Recently, I read a blog post by one of my classmates and was extremely offended. It suggested that Antoinette giving Rochester the love potion was akin to date-rape. Here is the link to the post.
http://charles20thcenturylitjournal-blog.blogspot.com/2011/11/christophines-amazing-ju-ju-luv-magic.html
Now, I will concede that there is a similarity between the love potion and a date-rape drug, and that similarity is control. However, the love potion is for control of the heart, while the date-rape drug is for control over the body. And while it is terrible to try and force someone to love you, it is even worse to take control of their body and use it without consent.
Here's where my classmate and I differ. He thinks that Antoinette used the love potion so that she could sleep with Rochester. I disagree. I don't think sex was on her mind at all. I think all she really wanted was affection. This man is her husband, and he wont even acknowledge her. He uses different names for her, is cold to her, and virtually ignores her. I think all Antoinette wanted was just a sign that Rochester cared about her, and when he never gave her that, she sought to get her for herself. The love potion was supposed to make Rochester love her. I don't think it was so that she could take control of him at all. I don't even think Antoinette really wants to control Rochester's heart. She just wants him to love her, and this is the only viable option she sees. I'm not commending her or saying she did the right thing, not at all, but I'm just pointing out where she's coming from.
And I don't think Antoinette wanted Rochester to forget everything. She wants him to love her always, not just for one night. That's also why I think the potion is for the heart and not for sex. Antoinette wants something that will change Rochester permanently, almost in the way he's changing her. She wants him to want her. Yes, the use of the love potion is a completely selfish and one-sided act, and it's why I don't approve it. However, the topic of consent in this issue is a little tricky. You can't make somebody love you, especially if they don't want to. Forcing them, blackmailing them, using love potions on them without their consent is a terrible thing. And the love that does arise from this love potion is probably not even a real love. It's fake. Fabricated. An illusion. But that's all the person wants. They want it to at least seem like they're being adored. But anyways, I do think Antoinette had no right to use the love potion, but I think she may have thought consent was implied. She's married to Rochester. There is supposed to be love in marriage. He has made it seem that he does love her, and she's just trying to bring back that love. I mean, when she does give him the potion, they are talking and sharing and for a moment, they're a happy couple. I think Antoinette was honestly just trying to win back Rochester's affection, but she did so in an extremely selfish way that caused more harm than good. And sex had nothing to do with it.
That's where date-rape changes. It's not about making that person love you. It's about taking control and using another person's body without their consent for one's own pleasure. Literally, taking advantage. Love isn't a factor in date-rape, lust is. The person wants what they want and they take it, forcefully, without consent of the person they're taking it from. And it's not usually a more than one time thing. That does happen, but you rarely hear of one person repeatedly date-raping the same person.
Though there is similarity with the factors of control and consent between the love potion and a date-rape drug, there's a vast difference in the motives and the execution. And I just...I am disgusted in the fact that this was brought up and written about in such an offhand manner. Date-rape is a serious issue and should be treated as such.
1 comment:
I agree with these important distinctions you're making here. While there is definitely an important sense in which Rochester *does* have a legitimate grievance here (at least for being "poisoned"--and he is genuinely, violently, and grossly ill as a result of her monkeying with his drink--but also for the attempted assault on his free will, or his mind, or emotions), there are *crucial* differences between this situation and rape. There have always been chemical ways to incapacitate someone's body--a hard blow to the head could produce the same result. But what Antoinette longs for is more poetic, and more elusive--and it reflects a longing that goes back at least as far as Shakespeare (_Midsummer Night's Dream_, with its "love potion"), but likely back to the Greeks (Aphrodite, Cupid, etc.) and maybe even further. The wish that *love* could be restored, or initiated, in someone who does not feel it sure does imply a potentially troubling preemption of their free will (and there is something unsettling about Demitrius still being under the influence of the love potion at the end of _MSN'sD_). But any analogy to *rape* needs to be pursued with caution and an appropriate sense of proportion.
Post a Comment