Progressive Philosophy: Castle Rackrent

After refreshing my knowledge of the 1798 Irish rebellion and the 1801 Act of Union, Edgeworth's Castle Rackrent presented itself in a new light for myself.

Clearly, inspired by the French Revolution (and almost receiving military aid from France), the newly formed United States, and drastically new concepts and philosophies of economics (capitalism and a free market), the Irish (specifically the United Irishmen) led a rebellion against the English in oder to achieve separation from the British Empire. The rebellion was crushed by the English military and as a result of the aftermath, the British chose to lead Ireland into a false sense of better representation to subdue Irish separatists.

In 1801, as a result of the failed military effort to gain independence, The Irish parliament and British parliament passed the Act of Union. Much like Scotland had been included in the Kingdom of Great Britain, Ireland had previously been excluded. Ireland, as a result of the Act of Union, became apart the United Kingdom. This did not grant the Irish independence or more favor with the British, in turn actually pushed Ireland even further under the hammer of being a British colony. Also on a side note, the Union Flag (the flag England uses to this day) was created.

Anyways, I read Castle Rackrent (1800) as a social commentary on many issues reflecting the time it was written. I think Edgeworth was commenting on numerous themes ranging from the idea of national identity, social class, economic structure, culture, gender, race...and many other topics. As Marilyn Bultler says in the introduction, Edgeworth's contribution to literature is “a remarkably intuitive, perceptive and far-reaching portrait of an unequal society” (p. 4) I think that even though Thady, and the editor reveal much through their perspective, Edgeworth's tone is predominately shown through her own voice:

“It is a problem of difficult solution to determine, whether an Union will hasten or retard the melioration of this country. The few gentlemen of education, who now reside in this country, will resort to England: but they are nothing inferior to men of the same rank in Great Britain. The best that can happen will be the introduction of British manufactures in their places. Did the Warwickshire militia, who were chiefly artisans, teach the Irish to drink beer? Or did they learn from the Irish to drink whiskey?” (p.122).

Although, this quote could be interpreted various ways in what she is saying, I got at least one centralized message from it. I feel that Edgeworth is commenting about the state of Ireland in general (it's conflict of identity, it being controlled through British colonial discourse, it's notion of class structure and heirarchies....ect.). She is commenting on the numerous external and internal problems the country is facing in its struggle to form a a national identity as well as its methods in dealing with the British in it's desire for independence. It also at the same time makes a statement that even though Ireland is under British rule (acting as a colony) it still has its own deserve set of discourses and culture that can never be considered controlled by or inferior to the British.

Edgeworth shows his through her writing through numerous ways. Although she uses English to write Castle Rackrent, she also incorporates Irish words (such as kilt, gasoon...ect.) and phrases as a form of empowerment over traditional ”correct” English and literary structures. Her use of dual linguistics as well as narrative structure sets her novel apart from other contemporary pieces at the time. She is not only making a giant step in showing that female written literature is just as legitimate, but that her writings being “Irish” (as a unique identity) are just as legitimate (if not original and more progressive than) are just as qualified (especially in writing about social realism) as any other literature of the time (or future). As Butler says,

“Indeed for modern readers, Edgeworth's worth handling of these these themes often has the advantage because it it fresh, odd, complex and skeptical. Ireland was more a colony than Scotland, and Edgeworth wrestles with the practical, political and ethnical consequences of her country's colonial status” (p. 3)

I would also like to address the question of whether Jason should be considered a villain or not. First off, I recognize that most of the story is told through Thady. \Thady's wisdom and philosophy are based on a preconceived “proper” construction of class, entitlement, duty and economics. He chooses to be loyal to whatever heir inhabits the Castle Rackernt estate (no matter how horribly they manage money or make very poor life decisions). His loyalty and fatherly compassion are admirable but also show that he considers himself to be born into a certain class and his role in society is to stay in that class and be the servant of a hierarchy based on heredity.

Ireland seems to be set up much like a traditional feudal system based from Britain. Wealth and land are only obtained through heredity and marriage. This hierarchical system could also be viewed as British colonial discourse in having Ireland mimic its own structure. Or even keep the Irish subjects through bribery and intermarriage promising land and wealth. This is reinforcing British dominance and keeping the Irish as a colony through forming and reinforcing their philosophy of class and economics.

Jason (other than all the heirs of the estate) acts responsibly and takes advantage of opportunities presented to him. Over time, his hard work and power accumulation allows him to buy the estate and literally move into an upper class. His father shuns him and thinks he is horrible for not staying loyal to his birth class and master (even though the heirs have squandered what they've had). Again, Thady is a product of an imposed class structure and feels obligated to stay a servant and loyal to the hierarchy(based on heredity). Jason could be viewed as a symbol of capitalism. The economic philosophy of a free market and the philosophy of a democratic government were radically new and different at the time. Like stated before, the Irish were inspired by the French Revolution and creation of the United States to rebel in 1798. Could Edgewod have been playing with a suggestion that Ireland's class structure, government, and economic philosophy (distribution of wealth) needed to dramatically change in order to more constructively fix its infrastructure and in order to gain or create an independent identity and nation? If so, she is contemplating an idea that is extremely different and certainly dramatically progressive. If Jason is meant to be viewed as breaking the that heretical wealth and power through hard work and opportunity, then I don't think he is to be seen as a villain.