Scott, Baillie, and the Bewitching of Social Relations

Abstract

In this essay, I examine Joanna Baillie’s Witchcraft as a sequel to Walter Scott’s The Bride of Lammermoor. Situating the works in the context of Poor Law reform in Scotland and England, I argue that Baillie’s play and Scott’s novel both criticize social relations bewitched by selfish and greedy attitudes and that both call for renewed charity. Scott, however, is equally critical of elite and non‐elite characters who fail to constitute a mutually supportive community in idealized traditional ways; Baillie offers a more sympathetic portrayal of the plight of the poor, making their resentment of elite privilege more pitiable than menacing. The differences in their representations of the poor, I conclude, reflect Scott’s relatively greater fear of social unrest and Baillie’s relatively greater fear of oppression.

Notes

[1] The relevant passages are in Baillie, Letters 388–389, 440; Scott, Letters 10: 262, 264, 425.

[2] Advocates of the New Poor Law included Harriet Martineau, who wrote at the request of Lord Brougham several volumes of stories meant to convince a working class audience of the advantages of the new system. These volumes, Poor Laws and Paupers Illustrated, first published in 1833/4, along with an earlier (1832–1834) set of Illustrations of Political Economy, also designed to reconcile working class readers to the operation of market forces, have been recently (2001) republished in a new edition with an Introduction by Caroline Franklin. Franklin remarks on the “chilling rigour [of] Martineau’s support for the new laws,” though pointing out that the Poor Laws stories soften her earlier commitment to an “extreme laissez‐faire position” opposed to any relief (xvii).

[3] I elaborate on the positive presentation of social relations in The Antiquary in Symbolic 129–132; for a contrasting evaluation, see Trumpener 120–125, 157.

[4] The relevant passages can be found in Scott’s Letters 4: 414–415, 446–448, 456–458, 494–496; 5: 114–115, 286–288.

[5] For the terms of obligation in the old Poor Laws, see Mitchison 47 and Boulton 21; regarding inferences about rights to relief and defenses of the “historic rights of the poor,” see Boulton, 21, Hitchcock et al. 10, Brundage 68.

[6] Though common definitions of “epiphany” are meaningful here, I develop the specialized application of the term to moments of recognizing a coincidence of private and public experience in Symbolic 126–128; I adapt my specialized use from Denzin 34–39.

[7] Baillie’s letter dated May 9, 1840 to Elizabeth Fletcher is in part a “thank you” note to the addressee for having sent her a “copy of Dr. Alison’s book.” Though Slagle’s footnote conjectures that the book is a reprint of The Rev. Archibald Alison’s Essays on the nature and principles of taste (1199n230), I surmise that it is Dr. W. P. Alison’s Observations on the Management of the Poor in Scotland, published in 1840. In the letter, Baillie concurs with Alison that the existing Scottish system cannot handle a large number of impoverished people in an urban, industrial environment and hopes that his work will be influential in “establishing a poor’s rate for Scotland.” On W. P. Alison, see Paterson 174, 212n3.

[8] Donkin 159–181 and Slagle 73–111 analyze Baillie’s struggles with theater managers.

[9] According to McMillan, the very setting of Witchcraft—partly in Paisley—suggests a decision to confront problems of poverty and oppression, for Paisley was a “textile town” that finally succumbed to bankruptcy a few years after the play was published (83). Though McMillan does not allude specifically to the Poor Laws, her point about the setting calls to mind the fact that the reform of the Scottish Poor Laws was necessitated by the failure of the textile industry. At the time of publication in 1836, Baillie may still have hoped to revive the old spirit of charity in this situation through her sympathetic portrayal of these poor women.

[10] Because line numbers are not printed with the plays in Baillie’s Works, I give page numbers after the act and scene in citations to the drama.

[11] My phrasing overlaps somewhat with that of Cox: “the truly destructive figure is the beautiful, cultured Annabella,” who is “the true ‘witch’ in the play” (157). Cox’s argument about the play differs from mine. Specifically, he reads Witchcraft as a successful example of Baillie’s using spectacle to turn her audience from cruel voyeurism toward moral judgment. Spectators learn to distrust the appearances of guilt and innocence and acquire more insightful “moral vision” (158).

[12] I elaborate on Baillie’s opposition to self‐sacrifice in “Joanna” 136–138 and Symbolic 93–94, 101, 108, 167–170.

[13] Administration of programs for “lunatics” began to be separated from administration of the Poor Laws during the 1840s in England and the 1850s in Scotland (Brundage 99, Paterson 189). The earlier practice of combining them is reflected in Scott’s presentation, in The Heart of Midlothian, of the workhouse as an asylum for the putative witch Madge Wildfire. Lincoln’s article on the novel addresses early efforts to create refuges for prostitutes and the mentally ill. I analyze Scott’s depiction of Madge Wildfire in Symbolic 76–78.