result of his poverty. But Rev. Crawley is also his own Javert, punishing himself and his family with a relentless puritanism that elevates his morality (but really his pride) over his wife, children, and common sense. His refusal to accept charity, or rather to allow his wife to accept charity, leads to his accidental crime and arrest. His pride is so great that he initially rejects Lucy Robarts’ offer to nurse Mrs. Crawley through typhus, and he resists letting his children removal to a safer place during the contagion. Of course, he’s so proud of his sanctimony, he won’t even identify it as pride (for that’s a SIN!).

Prodigality— A particularly dangerous type in these novels is the prodigal—the disastrously attractive but destructive young man. Whether the vice is gambling or women or drink (often all three), these lads are poison to their families and the ladies who love them. Often they are well-born into families of wealth. But they never remain rich because they are profligate. They gamble and get into debt and exhaust their fathers’ patience with the never-ending demands from moneylenders. They try anything but thrift to get out of debt – beggaring their relatives (Lord Chiltern), getting friends to co-sign their debts (Laurence Fitzgibbon), wooing women of wealth (Burgo Fitzgerald).  Fortunately, while they often attract young ladies, they repel the ladies’ less gullible parents. They often self-destruct (as Burgo did), but only after laying waste to family fortune and maiden hearts.

Understandably, men with any of these faults can make for bad husbands. In my next post, I’ll describe two particularly bad marriages. Trollope’s unsparing exploration of these two marriages shows that “a woman’s best right” can become her worst nightmare.

—