Elizabeth Gaskell began writing Cranford in 1851 when Charles Dickens invited her to send him tales for his new weekly journal, Household Words. Dickens and Gaskell were so pleased with the first two Cranford stories, which depicted a community of genteel single women in a retired country village, that Gaskell went on to write fourteen more, and what she had initially intended as a lighthearted sketch developed into one of her most subtle fictional creations.
Gaskell’s first two novels, Mary Barton (1848) and Ruth (1853), which she had begun before starting Cranford, were both greeted by controversy, Mary Barton for what some Victorian readers perceived as an alarming siding with the working class against the employing class, and Ruth for its sympathetic treatment of an unwed mother. Cranford seemed safer, more distant from such troubling nineteenth century issues. It became particularly popular after Gaskell’s death, its biggest sales coming at the turn of the century, and it was praised with such words as “charming,” “delightful,” “delicate.” Well into the twentieth century it continued to be read as a nostalgic portrait of a quaint, old-fashioned, feminine world.
The quaintness and charm are there, and so is some nostalgia, for Cranford’s narrator, Mary Smith, writes with a constant awareness that the life she describes is already anachronistic and likely soon to disappear altogether in a rapidly modernizing society. However, the novel is also marked by a clear-sighted probing into the conditions of its female characters’ lives in a society that expected the genders to occupy separate spheres.
The opening sentence—“In the first place, Cranford is in possession of the Amazons”—implies that separate spheres might mean immense power for women. Cranford’s circle of widows and single ladies pride themselves on their self-sufficiency; they rule their world, and it is one in which men are superfluous.
If, however, the image of Amazons leads readers to expect warrior-women who challenge Victorian orthodoxies about pursuits appropriate for females, Gaskell quickly sets them right in her descriptions of the most conventional of ladies. They may own their own houses—a right denied married Englishwomen until the Married Women’s Property Acts passed after 1870—but their economic power is severely curtailed. They glory in their “elegant economy,” but such economy is required of them because they live on very small inherited incomes and because they devote themselves to preserving the social rules with which they maintain the class status determined for them by their relation to fathers or husbands. They visit one another and play cards, they fantasize about threats from thieves who turn out not to exist, they read little and are vastly ignorant about the wider world, and in real crises they need help from men.
Gaskell develops the pathos and grotesqueries of the Cranford ladies’ lives by focusing on the Jenkyns sisters. The older sister, Deborah, had devoted herself to her authoritarian clergyman father; she never married and was always available to read to him and to help him with correspondence. Gaskell portrays her as something of a social tyrant devoted to preserving the cultural status quo, whether this be a matter of literary style (she scorns any deviation from the formal eighteenth century sentences of Samuel Johnson, her father’s favorite author) or social status (she has prevented her younger sister, Miss Matty, from marrying the farmer Mr. Holbrook, a free spirit who cares nothing about social advancement). After Deborah’s death, Miss Matty, who has been allowed no independent will or intellectual development, seems nearly helpless.
The narrative nevertheless leads readers to feel admiration and considerable sympathy for the Cranford ladies. Gaskell’s narrator, Mary, contrasts significantly with the women whose lives she describes, for she lives not in Cranford but in Drumble, an industrial city. She is...
(The entire section is 1,091 words.)