Emma and Clueless: Patriarchy Essay

As the context is altered from Jane Austen's 19th century novel, Emma to the late 20th century film, Clueless directed by Amy Heckerling, the initial attitudes towards the existence of patriarchy in society remain of concern but adjust to their new backgrounds. Austens novel, through Emmas self-improvement shows the notions of the importance of marriage, as a subjectification of women and also uses the characters of Emma to challenge societys patriarchy and Mr. Knightley as the male archetype to whom Emma must impress, whereas Heckerling transforms these ideas to the importance of dating, and Chers need for Joshs approval, with the remaining of both their requirement of improving themselves. Emma makes a statement on the notions of female independence, and subtly confronts the values of her 19th century patriarchal context. Womens roles in society at this time were solely marital and maternal, with writers such as Rousseau stating the idea that women must be subservient, dutiful and devoted to the men in their lives. The book firmly projects the patriarchal society as the context: A young woman, if she falls into bad hands may be teasedbut one cannot comprehend a young mans being under such restraint. This language, although satirical reaffirms a main attitude existent in the context of Regency England.

Austen uses the novel's protagonist Emma as a manager of self-determination and although she is a part of high society, she is delicately able through Austens narrative, to resist traditional gender roles and concerns. Emma proudly states, when refusing Mr. Eltons proposal: I have very little intention of ever marrying at all, showing her dominant stance yet she is still somewhat a woman of her context as the novel results in her marrying of Mr. Knightley. This reaffirms the fundamental reality of patriarchy as although Emma forms her own opinion, she falls subject eventually to the continual sequence of marriage. The belief of self-improvement emphasizes Regency England's male governing of society. Her highly modal language is used to stress her ignorance the need for male influenced improvement. Emma's individual beliefs and actions are satirized as undignified through the use of irony in her speech to highlight her naivety and need for improvement: the feelings which had kept her face averted, and her tongue motionless. They were combined only of anger against herself, mortification and deep concern. However, these feelings of self-contempt are brought about by the opinion of a man: Mr. Knightley, who never acts or speaks wrong throughout the entire text effects Emmas moral process vastly. In order for Emma to improve her both moral and womanly qualities, he is needed to point out and restore her flaws, presenting the existence of patriarchy is society.

Heckerling uses the earlier text Emma to reinforce the inflexible objectification of women despite the shift to a contemporary modernized context in Clueless. Similarly to Emma, the objectification of women is explored through the texts protagonist. The belittling representation of women is presented in a backward fashion for its time. 1990s American society was a disposable and consumerist one, revolutionized by individualism. In clueless, the issue of patriarchy is altered by exploring it through the practice of dating rather than Austens initial representation of human concern through marriage. Cher correspondingly to Emma is depicted as a woman in need of self improvement. Once again, Chers self enlightenment comes from the revelation that in order to be with Josh she must adhere to his morals. This is reinforced with the intertextual mimicking of the scene from the film GiGi. Cher is standing by the fountain with bright coloured lights and non-digetic music as she comes to the realisation that she loves Josh. The effect is to satirize Cher much like Austen does with Emma, however by using a classic teen modernistic scene more relevant to the transformation of context. Unlike Austens novel, Heckerling does not subvert family hierarchy.