The trauma of condemnation and the embellishment of an illegitimate child as a source of regeneration in Lizzie Leigh and Ruth

Open access


This paper focuses on Mrs Gaskell’s treatment of the erring girl in Lizzie Leigh (1850) and Ruth (1853) and the new elements that she introduces which brand the treatment as different. Contrary to her Victorian contemporaries, Mrs Gaskell stresses the role of religion, the use of biblical quotations on the treatment of the sinner, and the role of motherhood. The paper also shows how Mrs Gaskell makes the illegitimate child an incentive towards repentance and hope of reclamation. Through her motherly love and devotion to her child, a mother rises and grows in character and faith. Moreover, the paper demonstrates Mrs Gaskell’s condemnation of the falsity of the traditional taxonomy of “illegitimate” or “fallen”, and her assertion that social value lies in the inherent properties within the individual. It also highlights how she makes forgiveness for the sinner a duty which society has to fulfil, and maintains that if the charitable and the kind are forced “to lie” because of the existing social and moral attitudes, then it is imperative that they should be changed so that “lies” are unnecessary. It concludes by investigating the stormy reception and the controversy it created among readers.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Allott Miriam. I960. Elizabeth Gaskell. London: Longmans Green & Co.

  • Chappie J.A. & Arthur Pollard. 1966. (Eds.) The Letters of Mrs Gaskell Manchester: Manchester University Press.

  • Cunningham Gail. 1978. The Woman Question in Mrs Gaskell’s Life and Works. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

  • Easson Angus. 1979. Elizabeth Gaskell. London: Collins.

  • Gaskell Elizabeth C. 1850. “Lizzie Leigh” Household Words vol. VI. 30 March to April. Subsequent references appear in the text.

  • Gaskell Elizabeth C. [1853] 1974. Ruth. London: Dent & Son. Subsequent references appear in the text.

  • GregWilliam R. 1859. “FalseMoralityofLady Novelists” National Review vol. 8 pp. 166-167.

  • HaightGordon S. 1954.(ed.) TheGeorgeEliotLetters. LondomOxfordUniversity PressII.

  • Hogarth Georgiana & Mamie Dickens 1880. (eds.). The Letters of Charles Dickens 1833-1870. London: Chapman And Hall 1216.

  • Mews Hazel. 1969. Frail Vessels: Woman’s Role in Women’s Novels from Fanny Burney to George Eliot. London: Athlone P.

  • Pollard Arthur. 1965. Mrs Gaskell: Novelist and Biographer. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

  • Rubenius Ana. 1973. The Woman Question in Mrs Gaskell’s Life and Works. London: Russell & Russell.

  • Sharps John Geoffrey. 1970. Mrs Gaskell’s Observation and Invention: A Study of her Non-Biographic Works. London: Distributed by Centaur Press.

  • Shorter C. K. 1908. The Brontes: Life and Letters 2 vols. London: Hodder & Stoughton.

  • Thomson Patricia. 1956. The Victorian Heroine: A Changing Ideal 1837-1873. London: Oxford University Press.

  • Waller Ross D. 1935. (ed.). Letters Addressed to Mrs Gaskell by Celebrated Contemporaries Manchester: Manchester University Press.

  • Ward A.W. 1906. (ed.). The Works of Mrs Gaskell London: Smith Elder & Co. Volume II.

  • Ward A.W. 1910. “In Memoriam—Elizabeth Cleghom Gaskell” Cornhill Magazine vol. 29 p. 459.

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.24

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.114
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.781

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 49 49 13
PDF Downloads 28 28 7